diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743522/EFTA02743522.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743522/EFTA02743522.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..00410a1a123b9c12fee493247f3001a258fcbb8b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743522/EFTA02743522.md @@ -0,0 +1,171 @@ +FILED by VT D.C. +ELECTRONIC +February 6, 2008 +CLARENCE MADDOX +CLERK U.S. DIST. CT. +S.D. OF FLA. MIAMI + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: + +08-CV-80119-MARRA + +### COMPLAINT + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2 ("Jane" or "Jane Doe"), brings this Complaint against Jeffrey Epstein, as follows: + +### Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue + +- 1. Jane Doe No. 2 is acitizen and resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and is sui juris. +- 2. This Complaint is brought under afictitious name to protect the identity of the Plaintiff because this Complaint makes sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon a minor. + - 3. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein is acitizen and resident of the State of New York. + - 4. This is an action for damages in excess of 550 million. +- 5. This Court has jurisdiction of this action and the claims set forth herein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(a), as the matter in controversy (i) exceeds 575,000, exclusive of interest and costs; and (ii) is between citizens of different states. + - 6. This Court has venue of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(a) as asubstantial + +part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this District. + +## Factual Allegations + +7. At all relevant times, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") was an adult male, 52 years old. Epstein is afinancier and money manager with asecret clientele limited exclusively to billionaires. He is himself aman of tremendous wealth, power and influence. He maintains his principal home in New York and also owns residences in New Mexico, St and Palm Beach, FL. The allegations herein concern Epstein's conduct while at his lavish estate in Palm Beach. + +8. Upon information and belief, Epstein has asexual preference and obsession for underage minor girls. He engaged in a plan and scheme in which he gained access to primarily economically disadvantaged minor girls in his home, sexually assaulted these girls, and then gave them money. In or about 2004-2005, Jane Doe, then approximately 16 years old, fell into Epstein's trap and became one of his victims. + +9. Upon information and belief, Jeffrey Epstein carried out his scheme and assaulted girls in Florida, New York and on his private island, known as Little St. James, in St. + +10. Epstein's scheme involved the use of young girls to recruit underage girls. (Upon information and belief, the young girl who brought Jane Doe to Epstein was herself aminor victim of Epstein, and will therefore not be named in this Complaint). Under Epstein's plan, underage girls were recruited ostensibly to give a wealthy man amassage for monetary compensation in his Palm Beach mansion. The recruiter would be contacted when Epstein was planning to be at his Palm Beach residence or soon after he had arrived there. Epstein or someone on his behalf would direct the recruiter to bring one or more underage girls to the residence. The recruiter, upon information and belief, generally sought out economically disadvantaged underage girls from western Palm Beach County who would be enticed by the money being offered - generally \$200 to \$300 per "massage" session - and who were perceived as less likely to complain to authorities or have credibility if allegations of improper conduct were made. This was an important element of Epstein's plan. + +11. Epstein's plan and scheme reflected a particular pattern and method. Upon arrival at Epstein's mansion, the underage victim would be introduced to Epstein's assistant, who gathered the girl's personal information, including her name and telephone number. would then bring the girl up a flight of stairs to a bedroom that contained a massage table in addition to other furnishings. There were photographs of nude women lining the stairway and in the bedroom. The girl would then find herself alone in the room with Epstein, who would be wearing only atowel. He would then remove his towel and lie naked on the massage table, and direct the girl to remove her clothes. Epstein would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, including masturbation and touching the girl's vagina. + +12. Consistent with the foregoing plan and scheme, Jane Doe was recruited to give Epstein a massage for monetary compensation. Jane was brought to Epstein's mansion in Palm Beach. Once at the mansion, Jane was introduced to , who led her up the flight of stairs to the room with the massage table. In this room, Epstein told Jane to take off her clothes and give him a massage. Jane kept her panties and bra on and complied with Epstein's instructions. Epstein wore only atowel around his waste. After a short period of time, Epstein removed the towel and rolled over exposing his penis. Epstein began to masturbate and he sexually assaulted Jane. + +13. After Epstein had completed the assault, Jane was then able to get dressed, leave the room and go back down the stairs. Jane was paid \$200 by Epstein. The young girl who recruited Jane was paid \$100 by Epstein for bringing Jane to him. + +14. As a result of this encounter with Epstein, Jane experienced confusion, shame, humiliation and embarrassment, and has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries. + +#### COUNT I Sexual Assault + +15. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 above. + +16. Epstein tortiously assaulted Jane Doe sexually. Epstein's acts were intentional, unlawful, offensive and harmful. + +17. Epstein's plan and scheme in which he committed such acts upon Jane Doe were done willfully and maliciously. + +18. This sexual assault was in violation of Chapter 800 of the Florida Statutes, which recognizes as acrime the lewd and lascivious acts committed by Epstein upon Jane. + +19. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, punitive damages, costs, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +### COUNT II Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress + +20. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 above. + +21. Epstein's conduct was intentional or reckless. + +22. Epstein's conduct was outrageous, going beyond all bounds of decency. + +23. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. Epstein knew or had + +reason to know that his intentional and outrageous conduct would cause emotional trauma and damage to Jane Doe. + +24. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's intentional or reckless conduct, Jane Doe, has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, costs, punitive damages, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +**JURY TRIAL DEMAND** + +Plaintiffs demand a jury trial in this action. + +Dated: February 5, 2008 + +Respectfully submitted, + +HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P.A. + +*Attorneys for Plaintiffs* + +18205 Biscayne Blvd. + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +Tel: 305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +By: + +![]()Jeffrey M. Herman +[jherman@hermanlaw.com](mailto:jherman@hermanlaw.com) +Florida Bar No. 521647 +Stuart S. Mermelstein +[smermelstein@hermanlaw.com](mailto:smermelstein@hermanlaw.com) +Florida Bar No. 947245 +Adam D. Horowitz +Florida Bar No. 376980 +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) + +The JS-44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing, and service of pleading or other papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States In September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of the Court for the purpose of Initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE OF THE FORM.) + +|

(a) PLAINTIFFS
JANE DOE NO. 2,

|

DEFENDANTS
JEFFREY EPSTEIN

| +|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|

(b) COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED PLAINTIFF
OUT OF STATE

(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)

|

COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED DEFENDANT NEW YORK
(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

| +|

(c) ATTORNEYS (FIRM NAME, ADDRESS, AND TELEPHONE NUMBER)
Herman & Mermelstein, P.A., 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218, Miami, FL 33160, (305) 931-2200

|

ATTORNEYS (IF KNOWN)

| + +| (d) CIRCLE COUNTY WHERE ACTION AROSE: PALM BEACH | 9.08CV 80119-KAM-Johnson | II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION
(PLACE AN X ONE BOX ONLY) | III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES
(For Diversity Case Only) | PLACE AN X IN ONE BOX ON PLAINTIFF AND ONE FOR DEFENDANT Incorporated of Principal Place of Plaintiff | +|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| 1. U.S. Government

Plaintiff

2. U.S. Government

Defendant

(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) | 3. Federal Question

(U.S. Government Not a Party)

4. Diversity

(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) | Citizen of This State

Citizen of Another State

Citizen or Subject of a Foreign Country | 1 1

2 2

3 3 | 4 4

Business in This State

Incorporated and Principal Place of Plaintiff

Business in Another State

Foreign Nation | + +IV. CAUSE OF ACTION (CITE THE U.S. CIVIL STATUTE UNDER WHICH YOU ARE FILING AND WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUSE. DO NOT CITE JURISDICTIONAL STATUTES UNLESS DIVERSITY.) DIVERSITY ACTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. §1332(a) FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT + +Va. 5 days estimated (for both sides) to try entire case + +V. NATURE OF SUIT (PLACE AN X IN ONE BOX ONLY) + +| A CONTRACT | A TORTS | B FORFEITURE PENALTY | A BANKRUPTCY | A OTHER STATUS | | +|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------| +| |

PERSONAL INJURY

PERSONAL PROPERTY

| |

A PROPERTY RIGHTS

B SOCIAL SECURITY

| | | +| A REAL PROPERTY | A CIVIL RIGHTS | B PRISONER PETITIONS | A LABOR | A FEDERAL TAX SUITS | A OTHER STATUS | +| | | | | | | + +| VI. ORIGIN | | | | INTEREST | | +|-------------------|------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|--| +| x 1. Original | 2. Removed from | 3. Remanded from | 4. Refilled | 6. Multidistrict Litigation | | +| | | | 7. Appeal to District Judge from | | | +| Proceeding | State Court | Appellate Court
(Specify) | 5. Transferred from another district | | | +| | | | Magistrate Judgment | | | +| | | | | CLARENCE MADDOX
CLERK, DIST. CL. | | +| | | | | S.D., OF FLORIDA | | + +| VII. REQUESTED | CHECK IF THIS IS A | O CLASS ACTION | DEMAND | | | | +|----------------|---------------------|----------------|--------|----|--------------|------| +| IN COMPLAINT | O UNDER F.R.C.P. 23 | | | | | | +| | | | | CI | Check YE | | +| | | | | | JURY DEMAND: | O NO | + +VIII. RELATED CASE(S) IF ANY (See Instructions): (SEE ATTACHED) JUDGE \_\_\_\_\_ DOCKET NUMBER \_\_\_\_\_ + +DATE Feb. 5, 2014 SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD [Signature] + +UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +S/F 1-2 +REV. 9/94 + +FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Receipt No. \_\_\_\_\_ Amount: \$50 + +Date Paid: \_\_\_\_\_ M/fp: \_\_\_\_\_ + +542215 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743522/EFTA02743522.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743522/EFTA02743522.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1a09ede19e62ff9e0c903a175011e5ac8a10ee04 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743522/EFTA02743522.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,426 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743522.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 36096, + "elapsed_seconds": 14.52, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.79500000000002, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 395.4428405761719, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 395.4428405761719, + 127.710205078125 + ], + [ + 204.79500000000002, + 127.710205078125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.21999999999997, + 301.32 + ], + [ + 340.135498046875, + 301.32 + ], + [ + 340.135498046875, + 315.0332946777344 + ], + [ + 263.21999999999997, + 315.0332946777344 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.63, + 382.32 + ], + [ + 381.8179016113281, + 382.32 + ], + [ + 381.8179016113281, + 397.554931640625 + ], + [ + 222.63, + 397.554931640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Factual Allegations", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 358.53326416015625, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 358.53326416015625, + 128.31005859375 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 128.31005859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT I \nSexual Assault", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.605, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 342.55500000000006, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 342.55500000000006, + 168.48 + ], + [ + 262.605, + 168.48 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT II \nIntentional Infliction of Emotional Distress", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.495, + 553.23 + ], + [ + 419.7415771484375, + 553.23 + ], + [ + 419.7415771484375, + 580.77 + ], + [ + 192.495, + 580.77 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JURY TRIAL DEMAND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 234.93, + 282.68999999999994 + ], + [ + 369.0, + 282.68999999999994 + ], + [ + 369.0, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 234.93, + 295.65 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 257 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Form", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 388 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 391 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 280 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 32 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 450 + ], + [ + "Line", + 188 + ], + [ + "Form", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743522" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743528/EFTA02743528.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743528/EFTA02743528.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c381bfcb363fabaeff4a4900a8b95e34db99e460 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743528/EFTA02743528.md @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ +Clarence Maddox Clerk of Court + +## United States District Court + +Southern DISTRICT OF Florida + +## SUMMONS + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO. 08-CV-80119-MARRARMI + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +TO: JEFFREY EPSTEIN, individually: + +9 East 71st Street + +New York, NY 10021 + +YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to serve upon PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY, + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. + +Stuart S. Mennelstein, Esq. + +Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +(305) 931-2200 + +an answer to the complaint which is herewith served upon you, within 20 days after service of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You must also file your answer with the Clerk of this Court within a reasonable period of time after service. + +![](_page_0_Picture_23.jpeg) + +SIMINIONS + +siVern ice + +Deputy Clerk + +U.S. District Courts + +February 6, 2008 + +DATE \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743528/EFTA02743528.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743528/EFTA02743528.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6d1f2683a18cfa2e7d4eb5284084c9aa58b06d2e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743528/EFTA02743528.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,115 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743528.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 991, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.37, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_23.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "United States District Court", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 147.6, + 47.79 + ], + [ + 488.2568359375, + 47.79 + ], + [ + 488.2568359375, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 147.6, + 76.94999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUMMONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 271.21500000000003, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 355.66693115234375, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 355.66693115234375, + 117.3319091796875 + ], + [ + 271.21500000000003, + 117.3319091796875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 203 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743528" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743528/_page_0_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743528/_page_0_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fd31f052007786f4244798681d39723d666932fa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743528/_page_0_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7c3f40d79a40692401490ff39b54e1f1a3930c045d562622c8cc5d4bf8daa64b +size 15886 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743529/EFTA02743529.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743529/EFTA02743529.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3c76bc0acc6db34c9573de6ce2b97cee41799e32 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743529/EFTA02743529.md @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.08-80119-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER REQUIRING COUNSEL TO CONFER, FILE JOINT SCHEDULING REPORT AND FILE JOINT DISCOVERY REPORT + +THIS ORDER has been entered upon the filing of the complaint. Plaintiff's counsel is hereby ORDERED to forward to all defendants, upon receipt of a responsive pleading, a copy of this order. + +It is further ORDERED: + +- I. Every motion when filed shall be accompanied by a proposed order, except that motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment need not be accompanied by a proposed order. +- 2. Pretrial discovery in this case shall be conducted in accord with Local Rule 16.1 and Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. +- 3. Pursuant to Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, unless this action is excluded under Rule 26(aX1)(E), the parties must confer within twenty-one (21) days after the filing of the first responsive pleading by the last responding defendant, to consider the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for a prompt settlement or resolution of the case, to make or arrange for the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1), and to develop a + +proposed discovery plan that indicates the parties' views and proposals concerning the matters listed in Rule 26(f). + +4. The parties are jointly responsible for submitting a written report of this conference outlining the proposed discovery plan within 14 days after the conference. + +5. Counsel for the parties shall hold a scheduling conference either at the same time as the discovery conference described in Rule 26(f) or within fourteen (14) calendar days thereafter. See Local Rule 16.1(B). + +6. Within fourteen (14) days of the scheduling conference, counsel shall file a joint scheduling report pursuant to Local Rule 16.1(B)(2). This report shall indicate the proposed month and year for the trial plus the estimated number of trial days required, as well as an indication of whether the trial is to be a jury trial or bench trial. + +7. The parties may submit a single report combining the discovery plan report and the schedWing conference report. + +8. Failure of counsel or unrepresented parties to file a discovery plan report or joint scheduling report may result in dismissal, default, and the imposition of other sanctions including attorney's fees and costs. + +DONE AND SIGNED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 8t6 day of February, 2008. + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: + +All counsel \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743529/EFTA02743529.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743529/EFTA02743529.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7543dba6ce54464f638979deee2e066d0edb4574 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743529/EFTA02743529.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,151 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743529.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2619, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.71, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.856, + 57.50999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 57.50999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 86.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.856, + 86.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER REQUIRING COUNSEL TO CONFER, FILE JOINT SCHEDULING REPORT \nAND FILE JOINT DISCOVERY REPORT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.216, + 269.73 + ], + [ + 540.4690551757812, + 269.73 + ], + [ + 540.4690551757812, + 299.6030578613281 + ], + [ + 72.216, + 299.6030578613281 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743529" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743531/EFTA02743531.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743531/EFTA02743531.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0a58426df03053104b8f1a94a629bac167a29811 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743531/EFTA02743531.md @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@ +HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN PA + +ATTN: LISA + +U.S.SOUTHERN COURT FLORIDA .COUNTY + +JANE DOE NO.2 + +- against - + +plaintiff + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN defendant + +Index No. 08CV80119MARRA- + +Date Filed + +Office No. + +Court Date: / / + +STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF NEW YORK :SS: HARRY being duly sworn, deposes and says; I am over 18 years of age, not a party to this action, and reside in the State of New York. That on the 7th day of May, 2008 07:45 AM at + +9 EAST 71ST ST + +NEW YORK, NY 10021 + +I served the SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT + +after prior attempts were made on: 04/23/2008 06:15 PM 04/24/2008 02:30 PM 05/01/2008 06:27p. upon JEFFREY EPSTEIN \*\* + +the DEFENDANT therein named by delivering and leaving a true copy or copies of the aforementioned documents with + +"JOHN ", ASSISTANT & HOUSE STAFF EMPLOYEE WHO + +REFUSED TRUE NAME + +a person of suitable age and discretion, who refused access to DEFENDANT's actual apartment, and accepted in accordance with his/her everyday duties. + +Deponent describes the person served as aforesaid to the best of deponent's ability at the time and circumstances of the service as follows: + +SEX: MALE COLOR: HAIR: AGE: 45 HEIGHT: 6:0 WEIGHT: 200 + +OTHER IDENTIFYING FEATURES: MUSTACHE/BEARD + +en-- - 7/ - tbe.alosementioned + +..documents\_pxoperlq\_enringed\_and-sealed in\_e\_post-paid-etrappe.r .ariA-r..esed--to thasaicL + +DER93NENINP--at theebove-address . -Thee address-being- + +last-anowe..-Treeideucar-nsuni -place--of.--abods--ot--the--DEFENDANTp. + +caacked -pareenal-e -couticlential -not Snd-icaeing-ew-t-he-eueside-ehetasof -by zete-ra-acklress..e.r otherwise--that..-sald,-netise--th t.som-an-attorney es-0a :teens aet4es-age4net the person-to-be-sereed, \*\*& 5/5/08 9:20PM + +That at the time of service as aforesaid, I asked person spoken to whether DEFENDANT was in the military service of the State of New York or United States and received a negative reply. Upon information and belief based upon the conversation and observation as aforesaid I aver that the DEFENDANT is not in the military service of the State of New York United States as that term is defined in the statutes of Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act. the State of New York or or the the Federal + +DEPONENT STATED AT THE TIME OF SERVICE HE HAD LEGAL P IN A FLORIDA ACTION. + +Sworn to before me this + +12th day of May, 2008ni + +SAMSON + +Notary Public, + +No.01NE-4783767 + +Qualified in NEW YORK COUNTY + +Commission Expires 11/03/2009 + +HARRY TPRRR S 091325 + +AETNA CE RAL JUDICIAL SERVICES + +225 BROADWAY, SUITE 1802 + +NEW YORK, NY, 10007 + +Reference No: 7HM4111728 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743531/EFTA02743531.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743531/EFTA02743531.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aa288b964d7b8b58572fdf6a1e0bd872a31929b3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743531/EFTA02743531.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743531.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 2534, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.99, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 134 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 45 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743531" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743532/EFTA02743532.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743532/EFTA02743532.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..302b38f8e6ef0681dc67baf3c2eb4971514c803d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743532/EFTA02743532.md @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@ +HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN PA + +ATTN: LISA + +U.S.SOUTHERN COURT FLORIDA .COUNTY + +JANE DOE NO.2 + +- against - + +plaintiff + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN defendant + +Index No. 08CV80119MARBA- + +Date Filed + +Office No. + +Court Date: / / + +STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF NEW YORK :SS: HARRY being duly sworn, deposes and says; I am over 18 years of age, not a party to this action, and reside in the State of New York. That on the 7th day of May, 2008 07:45 AM at + +9 EAST 71ST ST + +NEW YORK, NY 10021 + +I served the SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT + +after prior attempts were made on: 04/23/2008 06:15 PM 04/24/2008 02130 PM 05/01/2008 06:27p. upon JEFFREY EPSTEIN \*\* + +the DEFENDANT therein named by delivering and leaving a true copy or copies of the aforementioned documents with + +"JOHN ", ASSISTANT & HOUSE STAFF EMPLOYEE WHO + +REFUSED TRUE NAME + +a person of suitable age and discretion, who refused access to DEFENDANT's actual apartment, and accepted in accordance with his/her everyday duties. + +Deponent describes the person served as aforesaid to the best of deponent's ability at the time and circumstances of the service as follows: + +SEX: MALE COLOR: HAIR: AGE: 45 HEIGHT: 6:0 WEIGHT: 200 + +OTHER IDENTIFYING FEATURES: MUSTACHE/BEARD + +- -71- the\_ lor-amentiorted + +xlocuments\_psoperly\_euringed\_and-sealed in\_a\_post-paid-strappar .arlAraissed..to-the-sai.d.. + +19EFLENSAMP--at the-above-mddress . -That address-being- + +last-44nomm.-ress.idosuce.... flees, plasze-of.--abode-o,f-the.-DEFENDANT,. + +Cop)c-mitilad-Zat-alaas-Inall caazkad -perscana,1,-4, -couticlential -not Sndicat-ing-ew-t-he-eute4.41e.-t7heteof .by zetura-acklrass...o.r otheswisda--that..-sald—netise--th Lisom-as.-at.torney or..-osaneewns aeG.i..eft-age4ast the ps.r.son-to-be.-serued, \*\*& 5/5/08 9:20PM + +That at the time of service as aforesaid, I asked person spoken to whether DEFENDANT was in the military service of the State of New York or United States and received a negative reply. Upon information and belief based upon the conversation and observation as aforesaid I aver that the DEFENDANT is not in the military service of the State of New York or the United States as that term is defined in the statutes of the State of New York or the Federal Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act. + +DEPONENT STATED AT THE TIME OF SERVICE HE HAD LEGAL P IN A FLORIDA ACTION. + +Sworn to before me this + +12th day of May, 2008ni + +SAMSON + +Notary Public, + +No.01NE-4783767 + +Qualified in NEW YORK COUNTY + +Commission Expires 11/03/2009 + +HARRY TPRRR S 091325 + +AETNA CE RAL JUDICIAL SERVICES + +225 BROADWAY, SUITE 1802 + +NEW YORK, NY, 10007 + +Reference No: 7HM4111728 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743532/EFTA02743532.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743532/EFTA02743532.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d99b72aa60575e7bce678ac87c2f4590959320f6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743532/EFTA02743532.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743532.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 2585, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.98, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 124 + ], + [ + "Line", + 59 + ], + [ + "Text", + 45 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743532" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/EFTA02743533.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/EFTA02743533.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..98854be37245f4e0b84f5b6bf811d910ded5699e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/EFTA02743533.md @@ -0,0 +1,125 @@ +Poem 12 - ma; WIN Hann + +HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN PA + +ATTN: LISA + +U.S.SOUTHERN COURT FLORIDA COUNTY + +JANE-DOE NO .2 + +- against - + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Plaintiff + +defendant + +Index No. 08CV80119KAWAr. + +Date Filed + +Office No. + +Court Date: / / + +STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF NEW YORK :SS: + +HARRY 11.1. being duly sworn, deposes and says; I am over 18 years of age, not aparty to this action, and reside in the State of New York. That on the 7th day of May, 2008 07:45 AM at + +9 EAST 71ST ST + +NEW YORK, NY 10021 + +I served the SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT + +after prior attempts were made on: 04/23/2008 06:15 PM 04/24/2008 02:30 PM 05/01/2008 06:27pi. + +upon JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +the DEFENDANT therein named by delivering and leaving a true copy or copies of the aforementioned documents with + +"JOHN , ASSISTANT & HOUSE STAFF EMPLOYEE WHO + +REFUSED TRUE NAME + +aperson of suitable age and discretion, who refused access to DEPENDANT' s actual apartment, and accepted in accordance with his/her everyday duties. + +Deponent describes the person served as aforesaid to the best of deponent's ability at the time and circumstances of the service as follows: + +SEX: MALE COLOR: HAIR: AGE: 45 HEIGHT: 6:0 WEIGHT: 200 + +OTHER IDENTIFYING FEATURES: MUSTACHE P ARD I + +-On-- -1 1I--depefrited-in—ttua-Unitad.-States\_zsaiL-a-t rise -copy-of t-tte-,..aforrementionad + +\_documents propea.enclased -and- seal PA in\_.a...poatpairlarapper athirso-sed..toSsaid. + +DE-PeNDAN213--at the-aberreeldress. -That acidress-be4ns). . . las..t...hztobra. re. ai Aia--44,--uatux3.--place-ot- -abode-of- -the,--DEVENDANT-b. . . + +Coplt-maned-las-classe-maskoad-parsonal-&-sontalentialnot-h.nd'eaSitng-es-she-etits4de-t-hessof- -by xesurnaddress-or.'etherwisa-that-said.-notia-is £som-aaatteaney-cs-oeseesns-ae64ea-agatxet the-parson-to-ba-seruscl.. \*\*& 5/5/08 9:20PM + +That at the time of service as aforesaid, / asked person spoken to whether DEFENDANT was in the military service of the State of New York or United States and received anegative reply. Upon information, and belief based upon the conversation and observation as aforesaid Iaver that the DEFENDANT is not in the military service of the State of New York or. the United States as that term is defined in the statutes of the State of New York or the Federal Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act. + +DEPONENT STATED AT THE TIME OF SERVICE HE HAD LEGAYA P IN- APAORIDA ACTION. + +Sworn to before me this + +12th day of May, 2008ni + +.1 1,, SAMSON Notary No.01NE-4783767 + +Qualified in NEW YORK COUNTY + +Commission Expires 11/03/2009 + +HARRY T RR \*S 091425' + +AETNA CE RAL JUDICIAL SERVICES + +225 BROADWAY, SUITE 1802 + +NEW YORK, NY, 10007 + +Reference No: 7HM4111728 + +![](_page_0_Picture_45.jpeg) + +UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED] + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +NON-MILITARY AFFIDAVIT + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) +) SS: +COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE ) + +**BEFORE ME**, the undersigned authority, personally appeared ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQ., an attorney of record for the Plaintiff, who is personally known to me, and who after first being duly sworn, deposes and says on personal knowledge that Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, is not on active duty in the armed forces of the United States. + +![]()Sworn to and subscribed before me this 29 day of May, 2008. + +![]()My Commission expires: + +![](_page_1_Picture_135.jpeg) + +Lisa [REDACTED] +Commission #DD417062 +Expires: APR. 11, 2009 +WWW.AARONNOTARY.COM + +![](_page_1_Picture_138.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/EFTA02743533.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/EFTA02743533.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..83a2da905ea818f3a508678218440266d9208d3a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/EFTA02743533.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,155 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 3616, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.93, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_45.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_135.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_138.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.194, + 87.588 + ], + [ + 405.193, + 87.588 + ], + [ + 405.193, + 114.35099999999998 + ], + [ + 207.194, + 114.35099999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NON-MILITARY AFFIDAVIT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 221.293, + 300.881 + ], + [ + 388.64199999999994, + 300.881 + ], + [ + 388.64199999999994, + 314.668 + ], + [ + 221.293, + 314.668 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 458 + ], + [ + "Line", + 61 + ], + [ + "Text", + 45 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Text", + 32 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743533" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/_page_0_Picture_45.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/_page_0_Picture_45.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6e7cae98824bf5e52696e038202a679c15654c41 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/_page_0_Picture_45.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8f819656ec15cfb6c0d3bb92c39b8e898e2d1b1494c1d1120369448f932d9910 +size 13939 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/_page_1_Picture_135.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/_page_1_Picture_135.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7ee604f3d6890e4f2a405efe0361e4b59249451e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/_page_1_Picture_135.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2b497254929ae3bce69fe5a2e6c88bbab74eba78691aa04a830b42e6daa61c85 +size 4997 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/_page_1_Picture_138.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/_page_1_Picture_138.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8b0102a5a8ca66d9224eccd0aa631c05fe7439fb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743533/_page_1_Picture_138.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1e3c443d717c19fb04d47e1267e031e3ab4273c975f356be5317725133bc1a9c +size 12131 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743535/EFTA02743535.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743535/EFTA02743535.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e698e2259f5d87d2b8dc28c0c65ba24048390e76 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743535/EFTA02743535.md @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +## DEFAULT + +It appearing that the Defendant Jeffrey Epstein is in Default for failure to plead or otherwise defend as required by law, Default is hereby entered as against the said Defendant this day of May, 2008. + +CLERK OF COURT \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743535/EFTA02743535.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743535/EFTA02743535.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b5e2c7bd05a8b96466cd1351a713b71c4ab164e8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743535/EFTA02743535.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743535.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 387, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.74, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.63200000000003, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 205.63200000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFAULT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.176, + 296.46 + ], + [ + 337.87054443359375, + 296.46 + ], + [ + 337.87054443359375, + 310.863037109375 + ], + [ + 274.176, + 310.863037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743535" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743536/EFTA02743536.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743536/EFTA02743536.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..84517cfcf1086c7af9d21f06499f007adaa61f6c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743536/EFTA02743536.md @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT AGAINST DEFENDANT + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2, by and through her undersigned counsel, and pursuant to the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) and S.D. Fla. L.R. 7.1, hereby files this Motion for Entry of Default Against Defendant, and states as follows: + +- I. On May 7, 2008, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein was served with a Summons and Complaint in this case. A copy of the Affidavit of Service is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". +- 2. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(1), Defendant was required to answer or otherwise serve a response to the Complaint on or before May 27, 2008. +- 3. To date, Defendant has neither answered the Complaint, filed a response of any kind, nor requested an enlargement of time. Moreover, no attorney has entered an appearance on behalf of the Defendant. +- 4. The Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein is not on active duty in the armed forces of the United States. See Exhibit "B". +- 5. Accordingly, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a), Plaintiff applies to this Honorable Court for the entry of default judgment against the Defendant. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, JANE DOE NO. 2, respectfully requests this Court to grant this motion in favor of Plaintiff and enter a default against Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +Dated: May 29, 2008. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Jeffrey M. Herman (FL Bar No. 521647) iherman@hermanlaw.com Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@hermanlaw.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on May 29, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CWECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Is/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASE NO.: 013-CV-80119-MARRA/ffi United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jeffrey Epstein (Via Regular Mail) 9 East 71st Street New York, NY 10021 + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743536/EFTA02743536.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743536/EFTA02743536.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5806900101308ef6be527be5006c1df77cde66c2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743536/EFTA02743536.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,239 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743536.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2603, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.78, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENTRY \nOF DEFAULT AGAINST DEFENDANT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 415.0776062011719, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 415.0776062011719, + 325.10302734375 + ], + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 325.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 447.93 + ], + [ + 385.7200622558594, + 447.93 + ], + [ + 385.7200622558594, + 462.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 462.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nCASE NO.: 013-CV-80119-MARRA/ffi \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.6502685546875, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.6502685546875, + 143.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 143.30352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743536" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/EFTA02743539.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/EFTA02743539.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5e3cfe4e0d6283a00fa936fec048e8a81e197007 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/EFTA02743539.md @@ -0,0 +1,105 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### AFFIDAVIT OF JEFFREY M. HERMAN + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS: COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE + +Jeffrey M. Herman, deposes and states as follows: + +1. I am the attorney of record for Jane Doe No. 2, and have knowledge of the status and history of this case. + +2. The Complaint filed in this action alleges that Defendant Epstein is a financier and money manager to billionaires, who himself is a man of tremendous wealth, power and influence. It alleges that Defendant Epstein preys on young teenage girls by inducing them to give him massages for compensation in his Palm Beach mansion, and then sexually assaulting them. + +3. PlaintiffJane Doe No. 2 seeks damages for sexual assault against Defendant Epstein. This case was filed on February 6, 2008. On that day, I attended a press conference in West Palm Beach, Florida concerning the filing of this suit. Accusations relating to Mr. Epstein's sexual misconduct with underage girls has been reported extensively in the press, since 2006. The filing of Jane Doe No. 2's case received extensive press coverage, as did a prior related case filed on January + +![](_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg) + +24, 2008 making similar allegations. Jack A. Goldberger, Esq., Mr. Epstein's attorney, attended a press conference in January, 2008 on Mr. Epstein's behalf, which concerned the filing of the first civil case. + +4. In March, 2008, I advised Mr. Goldberger in writing that I represent the woman who is Jane Doe No. 2. A redacted copy of this letter is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". Mr. Goldberger is attorney of record for Mr. Epstein in a criminal case pending against Mr. Epstein in Palm Beach County. I subsequently wrote to Mr. Goldberger again and asked for his consent to conducting a single deposition o fJane Doe No. 2 to be used in both criminal and civil matters. A redacted copy of this letter is attached hereto as Exhibit "B". Mr. Goldberger was also asked if he would accept service on behalf of Mr. Epstein, but he failed to respond. + +5. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff's process server made numerous attempts to serve Mr. Epstein with the Summons and Complaint at his New York residence, without success. It is my understanding that Defendant Epstein's principal residence is an approximate 45,000 square foot luxury townhouse in Manhattan. He also has an estate home in Palm Beach, an island in St. and a residence in New Mexico. I was later provided with information that Mr. Epstein was out of the country in and about April, 2008, in the State of Israel. I was further advised that he returned to the United States in late April - early May, 2008. In response to this information my firm instructed the New York process server to step up efforts to serve process on Defendant Epstein. Service was finally obtained on May 7, 2008 at Defendant Epstein's New York residence, on the fifth attempt to serve Defendant Epstein in a span of 14 days. + +6. It was not until June 6, 2008, when the Clerk denied Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default, that I became aware that the Clerk had an issue with service of process in this action. In two + +other related cases, Clerk's defaults were entered based on the same service. At every step, my firm has acted promptly and diligently to comply with the rules of the court, attempt to properly effect service, and move this case forward expeditiously. + +FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +Dated: June J 0 , 2008. + +FREY M. HERMAN + +BEFORE ME, personally appeared JEFFREY M. HERMAN who after being first duly sworn, deposes and states that he has executed the foregoing Affidavit, and that it is correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT was sworn to and subscribed before me this /0 day of Ankle , 2008. + +> itpait 1-e14 NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF FLORIDA + +![](_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg) + +# HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN PA + +ATTORNEYS AT LAW + +March 13, 2008 + +## Via Facsimile and U.S. Mail + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +> Re: State of Florida v. Jeffrey E. Epstein Case No.: 2006CF009454AXX + +Dear Mr. Goldberger: + +Please be advised we represent intended for her to our office. Please direct all communications + +Thank you for your attention to this matter. + +JMH/Ir + +![](_page_3_Picture_15.jpeg) + +Sincerel + +Jeffrey M. Herman Tel 305.931.2200 Fax 305.931.0877 jherman@hermanlaw.com + +18205 Biscayne Blvd. Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 www.hennanlaw.com + +effrey M. Herman + +## HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN PA + +ATTORNEYS AT LAW + +March 20, 2008 + +## Via Facsimile and U.S. Mail + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. 250 Australia Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +> Re: State of Florida v. Jeffrey E. Epstein Case No.: 2006CF009454AXX + +Dear Mr. Goldberger: + +Jeffrey M. Herman Tel 305.931.2200 Fax 305.931.0877 jhermamahermanlaw.com + +18205 Biscayne Blvd. Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 www.hermanlaw.com + +As you know, we represent in all matters pertaining to Jeffrey Epstein. If you plan on schedulinginfille for deposition please contact us to schedule to adate convenient for and myself. In addition, we would like to conduct asingle deposition to be used for both the criminal and the civil matters. Please let us know if you will agree to this or if we should seek court approval for same. Of course, we understand that the State Attorney's Office will need to agree to this as well, and we have not yet contacted them for approval. + +JMH/lr + +cc: Lanna Leigh Belohlavek, Asst. State Attorney + +![](_page_4_Picture_15.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/EFTA02743539.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/EFTA02743539.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c355239801c85a5ca1702e91244898c53557f46d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/EFTA02743539.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,366 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 5631, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.44, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg", + "_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg", + "_page_3_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_4_Picture_15.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.194, + 89.21 + ], + [ + 407.81707763671875, + 89.21 + ], + [ + 407.81707763671875, + 117.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 207.194, + 117.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF JEFFREY M. HERMAN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 194.93399999999997, + 302.503 + ], + [ + 419.5770263671875, + 302.503 + ], + [ + 419.5770263671875, + 316.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 194.93399999999997, + 316.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN PA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.23999786376953, + 72.92706298828125 + ], + [ + 351.86199999999997, + 72.92706298828125 + ], + [ + 351.86199999999997, + 97.0394287109375 + ], + [ + 72.23999786376953, + 97.0394287109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Via Facsimile and U.S. Mail", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.26899999999999, + 253.03199999999998 + ], + [ + 231.714, + 253.03199999999998 + ], + [ + 231.714, + 269.23248291015625 + ], + [ + 69.26899999999999, + 269.23248291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN PA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.142, + 79.478 + ], + [ + 363.8946838378906, + 79.478 + ], + [ + 363.8946838378906, + 101.375 + ], + [ + 82.142, + 101.375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Via Facsimile and U.S. Mail", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 77.851, + 257.087 + ], + [ + 242.28253173828125, + 257.087 + ], + [ + 242.28253173828125, + 273.307 + ], + [ + 77.851, + 273.307 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 214 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743539" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1aece985914f1bcedb3d1946e45b79bb8024bc98 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:05b8ab9004a23a0e904fcd6528a4b020baf99faefc1c0a0216a8d4faaf8e4bad +size 6574 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..223dd09e3cf1a74a7de7c5f031e04b03ea2e58ec --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a3028040bbceee2587dda05e06054ca7d03427920ac06fd978f356fcac1fb2c5 +size 10448 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/_page_3_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/_page_3_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1e066742942a8e5cd46665ecc34d9a011a18612a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/_page_3_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:846b7749362f340f552239851c40d246399e867ba05daf5366b61741773b6c85 +size 13829 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/_page_4_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/_page_4_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1850b00b28b6d23ade26e52ec4be6272711707d8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743539/_page_4_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8e2fe2777035846e5fde7c7c4311e2bea09706bf15126c3a92b2c8cf3464d1bf +size 13907 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743544/EFTA02743544.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743544/EFTA02743544.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b310ed8e72ea9911147d3f6385679c6f205c5e9b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743544/EFTA02743544.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintig + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +## AFFIDAVIT + +STATE OF NEW YORK ) SS: COUNTY OF MANHATTAN + +Joel Golub deposes and states as follows: + +- 1. Tam an agent with Aetna Judicial Serviette, Inc., a service of process firm in New York, NY. +- 2. I received the Summons and Complaint in this matter from Herman &Merraelstein, P.A. on Februmy 12, 2008. +- 3. We attempted service on Jeffrey Epstein a number of time during the months of February and March, 2008, at the residence located at 9 East 71st Street, New York, NY, and were unable to effectuate personal service during that time. + +JOEL GOLUB + +Sworn to and subscribed before me this ji day of SV A/, + +My Commission expires: + +![](_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg) + +Notary Pllblfe Cate of New York + +BIM GO Nek:1119b242,4:44 6 LUB of Now yolk QualMed I el n Nosily 129491 Commission Expires JumF°741:19009 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743544/EFTA02743544.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743544/EFTA02743544.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..58521188ee905d179ae6d9ae8a94e34c3f5458c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743544/EFTA02743544.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743544.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 969, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.06, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 213.32399999999996, + 120.02799999999999 + ], + [ + 401.06488037109375, + 120.02799999999999 + ], + [ + 401.06488037109375, + 150.60302734375 + ], + [ + 213.32399999999996, + 150.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 272.17199999999997, + 321.156 + ], + [ + 339.9516296386719, + 321.156 + ], + [ + 339.9516296386719, + 336.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 272.17199999999997, + 336.9730224609375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743544" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743544/_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743544/_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9337c0ba7c3ac7c1b4c3162be04c3f69b5f343b9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743544/_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b8a2679bc02e078949b0334db9ee1bde0a18010e3cdf560147a454e18615c65f +size 8179 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743545/EFTA02743545.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743545/EFTA02743545.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6830cadda5d91aa939dfb4f72faa74cea6e14297 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743545/EFTA02743545.md @@ -0,0 +1,68 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLING CLERK TO ENTER DEFAULT AGAINST DEFENDANT, OR ALTERNATIVELY, FOR AN ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO SERVE PROCESS, AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2, by and through her undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 55(a) and 4(m), and S.D. Fla. L.R. 7.1, hereby files this Motion for Order Compelling Clerk to Enter Default Against Defendant, or Alternatively, for an Enlargement of Time to Serve Process, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, as follows: + +- I. This action was filed on February 6, 2008. On May 7, 2008, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein was served with the Summons and Complaint. A copy of the Affidavit of Service was filed with the Court. (D.E. 4). +- 2. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(a)(I), Defendant Jeffrey Epstein was required to answer or otherwise serve a response to the Complaint on or before May 27, 2008. Defendant failed to do so. +- 3. On May 29, 2008, Plaintiff moved for entry of a Clerk's Default against Defendant pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(a). + - 4. On June 6, 2008, the Clerk denied Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default. lot + +improper service. (D.E. 8). + +5. The Affidavit of Service filed in this case, states that the process server made five separate attempts at service at the Defendant's New York residence over a two week period, at various times of day and night; on the fifth attempt, on May 7, 2008 at 7:45 a.m., the process server served an "Assistant and House Staff Employee" in Defendant's residence who refused to identify himself. + +6. According to press reports, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein is a billionaire with multiple residences; his principal residence is a 45,000 square foot townhouse in Manhattan, where the above-described service was made. Mr. Epstein began receiving extensive press coverage approximately two years ago when allegations first surfaced that he sexually molested young girls. There are presently pending criminal charges against Mr. Epstein in Palm Beach County relating to such allegations, in which Mr. Epstein is represented by Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. See Herman Alf., Exhibit "A" hereto 11 3-5). The Defendant's receipt of notice of this lawsuit is based on correspondence and communications between Plaintiff's counsel and Defendant's attorney, Mr. Goldberger, regarding both the criminal case and this civil case, and the extensive press coverage of the instant lawsuit when it was filed in February, 2008, as well as the May 7, 2008 service of process at his New York residence. (See Herman Aff., Exhibit "A" hereto, 11 3, 4). + +7. Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(e)(2)(B), service of process can be made on the defendant by "leaving a copy ... at the individual's dwelling or usual place of abode with someone of suitable age + +At the same time service of process was attempted in this case, it was also attempted in related cases in this Court a ainst Defendant Epstein, Jane Doe 3 v. Epstein, case no. CASE NO.: 08- CV-80232-MARK Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein case no., 08-CV-80380- MAR and Jane Doe No. 5 v. Epstein, case no. 08-80381-CIV-MARRA. Unlike the instant case, Clerk's defaults were entered in Jane Doe 4 and Jane Doe 5 based on affidavits of service identical to that filed in this case. Plaintiff filed a Motion for Entry of Default in Jane Doe + +and discretion who resides there."2 + +8. A filed Affidavit of Service constitutes prima facie evidence of valid service. Home-Stake Production Co. v. Talon Petroleum, C.A. 907 F.2d 1012 (10th Cir. 1990). In Home-Stake, the declaration of the process server stated only that the person served identified herself as the working for the defendant for the past twenty years. Id. at 1016. The Court held that the defendant's affidavit challenging the validity of that service was insufficient to overcome the presumption of valid service created by the process server's affidavit and return of service. Id. at 1017. In other words, it was the defendant's burden to show that the did not reside in his home, and he failed to meet that burden.3 Id. See also National Development Co. v. Triad Holding Corp., 930 F.2d 253, 256-58 (2d Cir. 1991) (upholding service on the defendant's housekeeper, where the defendant, like Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, was a wealthy individual with more than one residence, on the basis that, "if not the most likely method of ensuring that he received the summons and complaint, [the service] was reasonably calculated to provide actual notice of the action"). + +9. "Courts have liberally construed [Rule 4] and found valid service of process when a defendant has actual notice of a lawsuit filed against him." Keevan & Son. Inc. v. Callier Steel Pipe & Tube, Inc., 107 F.R.D. 665, 671 (S.D. Fla. 1985) (denying motion to set aside default). "If the court finds that the defendant received notice of the complaint and the plaintiff made a good + +No. 3 but to date there has been no action taken on that Motion. + +'Service can also be made on the Defendant in this case under Florida law or under the law of New York, where the service was made. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(2)(A). Florida law is substantially the same as federal law, as it allows service on a person 15 years or older who resides at the defendant's usual place of abode. Florida Statute §48.031(1)(a). + +' Under Florida law, like federal law, "[a] presumption of valid service arises from evidence of a return of service which is regular on its face. The party challenging the service must overcome that presumption by clear and convincing evidence." Magazine v. Bedova 475 So.2d 1035 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). + +faith effort to serve the defendant pursuant to the Rule, then the court will most likely find that service of process has been effective." IL Here, it may fairly and reasonably be inferred that Defendant Epstein had actual notice of the filing of the Complaint, and the Plaintiff has exercised diligence and good faith in attempting to serve Defendant Epstein with process. Accordingly, entry of default is appropriate. + +10. If the Court does not agree that service on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein was valid, then Plaintiff requests an enlargement of time to effect service. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m), the Court shall extend the 120-day period' for service for an appropriate period where good cause on behalf of Plaintiff is shown. Here, Plaintiff was diligent in seeking service of process through numerous attempts, until Plaintiff reasonably believed that service had been effectuated on May 7, 2008. (Golub Aff., Exhibit "B" hereto (attempts at service made in February and March, 2008); Affidavit of Service, D.E. 4 (attempts at service made in April and May, 2008, after Defendant Epstein returned from Israel)• see also Herman Aff. 11 5-6). Within days of the expiration of time for Defendant to answer or respond to the Complaint based on the May 7, 2008 service date, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Clerk's Default. Not until June 6, 2008, when Plaintiff's counsel received the Clerk's denial of the Motion for Entry of Default, did a need to take further action become apparent, and Plaintiff then promptly filed the instant Motion. Accordingly, Plaintiff has been diligent in attempting to serve process on Defendant Epstein. Additionally, for a significant portion of the 120 day period, Defendant Epstein was out of the country, in the State of Israel, and not amenable to service. (Herman Aff.,1 5). + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, JANE DOE NO. 2, respectfully requests that this Court enter an + +'This action was filed on February 6, 2008. The 120-day period to serve the Defendant with process ran on June 5. 2008, one day before the Clerk denied Plaintiffs Motion for Entry of Default. + +Order compelling the Clerk to enter a default against Defendant Jeffery Epstein pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(a), or in the alternative, for an enlargement of time to serve process on Defendant Epstein. + +Dated: June 11, 2008. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Jeffrey M. Herman (FL Bar No. 521647) iherman@hermanlaw.com Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@hermanlaw.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on June 11,2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jeffrey Epstein (Via Regular Mail) 9 East 71st Street New York, NY 10021 + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743545/EFTA02743545.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743545/EFTA02743545.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2d368ca2ccdbe4d9206c51d5ec1d98d5b7daff0b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743545/EFTA02743545.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,383 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743545.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 9197, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.08, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLING CLERK TO \nENTER DEFAULT AGAINST DEFENDANT, OR ALTERNATIVELY, \nFOR AN ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO SERVE PROCESS, \nAND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 117.50399999999999, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 495.03387451171875, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 495.03387451171875, + 353.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 117.50399999999999, + 353.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nCASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.6502685546875, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.6502685546875, + 143.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 143.30352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 72 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 42 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743545" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743552/EFTA02743552.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743552/EFTA02743552.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7d7dc17b0bbddc6b8fb79b38e01b9823f13b8efa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743552/EFTA02743552.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +## IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.:08-CV-80119-MARRA\_I + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## NOTICE OF FILING PERMANENT APPEARANCE + +The Clerk of Court shall enter the appearance of the undersigned counsel for JEFFREY EPSTEIN, in the above-entitled cause. + +DATED: June 13, 2008 + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy hereof has been furnished to Jeffrey M. Herman, Esquire, Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esquire and Adam D. Horowitz, Esq., Herman & Mermelstein, P.A., 18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218, Miami, Florida, 33160 this 13'h day of June, 2008. + +> ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 (561) 659-8300 Fax: (561)835-8691 + +/s/Jack A. Goldberger. Esq. JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE Florida Bar No. 262013 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743552/EFTA02743552.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743552/EFTA02743552.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..20a9c5e55f22e6bd349c5c16a5a5b3719e1046b9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743552/EFTA02743552.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743552.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 848, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.68, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 176.346, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 413.898, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 413.898, + 101.968017578125 + ], + [ + 176.346, + 101.968017578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF FILING PERMANENT APPEARANCE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 153.924, + 301.32 + ], + [ + 434.502, + 301.32 + ], + [ + 434.502, + 316.8380126953125 + ], + [ + 153.924, + 316.8380126953125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743552" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743553/EFTA02743553.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743553/EFTA02743553.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a69a74ad1801871cbc21ae11a6950749a5ab99d4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743553/EFTA02743553.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +## EXHIBIT A + +**AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD BARNETT** + +I, Richard Barnett, being duly sworn, do depose and state as follows: + +1. 1. I am over the age of 18, am otherwise competent to testify and base the following on my personal knowledge. +2. 2. On May 7, 2008, I received copies of the summons and complaint in four lawsuits: + 1. a. Jane Doe #2 v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 08-CV-80119, + 2. b. Jane Doe #3 v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 08-CV-80232, + 3. c. Jane Doe #4 v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 08-CV-80380, and + 4. d. Jane Doe #5 v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 08-CV-80381. +3. 3. I do not now, nor have I ever resided at 9 East 71st Street, New York, New York. + +FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +![]()Sworn and subscribed before me +this 12th day of June 2008 by +Richard Barnett, who +is personally known to me. I or did provide +as identification. + +![]()MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: + +LAUREN J. KWINTNER +Notary Public, State of New York +No. 02KW6016686 +Qualified in New York County +Commission Expires November 30, 20 10 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743553/EFTA02743553.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743553/EFTA02743553.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e4adbda44a5c285a4426d2345241e71a1a89513e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743553/EFTA02743553.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743553.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1037, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.43, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.18, + 319.1445007324219 + ], + [ + 404.5692138671875, + 319.1445007324219 + ], + [ + 404.5692138671875, + 359.9425964355469 + ], + [ + 204.18, + 359.9425964355469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD BARNETT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 178.12, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 419.07000000000005, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 419.07000000000005, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 178.12, + 102.06 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 5 + ], + [ + "Line", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743553" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743555/EFTA02743555.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743555/EFTA02743555.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8f6c1c1c5733bb370dbb37b9fd2635669e105321 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743555/EFTA02743555.md @@ -0,0 +1,135 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA- + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLING CLERK TO ENTER DEFAULT, OR ALTERNATIVELY, FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME + +Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(c), hereby opposes plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2's motion for order compelling clerk to enter default, or alternatively, for enlargement of time to serve process, upon the following showing of "good cause." + +#### Introduction + +A clerk's default should not be entered in this case. Service was effected as of June 2. Accordingly the response is due 20 days later, on or before June 23. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i). + +The plaintiff, in moving for a clerk's default, implied that service was made in accordance with either federal or Florida procedure. As discussed below, however, service was clearly ineffective under the federal and Florida rules of procedure. Accordingly, the only possibility for valid service was service under New York rules of procedure. Cf. RCP's Lear, LLC v. Taughannock Aviation Corp., No. 5:07-CV-96, 2008 WL 305103, at \*4 (N.D.N.Y. Jan. 31, 2008) (observing that "[a]s a threshold matter, the court must [first] address the rules pursuant to which process was served"). + +Service of process was valid under New York's rule for so-called "substitute-service" (i.e., service in a manner other than delivery in-hand to the defendant herself or himself), but that statute gives the defendant more time to respond than do the federal or Florida rules. See id. (acknowledging that Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)(2) has a "'resided therein' requirement," unlike "New York's substituted service statute," NY CPLR 308); NY CPLR 308 (providing that service is not deemed effected until 10 days after the process-server's affidavit is filed with the Court). + +This is not a motion to quash, or a motion arguing that service was completely ineffective. To the contrary, we acknowledge that service was effective under New York procedure, but point out that it was ineffective under Florida and federal procedure. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(e)(1) permits service to be + +made according to "state law for serving a summons in . . . the state . . where service is made" as an alternative to following the federal service method (Le., Rule 4(e)(2)). + +As shown below, under New York's so-called "substituted-service" rule, service was effected on June 2, not May 7 (as the plaintiff and the deputy clerk of court evidently believed). Accordingly, the defendant's response to the complaint is not due until June 23. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i) (allowing 20 days from the date of service of process to serve answer). + +### Facts and Procedural History + +- 1. On May 7, 2008, service was delivered at defendant Epstein's house located at 9 East 71st Street, New York, New York, to Richard Barnett, an employee. +- 2. Mr. Barnett does not reside at that address. See Affidavit of Richard Barnett (attached as Ex. A). +- 3. Upon the plaintiff's motion,2 the Clerk of Court denied entry of a clerk's default on June 6, 2008 [D.E. 8]. + +In this case, the 20th day falls on a Saturday (June 21). The answer is therefore due on Monday, June 23. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(3) (establishing that when a deadline falls on Saturday, the "period runs until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday"). + +2Notably, the plaintiffs attorney never mailed Mr. Epstein a copy of his motion for a Clerk's entry of default. + +4. On June 11, the plaintiff filed a motion to compel the Clerk of Court to enter default against Mr. Epstein, or in the alternative, for an enlargement of time to serve process [D.E. 91.3 + +# Overview of Rules for Service of Process + +The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorize three distinct methods of service in a diversity action. First, service can be effected in accordance with the procedures "in the state where the district court is located" (here, Florida). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)(1). Second, service can be effected in accordance with the procedures "in the state . .. where service is made" (here, New York). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)(1). Third, service can be effected in accordance with federal + +In addition to that action, the same plaintiff's attorney here has filed four other, identical lawsuits against Jeffrey Epstein on behalf of four plaintiffs that are still pending before this Court: Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein, Case No. 9:08-cv-80119-KAM; Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein, Case No. 9:08-cv-80232-KAM; Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein, Case No. 9:08-cv-80380-KAM; and Jane Doe No. 5 v. Epstein, Case No. 9:08-cv-80381-KAM. Plaintiffs counsel has sought an entry of default in each case. In the Jane Doe No. 2 litigation, the deputy clerk, identified on the docket as "tp," declined to enter a default on the grounds that there had been "Improper Service." See 9:08-cv-80119-KAM [D.E. 7, 8]. In the Jane Doe No. 3 litigation, the deputy clerk has not yet ruled upon the plaintiff's motion. See Case No. 9:08-cv-80232-KAM [D.E. 5]. In the Jane Doe No. 4 and Jane Doe No. S litigation, the deputy clerk, identified on both docket sheets as "ail," entered the default. See Case No. 9:08-cv-80380-KAM [D.E. 7, 8] and Case No. 9:08-cv-80381-ICAM [D.E. 5, 6]. Since then, the plaintiff's attorney has moved for a judgment of default in those two cases (Jane Doe Nos. 4 and 5). See Case No. 9:08-cv-80380-ICAM [D.E. 9] and Case No. 9:08-cv-80381-KAM [D.E. 7]. + +3The plaintiffs attorney here previously filed an identical action, captioned Jane Doe No. 1 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-80069-KAM, on behalf of a different plaintiff. That action was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff's attorney after a motion to intervene was filed by Jane Doe No. 1 (through her mother) indicating that neither Jane Doe No. 1 nor her mother had consented to the attorney's filing the lawsuit on her behalf. See Case No. 08-80069-KAM [D.E. 9]. + +procedure. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (e)(2). Cf. David D. Siegel, Practice Commentary on Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Commentary C4-22 (observing that "there is no priority between the [authorized methods of service]") (emphasis added). + +Thus, when a diversity action is brought in the Southern District of Florida, and service is made in New York, service is effective when it complies with either Florida law or New York law, or alternatively, with federal procedure. + +As discussed below, because New York does not have a residency requirement for the person to whom substitute-service is delivered (and Florida and the federal rules do), service was effective only in accordance with New York procedure. Cf. RCP's Lear, LLC, 2008 WL 305103, at \*4 (resolving parties' dispute concerning the intended method of service, and applicable procedure). Stated differently, service did not comply with either federal procedure or Florida procedure. + +# New York Procedure—CPLR 308 (no residency requirement) + +Under New York law, service of process can be effected by delivering the summons "to a person of suitable age and discretion at the . . . dwelling place or usual place of abode of the [defendant]," and when the summons is "mailed to the [defendant] at his or her last known residence or . . . mail[ed] . . . by first class mail to the [defendant] at his or her actual place of business" in accordance with specific technical instructions. N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 308(2) (McKinney 2008). As an additional requirement, "proof of such service shall be filed with the clerk of the court designated in the summons within twenty days of either such delivery or mailing, whichever is effected later." Id. + +In accordance with New York procedure, such substituted service "shall be complete ten days after such filing." Id. (emphasis added). Accordingly, New York does not use the date of delivery to the person at the defendant's "abode" as the date service is effected. This was the point of error for the deputy clerk and the plaintiff's attorney. + +# Florida Procedure—Fla. Stat. § 48.031 (residency requirement) + +Under Florida law, service of process can be effected "by leaving the copies [of the summons and complaint] at [the defendant's] usual place of abode with any person residing therein who is 15 years of age or older and informing the person of their contents." Fla. Stat. § 48.031(1)(a) (2007) (emphasis added). Service is deemed effected as of the date of delivery. + +### Federal Procedure—Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (e)(2)(B) (residency requirement) + +Service is effective, under federally authorized procedures, when copies of both the summons and the complaint are "le[ft] . . . at the individual's dwelling or usual place of abode with someone of suitable age and discretion who resides there." Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (e)(2)(B). Again, service is deemed effected as of the date of delivery. + +# Discussion + +Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's response to the complaint is not due until June 23. Accordingly, the clerk's entry of default was premature. For the following "good cause," it should be set aside. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(c) ("The court may set aside an entry of default for good cause."). + +# A. Service was not made on someone who "resided" at the subject address. + +Substituted service was attempted on Richard Barnett at a house owned by Mr. Epstein located at 9 East 71st Street, New York, New York. See Affidavit of Service [D.E. 4]. Mr. Barnett has never lived there.4 (Barnett Aff. c][ 3.) + +### B. Because service was not made on someone who "resided" at the subject address, service was effective only in accordance with New York procedure. + +Of the three possible methods of service in this case—New York service, Florida service, and federal-rules service—only New York rules allow substituted service on someone who does not "reside" at the service address. Compare Fla. Stat. § 48.031(1)(a) (authorizing substituted service of process only on a person meeting certain criteria who "reside[s]" at the service address), and Fed. R. Civ. P. + +4 Indeed, in a motion for an order compelling the Clerk to enter default against Mr. Epstein, filed in connection with the Jane Doe No. 2 litigation, the plaintiffs attorney characterized Mr. Barnett simply as an "Assistant and House Staff Employee," not a resident of the property. Case No. 9:08-cv-80119-KAM [D.E. 9 at 2]. + +4 (e)(2)(B) (same), with NY CPLR 308(2) (authorizing so-called "leave-and-mail" substituted service, which does not require delivery to a person who actually resides the service address). + +Because Mr. Barnett was not a resident of 9 East 71st Street, logically, service could have been effected only in accordance with New York procedure. + +# C. Service was effective as of June 2, not earlier. + +As noted above, Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 permits service according to the law "in the state . . . where service is made," here, New York. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)(1). While New York permits substitute service on a non-resident at the defendant's "abode," such substituted service is not complete until 10 days after the affidavit reciting the method of service is actually filed with the Court. See NY CPLR 308(2). + +Although the summons was left with Mr. Barnett at Epstein's New York home on May 7, the affidavit of service was not filed with the Court until May 22. Accordingly, under NY CPLR 308(2), service is not deemed complete until 10 days later, which was June 2. Counting 20 days more according to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i) and 5, Mr. Epstein's response is still not due until June 23. Accordingly, the plaintiff's motion for default was almost three weeks early and the default was entered improperly. + +#### D. "Actual" notice is irrelevant. + +In the related Jane Doe No. 2 case, the plaintiff advances the untenable position that the service rules are trumped simply because Epstein had "actual notice" of the complaints. See D.E. 9 at 4,1 9 (Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein, Case No. 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) ("Defendant Epstein had actual notice of the filing of the Complaint, and the Plaintiff has exercised diligence and good faith in attempting to serve Defendant Epstein with process. Accordingly, entry of default is appropriate."). The Eleventh Circuit is clear, however, that "actual notice of a suit does not dispose of the requirements of service of process." v. Warden, FCC Coleman-USP, 259 Fed. Appx. 181, 182 n.2 (11th Cir. 2007) (citing Mfrs. Hanover Trust Co. v. Ponsoldt, 51 F.3d 938, 940 (11th Cir.1995)). + +### Conclusion + +We do not dispute that service was effective. We only dispute the date that it became effective. Since service was ineffective under both Florida law and the federal-rules alternative (because the recipient of the service did not "reside" at the address), the only service law that could apply is New York's. New York's rule for substituted-service does not start the 20-day clock for responding to the complaint until 10 days after the process-server's affidavit is filed with the Court. + +Accordingly, the 20-day clock did not start to tick (Le., service was not deemed to have been effected) until June 2. Counting time as provided by Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(3), Epstein has until June 23 to serve a response to the complaint. + +WHEREFORE, "good cause" having been showing under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(c), the clerk's default should not be entered. + +Respectfully submitted, + +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel: 561 659 8300 Fax: 561 835 8691 + +By: /s/ Jack A. Goldberger Jack A. Goldberger Fla. Bar No. 262013 jgoldberger@ agwpa.com + +Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +#### CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7 + +Counsel for defendant has conferred in good faith with counsel for the Plaintiff, who opposes the relief requested in this motion. + +/s/ Jack A. Goldberger + +Jack A. Goldberger + +### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 13, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on counsel of record identified below by facsimile and U.S. Mail. + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Fax: 305 931 0877 + +/s/ Jack A. Goldberger + +Jack A. Goldberger \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743555/EFTA02743555.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743555/EFTA02743555.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7685c659f5a8182816317e3a898d5d357cf93b69 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743555/EFTA02743555.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,823 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743555.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 14394, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.62, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 184.212, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 417.3464050292969, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 417.3464050292969, + 120.88092041015625 + ], + [ + 184.212, + 120.88092041015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLING \nCLERK TO ENTER DEFAULT, OR ALTERNATIVELY, \nFOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.29599999999999, + 353.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 487.01873779296875, + 353.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 487.01873779296875, + 402.5009460449219 + ], + [ + 127.29599999999999, + 402.5009460449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.996, + 546.2133026123047 + ], + [ + 348.20977783203125, + 546.2133026123047 + ], + [ + 348.20977783203125, + 562.6494445800781 + ], + [ + 264.996, + 562.6494445800781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Facts and Procedural History", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 214.2, + 328.86 + ], + [ + 398.19049072265625, + 328.86 + ], + [ + 398.19049072265625, + 345.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 214.2, + 345.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Overview of Rules for Service of Process", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 167.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 448.64947509765625, + 167.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 448.64947509765625, + 185.38092041015625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 185.38092041015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "New York Procedure\u2014CPLR 308 (no residency requirement)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 118.116, + 521.64 + ], + [ + 494.6922607421875, + 521.64 + ], + [ + 494.6922607421875, + 540.5009307861328 + ], + [ + 118.116, + 540.5009307861328 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Florida Procedure\u2014Fla. Stat. \u00a7 48.031 (residency requirement)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 114.44400000000002, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 498.812255859375, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 498.812255859375, + 378.5009460449219 + ], + [ + 114.44400000000002, + 378.5009460449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Federal Procedure\u2014Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (e)(2)(B) (residency requirement)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 91.18799999999999, + 554.85 + ], + [ + 522.04638671875, + 554.85 + ], + [ + 522.04638671875, + 571.6209411621094 + ], + [ + 91.18799999999999, + 571.6209411621094 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Discussion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 271.728, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 340.8431701660156, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 340.8431701660156, + 121.25091552734375 + ], + [ + 271.728, + 121.25091552734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. Service was not made on someone who \"resided\" at the subject address.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 540.0619506835938, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 540.0619506835938, + 281.7509460449219 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 281.7509460449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Because service was not made on someone who \"resided\" at the subject \naddress, service was effective only in accordance with New York \nprocedure.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 392.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 543.843994140625, + 392.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 543.843994140625, + 443.0009460449219 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 443.0009460449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "C. Service was effective as of June 2, not earlier.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 232.46999999999997 + ], + [ + 381.7654113769531, + 232.46999999999997 + ], + [ + 381.7654113769531, + 250.1214599609375 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 250.1214599609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "D. \"Actual\" notice is irrelevant.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 283.8944396972656, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 283.8944396972656, + 89.00091552734375 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 89.00091552734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 269.28000000000003, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 342.80718994140625, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 342.80718994140625, + 443.0009460449219 + ], + [ + 269.28000000000003, + 443.0009460449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 118.116, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 495.2377624511719, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 495.2377624511719, + 120.88092041015625 + ], + [ + 118.116, + 120.88092041015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 402.5826416015625, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 402.5826416015625, + 297.8809814453125 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 297.8809814453125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743555" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743566/EFTA02743566.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743566/EFTA02743566.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..374fc670046f4637d1993ed66908782f6b720f09 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743566/EFTA02743566.md @@ -0,0 +1,75 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119—M\_ARRA- + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR STAY + +Defendant Jeffrey Epstein respectfully moves for a mandatory stay of this action under Title 18, United States Code, Section 3509(k). As discussed below, this action is subject to a mandatory stay based on the existence of two pending parallel criminal actions. + +#### Introduction + +This civil action is a private counterpart to two ongoing criminal actions, one in Palm Beach state court, the other in Miami federal court. Both cases purport to arise from the same occurrence: the alleged sexual assault of a minor, Jane Doe No. 2. A federal statute directly on point provides that when an alleged sexual assault involving a child victim results in a "criminal proceeding," a commonly derived civil suit "shall be stayed until the end of all phases of the criminal action." 18 U.S.C. § 3509(k) (emphasis added).' A stay of this case is required until there is no longer a pending criminal action derived from the same underlying allegations. See 18 U.S.C. § 3509(k). + +## Discussion + +The parallel state criminal action pending in Palm Beach Circuit Court is still in the discovery phase. State of Florida v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 2006 CF 09454 AXX (Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County). Meanwhile, there is also a parallel federal criminal grand jury action pending in the Southern District of Florida. In re Grand Jury, No. FGJ 07-103(WPB) (S.D. Fla.) Both cases arise out of the same occurrence and allege that the minor plaintiff is a victim. + +The language of section 3509(k) of title 18, United States Code, is clear: a parallel "civil action shall be stayed until the end of all phases of the criminal + +If, at any time that a cause of action for recovery of compensation for damage or injury to the person of a child exists, a criminal action is pending which arises out of the same occurrence and in which the child is the victim, the civil action shall be stayed until the end of all phases of the criminal action and any mention of the civil action during the criminal proceeding is prohibited. As used in this subsection, a criminal action is pending until its final adjudication in the trial court. + +The full text of the mandatory-stay provision reads: + +18 U.S.C. § 3509(k). + +action." 18 U.S.C. § 3509(k) (emphasis added). When it comes to statutory construction, the mandatory nature of the word "shall' is well-settled. See, e.g., .a 531 U.S. 230, 241 (2001) (noting Congress' "use of a mandatory `shall' to impose discretionless obligations") (emphasis added); Lexecon Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, 523 U.S. 26, 35 (1998) (explaining that "the mandatory `shall' . . . normally creates an obligation impervious to judicial discretion") (emphasis added). Cf. =Iv. .= 530 U.S. 327, 350 (2000) ("Through the PLRA [Prison Litigation Reform Act], Congress clearly intended to make operation of the automatic stay mandatory, precluding courts from exercising their equitable powers to enjoin the stay. And we conclude that this provision does not violate separation of powers principles.") (emphasis added). + +One district court within the Eleventh Circuit, facing the identical issue with a pending state prosecution, recently construed "the plain language of § 3509(k)" as "requilingl a stay in a case . . . where . . . a parallel criminal action [is] pending." Doe v. Francis, No. 5:03 CV 260 MCR/WCS, 2005 WL 950623, at \*2 (N.D. Fla. Apr. 20, 2005) (Francis II) (emphasis added). Accord Doe v. Francis, No. 5:03 CV 260 MCR/WCS, 2005 WL 517847, at \*1-2 (N.D. Fla. Feb. 10, 2005) (Francis I) (staying federal civil action in favor of "a criminal case currently pending in state court in Bay County, Florida, arising from the same facts and involving the same parties as the Instant action," noting that "the language of 18 + +U.S.C. § 3509(k) is clear that a stay is required in a case such as this where a parallel criminal action is pending which arises from the same occurrence involving minor victims") (emphasis added). There is no contrary opinion from any court. + +In determining that the federal stay provision is mandatory, the Francis II court expressed that there was apparently no case law supporting, or even "discussing the [avoidance] of a stay [under the command of] § 3509(k)." Francis II, 2005 WL 950623, at \*2. Deferring to the statute as written, the Francis H court rejected the plaintiffs' argument that some of the alleged victims had already reached their majority. See id. The court similarly rejected the plaintiffs' argument that it would be in the victims' best interests to avoid a stay so as to counteract the victims' "ongoing and increasing mental harm due to the `frustrating delay in both the criminal case and [the civil] case.' Id. The Francis H court, in adhering to the plain language of the statute, also adhered to the "well established priority of criminal proceedings over civil proceedings." Cf. United States v. Hanhardt, 156 F. Supp. 2d 988, 1000 (N.D. III. 2001) (citing Fed. R. Crim. P. 50(a)). + +## Conclusion + +Because this civil action arises from the same allegations as two pending criminal actions, § 3509(k) mandates a stay of this civil action. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein respectfully requests that the Court enter a stay under 18 U.S.C. § 3509(k), coextensive with the state and federal criminal actions. + +Respectfully submitted, + +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel: 561 659 8300 Fax: 561 835 8691 + +By: /s/ Jack A. Goldberger Jack A. Goldberger Fla. Bar No. 262013 j goldberger@agwpa.com + +Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7 + +Counsel for defendant has conferred in good faith with counsel for the plaintiff, who opposes the relief requested in this motion. + +/s/ Jack A. Goldberger + +Jack A. Goldberger + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 20, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on counsel of record identified below by facsimile and U.S. Mail. + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Fax: 305 931 0877 + +/s/ Jack A. Goldberger + +Jack A. Goldberger \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743566/EFTA02743566.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743566/EFTA02743566.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..39e22188307ca70705f1ea9549d04f08cfee149e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743566/EFTA02743566.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,410 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743566.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 6540, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.99, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.035, + 68.03999999999999 + ], + [ + 420.349365234375, + 68.03999999999999 + ], + [ + 420.349365234375, + 101.75592041015625 + ], + [ + 190.035, + 101.75592041015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR STAY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 183.885, + 343.43999999999994 + ], + [ + 424.9932556152344, + 343.43999999999994 + ], + [ + 424.9932556152344, + 360.1259460449219 + ], + [ + 183.885, + 360.1259460449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.60499999999996, + 504.63 + ], + [ + 345.2220764160156, + 504.63 + ], + [ + 345.2220764160156, + 520.9959411621094 + ], + [ + 262.60499999999996, + 520.9959411621094 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Discussion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 269.37, + 196.02 + ], + [ + 338.5753173828125, + 196.02 + ], + [ + 338.5753173828125, + 213.87591552734375 + ], + [ + 269.37, + 213.87591552734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.43000000000006, + 617.22 + ], + [ + 356.28851318359375, + 617.22 + ], + [ + 356.28851318359375, + 635.3759460449219 + ], + [ + 282.43000000000006, + 635.3759460449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 103.70000000000002, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 477.3429260253906, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 477.3429260253906, + 102.11590576171875 + ], + [ + 103.70000000000002, + 102.11590576171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.57000000000002, + 260.82 + ], + [ + 397.2915344238281, + 260.82 + ], + [ + 397.2915344238281, + 279.8759460449219 + ], + [ + 205.57000000000002, + 279.8759460449219 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743566" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743572/EFTA02743572.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743572/EFTA02743572.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d5b85415afa48090504c79f1f0ae6f9109c25901 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743572/EFTA02743572.md @@ -0,0 +1,81 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119—MARRA- + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +### DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO COMPLAINT + +Defendant Jeffrey Epstein moves, pursuant to S.D. Ha. L.R. 7.1(A), for an enlargement of time to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint until ten days after his motion for a mandatory stay, filed contemporaneously with this motion, is decided, and as grounds for this relief respectfully states as follows: + +- 1. This civil action is a private counterpart to two ongoing criminal actions, one in Palm Beach state court, the other in the Southern District of Florida. +- 2. These cases purport to arise from the same occurrence: the alleged sexual assault of a minor, Jane Doe No. 2. +- 3. On June 20, 2008, Mr. Epstein filed a motion seeking a stay of this action under 18 U.S.C. § 3509. Under that section, when an alleged sexual assault + +involving a child victim results in a "criminal proceeding," a commonly derived civil suit "shall be stayed until the end of all phases of the criminal action." 18 U.S.C. § 3509(k) (emphasis added). + +4. If Mr. Epstein's stay motion is granted, he will not be required to respond to the Complaint or otherwise litigate this action until the two pending criminal matters are resolved. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein respectfully requests an enlargement of time to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint until ten days after his motion for a stay is decided. + +Respectfully submitted, + +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel: 561 659 8300 Fax: 561 835 8691 + +By: /s/ Jack A. Goldberger Jack A. Goldberger Fla. Bar No. 262013 jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +Attorneys for Defendant JefreyEpstein + +### CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7 + +Counsel for defendant has conferred in good faith with counsel for the plaintiff, who opposes the relief requested in this motion. + +> /s/ Jack A. Goldberger Jack A. Goldberger + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 20, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on counsel of record identified below by facsimile and U.S. Mail. + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Fax: 305 931 0877 + +> /s/ Jack A. Goldberger Jack A. Goldberger + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119—MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +# ORDER + +THIS CAUSE having come to be heard on the Defendant's Motion for An Enlargement of Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond to the Complaint, and this Court being fully advised, it is hereby: + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion is hereby granted. + +DONE AND ORDERED in Miami-Dade County, Florida this day of , 2008. + +> KENNETH A. MARRA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE + +Copies furnished to: Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743572/EFTA02743572.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743572/EFTA02743572.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..10f443701b9eafffa4a72ef44a614290a43c3c72 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743572/EFTA02743572.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,319 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743572.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3198, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.93, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 432.71868896484375, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 432.71868896484375, + 103.25091552734375 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 103.25091552734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF \nTIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.652, + 344.25 + ], + [ + 531.2247924804688, + 344.25 + ], + [ + 531.2247924804688, + 377.7509460449219 + ], + [ + 104.652, + 377.7509460449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 132.804, + 74.94873046875 + ], + [ + 503.1077575683594, + 74.94873046875 + ], + [ + 503.1077575683594, + 91.75042724609375 + ], + [ + 132.804, + 91.75042724609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 220.32, + 251.91 + ], + [ + 411.1813659667969, + 251.91 + ], + [ + 411.1813659667969, + 269.13043212890625 + ], + [ + 220.32, + 269.13043212890625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 68.03999999999999 + ], + [ + 429.8524169921875, + 68.03999999999999 + ], + [ + 429.8524169921875, + 101.88043212890625 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 101.88043212890625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 286.41600000000005, + 343.43999999999994 + ], + [ + 342.90692138671875, + 343.43999999999994 + ], + [ + 342.90692138671875, + 360.63043212890625 + ], + [ + 286.41600000000005, + 360.63043212890625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743572" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743576/EFTA02743576.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743576/EFTA02743576.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..81e102cba976d2573aba9326d7e6f98f160ab7ea --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743576/EFTA02743576.md @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLING CLERK TO ENTER DEFAULT + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2, by and through her undersigned counsel, submits this Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion for Order Compelling Clerk to Enter Default, as follows: + +# Introduction + +Defendant Jeffrey Epstein claims that service of process on him was ineffective under Florida or Federal law, based solely on a "bare bones" affidavit that raises more questions than it answers. At a minimum, the issue of whether service was effective under Florida or Federal law is at this point one of fact which should be the subject of discovery. I + +#### The Affidavit Attached to the Defendant's Response to the Motion is Insufficient + +Service of process was effected at Jeffrey Epstein's New York residence on May 7, 2008, at 7:45 a.m. by handing a copy of the Summons and Complaint to a person in Defendant's residence who refused to identify himself. (See D.E. 4, Affidavit of Service). Defendant now attaches to his + +I The Plaintiff's Motion also requests in the alternative an enlargement of time to serve the Summons and Complaint. Because the Defendant has now appeared in the case without seeking to quash service, that portion of the Motion is moot. + +response as Exhibit "A" the Affidavit of Richard Barnett, who claims to have received the copies of the Summons and Complaint on May 7, 2008 at Defendant Epstein's residence. In this Affidavit, Mr. Barnett states very little. He asserts that he does not now, nor has he ever, resided at 9 E. 71st Street, New York, New York (Mr. Epstein's residence). He fails to state in this Affidavit, however, where he does live, if not at the residence in question; what he was doing at the subject address when service was made; his relationship with Defendant Epstein, and how often he was at the residence; or why he refused to identify himself to the process server. He also fails to state who instructed him to answer the door on May 7, 2008 and take service anonymously. + +The Court may grant limited discovery on the issue of service of process. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico v. SS Zoe Colocotroni,61 F.R.D. 653, 656-57 (D.P.R. 1974) ("discovery regarding the legal sufficiency of service of process so as to acquire in personam jurisdiction over the person of a defendant is permitted by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, specifically Rule 26"). See also Blair v. City of Worcester 522 F.3d 105, 111 (1st Cir. 2008); Monteiro v. San Nicolas. S.A. 254 F.2d 514, 516-17 (2d Cir. 1958) (holding that discovery was appropriate on disputed issues of service of process). The parties do not dispute that if the person who in fact received the copies of the summons and complaint resided at the residence, then service would have been valid under Florida or Federal law on May 7, 2008.2 See National Development Co. v. Triad Holding Corp., 930 F.2d 253 (2d Cir. 1991) (upholding service of process on housekeeper of defendant's New York + +'Defendant notes that under Rule 4(e) there is no priority between alternative methods of service. This means that Plaintiff has the option of perfecting service under either federal law, the law of the forum state, or the law of the state where service is made: "Either may be turned to with no attempted prior resort to the other." Fed.R.Civ.P. 4 (Commentary C4-22). It does not stand, however, for the proposition that the defendant can accept service under New York law, while ignoring valid service under Florida or Federal law. Accordingly, once valid service was made on Defendant Epstein under Federal or Florida law on May 7, 2008, Defendant was required to answer + +apartment, under Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(d)(1) [now 4(e)(2)], because the defendant was actually living in the apartment at the time service was effected). Alternatively, if the extraordinary difficulties encountered in serving Mr. Epstein were the result of Mr. Epstein's deliberate avoidance or deception, while knowing of the lawsuit, then it would likewise be appropriate to find good service and a default. See Keevan & Son . Inc. v. Callier Pipe & Tube. Inc., 107 F.R.C. 665, 671-72 (S.D. Fl.a. 1985) ("[e]ffective service is most likely found when a defendant has engaged in deception to avoid service of process"). Based on what Mr. Barnett's Affidavit does not disclose, Plaintiff should be granted discovery to determine whether service was proper under Florida or Federal law. Plaintiff would at a minimum like to take the depositions of Mr. Barnett and Mr. Epstein with regard to the service of process issues that have arisen in this matter. + +## Conclusion + +Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff requests that this Court allow Plaintiff to take discovery on the issue of service of process; conduct an evidentiary hearing on the validity of service under Florida or Federal law; enter an Order compelling the Clerk to enter a default against Defendant Epstein pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(a); and such other and further relief as this Court deems proper. + +Dated: June 24, 2008. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Jeffrey M. Herman . Jeffrey M. Herman (FL Bar No. 521647) iherman@hermanlaw.com Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@hermanlaw.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on June 24, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Is/ Jeffrey M. Herman + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ffi United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger jagesq@bellsouth.net + +/s/Jeffery M. Herman \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743576/EFTA02743576.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743576/EFTA02743576.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d558330fbb775343d847083227272264007d01ca --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743576/EFTA02743576.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,380 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743576.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 6300, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.2, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION \nFOR ORDER COMPELLING CLERK TO ENTER DEFAULT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 139.536, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 473.64349365234375, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 473.64349365234375, + 325.10302734375 + ], + [ + 139.536, + 325.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 271.116, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 341.68609619140625, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 341.68609619140625, + 409.10302734375 + ], + [ + 271.116, + 409.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Affidavit Attached to the Defendant's \nResponse to the Motion is Insufficient", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 195.84, + 533.79 + ], + [ + 417.485595703125, + 533.79 + ], + [ + 417.485595703125, + 562.8630218505859 + ], + [ + 195.84, + 562.8630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.788, + 366.12 + ], + [ + 337.7822265625, + 366.12 + ], + [ + 337.7822265625, + 380.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 274.788, + 380.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 196.863037109375 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 196.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nCASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ffi \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 455.6502685546875, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 455.6502685546875, + 143.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 143.68353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743576" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/EFTA02743581.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/EFTA02743581.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ed31ae3b97ea53ffa3c5d821c54ccd9c1749c51c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/EFTA02743581.md @@ -0,0 +1,5160 @@ +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +# EXHIBIT A + +![](_page_1_Picture_30.jpeg) + +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT +IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA +CASE NO. 2006 CP09454AXX +STATE OF FLORIDA. + +-vs- +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, +Defendant. + +DEPOSITION OF [REDACTED] + +Wednesday, February 20, 2008 + +2:00 p.m. - 4:30 p.m. +Palm Beach County Courthouse +205 North Dixie Highway +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +**COPY** + +Reported By: +Judith F. Consor, FYR +Notary Public, State of Florida +Consor & Associates Reporting and Transcription +Phone - 561.682.0905 + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_1_Picture_39.jpeg) + +1 APPEARANCES: +2 On behalf of the State: +3 LANNA BELOHLAVEK, ESQ. +4 ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY +5 401 North Dixie Highway +6 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 +5 561.355.7100 +6 On behalf of the Defendant: +7 MICHAEL R. TEIN, ESQ. +8 NATHRYN A. MEYERS, ESQ. +9 [REDACTED] TEIN, PL +10 3059 GRAND AVENUE, SUITE 340 +11 COCONUT GROVE, FL 33133 + +9 On behalf of the Defendant: +10 JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQ. +11 ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS +12 250 AUSTRALIAN AVENUE SOUTH +13 SUITE 1400 +14 WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33401 +15 561.659.8300 + +16 ALSO PRESENT: +17 ON BEHALF OF THE WITNESS: THEODORE J. LEOPOLD, ESQ. +18 KEITH J. BRETT, DIRECTOR OF MULTIMEDIA DIVISION, +19 LEGAL-EXE + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_1_Picture_46.jpeg) + +1 INDEX Page 3 +2 WITNESS: PAGE: +3 [REDACTED] 4 +4 DIRECT EXAMINATION +5 BY MR. TEIN: + +NO EXHIBITS MARKED + +6 CERTIFIED QUESTIONS..... + +| 10 | Page | Line | +|----|------|------| +| | 53 | 22 | +| 11 | 55 | 1 | +| | 59 | 2 | +| 12 | 111 | 14 | +| | 112 | 2 | + +![](_page_1_Picture_53.jpeg) + +1 Deposition taken before Judith F. Consor, +2 Court Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of +3 Florida at Large, in the above cause. + +4 Thereupon, +5 [REDACTED] +6 having been first duly sworn or affirmed, was examined +7 and testified as follows: +8 THE WITNESS: I do. +9 [REDACTED] DIRECT EXAMINATION + +10 BY MR. TEIN: +11 Q. Good afternoon. Please tell me your full. +12 name. + +13 A. +14 Q. And can you please spell it. +15 A. +16 [REDACTED] +17 [REDACTED] +18 Q. Thank you. +19 May I call you [REDACTED] +20 A. Up-huh. +21 Q. [REDACTED] I'm going to ask you a few +22 questions, several questions today. If at any time you +23 want to take a break, you just let me know. Okay? +24 A. Okay. +25 Q. If you at any time don't understand one of + +![](_page_2_Picture_19.jpeg) + +1 my questions, will you just please let me know? + 2 A. Yes. + 3 Q. And if at any time you're not feeling well + 4 or something like that, you'll tell us, right? + 5 A. Yes. + 6 Q. Do you feel okay today? + 7 A. Yes. + 8 Q. Not taking any alcohol or drugs or anything + 9 like that, right? + 10 A. No. + 11 Q. So you feel ready to have your deposition + 12 taken? + 13 A. Yes. + 14 Q. [REDACTED] what is your address? + 15 A. I'm currently living at my aunt's house and + 16 I don't know it off the top of my head. + 17 Q. Where is it? + 18 A. In Jupiter. + 19 Q. Who is your aunt? + 20 A. [REDACTED] + 21 Q. Who else is living there? + 22 A. [REDACTED] my uncle. + 23 Q. Anyone else living there? + 24 A. No. + 25 Q. The contempt motion that your mother filed + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_2_Picture_23.jpeg) + +1 against your father regarding your fifty million-dollar + 2 lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein says that you live with + 3 your aunt and uncle and have been living there; is that + 4 correct? + 5 A. Yes. + 6 Q. How long have you been living with your + 7 aunt and uncle? + 8 A. Since my father kicked me out. + 9 Q. That was Thanksgiving of this past year? + 10 A. Yes, sir. + 11 Q. Okay. Didn't your firefighter boyfriend + 12 [REDACTED] get an apartment for the two of you? + 13 A. No, sir. He has an apartment, but by + 14 himself. + 15 Q. Did he get an apartment for the two of you + 16 to live in? + 17 A. No, sir. + 18 Q. Are you planning to move in with him? + 19 A. Maybe one day in the future. + 20 Q. Do you have a plan to move in with him + 21 presently? + 22 A. No. + 23 Q. Have you been to the apartment that you and + 24 [REDACTED] have discussed moving in together? + 25 A. I have been to the apartment. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_2_Picture_27.jpeg) + +1 Q. Where is that? + 2 A. Palm Beach Lakes. + 3 Q. Have you spent the night over there? + 4 A. No, sir. + 5 Q. Do you know the address there? + 6 A. I do not. + 7 Q. Isn't your sister [REDACTED] planning on living + 8 with you and [REDACTED]? + 9 A. No. + 10 Q. [REDACTED] you know that this court case is a + 11 criminal prosecution, correct? + 12 A. Correct. + 13 Q. And you know that it's a criminal + 14 prosecution against a man who has no criminal background. + 15 Do you know that? + 16 A. I do now. + 17 Q. You agree that court is a very serious + 18 matter? + 19 A. Yes. + 20 Q. And you're here with your lawyer + 21 Mr. Leopold, right? + 22 A. Yes. + 23 Q. And you know that Mr. Leopold recently + 24 filed a lawsuit in federal court against Jeffrey Epstein, + 25 seeking fifty million dollars. + +![](_page_2_Picture_31.jpeg) + +1 MR. LEOPOLD: Let me just object. + 2 [REDACTED] let me instruct you. Anything that + 3 you have learned through conversations between you + 4 and me are protected. So if you know any of that + 5 information outside of those discussions, you may + 6 answer. But if the only way you know it is + 7 through our discussions, do not answer that + 8 question. + 9 BY MR. TEIN: + 10 Q. [REDACTED] you know that Mr. Leopold recently + 11 filed a lawsuit in federal court on your behalf against + 12 Jeffrey Epstein seeking fifty million dollars? + 13 MR. LEOPOLD: Same objection. + 14 If you know the answer to that outside of + 15 our discussions, you may answer. If it is the + 16 only way that you know the answer is through our + 17 discussions, do not answer that question. + 18 THE WITNESS: Okay. + 19 MR. LEOPOLD: Attorney/client privilege. + 20 BY MR. TEIN: + 21 Q. You can answer the question unless -- + 22 MR. LEOPOLD: Same objection. + 23 MR. TEIN: Let me finish. + 24 MR. LEOPOLD: Excuse me. We're -- + 25 MR. TEIN: No. Let me finish. + +![](_page_3_Picture_19.jpeg) + +Page 9 + +1 MR. LEOPOLD: [REDACTED], we're not going to do + +2 that. + +3 MR. TEIN: My name is not [REDACTED]. + +4 I'm going to finish my question. Okay? + +5 MR. LEOPOLD: Do not answer until you hear + +6 from me. + +7 BY MR. TEIN: + +8 Q. Other than conversations that you have had + +9 with Mr. Leopold -- I'm not asking about that -- are you + +10 sure that Mr. Leopold has filed a lawsuit in federal + +11 court seeking fifty million dollars from Jeffrey Epstein + +12 on your behalf? + +13 MR. LEOPOLD: Same objection. + +14 Anything that you learn through + +15 conversations between you and me, do not answer. + +16 Those are protected. If you know through any + +17 other realm of knowledge, you may answer. + +18 THE WITNESS: No. + +19 BY MR. TEIN: + +20 Q. You have no idea that Mr. Leopold filed a + +21 fifty million-dollar lawsuit on your behalf against + +22 Jeffrey Epstein? + +23 MR. LEOPOLD: Same objection. + +24 Do not answer that question if it's through + +25 discussions that you and I had. Outside of that, + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_3_Picture_22.jpeg) + +Page 10 + +1 you may answer. So do not answer that question if + +2 that is the only basis by which you understand + +3 that answer. + +4 THE WITNESS: No. + +5 BY MR. TEIN: + +6 Q. You didn't know that? + +7 MR. LEOPOLD: Don't answer that question. + +8 Again, it's attorney/client privilege. Any + +9 information you've learned through conversations + +10 between you and I are protected. If you know it + +11 through any other realm, you may answer. + +12 MR. TEIN: Are you going to say that for + +13 every question in the deposition, Mr. Leopold? + +14 MR. LEOPOLD: When you ask improper + +15 questions like that without the proper -- + +16 MR. TEIN: You're going to stop your + +17 speaking objections right now. Okay? + +18 MR. LEOPOLD: Without the proper -- + +19 MR. TEIN: You need to stop your speaking + +20 objections. + +21 Let's continue. + +22 MR. LEOPOLD: Counsel, you just asked me a + +23 question and I'm going to state it on the + +24 record -- + +25 MR. TEIN: You need to stop your speaking + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_3_Picture_25.jpeg) + +Page 11 + +1 objections. Check your rules. + +2 MR. LEOPOLD: Excuse me. For the record, + +3 Counsel asked me a question. I'll state the + +4 answer on the record. He asked me the question an + +5 I going to be answering that way throughout the + +6 deposition. So long as there's improper + +7 foundation and predicate asked by the attorney, I + +8 will protect my client and I make the record where + +9 appropriate. If counsel wishes to ask an + +10 appropriate worded question with the proper + +11 foundation and predicate, I will certainly allow + +12 the client to answer the question. + +13 MR. GOLDBERGER: Why don't you just state + +14 attorney/client privilege and just be done with + +15 it? + +16 MR. LEOPOLD: I want the record to be + +17 clear. + +18 MR. TEIN: You want to waste time is what + +19 you want to do. + +20 You were supposed to be here this morning + +21 and you totally broke the deal, the agreement that + +22 you had with us if your hearing got cancelled. + +23 But let's move on and maybe you'll stop + +24 obstructing this deposition. + +25 MR. LEOPOLD: I think the record is very + +![](_page_3_Picture_28.jpeg) + +Page 12 + +1 clear where we stand thus far. + +2 Is there a recording taken of this + +3 deposition? + +4 THE COURT REPORTER: Yes. + +5 MR. LEOPOLD: Just make sure that's + +6 preserved. + +7 BY MR. TEIN: + +8 Q. Go to Exhibit 20-01 -- well, before you do + +9 that. [REDACTED] are you aware that a lawyer named Jeffrey + +10 Herman filed a lawsuit on your behalf, yes or no? + +11 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. + +12 Any conversations that you and I have had + +13 regarding that, if that is the only way by which + +14 you understand how to answer that question, do not + +15 answer. It's attorney/client privilege, as well + +16 as any conversations you may have had with the + +17 attorney from Kiami. That is also attorney/client + +18 privilege. And I'm assuming -- + +19 MR. TEIN: You're actually wrong about the + +20 attorney/client privilege. + +21 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm assuming Counsel is not + +22 asking you to divulge attorney/client -- + +23 MR. TEIN: Of course not. + +24 BY MR. TEIN: + +25 Q. [REDACTED] are you aware that Jeffrey Herman, + +![](_page_4_Picture_15.jpeg) + +1 an attorney, filed a fifty-million-dollar lawsuit on your +2 behalf against Jeffrey Epstein, yes or no? + +3 MR. LEOPOLD: Same objection. + +4 MR. TEIN: We've heard the objection 10 +5 times already. + +6 MR. LEOPOLD: Counsel, excuse me. + +7 MR. TEIN: Just say attorney/client +8 privilege. Stop interrupting my questions. + +9 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm entitled to make an +10 objection for the record, which I'm doing, and +11 I'll make the same objection. And if it calls for +12 attorney/client privilege, any conversations you +13 and I have had, do not answer the question. + +14 And I think that it might be appropriate, +15 for the record, to ask questions via [REDACTED] +16 [REDACTED] as opposed to [REDACTED] I think that +17 would be more appropriate for this deposition. + +18 BY MR. TEIN: + +19 Q. Go ahead. Please answer yes or no. + +20 A. Yes. + +21 Q. Thank you. + +22 In fact, you know that Mr. Herman held a +23 press conference after he filed the fifty-million-dollar +24 lawsuit on your behalf, don't you? + +25 A. After it happened. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_4_Picture_31.jpeg) + +1 MR. LEOPOLD: We're going to leave or we're +2 going to take a break, because his demeanor is not +3 appropriate. There's no reason to have this kind +4 of demeanor. If you want to have this kind of +5 demeanor with me -- + +6 MR. TEIN: You are obstructing this +7 deposition. + +8 MR. GOLDBERGER: Why don't you guys go +9 outside and just talk about -- + +10 MR. LEOPOLD: She -- her job is very +11 difficult and she's not going to be able to take +12 us both talking at the same time. + +13 MR. GOLDBERGER: Off the record. + +14 MR. LEOPOLD: We're not going off the +15 record, Jack. We're not, Jack. Her job is very +16 difficult. I'm going to make the record. + +17 I don't think it is appropriate, especially +18 in the small confines of this room, to be very +19 appressive with this young lady. + +20 MR. TEIN: That's not happening. Stop, +21 stop actually -- + +22 MR. LEOPOLD: If you're going to interrupt +23 me, we're going to cancel this deposition -- + +24 MR. TEIN: Stop misrepresenting. + +25 THE COURT REPORTER: I need one at a time. + +![](_page_4_Picture_45.jpeg) + +1 Q. You know that he had a press conference. +2 don't you, yes or no? + +3 A. Yes. + +4 Q. In fact, let's go to Exhibit 20-91. +5 MR. GOLDBERGER: Look behind you. You'll +6 see it. +7 BY MR. TEIN: + +8 Q. Have you ever seen that picture before? + +9 A. Yes. +10 Q. Is that a picture of your father, your +11 stepmother and Mr. Herman at the press conference +12 regarding your lawsuit? + +13 A. Yes. + +14 Q. Now you know that this is a very serious +15 matter, don't you? + +16 MR. LEOPOLD: Asked and answered. +17 Objection. + +18 MR. GOLDBERGER: All right. You can +19 object. You're representing a witness here, +20 Mr. Leopold. You can object on privilege grounds. +21 You cannot make legal objections. You have no +22 standing to do so. + +23 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm going to make them and +24 then -- + +25 MR. GOLDBERGER: We're -- + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_4_Picture_59.jpeg) + +1 no matter who it is. +2 MR. LEOPOLD: I think we're going to take a +3 break. Perhaps you might want to talk to your +4 co-counsel -- + +5 MR. TEIN: I don't need to talk to him. +6 MR. LEOPOLD: But we're going to take a +7 break. + +8 MR. TEIN: We're not taking a break unless +9 the witness needs a break. + +10 You're obstructing this deposition, Ted. + +11 MR. LEOPOLD: Come on, [REDACTED] +12 You all want to continue in this +13 demeanor -- + +14 MR. TEIN: You're obstructing the +15 deposition. Stop making speeches. We're not +16 discussing this with you. The questions are to +17 your client. Go take your five-minute break. + +18 MR. LEOPOLD: Fine. We need to make sure +19 the record's clear and clean. + +20 And I want to make sure, as I've already +21 asked you -- I know that you're one of the best in +22 town -- that this audio -- this needs to be +23 preserved. Okay? + +24 MR. TEIN: Go take your five-minute break, +25 Mr. Leopold, now. + +![](_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg) + +1 You were supposed to be here at nine a.m.; + 2 it's now after two. Take your break and come + 3 back. + 4 MR. LEOPOLD: Okay. If the demeanor keeps + 5 up, we will not be here beyond those five minutes. + 6 MR. TEIN: Take your break and come back. + 7 MR. LEOPOLD: Okay. So I suggest that you + 8 relax. + 9 MR. TEIN: I suggest that you take your + 10 break. + 11 MR. GOLDBERGER: Let them take that + 12 five-minute break. + 13 MR. LEOPOLD: But I would suggest that you + 14 take deep breaths. + 15 MR. TEIN: Suggest whatever you want. Go + 16 take a break. + 17 (Thereupon, a recess was taken.) + 18 BY MR. TEIN: + 19 Q. [REDACTED] you agree that giving testimony + 20 today at your deposition is something very serious, don't + 21 you? + 22 A. Yes. + 23 Q. And you respect the court, don't you? + 24 A. Yes. + 25 Q. Let me show you Exhibit 31-001. Can you + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_5_Picture_22.jpeg) + +1 read that out loud, please. + 2 A. Okay. What do you want? + 3 Q. Will you read that out loud, please. + 4 A. [REDACTED] + 5 Q. Thank you. + 6 A. Lol hah my badd...lol yah I got some + 7 stupid court shit on the 20th...bullshit...and damn you + 8 still have court shit with him? Like after so long wow + 9 in sorry... well yah well we will definitely have make + 10 plans for sure..because i miss u tons times a million and + 11 no no no i love you...o and p.s. i love ur default pic. + 12 niggas. Mush no. + 13 Q. Did you send that message last week to a + 14 friend of yours on MySpace? + 15 A. I wouldn't know. There's no dates and I've + 16 deleted that MySpace, so -- + 17 Q. We're going to talk about that in a second. + 18 A. Okay. + 19 Q. Did you send that message last week -- + 20 A. Right. + 21 Q. Let me finish my question. + 22 Did you send that message last week to a + 23 friend of yours on MySpace? + 24 A. I wouldn't know the date, but obviously, + 25 it's to a friend. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_5_Picture_26.jpeg) + +1 Q. Did you send that message to a friend of + 2 yours on MySpace? + 3 A. Sure, yes. + 4 Q. Were you referring to this deposition? + 5 A. Yes. + 6 Q. Do you find the term n-i-g-g-e-r offensive? + 7 A. That's not anywhere in there. + 8 Q. What word did you use in there? + 9 MR. LEOPOLD: Were are you referring to, + 10 Counsel? There's 20 plus words in there. + 11 MR. TEIN: Don't make a speaking objection. + 12 THE WITNESS: Are you referring to + 13 anything -- + 14 MR. LEOPOLD: No, [REDACTED] Don't -- don't -- + 15 let him ask you the question. + 16 BY MR. TEIN: + 17 Q. What question were you asking, [REDACTED]? + 18 MR. LEOPOLD: She doesn't ask questions. + 19 You ask the questions. What is the question + 20 pending? + 21 BY MR. TEIN: + 22 Q. [REDACTED] what is the last word on there in + 23 the text of your message before the closing? + 24 A. Xiggas. + 25 Q. Don't you find that term offensive? + +![](_page_5_Picture_30.jpeg) + +1 A. No. + 2 MR. LEOPOLD: Can you spell it for the + 3 record, please. + 4 THE WITNESS: N-i-g-g -- + 5 MR. TEIN: No, no, no. You are not going + 6 to be asking questions. + 7 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm not asking questions. + 8 I'm asking for the record the word to be spelled, + 9 because we don't have a video here today. + 10 MR. TEIN: These exhibits are part of the + 11 record. You -- + 12 MR. LEOPOLD: Well, it's not marked as an + 13 exhibit. + 14 MR. TEIN: Stop interrupting me, + 15 Mr. Leopold. I have marked and identified as an + 16 exhibit and you will get it. + 17 MR. LEOPOLD: There has been no + 18 identification of this document in the record. + 19 MR. TEIN: Mr. Leopold, stop interrupting + 20 this deposition. + 21 MR. LEOPOLD: What is the exhibit number + 22 marked for identification? + 23 MR. TEIN: 31-001. + 24 MR. LEOPOLD: Do we have copies? Is it on + 25 the record anywhere? + +![](_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg) + +1 BY MR. TEIN: + +2 Q. Let me ask you, [REDACTED] did you in fact +3 write your friend this message about this deposition? + +4 A. Yes. + +5 Q. Do you wrote your friend that this +6 deposition is stupid court s-h-i-t, correct? + +7 A. Yes. + +8 Q. Because you think this deposition is stupid +9 court s-h-i-t, don't you? + +10 A. No. + +11 Q. You wrote that to your friend, didn't you? + +12 A. Yes. + +13 Q. You think that court is stupid, don't you? + +14 A. In some cases. + +15 Q. And you think that court is bull s-h-i-t, +16 don't you? + +17 A. No. + +18 Q. And you think this deposition is bull +19 s-h-i-t, don't you? + +20 A. No. + +21 Q. You wrote that to your friend, didn't you? + +22 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and +23 answered. + +24 MR. TEIN: That's not an objection. + +25 BY MR. TEIN: + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_6_Picture_41.jpeg) + +1 Q. You wrote that to your friend, didn't you? + +2 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and +3 answered, for the fourth time. + +4 MR. TEIN: You are improperly objecting. +5 Mr. Leopold. You have no grounds to object. And +6 that's not an objection. + +7 MR. LEOPOLD: It is an objection. + +8 MR. TEIN: Then terminate the deposition if +9 you think it's been asked and answered. + +10 MR. LEOPOLD: Counsel. I am not precluded +11 from just making an objection to the form of the +12 question. As the courts well know, and if you +13 practice here in West Palm Beach, many of the +14 judges require you to set the objection with +15 specificity. And I will do that. And if you +16 don't want me to, you can make the record. But I +17 will do that. + +18 MR. TEIN: Here's what we'll do, Ted. You +19 can -- I will allow you to reserve an objection to +20 form for every single one of my questions. +21 Otherwise, all you're doing is obstructing. + +22 MR. LEOPOLD: I won't do that. + +23 MR. TEIN: Of course; because you want to +24 obstruct. + +25 MR. LEOPOLD: All right. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_6_Picture_54.jpeg) + +1 BY MR. TEIN: + +2 Q. [REDACTED] you think that giving testimony +3 today, under cath, is bull s-h-i-t, don't you? + +4 A. No. + +5 Q. And you wrote that to your friend on +6 Myspace last week, didn't you? + +7 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and +8 answered. + +9 THE WITNESS: No, I did not. + +10 BY MR. TEIN: + +11 Q. You didn't write this exhibit? +12 A. I wrote that, but I didn't write what you +13 said. + +14 Q. You wrote in this exhibit, "I got some +15 stupid court s-h-i-t on the 20th. Bull s-h-i-t." Didn't +16 you write that? + +17 A. Yes. + +18 Q. Referring to this deposition, didn't you? + +19 A. Referring to the court. I was later +20 informed that it was a deposition. + +21 Q. I'm going to ask you some questions now +22 about what happened when you went to Jeff Epstein's House +23 three years ago. Okay? + +24 A. [REDACTED] huh. + +25 Q. When the police interviewed you one month + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_6_Picture_72.jpeg) + +1 after you went to Epstein's house, you swore on your +2 mother's grave that you and Epstein did not engage in sex +3 of any kind? + +4 A. Yes. + +5 Q. Didn't you tell that to the police? + +6 A. Yes. And I will continue. I have never +7 had sex with him. + +8 Q. Did what happened upstairs at Jeff +9 Epstein's house take you completely by surprise. [REDACTED] + +10 A. Yes. + +11 Q. Now the civil complaint that you filed +12 against Mr. Epstein for fifty million dollars alleged +13 that you were totally shocked by what happened when you +14 got there. + +15 A. Yes. + +16 Q. Were you totally shocked by what happened +17 when you got to Epstein's house? + +18 A. Yes. + +19 Q. You didn't expect it at all, did you? + +20 A. No. + +21 Q. You had absolutely no idea why your friend +22 [REDACTED] was taking you to Epstein's house, right? + +23 A. I was informed it was a massage. + +24 Q. All you thought that it was going to be was +25 a massage, correct? + +![](_page_7_Picture_61.jpeg) + +1 A. Yes. + 2 Q. Before you got to Epstein's house [REDACTED] + 3 never said anything to you on the telephone about sexual + 4 activity with Epstein, did she? + 5 A. No. + 6 Q. And before you got to Epstein's house + 7 [REDACTED] never sent you a message over the Internet about + 8 sexual activity with Epstein, did she? + 9 A. No. + 10 Q. Did [REDACTED] ever try to convince you to + 11 engage in any sexual activity with Epstein? + 12 A. No. + 13 Q. Did [REDACTED] every try to convince + 14 you to engage in any sexual activity with Epstein? + 15 A. I don't know who [REDACTED] is. + 16 Q. Do you have a friend [REDACTED]? + 17 A. No. + 18 Q. Okay. Before you went so Epstein's house + 19 did anyone call or e-mail you to induce you to engage in + 20 sexual activity with Epstein? + 21 A. No. + 22 Q. So you're sure that before you got to + 23 Epstein's house no one tried to persuade you to engage in + 24 sexual activity with Jeffrey Epstein? + 25 A. No. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_7_Picture_65.jpeg) + +1 Q. You're sure that -- let me ask the question + 2 again. + 3 You're sure that before you got to + 4 Epstein's house no one tried to persuade you to engage in + 5 sexual activity with Epstein for money. Are you? + 6 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and + 7 answered. + 8 THE WITNESS: No. And I've already + 9 answered that a barillion times. + 10 BY MR. TEIN: + 11 Q. Ne's coaching you now. So I'm going to ask + 12 the question -- + 13 MR. LEOPOLD: Counsel, I've made an + 14 objection for the record. + 15 MR. TEIN: Stop speaking. + 16 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm not going to stop + 17 speaking. You can't interrupt me when I'm making + 18 the record. + 19 MR. TEIN: You're coaching the witness. + 20 MR. LEOPOLD: Counsel -- + 21 MR. TEIN: Stop coaching the witness. + 22 BY MR. TEIN: + 23 Q. [REDACTED] let me ask you -- + 24 MR. LEOPOLD: If you continue to -- + 25 MR. TEIN: Stop interrupting my questions. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_7_Picture_69.jpeg) + +1 MR. LEOPOLD: If you do it one more time, + 2 we're leaving. + 3 BY MR. TEIN: + 4 Q. [REDACTED] + 5 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm going to make the record. + 6 You cannot interrupt me when I'm making the + 7 record. Out of professional conduct, you cannot + 8 do that. I'm entitled to make the record. I made + 9 an objection, asked and answered. Your demeanor + 10 is inappropriate. You're willing and you are able + 11 and you're responsible to ask a question in a + 12 professional manner, and ask the question and once + 13 you get the answer, to either follow up on it or + 14 move on, but not continuously broadcast and ask the + 15 same question over and over because you don't like + 16 the answer. + 17 MR. TEIN: Calm down, sir. + 18 MR. LEOPOLD: Trust me, I'm very calm here. + 19 When I'm not calm, you'll know it. I'm very calm. + 20 So please continue on. But I will not + 21 allow you to continue to harass her in the + 22 demeanor that you're doing. Ask her a question + 23 and move on. + 24 MR. TEIN: Are you done? + 25 MR. LEOPOLD: Thank you. I am. + +![](_page_7_Picture_73.jpeg) + +1 MR. TEIN: Stop misrepresenting the record + 2 and calm down. I'm going to ask my question. + 3 Stop it. + 4 BY MR. TEIN: + 5 Q. [REDACTED] + 6 MR. LEOPOLD: I think the record is very + 7 clear. + 8 MR. GOLDBERGER: Let me just clarify + 9 something. When you object to the form of a + 10 question, you're not instructing the witness not + 11 to answer the question, are you? + 12 MR. LEOPOLD: No. And I'm not waking that + 13 objection: only on attorney/client privilege. + 14 MR. TEIN: Will you stop speaking now so I + 15 can ask my question? Are you done? + 16 Okay. I'm going to ask my question. + 17 BY MR. TEIN: + 18 Q. Listen, [REDACTED] + 19 MR. LEOPOLD: Hold on. Stop. + 20 I've been doing this for 20 plus years and + 21 have met a lot of attorneys, but I've never had an + 22 experience like this where I've -- + 23 MR. TEIN: Stop your appethos. + 24 MR. LEOPOLD: If you continue to do this, + 25 whether it's with me or with my client, I will not + +![](_page_8_Picture_19.jpeg) + +1 put up with it and I don't need to put up with it +2 and it's not appropriate. And I'm sure +3 Mr. Goldberger knows all this, because I know that +4 he wouldn't do this. So I will not put up with +5 it. And I think it's highly inappropriate to do +6 this with this child sitting here, the way you're +7 acting, primarily towards me, and I will not put +8 up with it. + +9 MR. TEIN: Will you please stop your speech +10 so I can ask questions? + +11 MR. LEOPOLD: So long as you act +12 professionally, I will do so. But if you continue +13 to do it this way, I will leave. + +14 MR. TEIN: Suit yourself. + +15 BY MR. TEIN: + +16 Q. [REDACTED] are you sure that before you got to +17 Epstein's house so one tried to persuade you to engage in +18 sexual activity with Epstein for money? + +19 MR. LEOPOLD: Asked and answered. +20 Objection. + +21 MR. TEIN: Did you get her answer? + +22 THE COURT REPORTER: No, I did not. + +23 THE WITNESS: I'm sure. + +24 BY MR. TEIN: + +25 Q. Let me ask you a few questions about your + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_8_Picture_34.jpeg) + +1 contact with Jeffrey Epstein. Okay? + +2 A. (Witness noda head up and down.) + +3 Q. Jeff never e-mailed you, did he? + +4 A. No. + +5 Q. Jeff never text messaged you, did he? + +6 A. No. + +7 Q. Jeff never chatted in a chat room with you, +8 did he? + +9 A. No. + +10 Q. Before you got to Epstein's house you had +11 never spoken to Jeff, had you? + +12 A. No. + +13 Q. And before you got to Epstein's house you +14 had never met Jeff? + +15 A. Correct. + +16 Q. Before you got to Epstein's house you had +17 never told Jeff that you were under 18, right? + +18 A. No. + +19 Q. Before you got to Epstein's house had you +20 ever told Jeffrey that you were under 18? + +21 A. No. I never spoke to the man before that. + +22 Q. And you only went to Jeff Epstein's house +23 that one time three years ago, correct? + +24 A. Yes. + +25 Q. You never went there again, correct? + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_8_Picture_56.jpeg) + +1 A. No. + +2 Q. All right. Let me ask you two final areas +3 of questioning about this and we'll move onto something +4 else. Okay? + +5 A. Uh-huh. Yes. I'm sorry. + +6 Q. Before you got to Epstein's did anyone +7 associated with Epstein ever call you on the phone and +8 try to persuade, induce, entice or coerce you to engage +9 in any sexual activity? + +10 A. No. + +11 Q. Before you got to Epstein's did anybody +12 associated with Epstein ever contact you on the Internet +13 and try to persuade, induce, entice or coerce you to +14 engage in any sexual activity? + +15 A. No. + +16 Q. [REDACTED] who told you that when you got to +17 Jeff Epstein's house you should lie to Jeff about your +18 age? + +19 A. [REDACTED] + +20 Q. Was it [REDACTED] or was it the other girl in +21 the car who you rode over with to Epstein's house? + +22 A. [REDACTED] + +23 Q. Who was the other girl in the car with you +24 that day? + +![](_page_8_Picture_72.jpeg) + +1 Q. Had you ever seen her before? + +2 A. No, sir. + +3 Q. You told the police that when you rode over +4 to Epstein's you had no idea who she was, right? + +5 A. Correct. + +6 Q. You told the police that you didn't know +7 her name, but she was like really dark, kind of like a +8 Spanish girl? + +9 A. Yes. + +10 Q. Those were your words, right? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 Q. Do you now know who she is? + +13 A. No, sir. + +14 Q. So it was [REDACTED] who told you to lie about +15 your age to Jeff Epstein? + +16 A. Yes, sir. + +17 Q. And [REDACTED] told you that if you weren't 18, +18 Epstein wouldn't let you into his house, right? + +19 A. That's -- yes, yes. + +20 Q. All right. Let's talk for a minute about +21 when you first met Jeff. Okay? + +22 A. Sure. + +23 Q. When you first met Jeff he tried to find +24 out how old you were, right? + +![](_page_9_Picture_15.jpeg) + +1 Q. When you first met Jeff he tried to find + 2 out how old you were, right? + 3 A. Not when we first introduced each other? + 4 when we get upstairs, then, yes. + 5 Q. During the massage Jeff asked you how old + 6 you were, correct? + 7 A. Yes, yes. + 8 Q. How hadn't you already told Jeff's + 9 assistant, the one who walked you upstairs, that you went + 10 to college and had just moved down here from Ohio? + 11 A. I never spoke to the lady. + 12 Q. Do you want to rethink that answer? + 13 MR. LEOPOLD: Is that a question? + 14 BY MR. TEIN: + 15 Q. Do you want to rethink that answer? + 16 A. No. I didn't really speak with her that + 17 much. + 18 Q. Do you want to try to refresh your memory + 19 on that? + 20 MR. LEOPOLD: Do you have something to + 21 refresh her memory with? + 22 MR. TEIN: Do you want to stop making + 23 speaking objections? + 24 MR. LEOPOLD: No. But to refresh someone's + 25 memory, you show them a document. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_9_Picture_19.jpeg) + +1 MR. TEIN: I know how to do this. + 2 MR. LEOPOLD: Then show her a document. + 3 MR. TEIN: Stop speaking. + 4 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm not going to stop + 5 speaking. I'm going to continue to make the + 6 record. + 7 MR. TEIN: You're obstructing. Please + 8 stop. + 9 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm not obstructing. But if + 10 you want to refresh her recollection, you need to + 11 show her something. + 12 That's not a proper question. I object to + 13 the foundation and the predicate of that question. + 14 MR. TEIN: Are you done? + 15 MR. LEOPOLD: I am now. Thank you. + 16 BY MR. TEIN: + 17 Q. Do you want to try to refresh your memory + 18 as to whether you had any conversation with the woman who + 19 walked you upstairs in Epstein's house in which you told + 20 her that you went to college and had just moved down from + 21 Ohio? + 22 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Object to the + 23 form of the question. Lack of foundation and + 24 predicate. + 25 BY MR. TEIN: + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_9_Picture_23.jpeg) + +1 Q. You can answer the question. + 2 A. Sure. + 3 Q. Is there anything that would refresh your + 4 memory that in fact you told Mr. Epstein's assistant, the + 5 one who walked you upstairs, that you went to college and + 6 you had just moved down here from Ohio? + 7 A. I don't remember saying that, but if you -- + 8 I don't remember saying that myself, so -- + 9 Q. That would be a lie, right? + 10 A. No. I really don't remember. + 11 Q. So you told Jeff that you were 18 years + 12 old, correct? + 13 A. Yes. + 14 Q. Do you remember Detective [REDACTED] Pagan of + 15 the Police Department, Palm Beach Police Department? + 16 A. Yes. + 17 Q. Do you remember you spoke to her? + 18 A. Yes. + 19 Q. Do you remember that you told Detective + 20 Pagan that when you lied about your age to Jeff you said + 21 it really fast because you didn't want to make it sound + 22 like you were lying? + 23 A. I don't remember the words exactly, but I + 24 do remember telling her I told him I was 18. + 25 Q. And do you remember telling Detective Pagan + +![](_page_9_Picture_27.jpeg) + +1 that when you lied to Epstein about your age that you + 2 said it really fast so Epstein wouldn't realize you were + 3 lying? + 4 A. No, I don't remember saying those words + 5 exactly to her. I remember telling her that I told + 6 Epstein I was 18. + 7 Q. Does it sound right to you that you told + 8 Detective Pagan that you said your age really fast to + 9 Epstein -- + 10 MR. BELOHLAVEK: Objection. Asked and + 11 answered. + 12 BY MR. TEIN: + 13 Q. -- so he wouldn't think that you were + 14 lying? + 15 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and + 16 answered, lack of foundation, mischaracterization + 17 of her earlier testimony. She's already answered + 18 that question. + 19 BY MR. TEIN: + 20 Q. You can answer it. + 21 MR. LEOPOLD: Same objection. It's been + 22 asked and answered. + 23 You can answer. I've made the objection. + 24 THIS WITNESS: I forget the question, now. + 25 + +![](_page_10_Picture_23.jpeg) + +1 BY MR. TEIN: + +2 Q. Let me put it again. +3 Does it sound right to you that you told +4 Detective Pegan that when you lied about your age to +5 Jeffrey Epstein, you said it really fast because you +6 didn't want to make it sound like you were lying? + +7 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Lack of +8 foundation, asked and answered. + +9 THE WITNESS: I could have possibly said +10 that, yes. + +11 BY MR. TEIN: + +12 Q. You didn't want Mr. Epstein to know that +13 you were lying about your age, right? + +14 A. Correct. + +15 Q. You didn't want Mr. Epstein to know that +16 you were not 18 yet, right? + +17 A. Correct. + +18 Q. You wanted Mr. Epstein to believe that you +19 really were 18, right? + +20 A. Correct. + +21 Q. So you remember when Mr. Epstein asked +22 where you went to school? + +23 A. Yes. + +24 Q. And you told Mr. Epstein you went to +25 Wellington, right? + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_10_Picture_40.jpeg) + +1 A. Yes. + +2 Q. Was that the truth? + +3 A. No. + +4 Q. In fact, you went to [REDACTED] Palm, right? + +5 A. Yes. + +6 Q. So you lied to Mr. Epstein again, correct? + +7 A. Yes. + +8 Q. Is Wellington the college that you told +9 Jeff's assistant that you were attending? + +10 A. I don't remember having that conversation +11 with her, so I wouldn't know if that's what I said. + +12 Q. That was a lie, though, wasn't it? + +13 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection to the form of the +14 question, lack of foundation. You're making an +15 assumption. She just answered you she can't tell +16 you that. + +17 MR. TEIN: Speaking objection. And you +18 well know that, Mr. Leopold. + +19 MR. LEOPOLD: She can't answer that +20 question. The way you phrased that question, +21 you're purposely making her not be honest in her +22 testimony. She can't answer a question like that. +23 She doesn't remember. So then you say, "So you +24 were lying." That's improper and you know that. +25 That's not a proper question. And any attorney + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_10_Picture_56.jpeg) + +1 that would do that to a witnessess or to a person +2 that's sitting in this chair is not acting +3 professionally. You can't ask a question like +4 that. You can do it, but it's not proper. And +5 I'm sure you weren't trained that way, certainly +6 not ethically. + +7 MR. TEIN: Will you stop? + +8 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm not going to stop, +9 because the way you're asking that question is +10 improper and you know it. + +11 MR. TEIN: You're losing your cool. + +12 BY MR. TEIN: + +13 Q. Ms. [REDACTED] + +14 MR. LEOPOLD: Trust me. I'm very calm. +15 When I lose my cool, you'll know it. + +16 MR. TEIN: I do know it. + +17 BY MR. TEIN: + +18 Q. Ms. [REDACTED] Mr. Epstein never asked you +19 to do anything other than message him, correct? + +20 A. Incorrect; because he asked me to take off +21 my brea, so that would be two things he's asked me to do. + +22 Q. Other than asking you to take your brea off, +23 Mr. Epstein never asked you to do anything with him other +24 than message, correct? + +25 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Foundation, + +![](_page_10_Picture_72.jpeg) + +1 predicate. + +2 THE WITNESS: Correct. + +3 BY MR. TEIN: + +4 Q. You told the police, in your words, that +5 you did not whack him off, right? + +6 A. Correct. + +7 Q. What does that mean? + +8 A. Whack, like whacking off? + +9 Q. Your term, what does that mean? + +10 A. Masturbating. + +11 Q. Mr. Epstein never tried at any time to grab +12 your hand, did he? + +13 A. No. + +14 Q. Mr. Epstein never tried to put your hand +15 anywhere, did he? + +16 A. No. + +17 Q. At no time did you touch Mr. Epstein's +18 penis, did you? + +19 A. No. + +20 Q. And he did not touch you, correct? + +21 A. Incorrect. + +22 Q. Well, you told the police, "At no time did +23 he touch me." Were you lying to the police then? + +24 A. No. Well, I wasn't being fully truthful, +25 but I wasn't lying. + +![](_page_11_Picture_88.jpeg) + +1 Q. You told the police twice when you spoke to +2 ██████████ pagan that "at no time did he touch me." Didn't +3 you say that to the police? + +4 A. Yesh. +5 Q. And you're saying that that was not fully +6 truthful. Is that what you're saying now? + +7 A. Correct. +8 Q. And you're saying if you're not fully +9 truthful, that's not a lie. Correct? + +10 A. You took that out of context like really +11 bad. I didn't mean like that. Touching my legs and -- +12 he never kept his hands to himself the entire time. +13 That's what I'm trying to say. + +14 Q. You told the police, "at no times did he +15 touch me." You agree with that, correct? + +16 A. No, I don't agree with that, because he did +17 touch me. + +18 Q. Did you tell the police that he did not +19 touch you, yes or no? + +20 A. It's a possibility, but I do not remember. +21 Q. Okay. And you did not have any type of sex +22 with Jeff, correct? + +23 A. No. +24 Q. And you did not have any type of oral sex +25 with Jeff, correct? + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_11_Picture_100.jpeg) + +Page 42 + +1 A. No. +2 Q. No type of intercourse with Jeff, correct? +3 A. Correct. +4 Q. All right. Let's talk about what happened +5 after the massage was over. + +6 A. Okay. +7 Q. After the massage, you told Epstein that +8 you wanted to bring your twin sister back so she could +9 make some money, correct? + +10 A. Incorrect. +11 Q. Your twin sister is ██████████ right? +12 A. Correct. +13 Q. And you love ██████████ very much, don't you? +14 A. Yes. +15 Q. And when you left the house you were joking +16 with the other girls, weren't you? + +17 A. Incorrect. +18 Q. Well, when ██████████ and the other girl in the +19 car that day made their statements to the police they +20 told the police that you were joking afterwards. Are you +21 saying that they were lying to the police about that? + +22 A. No. But a question or -- questions from +23 ██████████ -- like she asked me questions, but it wasn't +24 joking. She was kind of like in a happy way, like, ██████████ +25 what did you do? What did you do? Like those kind of + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_11_Picture_108.jpeg) + +Page 43 + +1 things, but it wasn't joking about it at all. + +2 Q. You joked about it, didn't you? +3 A. No. +4 Q. You said to ██████████ that if you did this +5 every weekend you'd be rich, didn't you? + +6 A. No. That's what ██████████ told me. +7 Q. You didn't tell that to ██████████ +8 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and +9 answered. + +10 TWN WITNESS: No. +11 BY MR. TEIN: +12 Q. After you left Epstein's house you took the +13 money and you went shopping with ██████████ and the other +14 girl in the car, correct? + +15 A. Incorrect. I didn't spend any of the +16 money. + +17 Q. You went to Marshall's, didn't you? +18 A. I went along, yes, but I didn't -- +19 Q. You went shopping with them at Marshall's. + +20 didn't you? +21 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. +22 TWN WITNESS: I quess you could say that. +23 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Lack of predicate +24 and foundation. Mischaracterization of earlier +25 testimony. + +![](_page_11_Picture_118.jpeg) + +Page 44 + +1 BY MR. TEIN: +2 Q. And ██████████ bought a parse, right? +3 A. Yes. +4 Q. And you were with her the whole time at +5 Marshall's, correct? + +6 A. Yes. +7 Q. How tell me about when the federal +8 prosecutors told you about getting reimbursed. + +9 A. I have no idea what you're talking about. +10 Q. Tell me about when the federal prosecutors +11 spoke to you about getting money you feel you're entitled +12 to from Mr. Epstein. + +13 A. I don't know what you're talking about. +14 Q. Do you know who ██████████ Villafona is? +15 A. No, sir. +16 Q. Did you ever meet with any federal +17 prosecutors? + +18 A. I think -- yesh. I think they were -- I +19 think they were like PBI. + +20 Q. ██████████ huh. Did you meet with federal +21 prosecutors? + +22 A. They came to my house one time, yes. +23 Q. When did they come to your house? +24 A. Very long ago. +25 Q. Was it this year, 2008? + +![](_page_12_Picture_23.jpeg) + +1 A. It was not this year, no. + 2 Q. Was it 2007? + 3 A. I'd have to say at least two years ago or a + 4 year ago, yeah. So it would be 2007, 2006; but it was a + 5 while ago. + 6 Q. How many federal prosecutors or FBI agents + 7 came to your house? + 8 A. I'm trying to remember. I want to say four + 9 people came. + 10 Q. Did they give you their business cards? + 11 A. If they did, I don't remember, and they + 12 weren't toward me. Maybe my parents have them. I don't + 13 know. + 14 Q. Did they give you their cell phone numbers? + 15 A. No. + 16 Q. Did you ever speak to them on their cell + 17 phones? + 18 A. No, sir. + 19 Q. Did they speak to your parents? + 20 A. That's something you'd have to ask my + 21 parents. + 22 Q. Do you know whether they spoke to your + 23 parents? + 24 A. No, sir. + 25 Q. You have no idea? + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_12_Picture_27.jpeg) + +Page 46 + +1 A. No, sir. + 2 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and + 3 answered. + 4 BY MR. TEIN: + 5 Q. So if I say the name to you [REDACTED] + 6 Villafona, you don't know who that is? + 7 A. No, sir. + 8 Q. How many women and how many men came to + 9 your house? + 10 A. I want to say two ladies and two guys. + 11 Q. Did someone named Jeffrey Gloman come to + 12 your house? + 13 A. I don't know names, sir. + 14 Q. Do you know who Jeffrey Gloman is? + 15 A. No, sir. + 16 Q. Do you know who Jeffrey Herman is? + 17 A. Yes. + 18 Q. That's the lawyer who first sued Epstein on + 19 your behalf, right? + 20 A. Yes. + 21 Q. Has Mr. Herman advanced your family say + 22 money? + 23 MR. LEOPOLD: Any conversations that you've + 24 had with Mr. Herman regarding that issue, you are + 25 not to disclose. If you've learned in some other + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_12_Picture_31.jpeg) + +Page 47 + +1 fashion, you may answer. + 2 THE WITNESS: Okay. + 3 I wouldn't know. + 4 BY MR. TEIN: + 5 Q. You don't know? + 6 A. No. + 7 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Foundation. + 8 Attorney/client privilege. + 9 BY MR. TEIN: + 10 Q. And you say you don't know who Jeff Gloman + 11 is? + 12 A. No, sir. + 13 Q. Does it refresh your recollection that he's + 14 the number two prosecutor at the U.S. Attorney's Office? + 15 A. No. + 16 Q. That he's [REDACTED] Villafona's bone? + 17 A. No. + 18 Q. Does it refresh your memory that he's the + 19 ex-partner of Jeff Herman, the first lawyer who sued + 20 you -- sued Mr. Epstein on your behalf for fifty million + 21 dollars? + 22 A. No, sir. I don't know who he is. + 23 Q. Without telling me any conversations that + 24 you've had with your lawyers, how is it that you selected + 25 Mr. Herman as your lawyer from the 81,000 members of the + +![](_page_12_Picture_35.jpeg) + +Page 48 + +1 Florida Best? + 2 A. I did not select him. + 3 Q. Who did? + 4 A. My father. + 5 Q. Did you ever meet Mr. Herman? + 6 A. Once. + 7 Q. Don't -- don't tell me what you discussed + 8 with him. Where did you meet him? + 9 A. I was shopping in my -- he showed up at my + 10 friend's house. + 11 Q. Whose house? + 12 A. My friend [REDACTED] + 13 Q. Is that [REDACTED] from the Quarterdeck + 14 Tavern? + 15 A. Yes. + 16 Q. And did you have a meeting with him at + 17 [REDACTED] house? + 18 A. Yes. I guess you could say that. + 19 Q. And who else was there? + 20 A. My Aunt [REDACTED] + 21 Q. And what was that meeting about? + 22 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. That calls for + 23 attorney/client privilege. + 24 BY MR. TEIN: + 25 Q. What discussions did you have with + +![](_page_13_Picture_20.jpeg) + +1 Mr. Herman in the presence of [REDACTED] + 2 A. None. + 3 Q. What discussions did you have in the + 4 presence of her aunt? + 5 A. Of my aunt? + 6 MR. GOLDMERGER: It's the witness's aunt. + 7 BY MR. TEIN: + 8 Q. [REDACTED] of your aunt. + 9 A. The only one that we've ever discussed or + 10 ever had. + 11 Q. And so you were in a conversation with + 12 Mr. Herman and your aunt? + 13 A. Yes, sir. + 14 Q. And you discussed privileged matters during + 15 that conversation? + 16 MR. LEOPOLD: Object to the form. I think + 17 you might have to educate her on that question. + 18 BY MR. TEIN: + 19 Q. You discussed the lawsuit? + 20 A. Yes. + 21 Q. Did [REDACTED] tell you about any + 22 conversations that she had with Mr. Herman? + 23 A. As far as I'm concerned, she's never spoken + 24 or she's never had a conversation. She only opened the + 25 door and then left. She's the one who answered the door. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_13_Picture_24.jpeg) + +1 Q. Why did the meeting take place at [REDACTED] + 2 [REDACTED] house? + 3 A. I spent the night that night at her house. + 4 Q. And when was this? + 5 A. A while ago. + 6 Q. How long ago? + 7 A. A month and a half ago. I'm guessing. + 8 Q. A month and a half ago? + 9 A. [REDACTED] hub. + 10 Q. So was it before of after Mr. Herman filed + 11 the fifty-million-dollar lawsuit against Epstein? + 12 A. After. + 13 Q. Did you meet with an FBI agent named + 14 Resbitt Kurkendall, a woman? + 15 A. I don't know. + 16 Q. Did Ms. Kurkendall speak to you about + 17 getting reimbursed from Mr. Epstein? + 18 A. I've never had a discussion with anyone + 19 about getting reimbursed from Mr. Epstein. + 20 Q. Have you met with an agent named Jason + 21 Richards? + 22 A. Not to my knowledge. + 23 Q. How about an agent named Tim Slater? + 24 A. No, sir. + 25 Q. How about an agent named Junior Ortiz? + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_13_Picture_28.jpeg) + +1 A. No. + 2 Q. And we've learned that many of the girls, + 3 some of whom are as old as 23, were told by the + 4 government that they would get money at the end of the + 5 criminal prosecution. Does that sound familiar to you? + 6 A. No, sir. + 7 Q. Other than Mr. Leopold here -- I'm not + 8 asking about Mr. Herman either -- + 9 A. [REDACTED] hub. + 10 Q. -- did anyone ever discuss with you that + 11 you could get reimbursement for your damages? + 12 A. No, sir. + 13 Q. Did you or any member -- + 14 MR. LEOPOLD: Are you referring to a + 15 criminal matter or a civil matter? + 16 BY MR. TEIN: + 17 Q. Did you or any member -- + 18 MR. LEOPOLD: Excuse me. Let me object to + 19 the form of the question. + 20 BY MR. TEIN: + 21 Q. Did you or any member of your family ever + 22 get a victim notification letter from anyone? + 23 A. I no longer live at that residence and I + 24 wouldn't know. + 25 Q. So your testimony is that you have never + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_13_Picture_32.jpeg) + +1 REIMBURSED a victim notification letter, correct? + 2 rect. + 3 Q. And your testimony is that you don't know + 4 if your parents have ever received a victim notification + 5 letter, correct? + 6 A. Correct. + 7 Q. Have you given any evidence to prosecutors + 8 or law enforcement in this case? + 9 A. What do you mean by evidence? + 10 Q. Well. Anything that you can touch or feel. + 11 A. No. + 12 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection to the form of the + 13 question. + 14 BY MR. TEIN: + 15 Q. So you haven't given anything physical -- + 16 A. No. + 17 Q. -- any item to any prosecutor, police + 18 officer or law enforcement agent, correct? + 19 A. My cell phone four years ago or three years + 20 ago, but that's it. + 21 Q. You gave your cell phone to whom? + 22 A. [REDACTED] Pagan. + 23 Q. Did she keep it? + 24 A. Ask her. + 25 Q. You gave it to her and then you didn't get + +![](_page_14_Picture_23.jpeg) + +1 it back at the end of the meeting? + +2 A. No. They -- yeah. No. They have it. I'm + +3 guessing. I don't have it. + +4 Q. How much money are you hoping to get out of + +5 Mr. Epstein? + +6 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection to the form of the + +7 question. Attorney/client privilege. + +8 BY MR. TEIN: + +9 Q. Now much money are you hoping to get, you, + +10 yourself, hoping to get out of Epstein? + +11 MR. LEOPOLD: Same. Same objection, + +12 attorney/client privilege. + +13 Don't answer the question. + +14 BY MR. TEIN: + +15 Q. I'm not asking about what your lawyer told + +16 you. + +17 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm instructing her not to + +18 answer the question, because any of those + +19 conversations involve her counsel. + +20 MR. TEIN: Certify that. + +21 MR. LEOPOLD: Please. + +22 .....CERTIFIED QUESTION..... + +23 BY MR. TEIN: + +24 Q. Now, [REDACTED] you lied to get out of this + +25 deposition, didn't you? + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_14_Picture_27.jpeg) + +1 A. No, sir. + +2 Q. You didn't want to come to court today and + +3 tell the story that you had told to the police under + +4 cath, did you? + +5 MR. LEOPOLD: Object to the form of the + +6 question. Lack of foundation, predicate. + +7 THE WITNESS: No. I have no problem coming + +8 here and talking to you. + +9 BY MR. TEIN: + +10 Q. And to avoid getting served with a lawful + +11 subpoena, you lied about your name, didn't you? + +12 A. No. + +13 Q. And in fact, just lying yourself wasn't + +14 enough, was it? + +15 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection to the form of the + +16 question. + +17 Don't answer it. It's not a question. + +18 Object to the form of the question. Lack + +19 of foundation. + +20 MR. TEIN: Are you instructing her not to + +21 answer? + +22 MR. LEOPOLD: I am. + +23 MR. TEIN: Certify it. + +24 MR. LEOPOLD: Please. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_14_Picture_31.jpeg) + +1 .....CERTIFIED QUESTION..... + +2 BY MR. TEIN: + +3 Q. You asked your co-workers -- + +4 MR. LEOPOLD: It's vague and ambiguous. + +5 BY MR. TEIN: + +6 Q. You asked your co-workers at the + +7 Quarterdeck Tavern to lie for you, didn't you? + +8 A. No. I informed my boss about what was + +9 going on and he told me that he would help in any way + +10 that he can. + +11 Q. Okay. You got your friend [REDACTED] to lie + +12 by switching name tags with you, correct? + +13 A. Incorrect. It was a coincidence that same + +14 night she was not wearing her name tag; she was wearing + +15 mine. But I was also not wearing -- I was wearing my + +16 name tag. Everyone switches name tags. It just so + +17 happens it was a coincidence that same night the people + +18 came with the papers. + +19 MR. TEIN: Will you put up Exhibit 18-001? + +20 MR. GOLDBERGER: And mark 18-001 for + +21 identification purposes to this deposition. + +22 MR. LEOPOLD: None of them have been marked + +23 yet. Can we mark them and put them as attachment + +24 to the depositions? Because I think you've shown + +25 three photos now. And this is the only one that + +![](_page_14_Picture_35.jpeg) + +1 has been marked for identification yet. + +2 BY MR. TEIN: + +3 Q. [REDACTED] -- + +4 MR. LEOPOLD: Hold on just a second. Just + +5 so the record is clear -- + +6 MR. TEIN: I'm not speaking to you. + +7 MR. LEOPOLD: Okay. Then don't speak to me + +8 then. But I'll speak to Mr. Goldberger, perhaps. + +9 But at least for the record, can we put on + +10 the record what the previous two photographs were + +11 marked for identification? + +12 MR. GOLDBERGER: We will make sure that the + +13 record is clear at the end of the deposition so + +14 that there's no ambiguity. + +15 MR. LEOPOLD: Thank you. + +16 BY MR. TEIN: + +17 Q. [REDACTED] I've put a photograph marked 18-001 + +18 up on the screen. Do you see that? + +19 A. Yup. + +20 Q. Who is that in the photo? + +21 A. [REDACTED] on the left and me on the right. + +22 Q. [REDACTED] right? + +23 A. Yes. + +24 Q. [REDACTED] your friend at the + +25 Quarterdeck Tavern, right? + +![](_page_15_Picture_19.jpeg) + +1 A. Yes. + +2 Q. [REDACTED] your friend, who you say the day +3 that the process servers went to serve you with a +4 subpoena for this deposition, just happened -- just by +5 coincidence, was wearing your name tag? + +6 A. Yes, sir. + +7 Q. And just by coincidence, you were wearing +8 her name tag, correct? + +9 A. Yes. + +10 Q. Your testimony under oath is that's just a +11 coincidence, right? + +12 A. Total honesty. + +13 Q. It just happens to be the day that you were +14 going to be served with a subpoena, correct? + +15 A. That wasn't the first day that -- + +16 MR. LEOPOLD: [REDACTED] just answer the +17 question. It calls for a yes or no. + +18 THE WITNESS: Yes. + +19 BY MR. TEIN: + +20 Q. You said that wasn't the first day you were +21 going to be -- you thought you were being served with a +22 subpoena, correct? + +23 A. Correct. + +24 Q. You knew before the day that you switched +25 name tags with [REDACTED] that the process servers were + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_15_Picture_37.jpeg) + +Page 58 + +1 looking for you, didn't you? + +2 A. No. I knew -- + +3 MR. LEOPOLD: Just answer it. It calls for +4 a yes or no. + +5 THE WITNESS: Okay. No. + +6 BY MR. TEIN: + +7 Q. Now you can explain the answer that your +8 counsel stopped you from explaining. + +9 A. Okay. I work at Quarterdeck and people +10 were telling me that people were looking for me. So yes, +11 I was aware that people were searching for me. But I had +12 no idea who they were or what their intentions were. But +13 I thought they were just people I didn't want to talk to. +14 So I just didn't want to talk to them. And every time +15 they'd come to work I wasn't there. And so happens the +16 night that they came in me and my friend switched name +17 tags. No big deal. + +18 Q. That's a lie, isn't it? + +19 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Don't answer that +20 question. That's harassment and I will not allow +21 it. He could ask the questions and we'll allow a +22 jury to make that determination, but not counsel. +23 I will not allow her to answer that +24 question. + +25 MR. TEIN: Certify it. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_15_Picture_50.jpeg) + +Page 59 + +1 MR. LEOPOLD: I'll certify it. + +2 .....CERTIFIED QUESTION..... +3 She's answered that question. She's explained it five +4 times already. The fact that Counsel doesn't like the +5 answer, that's a different query. + +6 MR. TEIN: Stop making speaking objections. +7 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm not. I'm not going to +8 put up with it, because it's in appropriate, Jack, +9 and you know it. I will not allow Counsel to +10 berate a witness, whether it's in a criminal case +11 or a civil case, whether my client or -- + +12 MR. TEIN: Calm down. + +13 MR. LEOPOLD: Excuse me. + +14 No, I'm not going to allow it. That is not +15 proper. + +16 MR. GOLDBERGER: Okay. + +17 MR. LEOPOLD: If he wants to say that she's +18 lying after asking it five times and her +19 explaining in great detail, he can do that. But +20 I'm not going to allow her to answer, nor be +21 harassed by him. It's improper. + +22 MR. GOLDBERGER: Okay. But your response +23 that Counsel doesn't like the question -- or +24 doesn't like the answer -- just let me finish. + +![](_page_15_Picture_63.jpeg) + +Page 60 + +1 to interrupt you. + +2 MR. GOLDBERGER: Just requires us to say we +3 like the answer to that question. And it's not +4 you and I or you and Mr. Tein who are testifying +5 here. It's the witness. + +6 MR. LEOPOLD: Fine. But after the sixth +7 time of asking the same question and then coming +8 back and pointing a finger at her and saying, +9 "You're a liar" -- + +10 MR. TEIN: That didn't happen. + +11 MR. LEOPOLD: That's fine. But I'm not +12 going to allow her to answer that question, +13 because she's answered that same question and has +14 explained it. + +15 Now Counsel might be sitting there rubbing +16 his head with a migraine. That's his problem. +17 But if he can't ask a question appropriately in a +18 professional manner, we will leave. I will not +19 allow her to be berated like that. + +20 MR. GOLDBERGER: Actually, we're very happy +21 with the answer. + +22 MR. LEOPOLD: That's great. + +23 MR. GOLDBERGER: Do you want us to get into +24 that? + +![](_page_16_Picture_19.jpeg) + +1 MR. LEOPOLD: This is really high stuff that + 2 you're going through. But that's finer just ask + 3 your question and move on. But do it one time. + 4 If you don't understand it, I'll let you follow + 5 up, but I'm not going to allow you to ask the same + 6 question time and again and then call her a liar. + 7 Just ask the question, get the answer and move to + 8 the next subject matter. + 9 MR. TEIN: Ted, I'm sitting right across + 10 the table from you. + 11 MR. LEOPOLD: Yes, sir. + 12 MR. TEIN: Please be quiet. Don't yell. + 13 MR. LEOPOLD: I will not be quiet. + 14 MR. TEIN: Stop yelling. + 15 MR. LEOPOLD: [REDACTED] when I'm yelling + 16 you'll know it. I will not -- + 17 MR. TEIN: My name is not [REDACTED]. + 18 MR. LEOPOLD: I thought your first name was + 19 [REDACTED] Mr. Tein. + 20 MR. TEIN: You watched me for three days at + 21 the evidentiary hearing where you sat in the back + 22 of the courtroom. You should know who I am. + 23 MR. LEOPOLD: Well, that's the impression + 24 you must have made in the courtroom. + 25 I will not be quiet. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_16_Picture_23.jpeg) + +Page 62 + +1 MR. TEIN: That's obnoxious. Stop being + 2 obnoxious. It's stupid. Let's go ahead with the + 3 questions. + 4 MR. LEOPOLD: I will make the record. + 5 MR. TEIN: Let's get on with the questions. + 6 MR. LEOPOLD: Do you need a break? + 7 (Thereupon, a recess was taken.) + 8 BY MR. TEIN: + 9 Q. Okay. [REDACTED] after you told your manager + 10 at the Quarterdeck Tavern everything that was going on + 11 and he told you he would help you any way he could, he + 12 hid you in the kitchen from the process servers, correct? + 13 A. Incorrect. + 14 Q. Isn't it true that lying to avoid service + 15 is a meaningless lie to you, [REDACTED] + 16 A. Incorrect. + 17 Q. What is your manager's name? + 18 A. I have three. Would you like to know + 19 all -- + 20 Q. Who's the one who lied for you? + 21 A. [REDACTED] + 22 Q. And what did [REDACTED] do to lie for you? + 23 A. Said I wasn't there. + 24 Q. And who did he tell wasn't there? + 25 A. Ask him. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_16_Picture_27.jpeg) + +Page 63 + +1 Q. Where were you when [REDACTED] told this + 2 someone that you were not at the Quarterdeck Tavern? + 3 A. Eating nachos. + 4 Q. At the Quarterdeck Tavern? + 5 A. Yes. + 6 Q. What did you do so that [REDACTED] would lie to + 7 the process servers for you? + 8 A. Nothing. + 9 Q. You just got him to lie for you, didn't + 10 you? + 11 A. No. I had no influence on him saying I + 12 wasn't there. + 13 Q. He took that upon himself? + 14 Isn't it true that Mr. Epstein's process + 15 servers had to ask the police to get you out of the + 16 restaurant so that they could serve you? + 17 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Lack of + 18 foundation, predicate. + 19 BY MR. TEIN: + 20 Q. You can answer the question. + 21 MR. LEOPOLD: If you know, Don't guess. + 22 THE WITNESS: No. Can you repeat the + 23 question? + 24 MR. TEIN: Don't coach. + 25 MR. LEOPOLD: Don't guess. + +![](_page_16_Picture_31.jpeg) + +Page 64 + +1 MR. TEIN: That's a coaching. + 2 MR. LEOPOLD: No. That's an instruction to + 3 the client. + 4 MR. TEIN: No. You don't do that. + 5 THE WITNESS: Can you repeat the question? + 6 MR. LEOPOLD: Let me just state for the + 7 record -- + 8 BY MR. TEIN: + 9 Q. Once the police -- Isn't it true that + 10 Mr. Epstein's process servers had to ask the police to + 11 get you out of the restaurant so that they could serve + 12 you? + 13 A. Incorrect. My boss called the police. + 14 Q. And once the police showed up, to stop you + 15 from lying to avoid service, you made up another lie that + 16 the process servers had herassed you. Isn't that + 17 correct? + 18 A. Incorrect. + 19 Q. You lie all the time, don't you? + 20 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. + 21 THE WITNESS: Incorrect. + 22 BY MR. TEIN: + 23 Q. You have a Hydrapace page, don't you? + 24 A. No longer do I have a Hydrapace page. I + 25 deleted it. + +![](_page_17_Picture_27.jpeg) + +1 Q. When did you delete your MySpace page? + +2 A. A couple days ago. + +3 Q. Who told you to take your MySpace page down +4 a couple of days ago? + +5 A. Mobody. I'm sick and tired of MySpace. + +6 Q. You all of a sudden got sick and tired of +7 MySpace and just a few days before this deposition you +8 decided to delete your MySpace page, correct? + +9 A. Correct. + +10 Q. Is that your testimony under oath? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 Q. Did you take your MySpace page down because +13 you thought the government might subpoena it? + +14 A. Incorrect. + +15 Q. Hadn't your MySpace page been up for over +16 three months before you took it down? + +17 A. Correct. But I also had made tons of +18 MySpaces over the last years. I just got tired of them +19 and delete them because -- draws -- and make new ones. + +20 Q. We're going to talk about that. +21 So you deleted your MySpace page after you +22 were already under subpoena for this deposition, correct? + +23 A. Correct. + +24 Q. What about the MySpace page didn't you want +25 us to see, [REDACTED] + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_17_Picture_31.jpeg) + +Page 66 + +1 A. Nothing. + +2 Q. Well, we're going to come back to MySpace +3 in a second. + +4 A. You do that. + +5 Q. [REDACTED] I'm going to ask you some questions +6 about why you lie about your age so often, okay? + +7 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection to the form. + +8 Argumentative. + +9 BY MR. TEIN: + +10 Q. You lie about your age all the time, don't +11 you? + +12 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection, argumentative. + +13 THE WITNESS: Incorrect. + +14 BY MR. TEIN: + +15 Q. You lie about your age to get body +16 piercings, don't you? + +17 A. Incorrect. + +18 Q. You have body piercings, don't you? + +19 A. Yes. + +20 Q. You have four body piercings; I am't that +21 right? + +22 A. Five. + +23 Q. Other than the piercings on your ears -- +24 I'm not talking about that -- + +25 A. [REDACTED] then no; just one. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_17_Picture_35.jpeg) + +Page 67 + +1 Q. And where is the one body piercing? + +2 A. Belly. + +3 Q. When did you get that? + +4 A. For my birthday, with my stepmother and my +5 father. + +6 Q. And when was that? + +7 A. When I was 14. + +8 Q. Okay. So you had that body piercing when +9 you met Epstein, correct? + +10 A. It might have been, or maybe that -- yeah, +11 wither my 14th birthday or my 15th. I honestly don't +12 remember. + +13 Q. Now you've lied about your age to get into +14 bars by using driver's licenses that aren't yours, +15 correct? + +16 A. Incorrect. + +17 Q. Are you swearing under oath that you've +18 never done that? + +19 A. Yes, I swear under oath. + +20 Q. And you've lied about your age to buy beer, +21 correct? + +22 A. Incorrect. + +23 Q. You're swearing under oath that you've +24 never lied to stores about your age? + +25 A. I've never lied to a store about my age or + +![](_page_17_Picture_39.jpeg) + +Page 68 + +1 anything. + +2 Q. You try to look much older than you are, +3 don't you? + +4 A. Incorrect. + +5 Q. And you've lied about your age on your +6 MySpace pages, don't you? + +7 A. Incorrect. + +8 Q. All right. Let's look at Exhibit 26-01 +9 one. + +10 MR. BELOHLAVEK: 25-0017 + +11 MR. TEIN: Yes. + +12 BY MR. TEIN: + +13 Q. On this page you lied to everyone that you +14 were 18, didn't you? + +15 A. Correct. + +16 Q. Let's go to Exhibit 33. + +17 MR. BELOHLAVEK: That's 33-0017 + +18 TEIN: Correct. + +19 BY MR. TEIN: + +20 Q. On this page you lied to everyone that you +21 were 19, didn't you? + +22 A. Incorrect. + +23 MR. LEOPOLD: Just answer the question. + +24 THE WITNESS: [REDACTED] incorrect. + +25 BY MR. TEIN: + +![](_page_18_Picture_23.jpeg) + +1 Q. Now you can explain your answer. + +2 A. I know that I have seen all of these and I + +3 know that this one is mine. + +4 Can you go down? + +5 MR. LEOPOLD: Just for the record, you're + +6 pointing to the photo. + +7 THE WITNESS: I'm pointing to -- + +8 BY MR. TEIN: + +9 Q. You're pointing to the one where it says + +10 your age is 18? + +11 A. Correct. + +12 Q. That's yours, right? + +13 A. Correct. That's mine from a couple years + +14 ago that I have not been on, because I don't use that. + +15 Please keep going down, please. And I think that's it, + +16 because there's no one -- just that one is mine. + +17 Q. So the one you pointed to where it says + +18 your age is 18, that's yours, correct? + +19 A. Correct. + +20 Q. And when you wrote 18 as your age on your + +21 Myspace page, that was a lie, wasn't it? + +22 A. Correct. + +23 Q. Did you lie about your Myspace page back + +24 then because you couldn't post on Myspace unless you were + +25 18? + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL-33401 + +![](_page_18_Picture_27.jpeg) + +1 A. Correct. There was a rule many years ago + +2 that you had to be 18 to have a Myspace. + +3 Q. So you lied about your age so you could + +4 post on Myspace, right? + +5 A. Yes. + +6 Q. Let's go back to the top one on this page, + +7 23-01. + +8 Are you testifying now under oath that this + +9 Myspace page where the headline says, "Twins do have more + +10 fun," and the location is given as Low, abbreviation for + +11 Lowhatchee, and the age is 19, and it says [REDACTED] + +12 [REDACTED] is it your testimony that you did not post + +13 that? + +14 A. Correct. + +15 Q. Now let's go back to the one that you were + +16 pointing to before on this page, where it says your age + +17 is 18 and you lied about your age to post Myspace, okay? + +18 A. Uh-buh, yes. + +19 Q. All right. Why did you finally put your + +20 true age on your Myspace profile four days before you + +21 were scheduled to testify before the Grand Jury? + +22 A. I don't know what you're talking about. + +23 MR. LEOPOLD: If you don't understand, ask + +24 him to ask the question again. + +25 MR. TEIN: Don't coach. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL-33401 + +![](_page_18_Picture_31.jpeg) + +1 THE WITNESS: I don't know which Myspace + +2 you're talking about. + +3 BY MR. TEIN: + +4 Q. The Myspace page that you're just pointing + +5 to, where it says you were 18. + +6 A. Yes. + +7 Q. And you were lying about your age, right? + +8 A. Uh-buh. + +9 Q. Why did you finally post your true age on + +10 your Myspace profile -- + +11 A. [REDACTED] -- + +12 Q. -- four days before you were scheduled to + +13 testify before the Grand Jury? + +14 A. I honestly don't know which Myspace, + +15 because I've had like a bazillion Myspaces, and in that + +16 year, I had two, that one and another one, and that one's + +17 been deleted. So I don't know which one you're referring + +18 to. + +19 Q. You remember that you changed your age on + +20 your Myspace page from 18 to your true age just four days + +21 before you went and testified in the Grand Jury? + +22 A. No. + +23 Q. You don't remember that. + +24 A. No. + +25 Q. So you remember Detective Recarey? Did you + +![](_page_18_Picture_35.jpeg) + +1 over meet a Detective Recarey? + +2 A. I don't know the names. + +3 Q. How many different detectives have you met + +4 with on this case from Palm Beach? + +5 A. Probably a good six or seven, maybe. + +6 Q. Did one of the detectives tell you before + +7 you testified in the Grand Jury that you should take your + +8 Myspace age and put your true age? + +9 A. No. + +10 Q. Didn't Detective Recarey have to come to + +11 your house to pick you up to get you to testify in front + +12 of the Grand Jury? + +13 A. Possibly, maybe because I didn't have a + +14 rider I was only 14 or 15 at the time. + +15 Q. Your mon didn't drive you? + +16 A. No. + +17 Q. Stepmon didn't drive you? + +18 A. I think my dad. [REDACTED] my dad drove + +19 me. + +20 Q. Your dad drove you? + +21 A. Yes, sir. + +22 Q. So your testimony is Detective Recarey did + +23 not drive you, correct? + +24 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. /asked and + +25 answered. + +![](_page_19_Picture_23.jpeg) + +1 THE WITNESS: No. I'm pretty sure my dad + 2 drove me, because he was there with me. + 3 BY MR. TEIN: + 4 Q. Did any detective tell you to change your + 5 age on your MySpace page, to pat your true age? + 6 A. No, sir. + 7 Q. Now you also lied on your MySpace page + 8 about your income, didn't you? + 9 A. Yes. + 10 Q. And you lied, saying that you made a + 11 quarter million dollars a year and higher, correct? + 12 A. As a joke, yes. + 13 Q. That was a lie, wasn't it? + 14 A. Yes. + 15 Q. And you also lied on your MySpace page, + 16 saying that you were married, didn't you? + 17 A. Possibly. And that might have been an + 18 error on my part. + 19 Q. Now you also lie to the police, don't you? + 20 A. No. + 21 Q. Well, you lied to the police in your + 22 tape-recorded statement that you gave to Detective + 23 ██████████ Pagan three years ago, didn't you? + 24 A. To my knowledge, no, I did not. + 25 Q. Well, you lied to the police when you + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_19_Picture_27.jpeg) + +Page 74 + +1 accused Mr. Epstein of attempting to murder your father, + 2 didn't you? + 3 A. No. I never heard a statement saying that + 4 Mr. Epstein tried to murder my father. + 5 Q. You made that statement, didn't you? + 6 MR. LEOPOLD: Do you have a statement to + 7 show her? That's been asked and answered. + 8 MR. TEIN: I'm sorry. I didn't hear the + 9 witness' answer, Mr. Leopold. + 10 BY MR. TEIN: + 11 Q. ██████████ you told the police, didn't you, + 12 that Mr. Epstein almost killed your father, didn't you? + 13 A. No. + 14 Q. Three years ago, before Mr. Epstein even + 15 knew about this investigation, you told the police that + 16 Epstein had "already come to my dad's house and did + 17 something to my dad's tires and my dad almost died. I + 18 didn't want my dad to get hurt, because Jeff already + 19 almost killed him." + 20 Didn't you say that? + 21 A. Not to my knowledge or recollection. I + 22 have never said anything like that. + 23 Q. That would have been a complete lie, + 24 wouldn't it have been? + 25 A. Yeah. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_19_Picture_31.jpeg) + +Page 75 + +1 Q. Because Mr. Epstein never came to your + 2 dad's house, correct? + 3 A. Correct. + 4 Q. And no one who worked for Mr. Epstein ever + 5 did something to your dad's tires, did they? + 6 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Lack of + 7 foundation, predicate. + 8 Don't guess. + 9 BY MR. TEIN: + 10 Q. It's not true that Mr. Epstein almost + 11 killed your father, is it? + 12 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and + 13 answered, lack of foundation, predicate. + 14 BY MR. TEIN: + 15 Q. You can answer. + 16 A. No. + 17 Q. Now you told the police that you didn't + 18 know who was in the car with you and ██████████ on the day + 19 you went to Epstein's house, didn't you? + 20 A. Yes. + 21 Q. And that was a lie, wasn't it? + 22 A. It's the truth. + 23 Q. You told the police that there was someone + 24 in the car next to you and you specifically said you + 25 didn't know her name, right? + +![](_page_19_Picture_35.jpeg) + +Page 76 + +1 A. Correct. I do not know her name. + 2 Q. You said, "I don't know her name, but she + 3 was dark like a Spanish girl." Those were your words, + 4 right? + 5 A. Yes. + 6 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and + 7 answered. + 8 BY MR. TEIN: + 9 Q. Who was in the car that day with you and + 10 ██████████ + 11 A. Again, I do not know. + 12 Q. It was your good friend ██████████ + 13 wasn't it? + 14 A. No. I don't know a ██████████ + 15 Q. you lied to the police about who was in the + 16 car with you and ██████████ didn't you? + 17 A. Incorrect. + 18 Q. Let me ask you some questions about who you + 19 may have spoken to about this case. All right? + 20 A. Go ahead. + 21 Q. Did you speak to your twin sister ██████████ + 22 A. Not in detail, but of course she knows: + 23 she's family. And yes. + 24 Q. What's her e-mail? + 25 A. I don't think she has an e-mail. + +![](_page_20_Picture_31.jpeg) + +1 Q. - What is her phone number? + 2 A. ██████, goah. I don't know off the top of my + 3 head. + 4 Q. And what is her home address? + 5 A. She lives with my mom. + 6 Q. In Georgia? + 7 A. Yes, sir. + 8 Q. What about ██████ boyfriend ██████? Did you + 9 speak to him about Epstein's case? + 10 A. That's my mom's boyfriend. My sister + 11 doesn't have a boyfriend. My mom's husband's name is + 12 ██████ so maybe you get them confused. + 13 Q. Do you know his phone number? + 14 A. No. + 15 Q. Where does he live? + 16 A. With my mom. + 17 Q. In the same house with her? + 18 A. Yes. They're married. + 19 Q. So not boyfriend; husband? + 20 A. Yeah, husband. + 21 Q. Have you spoken to ██████ about + 22 what happened in Mr. Epstein's house? + 23 A. Not in detail, but he knows the basics. + 24 yes. + 25 Q. What is his e-mail? + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd.; Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL-33401 + +![](_page_20_Picture_35.jpeg) + +1 A. I don't know. + 2 Q. What is his phone number? + 3 A. How is that relevant? + 4 Q. What is his phone number? + 5 A. 561.719.2652. + 6 Q. What is his home address? + 7 A. I don't know. + 8 Q. Where does he live? + 9 A. In Palm Beach Lakes somewhere. + 10 Q. Ever been to his house? + 11 A. Yes. + 12 Q. You don't know what his address is? + 13 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and + 14 answered. She just said she doesn't know. + 15 MR. TEIN: Don't coach. + 16 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and + 17 answered. + 18 BY MR. TEIN: + 19 Q. You can answer the question. + 20 A. I don't know the exact address. + 21 Q. What street is it on? + 22 A. It's an apartment complex; its not a + 23 street. + 24 Q. What's the name of the apartment complex? + 25 A. Something Cove. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd.; Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL-33401 + +![](_page_20_Picture_39.jpeg) + +1 Q. what apartment number is it? + 2 A. I couldn't tell you. + 3 Q. When was the last time you went there? + 4 A. Just visited this past weekend. That's the + 5 first and last time I went there. + 6 Q. How about ██████ Have you spoken + 7 to him about your case? + 8 A. No. We no longer speak. + 9 Q. What's his phone number? Actually, we + 10 already have his phone number and e-mail. + 11 How about ██████ Have you ever + 12 spoken to her about your case? + 13 A. I don't know an ██████ + 14 Q. Have you ever met ██████ + 15 A. No. But just to let you know, I don't + 16 really know names. If you have pictures of there faces I + 17 could tell you. + 18 Q. All right. Let me see if I can refresh + 19 your memory. + 20 A. Okay. + 21 Q. Does it refresh your memory that ██████ + 22 is the other girl who made allegations about Epstein, but + 23 refused to show to the Grand Jury when she had to testify + 24 about them under oeth? + 25 A. No, sir. I have no knowledge of any other + +![](_page_20_Picture_43.jpeg) + +1 girls in this whole situation. We're not allowed to know + 2 each other. + 3 Q. I didn't get the last four words. + 4 A. We're not allowed to know each other. + 5 Q. And what about ██████ Have you + 6 of met her? + 7 A. No, sir. + 8 Q. Let's see if I can refresh your memory on + 9 her. She's the other person represented by your lawyer + 10 Mr. Herman, who is using Epstein for fifty million + 11 dollars. + 12 A. I have no knowledge of her. + 13 Q. Never met her? + 14 A. Never met her. + 15 Q. ██████ + 16 A. I don't know who that is either. + 17 Q. A person named ██████ who knows ██████ + 18 is that ██████ + 19 A. I don't know, sir. + 20 Q. Do you remember making a statement to + 21 Detective Pagan that's in the police reports? + 22 A. No, sir. + 23 Q. Have you read the police reports in this + 24 case? + 25 A. Yes. + +![](_page_21_Picture_15.jpeg) + +1 Q. They're on the Internet, right? + 2 A. Yes, I think. + 3 Q. Were you surprised when the police reports + 4 were released on the Internet containing your statements + 5 that you had made to the police? + 6 A. Yes. + 7 Q. You didn't want to see that happen, right? + 8 A. No. + 9 Q. So you're saying you don't know a [REDACTED] + 10 [REDACTED] + 11 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and + 12 answered. + 13 BY MR. TEIN: + 14 Q. Does it refresh your memory that he was + 15 somebody who had gone to jail for drugs and car theft? + 16 A. No, sir. + 17 Q. Someone who knows [REDACTED] + 18 A. No. + 19 Q. You don't know if he met with Detective + 20 Kecarey? + 21 A. No, sir. + 22 Q. How about [REDACTED] + 23 A. Yes, I remember. I know who that is. + 24 Q. Did you ever speak to [REDACTED] about what + 25 happened at Mr. Epstein's house? + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd.; Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_21_Picture_19.jpeg) + +1 A. He knows what happened four years ago. He. + 2 doesn't know this is still going on today. + 3 Q. What's his address? I'm sorry. I have his + 4 address. + 5 A. I don't know. + 6 Q. How about [REDACTED] + 7 A. [REDACTED]? + 8 Q. You know who that is? + 9 A. I know who that is, yes. + 10 Q. He's the one you stayed out drinking all + 11 night one night last year when your dad reported you + 12 missing? + 13 A. No, sir. + 14 Q. Remember the baseball game you were + 15 supposed to go to? + 16 A. No, sir. + 17 Q. Did you speak to [REDACTED] about this + 18 case? + 19 A. No, sir. + 20 Q. How about [REDACTED]? + 21 A. That's my sister's ex-boyfriend. + 22 Q. He's the one with the sawed-off shotgun + 23 with the obliterated serial number? + 24 A. Ask him. I would not know that + 25 information. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd.; Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_21_Picture_23.jpeg) + +1 Q. Did you speak to [REDACTED] about this + 2 case? + 3 A. No, sir. + 4 Q. Have you spoken to [REDACTED] about this + 5 case? + 6 A. No. I don't know who [REDACTED] is. + 7 Q. Did your parents speak to [REDACTED] + 8 A. Ask my parents. + 9 Q. Let's see if I can refresh your memory as + 10 to who he is. Okay? + 11 A. Uh-huh. + 12 Q. He's the Vanity Fair reporter who made a + 13 financial arrangement with your father. + 14 A. I am aware of that. And again, I was not + 15 aware like that my dad did it until after it was done. + 16 And I don't know the details about that. I just know + 17 what you know about that, like that they talked. + 18 Q. Tell me what you know about the financial + 19 arrangement that [REDACTED] the Vanity Fair reporter, + 20 made with your father. + 21 A. I don't know about the details at all. + 22 Q. How much money did [REDACTED] give to + 23 your father? + 24 A. I don't even know he gave money to my dad. + 25 Q. I'm sorry? + +![](_page_21_Picture_27.jpeg) + +1 A. I didn't even know he gave money to my dad. + 2 Q. What do you know about the deal that [REDACTED] + 3 [REDACTED] has with your father? + 4 A. I only know they spoke on the telephone + 5 occa. I don't know anything else. + 6 Q. When was that? + 7 A. This was a white ago, a year or two -- or a + 8 year ago. I honestly don't know. + 9 Q. Did [REDACTED] the Vanity Fair + 10 reporter, offer any money to your father? + 11 A. I don't know. + 12 Q. Did [REDACTED] the Vanity Fair + 13 reporter, give you any money? + 14 A. No, sir. + 15 Q. Did he offer you any money? + 16 A. No, sir. Never spoke to him. + 17 Q. What reporters have you spoken to? + 18 A. Zero. + 19 Q. What about your family members? What + 20 reporters have they spoken to? + 21 A. The whole Palm Beach County, obviously, as + 22 you can see in that newspaper. + 23 Q. Tell me -- let's go through each one that + 24 you remember. Other than the Vanity Fair reporter, [REDACTED] + 25 [REDACTED] what other reporters have any member of your + +![](_page_22_Picture_23.jpeg) + +1 family spoken to? + 2 A. I don't know. And I know my mom has spoken + 3 to zero. My sister spoke to zero. My father and + 4 stepmother, I wouldn't know. You'd have to ask them. I + 5 don't contact them. + +6 Q. Well, I just want to know -- I don't want + 7 you to -- I want to know what's in your mind. All right? + 8 MR. LEOPOLD: She just told you. She just + 9 answered -- + +10 MR. TEIN: He quiet. + 11 BY MR. TEIN: + +12 Q. What I want to know is what you know from + 13 your personal knowledge. My question to you is: What + 14 knowledge do you have about family members of yours + 15 speaking to reporters? + +16 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and + 17 answered. + 18 And if you can't talk professionally, we're + 19 going to leave. + +20 MR. TEIN: Do what you want to do. + +21 MR. LEOPOLD: Are you going to continue to + 22 talk this way? + +23 MR. TEIN: I'm not going to answer any + 24 question that you ask me, Mr. Leopold. + +25 MR. LEOPOLD: Okay. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 + 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 -- West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_22_Picture_35.jpeg) + +1 MR. TEIN: But you are misrepresenting the + 2 record and you are grandestanding for your client + 3 and it's wrong. So be quiet. And you know how to + 4 make an objection. Make it. Otherwise stop + 5 talking. + +6 BY MR. TEIN: + +7 Q. [REDACTED] + 8 MR. LEOPOLD: Excuse me. + +9 MR. TEIN: If you want to leave the + 10 deposition, leave. But you'll be back here. + +11 MR. LEOPOLD: Excuse me. If I could just + 12 make the record, instead of interrupting me, + 13 please. That's what we do professionally. + 14 There's a recorder here. I'm certainly not being + 15 obstructionist. I'm going to make the record. + 16 But we're going to act with some semblance of + 17 professionalism, hopefully, by all parties in the + 18 room. That goes to me, that goes to your + 19 co-nounsel sitting behind you and next to you, the + 20 court reporter and everyone else in the room. + 21 Everyone is entitled to that. + +22 You've asked a question. She answered the + 23 question fully and she's not going to be harassed + 24 because you don't like the answer. If you want to + 25 follow up -- + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 + 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 -- West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_22_Picture_44.jpeg) + +1 MR. TEIN: Stop engaging me. Make your + 2 speech and then we'll ask the questions. + 3 MR. LEOPOLD: Well, you won't let me finish + 4 making the objection, so it's difficult to do + 5 that. But if you want to follow with an + 6 appropriate question, feel free to do that. But + 7 we're not going to harass the witness. + +8 MR. TEIN: I disagree with everything + 9 you've said. Let's ask the questions. Okay? + +10 MR. LEOPOLD: Ask an appropriate question. + 11 MR. TEIN: Are you going to stop talking? + 12 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm going to make -- protect + 13 my client and make appropriate objections. But + 14 there's not a question pending right now. + +15 BY MR. TEIN: + 16 Q. [REDACTED] has [REDACTED] spoken to any reporters? + 17 A. No. + 18 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and + 19 answered. + +20 BY MR. TEIN: + 21 Q. Has [REDACTED] been given money by any + 22 reporters? + 23 A. No. + 24 Q. Has your mom spoken to any reporters? + 25 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and + +![](_page_22_Picture_52.jpeg) + +1 answered. + 2 THE WITNESS: No. + 3 BY MR. TEIN: + 4 Q. Has your mom's husband [REDACTED] spoken to any + 5 reporters? + 6 A. No. + 7 Q. Has your mom's husband [REDACTED] received any + 8 money from reporters? + 9 A. No. + 10 Q. Are you sure you don't know [REDACTED] + 11 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and + 12 answered. + 13 THE WITNESS: I'm positive. + 14 BY MR. TEIN: + 15 Q. I'll try again to refresh your memory. + 16 A. Okay. + 17 Q. Does it refresh your memory that she had + 18 been arrested for drugs and was cooperating with + 19 Detactive Recarey against Kpatein to get herself a better + 20 deal? + 21 A. No. I don't know who she is. + 22 Q. Have you spoken to anyone else who's been + 23 at Epatein's house? + 24 A. No. + 25 Q. Without telling me what was said -- I don't + +![](_page_23_Picture_1.jpeg) + +![](_page_23_Picture_6.jpeg) + +2 3 5 6 7 want to anon about Kw essereetlos with any lawyers. okay -- O. -- did you or your parrots speak to any otter law fine betides Kr. tartAn and Mr. Leopold's law firms? A. 0. Nov without tallies to \*best anything that 9 wee said, beat -- did one Prot one to tend? 10 A. Me. I was Manedsten something else. 11 0. not were you thinking about? 12 Does lastly oast !stripe? 13 O. Okay. Without tolling se what se Wild, It onto prepared you for today's esiesiksevl IS A. What do you most prepared? 16 0. Did you talk about this deposition. \*bout 17 um, would happen, with a/Obeid', 16 Tee. 19 O. Don't Loll me what was said. 30 Okay. 21 p. 'n not &Skits that. I don't west to knew 22 that. 23 A. Okay. 24 O. Who prepared you for today's deposition? 25 A. Mr. Laopold. + +Pogo 89 + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Pat. 561.682.1771 + +— — — 1695 Fa Peach labs Odd., Ste 500 . West Pato BeaChrfl. 33401-- + +![](_page_23_Picture_11.jpeg) + +Pape 9: + +2 O. Now you told Os -- again. 2 don't want eo 3 know Net vas said. 4 5 O. Yoe told no that you OS with Ni. Leopold 6 this earning to prepare for your deposition. right, 7 A. Yes. 6 0. whn did you set up that meeting with 9 Kt. Leopold to tato plate this morning? 10 A. Gee. like, like five days ego, four days 11 ego. 12 0. So you're wore that Kr. Leopold told us 13 that in could not start the deposition tole rotas.; 14 because be tied a court appaaranoe. °insert? 15 MR. LlOPOLD: Don't answer that 'Weft''. 16 Celle for attorney/client comsrecatices. 1/ AY NI. ISIS: 16 O. Wave you mum the letter that Mr. Leopold 29 wrote to ye elating that ha -- an atiail then Kr. Leopold 20 wrote to Mr. Goldberger elating that he could sot be here 21 this morning bacons be Asa a court appearance/ Old you 22 see that c-mail? 23 ton. Lt01014): Yon can answer that question. 24 ISM 25 + +0. 2 A. 0. NUM did you sat with Its. Leopold to p prepare for foley't donostilv.? 5 A. Ittissarning. 6 0. And how long did that meeting last? 7 A. Ontil it started. Anybody also? No. O. Nov you told We that you previously had 9 road the police pewits In this see? 10 h. Yes. 11 0. Nave you read your otatemeat that you gave 12 to the 'Olio\*? 13 A. tear air. 14 O. And 1a Nut form was that statenant, 15 A. net de yea seam? 16 O. Mae it in the lora et a police report or a 1? tranecript? 18 A. net's the drffeateeort 19 0. A transcript has questions and seniors at 20 It. A police report is jest typed out narratrve. 21 A. it's a police report. 22 O. And nendidyou read the policy airport/ 23 A. A low days ago. I overread it a tow day. 24 25 0. bad you read it Before their + +Pegg 9D + +Ph. 961.662.0905 - rev. 561482.1771 - - —1655 PaVa Ptah is Wed, &tee 500-west PM" BeWbh 3340I - - + +i 0 + +![](_page_23_Picture_16.jpeg) + +1 2 3 4 6 SY Ma. OLIN: 0. hove you listened to your tope-recorded statement to the yells? A. 0. bie. Wheys did you listen to that? In. I think, this building. I don't know. 7 It woo hero. 0. When did you ltotea to that &cabmen..? 9 A. This morning. 10 O. who was present whoa you listened to 11 that statement? 12 A. Sr. Leopold -- aid I forget Yost nom. 11 em. GOLDIULIKSA: Ms. bolohlamek. 11 TM WITNESS' NS. beldelavak. 25 R Ne. /ell: 16 O. And you hadn't listened to your ntatimon: 17 before that, correct? 16 A. No, six. 19 0. Nave you set with Imoor• isprosontlag 20 mopes else gain goatee?? 21 A. Po. sir. 22 O. Now many tees have you spoken to officer\* 23 each the pen such folio\* bithirtment? 24 A. More than I Ire can count. It's teen 25 amnia9 for four year. so glare a few ten. + +Pogo 92 + +![](_page_24_Picture_23.jpeg) + +1 Q. When was the last time you spoke with + 2 officers of the Palm Beach Police Department? + 3 A. A while ago. I'd say a year ago. + 4 Q. A year ago? + 5 A. Yeah. Maybe a year and a half. + 6 Q. Do you remember Detective Recarey? + 7 A. No. + 8 Q. Do you remember [REDACTED] Pagan, Detective + 9 Pagan? + 10 A. Yes. + 11 Q. How many times have you spoken to Detective + 12 Pagan? + 13 A. She was the only one I spoke to about this + 14 until for some reason she wasn't on the case anymore. + 15 Q. When was that? + 16 A. The first meeting I ever had was with her + 17 and then I think like I met with her like 10 times or 12 + 18 times or something like that, and then I didn't get -- + 19 another investigator questioned me after that. + 20 Q. And who was that? + 21 A. I don't remember. + 22 Q. And what type of questions did they ask + 23 you? + 24 A. The same. + 25 Q. The same questions all over again? + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_24_Picture_27.jpeg) + +1 A. Basically. + 2 Q. How many taped statements have you given to + 3 the police? + 4 A. One that I know of. + 5 Q. Just the one with Detective Pagan? + 6 A. Yes, sir. + 7 Q. How about to the FBI? Did you give any + 8 statements to them? + 9 A. No. Well, actually, I don't really + 10 remember if that was taped or not, to be honest with you. + 11 I had one meeting with them at my house and don't know if + 12 it was taped. + 13 Q. You were interviewed at [REDACTED] + 14 house? + 15 A. No. That was by the lawyer. + 16 Q. [REDACTED] by the lawyer? + 17 A. Uh-huh. + 18 Q. Where did the conversation that you had + 19 with the FBI take place? + 20 A. At my father's residence. + 21 Q. Which is where? + 22 A. On [REDACTED] in Loxahatchee. + 23 Q. On whore? + 24 A. [REDACTED] in Loxahatchee. + 25 Q. And when did that take place? + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_24_Picture_31.jpeg) + +1 A. I'd have to say like a year and a half ago. + 2 a year ago. It was a long time ago. + 3 (Discussion held off the record.) + 4 MR. TEIN: Tell me the last answer, please. + 5 (Thereupon, a portion of the record was read + 6 by the reporter.) + 7 BY MR. TEIN: + 8 Q. And who was present when the FBI spoke to + 9 you at your father's house? + 10 A. My stepmother was there, but she wasn't + 11 around. She made herself like do other things. + 12 Q. And how many FBI agents were there? + 13 A. I think four. + 14 Q. And you don't remember any of their names? + 15 A. No, sir. + 16 Q. And were there any lawyers there? + 17 A. Not that I know of. + 18 Q. And none of them gave you their call phone + 19 numbers? + 20 A. No. + 21 Q. And the last time you spoke to the FBI was + 22 a year and a half ago? + 23 A. It was a while ago. + 24 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and + 25 answered. + +![](_page_24_Picture_35.jpeg) + +1 BY MR. TEIN: + 2 Q. And the last time you spoke to the federal + 3 prosecutor's office was when? + 4 A. I don't know. + 5 Q. Did any of the FBI agents tell you that + 6 [REDACTED] Villafona had spoken with Mr. Leopold? + 7 A. No. + 8 Q. Did any of the FBI agents tell you that + 9 [REDACTED] Villafona had spoken with Mr. Herman? + 10 A. No. + 11 Q. Did any FBI agents tell you that Jeff + 12 Sloman spoke with Mr. Herman. + 13 A. No. + 14 Q. Did any FBI agents tell you that Jeff + 15 Sloman spoke with Mr. Leopold? + 16 A. No. + 17 Q. Do you know whether any of the federal + 18 prosecutors allowed Mr. Herman to review a draft + 19 indictment? + 20 A. I wouldn't know. + 21 Q. Do you know if any of the federal + 22 prosecutors discussed a draft indictment with Mr. Herman? + 23 A. I wouldn't know. + 24 Q. Have you ever e-mailed with any FBI agent + 25 or any federal prosecutor? + +![](_page_25_Picture_23.jpeg) + +1 A. No. + +2 Q. Have you ever text messaged with any FBI + +3 agent or any federal prosecutor? + +4 A. No. + +5 Q. Has the FBI told you about other testimony? + +6 A. No. + +7 Q. Has the FBI told you about what other girls + +8 have said? + +9 A. No. + +10 Q. Have federal prosecutors told you what + +11 other girls have said? + +12 A. No. + +13 Q. Do you have any way of getting in touch + +14 with the FBI if you wanted to get in touch with them? + +15 A. No. + +16 Q. How about your parents? Do they know how + +17 to get in touch with the FBI? + +18 A. I don't know. + +19 Q. And by your parents, I'm referring to both + +20 sets, okay? + +21 A. █ Well, I'm referring to only my dad, + +22 because my non really doesn't care to know any of this + +23 stuff. + +24 Q. So the answer would be the same for your + +25 non and █ + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_25_Picture_27.jpeg) + +1 A. Yeah. + +2 Q. Have you spoken to a lawyer named Burt + +3 Ocariz about this case? + +4 A. No. + +5 Q. Do you know who Burt Ocariz is? + +6 Let's see if I can refresh your memory. + +7 Does it refresh your memory that he's a good friend of + +8 █ Villafona's boyfriend? + +9 A. I don't know who █ Villafona is. + +10 Q. █ Villafona is the lead federal + +11 prosecutor that's on the federal part of this case. + +12 Okay? + +13 A. No. + +14 Q. So does it refresh your memory that Ocariz + +15 is the good friend of █ Villafona's boyfriend? + +16 A. Not at all. + +17 Q. Does it refresh your memory that Villafona + +18 tried to get Epstein to pay for Ocariz to represent you + +19 in the federal case? + +20 A. No. + +21 Q. Do you know if Detective Recarey has spoken + +22 with your father? + +23 A. No. + +24 Q. Do you know if Detective Recarey has spoken + +25 to your stepsmother? + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_25_Picture_31.jpeg) + +1 A. No. + +2 Q. How about with █ + +3 A. Yes, I would know; and no, she did not. + +4 Q. Let's put up -- let me ask you some + +5 questions about the photo that you had posted on your + +6 MySpace page before you erased it last week. Okay? + +7 A. Okay. + +8 MR. TEIN: Do you mind if we close the door + +9 a second, please. + +10 MR. LEOPOLD: Exhibit number, please. + +11 MR. TEIN: Put up 25-005. + +12 Hold on a second. + +13 MR. LEOPOLD: Don't say anything. She was + +14 talking to her counsel. + +15 MR. TEIN: Put up 25-006. + +16 MR. LEOPOLD: Is that 005 right there? + +17 MR. TEIN: Yes. + +18 BY MR. TEIN: + +19 Q. Who took this photo of you in a warehouse, + +20 simulating being gang-raped by a bunch of -- + +21 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Mischaracterizes + +22 the photograph, and lack of foundation and + +23 predicate. + +24 Fully explain if you need to. + +25 THE WITNESS: I will. + +![](_page_25_Picture_35.jpeg) + +1 First off, this is not a warehouse. This + +2 is in █ garage. + +3 Second of all, I'm not being gang-raped. + +4 Everyone has their clothing on. + +5 Thirdly, if you'd look at all the other + +6 pictures in that album, I'm drinking -- what's + +7 when you're sick you drink it? + +8 BY MR. TEIN: + +9 Q. You can't ask questions of your counsel. + +10 A. All right. I'm drinking like Sprite. I'm + +11 not drinking any kind of alcohol, if you would look at my + +12 other pictures in that album. + +13 You guys picked the possibly worst pictures + +14 out of there to present. And it was just a goofy + +15 picture. All of these kids like to be goofy. And that's + +16 what we were doing. + +17 Q. Who's the man on the left of the picture + +18 holding his -- holding a beer bottle as if it were a + +19 penis towards your mouth? + +20 A. █ + +21 Q. Who's the man behind you, right up towards + +22 your backside, with you bent over? + +23 A. That one? + +24 Q. The right side, kissing with his mouth. + +25 A. That's █ + +![](_page_26_Picture_15.jpeg) + +1 Q. He's the one grabbing towards the groin +2 area of [REDACTED] +3 A. Yes. +4 Q. And there's three other men in the photo. +5 What are their names? The one on the left with the hat? + +6 A. That's [REDACTED] (phonetic). + +7 Q. Smiling? + +8 A. Yes. + +9 Q. Who's the one kissing -- + +10 MR. LEOPOLD: Don't interrupt. Let her +11 finish the record. She's testifying. + +12 MR. TEIN: I know you don't like this +13 picture, my friend. + +14 MR. LEOPOLD: The picture is fine. + +15 BY MR. TEIN: + +16 Q. Who's the one with the hat? + +17 MR. LEOPOLD: No. Hold on. Stop, [REDACTED] + +18 You have to let the witness finish her +19 answer. She was in the process of explaining and +20 you cut her off. + +21 Please finish what you were saying and then +22 Counsel can ask you whatever he wishes after that. + +23 THE WITNESS: Okay. This guy -- + +24 MR. LEOPOLD: Just make it so the record is +25 clear who you're referring to. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_26_Picture_33.jpeg) + +1 THE WITNESS: -- on the far left is [REDACTED] +2 [REDACTED] +3 BY MR. TEIN: + +4 Q. He's the one whose heed is near the groin +5 of [REDACTED] right? + +6 A. Yes. + +7 Q. And in the middle there's a man smiling. + +8 Who's that? + +9 A. That's [REDACTED] + +10 Q. And who's the one in the red hat, kissing? + +11 A. That's [REDACTED] (phonetic). + +12 Q. Let me stop you for a second. Are you +13 done? + +14 A. Yes, I'm done. + +15 Q. Who is [REDACTED] + +16 A. My sister's friend. Well, she's a mutual +17 friend, but more my sister's. + +18 Q. What is her last name? + +19 A. [REDACTED] + +20 Q. Spell that. + +21 A. I don't know how to -- + +22 Q. Have you spoken to her about this case? + +23 A. No. + +24 Q. Who's [REDACTED] + +25 A. My sister's friend. I don't really speak + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_26_Picture_56.jpeg) + +1 to him at all. + +2 Q. What's his last name? + +3 A. [REDACTED] + +4 Q. [REDACTED] + +5 A. [REDACTED] + +6 Q. And have you spoken to [REDACTED] about this + +7 case? + +8 A. No, sir. + +9 Q. Have you spoken to [REDACTED] about this case? + +10 A. Not in detail, but yes. + +11 MS. BELOHLAVEK: Are we referring to + +12 [REDACTED] + +13 THE WITNESS: Yes. + +14 MR. TEIN: Yes. + +15 MS. BELOHLAVEK: Okay. + +16 BY MR. TEIN: + +17 Q. Have you spoken to [REDACTED] about this case? + +18 A. [REDACTED]? + +19 Q. Do you have a friend named [REDACTED] + +20 A. I do not have a friend named [REDACTED] + +21 Q. From freshman year? + +22 A. No. + +23 Q. How about [REDACTED] + +![](_page_26_Picture_84.jpeg) + +1 A. No. + +2 Q. What's her last name? + +3 A. [REDACTED] I don't know how to spell it. + +4 Q. Is she the person whose house you want to +5 on New Year's this year? + +6 A. No. I wasn't at her house on New Year's. + +7 Q. Where were you when you took the picture of +8 "Can you say blazed," that's on your website? + +9 A. I wouldn't know or -- with. We were at a +10 birthday party for some girl's 16th birthday. + +11 Q. Were you drinking at that party? + +12 A. No. There was no alcohol or anything +13 there. + +14 Q. What does "blaze" mean to you? + +15 A. It's like -- it just means like messed up. +16 But we weren't, if you look at the picture. + +17 Q. Messed up like drank, right? + +18 A. Sure. + +19 Q. Who's [REDACTED] + +20 A. A girl I know, like from like two years +21 ago. + +22 Q. She's the one you were supposed to be +23 staying with when you went drinking with [REDACTED] + +![](_page_27_Picture_15.jpeg) + +1 A. [REDACTED] + +2 Q. Where does she live? + +3 A. I don't know. In [REDACTED] Palm. + +4 Q. [REDACTED] + +5 A. Oh-huh. I'm guessing. + +6 Q. Do you know her phone number? + +7 A. No, I do not. + +8 Q. Let's look at 25-010. + +9 A. See, I'm drinking -- + +10 Q. I'm not asking you about what you're drinking. + +11 Who are the men in this photo who are pretending to gang up on you and stab you with knives? + +12 Who are they? + +13 A. [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] + +14 Q. Are these firemen? + +15 A. Are those? [REDACTED] -- he said the + +16 two stabbing with knives. That's why I said that. I + +17 don't know. That's [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] + +18 Q. Are these firemen? + +19 A. No. They're all on -- except [REDACTED] + +20 they're all on full rights for football. + +21 Q. Go to 025-015. + +22 MR. LEOPOLD: 025 dash? + +23 MR. TEIN: 015. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655.Palm.Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_27_Picture_19.jpeg) + +1 THE WITNESS: Gosh, that's so long ago. + +2 BY MR. TEIN: + +3 Q. Who took the photo of you licking the + +4 ponis? + +5 A. My stepmother. + +6 Q. Whose idea -- that was your stepmother's + +7 idea? + +8 A. It was in Buca di Beppo, where she works + +9 currently, and that was before she worked there. And we + +10 just thought it would be funny. + +11 MR. TEIN: 19-007. Can you enlarge that? + +12 BY MR. TEIN: + +13 Q. Who took this photo of you simulating you + +14 having sex with a man? + +15 A. We're not simulating having sex, and + +16 it's -- [REDACTED] and the person who took it was, I'm pretty + +17 sure. [REDACTED] but I know him as [REDACTED] I don't know his + +18 last name. + +19 Q. Go to 19-006, please. + +20 Who took this photo of you simulating sex + +21 with a man? + +22 A. The same person. And we're not simulating + +23 having sex, Mr. -- + +24 Q. Tein. + +25 Did you post that on the Internet? + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655.Palm.Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_27_Picture_23.jpeg) + +Page 107 + +1 A. Actually, this is an old MySpace I never + +2 finished and I never like did anything. I just kind of + +3 made it and left it. + +4 Q. So the answer is yes, you posted this on + +5 MySpace? + +6 A. Yup. + +7 Q. Go to 25-016. Who took this photo of you + +8 simulating sex with a woman? + +9 MR. LEOPOLD: Object to the form of the + +10 question. Argumentative. + +11 THE WITNESS: First off, she's piercing my + +12 bally button or repiercing it, and I'm pretty sure + +13 it was just like we put up a camera somewhere and + +14 put a timer on it. We didn't have anybody take + +15 it. + +16 BY MR. TEIN: + +17 Q. You posted that on your MySpace page? + +18 A. Yesh. + +19 Q. Go to 25-013. Is that a photo of you? + +20 A. Yep. + +21 Q. Who's in the photo with you? + +22 A. [REDACTED] + +23 Q. [REDACTED] + +24 A. Yep. + +25 Q. Is this you coming out of the shower? + +![](_page_27_Picture_27.jpeg) + +Page 108 + +1 A. Yes. + +2 Q. Are you clothed in this picture? + +3 A. Yesh. I have a halter dress on. + +4 Q. Where is that picture taken? + +5 A. In [REDACTED] house. + +6 Q. Did you post that on the Internet? + +7 A. Yes. + +8 Q. All right. + +9 MR. TEIN: You can take that down. + +10 BY MR. TEIN: + +11 Q. Now your boyfriend is [REDACTED] + +12 correct? + +13 A. Yesh. + +14 Q. You lie about your age in order to conceal + +15 something about your relationship with [REDACTED] + +16 isn't that correct? + +17 A. No. + +18 Q. [REDACTED] 22 years old, isn't he? + +19 A. Yes. + +20 Q. And [REDACTED] is a firefighter with the Palm + +21 Beach Fire Department, right? + +22 A. Yup. + +23 Q. Does the Palm Beach Fire Department know + +24 that your boyfriend is dating an underage girl? + +25 A. Actually, mister, it's legal. + +![](_page_28_Picture_15.jpeg) + +1 Q. Well -- + +2 MR. LEOPOLD: Just answer the question, + +3 [REDACTED] + +4 THE WITNESS: Yes. + +5 BY MR. TEIN: + +6 Q. Did they know two weeks ago that you were + +7 dating an underage girl (sic)? + +8 A. Yes. I met everybody in there. + +9 Q. Did they know your age? + +10 A. Yes. + +11 Q. Did you lie about your age so that the fire + +12 department wouldn't think that [REDACTED] is committing a + +13 crime by having a sexual relationship with an underage + +14 girl? + +15 MS. BELOCHEAVEK: Objection. Assumes facts + +16 not in evidence. + +17 BY MR. TEIN: + +18 Q. You can answer the question. + +19 A. No. + +20 Q. Does the Palm Beach Police Department know + +21 that [REDACTED] is having a sexual relationship with an + +22 underage girl? + +23 MR. LEOPOLD: Don't guess. Answer if you + +24 know. + +25 THE WITNESS: Can you repeat the question? + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_28_Picture_19.jpeg) + +1 BY MR. TEIN: + +2 Q. Does the Palm Beach Police Department know + +3 that [REDACTED] a member of the Palm Beach Fire Department, + +4 is having a sexual relationship with an underage girl? + +5 A. I'm guessing no. + +6 Q. You lie about your twin sister [REDACTED] don't + +7 you? + +8 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Argumentative. + +9 BY MR. TEIN: + +10 Q. Don't you? + +11 A. No. I have never lied for or to [REDACTED] + +12 Q. You lie about the fact that she has a drug + +13 habit, right? + +14 A. No. I would never accuse my sister of + +15 having a drug habit. + +16 Q. Do you try to conceal the fact that she has + +17 a drug habit? + +18 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Argumentative. + +19 BY MR. TEIN: + +20 Q. You can answer the question. + +21 A. No. My sister does not have a drug habit. + +22 Q. You lied when you went to the crack house + +23 in Georgia, didn't you? + +24 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Argumentative. + +25 Lack of foundation, lack of predicate. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_28_Picture_23.jpeg) + +Page 111 + +1 THE WITNESS: Never -- what did you say? + +2 BY MR. TEIN: + +3 Q. You lied when you went to the crack house + +4 in Georgia, didn't you? + +5 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Argumentative. + +6 Lack of foundation, lack of predicate. + +7 BY MR. TEIN: + +8 Q. You can answer the question. + +9 A. I have never been to a crack house. + +10 Q. Who don't you lie to? + +11 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Argumentative. + +12 Don't answer the question. + +13 MR. TEIN: Certify it. + +14 .....CRATIFIED QUESTION..... + +15 BY MR. TEIN: + +16 Q. You don't lie to [REDACTED] do you? + +17 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and + +18 answered. + +19 Don't answer the question. + +20 BY MR. TEIN: + +21 Q. No. You can answer that question. + +22 MR. LEOPOLD: No. I just told her not to. + +23 You've asked that question about five -- + +24 MR. TEIN: No, I haven't. + +25 MR. LEOPOLD: Don't answer the question. + +![](_page_28_Picture_27.jpeg) + +Page 112 + +1 MR. TEIN: I'll certify it. + +2 .....CRATIFIED QUESTION..... + +3 MR. LEOPOLD: For the record, you have to + +4 stop interrupting me because she can't take down + +5 both of us talking at the same time. + +6 BY MR. TEIN: + +7 Q. You tell [REDACTED] the truth, don't you? + +8 A. Excuse me? + +9 Q. You tell [REDACTED] the truth, don't you? + +10 A. When it's -- yes, I tell [REDACTED] the truth. + +11 Q. Who's [REDACTED] drug dealer? + +12 A. My sister does not have a drug dealer. She + +13 lives in Georgia with my mother. + +14 Q. Okay. Who is the drug dealer who dropped + +15 you and [REDACTED] off at 5:45 a.m., in 2006, after being out + +16 all night, the two of you, using drugs at Palm Beach + +17 Country Estates where your father called the police? + +18 A. [REDACTED] + +19 Q. He's the drug dealer? + +20 A. He is a drug dealer. + +21 Q. Do you remember [REDACTED] was arrested by the + +22 Palm Beach Police Department and taken to the Juvenile + +23 Assessment Center that morning? + +24 A. I do remember that. + +25 Q. Now before you massaged Epstein, you were + +![](_page_29_Picture_15.jpeg) + +1 involuntarily admitted into a juvenile educational + 2 facility; isn't that right? + 3 A. Did you say involuntarily? + 4 Q. Yes. + 5 A. No. I was willing to go. I -- duly said + 6 sure. + 7 Q. And you went there because you were lying + 8 so much, no one could control you; isn't that correct? + 9 A. That's very incorrect. + 10 Q. Now you lie to your parents all the time, + 11 don't you? + 12 A. Incorrect. + 13 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Argumentative. + 14 BY MR. TEIN: + 15 Q. Sorry? + 16 A. Incorrect. + 17 Q. The day you went to Epstein's house you + 18 lied to your father about where you were going; isn't + 19 that correct? + 20 A. Correct. + 21 Q. You admitted to the police that you told + 22 your father that you were going shopping, didn't you? + 23 A. Yes. + 24 Q. And that was a lie, wasn't it? + 25 A. Yes. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_29_Picture_19.jpeg) + +1 Q. And isn't it true that your father has + 2 accused you of lying? + 3 A. All the time. + 4 Q. Didn't your father throw you out of the + 5 house Thanksgiving of this past year because you were + 6 lying so much to him? + 7 A. Yes, he did kick me out. No, that's not + 8 the reasons why. + 9 Q. Didn't your father throw your sister + 10 out of the house, too? + 11 A. Yes. + 12 Q. And he threw her out of the house the week + 13 after Thanksgivings, right? + 14 A. I don't know the date, but sure. + 15 Q. Sounds about right? + 16 A. Sure. + 17 Q. And the reason he threw her out of the + 18 house was because she was lying, too? + 19 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Lack of + 20 foundation. Calls for speculation. + 21 BY MR. TEIN: + 22 Q. When your counsel coaches you, you say it's + 23 correct, right? + 24 A. I've never been coached. + 25 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_29_Picture_23.jpeg) + +1 BY MR. TEIN: + 2 Q. Okay. When your counsel that it was there + 3 was lack of foundation, you agree with your counsel. + 4 right? + 5 A. I was like saying, "Yeah, let's move on," + 6 because there was no point to asking that question. + 7 Q. Your father threw [REDACTED] out of the house + 8 because she was lying, correct? + 9 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Lack of + 10 foundation. + 11 Hold on, [REDACTED] Let me just make the + 12 objection. + 13 Lack of foundation, predicate, calls for + 14 speculation. + 15 BY MR. TEIN: + 16 Q. Answer. + 17 A. I'm not my sister. I don't know. + 18 Q. I want to know what you know only. + 19 A. I don't know. + 20 Q. You don't know. That's your answer? + 21 A. Yes. + 22 Q. Now your parents filed the police report + 23 regarding Mr. Epstein, right? + 24 A. Yes. + 25 Q. Now your parents are also lying, aren't + +![](_page_29_Picture_27.jpeg) + +1 they? + 2 A. Yes. + 3 MR. LEOPOLD: Just so the record is clear, + 4 the father -- because the mother was up north. + 5 MR. TEIN: Don't testify, Counsel. + 6 MR. LEOPOLD: So the record is clear, just + 7 the father. The mother was -- + 8 MR. TEIN: Counsel, don't coach and + 9 testify, please. That's absolutely improper. + 10 MR. LEOPOLD: You just asked the wrong + 11 question. + 12 MR. TEIN: You can't coach her that way and + 13 you will know it. + 14 MR. LEOPOLD: For the record, it's the + 15 father. He's remarried, I think on his third + 16 marriage. + 17 MR. TEIN: You cannot -- it's absolutely, + 18 totally against the rules and you know it. + 19 MR. LEOPOLD: The natural mother lives in + 20 Georgia. + 21 MR. TEIN: You need to behave yourself, + 22 lawyer. + 23 MR. LEOPOLD: The natural mother lives in + 24 Georgia. The father is here locally. + 25 MR. TEIN: Stop coaching. Stop talking. + +![](_page_30_Picture_15.jpeg) + +1 You object. You know the rules. You just +2 lectured me about the rules, Counsel. So why +3 don't you play by the rules? Or only when they +4 fit you? Why don't you grandstand a little more +5 now. Give us a five-minute speech, Mr. Leopold. + +6 MR. LEOPOLD: Are you finished, for the +7 record? + +8 MR. TEIN: I'm not talking to you. Do what +9 you want. + +10 MR. LEOPOLD: Don't say anything yet. + +11 BY MR. TEIN: + +12 Q. [REDACTED] your parents -- + +13 MR. LEOPOLD: Hold it. Don't say anything +14 yet. Let me -- + +15 BY MR. TEIN: + +16 Q. Your parents, who filed the police report +17 are also liars. + +18 MR. LEOPOLD: Don't answer the question. + +19 We're not going to answer until I make the record. +20 I want to put on the record, now that Counsel +21 appears to be finished with his comments for the +22 record, that the previous question was +23 inappropriate, was intentionally maleading. + +24 Now you can ask the question. + +25 BY MR. TEIN: + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_30_Picture_31.jpeg) + +1 Q. Your parents, who filed the police report +2 in this case, are also proven liars, aren't they? + +3 MR. LEOPOLD: Same objection. + +4 BY MR. TEIN: + +5 Q. Aren't your parents liars? + +6 MR. LEOPOLD: Calls for speculation. Lack +7 of predicate. + +8 MR. TEIN: Stop coaching. You know what +9 that is, Leopold. + +10 MR. LEOPOLD: Calls for speculation. Lack +11 of foundation. + +12 THE WITNESS: When you say parents, my now +13 is not, but sure, yeah, my dad has been to jail +14 for lying. + +15 BY MR. TEIN: + +16 Q. Your dad went to federal prison for two +17 years for lying, right? + +18 A. Correct. + +19 Q. Did he tell you it was for a financial +20 fraud? + +21 A. Yes. + +22 Q. For stealing money from some financial +23 institution? + +24 A. Correct. + +25 Q. And do you think your father is trying to + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_30_Picture_50.jpeg) + +1 steal your lawsuit money away from you? + +2 Don't look to your lawyer for the answer. + +3 MR. LEOPOLD: You can answer if you know +4 the answer to it. I have no idea. + +5 THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +6 BY MR. TEIN: + +7 Q. And your father filed a lawsuit, the first +8 lawsuit for fifty million dollars against Mr. Epstein +9 without consulting you, correct? + +10 A. Correct. + +11 Q. And your father had a lawyer file the first +12 lawsuit on your behalf for fifty million dollars against +13 Mr. Epstein without your knowledge, correct? + +14 A. Correct. + +15 Q. And you don't trust your father, do you? + +16 A. Correct. + +17 Q. And you believe he's trying to manipulate +18 you for his own gain, don't you? + +19 A. Sort of. + +20 Q. Well, you know that your mother filed a +21 statement, an affidavit, saying that you don't trust your +22 father and that you believe he's trying to manipulate you +23 for his own gain; isn't that correct? + +24 A. Correct. + +![](_page_30_Picture_69.jpeg) + +1 A. Up-huh. Yes. + +2 Q. Do you trust your stepmother? + +3 A. My stepmother, no. + +4 Q. You think she's also trying to steal your +5 Epstein lawsuit money away from you, don't you? + +6 A. I would like to clarify something. You +7 keep saying my Epstein lawsuit money. I don't have any +8 money, and it's just a lawsuit at the moment. So I just +9 don't trust her. + +10 Q. Okay. You think that your stepmother is +11 trying to take advantage of this lawsuit to try to get +12 money from Mr. Epstein that belongs to you, right? + +13 A. Yes. + +14 Q. Did your stepmother tell you why she was +15 arrested? + +16 A. No. + +17 Q. Did your stepmother tell you that she's +18 ever been arrested? + +19 A. No. + +20 Q. Did she tell you she was arrested for +21 fraud? + +22 A. Never. + +23 Q. Did she tell you that she was fired from +24 Newthorne Aviation? + +![](_page_31_Picture_74.jpeg) + +1 Q. Did she tell you that she was fired from +2 Hawthorne Aviation for stealing? + +3 A. No. + +4 MR. TEIN: Let's take a break. +5 (Thereupon, a recess was taken.) + +6 BY MR. TEIN: + +7 Q. [REDACTED] before you met Jeffrey Epstein, had +8 you ever had sexual intercourse? + +9 A. Yes, yesh. + +10 Q. How many times? + +11 A. Just a few. Twice. + +12 Q. With how many different men? + +13 A. Two. + +14 Q. How old were they? + +15 A. [REDACTED] being one year older than me, +16 and then the other person was two years older than me. + +17 Q. What was his name? + +18 A. [REDACTED] + +19 Q. How old were you when you first had sexual +20 intercourse? + +21 A. 14. + +22 Q. How many -- before you met Epstein, how +23 many different men had you had any type of sexual +24 activity with? + +25 A. Just those two. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_31_Picture_95.jpeg) + +1 Q. Are you saying you never kissed a man other +2 than those two? + +3 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection to the form of the +4 question. + +5 THE WITNESS: Yes, I had kissed people +6 before. + +7 BY MR. TEIN: + +8 Q. Before you met Epstein, had you ever had +9 oral sex? + +10 A. No. + +11 Q. Ever in your life, have you exchanged sex +12 for something of value? + +13 A. No. + +14 MR. TEIN: We're done. + +15 THE WITNESS: [REDACTED] okay. + +16 MR. LEOPOLD: We'll read. + +17 MS. BELOHLAVEK: I don't have any +18 questions. Thank you. + +19 MR. LEOPOLD: Before we go off the record, +20 it's my understanding -- Mr. Goldberger can +21 correct the record -- but we have stipulated that +22 color copies of the documents that were identified +23 for identification certainly will be attached to +24 the deposition and counsel will be taking the +25 photographs across street so that they can be + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_31_Picture_111.jpeg) + +1 laser color copied so that we have a copy, and I'm +2 assuming he'll get a copy to the court reporter, +3 too, to attach, actually a certified copy to the +4 deposition. + +5 MR. GOLDBERGER: Done. + +6 MR. LEOPOLD: That's if you agree to that. +7 if not, then I want to pull each one out and put +8 exhibit labels on them, which we should do before +9 we leave. + +10 MR. GOLDBERGER: We're not going to do +11 either. I'll have copies sent to the court +12 reporter and she can attach them to the +13 deposition. + +14 MR. LEOPOLD: So you're not going to agree +15 to what we talked about during the break then. + +16 MR. GOLDBERGER: I'm not quite sure what +17 your asking me to do. Let me finish. + +18 MR. LEOPOLD: Okay. Sure. That's fine. + +19 MR. GOLDBERGER: Okay. If you want me to +20 go over to Ms. Belohlavek's office and make copies +21 and then I'll give those to the court reporter, +22 fine. All I'm saying is that I would avoid that +23 process. I would send copies to the court +24 reporter. But if it will make you happier -- +25 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm not? + +![](_page_31_Picture_122.jpeg) + +1 MR. GOLDBERGER: Let me finish. + +2 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm not interrupting now. + +3 MR. GOLDBERGER: But if it will make you +4 happier if I go over to Ms. Belohlavek's office +5 and make a copy of those photos that were part of +6 this deposition and then I'll give them to the +7 court reporter, I'll be happy to do it. + +8 MR. LEOPOLD: I trust you implicitly, +9 however you with to do it. However, the +10 documents, before they leave this room, need to +11 have an exhibit aticky on them with the +12 appropriate -- + +13 MR. GOLDBERGER: Want to go get some? We +14 don't have any. + +15 MR. LEOPOLD: I will do that. Excuse me. +16 Let me finish the record, please. You can't do +17 that to the court reporter. She's going to stroke +18 out. You can't do that. You have to let me -- + +19 MR. TEIN: Finish your sentence, Ted. You +20 are the most long-winded lawyer I've ever seen in +21 my life. Finish your sentence. + +22 MR. LEOPOLD: Jack, tell him not to raise +23 his voice, please. + +24 MR. TEIN: Finish your sentence. Is there +25 going to be a paried at the end of the sentence or + +![](_page_32_Picture_60.jpeg) + +1 is it just going to be comma after comma after +2 comma? + +3 Go ahead, lawyer. + +4 MR. LEOPOLD: All right. The exhibits, I +5 can't prevent you from taking them, but I will +6 object and I will be bringing it to the court for +7 sanctions. You cannot take the exhibits out of +8 the room without them being marked. I want them +9 marked, because you cannot identify in the record +10 what was used. And with all due respect to +11 Mr. Goldberger, I do not -- the way this +12 deposition is going, I do not want to rely on +13 Counsel from Miami to mark the appropriate +14 exhibits. I will not do that. I cannot prevent +15 you from taking them. But if you do, I will be +16 bringing the matter to the court with appropriate +17 sanctions, because that is improper. That is +18 improper. When you use something in a deposition, +19 they are to be marked. And you have refused to do +20 that throughout for what ever reason. + +21 MR. TEIN: You're wrong. Finish your +22 sentence because you're talking about something +23 you have no idea. + +24 Every single one is marked. Ted. Every +25 single one is already marked. But you want to + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_32_Picture_68.jpeg) + +1 argue about everything. Ever single one is +2 already marked. Ien't that stilly, Ted? + +3 MR. GOLDBERGER: Thirty years of doing this +4 and I have never had an argument over this. + +5 MR. TEIN: You've made -- Ted, you are +6 obstructionist, you are a liar. You have lied and +7 misrepresented things, for the record. You are +8 grandstanding. + +9 MR. LEOPOLD: You need to back up. + +10 MR. TEIN: No, no. I'm going to finish. + +11 MR. LEOPOLD: You can finish, but don't +12 hover over me. + +13 MR. TEIN: No one is hovering over you. +14 Stop trying to make a lying record. + +15 Let me say something else. + +16 Don't you dare threaten me with sanctions, +17 after you lied in a letter to my co-counsel about +18 the fact -- be quiet. Be quiet and let me finish. + +19 You lied in a letter to my co-counsel, + +20 Mr. Leopold, in which you said -- it was a +21 complete and utter lie -- that you were + +22 unavailable this morning because you had a +23 hearing. That was a lie. I have never seen a + +24 lawyer design to do something like that. + +25 So you will get the ex -- be quiet. Let me + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_32_Picture_85.jpeg) + +1 finish. You behave. + +2 MR. LEOPOLD: Don't point your finger at +3 me. + +4 MR. TEIN: Listen. Be quiet and I won't +5 have a need to point it at you. + +6 MR. LEOPOLD: Don't point your finger at -- + +7 MR. TEIN: Mr. Leopold -- + +8 MR. LEOPOLD: Don't point your finger at +9 me. + +10 MR. TEIN: Mr. Leopold, let me finish. + +11 MR. LEOPOLD: Don't raise your voice +12 either. + +13 MR. TEIN: Mr. Leopold -- + +14 MR. LEOPOLD: Jack, do you want to take +15 care of this? + +16 MR. TEIN: Let me finish my sentence. The +17 exhibits are marked. We are walking out of here. + +18 You are someone who misrepresents the +19 record. It is absolutely atrocious what you do. +20 That is not how a lawyer should behave. This +21 deposition is over. You will get your exhibits, +22 Mr. Leopold. + +23 MR. GOLDBERGER: I understand what you're +24 saying, Michael, and I understand Ted's position. + +25 Just so there's -- we're going to have lots + +![](_page_32_Picture_102.jpeg) + +1 of issues in this case. We're going to have lots +2 of reasons to disagree. + +3 I'm going to take it over now and I'm going +4 to make copies and I'm going to give them to +5 Mr. Conaor. If you want to go find some exhibit +6 labels and put some exhibit labels on it, be my +7 guest. But that's what I'm offering to do. + +8 THE WITNESS: Let me say two things, +9 because I am happy to always disagree, and with +10 you, I have no problem; we could always do it +11 professionally. I have not problem. + +12 I want to say two things so the record is +13 very clear. + +14 Since for whatever reason I have not been +15 able to look at exhibits, because they have been +16 refused to have been shown to me -- + +17 MR. TEIN: That's a lie. + +18 MR. LEOPOLD: -- Jack, if you represent +19 that the documents have the appropriate exhibit +20 numbers or some identifying markings, 25, 30,000, +21 whatever they may be, then you can take them, make +22 copies, send me a copy, make sure the court +23 reporter gets a copy and then send me a bill for +24 my copies, that's fine. I didn't know that they +25 are marked that way because I haven't been able to + +![](_page_33_Picture_15.jpeg) + +1 look at them. +2 MR. GOLDBERGER: They are barcoded, and the +3 number that we've made reference to in the +4 deposition coincides with the barcoding. + +5 MR. LEOPOLD: That's fine. Eight by eleven +6 color laser copies are fine. + +7 MS. BELOGLAVEK: The State Attorneys Office +8 is not going to charge anybody for color copies I +9 print out. + +10 MR. LEOPOLD: That's fine. He's going to +11 take them back to his office. + +12 Secondly -- and I will be more than happy +13 to do it, because it sounds like you all know more +14 about it than I -- but I'm happy to get affidavits +15 from Mr. Pincus, Judge Stern, everybody else about +16 what happened with this hearing today, because I +17 know very little about it. But my representations +18 are what they are. + +19 MR. GOLDBERGER: They stay -- + +20 MR. LEOPOLD: Let me just finish for the +21 record. + +22 My representations or comments about what +23 happened, representation about this hearing this +24 morning, I know very little about it. I -- + +25 MR. GOLDBERGER: I'll take your word on + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_33_Picture_27.jpeg) + +1 that. +2 MR. LEOPOLD: No, no, no. I just put it on +3 the record. I will get an affidavit -- I'm +4 assuming it sounds like you need it -- from Mr. +5 Pincus. I have no clue about what happened and +6 why it was canceled. All I was told when I was +7 out of town yesterday was that the hearing this +8 morning was cancelled. + +9 MR. GOLDBERGER: I'll take your word for +10 it. + +11 MR. LEOPOLD: If you want an affidavit, +12 I'll get it for you. + +13 MR. GOLDBERGER: It's a personal issue for +14 me because I had to disrupt a vacation and if it +15 was done just because it wasn't convenient for +16 you, then I'm offended by that. But if you're +17 telling me that it was planned and it didn't +18 happen, I'll take your word for it. + +19 MR. LEOPOLD: I am more than happy to get +20 you an affidavit, because I don't know the reason +21 why it was canceled other than the fact that I'm +22 assuming since my deposition was taken for four +23 hours on Monday for preparation for the hearing +24 today, for whatever reason it was canceled, I am +25 told it is being re-noticed. Why it was canceled. + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_33_Picture_35.jpeg) + +1 I have no idea, but if your co-counsel wishes an +2 affidavit to that effect from Mr. Pincus, I'm more +3 than happy to get it. But I don't know the reason +4 why it was canceled. + +5 MR. TEIN: I don't need it. But what I do +6 take issue with is regardless of why it was +7 canceled, you owed us the courtesy of saying, You +8 know what? We can start earlier this morning. + +9 MR. LEOPOLD: I owe you nothing. + +10 MR. TEIN: I don't care. Don't interrupt +11 me. + +12 Because Jack canceled his vacation plans +13 because of you. + +14 MR. GOLDBERGER: That's all right, that's +15 all right. + +16 MR. TEIN: And you're selfish. And this +17 deposition is over. Good-by Mr. Leopold. + +18 MR. GOLDBERGER: You can go off the record. +19 - - - + +Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_33_Picture_46.jpeg) + +1 CERTIFICATE + +2 - - - +3 The State of Florida, ) +4 County of Palm Beach. ) + +5 I hereby certify that I have read the +6 foregoing deposition by me given, and that the statements +7 contained herein are true and correct to the best of my +8 knowledge and belief, with the exception of any +9 corrections or notations made on the errata sheet, if one +10 was executed. + +12 [REDACTED] +13 +14 +15 +16 +17 +18 +19 +20 +21 +22 +23 +24 +25 + +![](_page_34_Picture_15.jpeg) + +1 DATE: February 25, 2008 +2 TO: [REDACTED] +3 c/o LINA BELOHLAVER +4 Office of the State Attorney +5 401 W. Dixie Highway +6 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 +7 IN RE: STATE OF FLORIDA -V- JEFFREY EPSTEIN +8 CASE NO.: 2006 CF09454AXX + +9 Please take notice that on Wednesday, the +10 20th of February, 2008, you gave your deposition in the +11 above-referred matter. At that time, you did not waive +12 signature. It is now necessary that you sign your +13 deposition. + +14 Please call our office at the below-listed +15 number to schedule an appointment between the hours of +16 9:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. + +17 If you do not read and sign the deposition +18 within a reasonable time, the original, which has already +19 been forwarded to the ordering attorney, may be filed +20 with the Clerk of the Court. If you wish to waive your +21 signature, sign your name in the blank at the bottom of +22 this letter and return it to us. + +23 Very truly yours, + +24 Judith F. Consor, FPR +25 Consor & Associates Reporting and Transcription +26 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, Suite 500 +27 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +28 I do hereby waive my signature: + +29 [REDACTED] +30 oc via transcript: JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQ. +31 LANNA BELOHLAVER, ESQ. +32 MICHAEL R. TEIN, ESQ. +33 TWEDORE J. LEOPOLD, ESQ. +34 file copy + +35 Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +36 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_34_Picture_26.jpeg) + +1 THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ) +2 COUNTY OF PALM BEACH. ) + +3 I, the undersigned authority, certify that +4 [REDACTED] personally appeared before me on the 20th +5 of February, 2008 and was duly sworn. + +6 WITNESS my hand and official seal this 25 day +7 of February, 2008. + +8 Judith F. Consor + +9 Judith F. Consor, FPR +10 Motary Public - State of Florida + +![](_page_34_Picture_34.jpeg) + +1 ERRATA SHEET + +2 IN RE: STATE-V-JEFFREY EPSTEIN +3 DEPOSITION OF: [REDACTED] TAKEN: February 20th, +4 2008 + +5 DO NOT WRITE ON TRANSCRIPT - ENTER CHANGES HERE +6 PAGE # LINE # CHANGE REASON + +7 [REDACTED] +8 [REDACTED] +9 [REDACTED] +10 [REDACTED] +11 [REDACTED] +12 [REDACTED] +13 [REDACTED] +14 [REDACTED] +15 [REDACTED] +16 [REDACTED] +17 [REDACTED] +18 [REDACTED] +19 [REDACTED] +20 [REDACTED] +21 [REDACTED] + +22 Please forward the original signed errata sheet to this +23 office so that copies may be distributed to all parties. + +24 Under penalty of perjury, I declare that I have read my +25 deposition and that it is true and correct subject to any +26 changes in form or substance entered here. + +27 DATE: \_\_\_\_\_ SIGNATURE OF DEPONENT: \_\_\_\_\_ + +28 Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 +29 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +![](_page_34_Picture_44.jpeg) + +1 THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ) +2 COUNTY OF PALM BEACH. ) + +3 I, the undersigned authority, certify that +4 [REDACTED] personally appeared before me on the 20th +5 of February, 2008 and was duly sworn. + +6 WITNESS my hand and official seal this 25 day +7 of February, 2008. + +8 Judith F. Consor + +9 Judith F. Consor, FPR +10 Motary Public - State of Florida + +![](_page_34_Picture_51.jpeg) + +1 CERTIFICATE + +2 The State Of Florida, ) +3 County Of Palm Beach. ) + +4 I, Judith F. Consor, Court Reporter and Motary +5 Public in and for the State of Florida at large, do +6 hereby certify that I was authorized to and did +7 atenographically report the deposition of [REDACTED] +8 that a review of the transcript was requested, and that +9 the foregoing pages, numbered from 1 to 131, inclusive, +10 are a true and correct transcription of my atenographic +11 notes of said deposition. + +12 I further certify that said deposition was +13 taken at the time and place hereinabove set forth and +14 that the taking of said deposition was commenced and +15 completed as hereinabove set out. + +16 I further certify that I am not an attorney or +17 counsel of any of the parties, nor am I a relative or +18 employee of any attorney or counsel of party connected +19 with the action, nor am I financially interested in the +20 action. + +21 The foregoing certification of this transcript +22 does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any +23 means unless under the direct control and/or direction of +24 the certifying reporter. + +25 DATED this 15 day of February, 2008 + +26 Judith F. Consor + +![](_page_34_Picture_61.jpeg) + +27 Judith F. Consor, Court Reporter +28 Florida Professional Reporter \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/EFTA02743581.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/EFTA02743581.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..510c6c7e943b9f70af08a6f5c5ad815dfa4a7163 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/EFTA02743581.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1304 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 35, + "chars": 135940, + "elapsed_seconds": 61.4, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_1_Picture_30.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_39.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_46.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_53.jpeg", + "_page_2_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_2_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_2_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_2_Picture_31.jpeg", + "_page_3_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_3_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_3_Picture_25.jpeg", + "_page_3_Picture_28.jpeg", + "_page_4_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_4_Picture_31.jpeg", + "_page_4_Picture_45.jpeg", + "_page_4_Picture_59.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_26.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_30.jpeg", + "_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_6_Picture_41.jpeg", + "_page_6_Picture_54.jpeg", + "_page_6_Picture_72.jpeg", + "_page_7_Picture_61.jpeg", + "_page_7_Picture_65.jpeg", + "_page_7_Picture_69.jpeg", + "_page_7_Picture_73.jpeg", + "_page_8_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_8_Picture_34.jpeg", + "_page_8_Picture_56.jpeg", + "_page_8_Picture_72.jpeg", + "_page_9_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_9_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_9_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_9_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_10_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_10_Picture_40.jpeg", + "_page_10_Picture_56.jpeg", + "_page_10_Picture_72.jpeg", + "_page_11_Picture_88.jpeg", + "_page_11_Picture_100.jpeg", + "_page_11_Picture_108.jpeg", + "_page_11_Picture_118.jpeg", + "_page_12_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_12_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_12_Picture_31.jpeg", + "_page_12_Picture_35.jpeg", + "_page_13_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_13_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_13_Picture_28.jpeg", + "_page_13_Picture_32.jpeg", + "_page_14_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_14_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_14_Picture_31.jpeg", + "_page_14_Picture_35.jpeg", + "_page_15_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_15_Picture_37.jpeg", + "_page_15_Picture_50.jpeg", + "_page_15_Picture_63.jpeg", + "_page_16_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_16_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_16_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_16_Picture_31.jpeg", + "_page_17_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_17_Picture_31.jpeg", + "_page_17_Picture_35.jpeg", + "_page_17_Picture_39.jpeg", + "_page_18_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_18_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_18_Picture_31.jpeg", + "_page_18_Picture_35.jpeg", + "_page_19_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_19_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_19_Picture_31.jpeg", + "_page_19_Picture_35.jpeg", + "_page_20_Picture_31.jpeg", + "_page_20_Picture_35.jpeg", + "_page_20_Picture_39.jpeg", + "_page_20_Picture_43.jpeg", + "_page_21_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_21_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_21_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_21_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_22_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_22_Picture_35.jpeg", + "_page_22_Picture_44.jpeg", + "_page_22_Picture_52.jpeg", + "_page_23_Picture_1.jpeg", + "_page_23_Picture_6.jpeg", + "_page_23_Picture_11.jpeg", + "_page_23_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_24_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_24_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_24_Picture_31.jpeg", + "_page_24_Picture_35.jpeg", + "_page_25_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_25_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_25_Picture_31.jpeg", + "_page_25_Picture_35.jpeg", + "_page_26_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_26_Picture_33.jpeg", + "_page_26_Picture_56.jpeg", + "_page_26_Picture_84.jpeg", + "_page_27_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_27_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_27_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_27_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_28_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_28_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_28_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_28_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_29_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_29_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_29_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_29_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_30_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_30_Picture_31.jpeg", + "_page_30_Picture_50.jpeg", + "_page_30_Picture_69.jpeg", + "_page_31_Picture_74.jpeg", + "_page_31_Picture_95.jpeg", + "_page_31_Picture_111.jpeg", + "_page_31_Picture_122.jpeg", + "_page_32_Picture_60.jpeg", + "_page_32_Picture_68.jpeg", + "_page_32_Picture_85.jpeg", + "_page_32_Picture_102.jpeg", + "_page_33_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_33_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_33_Picture_35.jpeg", + "_page_33_Picture_46.jpeg", + "_page_34_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_34_Picture_26.jpeg", + "_page_34_Picture_34.jpeg", + "_page_34_Picture_44.jpeg", + "_page_34_Picture_51.jpeg", + "_page_34_Picture_61.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 171.36, + 391.46783447265625 + ], + [ + 438.1766662597656, + 391.46783447265625 + ], + [ + 438.1766662597656, + 442.5321960449219 + ], + [ + 171.36, + 442.5321960449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "1 CERTIFICATE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 33, + "polygon": [ + [ + 351.9, + 445.5 + ], + [ + 559.98, + 445.5 + ], + [ + 559.98, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 351.9, + 457.65 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 7 + ], + [ + "Line", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 46 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 56 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 75 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 62 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 78 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 79 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 117 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 65 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 10 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 41 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 283 + ], + [ + "Line", + 131 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 90 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 72 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 119 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 96 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 37 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 46 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743581" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_10_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_10_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a034a9489880b306ba24588181d86ea14ede9318 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_10_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ebc07ad4dcbd0ea16658e2e9eaac8dc68ce2e71b10e25135d0bbfb7cfc956690 +size 3231 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_10_Picture_40.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_10_Picture_40.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..21873a3c12226d1298fb81b21618b4e0fe28a64c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_10_Picture_40.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a9bef352753655221f7daae67d4e8730b60ec95316d4fcee7b04d44aaead1b1b +size 3178 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_10_Picture_56.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_10_Picture_56.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f20b18e50b9fd911a84300123e78ba6ddf994b00 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_10_Picture_56.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e0af13e631affb0cf267a54a3d6a54eab2013071e6c1ededf3687408e2314e59 +size 3214 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_10_Picture_72.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_10_Picture_72.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e072a131389d2b028dbf0db9a25bd6b410660a28 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_10_Picture_72.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:bf2525afae4652cf3c037f377367d147d0a6e410b89e5018359c0c5fcee35907 +size 3234 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_11_Picture_100.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_11_Picture_100.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..03018cb17c321fbf181514c4873e086090ef95c9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_11_Picture_100.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:43cd1be1b5616e6cf9b510a432f5ba5bf63dda5144fb0990e980ce490dc022df +size 3183 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_11_Picture_108.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_11_Picture_108.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..07dba0108d78c9eb0350edc671ded1ab6683ab79 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_11_Picture_108.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:28be234fd963601dc918fbc481811eb7f09dfcdd2f719d422dc39380a09292b9 +size 3359 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_11_Picture_118.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_11_Picture_118.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dd201e91e594f6c91f7d6d950a9b322c9f508940 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_11_Picture_118.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a17b82cb29010c8e12a7e6ea4083c6e564d80edacaa993fbae69ed7e622f8696 +size 2956 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_11_Picture_88.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_11_Picture_88.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f4dd38a6baa0edbce6b34af496a1c8dced209f05 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_11_Picture_88.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7e46a252fa6b452006fff774b8c9cfe58681ae4ecef1d9698cb334db392e87b1 +size 3385 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_12_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_12_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..be042a982fde5186b36ea7aeaf2b42335e736727 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_12_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0a02c80c1f94158b209948c74be17755648e4271d168c991be58552a2f80c6fd +size 3343 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_12_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_12_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e48e4b08757d8091c9a610e3b1dea874643dfc11 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_12_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4c9aa0400379fba5a2b2ac3fea6a5985afd4db0e88e77b4fdd6e0f1a7750e157 +size 3301 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_12_Picture_31.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_12_Picture_31.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cc772adccc9c9ac3e8557fea1036d07aba20314f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_12_Picture_31.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6cdf121086f6378d9f3536a4fc8acac1fd14c6f0159189e68e7384c3dbfd8938 +size 3250 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_12_Picture_35.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_12_Picture_35.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a9f3fe82e8b95d02601db1524f35675eb891554a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_12_Picture_35.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d34b37b3a6ffdd2376db549a2e1c27475246ef8d98e8c745b3c1ec04f1db054a +size 3351 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_13_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_13_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cf5d580fbfa168e21723b5774787239c1cd795e6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_13_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ae228257ba05f9b659de3de1b26f7f55b7f930ed1c38f6e7944934ed9dc319b8 +size 3369 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_13_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_13_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e6e0163f3ac3bd08f45d7994438fd0faef272398 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_13_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:44c5dc2919254b0c68515cb58810e7338fdad7706b38fe81b3af1c158475e273 +size 3392 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_13_Picture_28.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_13_Picture_28.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cfbc081052890de6e57fee87fd728a460822b6ce --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_13_Picture_28.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:506e0390f576e3955d56af054a5ed03713d520b93e70568648c7fed3d2088482 +size 3071 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_13_Picture_32.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_13_Picture_32.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7698e860fecfff756cfaa582f934dcfb8e1f196c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_13_Picture_32.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:159ff312eb5e5ccf5b30ab52bdb545e47c0bba3e5d166f6f865167fc942226d4 +size 3088 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_14_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_14_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3b5e2b4e725c623e3ea7c66420fd48c0d7f9d9bb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_14_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:47b646a8f55c1db61e5b8cd9a0aca6fc5d0d8228a27e4dcf49abe84377e73c46 +size 3370 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_14_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_14_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9482f0bc58630a0e0a46267de62ce45013471b0e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_14_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e4cb7aa8610452966565dd79ca75676c7665b087317bc710c094af0588858bd5 +size 3447 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_14_Picture_31.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_14_Picture_31.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a91f777083722236f6ba2ae3c3f95cb1c3c3b8f6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_14_Picture_31.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a9363ac43e3451eff7ab50a8135f4e9720a63812e068f95ca3fdd7922cd3bae9 +size 3160 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_14_Picture_35.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_14_Picture_35.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..43f6e7787a8f007ae52b3e802cd0e6fd47d55e7e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_14_Picture_35.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:fd6f3e814ebe1fad899690a7fa072cd114c04a3c3a62ebc4cb230403a08e2e6a +size 3506 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_15_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_15_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..08542b30721c159f60038e1f346ee66e9e7fcd1c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_15_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d59b902f30741ab3521496b02c2b262fb7dfa2412355e3f8fee149be9d8dc36d +size 3419 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_15_Picture_37.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_15_Picture_37.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e933a6ee2920ee3a4a1ccbf6245f12287ed1819f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_15_Picture_37.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:902d65f955055460745c60b5c56d9ebd4cf54084ea13f3677e446a10521ddd13 +size 3575 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_15_Picture_50.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_15_Picture_50.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..446d40ee76d8654a4859a29026c0faf4fb1fdccc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_15_Picture_50.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b792488eb9ed53992987e378779bdb717f39712eca9729fe99d8a5fb9379cae4 +size 3105 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_15_Picture_63.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_15_Picture_63.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5816286947c7af80514adb58bc0cb37fe0e07249 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_15_Picture_63.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f1c22645655a77e521ca76b3c044f3047179ffc406acef80d664ed95b2163e36 +size 3190 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_16_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_16_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0a5fbf4a5bbae285f715e7e78b86c05a98130823 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_16_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b017e5c517b9b1f29581897bad92f82901473b2936b4715220164c501cf805f1 +size 3239 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_16_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_16_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..59e9b3ccbd828d4eac99d771bb77c24c951ddd3e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_16_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:66e0306cba790429a1d4af4c26a89e75c1e79e7f483550de60200939379d5c22 +size 3198 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_16_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_16_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8ce040cc7c80fde4670963011cbead0cc801fa3f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_16_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a69c5cb12399b2e0b266b46ec0f0656d1d461c867fc7ba86138252c793779818 +size 3042 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_16_Picture_31.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_16_Picture_31.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cb0a1375b5decb25092f5b0b38977811ed357679 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_16_Picture_31.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:192fd2cf3c869434224e8aa8c7b6f88330d7366ed945bf3ecf7b40fa1ec5bd2d +size 3374 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_17_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_17_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5f1cad64ec8f1134148582044c6af71efc8d4ccf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_17_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:cb5c177a205fce1a5889646c3df95b2aa91fe930aad2b84c9506f423a8bd5113 +size 3312 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_17_Picture_31.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_17_Picture_31.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4548a86f24782bb57ee634da53d6337f3ff634ac --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_17_Picture_31.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6df1726564608f6f1eaa3ba9be66c823dfea3c79d0c88122d642a56434c96308 +size 3134 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_17_Picture_35.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_17_Picture_35.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0687f532b28ad75ced577da352b0c75dde938077 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_17_Picture_35.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b738e73e33e73de1e1e90b8e4fb7601dcce3719d05b33d9f6487f4f67ebb9e87 +size 3145 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_17_Picture_39.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_17_Picture_39.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2418342b701e8b76992d44ab0052bb2f18d56ca9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_17_Picture_39.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:30d42dd751789fc41b75bc7c5accae71f04e13e6d95048ed11580ab52ba2c7bf +size 3187 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_18_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_18_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..42fb3586332b54c2519a38fa2ba4508eadb04c8b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_18_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4c0702796564cd7974723212c30af89228b17fa422a8592a5607e94db9d9788b +size 3309 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_18_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_18_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f74dbd2fb7fd5070b61b428b309252b1d5377a65 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_18_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b8ef0e9cebe05427933ace41853e4bd3576be662d4bc5d16a0fecde4d52eb5af +size 3385 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_18_Picture_31.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_18_Picture_31.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b3660d6c245bb895d481fed5ba30bd920550c5f9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_18_Picture_31.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b11b928757330722ff08c3585e085d6e6f391fc2f33a8a167d61cdd733e87d7e +size 3168 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_18_Picture_35.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_18_Picture_35.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6ae8bce3180ff6946311d58f22d9eb838b318682 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_18_Picture_35.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:84df908178fd29ee08c7dab35b08ca5caf38371db2069cd762365364ae0272d7 +size 3092 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_19_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_19_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c97f6d18878f5c7ab1adc1a078832fe8bd43c0cf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_19_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:19adb3d744a3cebda5e56c77c4ebbe265b886ccbd50d9888e2e4d797996b7419 +size 3176 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_19_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_19_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a3f507dfddf13adf37e6be4ca35376b7b7a43bcc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_19_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:52318facb053d2568ee8481ed28f820201a7804d895ec86445f3c30f9f6e316f +size 3288 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_19_Picture_31.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_19_Picture_31.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a717bbed7a5702dd22bfb1b825ce6c06fe310e4d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_19_Picture_31.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:16f2ba6d48f7ab1ac27db977ba1a51d911a34650cab8565da05ed7798fe468ba +size 3506 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_19_Picture_35.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_19_Picture_35.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..669e6b72db6ea62a20fa0d4b7ef97c4f0513b2f4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_19_Picture_35.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0ae1d81d01bd65b058b728de560aa11679b1f1609609f04ff150e1506c47f562 +size 3267 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_1_Picture_30.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_1_Picture_30.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d96f9140ca33f3ef8dc081e6f9eaaef6a7c189b7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_1_Picture_30.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f0852e66558dc057574490f3988be21bb981c7e1d8c057beb75166df1a112e07 +size 3192 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_1_Picture_39.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_1_Picture_39.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e19357760408e893759c7659f1e7a4120198326a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_1_Picture_39.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:74b48d6ead16a5c81734cda3874413e4bebdd48fe4ec39e6200c6cdaf9aed79c +size 3209 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_1_Picture_46.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_1_Picture_46.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c93c4330e9668b634c35b0d8c8f7ec2272de390e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_1_Picture_46.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:5b580e0699f5623eec9a149a87de2be7ac0737b1f22b4d6a59b77c404123a3bb +size 3187 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_1_Picture_53.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_1_Picture_53.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f31027bf336848403bf1338c182a27974a037089 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_1_Picture_53.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:cef954525f3a3565c1ca1d257dd93a4dce89b044d7b571d26da1fc058a0b8d23 +size 3195 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_20_Picture_31.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_20_Picture_31.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9562c599c98f2a53cba45e68988aab54c0825d5f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_20_Picture_31.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:17df38fd2fca5fb2d66545d23eeb5583a772fc267e2cbb94cb783d1207910c6f +size 3812 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_20_Picture_35.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_20_Picture_35.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9ed4d4b2e21a52c04131b06dd2871ea71a71effe --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_20_Picture_35.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1617844af5bac2ea0701d2448ab642eb21408d821950eddea7c957997ef36892 +size 3737 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_20_Picture_39.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_20_Picture_39.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c86834bc62a628d0234bd27924ed3682cfe79df3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_20_Picture_39.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d42dc5557e5d79c1705fd6623ec120026eec1af2741a83db00edd3577d7c6dcf +size 3624 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_20_Picture_43.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_20_Picture_43.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3745fabfbc2069e97bc12cb9e36701e71936b4b2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_20_Picture_43.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f2d32e8decfea1e1ef8cb72ba3f6aa0a9f62f220e3716e70643ad04e2495096e +size 3589 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_21_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_21_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..20ea582f091123fecdc408e985cbe644bba03f74 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_21_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:61517711c1dfdcce974bbe44c645c9a5b371afe79bf70c903e6bc372346e41c3 +size 3829 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_21_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_21_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..00c3335d6ff1c610e9767f8cab69aad333307838 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_21_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4cac5eef3c6997220e83ac02f332fd051515d001eae055d0e67ed85a61c1d833 +size 3923 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_21_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_21_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8d0f902e6614499b836063144a93b7009deb8888 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_21_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:33a5ac3b08587d54bc56bd5f499e8f1eadcdd6f13afdfa1ce95d293912dec220 +size 3735 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_21_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_21_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1eaa664cf4c98e5b69f32c29b5b673c36da11862 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_21_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6d677dd14650120db370fc6640b135957985ccae15e0753af50e1bd78cbfc48b +size 3720 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_22_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_22_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c8cce2a62de90f4ce22d7d0a8da111821ebc97de --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_22_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a9ee2a9579c6e885a85cdd1ae17b86248f9e19a9483793de419e4e3e85379a88 +size 3703 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_22_Picture_35.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_22_Picture_35.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8bfaae400378618df4c570b6a8c1adb1450a2987 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_22_Picture_35.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1ee0343d5db20484a2b9e5ed09d873ea71e95e2284542796554069481611194f +size 3926 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_22_Picture_44.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_22_Picture_44.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bcf5c9d0e5280b2283e32581f60a6f66992a5557 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_22_Picture_44.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:61acaad27b4bca174c292c86b09a3579a0dec60c5673bba4a81e7364776fe26b +size 3574 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_22_Picture_52.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_22_Picture_52.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cf4207f148c6c6b02020608054e5ecec18d47797 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_22_Picture_52.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d2358a1f00204ed604a56cc569c42aefd6fb9f721dd219645d4949cd4b609e0e +size 3705 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_23_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_23_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aaa22bd4ca99ef3fd69093910a5f167c11b4c364 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_23_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d7704064576989b1ae278a4ccff3041ae179bde6b0ec8b51b1e115352b5c4158 +size 3555 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_23_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_23_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f00237db969b12dcbe37f5746719f610eaaf23af --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_23_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8f5420173a93c6a914f7ddf105f1858943b806d2ca11be7916654b5518508039 +size 3839 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_23_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_23_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5680aa65b83cbbff206c0a4dce23021292168a86 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_23_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8684c04bd809c21347b07446897d98c6f402a169f7522bf0e3376cb1cada80ae +size 3376 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_23_Picture_6.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_23_Picture_6.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ef5632f75add022ae86edc20a6dbd7736c21629a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_23_Picture_6.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:13f2bdb3c3c8893c747cf0b386f289bd2d26980b1e7f1e1b76907c6e05f004a5 +size 5610 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_24_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_24_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c35aeba0cb61121e005a8a895a2a82b52d6e07b5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_24_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d730cca14bc1cfcbeaaa5fd42e9b405f9077b0d80c778331ff7e8f6d16bb2f1e +size 3439 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_24_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_24_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c3d396f2a4e30c20d7441ce875777296b1edbab3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_24_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e40ff0ee6e714cd625ffa931da6eaff3763451f7c53fc8c7c6b20b1868ff085a +size 3724 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_24_Picture_31.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_24_Picture_31.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9460f0633bc2040205ab7e52214aa662bddb283d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_24_Picture_31.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:5a5849687ccacadabf944557f760b14f7cc48dfc4924456d07914259e8fd2ebc +size 3494 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_24_Picture_35.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_24_Picture_35.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7867d70729a11939ac4c78e85a7c7b075ce03a2a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_24_Picture_35.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:89f3c9c438370035b59d7a5357e8a9bd646833549914795ff13e27d3c3970ad7 +size 3540 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_25_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_25_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8b84f24797223937be18caee1a0c5475d32020db --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_25_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c647828e3944bb5aa3392cb367de3679a840206cf21582a7d16c8ff7eee6a724 +size 3675 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_25_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_25_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5c3e8f234c51eea84d4c15e6b8b5084c8079612f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_25_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ee72fd92c8328a46667cb11144771bf5599b151c9b0da3084beff5007a99364a +size 3727 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_25_Picture_31.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_25_Picture_31.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..83c6a7ed7e3f6b8d1e89c96955c75bf3a02a2416 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_25_Picture_31.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ba2936affb7f33ae16ee23ab599fcf36f5ced8634b34f4938a4004fd616701ac +size 3579 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_25_Picture_35.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_25_Picture_35.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a6c36fb30ae92a951bd1ced4c347096c7ba24d1b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_25_Picture_35.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:86b8d0866e31719cc6eddcbeec2dd83cec4ef32b13a507cfbc7257757d57a592 +size 3542 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_26_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_26_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..08d095826dc7a4b2cab5c256d133c09a8724df47 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_26_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2e35430a2fa50285c319b76d39f1536f3613f2520a591a58ea38722ef0d366ae +size 3648 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_26_Picture_33.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_26_Picture_33.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a1f7759b129cdd1372a89e703de51b02d69fa82a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_26_Picture_33.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:92dba1d385dcb01638a174f9690ed9097c632fe33e7681787632804284063796 +size 3568 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_26_Picture_56.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_26_Picture_56.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..223de68228082ddcf89054d9b87dc9e16f1d1500 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_26_Picture_56.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:12dacd59177097c9ae1d4a557b5496a4404a252e38f668620f28d1fd63a22dc8 +size 3460 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_26_Picture_84.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_26_Picture_84.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..13ed4fdf60cd7d1ca816297f137f108497857816 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_26_Picture_84.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:fcf04e85706cb06e174adbbbd5d419a73a756ee06c66965655eec0315bd96a7b +size 3170 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_27_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_27_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a07507a702fa374f20f9faa241f22d44b0076f0d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_27_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:9cd6a3781c0821606f349c65568fcf759b9c755b41b1dbfd8912354ee023861d +size 3672 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_27_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_27_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..80d76af655d3607f68ad797fce478bc3ef0dd4ef --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_27_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d32626fca370879d83e363350c972084461d79655b3a4a64a58c55988cd4ee11 +size 3544 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_27_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_27_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..91e981fd3774e57119f7ec545c1405258c34f48f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_27_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2ff71de3b456fc340c342ff189cf06a0ccc4156ea2aad46f24b49349d8410002 +size 3482 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_27_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_27_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7262d40e3bf6c6c2daeae9d3fa41aec05d856f18 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_27_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b7c4e34ddb2e7e6a7645560f4348b31954ff7fdc09153fcd1c78d5b7e2985a4e +size 3390 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_28_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_28_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c71aed04eed12a2ad91f6f4385e4be2abab66f87 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_28_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8f18d5a6447e234b8867cf123d6bc996a54c878fa4ff245db15f81ecf84c7760 +size 3710 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_28_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_28_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..371115a5b0b50d888194956b8f90da4aa0c1b71d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_28_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6866c116819d680c6ececa40bd6c8aed372b6b6fd25b29850f5c3d1f97858489 +size 3998 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_28_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_28_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..39c7b9953e6369bff15c4c5e12b1245cfd00df1f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_28_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:eaf3106b5c2c658419b6c0782275426c2e57dafd736d6c961b0ad8593d2c1794 +size 3554 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_28_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_28_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..497d4479349a31fb135d29d9612dfa5241ccc6c2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_28_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:10dfcc328c1f4a3aafcf955dc7913c3a2e924f81c8116d560fc3c8a7a11a7933 +size 3906 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_29_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_29_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d77a81d37a6aaac60912cd6cc8630a8cd36f117e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_29_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:fd88baf2b0000210d8ac8ffa226551a36b4b3fa5c7255618a18664e09de261da +size 3616 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_29_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_29_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5e9adc14b581f873a66fd1f6ea441b9aba7c5bec --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_29_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:66eb1185c0d3e5b7a1525132ae37c917e823150be27491ea937b9c4644302520 +size 3540 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_29_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_29_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..561911ca976356f2f3fedb2e8f65e4aa3b15d895 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_29_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:32077233d61bf53bb13722afc7e931000142f5e0df6c93d5388dffa4609086f5 +size 3448 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_29_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_29_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e4647570d24bdda8630a4a85b68383d17239cf48 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_29_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:95fa10e94cee81704391700679bb89361fd3c0acfee845f3c89ccad0fa2ce845 +size 3589 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_2_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_2_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ab23c3d99408e66d4dbcb2024f11569d18061853 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_2_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:96db893ab4752a26f15d87142d593310c5b69130d60b1400d03fc249fd3ef4db +size 3247 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_2_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_2_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ddcb24e45f71e165fd8bd254b556749920b75c16 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_2_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:74748fe237d6048fb336ab6fadd5a301f8c218eecdf8be69c684b26a6d15e0fb +size 3246 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_2_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_2_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7b66166166e2297008d56a3299db690335ebd81e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_2_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f48502cc39402c953aebc226e0ba0808652352fddc2e22f82332c088927d88b6 +size 3053 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_2_Picture_31.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_2_Picture_31.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e09f64083335a5ace64ff0781bfb7746eaed4df5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_2_Picture_31.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c481d4b44ea21eea1d7a92327de38a67774ce140293157ac2aa2cb442d17e360 +size 2958 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_30_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_30_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..04e9366a0d83091ecb6f643eb9d2e78e9bdcb114 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_30_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:990f7c07e0f4d802f468b7ace8ad67b6e0042ac3706e69f39734dd6d2e2b0839 +size 3611 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_30_Picture_31.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_30_Picture_31.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..eba12372b4c13bbd6697ab7ca3620c511ddfda24 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_30_Picture_31.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:70c002460adec27a37c8af4481f48e891a2c94c4a0e5623f8933ceaf156f81d9 +size 3662 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_30_Picture_50.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_30_Picture_50.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e9e389c771aaf44922cb2841dff1b0d761dc41e7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_30_Picture_50.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:19d3d44ddd2c9477b869fe4217e7fe3d4bd8ac7ce76dc2063e900fb4e5f93820 +size 3460 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_30_Picture_69.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_30_Picture_69.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ede52dd6d0885b96f047f26aa1feb95bfc362c9a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_30_Picture_69.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b31221b0a409e959fab69fee186a80164e4e283ba70a660844dcaa91ae5b31d5 +size 3409 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_31_Picture_111.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_31_Picture_111.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3e50aa573bfa666ceb7cc12a285d36138dcf5686 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_31_Picture_111.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4ec284fb3644e5fa57e480479d88d04810059657d24ba820eb7af0cf36c11d21 +size 3381 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_31_Picture_122.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_31_Picture_122.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b1ea703a2865e492027c3fc6705454330c25cf14 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_31_Picture_122.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d6f714321a160d1a124a91075282877ffcdf7d6b7ae9d8e0aa0b6c76f2589d74 +size 3449 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_31_Picture_74.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_31_Picture_74.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ce87808cc9df219b7dabd2e91dd9ed70906cadcc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_31_Picture_74.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:febf60915d8c55ddef4df25a348638b521d2aae02d23fc42678fe2ddcf717f78 +size 3696 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_31_Picture_95.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_31_Picture_95.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..86fa70bca67ecfb10e8ee97f49df90610c57cefb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_31_Picture_95.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f37ccc1f82e05bb6d33f0be11588827412dc95f2cae8c59990aefa63400be316 +size 3551 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_32_Picture_102.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_32_Picture_102.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0e589944afa60a1c1f31911372ae84451d90cccd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_32_Picture_102.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c1d208c4f423a80d330d7a6ac92586307bbb7c8163d7038208dac03ec595a516 +size 3539 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_32_Picture_60.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_32_Picture_60.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e176450cafaad32d4a844c6af6af6b1414b46141 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_32_Picture_60.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ec59e4a14cbb8d4b259be2786d373572d5d3b504648f2ed69eeb1944bd6d9dfe +size 3679 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_32_Picture_68.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_32_Picture_68.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..44f9d56ef5f4e8227eddfdb67af2a20f5fddbeaf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_32_Picture_68.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:37856fab98e3d97548d3d289fcbce1f385a7f195ad09f2c47e992a82c4f8aac0 +size 3666 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_32_Picture_85.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_32_Picture_85.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..540e02dda4ac54e06c85b7639a4fb1c9f190c4e3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_32_Picture_85.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b2e2305c33ff6c4f91073ace3035f303059a8d5b36cd0c7fabc19dea47bd62ba +size 3434 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_33_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_33_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d893d81adb3ec101c3b8c5a7300ce093df2de0bd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_33_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:aa311efd0f3f61dab9866b5fc1f168bb9fec59c1ee41b61cc9a41607a2a85a8a +size 3728 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_33_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_33_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..36a51c0b4ec553c267699a361488b189a7725168 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_33_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:516f471ab5276c23a02e025de39d9e83dd52b702e1e12138e984b641137b6f71 +size 3642 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_33_Picture_35.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_33_Picture_35.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c48fc71ca94d0f37b672ade89dbf7f715b847e3b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_33_Picture_35.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b1b05a7c3891fa953f7cad83cdcd01d2ba0c0e6cd7356314f58ac3c17f963564 +size 3594 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_33_Picture_46.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_33_Picture_46.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1743bdb501c35a7a4eef0d5719439bbadf2ca58d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_33_Picture_46.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7c5546e6f3615904da01512b0695d1a3ab236dc8349304e1ac69daa537553caa +size 3833 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f52f36e1d274f2d474f9ecd8193a24df4888d21a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:43129794e10f643896ca6b54c40314a8c9f3d5b4e8a486e2c673ec724cb91dda +size 3981 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_26.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_26.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9a436955f8108d6fbd4a5e936938f2f94921b5ac --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_26.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b6c0268313b7d617167263dfc2b091b69f9de751000d61a252403cea58d23b6c +size 3424 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_34.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_34.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6b112f00f301f71da9224d2f4a8176df96a99d5f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_34.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ab44c91e573bbdd56daae979c9a59e9061e8d7b351c090bd45eaeeee793108e5 +size 3920 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_44.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_44.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dbc6f53d05a5f2e20f90f66f00fa2e6dbd618e20 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_44.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a1c1f7cc780e915c40b6a3a4ba57148fb729928c9d717d1fdc1025ae9a8b2fa9 +size 3400 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_51.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_51.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..99242ef8efc270944d1be8151a5d4c24f4943a64 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_51.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:10ab64e10b339456f7ab4d2526e3ecc34b4e8c6d6b2616a1edf04d0cb54d27b7 +size 3324 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_61.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_61.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ca487695f0873f1f4c99d6e091c22f20fceb2225 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_34_Picture_61.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:529aa109956f5e22b8d10c319cc548355ce9295cb0eef8cf16cf89f23a676769 +size 3463 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_3_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_3_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d6dda26f8e829aa2438164efedb703241314a833 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_3_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3c6ebbda24883ef6156275166a87c05e43b114c633ef6b76f1121a9f94bf4b3b +size 3368 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_3_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_3_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4899e674bb151cc7fae203a7ec338ba80778c4ac --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_3_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f2a23188ebdc7d3b0943ba20184edac51e43f076d0789246d76b37c7360c912b +size 3452 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_3_Picture_25.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_3_Picture_25.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..968bc5373237fa9c1746361a4edc72040c6ba3cc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_3_Picture_25.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d68f2b5c077c37698837f130f4ee1070fe05fa32c0cc7618089088d8da7f9dff +size 3343 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_3_Picture_28.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_3_Picture_28.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a4087e30b273d8e68707ed1a47af4f2e372b5ea1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_3_Picture_28.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:20ef7f902fa0b7aebc5a1d0afc6345b5e1e475b61f38080e5097a9e7395bb51f +size 3203 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_4_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_4_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..71830dd7ae177ee4bd3e906f2e17dc40382cc564 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_4_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:fd2ea9d92d9e7c8f15539ee885747ee3699dac56238a3ad7ae26f6f5a6914fef +size 3223 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_4_Picture_31.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_4_Picture_31.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d89d506607c44cc76cbde2b09886c616c592c090 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_4_Picture_31.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e5c8545b0d4adc6ae6c2571412777713099f92f183136a5c58bedb403322bf83 +size 3027 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_4_Picture_45.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_4_Picture_45.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b6fe104d77f78dd9422d72ecf024a347d1983950 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_4_Picture_45.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6554d41cc5ee964b2d2ea1f5421e90fef9b907e50890d0293aa9ff263a5ee61b +size 3405 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_4_Picture_59.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_4_Picture_59.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..658fdee3dc6274048473c08c5d26a7dcd509c472 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_4_Picture_59.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ac4c4eabd8ee5d4626f577449951100c0f21a7ec60a387cdd056d4fb7c87ad7c +size 3079 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..be50c1ef677eb4d3278238f2e20a7714083f8bd5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8b907f956575d6c0171cab7ed65fc13623b5daa4f8b3bcc1a1ee6cc726255dc1 +size 3151 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_5_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_5_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a4466ad19dee9ccb38a6b7753627602598a3bfef --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_5_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7dc95e09be419482506d89cbd06bb2274636fb64458968b4ea2ec66104225f02 +size 3223 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_5_Picture_26.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_5_Picture_26.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cd5bda36c4e5ae7fa4b310cd2642f9acad97e82c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_5_Picture_26.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:229a190de9ab15682973b21397078f104b581cce5133b429cb693c7dba1b5895 +size 2981 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_5_Picture_30.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_5_Picture_30.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..32beb93565923bd0160511b076b2ae2e66f4de5e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_5_Picture_30.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:44a784bceab16de397642546a46310a20fba4774b03671ce3ea396382b27e829 +size 2944 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d5e71141159e7840c65cb0225549060c3d7b62ce --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8ca832e361745dd0bea23d92d34072b20d24a536b64d4c38f9f7cd1d33812e26 +size 3406 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_6_Picture_41.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_6_Picture_41.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4902c15b86cf2ed19b4dcb3198e752c7b3cc546d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_6_Picture_41.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8e50bdeac1f09546dca711accdeab91e4587c22dfbba57e5858ee39773bc2c93 +size 3370 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_6_Picture_54.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_6_Picture_54.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..eca8d227f45b703293e5902d4d7cf079ce26d97c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_6_Picture_54.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a53550adf2c0c70618ffca6461cfe509ed74d3a6bdacb276e27d0495e572a264 +size 2866 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_6_Picture_72.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_6_Picture_72.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5212aefb7d4a6b22d6b970d8f1f228b59cb121a4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_6_Picture_72.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:28af12c1cc55bca49a4e5ba30208ff73023f60f56cef6bf60d063f2726c31af5 +size 2898 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_7_Picture_61.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_7_Picture_61.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..319aef3b19101bf759c16887ec94b7550106ca6d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_7_Picture_61.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2faa103316c02457c1cba2de181d752d7e5c16ecea8eb3d861d12ccae7c85582 +size 3157 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_7_Picture_65.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_7_Picture_65.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..574c0b212f94545101aa4e83422b2a465c171f40 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_7_Picture_65.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:fc3ff7c7e811e4b23939c80d5f91bb375ddc38eb638cc1c20438c980f3425bff +size 3300 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_7_Picture_69.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_7_Picture_69.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..195342b5014680ddafc822f56d1c36797476d7d5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_7_Picture_69.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:5a86aa4cc13d09658a0b47505796da9be96661524771b52c44089334d5adeda1 +size 3222 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_7_Picture_73.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_7_Picture_73.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..464f2b21e0eae23952211bf8f181782b6cff19a5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_7_Picture_73.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1faf8773c8dfb7a0aa71c327b0f69989c6b7fe7b6d19b334a9a63c54eeafc666 +size 3059 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_8_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_8_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..617660084b1e4f015c0f0f2ae839bf421de46494 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_8_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:9168ff3ce8a4b6dabb3b2c80df185eea54af2823dc70dcfc41445845d3040c06 +size 3406 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_8_Picture_34.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_8_Picture_34.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9e611716771f9168f9fdee7e73401893201ee4f3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_8_Picture_34.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4d0f0cec347926e0e0ff80df529857543f1fe5e19480b9269fcbb2a2ebf363a0 +size 3425 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_8_Picture_56.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_8_Picture_56.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4bf482f23f5678f0577bc0fcda4bea13c77c9f3f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_8_Picture_56.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1f4831d67c95f883cccbdcbeb684cd2c6002131be36fb43c90dacd375cf1240f +size 3177 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_8_Picture_72.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_8_Picture_72.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0d9dfc08078cfa350a08cac4df117cdf9e2a5275 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_8_Picture_72.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ede38d5ba6d5f496f787adb8c2eafeff6fea2476947f163cd396c173568ccff6 +size 3232 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_9_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_9_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f534b4acd51a2c2b6795aa958660f76e64c99b86 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_9_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:55b2ffa05853f4e13635241ea8a5cff4e0ddf2c618d0bb3120045dc86f067a97 +size 3185 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_9_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_9_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6e6cbdd08e53916d3023436d6b80edffe2651e00 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_9_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7458d2b891007e033a64d4f6ac5a268bc3da06aa8f07127e533bf70cf6026e74 +size 3212 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_9_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_9_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..20e6aa4ccb02aad62de9cf0da8f5e9b1d46c65bb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_9_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:5d151af88fb884f6f4c361969e3a86546867d921d067816cfe8661f7a4327687 +size 3001 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_9_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_9_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..796dfdaebf5ba7912b43ce0a7903fa0bde7a3598 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743581/_page_9_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0a658e354c0609c4d543fb6edf135e3cd1d930ec19ddab92780f0a962c3bd553 +size 3127 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743616/EFTA02743616.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743616/EFTA02743616.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..07e565d86d57e9dec396c68540660caaa3343b35 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743616/EFTA02743616.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119—MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF FILING DEPOSITION + +In support of his motion to stay this action [DE 12], defendant Jeffrey Epstein hereby files the redacted deposition of Jane Doe #1 (Case No. 08-80069-Civ-Marrze, taken in State of Florida v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 2006 CF 09454 AXX (Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County). The redacted deposition is attached hereto as Exhibit A. + +Respectfully submitted, + +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel: 561 659 8300 Fax: 561 835 8691 + +By: /s/ Jack A. Goldberger + +Jack A. Goldberger Ha. Bar No. 262013 jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 30, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following service list via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 via CM/ECF Notice of Electronic Filing + +> /s/ Jack A. Goldberger Jack A. Goldberger \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743616/EFTA02743616.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743616/EFTA02743616.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..285a546e255d2137f32857efa2e70edea6f61c36 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743616/EFTA02743616.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,170 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743616.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1388, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.77, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF FILING DEPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 164.01600000000002, + 305.37 + ], + [ + 448.4820251464844, + 305.37 + ], + [ + 448.4820251464844, + 320.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 164.01600000000002, + 320.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 388.94989013671875, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 388.94989013671875, + 113.60302734375 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 113.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 30 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743616" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743618/EFTA02743618.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743618/EFTA02743618.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d69fa6ab9d23420cd4f0d56d5d50afb98bcfc245 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743618/EFTA02743618.md @@ -0,0 +1,182 @@ +## EXHIBIT A + +DIV : NO +CASE NO : 5020000000000000 ST OF FL VS. JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN 241 +Charges : FILED OFFER TO COMMIT PROSTITUTION + +AGREEST & COMMENTARY RECORD DOCTIC COPIES OF 3,000 OF + +Date 3/20/08 6/30/08 Judge PC III Ctr. Rep. C. DAFMIS + ASA L. Beloil AMWork DC PBO Int [redacted] + Deft---Pres / Not Pres. W / W/O Def. Co. G. O. D. Berger Esq / PD---Pres / Not Pres. + Before the Court for: Statuschool + Granted Denied With / Without Prejudice Withdrawn Court Reserves Ruling Written Order to Follow + Warrant Ordered Recalled Bond Set at \$ \_\_\_\_\_ See Below Also Covers Sp Cond + Bond Forf OR: Disch/Revoked/Reinstated Bond: Disch/Revoked SOR: Disch/Revoked/Reinstated + Bond Forf Vacated Previous Bond Reinstated, if Bondsman agrees State failed to file charges Released O.R. / S.O.R. + Deft \_\_\_ Indigent PD Appt Hrg only PD Pres \_\_\_\_\_ Court Appts \_\_\_\_\_ + Evaluation for: Drug Farm DOC Non-Secure Bed by \_\_\_\_\_ + Pre-Plea PSI ordered by/within \_\_\_\_\_ days w/input from DJJ / Staffing + Referred to: PTI / SAAP / PADD Case placed on the absentee docket + DEFT ENTERED A PLEA OF: NOT GUILTY GUILTY NO CONTEST BEST INTEREST TO THE COURT + As Charged-Cts O. N. L. Lesser Cts \_\_\_\_\_ Lesser Charge \_\_\_\_\_ + Sw & Test Adv of Rts Waived PSI Lesser Cts \_\_\_\_\_ Lesser Charge \_\_\_\_\_ + ADJ GUILTY as Charged as to Cts O. N. L. Lesser Cts \_\_\_\_\_ + FOUND GUILTY as Charged as to Cts \_\_\_\_\_ Lesser Cts \_\_\_\_\_ + ADJ W/HELD as to Cts \_\_\_\_\_ SENT W/HELD as to Cts \_\_\_\_\_ + FOUND AND ADJUDICATED DELINQUENT as to Cts \_\_\_\_\_ Dismiss Nolle Prosse Cts \_\_\_\_\_ Dispo Order to follow / Filed + FOUND & ADJ NOT GUILTY as to Cts \_\_\_\_\_ Dismiss Nolle Prosse Cts \_\_\_\_\_ + Prob / Comm Control: Revoked Reinstated Modified Term. Successfully / Unsuccessfully + Stip/Found: (violent) Habitual Off. 775.084 Stip/Found: Sexual Offender / Sexual Predator Stip/Found: P.R.R. + SENTENCE: PBCJ 12 MOS Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ / DOC: \_\_\_\_\_ Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ + PBCJ: \_\_\_\_\_ Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ / DOC: \_\_\_\_\_ Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ + W/Credit for \_\_\_\_\_ Days / Mos. / Yrs. Deft Remanded Deft to remain on same rel. status pending sent. + Conc / Consec / Co-Term w/cases / cts: \_\_\_\_\_ + Execution of Sentence Stayed Sentence Suspended Time served as to Cts \_\_\_\_\_ + Youthful Off Habitual Off Min / Mand: \_\_\_\_\_ as to Cts \_\_\_\_\_ + ABOVE SENTENCE TO BE FOLLOWED By: Probation Drug / Sex Off Prob Comm. Control I II - See Pg. 2 + DRIVERS LICENSE TO BE SUSPENDED / REVOKED FOR \_\_\_\_\_ YEARS AS A RESULT OF THIS PLEA. + +DNA Swab + +\_\_\_\_\_ Set / Remains Set / Reset \_\_\_\_\_ Div \_\_\_\_\_ Rm \_\_\_\_\_ at \_\_\_\_\_ AM/PM + \_\_\_\_\_ Set / Remains Set / Reset \_\_\_\_\_ Div \_\_\_\_\_ Rm \_\_\_\_\_ at \_\_\_\_\_ AM/PM + Deft sign \_\_\_\_\_ + Def Co \_\_\_\_\_ ASA \_\_\_\_\_ Bondsman \_\_\_\_\_ + Prob Jail DJJ GAL Notified by mail by: \_\_\_\_\_ on \_\_\_\_\_ / \_\_\_\_\_ / \_\_\_\_\_ + County Courthouse 205 N. Dixie, West Palm Beach Courtroom, Criminal Justice Bldg. Courtroom, Criminal Justice Complex + 2854 State Road 80, Belle Glade 3228 Gun Club Rd., West Palm Beach + +IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT MARY JAFFE, ADA COORDINATOR IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURT, PALM BEACH COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 205 N. DIXIE HWY, RM 52500, WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401; TELEPHONE (561) 355-0380, WITHIN 2 WORKING DAYS OF YOUR RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE. IF YOU ARE HEARING OR VOICE IMPAIRED, CALL 1-800-955-8771. + +Case No.: 2006CF009361AXX W ST of FL vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN +Charges: PROCURE PERSON UNDER AGE OF 18 FOR PROSTITUTION +(ARIZES FROM 2006CF009454EXX) + +Arrest# Bond# Type \$ A/C + +Date Date Judge Crt. Rep. ASA DC Int Def. Co. Esq PD Pres / Not Pres. + +Before the Court for: St. Hug Mark + + Granted Denied With / Without Prejudice Withdrawn Court Reserves Ruling Written Order to Follow + + Warrant Ordered Recalled Bond Set at \$ See Below Also Covers Sp Cond + Bond Forf OR: Disch / Revoked / Reinstated Bond: Disch / Revoked SOR: Disch / Revoked / Reinstated + Bond Forf Vacated Previous Bond Reinstated, if Bondsman agrees State failed to file charges Released O.R. / S.O.R. + + Deft Indigent PD Appt Hrg only PD Pres Court Appts + +Evaluation for: Drug Farm DOC Non-Secure Bed by Pre-Plea PSI ordered by/within days w/input from DJJ / Staffing + + Referred to: PTI / SAAP / PADD Case placed on the absentee docket + +DEFT ENTERED A PLEA OF: NOT GUILTY GUILTY NO CONTEST BEST INTEREST TO THE COURT +As Charged-Cts Lesser Cts Lesser Charge + Sw & Test Adv of Rts Waived PSI Lesser Cts Lesser Charge + + ADJ GUILTY as Charged as to Cts Lesser Cts + + FOUND GUILTY as Charged as to Cts Lesser Cts + + ADJ W/HELD as to Cts SENT W/HELD as to Cts + + FOUND AND ADJUDICATED DELINQUENT as to Cts Dismiss Nolle Prosse Cts + +Prob / Comm Control: Revoked Reinstated Modified. Term: Successfully / Unsuccessfully + Deft. to pay fine or complete hrs. Community Service or Serve days PBCJ. + + Stip/Found: (violent) Habitual Off. 775.084 Stip/Found: Sexual Offender / Sexual Predator Stip/Found: P.R.R. +SENTENCE: PBCJ Cts: / DOC: Cts: +PBCJ: Cts: / DOC: Cts: + + W/Credit for Days / Mos. / Yrs. Deft to remain on same rel. status pending sent. +Conc / Consec Co-Term w/cases / cts: 400 / 000 / 000 / 000 + + Execution of Sentence Stayed Sentence Suspended Time served as to Cts + + Youthful Off Habitual Off Min / Mand: as to Cts + ABOVE SENTENCE TO BE FOLLOWED By: Probation Drug Off Prob Comm. Control I II - See Page 2 + +DUT SUMB + +Set / Remains Set / Reset Div Rm at AM/PM + +Set / Remains Set / Reset Div Rm at AM/PM + + Deft sign ASA Bondsman + + Def Co ASA Bondsman + Prob Jail DJJ. GAL Notified by mail by: on / / / + + County Courthouse Courtroom, Criminal Justice Bldg. Courtroom, Criminal Justice Complex +205 N. Dixie, West Palm Beach 38844 State Road 80, Belle Glade 3228 Gun Club Rd., West Palm Beach + +IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT ROBIN SHEPPETT, ADA COORDINATOR IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURT, PALM BEACH COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 205 N. DIXIE HWY, RM 5.2500, WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401; TELEPHONE (561) 355-4386, WITHIN 2 WORKING DAYS OF YOUR RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE. IF YOU ARE HEARING OR VOICE IMPAIRED, CALL 1-800-955-8771. + +CASE NO. 2006087931 HY + +NAME: Te Broy Epstein + +TERM OF Prob / Sex Off / Drug Off Prob / C.C. I C.C. II: 12 mos yrs as to Cts. + + conc w/ consec. w/ \_\_\_\_\_ + + Probation transferred to: + +SPECIAL CONDITIONS: + +- Complete Originally Ordered Conditions +- Curfew: \_\_\_\_\_ p.m., with the following exception: \_\_\_\_\_ +- Deft. to report to Prob. Dept. immediately upon release +- Deft. not to have in care, custody, or control any unlawful or illegal material, subst., device, or object. +- Deft. to immediately notify Prob. Officer if place of residence or job changes. +- Restitution CRO filed +- Subject to all ordinary and special conditions of Probation + + Substance Abuse Eval. / Psychological Eval. / Psychosexual Eval. within / by: \_\_\_\_\_ and deft. to successfully complete recommended treatment + +- Random Drug/Alcohol Testing At Deft's Expense Costs Waived +- No Consumption/Possession of Alcohol or Drugs or Intoxicants without a Prescription. +- Attend \_\_\_\_\_ AA and/or NA Meetings per Week. +- Deft. not to frequent any place of business whose primary purpose is the sale of alcohol. + + Complete \_\_\_\_\_ Hrs. of Community Service to be done at the rate of \_\_\_\_\_ Hrs. per Wk / Mo.(Min.) + + License Revoked / Suspended for \_\_\_\_\_ mos / yrs + + Attend and successfully complete DUI school and 1 session of Victim Impact Panel + + No Contact / No Violent Contact / No Direct or Indirect contact w/Victim(s) or others listed: + + No Contact w/Minor Children w/o Adult Supervision aware of this case and the disposition. + + Cost of Supervision: \$ \_\_\_\_\_ per month Waived by Court. \_\_\_\_\_ + + Enter and Successfully Complete DOC Non-Secure Bed Program and Any Recommended Aftercare. + + Hold in Custody, release only to DOC Non-Secure Bed Program Officer. + + Enter and Successfully Complete PBSO Long / Short Track Drug Farm and Any Rec. Aftercare. + + Enter and Complete: Anger Management Program Batterers Intervention Program + + Theft Abatement Program: \_\_\_\_\_ Other: \_\_\_\_\_ + + Defendant may apply for Early Termination after \_\_\_\_\_, provided all conds. are satisfied. + + Serve \_\_\_\_\_ days / months in PBCJ, with credit for \_\_\_\_\_ days / months. + + See all attached documents + + Deft. must hold an ASA Secure Offender + + w/+N 48 hours of Pre/Pose + + \_\_\_\_\_ + + \_\_\_\_\_ + + \_\_\_\_\_ + + \_\_\_\_\_ \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743618/EFTA02743618.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743618/EFTA02743618.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..71fc5182053877510419372b9d9d03c9697b0b5b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743618/EFTA02743618.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,199 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743618.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 9002, + "elapsed_seconds": 16.27, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.565, + 330.48 + ], + [ + 405.43341064453125, + 330.48 + ], + [ + 405.43341064453125, + 369.18365478515625 + ], + [ + 203.565, + 369.18365478515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SPECIAL CONDITIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 39.975, + 133.65 + ], + [ + 169.12500000000003, + 133.65 + ], + [ + 169.12500000000003, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 39.975, + 149.85000000000002 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 5 + ], + [ + "Line", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "Form", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 64 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 44 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743618" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743622/EFTA02743622.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743622/EFTA02743622.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b6c869dd1069019c85c1504ce63ea61d55e714d2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743622/EFTA02743622.md @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119—MARRA- + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +I + +## DEFENDANT'S NOTICE CONCERNING MOTION TO STAY IDE 121 + +In connection with his motion to stay this action [DE 12], Defendant Jeffrey Epstein hereby notifies the Court that the State Court action, State of Florida v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 2006 CF 09454 AXX (Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County), was resolved on June 30, 2008. See Final Disposition sheets, attached hereto as Exhibit A. The federal criminal proceeding, however, remains pending. + +Respectfully submitted, + +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel: 561 659 8300 Fax: 561 835 8691 + +By: /s/ Jack A. Goldberger + +Jack A. Goldberger + +Ha. Bar No. 262013 + +jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 1, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on counsel of record identified below by facsimile and U.S. Mail. + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Fax: 305 931 0877 + +> /s/ Jack A. Goldberger Jack A. Goldberger \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743622/EFTA02743622.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743622/EFTA02743622.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..03bba42634061cfe8cac754ef9685f1036fb39d4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743622/EFTA02743622.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,204 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743622.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 1428, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.75, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 422.59869384765625, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 422.59869384765625, + 104.75091552734375 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 104.75091552734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S NOTICE CONCERNING MOTION TO STAY IDE 121", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.456, + 345.06 + ], + [ + 529.7177124023438, + 345.06 + ], + [ + 529.7177124023438, + 362.3809509277344 + ], + [ + 84.456, + 362.3809509277344 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5826416015625, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5826416015625, + 89.00091552734375 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 89.00091552734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 33 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743622" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743625/EFTA02743625.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743625/EFTA02743625.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b34bf4401c957ac83154b1118d0ccb0498ae3ca6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743625/EFTA02743625.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-~ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AS CO-COUNSEL + +NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the law firm of Tein, P.L. enters its appearance as co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein in these proceedings. + +Respectfully submitted, + +TEIN, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 Tel: 305 442 1101 Fax: 305 442 6744 + +By: Is/ Michael R. Tein GUY A. Fla. Bar No. 623740 MICHAEL R. TEIN Fla. Bar No. 993522 tein@lewistein.com + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 8, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following service list via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. + +> /s/ Michael R. Tein Michael R. Tein + +## SERVICE LIST + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Merme!stein. Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Herman & Mennelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Fax: 305 931 0877 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743625/EFTA02743625.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743625/EFTA02743625.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a50642100fff8115c634f52716d5961348513f19 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743625/EFTA02743625.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,231 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743625.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 1165, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.74, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 400.70098876953125, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 400.70098876953125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AS CO-COUNSEL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 176.25599999999997, + 315.9 + ], + [ + 436.06396484375, + 315.9 + ], + [ + 436.06396484375, + 331.10302734375 + ], + [ + 176.25599999999997, + 331.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 388.5423889160156, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 388.5423889160156, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.712, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 351.1127014160156, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 351.1127014160156, + 85.447021484375 + ], + [ + 260.712, + 85.447021484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743625" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743628/EFTA02743628.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743628/EFTA02743628.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..660c7f5a3e2c0a9eeff2ab94f05e508d98075514 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743628/EFTA02743628.md @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +## WROPOSED1 ORDER + +Upon Plaintiff's Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motion for Stay, and good cause being shown it is hereby + +ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion is granted. Plaintiff shall have an enlargement of time of twenty (20) days, until July 30, 2008, to respond to Defendant's Motion for Stay. + +DONE AND ORDERED in in Ft. Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this day of , 2008. + +DISTRICT COURT JUDGE \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743628/EFTA02743628.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743628/EFTA02743628.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2b9f1a03000f98cb1786280070501379a6ef8812 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743628/EFTA02743628.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743628.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 587, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.65, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "WROPOSED1 ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.188, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 369.05316162109375, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 369.05316162109375, + 310.863037109375 + ], + [ + 244.188, + 310.863037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743628" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743629/EFTA02743629.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743629/EFTA02743629.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..156f9a49866833a10bb272f26b43cf2bc0733ffa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743629/EFTA02743629.md @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +## PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR STAY + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2, by and through undersigned counsel, files this Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motion for Stay, and states as follows: + +- 1. Defendant filed his Motion for Stay on June 20, 2008. Plaintiff's response is due on or before July 10, 2008. +- 2. Defendant's Motion for Stay is based upon the existence of purported parallel criminal actions, and is grounded in section 3509(k) of Title 18, United States Code. +- 3. Subsequent to filing his Motion for Stay on July 1, 2008, Defendant Epstein filed a Notice advising this Court that the State Court criminal action against the Defendant was resolved, but that the federal criminal proceeding remained pending. It is Plaintiff's counsel's understanding from press reports, however, that the federal criminal proceeding will be resolved in the same plea deal, which would make the Defendant's Motion for Stay moot.' + - 4. Therefore, Plaintiff respectfully requests a brief enlargement of time of twenty (20 + +' Plaintiff opposes the Motion for Stay on its merits under 18 U.S.C. §3509(k). + +days) within which to file a memorandum in opposition to Defendant's Motion for Stay. This request for enlargement of time is in the interest of judicial economy and efficiency. + +- 5. Additionally, Plaintiffs counsel requests this enlargement of time due to the demands on their time in other cases and matters. +- 6. Prior to filing this Motion, Plaintiffs counsel, Adam Horowitz, attempted to confer with defense counsel, to no avail. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully request that this Court enter an order enlarging by twenty (20) days the time within which the Plaintiff may respond to the Defendant's Motion for Stay, until July 30, 2008. + +Dated: July 10, 2008. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Jeffrey M. Herman (FL Bar No. 521647) jherman@hermanlaw.com Stuart S. Mennelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@hermanlaw.com Adam 1). Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on July 10, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Is/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST + +DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger jagesq@bcllsouth.nct + +Michael R. Tein tein@lewistein.com + +Is/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743629/EFTA02743629.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743629/EFTA02743629.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..19771afa8aeb302868790f00532dc52c87788fc9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743629/EFTA02743629.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,285 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743629.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3148, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.81, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME \nTO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR STAY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 148.71599999999998, + 310.23 + ], + [ + 464.7416076660156, + 310.23 + ], + [ + 464.7416076660156, + 338.9830627441406 + ], + [ + 148.71599999999998, + 338.9830627441406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 100.863037109375 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 100.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.712, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 351.59228515625, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 351.59228515625, + 100.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 260.712, + 100.93353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 26 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743629" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743633/EFTA02743633.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743633/EFTA02743633.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..db2fa454c355bad708b5bda1b8bd3f74b5e7feca --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743633/EFTA02743633.md @@ -0,0 +1,105 @@ +**U.S. District Court +Southern District of Florida (West Palm Beach) +CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM +*Internal Use Only*** + +Doe v. Epstein +Assigned to: Judge Kenneth A. Marra +Referred to: Magistrate Judge Linnea R. [REDACTED] +Case: 9:08-cv-80232-KAM +Cause: 28:1391 Personal Injury + +Date Filed: 02/06/2008 +Jury Demand: Plaintiff +Nature of Suit: 360 P.I.: Other +Jurisdiction: Diversity + +**Plaintiff** + +**Jane Doe** +*No. 2* + +represented by **Adam D. Horowitz** +Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Blvd. +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +Email: ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com +**LEAD ATTORNEY** +**ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED** + +**Jeffrey Marc Herman** +Herman & Mermelstein +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 931-0877 +Email: jherman@hermanlaw.com +**LEAD ATTORNEY** +**ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED** + +**Stuart S. Mermelstein** +Herman & Mermelstein +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 931-0877 +Email: lrivera@hermanlaw.com +**LEAD ATTORNEY** +**ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED** + +V. + +**Defendant** + +**Jeffrey Epstein** + +represented by **Jack Alan Goldberger** +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 835-8691 +Email: jagesq@bellsouth.net +**ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED** + +**Michael [REDACTED] Tein** +[REDACTED] Tein +3059 Grand Avenue +Suite 340 + +Coconut Grove, FL 33133 305-442-1101 Fax: 442-6744 Email: tein@lewistein.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED + +| Date Filed | # | Docket Text | +|------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| 02/06/2008 | I | COMPLAINT against Jeffrey Epstein; Filing fee \$ 350. Receipt#: 542215, filed | +| 02/06/2008 | 2 Summons Issued as to Jeffrey Epstein. (1k) (Entered: 02/06/2008) | | +| 02/08/2008 | 1 | Order Requiring Counsel to Confer and Joint Scheduling Report.Signed by | +| 05/22/2008 | 4 | AFFIDAVIT of Service for Summons and Complaint served on Jeffrey Epstein | +| 05/22/2008 | 1 | SUMMONS Returned Executed by Jane Doe. Jeffrey Epstein served on | +| 05/27/2008 | 6 NOTICE of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer: reA Affidavit of Service | | +| 05/29/2008 | 2 Plaintiffs MOTION for Entry of Default by Clerk Against Defendant by Jane | | +| | | Doe. (Attachments: itI Exhibit A and B. #j Text of Proposed Order Default | +| 06/06/2008 | 8 | CLERK'S NOTICE Denying for Improper Service/ Plaintiff's MOTION for | +| 06/11/2008 | 2 Plaintiffs MOTION to Compel Clerk to Enter Default Against Defendant, or | | +| 06/13/2008 | 1.(1 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Jack Alan Goldberger on behalf of Jeffrey | | +| 06/13/2008 | II | RESPONSE to Motion re.2 Plaintiff's MOTION to Compel Clerk to Enter | +| 06/20/2008 | 12 | Defendant's MOTION to Stay by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 7/10/2008 | +| 06/20/2008 | la Defendant's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or Otherwise | | +| 06/24/2008 | JA | MEMORANDUM in Support re.2 Plaintiffs MOTION to Compel Clerk to Enter | +| 06/30/2008 | la NOTICE by Jeffrey Epstein Of Filing Deposition (Attachments: #1 | | +| 07/01/2008 | 16 | NOTICE by Jeffrey Epstein Concerning Motion To Stay IDE 12) (Attachments: | +| | | #1 Exhibit A)(Goldberger, Jack) (Entered: 07/01/2008) | + +| 07/08/2008 | 12 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Michael | Tein on behalf of Jeffrey | +|------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------| +| 07/10/2008 | la Plaintiffs MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as toil Defendant's | | +| 07/10/2008 | 19 | Sealed Document. (yc) (Entered: 07/10/2008) | +| 07/10/2008 | 20 | Sealed Document. (yc) (Entered: 07/10/2008) | +| 07/16/2008 | 21 ORDER denying motion to file Ex Parte and Under Seal. The clerk shall unseal | | +| 07/16/2008 | 22 | ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE why default should not be entered against | \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743633/EFTA02743633.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743633/EFTA02743633.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4eafaec064c883f1fdffb7cfc4c4679132322c98 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743633/EFTA02743633.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,196 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743633.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 6279, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.05, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida (West Palm Beach) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Internal Use Only", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 154.7, + 37.26 + ], + [ + 474.21500000000003, + 37.26 + ], + [ + 474.21500000000003, + 92.34 + ], + [ + 154.7, + 92.34 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Plaintiff", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.21, + 174.96 + ], + [ + 113.05000000000001, + 174.96 + ], + [ + 113.05000000000001, + 186.3 + ], + [ + 70.21, + 186.3 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.21, + 581.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 123.16499999999998, + 581.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 123.16499999999998, + 593.73 + ], + [ + 70.21, + 593.73 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 120 + ], + [ + "Line", + 51 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 33 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743633" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743636/EFTA02743636.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743636/EFTA02743636.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d93d56e2a186b98ee8bd21dbf92a5f35f2fd5ea8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743636/EFTA02743636.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to File Ex Parte and Under Seal, filed July 10, 2008. Defendant seeks to file a Notice of Continued Pendency of Federal Criminal Action under seal.' The Court has carefully considered the motion and the record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +As stated in the Local Rules for the Southern District of Florida, "proceedings in the United States District Court are public and Court filings are matters of public record." S.D. Fla. L.R. 5.4(A). It is well settled that the media and the public in general possess a common-law right to inspect and copy judicial records. See Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978). "The right to inspect and copy records is not absolute, however. As with other forms of access, it may interfere with the administration of justice and hence may have to be curtailed." v. Graddick, 696 F.2d 796, 803 (11th Cir.1983). This right of access creates + +'All documents filed conventionally shall henceforth be filed directly with the Office of the Clerk in West Palm Beach, Florida. The parties shall not file documents conventionally in any other division of the Southern District of Florida. + +a presumption in favor of openness of court records, which "must be balanced against any competing interest advanced." United States v. Noriega, 752 F. Supp. 1037, 1040 (S.D. Fla.1990). For example, courts may look to see whether the records sought are for illegitimate purposes. 696 F.2d at 803. Likewise, the Court may consider whether "the press has already been permitted substantial access to the contents of the records." Id. + +In his motion to seal, Defendant has made no argument as to why his Notice of Continued Pendency of Federal Criminal Action should not be made available to the public. Defendant states only that he wishes ItIo avoid disclosure of confidential material." (Def. Mot. 2.) The Court finds this justification insufficient to justify keeping this document (filed ex parte) under seal. The Court is supported in this conclusion by its decision in a similar case, In re: Jane Doe, No. 08-80736-CIV (S.D. Fla. July 11, 2008), in which the Court unsealed, over the objection of the United States Attorney, documents containing similar information regarding Defendant's criminal plea agreement. Thus, any argument regarding confidentiality is vitiated by the fact that information regarding Defendant's criminal plea arrangement is already a matter of public record. See, e.g., Sally Apgar, Victims Object to Palm Beach Billionaire's Plea Deal in Underage Sex Case, S. Fla. Sun-Sentinel, July 12, 2008. Similarly, Defendant has not justified the necessity of filing his Notice ex parte. As such, Defendant's Motion to Seal shall be denied. + +Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion to File Ex Pare and Under Seal is DENIED. The Clerk shall UNSEAL docket entries 19 and 20 and make them available for public inspection through CM/ECF at the earliest possible time. Defendant is further ORDERED to serve a copy of his Notice on Plaintiff within five (5) days of the date of + +entry of this Order. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, + +Florida, this 16th day of July, 2008. + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743636/EFTA02743636.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743636/EFTA02743636.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dec20990d1ad6cc881d84dc20d385d7326bf6ebe --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743636/EFTA02743636.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,181 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743636.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3552, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.04, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.856, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.856, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 415.5150451660156, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 415.5150451660156, + 313.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 313.18353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743636" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743639/EFTA02743639.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743639/EFTA02743639.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b5a81a156676d77c25c6dc521301b9d0896a4093 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743639/EFTA02743639.md @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +NO.08-80119-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY DEFAULT SHOULD NOT BE ENTERED AGAINST DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiff'S Motion to Compel Clerk to Enter Default Against Defendant (DE 9), filed June 11, 2008. The motion is now fully briefed and is ripe for review. The Court has carefully considered the motion and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +# Background + +On February 6, 2008, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 ("Plaintiff") filed the instant action against Jeffrey Epstein ("Defendant"), alleging claims of sexual assault and intentional infliction of emotional distress. (DE 1.) Plaintiff's process server attempted to deliver a copy of the summons and complaint to Defendant personally on April 23, April 24, and May I, 2008, at his residence in New York City. (DE 4.) None of these attempts were successful. On May 7, 2008, the process server left a copy of the summons and complaint with "'John M' Assistant & House Staff Employee who refined true name." (DE 4.) The process server also mailed a copy + +of the summons and complaint to Defendant on May 5, 2008, via first class mail. (DE 4.) The envelope was marked "personal and confidential" and did not indicate that the envelope was from an attorney or related to a legal action. (DE 4.) + +# Discussion + +Rule 4(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that an individual may be served by "following state law for serving a summons in an action brought in courts of general jurisdiction in the state where the district court is located or where service is made." Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(eX I). Alternatively, service may be made by leaving a copy of the summons and complaint at the individual's place of abode "with someone of suitable age and discretion who resides there." Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)(2)(B). + +Plaintiff claims that service in this case is valid pursuant to either Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(eX2XB) or Florida law. Like the Federal Rules, Florida law requires that process be left at the individual's usual place of abode "with any person residing therein who is 15 years of age or older." Fla. Stat. § 48.031(1)(a). The affidavit of service (DE 4) states that the summons and complaint were left with "John at Defendant's usual place of abode. From this declaration, the Court cannot determine whether "John resides at the Manhattan apartment. Further, Defendant has submitted the affidavit of Richard Barnett, who avers that he received copies of the summons and complaint on May 7, 2008, from the process server. (DE 9 Ex. A.) Because Plaintiff has provided no indication to suggest that "John resides at the apartment, the Court concludes that Plaintiff did not effect valid service on Defendant under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(eX2XB) or Fla. Stat. § 48.031(1)(a). + +The Court does not believe that Plaintiffs request for discovery on the issue of service is + +necessary, because service of process was made pursuant to New York law. Under New York law, personal service may be made on an individual by + +> delivering the summons within the state to a person of suitable age and discretion at the actual place of business, dwelling place or usual place of abode of the person to be served and by either mailing the summons to the person to be served at his or her last known residence or by mailing the summons by first class mail to the person to be served at his or her actual place of business in an envelope bearing the legend "personal and confidential" and not indicating on the outside thereof, by return address or otherwise, that the communication is from an attorney or concerns an action against the person to be served, such delivery and mailing to be effected within twenty days of each other. + +N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 308(2) (McKinney 2008) (emphasis added). New York law does not require the person receiving the summons and complaint at the individual's place of abode to reside at that location. See, e.g., Boston Safe Deposit and Trust Co. v. Morse, 779 F. Supp. 347, 350 (S.D.N.Y. 1991); Al Fayed v. Barak, 833 N.Y.S. 2d 500, 501 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007). + +In this case, the affidavit of service states that "John was a person of suitable age and discretion who accepted a copy of the summons and complaint at Defendant's actual apartment. (DE 4.) Thus, under New York law, delivery of the summons and complaint to "John was appropriate. Because the summons and complaint were mailed to Defendant and delivered to his residence within twenty days of each other, Plaintiff took all necessary steps to serve Defendant under New York law. + +As Defendant recognizes, New York law also requires that proof of service be "filed with the clerk of the court designated in the summons within twenty days of either such delivery or mailing, whichever is effected later." N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 308(2). Here, Plaintiff is in compliance with this requirement as well: delivery was made on May 7, 2008, and proof of service was filed + +with the Clerk of the Court on May 22, 2008. (DE 4.) Thus, service was deemed complete as of June 2, 2008, under New York law. See N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 308(2) (stating "service shall be complete ten days after" filing of proof of service). + +Nevertheless, Defendant's analysis is not entirely correct. In calculating when Defendant's response was due, the Court turns to Fed. R. Civ. P. I2(a), which states that a defendant must serve an answer within twenty days of being served with the summons and complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(aXIXAXi). Under this rule, Defendant was required to respond to the Complaint within twenty days from the receipt of the summons; the rule does not suggest a longer period of time is available when substituted service is used to serve a defendant. While Rule 4(e)(1) allows Plaintiff to serve process on Defendant in the method permitted by New York, Rule 4(e)(I) does not alter the twenty day period specified by Rule 12(a). In other words, under Rules 4(e)(1) and 12(a), the Court is not bound by New York's proof of service filing requirement nor New York's "completion" date in determining when Defendant's answer needed to be filed. Beller & v. Tyler, 120 F.3d 21, 25-26 (2d Cir. 1997) (reconciling the deadlines imposed by Rule 12(a) and N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 308). Instead, once Defendant received a copy of the summons and complaint, Defendant had twenty days to respond. Id. ("[A] defendant has twenty days from the receipt of the summons to file an answer .... This is so even if ... the defendant is served pursuant to a state law method of service and the state law provides a longer time in which to answer."). Thus, Defendant's response was due on May 27, 2007.1 + +'In Tyler, the court acknowledged that, because service was made in part by mail, the defendant may have the benefit of three extra days to respond per Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(e). Tyler, 120 F.3d at 26. In this case, Plaintiff's server mailed the summons and complaint on May 5, 2008. Thus, under this scheme, Defendant would have had until May 28, 2008, to respond. Either way, Defendant failed to appear int his case until June 13, 2008. + +## Conclusion + +Accordingly, Defendant is hereby ORDERED to file a report with the Court showing good cause why default should not be entered for failure to respond to the Complaint in a timely manner within ten (10) days from the date of entry of this Order. Plaintiff may respond to Defendant's report within the time allotted by the Local Rules. Failure to respond to this Order shall result in an entry of default against Defendant. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this le day of July, 2008. + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743639/EFTA02743639.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743639/EFTA02743639.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..34e1f72222bf8f52ed4be9bb558f7571c44adbbb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743639/EFTA02743639.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,326 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743639.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 7822, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.03, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY DEFAULT SHOULD NOT BE ENTERED \nAGAINST DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 100.98000000000002, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 511.34710693359375, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 511.34710693359375, + 327.363037109375 + ], + [ + 100.98000000000002, + 327.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 138.31503295898438, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 138.31503295898438, + 469.10302734375 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 469.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Discussion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 156.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 129.74896240234375, + 156.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 129.74896240234375, + 171.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 171.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 131.8949737548828, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 131.8949737548828, + 86.60302734375 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 86.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743639" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743644/EFTA02743644.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743644/EFTA02743644.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5d6624ee165ec95e87535b814f2efb6605fade3e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743644/EFTA02743644.md @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@ +UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA- + +![](_page_0_Picture_55.jpeg) + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +PILED BY +STEVEN H. LARIMORE +CLERK U.S. DIST. CT. +S.D. OF FLA - HIA + +08 JUL 10 PM 12: 19 + +![]()**FILED EX PARTE +UNDER SEAL** + +**DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO FILE EX PARTE AND UNDER SEAL** + +![]()Pursuant to S.D. Fla. L.R. 5.4, defendant Jeffrey Epstein hereby moves to file his Notice of Continued Pendency of Federal Criminal Action, as well as this motion, ex parte and under seal, stating as follows: + +- 1. In support of his motion to stay [DE 12], defendant has herewith filed a Notice of Continued Pendency of Federal Criminal Action. +- 2. The Notice relates to a confidential agreement between the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida and the defendant. +- 3. The information contained in the Notice is material to this Court's consideration of Epstein's motion to stay. +- 4. To avoid disclosure of confidential material, Epstein requests leave to file the Notice, and this motion, ex parte and under seal. +- 5. Pending a ruling from this Court, Epstein has not served this motion or the Notice on counsel for plaintiff. + +WHEREFORE, defendant Jeffrey Epstein respectfully requests leave to file this motion and his Notice of Continued Pendency of Federal Criminal Action, ex parte and under seal. + +Respectfully submitted, + +TEIN, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 Tel: 305 442 1101 Fax: 305 442 6744 + +By: + +GUY A. Fla. Bar No. 623740 + +MICHAEL R. TEIN Fla. Bar No. 993522 tein@lewistein.com + +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel. 561 659 8300 Fax. 561 835 8691 + +By: JACK A. GOLDBERGER Fla. Bar No. 262013 jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +**CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that this motion, in accordance with S.D. Fla. L.R. 5.4, has not been served on opposing counsel and was filed under seal on July 10, 2008. + +![]()\_\_\_\_\_ +Michael R. Tein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743644/EFTA02743644.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743644/EFTA02743644.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..672a7a13e8275b6ddab9e16d6673a12fba1b6b9a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743644/EFTA02743644.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,233 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743644.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 2122, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.4, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_55.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 178.96499999999997, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 410.82, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 410.82, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 178.96499999999997, + 102.06 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.41500000000002, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 402.21, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 402.21, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 197.41500000000002, + 86.67 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743644" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743644/_page_0_Picture_55.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743644/_page_0_Picture_55.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1edd3f5bb31f0c0562fc7094e54911b7d1008318 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743644/_page_0_Picture_55.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4c36d4fa2055edd56b248669c739a0666206235c2de45d6fbb6821bc3e5a4440 +size 1222 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743648/EFTA02743648.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743648/EFTA02743648.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..04d90c51c408be4cf5d01085d952e1865da8a72b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743648/EFTA02743648.md @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ +UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-[REDACTED] + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +![]()**FILED EX PARTE +UNDER SEAL** + +![]() + +## NOTICE OF CONTINUED PENDENCY OF FEDERAL CRIMINAL ACTION + +Defendant Jeffrey Epstein hereby notifies the Court of the continued pendency of a federal criminal action against him, stating as follows: + +On June 30, 2008, after defendant Jeffrey Epstein filed his motion to stay IDE 121, he was sentenced in the state-court criminal case described in that motion (State of Florida v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 2006 CF 09454 AXX, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County) (the "Florida Criminal Action"). As explained below, the parallel federal criminal action against him described in that motion (In re Grand Jury, No. FGJ 07-103(WPB), United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida) (the "Federal Criminal Action"), remains pending. + +On September 24, 2007, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("USAO"), represented by Assistant United States Attorney Ann C. Villafana, Esq., and Mr. Epstein, entered into a deferredprosecution agreement ("Agreement"), which the parties agreed to keep confidential. Prior to entering into that Agreement, Ms. Villafana advised that she had already prepared a federal criminal indictment against Mr. Epstein in the Federal Criminal Action. + +Under the Agreement, beginning on the date Mr. Epstein began serving his sentence in the Florida Criminal Action, the USAO agreed to suspend its grand jury investigation in the Federal Criminal Action. The USAO, however, retains the right to reactivate the grand jury and indict Mr. Epstein should he breach any part of the Agreement during its term, which runs for 33 months, beginning on the date Mr. Epstein began serving his sentence in the Florida Criminal Action. Accordingly, the Federal Criminal Action will remain pending against Mr. Epstein for 33 months from June 30, 2008. + +Mr. Epstein will provide the Court with a copy of the confidential Agreement for its in-camera inspection at the Court's request. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein hereby notifies the Court of the continued pendency of the Federal Criminal Action. + +Respectfully submitted, + +TEM, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 Tel: 305 442 1101 Fax: 305 442 6744 + +By: + +GUY A. Fla. Bar No. 623740 + +MICHAEL R. TEIN Fla. Bar No. 993522 tein@lewistein.com + +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel. 561 659 8300 Fax. 561 835 8691 + +By: Jack A. Goldberger Fla. Bar No. 262013 jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that this motion, in accordance with S.D. Ha. L.R. 5.4, has not been served on opposing counsel and was filed under seal on July 10, 2008. 444 + +Michael R. Tein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743648/EFTA02743648.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743648/EFTA02743648.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..89dd2204a759abbf68319e5ca08f249692b5f2c5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743648/EFTA02743648.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,246 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743648.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 2969, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.56, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 184.5, + 68.03999999999999 + ], + [ + 415.74, + 68.03999999999999 + ], + [ + 415.74, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 184.5, + 100.44 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF CONTINUED PENDENCY \nOF FEDERAL CRIMINAL ACTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 166.05, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 439.9009094238281, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 439.9009094238281, + 106.62091064453125 + ], + [ + 166.05, + 106.62091064453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.26, + 307.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 405.44317626953125, + 307.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 405.44317626953125, + 325.62091064453125 + ], + [ + 199.26, + 325.62091064453125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 36 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743648" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743652/EFTA02743652.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743652/EFTA02743652.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a882bff8c363d196ffe7acc774e3321c65fc17da --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743652/EFTA02743652.md @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ +![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg) + +U.S. Department of Justice + +United States Attorney Southern District of Florida + +500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561)820-8711 Facsimile: (561)820-8777 + +July 10, 2008 + +## NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM + +NOTICE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 3509(d) AND FLORIDA LAW, THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH A LEGAL PROCEEDING. + +![](_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg) + +## U.S. Department of Justice + +United States Attorney Southern District of Florida + +300 South Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561) 8104711 Facsimile: (561)8104777 + +July 10, 2008 + +## VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL + +Jeffrey Herman, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 + +> Re: ..klfreEsteir ypAll liell ls IDENTIFIED VICTIM + +Dear Mr. Herman: + +By virtue of this letter, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida asks that you provide the following notice to your client, SS. + +On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein) entered a plea of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution) and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009454AXXXMB and 2008-cf-009381/OOOMB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be followed by an additional six months' imprisonment, followed by twelve months of Community Control 1, with conditions of community confinement imposed by the Court. + +In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain conditions. + +One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following: + +"My person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same JEFFREY HERMAN, ESQ. + +NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS + +JULY 10, 2008 + +PAGE 2 OF 2 + +rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein. Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less." + +Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that your client, is an individual whom the United States was prepared to name as a victim of an enumerated offense. + +Should your client decide to file a claim against Jeffrey Epstein, his attorney, Jack Goldberger, asks that you contact him at Atterbury Goldberger and Weiss, 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401. + +Please understand that neither the U.S. Attorney's Office nolhe Federal Sureau of Investigation can take part in or otherwise assist in civil litigation; however, if you do file a claim under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 and Mr. Epstein denies that your client is a victim of an enumerated offense, please provide written documentation of that denial to the undersigned. + +Please thank your client for all of her assistance during the course of this investigation and express the heartfelt regards of myself and Special Agents Kuyrkendall and Richards for the health and well-being of\_ + +> R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY + +By: + +cc: Jack Goldberger, Esq. + +Lee-4; C' + +A. VILLAFANA ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743652/EFTA02743652.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743652/EFTA02743652.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3b93bead0de97f447000dcbf6688ea6a53440698 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743652/EFTA02743652.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743652.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3975, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.93, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.66, + 249.48 + ], + [ + 433.95770263671875, + 249.48 + ], + [ + 433.95770263671875, + 265.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 186.66, + 265.56353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "U.S. Department of Justice", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 174.42, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 310.52734375, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 310.52734375, + 90.49249267578125 + ], + [ + 174.42, + 90.49249267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.456, + 249.48 + ], + [ + 270.28411865234375, + 249.48 + ], + [ + 270.28411865234375, + 264.862548828125 + ], + [ + 84.456, + 264.862548828125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 76 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743652" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743652/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743652/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7177e9549801cb693cc5a7e44dccff9f48d16d5d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743652/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:61a71da37a18d75920f7fb5eeea8a9f5dec89f32efe93c2eec69f4718e98a199 +size 10775 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743652/_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743652/_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..53b72e6319a6fde36bab74efb0dadb3c620f9fd8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743652/_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:32dddde8aec97e051687482be385f0c83ac11fa08d9a5357e4979a1043bb5e5e +size 10779 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743655/EFTA02743655.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743655/EFTA02743655.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..668e19ee8f22a46d1a03b086e72ed4358c449ded --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743655/EFTA02743655.md @@ -0,0 +1,95 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-801 l9-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR STAY + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2, by and through her undersigned counsel, submits this Memorandum of Law in Response to Motion for Stay, as follows: + +# INTRODUCTION + +Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Stay this action is based on the incorrect premise that there are criminal actions pending against him in Palm Beach Circuit Court, State of Florida v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 2006 CF 09454 AXXMB (Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County), and in the Southern District of Florida, In re Grand Jury, No. FGJ 07-103 (WPB) (S.D. Fla.). The Motion to Stay as to the state court criminal action was rendered moot on June 30, 2008 when Jeffrey Epstein entered a plea of guilty to violations of Florida Statute §796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution) and §796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution) in the state criminal action. (See Defendant's Notice Concerning Motion to Stay dated July 1, 2008). Jeffrey Epstein, now an admitted sex offender, was sentenced to a term of imprisonment followed by community control and sex offender registration. + +As to the federal prosecution, Defendant's mistitled "Notice of Continued Pendency of HERMAN S MERMELSTEIN, P. A. www.hermanlaw.com + +Federal Criminal Action," which has now been unsealed, makes clear that there is in fact no criminal federal action pending. This Notice discloses a confidential Agreement between the U.S. Attorney and Defendant, the terms of which were triggered when Epstein began serving his state imposed criminal sentence. Under the Agreement, according to the Notice, the U.S. Attorney "agreed to suspend its grand jury investigation", while "retain[ing] the right to reactivate the grand jury and indict Mr. Epstein should he breach any part of the Agreement during its term, which runs for 33 months, beginning on the date Mr. Epstein began serving his sentence in the Florida Criminal Action." (The terms of this Agreement are also described in the notice letter to the victim Plaintiff, a redacted copy which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A".) Accordingly, as represented in Defendant's own filing, Mr. Epstein is not under indictment and the grand jury is not active in his case. There is simply no pending criminal action, a necessary prerequisite for a stay under 28 U.S.C. §3509(k). + +Additionally, the stay provision of 18 U.S.C. 3509(k) is limited to circumstances in which the plaintiff is a "a person who is under the age of 18..." The Statute is therefore inapplicable in that Plaintiff is not a minor, and was not a minor when she filed this lawsuit. The Motion is also procedurally defective because (i) Defendant failed to comply with the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida in that Defendant's counsel neither conferred nor attempted to confer with counsel for the Plaintiff as to the relief request prior to filing the Motion to Stay; and (ii) in light of changed circumstances after the filing of the Motion to Stay, the Motion fails to inform the Plaintiff or the Court of the grounds for the relief sought. + +For the foregoing reasons, Defendant's Motion to Stay must be denied in its entirety. + +#### THE DEFENDANT HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED THAT 28 U.S.C. §3509(k) IS APPLICABLE AND A STAY MANDATED + +As the movant, it is the Defendant's burden to demonstrate that the requirements for a stay have been met. He has not met this burden. 18 U.S.C. §3509(k) states as follows: + +Stay of civil action. -- If, at any time that a cause of action for recovery of compensation for damage or injury to the person of a child exists, a criminal action is pending which arises out of the same occurrence and in which the child is the victim, the civil action shall be stayed until the end of all phases of the criminal action and any mention of the civil action during the criminal proceeding is prohibited. As used in this subsection, a criminal action is pending until its final adjudication in the trial court. + +(emphasis added). + +A threshold inquiry in determining whether to invoke the stay provision of 18 U.S.C. §3509(k) is whether the plaintiff in a civil action is also the victim of a "criminal action ...pending which arises out of the same occurrence and in which the child is the victim...." (Emphasis supplied). Given Jeffrey Epstein's plea of guilty to the criminal charges in the state case and the Agreement entered into with the U.S. Attorney, his argument that a stay of this lawsuit should be granted because of pending criminal charges appears at this point to be specious. Nonetheless, Defendant Epstein represents to this Court in his "Notice Concerning Motion to Stay" dated July 1, 2008 that "the federal criminal proceeding . . . remains pending." No further explanation is provided. The argument supporting this assertion is unknown to Plaintiff.' There is no indication in the statutory language or elsewhere that 18 U.S.C. §3509(k) can be applicable in a situation, such as here, where there is an agreement concerning federal crimes but there has been no indictment. + +The notice letter attached hereto as Exhibit "A" further sets forth one of the conditions imposed by Mr. Epstein's Agreement with the U.S. Attorney, as follows: "Any person [including + +' The developments relating to the Defendant's plea deal arose after the Defendant filed his Motion to Stay. As a result, the Motion does not explain why a stay is justified under the present circumstances. Plaintiff is at a disadvantage in filing this Memorandum in Response, and is left to guess as the present grounds for the Motion. For this reason alone, the Motion should be denied. + +this plaintiff], who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense." Thus, not only is a necessary prerequisite for a statutory stay missing in that no criminal case is pending, but a stay under 28 U.S.C. §3509(k) would be inconsistent with Mr. Epstein's Agreement with the U.S. Attorney, which contemplates civil claims by victims pursuant to federal law. Defendant Epstein apparently contends that a stay should nonetheless apply for the next 33 months, preventing for this extended period the civil litigation of these claims, to see if Mr. Epstein complies with his Agreement. Needless to say, this would be absurd. It cannot be seriously argued in the circumstances of this case that a stay under 28 U.S.C. §3509(k) is mandated because there is a "pending" federal criminal action. + +# 18 U.S.C. §3509(k) DOES NOT AUTHORIZE A STAY OF A CIVIL LAWSUIT FILED BY AN ADULT PLAINTIFF + +Even if there were a criminal case pending, which there is not, 18 U.S.C. §3509(k) would not apply to the claim of a child victim who is now an adult. This Statute applies in situations in which a child who has been the victim of sexual abuse is the plaintiff in a civil lawsuit at the same time that the child is a victim in a criminal proceeding arising out of the same occurrence. That is not the case here. The Plaintiff is an adult and was an adult at the time she filed this civil lawsuit. Defendant misinterprets 18 U.S.C. §3509(k) to suggest that the Statute also applies in instances where an adult plaintiff in the civil lawsuit was a victim of sexual abuse during childhood. A careful reading of the definitions section of 18 U.S.C. §3509 reveals that Defendant's interpretation is incorrect. See 18 U.S.C. §3509(a)(2) (defining "child" as person who is under the age of 18). + +18 U.S.C. §3509(k) states, in relevant pan, as follows: + +(k) Stay of civil action. -- If, at any time that a cause of action for recovery of + +compensation for damage or injury to the person of a child exists, a criminal action is pending which arises out of the same occurrence and in which the child is the victim, the civil action shall be stayed until the end of all phases of the criminal action.... + +(emphasis added). + +18 U.S.C. §3509(2) defines as a "child" as "a person who is under the age of 18." Thus, the term "child" is limited for purposes of 18 U.S.C. §3509 to a person who is currently under the age of 18. While the statute could have been written to say "a person who is under the age of 18 or was under the age of 18 at the time of the abuse", it does not. Yet, this is the precise interpretation suggested by the Defendant. + +The plaintiffs interpretation of 18 U.S.C. §3509(k) is not only consistent with the plain language of the statute, but also with the policies underlying the stay provision. The statute is designed to protect children who are involved in legal proceedings arising from physical, sexual, or mental abuse. For instance, 18 U.S.C. §3509 provides protections for persons under the age of 18, including alternatives to live in-court testimony, competency examinations, psychological examinations, privacy issues, filing under seal, closing the courtroom, the handling of videotaped testimony, adult attendants, speedy trials, the use of guardians ad litem and testimonial aids. Each of these protections is only implicated when the victim "is under the age of 18." See 18 U.S.C. §3509(a)(2). In the context of a civil lawsuit, a child similarly needs protection from the possibility of concurrent proceedings involving deposition or trial testimony, psychological examinations, and competency examinations. Moreover, the use of a stay of a civil lawsuit involving a child-plaintiff may be particularly warranted in circumstances where the child may not have had made the decision to file the lawsuit in the first instance. Thus, the law protects the children from multiple concurrent proceedings. These concerns do not exist to the same degree when a competent adult such as the Plaintiff elects to file suit on her own behalf. Yet, the Defendant seeks to carve out an exception + +where none exists by arguing that the "Stay of Civil Action" provision in subsection (k) must be applied to victims who are 18 or older who were under the age of 18 at the time of their abuse. This argument is unsupported by the statute or its underlying policies. + +The unpublished, trial court decisions cited by Defendant of Doe v. Francis, 2005 WL 517487 (N.D. Fla. Apr. 20, 2005) (Francis I) and Doe v. Francis, 2005 WL 950623 (N.D. Fla. Apr. 20, 2005) (Francis II) are readily distinguishable. The Plaintiffs in Francis I and Francis II "offered no legal authority or evidence to support their argument that the stay should be lifted." Francis II, at \*1. By contrast, in this case, the Plaintiff has cited the definition of "child" found in 18 U.S.C. §3509(aX2). The Francis cases also involved seven plaintiffs, three of whom were victims in the criminal case. That is not the case here were the only plaintiff in this lawsuit is not a victim in a pending criminal case. Additionally, the stay in the Francis cases was imposed before the plaintiffs reached the age of majority. Here, the civil lawsuit was not even filed until after the plaintiff reached the age of majority. + +#### DEFENDANT'S MOTION SHOULD BE DENIED IN THAT DEFENDANT DID NOT CONFER WITH PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL PRIOR TO FILING HIS MOTION, AND THE MOTION FAILS TO INFORM PLAINTIFF OR THE COURT OF THE GROUNDS FOR RELIEF IN LIGHT OF CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES + +Defendant's Motion should be denied in that Defendant failed to comply with the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida in that Defendant's counsel neither conferred nor attempted to confer with counsel for the Plaintiff as to the relief request prior to filing the Motion to Stay. See S.D. Fla. L. R. 7. I.A.3. Notably, Defendant's Motion also contains no certification as to any such attempt as required by the Local Rules. See id. The Local Rules provide that the "[fjailure to comply with the requirements of this rule may be cause for the court to grant or deny the motion and impose on counsel an appropriate sanction, which may + +include an order to pay the amount of the reasonable expenses incurred because of the violation, including a reasonable attorney's fee." Id. + +Finally, when the circumstances materially changed after the filing of the Motion, it was incumbent upon the Defendant to either withdraw the Motion or at least amend it to explain the grounds for a stay in light of the plea deal. Defendant has not done so, to the prejudice of Plaintiff in preparing this Memorandum in response. For this reason alone the Motion to Stay should be denied. + +# CONCLUSION + +Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff requests that this Court deny Defendant's Motion to Stay pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3509(k) in its entirety, award attorney's fees to Plaintiff for Defendant's failure to comply with Southern District of Florida Local Rule 7.1.A.3, and all other relief this Court deems just and appropriate. + +Dated: July 18, 2008. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Jeffrey M. Herman Jeffrey M. Herman (FL Bar No. 521647) jherman@hermanlaw.com Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@hermanlaw.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on July 18, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the + +Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Jeffrey M. Herman + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASE NO.: 013-CV-80119-MARRA/ United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger iagesq@bellsouth.net + +Michael R. Tein tein@lewistein.com + +/s/ Jeffrey M. Herman \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743655/EFTA02743655.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743655/EFTA02743655.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..40330346a47695ebe7a5d39272858e4f4b1944de --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743655/EFTA02743655.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,566 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743655.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 14337, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.46, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN \nRESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR STAY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 159.732, + 294.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 454.1123046875, + 294.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 454.1123046875, + 323.9830627441406 + ], + [ + 159.732, + 323.9830627441406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "INTRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.81599999999997, + 392.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 357.344970703125, + 392.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 357.344970703125, + 408.363037109375 + ], + [ + 255.81599999999997, + 408.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "THE DEFENDANT HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED THAT \n28 U.S.C. \u00a73509(k) IS APPLICABLE AND A STAY MANDATED", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 686.8799999999999 + ], + [ + 479.7676696777344, + 686.8799999999999 + ], + [ + 479.7676696777344, + 715.5635147094727 + ], + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 715.5635147094727 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "18 U.S.C. \u00a73509(k) DOES NOT AUTHORIZE A STAY \nOF A CIVIL LAWSUIT FILED BY AN ADULT PLAINTIFF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 144.432, + 378.27 + ], + [ + 469.1069641113281, + 378.27 + ], + [ + 469.1069641113281, + 408.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 144.432, + 408.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S MOTION SHOULD BE DENIED IN THAT \nDEFENDANT DID NOT CONFER WITH PLAINTIFF'S \nCOUNSEL PRIOR TO FILING HIS MOTION, AND THE MOTION \nFAILS TO INFORM PLAINTIFF OR THE COURT OF THE \nGROUNDS FOR RELIEF IN LIGHT OF CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.384, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 503.51043701171875, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 503.51043701171875, + 506.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 111.384, + 506.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 350.86065673828125, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 350.86065673828125, + 254.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 254.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 656.1 + ], + [ + 386.0939636230469, + 656.1 + ], + [ + 386.0939636230469, + 670.9335174560547 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 670.9335174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nCASE NO.: 013-CV-80119-MARRA/ \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.89600000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.5345764160156, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.5345764160156, + 128.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 157.89600000000002, + 128.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743655" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743664/EFTA02743664.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743664/EFTA02743664.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1a10cf78b50078fcf69301c62ff9e2a3d8acdc11 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743664/EFTA02743664.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +## DECLARATION OF JEFFREY M. HERMAN REGARDING SERVICE OF PROCESS AND THIS COURT'S ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE + +Jeffrey M. Herman, deposes and states as follows: + +1. I am counsel for Plaintiff in this action. After the parties' briefed the issue of service of process on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, this Court found valid service under New York law and entered an Order to Show Cause Why Default Should Not be Entered Against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, dated July 16, 2008. + +2. I submit this Declaration to correct what appears to be a factual error in the Court's Order to Show Cause. I do so even though this error is in Plaintiffs favor. + +3. In the Order to Show Cause, this Court finds that "[t]he process server also mailed a copy of the summons and complaint to Defendant on May 5, 2008, via first class mail. (DE4)." It is my understanding that the Affidavit of Service (DE 4) crosses out language regarding mail to the Defendant, and that the process server in this case did not mail a copy of the Summons and Complaint to the Defendant's New York address. In none of the papers Plaintiff filed in this matter is it asserted that the Summons and Complaint was mailed, nor did Plaintiff claim that service was valid under New York law. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRS + +Under penalties of perjury, I declare the foregoing to be true and correct. + +Dated: July 21, 2008. + +s/Jeffrey M. Herman + +Jeffrey M. Herman \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743664/EFTA02743664.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743664/EFTA02743664.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6d7e9ec1a5b2f6ee4c1ee7be1debb3e61351d741 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743664/EFTA02743664.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743664.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1557, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.7, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DECLARATION OF JEFFREY M. HERMAN REGARDING SERVICE \nOF PROCESS AND THIS COURT'S ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 115.66799999999999, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 496.9223937988281, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 496.9223937988281, + 310.4830627441406 + ], + [ + 115.66799999999999, + 310.4830627441406 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743664" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743666/EFTA02743666.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743666/EFTA02743666.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d8bd34753ae1ad6bc9066ce2eca9ac7655d9b3e3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743666/EFTA02743666.md @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT'S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT + +Pursuant to Rule 7.1(B)(1) of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, defendant Jeffrey Epstein respectfully requests oral argument in connection with his motion to stay. + +Defendant believes an opportunity to formally argue the motion would assist the Court in ruling on his motion, which seeks to stay this action until resolution of a pending criminal action. + +Defendant estimates that the time required for argument is one hour. + +![](_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg) + +Respectfully submitted, + +TEIN, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 Tel: 305 442 1101 Fax: 305 442 6744 + +By: /s/ Michael R. Tein GUY A. Ha. Bar No. 623740 MICHAEL R. TEIN Fla. Bar No. 993522 tein@lewistein.com + +> ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel. 561 659 8300 Fax. 561 835 8691 + +By: Jack A. Goldberger Ha. Bar No. 262013 jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 25, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on counsel of record identified below by U.S. Mail. + +> /s/ Michael R. Tein Michael R. Tein + +## Service List + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Fax: 305 931 0877 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743666/EFTA02743666.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743666/EFTA02743666.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..599c44db7fb718177ef908ade1c5897c7ba26e6a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743666/EFTA02743666.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,233 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743666.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 1705, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.86, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 417.3464050292969, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 417.3464050292969, + 104.75091552734375 + ], + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 104.75091552734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 136.476, + 348.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 476.40521240234375, + 348.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 476.40521240234375, + 365.7509460449219 + ], + [ + 136.476, + 365.7509460449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.1851806640625, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.1851806640625, + 88.62091064453125 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 88.62091064453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Service List", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 280.26 + ], + [ + 343.62774658203125, + 280.26 + ], + [ + 343.62774658203125, + 297.5009765625 + ], + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 297.5009765625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743666" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743666/_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743666/_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..80c3106a79344b9cde3806aedacdfe2cf401dbb8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743666/_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:46d1e5c0c211a1856b8e4da7eee7b960ad2ba281f08c776d6f140cb253d294fd +size 2473 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743669/EFTA02743669.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743669/EFTA02743669.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a6b9c6ba46bdd018e19c63e68072eeef5094ab3a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743669/EFTA02743669.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL CLERK TO ENTER DEFAULT + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Clerk to Enter Default Against Defendant (DE 9), filed June 11, 2008. The motion is now fully briefed and is ripe for review. The Court has carefully considered the motion and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +On July 16, 2008, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause' why default should not be entered against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein (DE 22), arguing that Defendant had let more than twenty days elapse after service of process before attempting to respond to the Complaint. As the Court explained, under New York law, personal service may be made on an individual by + +> delivering the summons within the state to a person of suitable age and discretion at the actual place of business, dwelling place or usual place of abode of the person to be served and by either mailing the summons to the person to be served at his or her last known residence or by mailing the summons by first class mail to the person to be served at his or her actual place of business in an envelope bearing the legend "personal and confidential" and not indicating on the outside thereof, by return address + +'The Court presumes familiarity with the contents of this Order. + +or otherwise, that the communication is from an attorney or concerns an action against the person to be served, such delivery and mailing to be effected within twenty days of each other. + +N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 308(2) (McKinney 2008) (emphasis added). Based on the Court's reading of the Affidavit of Service (DE 4), it appeared that Plaintiff's process server had mailed a copy of the Summons and Complaint to Defendant on May 5, 2008. What appeared to be a distortion in the document due to its electronic upload into the Court's CM/ECF system, however, was apparently a line striking the language from the affidavit regarding the mailing of the Summons and Complaint. (See DE 26.) Plaintiff brought this error to the Court's attention after the Court issued its Order to Show Cause. + +Because the Summons and Complaint were not mailed to Defendant, service was not accomplished under New York law.' See N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 308(2). Further, as the Court has already explained, service was not effective under either the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or Florida law.' Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Clerk to Enter Default Against Defendant (DE 9) is DENIED. Plaintiff shall have forty-five (45) days from the date of entry of this Order to serve a copy of the Summons and Complaint on Defendant. Failure to serve Defendant within forty-five days shall result in dismissal of the above-styled action pursuant to + +'Interestingly, Plaintiff did not bring this issue to the Court's attention in its Reply brief. Defendant's Response to the Motion (DE 11) made clear that he assumed all the steps were taken to serve Defendant in accordance with New York law, including that copies were sent through the mail.

'The Court again declines to allow discovery on whether Richard Barnett resides at Defendant's New York home. Mr. Barnett submitted an affidavit sworn under penalty of perjury that he does not reside at that address. (See Barnett Aff.) Plaintiff has not submitted any evidence to suggest that Mr. Bamett is not credible, so allowing discovery on this point would simply be a waste of resources.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). It is further ORDERED that Defendant is relieved of responsibility from responding to the Court's Order to Show Cause (DE 22) issued on July 16, 2008.

DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County,

Florida, this 25' day of July, 2008.

K in

KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge

Copies furnished to: all counsel of record

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743669/EFTA02743669.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743669/EFTA02743669.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0a74cba1ea3bf66ab4bb46f66cfeb355ee1e8f39 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743669/EFTA02743669.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,189 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743669.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 4135, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.17, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL CLERK TO ENTER DEFAULT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 100.98000000000002, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 511.0933532714844, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 511.0933532714844, + 313.4830627441406 + ], + [ + 100.98000000000002, + 313.4830627441406 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743669" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/EFTA02743672.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/EFTA02743672.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..46318575b1080fa0114597112886cc5cc5c6621c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/EFTA02743672.md @@ -0,0 +1,387 @@ +# EXHIBIT A + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/ + +IN RE: JANE DOE, + +Petitioner. + +/ + +FILED by S D.C. + +JUL 0 9 2008 + +# DECLARATION OF A. VILLAFARA IN SUPPORT OF UNITED STATES' RESPONSE TO VICTIM'S EMERGENCY PETITION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF CRIME VICTIM RIGHTS ACT, 18 U.S.C.§ 3771 + +STEVEN M. LAFSMORE CLERK U.S. DIST. CT S.D. OF FLA. • sme a. + +1. I, A. Villafatia, do hereby declare that I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of Florida. I graduated from the University of California at Berkeley School of Law (Boalt s in 1993. After serving as ajudicial clerk to the Hon. David F. Levi in Sacramento, California, I was admitted to practice in California in 1995. I also am admitted to practice in all courts of the states of Minnesota and Florida, the Eighth, Eleventh, and Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals, and the U.S. District Courts for the Southern District of Florida, the District of Minnesota, and the Northern District of California. My bar admission status in California and Minnesota is currently inactive. I am currently employed as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of Florida and was so employed during all of the events described herein. + +2. 1 am the Assistant United States Attorney assigned to the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. The case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI"). The federal investigation was initiated in 2006 at the request of the Palm Beach Police Department ("PBPD") into allegations that Jeffrey Epstein, and his personal assistants had used facilities of interstate commerce to induce young girls between the ages of thirteen and seventeen to engage in prostitution, amongst other offenses. + +3. Throughout the investigation, when a victim was identified, victim notification letters were provided to her both from your Affiant and from the FBI's Victim-Witness Specialist. Attached hereto are copies of the letters provided to three clients, T.M., C.W., and S.R.' Your Affiant's letter to C.W. was provided by the FBI. (Ex. 1). Your Affiant's letter to T.M. was hand-delivered by myself to T.M. at the time that she was interviewed (Ex. 2).2 Both C.W. and T.M. also received letters from the FBI's Victim-Witness Specialist, which were sent on January 10, 2008 (Exs. 3 & 4). S.R. was identified via the FBI's investigation in 2007, but she initially refused to speak with investigators. S.R.'s status as a victim of a federal offense was confirmed when she was interviewed by + +'Attorney filed his Motion on behalf of "Jane Doe," without identifying which of his clients is the purported victim. Accordingly, 1Will address facts related to C.W., T.M., and S.R. All three of those clients were victims of Jeffrey Epstein's while they were minors beginning when they were fifteen years old. + +?Please note that the dates on the U.S. Attorney's Office letters to C.W. and T.M. are not the dates that the letters were actually delivered. Letters to all known victims were prepared early in the investigation and delivered as each victim was contacted. + +federal agents on May 28, 2008. The FBI's Victim-Witness Specialist sent a letter to S.R. on May 30, 2008 (Ex. 5). + +4. Throughout the investigation, the FBI agents, the FBI's Victim-Witness Specialist, and your A Mant had contact with C.W. and S.R. Attorney other client, T.M., was represented by counsel and, accordingly, all contact with T.M. was made through that attorney. That attorney was James Eisenberg, and his fees were paid by Jeffrey Epstein,. the target of the investigation.' + +5. In the summer of 2007, Mr. Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("the Office") entered into negotiations to resolve the investigation. At that time, Mr. Epstein had been charged by the State of Florida with solicitation of prostitution, in violation of Florida Statutes § 796.07. Mr. Epstein's attorneys sought a global resolution of the matter. The United States subsequently agreed to defer federal prosecution in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida, so long as certain basic preconditions were met. One of the key objectives for the Government was to preserve a federal remedy for the young girls whom Epstein had sexually exploited. Thus, one condition of that agreement, notice of which was provided to the victims on July 9, 2008, is the following: + +"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein + +3The undersigned does not know when Mr. began representing T.M. or whether T.M. ever formally terminated Mr. Eisenberg's representation. + +had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein. Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less." + +6. An agreement was reached in September 2007. The Agreement contained an express confidentiality provision. + +7. Although individual victims were not consulted regarding the agreement, several had expressed concerns regarding the exposure of their identities at trial and they desired a prompt resolution of the matter. At the time the agreement was signed in September 2007, T.M. was openly hostile to the prosecution of Epstein. The FBI attempted to interview S.R. in October 2007, at which time she refused to provide any information regarding Jeffrey Epstein. None of AttorneyMI' clients had expressed a desire to be consulted prior to the resolution of the federal investigation. + +8. As explained above, one of the terms of the agreement deferring prosecution to the State of Florida was securing a federal remedy for the victims. In October 2007, shortly after the agreement was signed, four victims were contacted and these provisions were discussed. One of those victims Was C.W..Whe at the time was not represented, and she was given notice of the agreement. Notice was also provided of an expected change of plea in October 2007. When Epstein's attorneys learned that some of the victims had been + +notified, they complained that the victims were receiving an incentive to overstate their involvement with Mr. Epstein in order to increase their damages claims. While your Affiant knew that the victims' statements had been taken and corroborated with independent evidence well before they were informed of the potential for damages, the agents and I concluded that informing additional victims could compromise the witnesses' credibility at trial if Epstein reneged on the agreement. + +9. After C.W. had been notified of the terms of the agreement, but before Epstein • performed his obligations, C.W. contacted the FBI because Epstein's counsel was attempting to take her deposition and private investigators were harassing her. Your Affiant secured pro bono counsel to represent C.W. and several other identified victims. Pro bono counsel was able to assist C.W. in avoiding the improper deposition. That pro bono counsel did not express to your Affiant that C.W. was dissatisfied with the resolution of the matter. + +10. In mid-June 2008, Attorney contacted your Affiant to inform me that he represented C.W. and S.R. and asked to meet to provide me with information regarding Epstein. I invited Attorney to send to me any information that he wanted me to consider. Nothing was provided. I also advised Attorney that he should consider contacting the State Attorney's Office, if he so wished. I understand that no contact with that office was made. Attorney EdWards hid 'alluded to SciTliciViged him that, to my knowledge, T.M. was still represented by Attorney James Eisenberg. + +I. On Friday, June 27, 2008, at approximate 4:15 p.m., your Affiant received a copy of the proposed state plea agreement and learned that the plea was scheduled for 8:30 a.m., Monday, lune 30, 2008. Your Affiant and the Palm Beach Police Department attempted toprovide notification to victims in the short time that Epstein's counsel had given us. Although all known victims were not notified, your Affiant specifically called attorney to provide notice to his clients regarding the hearing. Your Affiant believes that it was during this conversation that Attorney notified me that he represented T.M., and I assumed that he would pass on the notice to her, as well. Attorney informed your Affiant that he could not attend but that someone would be present at the hearing. Your Affiant attended the hearing, but none of Attorney I= clients was present. + +12. On today's date, your Affiant provided the attached victim notifications to C.W. and S.R. via their attorney, (Exs. 6 & 7). A notification was not provided to T.M. because the U.S. Attorney's modification limited Epstein's liability to victims whom the United States was prepared to name in an indictment. In light of T.M.'s prior statements to law enforcement, your Affiant could not in good faith include T.M. as a victim in an indictment and, accordingly, could not include her in the list provided to Epstein's counsel. + +13. Furthermore, with respeet tdth&Certifieaticiri of Emergency, Attorney did not ever contact me prior to the filing of that Certification to demand the relief that he requests in his Emergency Petition. On the afternoon °flu1y 7, 2008, after your Affiant had + +already received the Certification of Emergency and Emergency Petition, I received a letter from Attorney [REDACTED] that had been sent, via Certified Mail, on July 3, 2008. While that letter urges the Attorney General and the United States Attorney to consider "vigorous enforcement" of federal laws with respect to Jeffrey Epstein, it contains no demand for the relief requested in the Emergency Petition. + +14. I declare under penalty of perjury, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746 that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. + +Executed this 9th day of July, 2008. + +![]()![](_page_8_Picture_2.jpeg) + +#### DEL/VERY BY HAND + +Miss Cale la + +### U.S. Department of Justice + +United Stales Attorney Southern District of Florida + +![](_page_8_Picture_5.jpeg) + +500Sough Australian Ave , Suite 400 ;Vest Pohn Bench, FL. 33401 (.561)820-8711 Facsimile: (561)8204777 + +June 7, 2007 + +Re: Crime Victims' and Wiinesses• Rights + +Dear Miss VIM + +Pursuant to the Justice for All Act of2004, as a victim and/or witness of a federal offense, you have a number of rights. Those rights arc: + +- (I) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused. +- (2) The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused. +- (3) The right not to be excluded from any public court proceeding, unless the court determines that your testimony may be materially altered if you are present for other portions of a proceeding. +- (4) The right to be reasonably heard ai any public proceeding in the district court involving release, plea, or sentencing. +- (5) The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the United States in the case. +- (6) The right to full and timely restitution as provided in law. +- (7) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay. +- (8) The right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy It + +Members of tare U.S. Department of Justice and other federal investigative agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, must use their best efforts to make sure that these rights arc protected. If you have any concerns in this regard, please feel free to contact me at 561 209-1047, or Special Agent Nesbitt Kuyrkendall frorwthe Federal Bureau of Investigation at 561 822-5946. You also• can coniact-thrlilifiae Deplithient'S.°Wee Tor Crithe iti Washington, D.C. at 202-307.5983. That Office has a website at www.ovc.gov. + +You con seek the advice of an attorney with respect to the rights listed above and, if you believe that the rights !;et fonh above are being violated, you have the right to petition. the Court for relief. + +Miss JUNE 7,2007 PAGE 2 + +Inaddition to these sights, you are entitled to counseling and medical services, and protection from intimidation and harassment. if the Court determines that you arc avictim, you also may be entitled to restitution from the perpetrator. A list of counseling and medical service providers can be provided to you, if you so desire. If you or your family is subjected to any intimidation or harassment, please contact Special Agent Kuyrkcndall or myself immediately. II is possihle that someone working on behalf of the targets of the investigation may contact you. Such contact does not violneithe law." However, if you are contacted, you have the choice of speaking to that person or refusing to'clo to. If you refuse and feel that you are being threatened or harassed, then please • contact Special Agent Kuyrkcndall or myself. + +You also are entitled to notification of upcoming case events. At this time, yourcase is under investigation) I (anyone is charged in connection with the investigation, you will be notified. + +Sincerely, + +R. Alexander Acosta United States Attorney + +By: 4.elgeaoruc,\_ A. VillafaAa Assistant United States Attorney + +cc: Special Agent Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, F.B.I. + +![](_page_10_Picture_2.jpeg) + +United Slates Attorney • Southern District of Florida + +![](_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg) + +500 South Australian Ave.. Suite 400 West Polm thatch. FL 33401 (36!) 8204711 Facsimile: (561) 820-8777 + +August I I, 2006 + +#### DELIVERY BY HAND + +Miss Tea. + +Re: Crime Victims' and WitncsseL\_Rigts + +Dear Miss Me + +Pursuant to the Justice for All Act of 2004, as a victim and/or witness of a federal offense, you have a number of rights. Those rights are: + +- (I ) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused. +- (2) The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused. +- (3) The right not to be excluded from any public court pmceeding, unless the court determines that your testimony may be materially altered if you are present for other portions of a proceeding. +- (4) The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving release, plea, or sentencing. +- (5) The retsonable right to confer with the attorney for the United States in the case. +- (6) The right to full and timely restitution as provided in law. +- (7) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay. +- (8) The right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy. f + +Members of the U.S. Department of Justice and other federal investigative agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, must use their best efforts to make sure that these rights are protected. If you have any concerns in this regard, please feel free to contact me at 561 209.1047, or Special Agent Nesbitt Kuyrkendall from the Federal Bureau of Investigation at 561 822-5946r- Xou also can-contact-the Justice .D.epartnent's Office ,for of Crime in Washington, D.C. at 202-307.5983. That Office has a websitc at www.ovc.gov. + +You can seek the advice of an attorney with respect to the rights listed above and, if you believe that the rights set forth above are being violated, you have the right to petition the Court for relief + +MISS Tela AUGUST I 1,2006 PAGE 2 + +In addition to these rights, youare entitled to counseling and medical services, and i. from intimidation and harassment. If the Court determines that you are avictim, you entitled to restitution from the perpetrator. A list of counseling and medical service ply. be provided to you, if you so desire. If you or your family is subjected to any num • harassment, please contact Special Agent Kuyrkendall or myself immediately. It is p someone working on behalf of the targets of the investigation may contact you. Such cur. not violate the law. However, if you are contacted, you have the choice of speaking or refusing to do so. If you refuse and feel that you are being threatened or harassed, IN. Contact Special Agent Kuyrkendall or myself. + +You also are entitled to notification of upcoming case events. At this time, your L.,: investigation. If anyone is charged in connection with the investigation, you will he nog + +Sincerely, + +R. Alexander Acosta United States Attorney + +By: + +A. Villafana Assistant United States Attorney + +cc: Special Agent Nesbit( Kuyrkendall, F.B.I. + +![](_page_12_Picture_1.jpeg) + +U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation FBI - West Palm Beath Suite 500 505 South Fleeter Drive West Palm Beath, Fl. 33401 Phone: (581) 833-7517 Fax (561) 833-7970 + +January 10. 2008 + +Re: Case Number: + +Dear COMe + +This case Is current& under Investigation. This can be a lengthy process and we request your Continued patience while we conduct a thorough Investigation. + +As a alma victim, you have the following rights under 18 United states Code § 3771: (1) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused; (2) The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any pubno court proceeding, or any parole proceeding, Involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused; (3) The right not to be excluded from any such public court proceeding, unless thecourt, after receiving clear and convincing evidence, determines that testimony by the victim would be materially altered if the victim heard other testimony at that proceeding; (4) The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court Involving release, Plea, sentencing, or any parole proceeding; (5) The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government In the case; (6) The right to fug and timely restitution as provided in law: (7) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay; (I) The right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy. + +We Ml make our best efforts to ensure you art accorded the rights described. Most of these rights pertain to events occurring alter the arrest or indictment of an Individual for the crime, and It will become the responsibility of the prosecuting Untied States Attorney's Office to ensure you are accorded those rights. You may also seek the advice of a private attorney with respect to these rights. + +The Victim Notification System (VNS) is designed to provide you with direct information regarding the case es it proceeds through the criminal justice system. You may obtain current Information about this matter on the Internet el WWW.Notty.USGO,J.GOV or from the VNS Call Center at 1465-00J-4YOU (1-866-365- 4968) (TDD/TTY: 1.866.2284619) (International: 1.502.213-2767). In addition, you may use the Can Center or Internet to update your contact information andlor change your decision about participation in the notification program. If you update your Information to include a current email address, VNS will send information to that address. You wig need the following Victim Identification Number (VIN) '1941737' and' Personal Identilicatbn Number (PIN) '5502' anytime you contact the Call Center and the brat time you log on to VNS on the Internet. In addition, the Bret time you access the VNS Internet site, you will be prompted to enter your last name (or business name) es currently contained in VNS. The name you should enter Is a + +![](_page_12_Picture_11.jpeg) + +If you have additional questions which involve this matter, pleese contact the office listed above. When you cal, please provide the IYe number located at the top of this letter. Please remember, your participation in the notification part of this program is voluntary. In order to continue to receive notifications. It is your responsibility to keep your contact information current. + +Sincerely. + +riA) + +TwIler worn Specialist + +![](_page_14_Picture_1.jpeg) + +U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation FBI - West Palm Beach Suite 500 505 South Fleeter Drive West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 833.7517 Fax: (581) 633-7970 + +January 10, 2006 + +James Eisenberg One Cleadake Center Ste 704 Australian South Weal Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Re: + +Dear James Eisenberg: + +You have requested to teceNe notifications for TIMablap + +This case is oJrrentiy under Investigation. This can be a lengthy process and we request your continued patience while we conduct a thorough investigation. + +Asa crime victim, you have the following rights under 18 United States Code § 3771: (1) The right to be reasonably protected from the.accused; (2) The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding, or any parole proceeding, Involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused; (3) The right not to be excluded from any auch public court proceeding. unless the court. after • receiving clear and convincing evidence, determines that testimony by the victim would be materially altered if the victim heard other testimony at that proceeding; (4) The right to be reasonably heard at arty public proceeding In the district court Involving release, plea, sentencing. or any parole proceeding; (5) The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government in the case; (6) The right to full and timely restitution as provided In law; (7) The right to proceedings free horn unreasonable delay: (8) The right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy. + +We will make our best efforts to ensure you are accorded the rights deathbed. Most of these rights pertain to events atoning after the arrest or Indictment of an individual for the time, and It will become the responslaity of the prosecuting United States Attorney's Office to ensure you are accorded those rights. You may oleo seek the advice of a private attorney with respect to these rights. + +The Victim NotileatiOn System (VNS) is designed to provide you wIth direct Information regarding the case as nproceeds through the criminal justice system. You may obtain current Information about this matter on the Internet at WWw.NotIty.USDO.LGOv or from the VNS Call Center al 1.8811-00J.4YOU (1-866-385- 4968) (TDO/TTY: 1-668-228-4619) (international 1-502-213-2767). In addition, you may use the Cal Center or Internet to update your contact information and/or change your decision about participation in the notification program, If you update your information to Include acurrent email address. VNS will send information to that address. You MI need the following Victim Identification Number WIN) '1941741' and Personal Identification Number (PIN) 7760' anytime you contact the Call Center and the first time you log on to -VNS ootheintemetHe addition, the first time you access th&VNS.Intemet the, you willte prompted:to enter your lest name (or business name) as currently contained in VNS. The name you should enter is Eisenberg. + +![](_page_14_Picture_12.jpeg) + +If you have additional questions which Involve this matter, please contact the office listed above. When You call, please provide the file number located at the top of this letter. Please remember, your participation in the notlicatlon part of this program Is voluntary. In order to continue to receive notifications. It is your rasporultaltty to keep your contact Information current. + +Sincerely. + +1; le.A. + +Tvellec Victim pa elist + +![](_page_16_Picture_736.jpeg) + +U.S. Department of Justice +Federal Bureau of Investigation +FBI - West Palm Beach +Suite 500 +505 South Flagler Drive +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 833-7517 +Fax: (561) 833-7970 + +![](_page_16_Picture_738.jpeg) + +May 30, 2008 + +SECRET +[REDACTED] + +Re: [REDACTED] + +Dear SA [REDACTED] + +Your name was referred to the FBI's Victim Assistance Program as being a possible victim of a federal crime. We appreciate your assistance and cooperation while we are investigating this case. We would like to make you aware of the victim services that may be available to you and to answer any questions you may have regarding the criminal justice process throughout the investigation. Our program is part of the FBI's effort to ensure the victims are treated with respect and are provided information about their rights under federal law. These rights include notification of the status of the case. The enclosed brochures provide information about the FBI's Victim Assistance Program, resources and instructions for accessing the Victim Notification System (VNS). VNS is designed to provide you with information regarding the status of your case. + +This case is currently under investigation. This can be a lengthy process and we request your continued patience while we conduct a thorough investigation. + +As a crime victim, you have the following rights under 18 United States Code § 3771: (1) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused; (2) The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding, or any parole proceeding, involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused; (3) The right not to be excluded from any such public court proceeding, unless the court, after receiving clear and convincing evidence, determines that testimony by the victim would be materially altered if the victim heard other testimony at that proceeding; (4) The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving release, plea, sentencing, or any parole proceeding; (5) The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government in the case; (6) The right to full and timely restitution as provided in law; (7) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay; (8) The right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy. + +We will make our best efforts to ensure you are accorded the rights described. Most of these rights pertain to events occurring after the arrest or indictment of an individual for the crime, and it will become the responsibility of the prosecuting United States Attorney's Office to ensure you are accorded those rights. You may also seek the advice of a private attorney with respect to these rights. + +The Victim Notification System (VNS) is designed to provide you with direct information regarding the case as it proceeds through the criminal justice system. You may obtain current information about this matter on the Internet at WWW.Notify.USDOJ.GOV or from the VNS Call Center at 1-866-DOJ-4YOU (1-866-365-4968) (TDD/TTY: 1-866-228-4619) (International: 1-502-213-2767). In addition, you may use the Call Center or Internet to update your contact information and/or change your decision about participation in the notification program. If you update your information to include a current email address, VNS will send information to that address. You will need the following Victim Identification Number (VIN) '2074381' and Personal Identification Number (PIN) '1815' anytime you contact the Call Center and the first time you log on to VNS on the Internet. In addition, the first time you access the VNS Internet site, you will be prompted to enter your last name (or business name) as currently contained in VNS. The name you should enter is [REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +II you have additional questions which Involve this matter, please canted the office listed above. When you call, please provide the rte number located at the lop of this letter. Please remember, your participation in the notification pan of this program le voluntary. In order to continue to receive noldicaliOnS, It is your responsibility to keep your contact information current. + +• + +Sincerely, + +4); Le-A. Cr . + +Twle Victimilecalist + +![](_page_18_Picture_1.jpeg) + +U.S. Department of Justice • + +United States Attorney Southern District of Florida + +![](_page_18_Picture_4.jpeg) + +500 South Australian Ave.. Suite 400 West Palm Beailt FL 33401 (561)8204711 Facsimile: (561) 820-8777 + +July 9, 2008 + +# VIA FACSIMILE + +Brad l=1 Esq. The Law Offices of Brad !M.& Associates, LLC 2028 1=1Street, Suite 202 Hollywood, Florida 33020. + +> Re: Jeffrey a NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM + +Dear Mr. a + +By virtue of this letter, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida asks that you provide the following notice to your client, Cant WIM. + +On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein) entered a plea of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution) and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009454A)CaMB and 2008-cf-009381AXXXMB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be followed by an additional six months' imprisonment, followed by twelve months of Community Control 1, with conditions of community confinement imposed by the Court. + +In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to defeiriede-farproie-diftiiiii-ii-FfaVOrtif this state- plea- and sentence; subject to certain conditions. + +One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following: + +"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United StatesCode, Section 2255, will have the same rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein + +BRAD [REDACTED] ESQ. +NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM C [REDACTED] W [REDACTED] +JULY 9, 2008 +PAGE 2 OF 2 + +had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein. Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less." + +Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that your client, C [REDACTED] W [REDACTED] is an individual whom the United States was prepared to name as a victim of an enumerated offense. + +Should your client decide to file a claim against Jeffrey Epstein, his attorney, Jack Goldberger, asks that you contact him at Atterbury Goldberger and Weiss, 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401, (561) 659-8300. + +Please understand that neither the U.S. Attorney's Office nor the Federal Bureau of Investigation can take part in or otherwise assist in civil litigation; however, if you do file a claim under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 and Mr. Epstein denies that your client is a victim of an enumerated offense, please provide notice of that denial to the undersigned. + +Please thank your client for all of her assistance during the course of this examination and express the heartfelt regards of myself and Special Agents Kuyrkendall and Richards for the health and well-being of Ms. W [REDACTED] + +R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA +UNITED STATES ATTORNEY + +![]()cc: Jack Goldberger, Esq. + +![](_page_20_Picture_1.jpeg) + +U.S. Department of Justice + +United States Attorney Southern District of Florida + +| ADMIRAL C | | +|-------------------------------|--| +| GOVERNMENT
EXHIBIT
| | +| CASE | | +| NO. 08-80736-CV-MARRA | | +| EXHIBIT | | +| NO. 7 | | + +500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (56/) 820-8711 Facsimile: (561) 820-8777 + +July 9, 2008 + +VIA FACSIMILE + +Brad Esq. + +The Law Offices of Brad Associates, LLC + +2028a Street, Suite 202 . + +Hollywood, Florida 33020. + +Re: Jeffrey E IS NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM + +Dear Mr. + +By virtue of this letter, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida asks that you provide the following notice to your client, a WIMP + +On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein) entered a plea of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution) and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009454AXXXMB and 2008-cf-009381AXXXMB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be followed by an additional six months' imprisonment, followed by twelve months of Community Control I, with conditions of community confinement imposed by the Court. + +In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to .defer\_federal\_prosecution\_in\_favor\_ofithis..state plea and sentence; subject to certain conditions. + +One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following: + +"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein + +Esp. + +NOTIFICATION OF IDENFIFIED VICTIM S + +JULY 9, 2008 + +PAGE 2 OF 2 + +had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein. Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less." + +Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that your client, Sa. P is an individual whom the United States was prepared to name as a victim of an enumerated offense. + +Should your client decide to file a claim against Jeffrey Epstein, his attorney, Jack Goldberger, asks that you contact him at Atterbury Goldberger and Weiss, 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401, (561) 659-8300. + +Please understand that neither the U.S. Attorney's Office nor the Federal Bureau of Investigation can take part in or otherwise assist in civil litigation; however, if you do file a claim under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 and Mr. Epstein denies that your client is a victim of an enumerated offense, please provide notice of that denial to the undersigned. + +Please thank your client for all of her assistance during the course of this examination and express the heartfelt regards of myself and Special Agents Kuyrkendall and Richards for the health and well-being of Ms. lap + +> R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY + +By: + +cc: Jack Goldberger, Esq. + +A. VILLAFARA ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/EFTA02743672.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/EFTA02743672.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4cfac416e3bf1b000c25db9a567134a845624dc5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/EFTA02743672.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1039 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 22, + "chars": 35595, + "elapsed_seconds": 17.13, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_8_Picture_2.jpeg", + "_page_8_Picture_5.jpeg", + "_page_10_Picture_2.jpeg", + "_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg", + "_page_12_Picture_1.jpeg", + "_page_12_Picture_11.jpeg", + "_page_14_Picture_1.jpeg", + "_page_14_Picture_12.jpeg", + "_page_16_Picture_736.jpeg", + "_page_16_Picture_738.jpeg", + "_page_18_Picture_1.jpeg", + "_page_18_Picture_4.jpeg", + "_page_20_Picture_1.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.71, + 317.2745056152344 + ], + [ + 387.891845703125, + 317.2745056152344 + ], + [ + 387.891845703125, + 358.4425964355469 + ], + [ + 189.71, + 358.4425964355469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 173.85, + 127.98000000000002 + ], + [ + 382.8636169433594, + 127.98000000000002 + ], + [ + 382.8636169433594, + 158.76 + ], + [ + 173.85, + 158.76 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DECLARATION OF A. VILLAFARA \nIN SUPPORT OF UNITED STATES' RESPONSE \nTO VICTIM'S EMERGENCY PETITION FOR ENFORCEMENT \nOF CRIME VICTIM RIGHTS ACT, 18 U.S.C.\u00a7 3771", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.31000000000003, + 314.28000000000003 + ], + [ + 455.0398254394531, + 314.28000000000003 + ], + [ + 455.0398254394531, + 375.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 104.31000000000003, + 375.03000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEL/VERY BY HAND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 57.95, + 221.13000000000002 + ], + [ + 164.9286651611328, + 221.13000000000002 + ], + [ + 164.9286651611328, + 234.09 + ], + [ + 57.95, + 234.09 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "U.S. Department of Justice", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 279.38000000000005, + 52.650000000000006 + ], + [ + 406.7337646484375, + 52.650000000000006 + ], + [ + 406.7337646484375, + 66.77288818359375 + ], + [ + 279.38000000000005, + 66.77288818359375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "U.S. Department of Justice", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 275.72, + 46.17 + ], + [ + 401.04266357421875, + 46.17 + ], + [ + 401.04266357421875, + 60.46435546875 + ], + [ + 275.72, + 60.46435546875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DELIVERY BY HAND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 54.900000000000006, + 213.84 + ], + [ + 160.76483154296875, + 213.84 + ], + [ + 160.76483154296875, + 226.245849609375 + ], + [ + 54.900000000000006, + 226.245849609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VIA FACSIMILE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 57.95, + 243.0 + ], + [ + 150.1639862060547, + 243.0 + ], + [ + 150.1639862060547, + 259.8480224609375 + ], + [ + 57.95, + 259.8480224609375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 5 + ], + [ + "Line", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 262 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 358 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 331 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 304 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 321 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 136 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 401 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 243 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 406 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 234 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 542 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 101 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 556 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 106 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 667 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 113 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 88 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 92 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "Form", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 76 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743672" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_10_Picture_2.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_10_Picture_2.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..27d8f4e51ca9872ca26b5f9e8cf860644a142766 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_10_Picture_2.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d672bd58306da67cf01e1c1c91b40ac620ab2b2f0081b54c174e60e4b8753c92 +size 9452 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..733e7a91e80c2b6bd77b8e5ec0fa3cc50fe8187d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:efe6c4f02a86aa7267ec08ac0048e50df9ce53766d38f28ca1b77e411da91217 +size 19737 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_12_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_12_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ec370331225e367a2bde137cb5e642cd9efe2a71 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_12_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e5f1826cc926166c6f551681e55c04c0ad8841b7d0a2faa2f6b2df788b8311cf +size 5137 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_12_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_12_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ff9f0bfce17b63a81f7ade915f0180d290b0c700 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_12_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e9ad8362a16d7750b46ce282a9cbf74e6f9995930e1a90cd2512c43a30406170 +size 22093 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_14_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_14_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..714d6dc47be9b010fef074aebc0d38004e4c1cde --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_14_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f401f9ce5678382c988fa42314afaa70b3b19d7d8d9b5f834f740259d23a895b +size 5280 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_14_Picture_12.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_14_Picture_12.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..59dac967faa0a3f34ceb9ede46608e667f1204e3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_14_Picture_12.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8e3cf8973e9c571b4924301a6eae43e284d07945188780af7cc2b649b6879913 +size 21267 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_16_Picture_736.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_16_Picture_736.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..31d3af5f069af69cc003e55b02e4a577f3562031 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_16_Picture_736.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f0890adaef8d5adccd72f0a38de0974b74c92b5c89904e13e92b80afe95e9284 +size 5356 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_16_Picture_738.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_16_Picture_738.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..88bf7e042f8daddc204eff1dfeb31c5338e8c250 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_16_Picture_738.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:135990da7d6af57755a688016b6cd59419a23094fde521b921afe21b0b64e826 +size 21353 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_18_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_18_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..69326e54e0fb1015c8c98b7eb739f6ec81e119c0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_18_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:9ce3a38317e86211aa30eee195f133e7ae53d00e2a9abeac5eac7e7fa7251d21 +size 10023 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_18_Picture_4.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_18_Picture_4.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5fc78ecaf248c7de10a2bda095107a3099a50f20 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_18_Picture_4.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:223d593bb956f55ff304804ae5f8849aa32de18fcf1ce2bb57dde780bbdcb032 +size 12217 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_20_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_20_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1a704d86a83a966b2d8b3f6f6c9ff69352c39228 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_20_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:58fc8cffb301de500d5e5b23a315f7df99dc381e8a4c8b3e4d1863160c0cd976 +size 10252 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_8_Picture_2.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_8_Picture_2.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..da0d2fc191fbe467801f3af6242e158689230311 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_8_Picture_2.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8c4b7676a9f4bba4a0aec97cbb8c49af74fe96470e9bdb896ae032ad1f9f6fca +size 9752 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_8_Picture_5.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_8_Picture_5.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4abc444925d4a1d0817acb6b8f954b16736dbb60 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743672/_page_8_Picture_5.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1cc87571d07ee35c71261b2991a3218d19a652864643f18b54dd1887602c7af2 +size 19891 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743694/EFTA02743694.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743694/EFTA02743694.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7f7e33d7e3bc0119703fabc361c00c7c26823795 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743694/EFTA02743694.md @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@ +# EXHIBIT B + +18 U.S.C.A. § 1595 Page 1 + +![](_page_1_Picture_4.jpeg) + +Effective: December 19, 2003 + +# United States Code Annotated Currentness + +Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure (Refs & Annos) + +rig Part I. Crimes (Refs & Annos) + +Chapter 77. Peonage, Slavery, and Trafficking in Persons (Refs & Annos) + +§ 1595. Civil remedy + +(a) An individual who is a victim of a violation of section 1589, 1590, or 1591 of this chapter may bring a civil action against the perpetrator in an appropriate district court of the United States and may recover damages and reasonable attorneys fees. + +(bX1) Any civil action filed under this section shall be stayed during the pendency of any criminal action arising out of the same occurrence in which the claimant is the victim. + +(2) In this subsection, a "criminal action" includes investigation and prosecution and is. pending until final adjudication in the trial court. + +#### CREDIT(S) + +(Added Pub.L. 108-193, § 4(aX4XA), Dec. 19, 2003, 117 Stat. 2878.) + +# HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES + +### Revision Notes and Legislative Reports + +2003 Acts. House Report No. 108-264(Parts I and II), see 2003 U.S. Code Cong. and Adm. News, p. 2408. + +## LIBRARY REFERENCES + +# American Digest System + +Action C.:=. 5. + +Torts €=:, 1. + +Key Number System Topic Nos. 13, 379. + +#### RESEARCH REFERENCES + +#### Encyclopedias + +Am. Jur. 2d Involuntary Servitude and Peonage § 12, Federal Statutes Outlawing Slave Trade; Actions on Vessels in Slave Trade. + +Am. Jur. 2d Involuntary Servitude and Peonage § 20, Remedies. + +is.> 2008 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. + +18 U.S.C.A. § 1595, 18 USCA § 1595 + +Current through P.L. 110.282 (excluding P.L. 110-234, 110-246, and 110-275) approved 7-23.08 + +Copr. (C) 2008 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works + +END OF DOCUMENT + +O 2008 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743694/EFTA02743694.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743694/EFTA02743694.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7321bffddcdda62b73097ad4db28e0f692bbd137 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743694/EFTA02743694.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,344 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743694.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 1884, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.47, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_1_Picture_4.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT B", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 193.37, + 316.4031066894531 + ], + [ + 391.711669921875, + 316.4031066894531 + ], + [ + 391.711669921875, + 358.1890869140625 + ], + [ + 193.37, + 358.1890869140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "United States Code Annotated Currentness", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 65.27000000000001, + 162.0 + ], + [ + 239.28929138183594, + 162.0 + ], + [ + 239.28929138183594, + 177.339599609375 + ], + [ + 65.27000000000001, + 177.339599609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CREDIT(S)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 64.05, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 116.34766387939453, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 116.34766387939453, + 379.0895690917969 + ], + [ + 64.05, + 379.0895690917969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 64.05, + 409.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 244.7783966064453, + 409.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 244.7783966064453, + 424.0895690917969 + ], + [ + 64.05, + 424.0895690917969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Revision Notes and Legislative Reports", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 64.05, + 431.73 + ], + [ + 223.5392608642578, + 431.73 + ], + [ + 223.5392608642578, + 446.5895690917969 + ], + [ + 64.05, + 446.5895690917969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "LIBRARY REFERENCES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 62.83, + 476.28 + ], + [ + 174.26669311523438, + 476.28 + ], + [ + 174.26669311523438, + 491.2195739746094 + ], + [ + 62.83, + 491.2195739746094 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "American Digest System", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 62.83, + 498.96 + ], + [ + 164.76138305664062, + 498.96 + ], + [ + 164.76138305664062, + 514.0895690917969 + ], + [ + 62.83, + 514.0895690917969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "RESEARCH REFERENCES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 62.83, + 566.1899999999999 + ], + [ + 181.38722229003906, + 566.1899999999999 + ], + [ + 181.38722229003906, + 580.8395690917969 + ], + [ + 62.83, + 580.8395690917969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Encyclopedias", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 62.83, + 588.87 + ], + [ + 123.76834869384766, + 588.87 + ], + [ + 123.76834869384766, + 602.9595642089844 + ], + [ + 62.83, + 602.9595642089844 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 5 + ], + [ + "Line", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743694" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743694/_page_1_Picture_4.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743694/_page_1_Picture_4.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f673d8e6e9fb23b3838566e09dfa0cc79b6a984c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743694/_page_1_Picture_4.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3c06aae003d0c4d8f83cb0b76c43ea7cbce0e54afbba02980e9a217691788ffd +size 872 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743697/EFTA02743697.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743697/EFTA02743697.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c07dbabcdd24baa1a411010c4e7679e33c5398f5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743697/EFTA02743697.md @@ -0,0 +1,76 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-KAM-LRJ + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-80232-CIV-KAM-LRJ + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-80380-CIV-KAM-LRJ + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-80381-CIV-KAM-LRJ + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +## DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF FILING EXHIBITS + +Defendant Jeffrey Epstein hereby files the following two exhibits to his Reply in Suppo►t **of Motion to Stay, filed under seal on July 28, 2008:** + +- **A. Exhibit "A" is the July 9, 2008 Declaration of Assistant United States Attorney Ann** + - **C. Villafana, previously filed by the United States in** In re: Jane Doe, Case No. 08- 80736-CIV-Marrai (S.D. Ha.) (DE 14). + +![](_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg) + +B. Exhibit "B" is a copy of Title 18, United States Code, section 1595. + +These exhibits were inadvertently omitted from the reply memorandum. + +Respectfully submitted, + +TEN, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 Tel: 305 442 1101 Fax: 305 442 6744 + +By: /s/ Michael R. Tein GUY A. Fla. Bar No. 623740 + +> MICHAEL R. TEIN Fla. Bar No. 993522 tein@lewistein.com + +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel. 561 659 8300 Fax. 561 835 8691 + +By: Jack A. Goldberger Ha. Bar No. 262013 jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 29, 2007, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record on the attached service list by transmission of Notice of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. + +/s/ Michael R. Tein + +2 + +## SERVICE LIST + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. + +Stuart S. Mermelstein. Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Herman & Mennelstein, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +![](_page_2_Picture_9.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743697/EFTA02743697.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743697/EFTA02743697.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..18ccfed757e7154f589db7ce7fee16a7fac0aab1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743697/EFTA02743697.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,250 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743697.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2006, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.27, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_2_Picture_9.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF FILING EXHIBITS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 171.972, + 526.5 + ], + [ + 440.56756591796875, + 526.5 + ], + [ + 440.56756591796875, + 542.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 171.972, + 542.2330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 512.73 + ], + [ + 388.94989013671875, + 512.73 + ], + [ + 388.94989013671875, + 527.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 527.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.712, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 351.0904846191406, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 351.0904846191406, + 86.103515625 + ], + [ + 260.712, + 86.103515625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743697" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743697/_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743697/_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fcd2eee8ef6208978f7b329fe0441107e66cdc03 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743697/_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:86957ca53fe277d50793502498d9d398895e543c4ff4be100eb11a4aeb29a117 +size 2208 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743697/_page_2_Picture_9.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743697/_page_2_Picture_9.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cf44c3b6cce9f234c6b354457d4c90a301df7f6d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743697/_page_2_Picture_9.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:304646eb332a7fd9261d34e554fb9afcd07439cd3597813a21554fc44af62113 +size 2553 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743700/EFTA02743700.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743700/EFTA02743700.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..69412c5054b56dd340dfe09a53cb3a28cd9dd4cd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743700/EFTA02743700.md @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +CASE NO.: 08-80119-CI V-ICAM-LRJ + +CASE NO.: 08-80232-CIV-KAM-LRJ + +CASE NO.: 08-80380-CIV-KAM-LRJ + +CASE NO.: 08-80381-CIV-KAM-LRJ + +## WAIVER OF SERVICE + +Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d) and in response to this Court's Orders entered July 25, 2008, defendant Jeffrey Epstein hereby waives formal service of a summons and complaint and will accept delivery by mail or by hand at the below-listed address of his counsel, Tein, P.L. + +![](_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg) + +Respectfully submitted, + +TEIN, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 Tel: 305 442 1101 Fax: 305 442 6744 + +By: Michael R. GUY A. Fla. Bar No. 623740 MICHAEL R. TEIN Ha. Bar No. 993522 tein@lewistein.com + +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel. 561 659 8300 Fax. 561 835 8691 + +By: Jack A. Goldberger Ha. Bar No. 262013 jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 30, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record listed below via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Fax: 305 931 0877 + +> /s/ Michael R. Tein Michael R. Tein + +![](_page_2_Picture_6.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743700/EFTA02743700.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743700/EFTA02743700.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6f4aae1e600264a22da42a87ff5e10f60dda165e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743700/EFTA02743700.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743700.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 1727, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.24, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_2_Picture_6.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 406.3231201171875, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 406.3231201171875, + 99.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 99.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "WAIVER OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 240.516, + 512.73 + ], + [ + 373.0911560058594, + 512.73 + ], + [ + 373.0911560058594, + 527.6835327148438 + ], + [ + 240.516, + 527.6835327148438 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.94989013671875, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.94989013671875, + 112.10302734375 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 112.10302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743700" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743700/_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743700/_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1ad556c3ad3d7536ac397dd517ad3c1b1add93d8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743700/_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3e6c922931949c456877adfd672eaaa6dd522525cba20d1c420debf202238387 +size 2276 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743700/_page_2_Picture_6.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743700/_page_2_Picture_6.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d27ad9904ccc1acf8e25778293597c73c2150c42 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743700/_page_2_Picture_6.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8cc8e5c6dc88ff215671b793568c39542027479412db825e86bfcfc639d2aa10 +size 2376 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743703/EFTA02743703.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743703/EFTA02743703.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c26de55bc61402dcbbdd5bc81da790915c1221a5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743703/EFTA02743703.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STAY + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Stay (DE 12), filed June 20, 2008. The motion is now fully briefed and is ripe for review. The Court has carefully considered the motion and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Defendant") seeks a stay of this civil action under a federal statute which reads, in pertinent part, as follows: + +> If, at any time that a cause of action for recovery of compensation for damage or injury to the person of a child exists, a criminal action is pending which arises out of the same occurrence and in which the child is the victim, the civil action shall be stayed until the end of all phases of the criminal action and any mention of the civil action during the criminal proceeding is prohibited. As used in this subsection, a criminal action is pending until its final adjudication in the trial court. + +18 U.S.C. § 3509 (k). In his motion, Defendant cites a state case, Florida v. Epstein, No. 2006 + +CF 09454AXX (Fla. Cir. Ct. 2008)' and a federal case, In re Grand Jury, No. FGJ 07-103(WPB) (S.D. Fla.), that arise out of the same occurrences and are pending and thus require a stay of this civil case. The federal "case," according to Defendant, involves a "deferred-prosecution" agreement whereby the U.S. Attorney agreed to suspend its investigation of Defendant while "retaining the right to reactivate the grand jury." (DE 24.) Defendant essentially reasons, because the U.S. Attorney could bring criminal charges against Defendant, that a criminal action is "pending." The Court rejects this definition of a "pending criminal action." + +When interpreting the text of a statute, the Court begins with the plain meaning of the text. In rel=, 524 F.3d 1175, 1186 (111° Cir. 2008). If the plain meaning of a statute is clear, the Court should not deviate from that interpretation. Id. Pending is defined as "remaining undecided" and "awaiting decision." Blacks Law Dictionary (8th ed. 2004).2 Likewise, an + +'As Defendant recognizes, the state court case was "finally adjudicated" and thus no longer pending as of June 30, 2008. (See DE 12.) + +'Defendant attempts to argue that the fact that grand jury subpoenas are still "outstanding" and "not withdrawn" and that the grand jury will not be dismissed until Defendant completes his obligations under the state plea agreement means that a "criminal action" is "pending." (Def. Reply 4.) Defendant misunderstands the purpose of a grand jury. A grand jury, as Blackstone writes, is composed of citizens who "inquire, upon their oaths, whether there be sufficient cause to call upon the party to answer" the charge of criminal activity. Beavers v. Henkel, 194 U.S. 73, 84 (1904) (quoting William Blackstone, 4 Commentaries \*303). The grand jury's sole purpose is to inquire into whether there is probable cause to bring an individual before a tribunal to determine his guilt or innocence of an alleged crime. Id. The grand jury is simply an investigative body. See U.S. v. Aired, 144, F.3d 1405, 1413 (11th Cir. 1998). A "criminal action" is not instigated by the calling of a grand jury, because a grand jury is convened "to determine whether a crime has been committed and whether criminal proceedings should be instituted against any person." U.S. v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 344 (1974). An "action" is commenced against a person after the grand jury actually finds probable cause to make an individual answer specific charges and renders a bill of indictment against that individual. Until a grand jury's investigation is complete and there has been a determination by a lawful authority that probable cause exists, there can be no criminal action.

"action" is defined as a "criminal judicial proceeding." Id. Because the U.S. Attorney has not filed an indictment or an information against Defendant, the Court fails to see how there is an undecided judicial proceeding in federal court against Defendant.

Defendant argues that this statute should be read to include the definition of "criminal action" used in 18 U.S.C. § 1595(bX2), which reads as follows: "In this subsection, a `criminal action' includes investigation and prosecution and is pending until final adjudication in the trial court." Defendant argues that "Congress specifically intended that the term 'criminal action' would be applied extremely broadly" under § 1595, so Congress "took pains to ensure that courts would give it the broadest possible construction" and defined "criminal action" as including investigatory stages. (Def. Reply 4.) Defendants argue that the Court should borrow this definition.

The Court disagrees. The Court believes that Congress's inclusion of this broader definition under § 1595 evinces Congressional intent to depart from the normal meaning of the term "criminal action."3 This addition to the text suggests that Congress knows the plain meaning of the term "criminal action" and that Congress decided, under § 1595, that the definition of "criminal action" should be broader. In contrast, Congress could have made such an addition to § 3509 had it intended the mandatory stay provision to apply to pre-indictment investigations, but it did not. In other words, by not broadening the definition of "criminal action" § 3509, Congress intended that the term should only have its ordinary meaning: that an indictment or information has been filed naming a specific defendant. Instead, it seems clear that

'In fact, Congress made this intent clear by stating that this broader definition of a "criminal action" applied only "in this subsection."

Congress intended that these two statutory provisions should each have a different scope. Defendant's argument of statutory construction fails.

The single case cited by Defendant in support of his motion is not on point. In Doe I v. Francis, No. 5:03CV260/MCR/WCS, 2005 WL 517847 (N.D. Fla. Feb. 10, 2005), the stay was entered because criminal charges had been filed against the defendant in a state court several months earlier (i.e., the defendants had been indicted by the state attorney). See Memorandum in Support of Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Outcome of Parallel Criminal Proceedings at 3, Doe I v. Francis, No. 5:03CV260/MCR/WCS (N.D. Fla. Dec. 2, 2003). The Court agrees with Defendant that a stay under § 3509(k) is mandatory when a criminal action is pending; the Court simply disagrees that the "deferred-prosecution agreement" constitutes a pending criminal action.

The Court also does not believe a discretionary stay is warranted. Defendant did not seek this relief in his motion; including such a request in the reply brief is inappropriate. Further, the Court sees no reason to delay this litigation for the next thirty-three months. After all, Defendant is in control of his own destiny — it is up to him (and him alone) whether the plea agreement reached with the State of Florida is breached. If Defendant does not breach the agreement, then he should have no concerns regarding his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The fact that the U.S. Attorney (or other law enforcement officials) may object to some discovery in these civil cases is not, in an of itself, a reason to stay the civil action. Any such issues shall be resolved as they arise in the course of this litigation.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

3. Plaintiff's Motion for an Extension of Time to File Response (DE 18) is GRANTED NUNC

PRO TUNC.

DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County,

Florida, this 41h day of August, 2008.

/en

KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge

Copies furnished to: all counsel of record

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743703/EFTA02743703.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743703/EFTA02743703.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9f7b9feb4a629fa2198ba2195f8408145cad7d50 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743703/EFTA02743703.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,265 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743703.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 8723, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.03, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STAY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 196.452, + 325.62 + ], + [ + 415.4923095703125, + 325.62 + ], + [ + 415.4923095703125, + 341.60302734375 + ], + [ + 196.452, + 341.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 90 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743703" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743708/EFTA02743708.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743708/EFTA02743708.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..16e1971cba90079280f1d736f0bbb1b0483c1c18 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743708/EFTA02743708.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to File Under Seal, filed July 28, 2008. Defendant seeks to file his reply to his Motion to Stay under seal.' The Court has carefully considered the motion and the record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +As the Court has previously explained to the parties, the Local Rules for the Southern District of Florida state that "proceedings in the United States District Court are public and Court filings are matters of public record." S.D. Fla. L.R. 5.4(A). It is well settled that the media and the public in general possess a common-law right to inspect and copy judicial records. See Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978). "The right to inspect and copy records is not absolute, however. As with other forms of access, it may interfere with the administration of justice and hence may have to be curtailed." v. Graddick, 696 F.2d + +'The parties are reminded that all documents filed conventionally (including those filed under seal) must be filed with the Clerk's Office in West Palm Beach, Florida. + +796, 803 (11th Cir.1983). This right of access creates a presumption in favor of openness of court records, which "must be balanced against any competing interest advanced." United States v. Noriega, 752 F. Supp. 1037, 1040 (S.D. Fla.1990). For example, courts may look to see whether the records sought are for illegitimate purposes. 696 F.2d at 803. Likewise, the Court may consider whether "the press has already been permitted substantial access to the contents of the records." Id. + +In his motion to seal, Defendant states that he seeks to file this document under seal "to comply with the confidentiality clause" in the agreement between Defendant and the U.S. Attorney cited in his brief. (Del. Mot. 2.) The Court is familiar with the U.S. Attorney's objections to unsealing any part of the agreement, see In re: Jane Doe, No. 08-80736-C1V (S.D. Fla. July 11, 2008). However, as the Court has previously held, the U.S. Attorney's objections do not outweigh the public interest in having access to court records. Further, the details of the agreement contained in Defendant's Reply brief have, in large part, already been unsealed and released to the public. The Court finds no justification to keep these documents under seal. + +Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion to File Under Seal is DENIED. The Clerk shall UNSEAL docket entries 29 and 30 and make them available for public inspection through CM/ECF at the earliest possible time. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 4'h day of August, 2008. + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743708/EFTA02743708.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743708/EFTA02743708.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..99361fdfc22bdb7f9f78b99dba0792505578c3f3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743708/EFTA02743708.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743708.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2970, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.79, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 415.5150451660156, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 415.5150451660156, + 313.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 313.18353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743708" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743710/EFTA02743710.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743710/EFTA02743710.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7837beb4ec980dc4e919a8af3b32a7212a2dc97b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743710/EFTA02743710.md @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## STIPULATION FOR ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE OF PROCESS AND AGREED DATE FOR DEFENDANT'S RESPONSES TO COMPLAINTS + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe 2, Jane Doe 3, Jane Doe 4 and Jane Doe 5, and Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, hereby enter into this Stipulation for Acceptance of Service of Process and Agreed Date for Responses to Complaints, as follows: + +1. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein waives formal service of process under Fed.R.Civ.P. 4, and hereby accepts service of process in each of these cases through service on his attorney, Michael Tein, Esq. It is stipulated, agreed and acknowledged that the Summons and Complaint (DE 1) in each of the above-referenced cases was duly served on Michael Tein, Esq. on August 5, 2008. + +2. It is stipulated and agreed that Defendant Jeffrey Epstein shall have thirty (30) days from the date of service, until September 4, 2008, to serve an answer or otherwise respond to each of the Complaints in these cases. + +Dated: August 6, 2008. + +Respectfully submitted: + +By: /s/ Jeffrey M. Herman HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe 2-5 Jeffrey M. Herman (FL Bar No. 521647) iherman@hermanlaw.com Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@hermanlaw.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +By: /s/ Michael R. Tein TEIN, P.L. Attorneys or Defendant Epstein Gu A. FL Bar No. 623740) Michael Tein, Esq. (FL Bar No. 993522) tein@ le w istein.com 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, FL 33133 Tel: (305) 442-1101 + +and + +ATIERBURY, GOLDBERGER, et al. Attorneys for Defendant Epstein Jack A. Goldberger jagesq@bellsouth.net 250 Australian Ave. S, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743710/EFTA02743710.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743710/EFTA02743710.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..12f9bee4088236887bc4a0aecb08151522d58bc7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743710/EFTA02743710.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743710.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2155, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.12, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "STIPULATION FOR ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE OF PROCESS \nAND AGREED DATE FOR DEFENDANT'S RESPONSES TO COMPLAINTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.92, + 673.1099999999999 + ], + [ + 514.7868041992188, + 673.1099999999999 + ], + [ + 514.7868041992188, + 701.6030197143555 + ], + [ + 97.92, + 701.6030197143555 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743710" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743712/EFTA02743712.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743712/EFTA02743712.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3dc64618cd1c48c9baee7c0c80140ee0a70b7a2e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743712/EFTA02743712.md @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MAR + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +1PROPOSED1 ORDER + +Upon the parties Joint Motion to Approve Stipulation for Acceptance of Service of Process and Agreed Date for Defendant's Responses to Complaints, and good cause being shown, said Stipulation is hereby SO ORDERED. + +DONE AND ORDERED in , in Ft. Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this day of 2008. + +DISTRICT COURT JUDGE + +LAIleadingrAthl-Sup Seri' of ProcnsAoc \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743712/EFTA02743712.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743712/EFTA02743712.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7845e5b87521ae6cc8349f606ba1ae8477479a0e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743712/EFTA02743712.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743712.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 806, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.16, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743712" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743714/EFTA02743714.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743714/EFTA02743714.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0da794a56649f0f7a152b98244dfa8cc505a06e4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743714/EFTA02743714.md @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## JOINT MOTION TO APPROVE STIPULATION FOR ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE OF PROCESS AND AGREED DATE FOR DEFENDANT'S RESPONSES TO COMPLAINTS + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe 2, Jane Doe 3. Jane Doe 4 and Jane Doe 5, and Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, file this Joint Motion for Approval of Stipulation of Acceptance of Service of Process and Agreed Date for Defendant's Responses to Complaints, as follows: + +I. Plaintiffs and Defendant have entered into a Stipulation under which Defendant's counsel waives formal service of process and accepts service of process on behalf of Defendant on a date certain. The parties further agree to thirty (30) days (Le., September 4) for Defendant to file answers or otherwise respond to the Complaints. + +2. The Stipulation provides certainty regarding service of process and the response date, will move these lawsuits forward, and will avoid unnecessary costs of formal service of process on Defendant. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs and Defendant jointly respectfully request that the attached Stipulation be so ordered. + +Dated: August 6, 2008. + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: /s/ Jeffrey M. Herman HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe 2-5 Jeffrey M. Herman (FL Bar No. 521647) jherman @hermanlaw.com Stuart S. Mermelstein(FL Bar No 947245) ssm@hermanlaw.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +By: /s/ Michael R. Tein TEIN, P.L. Attorneys for Defendant Epstein Michael Tein, Esq. tein@lewistein.com 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, FL 33133 Tel: (305) 442-1101 + +and + +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER, et aL Attorneys for Defendant Epstein Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. jagesq@bellsouth.net 250 Australian Ave., S., Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743714/EFTA02743714.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743714/EFTA02743714.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7ece148990ee7e90ca644d6fa61f5503e2a738f6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743714/EFTA02743714.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743714.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2206, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.14, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JOINT MOTION TO APPROVE STIPULATION FOR \nACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE OF PROCESS AND AGREED \nDATE FOR DEFENDANT'S RESPONSES TO COMPLAINTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 139.536, + 672.3 + ], + [ + 473.1667785644531, + 672.3 + ], + [ + 473.1667785644531, + 715.8630142211914 + ], + [ + 139.536, + 715.8630142211914 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743714" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743716/EFTA02743716.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743716/EFTA02743716.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..15d45af989b46cf6a74e11a34b20be0c21d757d0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743716/EFTA02743716.md @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@ +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +VS + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +## UNITED STATES DISTRIC OURT Sealed SOUTHERN DISTRICT 0 FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-80119-C1V- M-LRJ + +JUL 2 I STEVEN Id. LARIMORE CLERK U.S. DIST CT FLA MliDI + +CASE NO.: 08-80232-CIV-KAM-LRJ + +CASE NO.: 08-80380-CIV-KAM-LRJ + +CASE NO.: 08-80381-CIV-KAM-LRJ + +FILED UNDER SEAL + +DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL + +![](_page_0_Picture_22.jpeg) + +Pursuant to Rule 5.4 of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, defendant Jeffrey Epstein hereby moves to file his reply to plaintiffs' responses to his motions for stay, as well as this motion, under seal, stating as follows: + +I. In his reply to plaintiffs' responses to his motions for stay, defendant Jeffrey Epstein refers to a confidential agreement between the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida and Jeffrey Epstein. + +2. The information contained in the confidential agreement is material to this Court's consideration of defendant's reply to plaintiffs' responses to his motions for stay. + +3. To avoid disclosure of confidential material, defendant requests leave to file his reply to plaintiffs' responses to his motions for stay, and this motion, under seal. + +4. We recognize that this Court has previously unsealed documents referring to this same agreement. We mean in no way to disregard that order, but seek merely to comply with the confidentiality clause in that agreement for this new and independent filing, in an abundance of caution, until directed otherwise by the Court. + +WHEREFORE, defendant Jeffrey Epstein respectfully requests leave to file this motion and his reply to plaintiffs' responses to his motions for stay, under seal. + +Respectfully submitted, + +TEIN, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 Tel: 305 442 1101 Fax: 305 442 6744 + +By: + +GUY A. Fla. Bar No. 623740 + +MICHAEL R. TEIN Fla. Bar No. 993522 tein@lewistein.com + +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS. P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel. 561 659 8300 Fax. 561 835 8691 + +By: Jack A. Goldberger Fla. Bar No. 262013 jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +## CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WIT!' LOCAL RULE 7.1 + +Undersigned counsel has conferred in good faith with counsel for the plaintiff. who opposes the relief requested in this motion. + +Michael R. Tein + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing document is being served this day, July 28, 2008, on counsel of record identified n the service list by U.S. Mail. + +ichael R. Tein + +## Service List + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd. Suite 2218 Miami. Florida 33160 Fax: 305 931 0877 + +![](_page_3_Picture_4.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743716/EFTA02743716.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743716/EFTA02743716.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..794ae1201b7765f73978c7b5cbf69f208ebb9983 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743716/EFTA02743716.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,280 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743716.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 2880, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.36, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_3_Picture_4.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRIC OURT Sealed \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT 0 FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.26500000000001, + 70.1015625 + ], + [ + 515.0673217773438, + 70.1015625 + ], + [ + 515.0673217773438, + 98.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 191.26500000000001, + 98.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WIT!' LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.14999999999998, + 346.68 + ], + [ + 457.5748291015625, + 346.68 + ], + [ + 457.5748291015625, + 362.2230224609375 + ], + [ + 129.14999999999998, + 362.2230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 212.17499999999998, + 525.69 + ], + [ + 374.9980773925781, + 525.69 + ], + [ + 374.9980773925781, + 540.7230224609375 + ], + [ + 212.17499999999998, + 540.7230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Service List", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 259.53, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 326.85748291015625, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 326.85748291015625, + 85.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 259.53, + 85.18353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 26 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743716" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743716/_page_0_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743716/_page_0_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8874fcde81da53f3b0fe62a217133928b4a43151 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743716/_page_0_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8796457291469b970a91e7f31323379a0a0d78b010fa37f9259c41863d446c4e +size 2244 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743716/_page_3_Picture_4.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743716/_page_3_Picture_4.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f2acb09bbc634e85a924804187cc10089de1a48b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743716/_page_3_Picture_4.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b82fe293e352d423e7c2ba21cd9802e45edba4492e8d47dd43d9cb0d45b067d1 +size 2274 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743720/EFTA02743720.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743720/EFTA02743720.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0c67410c74ec51ef199104e7d9ac08df11ca0490 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743720/EFTA02743720.md @@ -0,0 +1,218 @@ +Seated + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-ICAM-L + +![](_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg) + +CASE NO.: 08-80232-CIV-KAM-Liii + +CASE NO.: 08-80380-CIV-KAM-LRJ + +CASE NO.: 08-80381-CIV-KAM-LRJ + +FILED UNDER SEAL. + +EPSTEIN'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STAY + +This motion is filed under seal because the deferred-prosecution agreement between the United States Attorney's Office and Mr. Epstein. discussed herein, contains a confidentiality clause. A motion to seal has been filed contemporaneously. + +### The Pendine Federal Criminal Action + +In 2006, a Florida state grand jury indicted Jeffrey Epstein on allegations similar to those in the instant actions (State of Florida v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 2006 CF 09454, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit. Palm Beach County) (the "Florida Criminal Action")) Shortly thereafter, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (the "USAO") began a federal grand-jury investigation into allegations arising out of the same incidents alleged in the instant actions (Grand Jury No. 07-103 (WPB),2 United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida) (the "Federal Criminal Action"). + +In September 2007, the USAO and Mr. Epstein entered into a highly unusual and unprecedented deferred-prosecution agreement (the "Agreement"), in which the USAO agreed to defer (not dismiss or close) the Federal Criminal Action on the condition that Mr. Epstein continue to comply with numerous obligations, the first of which was pleading guilty to certain state charges in the Florida Criminal Action. The Agreement itself uses the term "deferred" (rather than "dismissed" or - closed") to describe the status of the Federal Criminal Action: + +THEREFORE, on the authority of R. Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, prosecution in this District for these offenses shall be deferred in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida, provided that Epstein abides by the following conditions and the requirements of this Agreement . . . . + +Agreement, at 2. + +By no stretch did the USAO finalize, close, complete, dismiss or abandon the Federal Criminal Action. Indeed, as the lead federal prosecutor recently explained, the USAO merely + +Since the filing of the motion to stay, Mr. Epstein has pled guilty and been sentenced in the Florida Criminal Action. See Notice Concerning Motion to Stay (7/1/08). Accordingly, the Florida Criminal Action is no longer a basis for this stay. Epstein relies exclusively on the pending Federal Criminal Action for this motion and therefore here provides additional background information relating to that action. + +At the USAO's request, we wish to clarify a minor issue regarding the form of a citation in Epstein's initial memorandum supporting his motion to stay. That memorandum cites to the Federal Criminal Action as "bui Grand Jury No. 07.103 (WPB)," rather than citing it simply as "Grand Jury No. 107-103 (WPB)." See Motion to Stay, at 2 (6/20/08). Technically, a citation to "in re Grand Jury No. 07-103 (WPB)" could be interpreted as referring to litigation arising from Epstein's motion to quash a subpoena previously issued by "Grand Jury No. 07-103 (WPB)," which subpoena, according to the terms of the deferred-prosecution agreement between Epstein and the USAO described infra at 1-3, the USAO is presently holding in abeyance. Accordingly, we hereby clarify that our citation on Page 2 of our motion to stay denoted the grand-jury investigation itself, not litigation arising from that grand-jury investigation. + +"agreed to defer federal prosecution in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida . . . ." See In re. Jane Doe, Case No. 08-80736-CIV-Marra/ (S.D. Fla.) (DE 14), Decl. of AUSA Villafana, 07/09/08, 1 5, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" (emphasis added). Under the Agreement, the USAO presently retains the continuing right to indict Mr. Epstein - - or to unseal "any" already-existing federal "charges" that may already have been handed up by the federal grand jury and sealed - - should he breach any of its provisions. Agreement, at 2. + +The period of the deferral continues until three months after Mr. Epstein completes service of his sentence in the Florida Criminal Action. id. Indeed, the final three months of the Agreement's term constitute an extended period during which the USAO expressly retains the ability to evaluate whether Epstein committed any breaches of his numerous obligations under the Agreement while he was serving his state sentence, and, if it so determines, reserves the right to indict (or unseal an existing indictment against) Mr. Epstein - - even after he has completed serving his entire state sentence. + +The Agreement further provides that upon Epstein's execution of a plea agreement in the State Criminal Case, the Federal Criminal Action "will be suspended" and all pending grand-jury subpoenas "will be held in abeyance unless and until the defendant violates any term of this agreement." Agreement, at 5 (emphasis added). The Agreement directs the USAO and Epstein to -maintain their evidence, specifically evidence requested by or directly related to the grand jury subpoenas that have been issued," and to maintain such evidence "inviolate." Id. (emphasis added). It also expressly provides that the grand-jury subpoenas continue to remain "outstanding" until "the successful completion of the terms of this agreement." Id. (emphasis added). + +Finally, the Agreement provides that the USAO's declination of prosecution for certain enumerated offenses and dismissal of any existing (sealed) charges will not occur until 90 days following the completion of his state sentence: + +If the United States Attorney should determine, based on reliable evidence, that, during the period of the Agreement, Epstein willfully violated any of the conditions of this Agreement, then the United States Attorney may, within ninety (90) days following the expiration of the term of home confinement discussed below, provide Epstein with timely notice specifying the condition(s) of the Agreement that he has violated, and shall initiate its prosecution on any offense within sixty (60) days' of [sic] giving notice of the violation. Any notice provided to Epstein pursuant to this paragraph shall be provided within 60 days of the United States learning of facts which may provide a basis for a determination of a breach of the Agreement. + +After timely fulfilling all the terms and conditions of the Agreement, no prosecution for the offenses set out on pages 1 and 2 of this Agreement, nor any other offenses that have been the subject of the joint investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the United States Attorney's Office, nor any offenses that arose from the Federal Grand Jury investigation will be instituted in this District, and the charges against Epstein, if any, will be dismissed. + +Agreement, at 2. + +Consistent with the Agreement and its position that the Federal Criminal Action continues to remain pending, the USAO recently sent letters to attorneys for people that the USAO has designated as - victims." In those letters, the USAO asked, "[1]f you do file a claim under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 and Mr. Epstein denies that your client is a victim of an enumerated offense, please provide notice of that denial to the undersigned [AUSA]." See Decl. of AUSA Villafana, Exhs. 6 & 7, as 2 (July 9, 2008). The clear implication of the USAO's request (by which the USAO appears to involve itself in the instant litigation, despite advising the recipients that it cannot "take part in or otherwise assist in civil litigation," id.), is that the USAO believes that such denial might breach the Agreement. + +Accordingly, the Federal Criminal Action remains "pending." + +#### Discussion + +### I. Section 3509(k) Applies to Investigations, Not Just Indictments. + +While there is no unsealed indicted criminal case against Mr. Epstein, the government's criminal investigation against him remains open. Section 3509(k) clearly applies to stay civil cases during the pendency, not only of indicted criminal cases, but also of yet-to-be-closed investigations. + +The term "criminal action" is not expressly defined in § 3509(k). It is defined, however, by a closely related statute. Title 18, U.S.C. § 1595 provides a civil remedy for "forced labor" and "sex trafficking" violations, but stays such actions "during the pendency of any criminal action arising out of the same occurrence in which the claimant is the victim." (A copy of § 1595 is attached hereto as Exhibit "B"). In enacting § 1595, Congress specifically intended that the term "criminal action" would be applied extremely broadly. Accordingly, Congress took pains to ensure that courts would give it the broadest possible construction and, for that reason, specified in the definition provision that "criminal action" also "includes investigation." 18 U.S.C. § 1595(b)(2). The only reported decision addressing this provision interpreted it according to its plain language. See Ara v. Khan, No. CV 07-1251, 2007 WL 1726456,'2 (E.D.N.Y. June 14, 2007) (ordering "all proceedings in this case stayed pending the conclusion of the government's criminal investigation of the defendants and of any resulting criminal prosecution") (emphasis added). + +Given that the USAO's Agreement with Epstein indicates that: + +- the grand-jury's subpoenas remain "outstanding" (Agreement, at 5); +- the subpoenas are "held in abeyance" (id.): +- the subpoenas are not "withdrawn" (W.); +- the parties must "maintain their evidence" (id.) (which would be entirely unnecessary if the investigation against Epstein were closed); +- "any" existing "charges" will not "be dismissed" until after Epstein has "timely fulfill[ed] all the terms and conditions of the [A]greement" (id. at 2); and +- "prosecution in this District . .. shall be deferred" (id.) (but not closed or dismissed). + +- - then, the only reasonable conclusion is that the Federal Criminal Action remains "pending.-3 + +The plaintiffs argue that a § 3509(k) stay would be "inconsistent with Mr. Epstein's Agreement with the U.S. Attorney" which the plaintiffs claim is reproduced in the lead + +3 The ordinary meaning of the adjective "pending" is "(r]emaining undecided; awaiting decision . . .. Black's Law Dictionary 1154 (8th ed. 2004). The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit routinely relies on Black's Law Dictionary for the definition of statutory terms, including in criminal cases. See e.g., United States v. Young. l d 1294, 1297 n.3(11th Cir. 2008) (definitions of criminal "complaint" and "indictment"); United States v. 526 F.3d 691, 705 (11th Cir. 2008) (definition of "knowingly" in criminal statute). A Westlaw search revealed that in 2008 alone, the Eleventh Circuit has already published eight opinions relying on Black's Law Dictionary for definitions. See also, IM v. Klitzkie, 281 F.3d 920, 928 (9th Cir. 2002) (relying on Black's Law Dictionary, in the context of a criminal case, for the definition of "pending" as "awaiting decision"); Swam v. Meyers, 204 F.3d 417, 421 (3d Cir. 2000) (relying on Black's Law Dictionary for the definition of "pending," expressly because "'pending' is not defined in the statute"). Any common-sense reading of the Agreement and the USAO's recent sworn construction of it, is consonant with the Federal Criminal Action's "remaining undecided" and "awaiting decision." See Unified Gov't of Athens-Clarke County v. Athens Newspapers, LLC, No. S07Gl133. \_S.E.2d 2008 WL. 2579238, '3 (Ga. June 30, 2008) (reviewing a public-records request against Georgia's "pending investigation" exception to its open-records law, and holding that "a seemingly inactive investigation which has not yet resulted in a prosecution logically "remains undecided," and is therefore -pending," until it -is concluded and the lilt closed') (emphasis added). + +prosecutor's July 10 letter to their counsel (attached to Plaintiffs' responses as Exhibit A). Apparently, on July 10, the lead prosecutor sent a letter to the plaintiffs' lawyer stating that "[ojne . . . condition to which Epstein has agreed" is that each plaintiff "will have the same rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense." See Response Memo, at 5 & Ex. A, at 1-2 (emphasis added). This argument warrants absolutely no consideration, however, since the plaintiffs have not pled any claims under 18 U.S.C. § 2255. + +## H. Section 3509(k) Applies Even After a Plaintiff Turns 18. + +Without citing to a single case, the plaintiffs argue that § 3509(k) does not apply to plaintiffs over the age of 18. An examination of the legislative history and related statutes shows that this unsupported argument must be rejected. + +The parallel stay provision in § 1595, discussed supra at 3-4, mandates, without exception, that any civil action brought under that section for violations of § 1591 (prohibiting transportation of minors for prostitution) "shall be stayed during the pendency of any criminal action arising out of the same occurrence in which the claimant is the victim." 18 U.S.C. § 1591(bX1). Whether the § 1595 plaintiff has turned 18 does not vitiate the efficacy of this mandatory stay. + +An example illustrates why the stay provided in § 3509(k) has the same broad scope as the stay provided in § 1591(b)(1). As discussed above, § 3509(k) stays any civil suit for injury to a minor, arising out of the same occurrence as apending criminal action. One type of civil suit falling within § 3509(k)'s ambit is a suit seeking redress for a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a). Section 2423(a) - - just like § 1591 - - prohibits transportation of minors for prostitution. The elements of both statutes are identical. There would simply be no legitimate basis for Congress to differentiate between the consequences attached to violating these two sections. Thus, just as Congress mandated under § 1595(bX1) that civil discovery shall be stayed when there is an ongoing federal investigation under § 1591 (even after the victim turns 18), the identical treatment should apply under § 3509(k) to civil actions brought for the identical violation of § 2423(a). + +Logic compels arule requiring continued application of the § 3509(k) stay to a putative victim who has since turned 18. Consider again the example of § 2243(a). Assume that the USAO is investigating a § 2243(a) violator with two alleged victims: one who is now 17, and one who has turned 19. Assume further that both decide to sue the alleged offender while the USAO is still in the process of conducting its criminal investigation. Why would Congress prohibit the defendant from conducting civil discovery in the 17-year-old's lawsuit, but permit him to conduct full discovery in the 19-year-old's lawsuit, including taking the depositions of both the 19- and the 17-year-old, the federal investigating agents and all the grand-jury witnesses? This could not have been Congress' intent. + +The legislative history to a statute resembling § 1595 is also instructive. When Congress enacted 18 U.S.C. § 2255, it provided a civil remedy to any "minor . . . victim" of enumerated federal sex offenses. See Child Abuse Victims' Rights Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-500, 100 Stat. 1783. § 703 (1986). In 2006, Congress amended the statute to clarify that the civil cause of action was available not just while the victim was aminor, but even after she or he turned 18. See Pub. 1. 109-248, 120 Stat. 650, § 707 (bXI XA) (amending § 2255 to permit suit by adults who were victims of enumerated federal offenses when they were minors, by deleting "Any minor who is [a victim]" and adding "Any person, who, while a minor, was [a victim]"). Meanwhile, the stay provisions of § 3509(k) remained unchanged. There is no reason to think that Congress would afford prosecutors protection for their investigations while the victims were minors, but completely eliminate those protections the moment one of the victims turned 18. + +The District Court for the Northern District of Florida confirmed this position and specifically rejected the plaintiffs' contrary argument. See Doe v. Francis, No. 5:03 CV 260, 2005 WL 950623, at "2 (N.D. Fla. 2005). The plaintiffs there argued that "the stay should be lifted due to the fact that the minor Plaintiffs have now reached the age of majority during the pendency of the state criminal case." Id. The court found this argument "unavailing . . . given the victims' minor status at the time of the events giving rise to the underlying claims." Id. (Interestingly. the arguments made by Jane Doe Nos. 2-5 in their oppositions to Epstein's motion to stay presently pending before this Court, are literally lifted° from the plaintiffs' brief submitted to, and rejected by, the Northern District of New York in Francis.) The court specifically held that "because the victims were minors at the time of the Defendants' actions alleged in both [the civil and criminal] cases, § 3509(k) applies." Id. (emphasis added). + +The United States Department of Justice has itself emphatically embraced the interpretation of § 3509(k) as applying to stay all civil actions relating to sex offenses against minors, pending the completion of a parallel criminal action, without regard to whether the plaintiff has turned 18 during her civil lawsuit: + +The subsection should stay all pending civil actions in the wake of acriminal prosecution. Notably, in the context of 18 USC § 2255 ("civil remedy for personal injuries"), all civil actions are stayed pending the completion of acriminal action. See also 18 USC § 3509(k). + +H.R. Rep. 108-264(11), 108th Cong., 1st Sess. (2003), reprinted at 2003 WL 22272907, at •16-17 ("agency view" by the Department of Justice on bill later codified at 18 U.S.C. § 1595). + +The Department specifically argued to Congress in the clearest terms: "We believe that prosecutions should take priority over civil redress and that prosecutions should be complete prior to going forward with civil suits." Id. at 17 (emphasis added). Nowhere did the Department remotely suggest - - as the plaintiffs have implied - - that pending prosecutions warrant less protection (i.e., should be "hinder[ed]") simply because a particular civil plaintiff happens to reach his or her 18th birthday. + +# III. A Stay is Mandatory Despite Resulting "Delay" to Civil Lawsuits. + +Inherent in any § 3509(k) stay is delay to the progress (discovery, trial, appeal) of all related civil lawsuits. Congress recognized this in enacting the stay provision, which necessarily prioritized the interests of completing acriminal investigation and prosecution over the interests of aparticular plaintiff in seeking personal pecuniary damages. Based on this reasoning, the Francis + +Compare Doe t Fronds, Case No. 5:03cv260-MCR-WCS (N.D. Ha.), Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion to Reconsider Plaintiffs' Motion to Lift Stay and for Status Conference (DE 92. available on PACER), with Plaintiff's Memorandum of Law in Response to Defendant's Motion to Stay, filed in Case Nos. 08-cv-80119-KAM iDoe No. Z DE 25), 08-cv-80232-KAM (Doe No. 3. DE 20), 08-cv-80380-KAM (Doe No. 4, DE 31), and 08-cv-80381-KAM (Due No. 5. DE 29). + +court specifically refused to provide any relief to plaintiffs "simply because the state [criminal] matter is not progressing as fast as they would hope." 2005 WL 950623, at \*2. The court made this determination despite the plaintiffs' complaints about the "frustrating delay" and that "the state criminal case 'has languished for almost two years with no end in sight,' finding that this "is amatter to be addressed in state [criminal] court." Id. Accordingly, the anticipated delay in this case, attendant to the term of the deferred-prosecution agreement, does not change the clear command of § 3509(k). + +According to their own pleadings, the plaintiffs waited between three and six years before filing these lawsuits? and so cannot rightfully claim prejudice from additional temporary delay. + +## IV. Section 3509 Aside, a Discretionary Stay is Warranted. + +Even, arguendo, were this Court not to apply the mandate of § 3509, a discretionary stay should still be entered during the pendency of the Federal Criminal Action. SEC v. Healthsouth Corp.. 261 F. Supp. 2d 1298, 1326 (N.D. Ala. 2003) ("No question exists that this court has the power to stay acivil proceeding due to an active, parallel criminal investigation."). Other federal statutes support such a stay -- particularly when the criminal action may be adversely affected by the civil litigation. For example, under 18 U.S.C. § 2712(eX1), "the court shall stay any action commenced [against the United States] if the court determines that civil discovery will adversely affect the ability of the Government to conduct a related investigation or prosecution of a related criminal case." Allowing these lawsuits to progress while Epstein remains subject to the Federal Criminal Action will prejudice him irrevocably and irreparably. As provided below, there are several adverse effects to allowing the civil litigation to proceed while the Federal Criminal Action remains pending. + +In these lawsuits, Epstein has a right to defend himself. In the Federal Criminal Action, Epstein has a right against self-incrimination .6 Without a stay, Epstein will be immediately forced to abandon one of these rights. + +Jane Does No. 2 and No. 3 allege that their claims arose "iiIn or about 2004-2005;" Jane Does No. 4 and No. 5 allege that their claims arose Ian or about 2002-2003." Complaints, 1 8. + +Should he choose his Fifth Amendment rights, he will expose himself to an adverse inference at the summary-judgment stage and at trial. See generally. Wehling v. Columbia Broad. Sys., 611 F.2d 1026, 1027 (5th Cir. 1980) (observing that "invocation of the privilege would be subject to the drawing of an adverse inference by the trier of fact"). + +On the other hand, should Epstein choose his right to defend himself in these lawsuits, the USAO will be able to use his responses at every stage of the discovery and trial process (e.g., his Answer, responses to document requests, responses to requests for admissions, sworn answers to interrogatories, answers to deposition questions, and trial testimony) to his detriment in the Federal Criminal Action.' + +In these lawsuits, even before civil discovery begins, under the Initial Disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 and S.D. Fla. Local Rule 26.1, Epstein "must" disclose the identities of all the witnesses he would call in his defense to the Federal Criminal Action (Rule 26(a)(1 XAXi)), copies of "all documents" he "may use to support [his] defenses" (Rule 26(aX1XA)(ii)), as well as the identity of "any" expert witness he "may use at trial," along with mandatory disclosure of "a written report" containing "a complete statement of all opinions the [expert] will express and the basis and reasons for them" (Rule 26(a)(2)(A) and (B)(i)). + +In contrast, in the pending Federal Criminal Action, which is governed exclusively by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the USAO would not be entitled to compel pm-trial production of any of this information. See Fed. R. Cr. P. 16(bX1)(A), (C), and 16(bX2); United States v. Argomaniz, 925 F.2d 1349, 1355-56 (11th Cir. 1991) (explaining act-of-production privilege). + +Thus, absent a stay of this civil action, the USAO would receive fundamentally unfair access to defense information and highly prejudicial advance insight into criminal defense + +The privilege applies in "instances where the witness has reasonable cause to apprehend danger" of criminal liability. Hoffman v. United Stares, 341 U.S. 479,486 (1951). + +This could give the USAO a tremendous advantage in prosecuting Epstein in the Federal Criminal Action. See Comment, Using Equitable Powers to Coordinate Parallel Civil and Criminal Actions, 98 Harv. L. Rev. 1023. 1030 (1985) (observing that '-the prosecutor may have access to detailed civil depositions of the accused witnesses, while the rules of criminal procedure bar the accused from deposing the prosecutor's witnesses"). + +strategy. See Comment, 98 Ilarv. L. Rev. at 1030 ("To the extent that a prosecutor acquires evidence that was elicited from the accused in a parallel civil proceeding. the criminal process becomes less adversarial."). + +Without a stay in place, discovery will proceed, including against third parties. Mr. Epstein will have no alternative but to issue subpoenas seeking evidence from state and federal law-enforcement officers. For example, Epstein is clearly entitled to discover evidence of prior statements (including inconsistent statements) given by witnesses whom law-enforcement has previously interviewed. See, e.g., Cox v. Treadway, 75 F.3d 230, 239 (6th Cir. 1996) (holding that district court properly admitted testimony of prosecutor about prior inconsistent statements that witness made to the prosecutor). Likewise, Epstein may be entitled to discovery of relevant evidence that is in the present possession of the grand jury or other law-enforcement agencies. See, e.g., Simpson v. Hines, 729 F. Supp. 526, 527 (E.D. Tex. 1989) ("The grand jury has concluded its deliberations . . The need for secrecy of these specific tapes no longer outweighs other concerns."); Golden Quality Ice Cream Co., Inc. v. Deerfield Specialty Papers. Inc., 87 F.R.D. 53, 59 (E.D. Pa. 1980) ("[W]here, as here, the grand jury has completed its work and all that is sought are those documents turned over to the grand jury by the corporations which are defendants in the civil case, the considerations . . . militating against disclosure are beside the point.") (citing Douglas Oil Co. of Calif. v. Petrol Stops Nw., 441 U.S. 211 (1979)). + +In response to such third-party subpoenas to law-enforcement witnesses, we anticipate that it will be the government, not Mr. Epstein, who will object to discovery in these civil cases, until the final conclusion of the Federal Criminal Action. + +### Conclusion + +Because these lawsuits arise from the same allegations as the Federal Criminal Action, this Court should stay these cases until that criminal action is no longer pending. + +Respectfully submitted, + +TEIN, P.L. + +3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 + +Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 + +Tel: 305 442 1101 Fax: 305 442 6744 + +By: + +MICHAEL R. TEIN + +Fla. Bar No. 993522 + +tein@lewistein.com + +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Tel. 561 659 8300 Fax. 561 835 8691 + +By: Jack A. Goldberger + +Fla. Bar No. 262013 + +jgoldberger®agwpa.com + +Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +### CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 711.A.3 + +While defense counsel admittedly did not confer with plaintiffs' counsel prior to filing the motion to stay, it was by no means in willful disregard of the Local Rule. Shortly after the filing of the motion and before plaintiffs filed their response memoranda suggesting that no conference had taken place, the parties did confer in agood-faith and specific attempt to resolve the motion and were unable to do so, because plaintiffs' counsel would not agree to astay. Accordingly, the brief delay in conducting the Rule 7.1 conference did not prejudice the plaintiffs at all or result in unnecessary judicial intervention. It is perhaps worth noting that, contrary to their Rule 7.1 certificate, plaintiffs did not confer prior to filing their motion to extend time to file their response memoranda (which extension defendant did not oppose anyway, including on the basis of failure to comply with Rule 7.1). Further information on the reasons the Rule 7.1 conference for the instant motion to stay was conducted after filing the motion to stay will be provided to the Court upon its request, preferably ex pane in order to avoid disclosure of privileged information. The defendant respectfully requests the opportunity to make such an ex pane disclosure in the event that the Court considers denying the motion under Local Rule 7.1.A.3. In any event, we apologize to the Court for non-compliance with the pre-filing requirement of the Rule, would have conferred even sooner had plaintiffs pointed the issue out immediately upon receipt of our motion, did confer with plaintiffs' counsel prior to filing the motion to seal this reply, and commit to precise compliance with the Rule for the remainder of this litigation. + +rger, "Michael Tein + +### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing was served on July 28, 2008 by U.S. mail on all counsel named on the service list. + +Michael R. Tein + +#### SERVICE LIST + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Herman & Mermelstcin, P.A. 18205Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743720/EFTA02743720.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743720/EFTA02743720.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dd892bd8f42cb6c7c746c1e41a2931c98f3d4f2c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743720/EFTA02743720.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,798 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743720.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 13, + "chars": 29217, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.56, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.41500000000002, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 397.69708251953125, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 397.69708251953125, + 135.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 197.41500000000002, + 135.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Pendine Federal Criminal Action", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 196.185, + 62.37 + ], + [ + 394.7195129394531, + 62.37 + ], + [ + 394.7195129394531, + 78.363037109375 + ], + [ + 196.185, + 78.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Discussion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 266.295, + 486.0 + ], + [ + 325.8629455566406, + 486.0 + ], + [ + 325.8629455566406, + 500.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 266.295, + 500.68353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Section 3509(k) Applies to Investigations, Not Just Indictments.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 54.73499999999999, + 509.49 + ], + [ + 421.7877197265625, + 509.49 + ], + [ + 421.7877197265625, + 525.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 54.73499999999999, + 525.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "H. Section 3509(k) Applies Even After a Plaintiff Turns 18.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 60.269999999999996, + 236.51999999999998 + ], + [ + 389.1167907714844, + 236.51999999999998 + ], + [ + 389.1167907714844, + 254.72528076171875 + ], + [ + 60.269999999999996, + 254.72528076171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. A Stay is Mandatory Despite Resulting \"Delay\" to Civil Lawsuits.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 64.57499999999999, + 521.64 + ], + [ + 442.53778076171875, + 521.64 + ], + [ + 442.53778076171875, + 541.2308044433594 + ], + [ + 64.57499999999999, + 541.2308044433594 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IV. Section 3509 Aside, a Discretionary Stay is Warranted.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 61.5, + 285.92999999999995 + ], + [ + 384.5220947265625, + 285.92999999999995 + ], + [ + 384.5220947265625, + 304.56 + ], + [ + 61.5, + 304.56 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 268.755, + 573.48 + ], + [ + 333.3922424316406, + 573.48 + ], + [ + 333.3922424316406, + 590.3035125732422 + ], + [ + 268.755, + 590.3035125732422 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 711.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 118.695, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 469.6991882324219, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 469.6991882324219, + 442.26000000000005 + ], + [ + 118.695, + 442.26000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.9413604736328, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 373.92, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 373.92, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 209.9413604736328, + 104.49 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.30499999999995, + 213.84 + ], + [ + 338.865, + 213.84 + ], + [ + 338.865, + 228.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 250.30499999999995, + 228.41999999999996 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 90 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 437 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 484 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 484 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 424 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 459 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 426 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 90 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743720" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743720/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743720/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5d33f23852ee4c1d3cf25f0c2d03ffeccdf5b0ff --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743720/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ac1a0a1d9b4e97a99d8af41c20f80525d804a68ab477f32bbe20de5bba341f56 +size 11719 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743733/EFTA02743733.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743733/EFTA02743733.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1a8911ead3aec552fd06fd4098a578d37ec06e1e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743733/EFTA02743733.md @@ -0,0 +1,69 @@ +**UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA** + +**CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-[REDACTED]** + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +**NOTICE OF APPEARANCE** + +Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman, LLP file their appearance as co-counsel for Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, in the above-styled matter. + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 27th day of August, 2008: + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com +iherman@hermanlaw.com +lrivera@hermanlaw.com +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +jagesq@bellsouth.net +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Michael R. Tein, Esq. +[REDACTED] Tein, P.L. +3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 +Coconut Grove, FL 33133 +305-442-1101 + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein Page 2 + +> Fax: 305 442 6744 Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein teinOlewistein.com + +Respectfully submitted, + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561) 842-282 + +By: caQJ tKe + +Robert D. Critton, Jr. Florida Bar #224162 Michael J. Pike Florida Bar #617296 + +Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein rcritQbelclaw.com mpike@bc1claw.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743733/EFTA02743733.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743733/EFTA02743733.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bfa5c1288249e0088da0163b8f88bda17ff27cd9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743733/EFTA02743733.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,158 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743733.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1758, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.56, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 408.20400000000006, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 408.20400000000006, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 104.49 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF APPEARANCE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 288.35999999999996 + ], + [ + 381.276, + 288.35999999999996 + ], + [ + 381.276, + 302.94 + ], + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 302.94 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 258.876, + 386.37 + ], + [ + 382.5, + 386.37 + ], + [ + 382.5, + 400.14 + ], + [ + 258.876, + 400.14 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 97 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743733" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743735/EFTA02743735.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743735/EFTA02743735.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c4ab9c0bc1e32854bf954f2dc0a852e6aca1480f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743735/EFTA02743735.md @@ -0,0 +1,85 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +## MOTION TO DISMISS + +Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule 7.1(A) of the Local Rules for the Southern District of Florida, moves to dismiss Count I of plaintiffs complaint,' and states as follows: + +' The time to answer the remaining allegations of the complaint is tolled pending the Court's ruling on the present motion. See Beaulieu v. Bd. of Trustees of Univ. of W. Fla., No. 3:07cv30/RV/EMT, 2007 WL 2020161, \* 2 (N.D. Fla. July 9, 2007) (holding that defendant's partial motion to dismiss "automatically extends its time to answer . . . until after the court has ruled on [its] motion to dismiss"); Finnegan v. Univ. of Rochester Med. Ctr., 180 F.R.D. 247, 249 (W.D.N.Y. 1998) (concluding "that the filing of a motion that only addresses part of a complaint suspends the time to respond to the entire complaint, not just to the claims that are the subject of the motion"); v. Berry College, Inc., No. Civ.A. 4:96CV338-HLM, 1997 WL 579166, \*1 (N.D. Ga. July 3, 1997) (noting that there is significant case law to support the position that "when a defendant files a Rule 12(b) motion to dismiss, addressing only some of the claims contained in the plaintiff's complaint, the defendant is not required to file an answer until the court rules on the motion to dismiss"). + +#### ALLEGATIONS IN PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT + +This action arises out of the alleged assault of the plaintiff. According to the allegations in her complaint, the plaintiff went to Mr. Epstein's house to give him "a massage for monetary compensation" (Compl. ¶ 12), where Mr. Epstein allegedly assaulted her "in violation of Chapter 800 of the Florida Statutes." (Comp!. ¶ 18). + +The plaintiff tries to assert a claim for sexual assault (Compl. ¶¶ 15-19.) This theory of liability, however, cannot be supported by the allegations in the complaint. In fact, even if everything in the complaint were true, recovery against Jeffrey Epstein, for Count I, under any formulation, is impossible under Florida law. Accordingly, this count must be dismissed. + +#### ARGUMENT + +A motion to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) should be granted when a court cannot identify "each of the material elements necessary to sustain a recovery under some viable legal theory." Snow v. DirectTV, Inc., 450 F.3d 1314, 1320 (11th Cir. 2006) (quoting Roe v. Aware Woman Ctr. For Choice, Inc., 253 F.3d 678, 684 (11th Cir. 2001)). Moreover, a court should dismiss a complaint "when, on the basis of a dispositive issue of law, no construction of the factual allegations will support a cause of action." Marshall County Bd. of Educ. v. Marshal County Gas Dist., 992 F.2d 1171, 1174 (11th Cir. 1993). "[T]o survive a + +motion to dismiss, plaintiffs must do more than merely state legal conclusions; they are required to allege some specific factual bases for those conclusions . Holt v. Crist, No. 06-14617, 2007 WL 1156938, \*2 (11th Cir. Apr. 19, 2007). As such, "conclusory allegations, unwarranted deductions of facts or legal conclusions masquerading as facts will not prevent dismissal." Snow, 450 F.3d at 1320. + +#### I. Count I Fails to State a Cause of Action For Assault Recoenized by Florida Law. + +The plaintiff attempts to plead a cause of action against Mr. Epstein for "sexual assault" based on a "violation of Chapter 800 of the Florida Statutes"2 for the "lewd and lascivious acts committed by Epstein upon Jane Doe." (Compl. 18.) Plaintiff cannot assert a cause of action for "violation of Chapter 800, Florida Statutes" because there is no private right of action under that Chapter. See generally Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Plaza Materials Corp., 908 So. 2d 360, 374 (Fla. 2005) (observing that "not every statutory violation carries a civil remedy" (citing Villazon v. Prudential Health Care Plan, Inc., 843 So. 2d 842, 852 (Fla. 2003)). See also, e.g., Miami Herald Publ'g Co. v. Ferre, 636 F. Supp. 970 (S.D. Fla. 1985) (, C.J.) (holding that violation of Florida's criminal extortion statute does not give rise to a civil cause of action for damages). + +2Chapter 800, Florida Statutes, is entitled, "Lewdness; Indecent Exposure." + +Where a plaintiff brings a civil action pursuant to a criminal statute that provides no civil remedy, her complaint is properly dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. See Mantooth v. Richards, 557 So. 2d 646, 646 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal of plaintiff's claim for parental kidnapping where "the mentioned statutes concern only criminal violations and do not afford a civil remedy") (citation omitted) (emphasis added). + +Even if Chapter 800 provided a civil remedy (which it does not) the statute does not apply to the plaintiff. The statute prohibits sexual activity with or lewd or lascivious offenses against "a person . . . less than 16 years of age." § 800.04, Fla. Stat. (2008) (emphasis added). By her own admission, the plaintiff was "approximately 16 years old." (Comp/. ¶ 8.) (emphasis added). Plainly, the plaintiff falls outside of the scope of the statute's protection. Accordingly, the plaintiff's claim for sexual assault against Mr. Epstein, pursuant to a violation of Chapter 800, Florida Statutes, must be dismissed. + +Should the Court look beyond the plain language of the plaintiff's complaint and construe Count I as a claim for common-law assault, that claim would also fail. As the court explained in Lay v. Kremer, 411 So. 2d 1347, 1349 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), an assault is "an intentional, unlawful offer of corporal injury to another by force, or force unlawfully directed toward another under such circumstances as to create a fear of imminent peril, coupled with the apparent + +present ability to effectuate the attempt." An assault thus requires "an affirmative act—a threat to use force, or the actual exertion of force." v. Ad. Fed. Say. & Loan Assoc., 454 So. 2d 52, 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (affirming dismissal of assault claim where there was no affirmative act). + +In this case, there is no such affirmative act. The only thing that Mr. Epstein is alleged to have said to the plaintiff is "to take off her clothes" and "to give him a massage." (Compl. ¶ 12.) These allegations fall far short of an "offer of corporal injury by force." There are no allegations that Jane Doe was placed in any fear of imminent peril. See Gatto v. Publix Supermarket, Inc., 387 So. 2d 377, 379 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) (holding that where there was no evidence to show that Gatto was placed in fear of imminent peril, there was no assault). In fact, the plaintiff does not even allege that Mr. Epstein touched her. Thus, there was no assault. + +Accordingly, because the plaintiff has failed to plead a cause of action for assault recognized in Florida, Count I against Mr. Epstein must be dismissed. + +### Conclusion + +For the reasons set forth herein, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein respectfully requests that Count I of the plaintiff's complaint be dismissed. + +Respectfully submitted, + +TEIN, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 Tel: 305 442 1101 Fax: 305 442 6744 + +By: /s/ Michael R. Tein GUY A. Fla. Bar No. 623740 MICHAEL R. TEIN Fla. Bar No. 993522 tein@lewistein.com + +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel. 561 659 8300 Fax. 561 835 8691 + +By: Jack A. Goldberger Fla. Bar No. 262013 jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel. 561 842 2820 Fax. 561 515 3148 + +By: Robert D. Critton, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 224162 rcritton@bc1claw.com Michael J. Pike, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 617296 mpike@bc1claw.com + +Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1 + +Undersigned counsel has conferred in good faith with counsel for the plaintiff, who opposes the relief requested in this motion. + +> /s/ Michael R. Tein Michael R. Tein + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on September 4, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all individuals on the following service list via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. + +> /s/ Michael R. Tein Michael R. Tein + +## Service List + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Fax: 305 931 0877 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743735/EFTA02743735.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743735/EFTA02743735.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c0e4cbd69cfc049d9940d6a72a20fc871a94096f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743735/EFTA02743735.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,536 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743735.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 8686, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.41, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 424.5933532714844, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 424.5933532714844, + 107.13043212890625 + ], + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 107.13043212890625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MOTION TO DISMISS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.74, + 357.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 389.6916809082031, + 357.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 389.6916809082031, + 375.25042724609375 + ], + [ + 241.74, + 375.25042724609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ALLEGATIONS IN PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 164.62800000000001, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 468.20196533203125, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 468.20196533203125, + 90.75146484375 + ], + [ + 164.62800000000001, + 90.75146484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ARGUMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 270.504, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 358.239990234375, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 358.239990234375, + 445.8714599609375 + ], + [ + 270.504, + 445.8714599609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Count I Fails to State a Cause of Action For Assault Recoenized by \nFlorida Law.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.62, + 247.04999999999998 + ], + [ + 550.4068603515625, + 247.04999999999998 + ], + [ + 550.4068603515625, + 279.88092041015625 + ], + [ + 82.62, + 279.88092041015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 277.236, + 527.3100000000001 + ], + [ + 350.0679626464844, + 527.3100000000001 + ], + [ + 350.0679626464844, + 544.1835021972656 + ], + [ + 277.236, + 544.1835021972656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 125.46000000000001, + 254.34 + ], + [ + 507.28289794921875, + 254.34 + ], + [ + 507.28289794921875, + 272.88043212890625 + ], + [ + 125.46000000000001, + 272.88043212890625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 219.096, + 432.54 + ], + [ + 410.0613708496094, + 432.54 + ], + [ + 410.0613708496094, + 449.88043212890625 + ], + [ + 219.096, + 449.88043212890625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Service List", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 278.46000000000004, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 354.5593566894531, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 354.5593566894531, + 92.991455078125 + ], + [ + 278.46000000000004, + 92.991455078125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743735" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743743/EFTA02743743.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743743/EFTA02743743.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..461378e9a2a6684f4b1b45b615e6cbc70cbc3d5b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743743/EFTA02743743.md @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM IN RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2, ("Jane" or "Jane Doe"), by and through her undersigned counsel, files this Memorandum in Response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, and states as follows: + +1. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein is alleged to have sexually abused Jane Doe when she was a minor. The Complaint is in two Counts: Count I is labeled "Sexual Assault", and alleges an intentional ton based on the actions of Jeffrey Epstein; Count II alleges the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress based on the same factual allegations. Defendant Epstein has moved to dismiss only Count I of the Complaint, contending that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim. Simultaneously herewith, Plaintiff intends to file an Amended Complaint which substantially revises Count I and moots the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss.' + +2. In any event, the Complaint sufficiently alleged a claim for sexual assault and battery. + +' The Amended Complaint also adds as Count III a federal claim against Defendant Epstein under 18 U.S.C. §§2422 and 2255. Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a), a party may amend the pleading once as a matter of course before being served with a "responsive pleading". Defendant has not to date filed a "responsive pleading" in this case within the meaning of Fed.R.Civ.P. 7(a). It is established in the courts of the Eleventh Circuit that a motion to dismiss is not a "responsive pleadin " and does not affect a plaintiffs right to amend the pleading once as a matter of course. v. Board of Regents, 477 F.3d 1282, 1291 (11th Cir. 2007). + +The gravamen of the claims in Count I is set forth in paragraph 16 of the Complaint: "Epstein tortiously assaulted Jane Doe sexually. Epstein's acts were intentional, unlawful, offensive and harmful." + +3. Count I does not purport to be brought under the criminal statutes? Whether a Complaint states a claim for relief is not based on labels or conclusions; rather it is determined by the factual allegations, which "must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombley 127 5. Ct. 1955, 1965 (2007). Here, the factual allegations establish an intentional tort claim for sexual assault and battery.3 See Paul v. Holbrook, 696 So.2d 1311 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) ("[a] battery consists of the infliction of a harmful or offensive contact upon another with the intent to cause such contact or the apprehension that such contact is imminent"); Scelta v. Delicatessen Support Services, Inc., 57 F.Supp. 2d 1327, 1358-59 (M.D. Fla. 1999) (allegation that defendant attempted to put his hands down plaintiffs dress, and that there was an actual and intentional touching, sufficient to state a claim for battery); Hogan v. Tavzel, 660 So.2d 350 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (tortfeasor may be liable for battery for infecting another with a sexually transmitted disease); see also Restatement (Second) of Torts Assault, § 21 (1965) (stating that an assault occurs when a person "acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with the person of the other, or an imminent apprehension of such contact, and the other is thereby put in such imminent apprehension"). + +=Chapter 800 of the Florida Statutes is mentioned in the Complaint 118) because conduct against a person in violation of the criminal laws of the State generally give rise to a civil claim for intentional tort. Count I does not purport to bring a separate civil claim for violation of a strictly criminal statute. + +3 Assault and battery are closely related common law intentional torts that are commonly alleged together. See Herzfeld v. Herzfeld, 781 So.2d 1070 (Fla.2001) (noting that laintiff alleged intentional tort of "assault and battery" based on allegations of sexual abuse). v. Atlantic Federal Savings & Loan 454 So.2d 52 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (holding that a cause of action for assault and battery cannot be based entirely on an omission). + +4. Epstein's conduct as alleged in this case of masterbating during the massage, directing the Plaintiff to remove her clothes, and touching the Plaintiff, constitutes the intentional tort of assault and battery. Accordingly, even if the Complaint had not been amended, it sufficiently alleges facts establishing an assault and battery. + +Based on the foregoing, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is moot, and, in any event, not well founded, and therefore should be denied. + +Dated: September 22, 2008. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Jeffrcy M. Herman Jeffrey M. Herman (FL Bar No. 521647) jhennan@hermanlaw.com Stuart S. Mennelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@hermanlaw.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on September 22, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Jeffrey M. Herman + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +Michael R. Tein, Esq. tein@lewistein.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Michael Pike, Esq. mpike@bciclaw.com + +/s/ Jeffrey M. Herman \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743743/EFTA02743743.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743743/EFTA02743743.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e278f47286af8f83042b8cb7f52c317b1943b9e5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743743/EFTA02743743.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,273 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743743.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5886, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.97, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.856, + 53.46 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 53.46 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 82.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.856, + 82.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM IN RESPONSE \nTO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 175.64399999999998, + 263.25 + ], + [ + 436.8489685058594, + 263.25 + ], + [ + 436.8489685058594, + 292.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 175.64399999999998, + 292.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 458.46 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 458.46 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 473.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 473.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nCASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 51.84 + ], + [ + 455.1346740722656, + 51.84 + ], + [ + 455.1346740722656, + 110.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 110.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 82 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 33 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743743" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743747/EFTA02743747.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743747/EFTA02743747.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b8a4f2270f278e09762d1dc1f66318000cdcddd3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743747/EFTA02743747.md @@ -0,0 +1,129 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## AMENDED COMPLAINT + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2 ("Jane" or "Jane Doe"), brings this Complaint against Jeffrey Epstein, as follows: + +#### Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue + +- 1. Jane Doe No. 2 is a citizen and resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and is sui juris. +- 2. This Complaint is brought under a fictitious name to protect the identity of the Plaintiff because this Complaint makes sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon a minor. + - 3. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein is a citizen and resident of the State of New York. + - 4. This is an action for damages in excess of \$50 million. +- 5. This Court has jurisdiction of this action and the claims set forth herein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(a), as the matter in controversy (i) exceeds \$75,000, exclusive of interest and costs; and (ii) is between citizens of different states. +- 6. This Court has venue of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(a) as a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this District. + +# Factual Allegations + +7. At all relevant times, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") was an adult male, 52 years old. Epstein is a financier and money manager with a secret clientele limited exclusively to billionaires. He is himself a man of tremendous wealth, power and influence. He maintains his principal home in New York and also owns residences in New Mexico, St. and Palm Beach, FL. The allegations herein concern Epstein's conduct while at his lavish estate in Palm Beach. + +8. Upon information and belief, Epstein has a sexual preference and obsession for underage minor girls. He engaged in a plan and scheme in which he gained access to primarily economically disadvantaged minor girls in his home, sexually assaulted these girls, and then gave them money. In or about 2004-2005, Jane Doe, then approximately 16 years old, fell into Epstein's trap and became one of his victims. + +9. Upon information and belief, Jeffrey Epstein carried out his scheme and assaulted girls in Florida, New York and on his private island, known as Little St. James, in St. + +10. Epstein's scheme involved the use of young girls to recruit underage girls. (Upon information and belief, the young girl who brought Jane Doe to Epstein was herself a minor victim of Epstein, and will therefore not be named in this Complaint). Under Epstein's plan, underage girls were recruited ostensibly to give a wealthy man a massage for monetary compensation in his Palm Beach mansion. The recruiter would be contacted when Epstein was planning to be at his Palm Beach residence or soon after he had arrived there. Epstein or someone on his behalf would direct the recruiter to bring one or more underage girls to the residence. The recruiter, upon information and belief, generally sought out economically disadvantaged underage girls from western Palm Beach County who would be enticed by the money being offered - generally \$200 to \$300 per "massage" session - and who were perceived as less likely to complain to authorities or have credibility if allegations of improper conduct were made. This was an important element of Epstein's plan. + +11. Epstein's plan and scheme reflected a particular pattern and method. Upon arrival at Epstein's mansion, the underage victim would be introduced to Epstein's assistant, who gathered the girl's personal information, including her name and telephone number. would then bring the girl up a flight of stairs to a bedroom that contained a massage table in addition to other furnishings. There were photographs of nude women lining the stairway and in the bedroom. The girl would then find herself alone in the room with Epstein, who would be wearing only a towel. He would then remove his towel and lie naked on the massage table, and direct the girl to remove her clothes. Epstein would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, including masturbation and touching the girl's vagina. + +12. Consistent with the foregoing plan and scheme, Jane Doe was recruited to give Epstein a massage for monetary compensation. Jane was brought to Epstein's mansion in Palm Beach. Once at the mansion, Jane was introduced to who led her up the flight of stairs to the room with the massage table. In this room, Epstein told Jane to take off her clothes and give him a massage. Jane kept her panties and bra on and complied with Epstein's instructions. Epstein wore only a towel around his waste. After a short period of time, Epstein removed the towel and rolled over exposing his penis. Epstein began to masturbate and he sexually assaulted Jane. + +13. After Epstein had completed the assault, Jane was then able to get dressed, leave the room and go back down the stairs. Jane was paid \$200 by Epstein. The young girl who recruited Jane was paid \$100 by Epstein for bringing Jane to him. + +14. As a result of this encounter with Epstein, Jane experienced confusion, shame, humiliation and embarrassment, and has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries. + +## COUNT I Sexual Assault and Battery + +- 15. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 above. +- 16. Epstein acted with intent to cause an offensive contact with Jane Doe, or an imminent + +17. Epstein made an intentional, unlawful offer of offensive sexual contact toward Jane Doe, creating a reasonable fear of imminent peril. + +18. Epstein intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Jane Doe, with the intent to cause such contact or the apprehension that such contact is imminent. + +19. Epstein tortiously committed a sexual assault and battery on Jane Doe. Epstein's acts were intentional, unlawful, offensive and harmful. + +20. Epstein's plan and scheme in which he committed such acts upon Jane Doe were done willfully and maliciously. + +21. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, punitive damages, costs, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +## COUNT II Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress + +22. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 above. + +23. Epstein's conduct was intentional or reckless. + +24. Epstein's conduct with a minor was extreme and outrageous, going beyond all bounds of decency. + +25. Epstein committed willful acts of child sexual abuse on Jane Doe. These acts resulted in mental or sexual injury to Jane Doe, that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. + +26. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. Epstein knew or had + +reason to know that his intentional and outrageous conduct would cause emotional distress and damage to Jane Doe, or Epstein acted with reckless disregard of the high probability of causing severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. + +27. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's intentional or reckless conduct, Jane Doe, has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, costs, punitive damages. and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +## COUNT III Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activitv in Violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 + +28. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs I through 14 above. + +29. Epstein used a facility or means of interstate commerce to knowingly persuade, induce or entice Jane Doe, when she was under the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense. + +30. Epstein's acts and conduct are in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422. + +31. As a result of Epstein's violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422, Plaintiff has suffered personal injury, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. + +32. Plaintiff hired Herman & Mermelstein, P.A., in this matter and agreed to pay them a reasonable attorneys' fee. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for all damages available under 28 U.S.C. §2255(a), including without limitation, actual and compensatory damages, costs of suit, and attorneys' fees, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +# JURY TRIAL DEMAND + +Plaintiff demands a jury trial in this action on all claims so triable. + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Jeffrey M. Herman Jeffrey M. Herman (FL Bar No. 521647) jherman@hermanlaw.com Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@hermanlaw.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff' 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +I hereby certify that on September 22, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Jeffrey M. Herman + +# SERVICE LIST + +DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRa + +United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +jcoldbercer@aewoa.com + +Michael R. Tein, Esq. + +tein@lewistein.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. + +rcritton@bcIclaw.com + +Michael Pike, Esq. + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +/s/ Jeffrey M. Herman \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743747/EFTA02743747.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743747/EFTA02743747.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a339254c9ba5338ffbd957d626c47fba56742c15 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743747/EFTA02743747.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,567 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743747.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 9973, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.2, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 41.31 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 41.31 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 69.363037109375 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 69.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AMENDED COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 233.784, + 250.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 379.20025634765625, + 250.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 379.20025634765625, + 265.10302734375 + ], + [ + 233.784, + 265.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 334.53 + ], + [ + 389.681396484375, + 334.53 + ], + [ + 389.681396484375, + 349.10302734375 + ], + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 349.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Factual Allegations", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 697.41 + ], + [ + 359.16802978515625, + 697.41 + ], + [ + 359.16802978515625, + 713.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 713.2330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT I \nSexual Assault and Battery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 233.17200000000003, + 626.94 + ], + [ + 378.70458984375, + 626.94 + ], + [ + 378.70458984375, + 656.6835174560547 + ], + [ + 233.17200000000003, + 656.6835174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT II\nIntentional Infliction of Emotional Distress", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.168, + 459.2699999999999 + ], + [ + 419.5736083984375, + 459.2699999999999 + ], + [ + 419.5736083984375, + 488.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 192.168, + 488.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT III \nCoercion and Enticement to Sexual Activitv in Violation of 18 U.S.C. \u00a72422", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 109.548, + 263.25 + ], + [ + 501.8175048828125, + 263.25 + ], + [ + 501.8175048828125, + 292.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 109.548, + 292.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JURY TRIAL DEMAND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 238.68, + 669.06 + ], + [ + 374.0046081542969, + 669.06 + ], + [ + 374.0046081542969, + 684.7330169677734 + ], + [ + 238.68, + 684.7330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 40.5 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 40.5 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 54.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 54.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.324, + 39.69 + ], + [ + 350.6640319824219, + 39.69 + ], + [ + 350.6640319824219, + 55.863037109375 + ], + [ + 261.324, + 55.863037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 36 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743747" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743755/EFTA02743755.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743755/EFTA02743755.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..279ad82de2e86aa21a1d353c74bcc9512259f1fe --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743755/EFTA02743755.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA + +Jane Doe No. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER DENYING MOTIONS AS MOOT + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant's Motion for Enlargement of Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Complaint (DE 13) and Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Complaint (DE 40). As Plaintiff's Complaint has been replaced by an Amended Complaint, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: + +(1) Defendant's Motion for Enlargement of Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Complaint (DE 13) is DENIED as moot. + +(2) Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Complaint (DE 40) is DENIED as moot. This denial is without prejudice to Defendant reasserting the grounds asserted in the motion if he deems it appropriate as to the Amended Complaint. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 23rd day of September, 2008. + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +copies to: All counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743755/EFTA02743755.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743755/EFTA02743755.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..68337ef181cfe0af430ed7a5edd6fb91bd00ea96 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743755/EFTA02743755.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743755.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1010, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.72, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.856, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.856, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER DENYING MOTIONS AS MOOT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 269.73 + ], + [ + 420.8175048828125, + 269.73 + ], + [ + 420.8175048828125, + 284.9830627441406 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 284.9830627441406 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743755" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743756/EFTA02743756.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743756/EFTA02743756.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8f5942dac756c005ad669bcb0dd87f413c25d82d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743756/EFTA02743756.md @@ -0,0 +1,211 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## JOINT SCHEDULING AND DISCOVERY REPORT + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No. 2, Jane Doe No. 3, Jane Doe No. 4 and Jane Doe No. 5, and Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, submit this Joint Scheduling and Discovery Report' in accordance with this Court's Order Requiring Counsel to Confer, file Joint Scheduling Report and file Joint Discovery Report, and S.D.Fla.L.R. 16.1(B)(2) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f), as follows: + +## I. DISCOVERY REPORT + +## A. Disclosures Under Rule 26(a) + +The parties propose to exchange initial disclosures under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a) on or before October 17, 2008. + +# B. Conduct of Discovery + +## 1. Discovery and Pretrial Deadlines + +The parties propose the following discovery and pre-trial deadlines: + +Joinder of parties and Amendment of pleadings + +Parties to exchange list of fact witnesses and expert witness summaries/reports required by S.D.Fla.L.R. 16.1E + +Mediation to be completed + +Completion of Discovery + +Dispositive Motions to be Filed + +Joint Pretrial Statement to be Filed pursuant to S.D.Fla.L.R. 16.1E + +Propose pre-trial conference + +Proposed Trial + +December 1, 2008 + +June 1, 2009 + +July 1, 2009 + +August 1, 2009 + +August 20, 2009 + +September 25, 2009 + +October, 2009 + +November, 2009 + +I The submission of one Joint Scheduling and Discovery Report for the four cases is not intended to be an agreement or admission regarding whether these cases should be consolidated for any purpose. See §II(D) below. + +# Number of days estimated for jury trial 10 + +#### 2. Subjects of Discovery and Whether Discovery Should be Phased or Limited to Particular Issues + +Plaintiffs' Position: There are no unusual issues at this time which require bifurcation or special restrictions on the scope of discovery or the subjects of discovery. Such issues may arise, however, as discovery continues. It is suggested that no restrictions on discovery be imposed at the outset of discovery. + +Defendant's Position: Any financial discovery, if allowed, relating to a punitive damage should be postponed until May 15, 2009. As well, as set forth in §D below, Defendant will request an order approving a confidentiality agreement governing access to and use of said information by Plaintiff and her attorneys until such time as documents/testimony is admitted at trial. + +## C. Issues About Disclosure of Electronically Stored Information + +The parties do not know whether issues may arise concerning discovery of electronically stored information. At this time, such discovery may be produced in paper or electronic form, subject to further order of the Court as may be necessary as discovery proceeds. + +# D. Issues About Claims of Privilege or Confidentiality + +Plaintiffs' Position: Plaintiffs request that their identities remain anonymous in this proceeding because they have alleged that they were victims of sexual misconduct as minors. Papers and exhibits filed with the Court should redact the names of the Plaintiffs or otherwise be filed under seal. + +Defendant's Position: Defendant may oppose anonymity in that Defendant will be prejudiced in defending himself and conducting his discovery without the ability to disclose Plaintiffs name(s), such as at depositions, subpoenaing medical/health related information, school records, etc. As well, Defendant's counsel has found that disclosure of a Plaintiff's name (who previously filed anonymously) oftentimes produces invaluable and otherwise relevant and material discovery. + +Defendant will request a confidentiality agreement with restrictions on any financial discovery which this court may allow. Defendant may assert his Fifth Amendment privilege in this matter. + +### E. Limitations Imposed by the Discovery Rules + +Plaintiffs' Position: Plaintiffs request that the limitation of 10 depositions for each party under Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(a)(2) be removed. Plaintiffs intend to take the depositions of other minor victims of Defendant Epstein, who are numerous. There is no need at this time to alter other limitations imposed by the discovery rules. + +Defendant's Position: Defendant would request that the number of 10 deposition limit be imposed, pending a motion by either side setting forth justification for additional depositions. + +### F. Other Orders that the Court Should Issue Under Rule 26(c) or Rule 16(b) and (c) + +No other orders appear necessary at this time except as set forth above. + +### II. CONFERENCE REPORT + +#### A. Likelihood of Settlement + +The parties have not to date engaged in settlement discussions. They are, however, willing to explore the prospects for settlement through mediation or otherwise as the case proceeds forward. + +#### B. Likelihood of Appearance of Additional Parties + +It does not appear that additional parties will appear in this case. However, the parties reserve the right to join additional parties within the deadline set forth in §1(8), if appropriate. + +#### C. Proposed Time Limits + +Proposed time limits are set forth in the Discovery Plan, §I(B) above. + +#### D. Proposals for the Formulation and Simplification of Issues + +Plaintiffs' Position: It would be in the interests of judicial economy and efficiency to consolidate these cases at least for purposes of discovery. Plaintiffs have no other proposals for the formulation and simplification of issues at this time. + +Defendant's Position: Defendant is opposed to consolidation of the cases for any purpose at this time. Should Plaintiff file a motion, Defendant will consider the request and respond. + +#### E. Necessity or Desirability of Amendments to the Pleadings + +Plaintiff's filed Amended Complaints in each case on September 22, 2008. Plaintiffs do not believe at this time that further amendment will be necessary. The parties however reserve the right to amend pleadings within the deadline set forth in §I(B) above. + +#### F. Possibility of Obtaining Admissions of Fact and of Documents; Stipulations; Need for Advance Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence + +Plaintiffs' Position: Plaintiffs believe that Defendant Epstein's plea agreement is an admission of liability as to all Counts of the Amended Complaint. Plaintiff's request an early ruling by the Court on the affect of the plea agreement, which will simplify the issues. Additionally, Plaintiffs believe that it is appropriate to have an advance evidentiary ruling on similar fact evidence. If the parties know early in the case how similar fact evidence will be treated at trial, discovery can be more focused and efficient. + +Defendant's Position: Defendant expects that the parties will work together to arrive at admissions as the matter progresses. Defendant disagrees that Defendant's plea agreement is an admission as described by Plaintiff. Defendant does agree that having an advance ruling on similar fact evidence may be desirable, after motion and ability to brief and respond. + +#### G. Suggestions for the Avoidance of Unnecessary Proof and of Cumulative Evidence + +There are no suggestions at this time for the avoidance of unnecessary proof or of cumulative evidence. + +### H. Suggestion on the Advisability of Referring Matters to a Magistrate Judge or + +It is suggested that discovery matters be referred to a Magistrate Judge. + +# f. Preliminary Estimate of the Time Required for Trial + +It is estimated that the trial will require ten (10) days. + +# J. Requested Date or Dates for Pre Trial Conference and Trial + +Dates are set forth in the proposed discovery plan §I(B) above. + +### K. Other Information + +There is no other information that might be helpful to the Court at this early date regarding setting the case for status conference or pm trial conference. + +Dated: September 25, 2008. + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Jeffrey M. Herman Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com iherman@hermanlaw.com lrivera@hermanlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiffs Jane Doe #2 - #5 + +By: s/ Jack Alan Goldberger Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jage.sq@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +By: s/ Michael R. Tein Michael R. Tein, Esq. Tein, P.L. + +By: s/ Robert D. Critton + +Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esq. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +Michael J. Pike, Esq. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman, + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 + +Coconut Grove, FL 33133 + +305-442-1101 + +Fax: 305 442 6744 + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +tein@lewistein.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743756/EFTA02743756.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743756/EFTA02743756.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b2a829be35fe2dd435d2cc98b2041d7e9e020878 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743756/EFTA02743756.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,843 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743756.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 9134, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.64, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JOINT SCHEDULING AND DISCOVERY REPORT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 165.24, + 672.3 + ], + [ + 447.4479064941406, + 672.3 + ], + [ + 447.4479064941406, + 687.7330169677734 + ], + [ + 165.24, + 687.7330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. DISCOVERY REPORT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.768, + 183.06 + ], + [ + 389.7190856933594, + 183.06 + ], + [ + 389.7190856933594, + 198.363037109375 + ], + [ + 222.768, + 198.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. Disclosures Under Rule 26(a)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 210.52799999999996, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 401.9444885253906, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 401.9444885253906, + 226.863037109375 + ], + [ + 210.52799999999996, + 226.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Conduct of Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 230.11199999999997, + 294.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 382.11114501953125, + 294.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 382.11114501953125, + 310.4830627441406 + ], + [ + 230.11199999999997, + 310.4830627441406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "1. Discovery and Pretrial Deadlines", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 323.19 + ], + [ + 412.03253173828125, + 323.19 + ], + [ + 412.03253173828125, + 338.60302734375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 338.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Number of days estimated for jury trial 10", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 446.95416259765625, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 446.95416259765625, + 100.863037109375 + ], + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 100.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "2. Subjects of Discovery and Whether Discovery \nShould be Phased or Limited to Particular Issues", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 168.3, + 113.4 + ], + [ + 452.9078063964844, + 113.4 + ], + [ + 452.9078063964844, + 142.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 168.3, + 142.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "C. Issues About Disclosure of Electronically Stored Information", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.744, + 379.08000000000004 + ], + [ + 483.0190124511719, + 379.08000000000004 + ], + [ + 483.0190124511719, + 394.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 129.744, + 394.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "D. Issues About Claims of Privilege or Confidentiality", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 154.836, + 490.86 + ], + [ + 457.64141845703125, + 490.86 + ], + [ + 457.64141845703125, + 506.60302734375 + ], + [ + 154.836, + 506.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "E. Limitations Imposed by the Discovery Rules", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 171.972, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 440.51019287109375, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 440.51019287109375, + 254.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 171.972, + 254.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "F. Other Orders that the Court Should Issue \nUnder Rule 26(c) or Rule 16(b) and (c)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 177.48, + 434.97 + ], + [ + 434.70513916015625, + 434.97 + ], + [ + 434.70513916015625, + 464.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 177.48, + 464.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. CONFERENCE REPORT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 216.64799999999997, + 505.43999999999994 + ], + [ + 395.7191162109375, + 505.43999999999994 + ], + [ + 395.7191162109375, + 520.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 216.64799999999997, + 520.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. Likelihood of Settlement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 533.79 + ], + [ + 389.8231201171875, + 533.79 + ], + [ + 389.8231201171875, + 548.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 548.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Likelihood of Appearance of Additional Parties", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 164.01600000000002, + 618.03 + ], + [ + 449.33978271484375, + 618.03 + ], + [ + 449.33978271484375, + 632.6030120849609 + ], + [ + 164.01600000000002, + 632.6030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "C. Proposed Time Limits", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 229.5, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 384.80322265625, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 384.80322265625, + 86.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 86.68353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "D. Proposals for the Formulation and Simplification of Issues", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 136.476, + 127.98000000000002 + ], + [ + 477.02655029296875, + 127.98000000000002 + ], + [ + 477.02655029296875, + 142.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 136.476, + 142.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "E. Necessity or Desirability of Amendments to the Pleadings", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 138.924, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 474.0537414550781, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 474.0537414550781, + 310.1835632324219 + ], + [ + 138.924, + 310.1835632324219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "F. Possibility of Obtaining Admissions of Fact and of Documents; \nStipulations; Need for Advance Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 125.46000000000001, + 407.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 501.4578552246094, + 407.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 501.4578552246094, + 436.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 125.46000000000001, + 436.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "G. Suggestions for the Avoidance of \nUnnecessary Proof and of Cumulative Evidence", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 451.13995361328125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 451.13995361328125, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "H. Suggestion on the Advisability of Referring \nMatters to a Magistrate Judge or", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 175.03199999999998, + 169.29 + ], + [ + 437.9033508300781, + 169.29 + ], + [ + 437.9033508300781, + 198.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 175.03199999999998, + 198.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "f. Preliminary Estimate of the Time Required for Trial", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 150.552, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 462.21832275390625, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 462.21832275390625, + 254.60302734375 + ], + [ + 150.552, + 254.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "J. Requested Date or Dates for Pre Trial Conference and Trial", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 131.57999999999998, + 294.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 480.96832275390625, + 294.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 480.96832275390625, + 311.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 131.57999999999998, + 311.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "K. Other Information", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 237.45600000000002, + 351.53999999999996 + ], + [ + 375.01904296875, + 351.53999999999996 + ], + [ + 375.01904296875, + 366.363037109375 + ], + [ + 237.45600000000002, + 366.363037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743756" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743763/EFTA02743763.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743763/EFTA02743763.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5c760c93bf3936a65eb4854b2de8d7e68019172d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743763/EFTA02743763.md @@ -0,0 +1,160 @@ +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA, + +CASE NO. 08-80232-CIV-MARRA + +CASE NO. 08-80380-CIV-MARRA + +CASE NO. 08-80381-CIV-MARRA + +### ORDER SETTING TRIAL DATE & DISCOVERY DEADLINES, REFERRING CASE TO MEDIATION & REFERRING DISCOVERY MOTIONS TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon receipt of the parties' joint scheduling report. + +It is thereupon, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: + +### Trial Date & Location + +1. This case is set for trial on the two-week calendar commencing Monday, January 25, 2010. Counsel for all parties shall appear at a calendar call commencing at 10:00 o'clock A.M. on Friday, January 22, 2010. Unless instructed otherwise by subsequent order, the trial and all other proceedings in this case shall be conducted at the U.S. Courthouse, 701 Clematis Street, Courtroom 4, Third Floor, West Palm Beach, Florida. + +### Motion Practice + +2. Every motion filed in this case will be accompanied by one proposed original order granting the motion. The order will contain an up-to-date service list of all attorneys in the case, including e-mail addresses. + +## Pretrial Schedule + +3. Pretrial discovery will be conducted in accordance with Local Rules 16.1 and 26.I and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. No pretrial conference shall be held in this action, unless the Court determines, either sua sponte or upon motion and order, that a pretrial conference is necessary. In setting the following deadlines, the Court has considered the parties' suggested discovery schedule. Dates and other agreements between the parties not otherwise addressed herein shall be considered part of this Order. To the extent this Order conflicts with the Local Rules, this Order supercedes the Local Rules. + +Amend Pleadings/Add Parties -December 1, 2008 + +Discovery Cutoff —August 3, 2009 + +Substantive Pretrial Motions —August 31, 2009 + +### Mediation Cutoff + +## Mandatory Pretrial Stipulation + +### Motions in Limine + +### Responses to Motions in Limine + +### Jury Instructions + +### Proposed Findings & Conclusions + +# your Dire Questions + +# Exhibit List for Court + +# Witness List for Court + +60 days before calendar call + +-Fifteen days before calendar call + +— Fifteen days before calendar call + +— Ten days before calendar call + +— Five days before calendar call + +— Five days before calendar call + +— Calendar call + +— First day of Trial (impeachment excepted) + +— First day of Trial (impeachment excepted) + +## Mandatory Pretrial Stipulation + +4. Counsel must meet at least one month prior to the beginning of the trial period to confer on the preparation of a Pretrial Stipulation in accordance with Local Rule 16.1E. + +A Pretrial Stipulation lacking substance will not be accepted. Any party causing a unilateral pretrial stipulation to be filed will be required to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed. Each attorney and each self-represented party is charged with the duty of complying with this Order. A motion for continuance shall not stay the requirement for the filing of the Pretrial Stipulation and, unless an emergency situation arises, or good cause is shown, a motion for continuance will not be considered unless it is filed at least twenty (20) days prior to the calendar call. Failure to comply with the time schedule may result in dismissal or other sanctions. + +### Consent Jurisdiction + +5. In light of the benefits offered by a trial before a magistrate judge, a, trial on a date certain as opposed to placement on a trial calendar, the panics arc urged to consider this option. Therefore, within twenty (20) days of the entry of this order each attorney is ordered to meet with his or her client and discuss this option. Plaintiff's counsel shall monitor this process. If there is not unanimity in favor of magistrate jurisdiction, plaintiff's counsel need do nothing further. lf, however, there is unanimity in favor of magistrate jurisdiction, plaintiff's counsel shall execute the form (which can be retrieved from www.flsd.uscourts.gov) entitled "Notice of Right to Consent to Disposition of a Civil Case by a United States Magistrate Judge," and forward the original, executed form to defendants' counsel. After completion by all defendants or their counsel, the original form should be forwarded to the Clerk of the Court, West Palm Beach Division. + +# Mediation + +6. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 and Local Rule 16.2, this case is referred to mediation, to the extent not excluded by Local Rule 16.2.C, as follows: + +- a. The mediation shall be completed sixty (60) days prior to the scheduled calendar call; +- b. The parties shall, within sixty (60) days hereof, agree upon a mediator and advise the Clerk's office of their choice, failing which the Clerk will designate a mediator from the list of certified mediators on a blind random basis; +- c. Plaintiff's counsel shall be responsible for coordinating the mediation conference date and location agreeable to the mediator and all counsel of record; +- d. Within five (5) days following the mediation conference, the mediator shall file a Mediation Report indicating who attended the mediation and the result thereof. + +## Discovery Referred to Magistrate Judge + +7. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the Magistrate Rules of the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida, the above-captioned cause is referred to United States Magistrate + +Judge Linnea R. for appropriate disposition of all pretrial discovery motions, and all motions that relate directly to these motions, such as motions for extension of time, motions for reconsideration, motions for sanctions, and motions for mental or physical examinations. This Order does not refer any motion which requests a continuance or extension of the trial or pretrial scheduling dates. + +# Exhibits + +8. Exhibits must be pre-marked and exchanged prior to execution of the Pretrial Stipulation. Each exhibit should be marked with a sticker identifying the case number, exhibit number, and party offering the exhibit. + +# Jury Instructions and Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law + +9. In cases tried before a jury, each party shall submit joint, stipulated proposed jury instructions and a joint, stipulated proposed verdict form in hard copy form and on 3.5" diskette. All requested instructions shall be typed on a separate page, and except for Eleventh Circuit Pattern instructions, must be supported by citations of authority. Any objections to the proposed instructions shall be stated clearly and concisely and also shall be supported by citations of authority. + +In cases tried before the Court, each party shall file proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law in hard copy form and on 3.5" diskette. Proposed Conclusions of Law must be supported by citations of authority. + +### Settlement + +10. If a case is settled, counsel are directed to inform the Court promptly at (561) 561-514- 3790 and to submit an appropriate Stipulation for Order of Dismissal, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(I). Such an Order must be filed within ten (10) days of notification to the Court, or prior to + +the Calendar Call, whichever occurs first. Cases arc not removed from the trial calendar unless a stipulation for dismissal is filed with the Court. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Florida, this 29' day of September, 2008. + +e r + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: + +Magistrate Judge Linnea R. All counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743763/EFTA02743763.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743763/EFTA02743763.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..09f6ccc0cc9dcd65458f25f8d964c0bc734861cc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743763/EFTA02743763.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,744 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743763.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 7739, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.89, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 208.692, + 57.50999999999999 + ], + [ + 403.18975830078125, + 57.50999999999999 + ], + [ + 403.18975830078125, + 86.853515625 + ], + [ + 208.692, + 86.853515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER SETTING TRIAL DATE & DISCOVERY DEADLINES, \nREFERRING CASE TO MEDIATION & REFERRING DISCOVERY MOTIONS TO \nUNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 83.844, + 656.9100000000001 + ], + [ + 525.80322265625, + 656.9100000000001 + ], + [ + 525.80322265625, + 698.5670394897461 + ], + [ + 83.844, + 698.5670394897461 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Trial Date & Location", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 115.1702880859375 + ], + [ + 365.6606750488281, + 115.1702880859375 + ], + [ + 365.6606750488281, + 128.947021484375 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 128.947021484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Motion Practice", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.772, + 282.68999999999994 + ], + [ + 350.2125244140625, + 282.68999999999994 + ], + [ + 350.2125244140625, + 296.5670471191406 + ], + [ + 263.772, + 296.5670471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Pretrial Schedule", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.548, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 354.271240234375, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 354.271240234375, + 407.9470520019531 + ], + [ + 262.548, + 407.9470520019531 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Mediation Cutoff", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.372, + 58.31999999999999 + ], + [ + 230.05784606933594, + 58.31999999999999 + ], + [ + 230.05784606933594, + 72.10406494140625 + ], + [ + 141.372, + 72.10406494140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Mandatory Pretrial Stipulation", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.372, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 289.9385681152344, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 289.9385681152344, + 100.22406005859375 + ], + [ + 141.372, + 100.22406005859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Motions in Limine", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.372, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 235.693603515625, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 235.693603515625, + 127.97406005859375 + ], + [ + 141.372, + 127.97406005859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Responses to Motions in Limine", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.372, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 300.9114990234375, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 300.9114990234375, + 155.72406005859375 + ], + [ + 141.372, + 155.72406005859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Jury Instructions", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.372, + 170.1 + ], + [ + 225.42617797851562, + 170.1 + ], + [ + 225.42617797851562, + 183.84405517578125 + ], + [ + 141.372, + 183.84405517578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Proposed Findings & Conclusions", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.372, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 309.5307922363281, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 309.5307922363281, + 211.60406494140625 + ], + [ + 141.372, + 211.60406494140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "your Dire Questions", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.372, + 225.18 + ], + [ + 242.7584686279297, + 225.18 + ], + [ + 242.7584686279297, + 239.72406005859375 + ], + [ + 141.372, + 239.72406005859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Exhibit List for Court", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.372, + 252.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 249.37429809570312, + 252.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 249.37429809570312, + 267.47406005859375 + ], + [ + 141.372, + 267.47406005859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Witness List for Court", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.372, + 294.03 + ], + [ + 252.37429809570312, + 294.03 + ], + [ + 252.37429809570312, + 309.10406494140625 + ], + [ + 141.372, + 309.10406494140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Mandatory Pretrial Stipulation", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 336.96 + ], + [ + 388.7518005371094, + 336.96 + ], + [ + 388.7518005371094, + 351.10406494140625 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 351.10406494140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Consent Jurisdiction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 616.41 + ], + [ + 362.205322265625, + 616.41 + ], + [ + 362.205322265625, + 630.1040649414062 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 630.1040649414062 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Mediation", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 279.684, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 336.6300048828125, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 336.6300048828125, + 296.1035461425781 + ], + [ + 279.684, + 296.1035461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Discovery Referred to Magistrate Judge", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 616.41 + ], + [ + 411.5246887207031, + 616.41 + ], + [ + 411.5246887207031, + 630.6035461425781 + ], + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 630.6035461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Exhibits", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 285.192, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 332.09344482421875, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 332.09344482421875, + 212.4735107421875 + ], + [ + 285.192, + 212.4735107421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Jury Instructions and Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.62400000000002, + 309.42 + ], + [ + 493.1761169433594, + 309.42 + ], + [ + 493.1761169433594, + 323.85357666015625 + ], + [ + 123.62400000000002, + 323.85357666015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Settlement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 279.072, + 588.87 + ], + [ + 337.964599609375, + 588.87 + ], + [ + 337.964599609375, + 602.5670318603516 + ], + [ + 279.072, + 602.5670318603516 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743763" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743769/EFTA02743769.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743769/EFTA02743769.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8183bdd5a30da1f1d33ca127c6a0ba4ad70eae41 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743769/EFTA02743769.md @@ -0,0 +1,159 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA=M + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### DEFENDANT'S. EPSTEIN, MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT DIRECTED TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED COMPLAINT + +Defendant, JEFFERY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves to dismiss and for more definite statement of Plaintiff JANE DOE NO. 2's Amended Complaint. Rules 12(b)(6), and 12(e) and (f), Fed.R.Civ.P. (2008). In support of his motion, Defendant states: + +## Introduction + +Defendant is filing similar motions to dismiss and for more definite statement directed to the Amended Complaints filed against Defendant in this Court in JANE DOE NO. 2, JANE DOE NO. 3, JANE DOE NO. 4 and JANE DOE NO. 5. The motions are directed to the Counts for "Sexual Assault and Battery," and "Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422" in each of the respective complaints. However, there are distinctions in the four motions filed based on the complaint allegations. For example, Defendant challenges the Plaintiffs' allegations as to assault in all four actions, and challenges the battery allegations in JANE DOE NOS. 2 and 3, + +but not in JANE DOE NOS. 4 and 5. Defendant moves to dismiss the §2422 count in all four actions. + +## Motion + +1. Counts I and III of the Amended Complaint are required to be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Rule 12(b)(6). Plaintiff has failed to allege sufficient factual allegations in the Counts and instead alleges labels and conclusions, and an attempted formulaic recitation of the elements in each Count. + +2. In the alternative, Defendant seeks more definite statement of Count I and III. In Count I, the Plaintiff is required to more definitely allege what was done to her; what EPSTEIN said and did, if anything, to create fear and apprehension in Plaintiff; what was the intentional offensive or harmful contact in pleading the elements of assault and battery. In Count III, Plaintiff is required to more definitely state the underlying factual allegations to support her claim as set forth in the statute, 18 U.S.C. §2422(b) and §2455. Rule 12(e). See discussion of law below herein. + +3. Also, Plaintiffs reference in Count Ill to 28 U.S.C. §2255, pertaining to habeas corpus proceedings is required to be stricken as immaterial. Rule 12(f). Plaintiff is required to more definitely state what statutory provision she is relying on. Rule 12 (e). + +WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court dismiss Counts I and III, strike the immaterial statutory reference, and require Plaintiff to more definitely plead the underlying elements of her claims. + +### Supporting Memorandum of Law Standard on Rule 12831(61 Motion To Dismiss + +As established by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. V. Twombly 127 S.Ct. 1955 (2007), a motion to dismiss should be granted if the plaintiff does not plead + +"enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Id, at 1974. Although the complaint need not provide detailed factual allegations, the basis for relief in the complaint must state "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id, at 1965. Further, "[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level ... on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact)." Id. On a motion to dismiss, the well pleaded allegations of plaintiffs complaint are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. M.T.V. v. DeKalb County Sch. Dist., 446 F.3d 1153, 1156 (11th Cir.2006). + +Significantly, the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. V. Twomblv abrogated the often cited observation that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove not set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief." Id, (abrogating and quoting Conley 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 102, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957)). The Supreme Court rejected the notion that "a wholly conclusory statement of claim [can] survive a motion to dismiss whenever the pleadings le[ave] open the possibility that a plaintiff might later establish some 'set of [undisclosed] facts' to support recovery." Id. As explained by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. supra at 1664-65: + +While a complaint attacked by a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations ibid.; Sanivan v. American Bd. of Psychiatry and Neurology. Inc., 40 F.3d 247, 251 (C.A.7 1994), a plaintiffs obligation to provide the "grounds" of his "entitle[ment] to relief" requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do, see Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265, 286, 106 S.Ct. 2932, 92 L.Ed.2d 209 (1986) (on a motion to dismiss, courts "are not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation"). Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level, see 5 C. & A. Federal Practice and + +> Procedure § 1216, pp. 235-236 (3d ed.2004) (hereinafter ("[T]he pleading must contain something more ... than ... a st! ement oil that merely creates a suspicion [of] a legally cognizable right of action"), on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact), see, e.g., Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002); Neitzke v. 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (" it l it)(6) does not countenance ... dismissals based on a judge's disbelief of a complaint's factual allegations"); Scheuer v. 416 U.S. 232, 236, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974) (a well-pea e complaint may proceed even if it appears "that a recovery is very remote and unlikely"). + +Pursuant to Rule 12(e), a party may move for more definite statement of a pleading to which a responsive pleading is allowed where the pleading "is so vague or ambiguous that the party cannot reasonably frame a response." The motion is required to point out the defects and the desired details. Id. + +Count I — "Sexual Assault and Battery" is subject to dismissal as Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. + +It is well settled that this Court is to apply Florida substantive law in this action. Erie R.Co. v. Tompkins, 58 S.Ct. 817 (1938). Pursuant to Florida law, although the term "assault and battery" is most commonly referred to as if it were a legal unit, or a single concept, "assault and battery are separate and distinct legal concepts, assault being the beginning of an act which, if consummated, constitutes battery." 3A Fla.Jur.2d Assault §1. An assault and battery are intentional acts. See generally, Spivey v. Battaglia 258 So.2d 815 (Fla. 1972); and Travelers Indem. Co. v. PCR. Inc., 889 So.2d 779 (Ha. 2004). + +An "assault" is an intentional, unlawful offer of corporal injury to another by force, or exertion of force directed toward another under such circumstances as to create a reasonable fear of imminent peril. See Lay v. Kremer 411 So.2d 1347 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). It must be premised upon an affirmative act - a threat to use force, or the actual + +exertion of force. See 3A Fla.Jur.2d Assault §1("The essential element of the tort of assault is the violence offered, and not actual physical contact."). + +Tort of "battery" consists of the infliction of a harmful or offensive contact upon another with the intent to cause such contact or the apprehension that such contact is imminent. Quilling v. Price, 894 So.2d 1061 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).a v. Atlantic Federal Savings & Loan 454 So.2d 52 (Fla. 41h DCA 1984)("a battery consists of the intentional infliction of a harmful or offensive contact upon the person of another'). See 3A Fla.Jur.2d Assault §1. + +With the standard of pleading established in Twombly, supra, in the context of the elements for assault and battery, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Rule 12(b)(6). As to the elements of assault, here are no factual allegations as to what was said or done to Plaintiff such that it constituted an "intentional, unlawful offer of corporal injury to another by force, or exertion of force directed toward another under such circumstances as to create a reasonable fear of imminent peril." See ¶12 of Am. Comp. The same is true for the claim of battery. Plaintiff makes the general allegation that "he (Defendant) sexually assaulted Jane." The other allegations in ¶12 pertain to what Plaintiff allegedly did. Under applicable law, Plaintiff is required to give more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action. Twombly, supra. Plaintiff is required to allege the facts of what was done to her; what EPSTEIN said and did, if anything, to create fear and apprehension in Plaintiff; what was the intentional offensive or harmful contact? + +As noted in the introduction and as this Court is well aware, there is more than one action brought against this Defendant attempting to allege similar sounding claims. + +With all due respect, the details as to a particular claim asserted by a particular Plaintiff are important to give this Defendant fair notice of Plaintiffs claim so he may properly respond. Accordingly, under applicable law, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for sexual assault and battery. + +In the alternative to dismissing Count I, Defendant requests that Plaintiff be required to give more definite statement as to what was done to her; what EPSTEIN said and did, if anything, to create fear and apprehension in Plaintiff; what was the intentional offensive or harmful contact in pleading the elements of assault and battery. Rule 12(e). + +Count III - "Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422" - Is subiect to dismissal as Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Rule 12(b)(6). Count III also contains an Immaterial reference to 28 U.S.C. §2255. which is required to be stricken and more definitely stated. + +Count III of Plaintiffs Complaint attempts to assert a claim for "Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422." In her prayer for relief in Count III, Plaintiff "demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for all damages available under 28 U.S.C. §2255(a), ." + +Although the reference to "28 U.S.C. §2255," pertaining to habeas corpus proceedings - federal custody and remedies on motion attacking sentence, is probably a typographical error by Plaintiff, and the reference to "28" was meant to be "18," Defendant requests that Plaintiff correct this error so that Defendant may have fair notice of the claim Plaintiff is attempting to assert. Whether or not the "28" is typographical error, Defendant is still entitled to dismissal of the count. + +The applicable version of these statutory provisions, (pre-2006 Amendments, as the Amended Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005,"18), provides: + +## CHAPTER 117-TRANSPORTATION FOR ILLEGAL SEXUAL ACTIVITY AND RELATED CRIMES + +## § 2422. Coercion and enticement + +(a) Whoever knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, to engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. + +(b) Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 30 years. + +## CHAPTER 110-SEXUAL EXPLOITATION AND OTHER ABUSE OF CHILDREN + +# § 2255. Civil remedy for personal injuries + +(a) Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242 2243 2251 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than \$50,000 in value. + +(b) Any action commenced under this section shall be barred unless the complaint is filed within six years after the right of action first accrues or in the case of a person under a legal disability, not later than three years after the disability. + +Relevant to Plaintiffs complaint, 18 U.S.C. 2255(a) creates a civil remedy for "a minor who is a victim of a violation of section ... 2422 ... of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation ... ." Plaintiff has failed to plead any factual allegations whatsoever pertaining to violations of 18 U.S.C. 2422. Rather, Plaintiff has alleged conclusory allegations simply attempting to track parts of the statutory language + +in the statute without underlying factual allegations pertaining to the Plaintiff and any conduct by Defendant. See ¶29 of Am. Comp. Plaintiffs allegations, (or lack of factual allegations), are precisely what the standard set forth by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. prohibits — Plaintiffs complaint alleges only "labels and conclusions, and a (partial) formulaic recitation of the elements." + +First, the Amended Complaint fails to designate whether Plaintiff is relying on §2422(a) or §2422(b). Second, although the complaint does contain a partial tracking of the language in 18 U.S.C. §2422(b), it contains absolutely no factual allegations concerning the requisite "using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce" by Plaintiff to state a cause of action based on a violation of 18 U.S.C. 2422(b). As well, there are no underlying factual allegations involving this Plaintiff as to the requisite elements that a defendant knowingly persuaded, induced, enticed, or coerced any individual (Plaintiff in this case) who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempted to do so. See 18 U.S.C. 2422(b); i.e. with what criminal offense could Plaintiff and Defendant have been charged. Again, a Plaintiff cannot simply track the language of a statute without some underlying factual allegations to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Accordingly, Count III is required to be dismissed, and the reference to 28 USC 2455 be stricken. + +In the alternative, Plaintiff should be required to more definitely state the underlying factual allegations to support her claim as set forth in the statute, 18 U.S.C. §2422(b) and §2455. + +**Conclusion** + +As discussed above herein, under the pleading standard established in Twombly, supra, and law concerning the elements of Count I and III, Plaintiff has failed to state claims upon which relief can be granted. Rule 12(b)(6). Plaintiff's complaint lack underlying factual allegations and, thus, Plaintiff is required to more definitely state the requisite factual allegations. Finally, Plaintiff should correct any improper statutory references. + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 6th day of October, 2008: + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) +[jherman@hermanlaw.com](mailto:jherman@hermanlaw.com) +[lrivera@hermanlaw.com](mailto:lrivera@hermanlaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Michael R. Tein, Esq. +[REDACTED] Tein, P.L. +3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 +Coconut Grove, FL 33133 +305-442-1101 +Fax: 305 442 6744 +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* +[tein@lewistein.com](mailto:tein@lewistein.com) + +![]()![]()Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bclclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bclclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +*(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743769/EFTA02743769.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743769/EFTA02743769.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e6202b8b3b90a5198675a8496b7baf55e161e88c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743769/EFTA02743769.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,618 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743769.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 17352, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.6, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 84.177490234375 + ], + [ + 406.36800000000005, + 84.177490234375 + ], + [ + 406.36800000000005, + 112.66998291015625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 112.66998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S. EPSTEIN, MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR MORE \nDEFINITE STATEMENT DIRECTED TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 103.26000213623047, + 280.677490234375 + ], + [ + 502.0448303222656, + 280.677490234375 + ], + [ + 502.0448303222656, + 308.61 + ], + [ + 103.26000213623047, + 308.61 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 430.677490234375 + ], + [ + 336.5785217285156, + 430.677490234375 + ], + [ + 336.5785217285156, + 445.5 + ], + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 445.5 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Motion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.9700012207031, + 124.66748046875 + ], + [ + 324.36, + 124.66748046875 + ], + [ + 324.36, + 139.27996826171875 + ], + [ + 282.9700012207031, + 139.27996826171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Supporting Memorandum of Law \nStandard on Rule 12831(61 Motion To Dismiss", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 182.988, + 620.4275054931641 + ], + [ + 421.73590087890625, + 620.4275054931641 + ], + [ + 421.73590087890625, + 648.5400085449219 + ], + [ + 182.988, + 648.5400085449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CHAPTER 117-TRANSPORTATION FOR ILLEGAL SEXUAL ACTIVITY \nAND RELATED CRIMES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 96.54999542236328, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 512.2439999999999, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 512.2439999999999, + 98.77996826171875 + ], + [ + 96.54999542236328, + 98.77996826171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a7 2422. Coercion and enticement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 96.1500015258789, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 288.864, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 288.864, + 114.90997314453125 + ], + [ + 96.1500015258789, + 114.90997314453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CHAPTER 110-SEXUAL EXPLOITATION AND OTHER ABUSE OF \nCHILDREN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 96.16999816894531, + 335.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 511.02, + 335.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 511.02, + 365.77996826171875 + ], + [ + 96.16999816894531, + 365.77996826171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a7 2255. Civil remedy for personal injuries", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 96.1500015258789, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 333.60064697265625, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 333.60064697265625, + 381.90997314453125 + ], + [ + 96.1500015258789, + 381.90997314453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 271.116, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 335.376, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 335.376, + 111.78000000000002 + ], + [ + 271.116, + 111.78000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 289.17 + ], + [ + 364.75199999999995, + 289.17 + ], + [ + 364.75199999999995, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 303.75 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743769" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743779/EFTA02743779.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743779/EFTA02743779.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f1c6a3ffcf520ee06bebaa598561a221071bf698 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743779/EFTA02743779.md @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +ORDER + +Upon Plaintiffs' Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motions to Dismiss and for More Definite Statement, and good cause being shown it is hereby + +ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs shall have an enlargement of time of five (5) days, until October 31, 2008, to respond to Defendant's Motions to Dismiss. + +DONE AND ORDERED in in Ft. Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this day of 2008. + +DISTRICT COURT JUDGE \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743779/EFTA02743779.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743779/EFTA02743779.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b5012497f723880dc44a4d9ff21817ab38b0f1f9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743779/EFTA02743779.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743779.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 884, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.15, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743779" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743781/EFTA02743781.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743781/EFTA02743781.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ba5268675ab3cf1ae6b99ad332ef559536feba7a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743781/EFTA02743781.md @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +> PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe 2, Jane Doe 3, Jane Doe 4 and Jane Doe 5, by and through undersigned counsel, file this Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motions to Dismiss and for More Definite Statement, and state as follows: + +1. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein filed a similar Motion to Dismiss and Motion for More Definite Statement (the "Motions to Dismiss") in each of the above-captioned cases, on October 6, 2008. Plaintiffs' response to the Motions to Dismiss under Local Rule 7.1 is presently due on October 24, 2008. + +2. Plaintiffs seek an enlargement of time of five (5) business days, until October 31, 2008, to file their response to the Motions to Dismiss. This enlargement of time will synchronize the response date to the Motions to Dismiss in the above-captioned cases with the response date to the similar Motions to Dismiss filed in Jane Doe Nos. 6-7 v. Epstein, case nos. 08-80994-CI V-Marra and 08- 80993-CIV-Marra, which is October 31, 2008. + +3. Additionally, this request for enlargement of time is necessitated by Plaintiffs' counsel's prior commitments and the demands of other cases and matters, including upcoming discovery cutoffs in Jane Doe v. School Board of Broward County and Scavella case no. 07-21367- CIV-SEITZ, U.S. District Court, Southern District Court of Florida, and Doe v. Faerber, case no. 05-CV-142-FTM-33DNF, U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida. + +4. This Motion seeks a brief enlargement of time and is not brought for purposes of delay. + +5. Plaintiff has conferred with Defendant's counsel, Robert Critton, regarding this request for enlargement of time, and he has no objection to this request. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests an Order granting an enlargement of time of five (5) business days, until October 31, 2008, to file the Plaintiffs' response to the Motions to Dismiss. + +Dated: October 24, 2008. Respectfully submitted, + +By: a Jeffrey M. Herman Jeffrey M. Herman (FL Bar No. 521647) jherman@hermanlaw.com Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@hermanlaw.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL. Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on October 24, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +s/ Jeffrey M. Herman + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +Michael R. Tein, Esq. tein@lewistein.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Michael Pike, Esq. mpike@bciclaw.com + +s/ Jeffrey M. Herman \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743781/EFTA02743781.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743781/EFTA02743781.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..75e5534fdb9213e633b0606e64de957aa3741c5c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743781/EFTA02743781.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,242 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743781.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3652, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.24, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 377.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 377.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.1346740722656, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.1346740722656, + 114.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 114.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743781" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743785/EFTA02743785.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743785/EFTA02743785.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..27795a27f3e60ab53819804bd199b3aa1206dce9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743785/EFTA02743785.md @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAIMI + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRAIMI + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRAMMI + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +Upon Plaintiffs' Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motions to Dismiss and for More Definite Statement, and good cause being shown it is hereby + +ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs shall have an enlargement of time of five (5) days, until October 31, 2008, to respond to Defendant's Motions to Dismiss. + +DONE AND ORDERED in in Ft. Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this at/ day of f) .--aefa.\_ , 2008. + +DISTRICT COURT JUDGE \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743785/EFTA02743785.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743785/EFTA02743785.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0ab848f6181294566b4306a1bd67f05ae807ff8d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743785/EFTA02743785.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743785.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 912, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.4, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.72000000000003, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 401.5509338378906, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 401.5509338378906, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 201.72000000000003, + 115.83 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.9, + 704.7 + ], + [ + 333.2853698730469, + 704.7 + ], + [ + 333.2853698730469, + 718.47 + ], + [ + 282.9, + 718.47 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 98 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743785" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743787/EFTA02743787.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743787/EFTA02743787.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ce49c14f24483d775cb0fc78ff02b48d2d13dbb7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743787/EFTA02743787.md @@ -0,0 +1,51 @@ +![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg) + +## U.S. Department of Justice + +United States Attorney Southern District of Florida + +500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561)820-8711 Facsimile: (561) 820-8777 + +July 10, 2008 + +## VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL + +Jeffrey Herman, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 + +> Re: Jeffrey Epstein NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM + +Dear Mr. Herman: + +By virtue of this letter, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida asks that you provide the following notice to your client, + +On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein) entered aplea of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution) and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009454MCCCIVIB and 2008-cf-00938IMOCCVIB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be followed by an additional six months' imprisonment, followed by twelve months of Community Control 1, with conditions of community confinement imposed by the Court. + +In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain conditions. + +One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following: + +"Any person, who while a minor, was avictim of aviolation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same JEFFREY HERMAN, ESQ. + +NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM + +JULY 10, 2008 + +PAGE 2 OF 2 + +rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein. Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens if any aplaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less." + +Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that your client, MEN MN/ is an individual whom the United States was prepared to name as avictim of an enumerated offense. + +Should your client decide to file aclaim against Jeffrey Epstein, his attorney, Jack Goldberger, asks that you contact him at Atterbury Goldberger and Weiss, 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401. + +Please understand that neither the U.S. Attorney's Office nor the Federal Bureau of Investigation can take part in or otherwise assist in civil litigation; however, if you do file a claim under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 and Mr. Epstein denies that your client is avictim of an enumerated offense, please provide written documentation of that denial to the undersigned. + +Please thank your client for all of her assistance during the course of this investigation and express the heartfelt regards of myself and Special Agents Kuyrkendall and Richards for the health and well-being of fl + +> R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY + +By: + +cc: Jack Goldberger, Esq. + +A. VILLAFARA ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743787/EFTA02743787.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743787/EFTA02743787.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..51f65d5705ba46ae23a653197d861c102b688d9e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743787/EFTA02743787.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,149 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743787.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 3531, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.88, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "U.S. Department of Justice", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 169.80100000000002, + 55.148 + ], + [ + 316.22857666015625, + 55.148 + ], + [ + 316.22857666015625, + 69.7681884765625 + ], + [ + 169.80100000000002, + 69.7681884765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.33399999999999, + 240.05599999999998 + ], + [ + 271.37310791015625, + 240.05599999999998 + ], + [ + 271.37310791015625, + 254.917236328125 + ], + [ + 72.33399999999999, + 254.917236328125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 297 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 360 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743787" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743787/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743787/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7a0757dd4d30c6ea8f78ed39f0f1527db534108c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743787/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f946837e7c1ba631366aa4fef414e729cc6c63447b3f1c472e9cb1387616817b +size 11805 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743789/EFTA02743789.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743789/EFTA02743789.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c2b0cfc65faad9741bcbd27b71f793769b56032a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743789/EFTA02743789.md @@ -0,0 +1,135 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08- 80994-CIV-MARRAia + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO MOTIONS TO DISMISS + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-7, by and through undersigned counsel, file this Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motions to Dismiss, pursuant to S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1(C), as follows: + +#### I. Introduction and Sununars + +Defendant's Motions to Dismiss and for More Definite Statement filed in each of the abovecaptioned cases pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(6)(6) and 12(e) essentially concede that Plaintiffs have alleged the elements of the claims asserted in Counts I and III of each pleading, but contend that more factual allegations are necessary for these claims. The pleadings at issue contain a short and plain statement of the claims showing that the Plaintiffs are entitled to relief in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). The specific facts sought by Defendant may properly be the subject of discovery, but are not necessary for purposes of pleading. Accordingly, Defendant's Motions are without merit and should be denied in their entirety. + +# II. Facts Plead + +The pleadings in these six cases are all similarly structured and assert the same claims. In the section entitled "Factual Allegations" each describes the plan and scheme of Defendant Epstein to recruit underage girls to his Palm Beach mansion for "massages". (Jane Doe No. 2 Amd. Compl.11 10-11; Jane Doe No. 3 Amd. Compl 10-11; Jane Doe No. 4 Amd. Comp/.111-12; Jane Doe No. 5 Amd. Compl. 1 10-11; Jane Doe No. 6 Amd. Compl.111-12; Jane Doe No. 7 Amd. Comp1.1 11-12). The pleading then alleges that, consistent with this scheme, the Plaintiff was lured to Epstein's Palm Beach mansion to give a massage for monetary compensation. (Jane Doe No. 2 Amd. Compl. 1 12; (Jane Doe No. 3 Amd. Compl. 1 12; Jane Doe No. 4 Amd. Compl. 1 13; Jane Doe No. 5 Amd. Compl. 1 12; Jane Doe No. 6 Amd. Compl. 1 13; Jane Doe No. 7 Amd. Compl. 1 13). The Plaintiff was directed up a flight of stairs to a room where Epstein instructed the Plaintiff to remove her clothes and give him a massage. Epstein then masturbated and sexually assaulted the Plaintiff during this massage. (Jane Doe No. 2 Amd. Compl. 112; Jane Doe No. 3 Amd. Compl. 112; Jane Doe No. 4 Amd. Compl. 113; Jane Doe No. 5 Amd. Compl. 112; Jane Doe No. 6 Amd. Compl. 113; Jane Doe No. 7 Amd. Compl. 113). + +Count I of the pleading in each case alleges a claim of sexual assault and battery. Count II alleges a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress, which Defendant does not seek to dismiss in his Motions before the Court. Count HI alleges a claim for coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422. Defendant's Motions to Dismiss seek dismissal of Counts I and III for failure to state a claim under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(bX6), or alternatively move for a more definite statement under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(e) on these Counts. As discussed below, Plaintiffs' claims are sufficiently plead, and Defendant's Motions should be denied in their entirety. + +# III. Argument + +# A. THE STANDARD UNDER FED.R.CIV.P. 12(b)(6) DOES NOT SUPPORT DISMISSAL + +The gravamen of Defendant's Motion is that Plaintiffs' have not pled sufficient facts in support of their claims in Counts I and III. According to Defendant, the pleadings in this case do not satisfy "the standard of pleading" established in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly 127 S.Ct. 1955 (2007). In making this argument, Defendant would extend Twombly well beyond its intended scope. + +Twombly was an antitrust conspiracy case, in which the Court abrogated the longstanding pronouncement first made in Con 355 U.S. 41 (1957), that a complaint should not be dismissed under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(bX6) "unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief." 127 S.Ct. at 1969. The Court noted that it did "not require heightened fact pleading of specifics, but only enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Id. at 1974 (emphasis supplied). The antitrust conspiracy claim before the Court was dismissed "[b]t:cause the plaintiffs here have not nudged their claims across the line from conceivable to plausible...." Id. + +Since Twombly, courts and commentators have grappled with the case's meaning and scope. Courts within the Eleventh Circuit have held that Twombly did not alter the standard for dismissal under Rule 12(bX6) in the typical case. See, e.g.,CBT Flint Partners, LLC v. Goodmail Systems, Inc 529 F.Supp. 2d 1376, 1379 (N.D. Ga. 2007); Coughlin v. Wal-Mart Stores East LP 2008 WL 2704381 (M.D. Fla. 2008); Capaz v. Whitaker, Weinstraub & Grizzard, M.D.S. P.A., 2007 WL 1655473 (M.D. Fla. 2007). In CBT Flint Partners the Court warned against reading the decision in Trombly too broadly: + +In my view, Trombly did not radically alter the elementary rules of civil procedure that have governed litigation in the federal courts for ibtt st seventy years. The Court's forced retirement of Conley v. "no set of facts" language does not change the fundamental command of Rule 8 as to what a valid complaint must look like. Indeed, the Court made clear that it was not imposing a heightened pleading standard. As a general matter, I am loath to assume that the Supreme Court circumvented the normal channels for amending the Federal Rules. The Court's "new standard" was merely a specific way to articulate a solution to what it perceived to be a specific pleading problem, in a specific area of law that inflicted a high cost upon antitrust defendants. It was not a broad based new license for federal courts to ramp up pleading requirements. + +529 F.Supp. 2d at 1379 (citations omitted). + +The standard for pleading in the federal courts remains controlled by Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2), which "only requires a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief in order to give the defendant fair notice of what the claim is and the grounds upon which it rests." Cavaz, 2007 WL 1655473 at \*1. While the scope of Twombly may not be entirely clear, it plainly cannot be read to turn pleadings into a discovery device, as Defendant advocates here in seeking dismissal for failure to plead detailed factual allegations. + +In Iqbal v. Hasty 490 F.3d 143 (2d Cir. 2007), the Court reviewed and analyzed in depth Twombly's "conflicting signals", and ultimately held that the Supreme Court did not impose "a universal standard of heightened fact pleading," but rather a "flexible 'plausibility standard' ". Id. at 157-158. This standard "obliges a pleader to amplify a claim with some factual allegations in those contexts where such amplification is needed to render the claim plausible." Id. (emphasis original). See also Sales v. All Florida Dialysis Services, Inc., 2007 WL 3231723 \*2 n.2 (S.D. Fla. 2007) (noting that Twomblv was inapplicable because the defendants did not raise the type of pleading deficiencies confronted in Twombly - lack of specific time, place or person involved in the alleged antitrust conspiracies). + +The instant allegations and claims cannot be compared to the speculative antitrust conspiracy alleged in Twombly. See 127 S.Ct. at 1965. There should be no doubt that the Plaintiffs' claims are plausible. Accordingly Twombley is not authority for dismissal of the pleadings in these cases. + +# II. THE ELEMENTS OF COUNT I FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT AND BATTERY ARE SUFFICIENTLY ALLEGED + +In each case, the claim in Count I is labeled "Sexual Assault and Battery." Assault and battery are closely related common law intentional torts that are often alleged together. See Herzfeld v. Herzfeld 781 So.2d 1070 (F1a.2001) (noting that plaintiff alleged intentional ton of "assault and battery" based on allegations of sexual abuse); v. Atlantic Federal Savings & Loan, 454 So.2d 52 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (holding that a cause of action for assault and battery cannot be based entirely on an omission). A common law assault occurs when a person "acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with the person of the other, or an imminent apprehension of such contact, and the other is thereby put in such imminent apprehension". Restatement (Second) of Tons, Assault §21 (1965). "A battery consists of the infliction of a harmful or offensive contact upon another with the intent to cause such contact or the apprehension that such contact is imminent". See Paul v. Holbrook, 696 So.2d 1371 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). See also Scelta v. Delicatessen Support Services. Inc. 57 F.Supp. 2d 1327, 1358-59 (M.D. Ha. 1999) (allegation that defendant attempted to put his hands down plaintiff's dress, and that there was an actual and intentional touching, sufficient to state a claim for battery); Hogan v. Tavzel 660 So.2d 350 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (tortfeasor may be liable for battery for infecting another with a sexually transmitted disease). + +Defendant does not contend that the Plaintiffs failed to allege these elements of the common law tons of assault and battery in Count I of their pleadings. Rather, Defendant argues that the pleadings fail to allege the specific facts of "what was said or done to Plaintiff'. Defendant thus misconstrues Twombly. All of the Plaintiffs allege essentially the same plan and scheme of Defendant to lure underage girls to his Palm Beach mansion for "massages", leading to Defendant engaging in sexual activities with the Plaintiffs. The specific facts concerning what was said and done prior to and during the course of these "massages" is the proper subject of discovery, not the pleadings. Plaintiffs satisfy the pleading requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2), and Twombly does not require more specific fact pleading in these cases. + +# III. PLAINTIFFS SUFFICIENTLY ALLEGE A CLAIM IN COUNT III FOR VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C. 42422 + +The pleadings in Count III closely track the language of 18 U.S.C. §2422, and thus set forth the elements of a violation of this Statute, as follows: + +(i) Allegation in Complaint. Epstein used a facility or means of interstate commerce to knowingly persuade, induce or entice Jane Doe, when she was under the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense; and + +(ii) 18 U.S.C. 42422(M. Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, ... knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so... + +18 U.S.C. §2455(b); Jane Doe 2 Amd. Comp!. 1 29; Jane Doe 3 Amd. Compl. 1 29; Jane Doe 4 Amd. Compl. 1 30; Jane Doe 5 Amd. Comp1.1 29; Jane Doe 6 Amd. Compl. 1 28; Jane Doe 7 Amd. Compl. 1 29. Defendant does not appear to contend that Plaintiffs have failed to allege the elements of a violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 in Count III, but instead argues that further factual allegations are necessary. As with Count I, such specific facts are the proper subject of discovery, and need not be set forth in the pleadings under Rule 8(aX2). There is no issue of plausibility concerning the Plaintiffs' claims under 18 U.S.C. §2422. Indeed, the Plaintiffs in these cases were notified by the U.S. Attorney's office that the Defendant has agreed that each Plaintiff has the same right to proceed on her federal statutory claim "as she would have had if Mr. Epstein had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense." ( \$ite July 10, 2008 letter from A. Villafafia, Assistant U.S. Attorney, attached hereto as Exhibit "A"). + +Defendant also attempts to make much of a typographical error that appears in Count III in the "Wherefore" clause demanding a judgment for damages. There, the pleading inadvertently makes reference to 28 U.S.C. §2255(a) instead of 18 U.S.C. §2255(a). As is clear from the Defendants' Motions, Defendant is well aware that this is a typographical error and that the intent is to reference 18 U.S.C. §2255. In any event, this reference concerns the Plaintiffs' damages, not the elements of Plaintiff's claim set forth in the paragraphs above it. I Count III nonetheless satisfies Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(3), as the "Wherefore" clause states that Plaintiff seeks actual and compensatory damages, costs of suit, attorneys' fees and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. If deemed necessary, the typographical error in the "Wherefore" clause of Count III can be corrected by interlineation. It does not warrant a dismissal and repleading. + +# IV. THERE IS NO BASIS FOR DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT + +A motion for more definite statement under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(e) may only be granted "if a pleading is so vague or ambiguous that a party cannot reasonably be required to frame a responsive pleading." v. Two Brothers Farm. LLC, 2008 WL 4405409 \*1 (S.D. Ha. 2008) (quoting Betancourt v. Marine Cargo Mgmt., 930 F. Supp. 606, 608 (S.D. Fla. 1996)). Federal courts disfavor motions for more definite statement. Home Mgmt. Solutions. Inc. v. Prescient. Inc. 2007 WL 2412834 (S.D. Ha. 2007). Most importantly, "Defendants may not use a motion for more definite statement as a means of discovery regarding those claims." 2008 WL 4405409 at \*1. Yet that is exactly how Defendant Epstein uses his Motions for More Definite Statement. He + +' As a result, this reference in error to 28 U.S.C. 2255(a) is not set forth in a paragraph to which Defendant would be expected to frame an answer. + +seeks by these Motions specific facts which are the proper subject of discovery, not pleadings. Accordingly, Defendants Motions for More Definite Statement should be denied. + +# V. Conclusion + +For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs respectfully request that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss be denied in their entirety. + +Dated: October 31, 2008. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Jeffrey M. Herman Jeffrey M. Herman (FL Bar No. 521647) iherman@hermanlaw.com Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@hermanlaw.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on October 31, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +s/ Jeffrey M. Herman + +# SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +Michael R. Tein, Esq. tein@lewistein.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bc1claw.com + +Michael Pike, Esq. mpike@bciclaw.com + +s/ Jeffrey M. Herman \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743789/EFTA02743789.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743789/EFTA02743789.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..48337e45ebe58ee53d7d996a7e8a2561cfe8f3af --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743789/EFTA02743789.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,719 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743789.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 15676, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.75, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM OF LAW \nIN OPPOSITION TO MOTIONS TO DISMISS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 180.54, + 378.27 + ], + [ + 432.22998046875, + 378.27 + ], + [ + 432.22998046875, + 408.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 180.54, + 408.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction and Sununars", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 214.2, + 477.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 396.0953674316406, + 477.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 396.0953674316406, + 491.60302734375 + ], + [ + 214.2, + 491.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Facts Plead", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.81599999999997, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 356.1445007324219, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 356.1445007324219, + 114.363037109375 + ], + [ + 255.81599999999997, + 114.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. Argument", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 258.876, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 353.11187744140625, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 353.11187744140625, + 114.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 258.876, + 114.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. THE STANDARD UNDER FED.R.CIV.P. 12(b)(6) \nDOES NOT SUPPORT DISMISSAL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 154.836, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 457.8358154296875, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 457.8358154296875, + 156.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 154.836, + 156.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. THE ELEMENTS OF COUNT I FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT \nAND BATTERY ARE SUFFICIENTLY ALLEGED", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 130.968, + 154.71 + ], + [ + 481.0647888183594, + 154.71 + ], + [ + 481.0647888183594, + 184.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 130.968, + 184.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. PLAINTIFFS SUFFICIENTLY ALLEGE A CLAIM \nIN COUNT III FOR VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C. 42422", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 148.71599999999998, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 468.0710144042969, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 468.0710144042969, + 268.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 148.71599999999998, + 268.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IV. THERE IS NO BASIS FOR DEFENDANT'S \nMOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 169.524, + 406.62 + ], + [ + 456.38507080078125, + 406.62 + ], + [ + 456.38507080078125, + 436.10302734375 + ], + [ + 169.524, + 436.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "V. Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 256.428, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 355.39495849609375, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 355.39495849609375, + 142.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 256.428, + 142.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 85.863037109375 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 85.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.1346740722656, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.1346740722656, + 114.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 114.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 87 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743789" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743800/EFTA02743800.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743800/EFTA02743800.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..09c64c6bc4ec819996a363df76e49259cdf6ed9d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743800/EFTA02743800.md @@ -0,0 +1,47 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS & FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT + +Defendant, JEFFERY EPSTEIN, (EPSTEIN), by and through his undersigned attorneys, files his reply to Plaintiffs' Memorandum Of Law In Opposition To Motions To Dismiss, dated October 31, 2008, and states: + +Although Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2 through 7, are separate and distinct persons, in separate and distinct actions, with separate and distinct facts and circumstances pertaining to the claims each is attempting to allege, Plaintiffs' counsel has filed a broad brush, identical response to Defendant's motions to dismiss and for more definite statement which were filed in each of the actions. As pointed out in Defendant's previously filed motions, there are factual distinctions in the actions and the allegations in Plaintiffs' attempts to assert the claims labeled as Count I - "Sexual Assault and Battery," and Count III - "Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity In Violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422." It is essential that each of the actions and the respective complaints filed therein are examined and treated as separate and distinct actions in deciding the respective legal issues and positions asserted. + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Page 2 + +As noted, Defendant's motion is directed to Count I and III of the respective complaints. Contrary to each Plaintiff's assertion, Defendant does not concede that Plaintiff has sufficiently plead the elements required to assert claims in Count I for "Sexual Assault and Battery" and in Count III pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§2422, and Defendant has not "misconstrued" the pleading standard formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S.Ct. 1955 (2007). In discussing Twombly, the Eleventh Circuit in Iv\_. Fla. International Univ., 495 F.3d 1289, 1295 (11th Cir. 2007), noted - "The Supreme Court's most recent formulation of the pleading specificity standard is that 'stating such a claim requires a complaint with enough factual matter (taken as true) to suggest' the required element." In order to sufficiently allege the claim, the complaint is required to identify "facts that are suggestive enough to render [the element] plausible." 495 F.3d at 1296 (quoting Twombly , 127 S.Ct. at 1965). As stated in Defendant's motion to dismiss, Plaintiff has not met this standard requiring the pleading of facts to suggest the elements of the claims she is attempting to assert. In other words, Plaintiff is required to plead facts that suggest each element of the claim she is attempting to assert, as opposed to a generalized pleading. Accordingly, Defendant relies on the legal positions and argument in his motion, rather than reargue what has already been stated. + +Finally, the letter attached as an Exhibit to Plaintiffs response is not dispositive of the issue of whether the Plaintiff has sufficiently alleged a claim in Count III pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2422. + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Page 3 + +Wherefore, Defendant requests that this Court grant his motion to dismiss and for more definite statement directed to Plaintiffs Complaint. + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record dentified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this/0 day of November 2008: + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ahorowitzahermanlaw.com jhermanehermanlaw.com Iriveraehermanlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jaqesqObellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Njawel R. Tein, Esq. Tein, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, FL 33133 305-442-1101 Fax: 305 442 6744 Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein tein lewistein.com + +Respectfully sub + +By: ROBERT D RITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Ba• o. 224162 rcrit bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 moikeebcIclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743800/EFTA02743800.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743800/EFTA02743800.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d3f46e8c2154434802a4c8733cc65bbd5aaccf34 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743800/EFTA02743800.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,204 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743800.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 4618, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.82, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 407.8999938964844, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 407.8999938964844, + 101.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 101.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO \nDEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS & FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 107.1, + 265.3074951171875 + ], + [ + 500.9239807128906, + 265.3074951171875 + ], + [ + 500.9239807128906, + 293.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 107.1, + 293.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.63600000000002, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 360.82440185546875, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 360.82440185546875, + 141.68701171875 + ], + [ + 246.63600000000002, + 141.68701171875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 117 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743800" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743803/EFTA02743803.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743803/EFTA02743803.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a3dbaeada2e89157b8d30c9c993365ce199f7399 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743803/EFTA02743803.md @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL AS CO-COUNSEL + +TEN, PL notices its withdrawal as co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein in this matter. + +Respectfully submitted, + +TEIN, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 Tel: 305 442 1101 Fax: 305 442 6744 + +By: /s/ Michael R. Min + +GUY A. Fla. Bar 11.740 + +Fla. Bar No. 993522 tein©lewistein.com + +![](_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg) + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on December 30, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system. I further certify that plaintiff's attorneys are CM/ECF participants, as indicated by the CM/ECF Attorney Listings for this case. + +> /s/ Michael R. Tein Michael R. Tein + +## Service List + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. Atterbery, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman, LLP 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +![](_page_1_Picture_10.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743803/EFTA02743803.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743803/EFTA02743803.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..67a386ff9c4b8d19a639ced40a35ea6ea0e68081 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743803/EFTA02743803.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,204 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743803.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1355, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.99, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_10.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.25000000000003, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 397.3210144042969, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 397.3210144042969, + 99.72802734375 + ], + [ + 198.25000000000003, + 99.72802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL AS CO-COUNSEL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 169.58, + 318.33 + ], + [ + 432.6230773925781, + 318.33 + ], + [ + 432.6230773925781, + 333.3580322265625 + ], + [ + 169.58, + 333.3580322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 220.21, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 385.11810302734375, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 385.11810302734375, + 99.72802734375 + ], + [ + 220.21, + 99.72802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Service List", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 268.40000000000003, + 255.96000000000004 + ], + [ + 335.01556396484375, + 255.96000000000004 + ], + [ + 335.01556396484375, + 272.22802734375 + ], + [ + 268.40000000000003, + 272.22802734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743803" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743803/_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743803/_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..54c3e6f93592fe5879d3c8f0ff4845aca6185866 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743803/_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c2354a8b5d31e1b39b9a691e350dc8be6cd2b563bb39ea2ca0e34290b9648a61 +size 2521 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743803/_page_1_Picture_10.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743803/_page_1_Picture_10.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ce319e151ba31a49bf765183b7ab467ec0e20df1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743803/_page_1_Picture_10.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8bc3726e53080567f834d1243f108e59526120b497e34e76978efe0130223c6b +size 2565 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743805/EFTA02743805.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743805/EFTA02743805.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2241b5ad4c33e7dd03be636b07b97edd8473f124 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743805/EFTA02743805.md @@ -0,0 +1,125 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA + +Jane Doe No. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Defendant")'s Motion to Dismiss and Motion for More Definite Statement, Directed to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (DE 46), filed October 6, 2008. Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 ("Plaintiff") filed a response to the motion (DE 49) and Defendant filed a Reply (DE 50). The Court has carefully reviewed the motion, response, and reply, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +### Background + +On February 6, 2008, Plaintiff filed her Complaint against Defendant (DE 1), which was replaced on September 22, 2008 by an Amended Complaint (DE 42). Plaintiff brings suit alleging Count I - Sexual Assault and Battery; Count II - Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; and Count III - Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422. + +The facts, as alleged in the Amended Complaint, are as follows: At all relevant times, Defendant was an adult male. Am. Compl. 1 8. Defendant engaged in a plan and scheme in + +which he gained access to primarily economically disadvantaged minor girls in his home, sexually assaulted these girls, and then gave them money. Am. Compl. ¶ 8. In or about 2004- 2005, Plaintiff, then approximately 16 years old, became one of Defendant's victims. Am. Compl. ¶ 9. Defendant carried out his scheme and assaulted girls in Florida, New York, and his private island in St. Am. Compl. ¶ 9. + +Defendant's scheme involved the use of young girls to recruit underage girls. Am. Compl. ¶ 10. Under Defendant's plan, underage girls were recruited ostensibly to give a wealthy man a massage for monetary compensation in his Palm Beach mansion. Id. The recruiter would be contacted when Defendant was planning to be at his Palm Beach residence or soon after he arrived. Id. Defendant or someone on his behalf directed the recruiter to bring one or more underage girls to the residence. Id. The recruiter generally sought out economically disadvantaged underage girls from western Palm Beach County who would be enticed by the money being offered — generally \$200 to \$300 per "massage" session — and who were perceived as less likely to complain to authorities or have credibility if allegations of improper conduct were made. Id. This was an important element of Epstein's plan. Id. + +Defendant's plan and scheme reflected a particular pattern and method. Am. Comp!. ¶ 11. Upon arrival at Defendant's mansion, the underage victim would be introduced to Defendant's assistant, who gathered the girl's personal information, including her name and telephone number. Id. would then bring the girl up a flight of stairs to a bedroom that contained a massage table in addition to other furnishings. Id. There were photographs of nude women lining the stairway and in the bedroom. Id. would then leave the girl alone in the room, whereupon Defendant would enter wearing only a towel. Id. Defendant would then + +remove his towel, lay down naked on the massage table, and direct the girl to remove her clothes. + +Id. Defendant would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, including masturbation and touching the girl's vagina. Id. + +Consistent with the foregoing plan, Plaintiff was recruited to give Defendant a massage for monetary compensation. Am. Compl. ¶ 12. Plaintiff was brought to Defendant's mansion in Palm Beach. Id. Plaintiff was introduced to M, who led her up the stairs to the room with the massage table. Id. In this room, Defendant told Plaintiff to remove her clothes and to give him a massage. Id. Plaintiff kept her panties and bra on and complied with Defendant's instructions. Id. Defendant wore only a towel around his waist. Id. After a short period of time, Defendant removed the towel and rolled over, exposing his penis. Id. Defendant began to masturbate and he sexually assaulted Plaintiff. Id. + +After Defendant had completed the assault, Plaintiff was then able to get dressed, leave the room and go back downstairs. Am. Compl. ¶ 13. Defendant paid Plaintiff \$200. Defendant paid the recruiter \$100 for bringing Plaintiff to him. Id. As a result of this encounter, Plaintiff experienced confusion, shame, humiliation, and embarrassment, and has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries. Am. Compl. ¶ 14. + +Under Count I - Sexual Assault and Battery, the Amended Complaint alleges as follows: Defendant acted with intent to cause an offensive contact with Plaintiff, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and Plaintiff was thereby put in such imminent apprehension. Am. Compl. ¶ 16. Defendant made an intentional, unlawful offer of offensive sexual contact toward Plaintiff, creating a reasonable fear of imminent peril. Am. Compl. ¶ 17. Defendant intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Plaintiff, with the intent to + +cause such contact or the apprehension that such contact is imminent. Am. Compl. 18. + +Defendant tortiously committed a sexual assault and battery on Plaintiff. Am. Compl. ¶ 19. + +Defendant's acts were intentional, unlawful, offensive and harmful. Id. Defendant's plan and scheme in which he committed such acts upon Plaintiff were done willfully and maliciously. Am. Compl. 1 20. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's assault on Plaintiff, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. Am. Compl. ¶ 21. + +Under Count II, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, the Amended Complaint alleges as follows: + +Defendant's conduct was intentional or reckless. Am. Compl. ¶ 23. Defendant's conduct with a minor was extreme and outrageous, going beyond all bounds of decency. Am. Compl. 1 24. Defendant committed willful acts of child sexual abuse on Plaintiff Am. Compl. ¶ 25. These acts resulted in mental or sexual injury to Plaintiff, that caused or were likely to cause Plaintiff's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. Am. Compl. ¶ 25. Defendant's conduct caused severe emotional distress to Plaintiff. Am. Compl. ¶ 26. Defendant knew or had reason to know that his intentional and outrageous conduct would cause emotional distress and damage to Plaintiff, or Defendant acted with reckless disregard of the high probability of causing severe emotional distress to Plaintiff Id. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's intentional or reckless conduct, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain. Am. Compl. ¶ 27. + +Under Count III, Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of I 8 U.S.C. § 2422, the Amended Complaint alleges as follows: + +Defendant used a facility or means of interstate commerce to knowingly persuade, induce or entice Plaintiff, when she was under the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense. Am. Compl. ¶ 29. As a result of Defendant's violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422, Plaintiff has suffered personal injury, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. Am. Compl. ¶ 31. + +Defendant argues in his motion that Counts I and III of the Amended Complaint must be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(bX6). Alternatively, Defendant seeks a more definite statement of Counts I and III. Lastly, Defendant argues that the reference in Count III to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 should be stricken as immaterial. + +Plaintiff responds that the Court should deny the motion because the pleadings at issue contain a short and plain statement of the claims showing that Plaintiff is entitled to relief in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(aX2). Plaintiff contends that the specific facts sought by Defendant may properly be the subject of discovery, but are not necessary for purposes of pleading. + +# Standard of Review + +In deciding a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), a court must accept all factual allegations in a complaint as true and take them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. See Erickson v. Pardus, 127 S.Ct. 2197, 2200 (2007). To satisfy the pleading requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, a complaint must contain a short and plain statement showing an entitlement to relief, and the statement must "give the defendant fair notice of what the plaintiffs claim is and the grounds upon which it rests." Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A. 534 U.S. 506, 512 (2002) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 8); see also Bell Atlantic Corp. v. + +Twombly, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964 (2007); Dura Pharm., Inc. v. Broudo 544 U.S. 336, 346 (2005). + +This is a liberal pleading requirement, one that does not require a plaintiff to plead with particularity every element of a cause of action. Roe v. Aware Woman Ctr. for Choice, Inc. 253 F.3d 678, 683 (I I th Cir. 2001). Instead, the complaint need only "contain either direct or inferential allegations respecting all the material elements necessary to sustain a recovery under some viable legal theory." Id. (internal citation and quotation omitted). "A complaint need not specify in detail the precise theory giving rise to recovery. All that is required is that the defendant be on notice as to the claim being asserted against him and the grounds on which it rests." v. United Food and Commit Workers WI Union, 866 F.2d 1380, 1384 (11th Cir. 1989). + +"While a complaint attacked by a Rule 12(bX6) motion to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations, [ ] a plaintiff's obligation to provide the 'grounds' of his 'entitlement to relief requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S.Ct. at 1964-65 (citations omitted). "Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level on the assumption that all of the complaint's allegations are true." Id. at 1965. Plaintiff must plead enough facts to state a plausible basis for the claim. Id. + +# Discussion + +Counts I alleges a claim for sexual assault and battery. Under Florida law, It is customary to refer to the term "assault and battery" as if it were a legal unit, or a single concept; however, assault and battery are separate and distinct legal concepts, assault being the beginning of an act which, if consummated, constitutes battery. 3A Fla. Jur 2d Assault §1. "'The essential element + +of an assault is the violence offered, and not actual physical contact,' and 'a battery is defined as an unlawful touching or striking or the use of force against the person of another with the intention of bringing about a harmful or offensive contact or apprehension thereof.' McDonald yM, 223 So.2d 553, 555 (Fla. 2n°DCA 1969), quoting 3 Fla.Jur., Assault and Battery, § 3. Assault is defined as an intentional, unlawful offer of corporal injury to another by force, or force unlawfully directed toward another under such circumstances as to create a fear of imminent peril, coupled with the apparent present ability to effectuate the attempt. Lay v. Kremer, 411 So.2d 1347, 1349 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). A battery consists of the infliction of a harmful or offensive contact upon another with the intent to cause such contact or the apprehension that such contact is imminent. Paul v. Holbrook, 696 So.2d 1311, 1312 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); v. Atlantic Fed. Say. & Loan Ass'n 454 So.2d 52, 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), review denied, 461 So.2d 116 (Fla.1985). + +Defendant does not contend that Plaintiff failed to allege the above-listed elements of the torts of assault and battery in Count I. Instead, Defendant argues that, under the standard of pleading established in Twombly,Plaintiff has failed to set forth sufficient factual allegations to support the pleading. Defendant's argument, in essence, is that in a post-Twombly pleading, a heightened fact pleading of specifics is required. However, Twombly did not alter the standard for dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) in the typical case. As the Court explained in CBT Flint Partners, LLC v. Goodmail Systems, Inc: + +In my view Twombly did not radically alter the elementary rules of civil procedure that have governed litigation in the federal courts for the past seventy years. The Court's forced retirement of Conley v. "no set of facts" language does not change the fundamental command of Rule 8 as to what a valid complaint must look like. Indeed, the Court made clear that it was not imposing a + +heightened pleading standard. Twombly, 127 S.Ct. at 1974 ("[W]e do not require heightened fact pleading of specifics, but only enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face."). As a general matter, I am loath to assume that the Supreme Court circumvented the normal channels for amending the Federal Rules. Swierkiewicz v. Sorema 534 U.S. 506, 515 (2002) ("A requirement of greater specificity for particular claims is a result that must be obtained by the process of amending the Federal Rules, and not by judicial interpretation.") (quotations omitted). Second, to the extent that Twombly might be plausibly read to alter the requirements for the sufficiency of a complaint, there should be a strong presumption in favor of narrowly confining the decision to its facts. Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264 (1821) ( "It is a maxim not to be disregarded, that general expressions, in every opinion, are to be taken in connection with the case in which those expressions are used."). The Court's "new standard" was merely a specific way to articulate a solution to what it perceived to be a specific pleading problem, in a specific area of law that inflicted a high cost upon antitrust defendants. It was not a broad based new license for federal courts to ramp up pleading requirements. + +CBT Flint Partners, LLC v. Goodmail Systems, Inc., 529 F.Supp.2d 1376, 1379 (N.D. Ga. 2007). + +In this case, Defendant contends that the pleadings fail to allege the specific facts of "what was said or done to Plaintiff;" "what Epstein said and did, if anything, to create fear and apprehension in Plaintiff'; and "what was the intentional or harmful contact?" (Mot. 5). As to these issues, the Amended Complaint alleges as follows: Alone with Plaintiff in an upstairs room of Defendant's mansion, Defendant told Plaintiff to remove her clothes and to give him a massage. Am. Comp!. ¶ 12. Defendant wore only a towel around his waist. Id. After a short period of time, Defendant removed the towel and rolled over, exposing his penis. Id. Defendant acted with intent to cause an offensive contact with Plaintiff, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and Plaintiff was thereby put in such imminent apprehension. Am. Compl. ¶ 16. Defendant made an intentional, unlawful offer of offensive sexual contact toward Plaintiff, creating a reasonable fear of imminent peril. Am. Compl. ¶ 17. Defendant began to masturbate and he sexually assaulted Plaintiff. Am. Compl. 12. Defendant intentionally inflicted harmful + +or offensive contact on the person of Plaintiff, with the intent to cause such contact or the apprehension that such contact is imminent. Am. Compl. 18. Defendant tortiously committed a sexual assault and battery on Plaintiff. Am. Compl. ¶ 19. Defendant's acts were intentional, unlawful, offensive and harmful. Id. + +Plaintiff need not set forth more specific facts to support its allegations to satisfy the notice pleading standard under Rule 8, which requires only that a complaint must set forth a short and plain statement of the facts upon which the claim is based that is sufficient to give the defendant fair notice of what the plaintiff's claims are and the grounds upon which they rest. The parties will be afforded a liberal opportunity for discovery "to disclose more precisely the basis of both claim and defense and to define more narrowly the disputed facts and issues." Conley v. 355 U.S. 41, 48 (1957). Defendant's motion to dismiss or for a more definite statement is DENIED as to Count I. + +Counts III' alleges a claim for coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422. That statute states, in pertinent part, + +(b) Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 10 years or for life. + +'Plaintiff mistakenly cites 28 U.S.C. § 2255 in the wherefore clause of Count III, regarding damages sought. Plaintiff acknowledges that this was a typographical error and the correct cite is to 18 U.S.C. § 2255. Defendant's motion to strike the citation to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 in the Amended Complaint is GRANTED. That citation is hereby STRICKEN and substituted with 18 U.S.C. § 2255. + +18 U.S.C. § 2422(b).2 + +The Amended Complaint alleges: "Epstein used a facility or means of interstate commerce to knowingly persuade, induce or entice Jane Doe, when she was under the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense." Am. Comp1.1 29. + +First, the Amended Complaint sufficiently alleges the element of using a facility or means of interstate commerce. See 1 29. More specifics are properly the subject of discovery. + +Second, Defendant argues that the Amended Complaint fails to set forth underlying factual allegations as to the requisite elements that Defendant knowingly persuaded, induced, enticed, or coerced Plaintiff, when she was under the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense. Specifically, Defendant claims that Plaintiff fails to allege with what criminal offense Defendant could have been charged. See 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). The Amended Complaint states a cause of action for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422. However, Defendant's position that Plaintiff must state what part of "to engage in prostitution or sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense" upon which is relying Plaintiff is well-taken. + +Rule 12(e) permits a party to move for a "more definite statement of a pleading to which a responsive pleading is allowed but which is so vague or ambiguous that the party cannot reasonably prepare a response." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(e). As explained by another court, "[t]he claim of the plaintiff in his complaint is sufficiently definite to enable the defendant to know with + +2 The allegations in the Amended Complaint closely track the language of § 2422(6), making it clear that this is the subsection upon which Plaintiff is relying. + +what it is charged, and it is reasonably able therefrom to respond whether it did the thing charged." Dennis v. Begley Drug Co. of Tennessee, Inc., 53 F.R.D. 608, 609 (E.D. Tenn. 1971). As it is written, ¶ 29 is ambiguous as to whether Plaintiff claims prostitution or another criminal offense (and if so, what offense) with which Defendant could have been charged.' The Court finds that Defendant is entitled to a more definite statement as to ¶ 29 in order to provide Defendant with sufficient notice to frame a responsive pleading. + +## Conclusion + +For the reasons stated herein, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and Motion for More Definite Statement, Directed to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (DE 46) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: + +- I. Defendant's motion to dismiss or for a more definite statement as to Count I is DENIED. +- 2. Defendant's motion to dismiss or for a more definite statement as to Count III is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Defendant's motion to dismiss is denied; however, Plaintiff must file another complaint, which includes a more definite statement as to Count III - Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422, as explained in this Order. +- 3. Defendant's motion to strike the citation to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 in the Amended Complaint + +3 In its opposition, Plaintiff improperly seeks to rely upon a July 10, 2008 letter from A. Villafana, Assistant U.S. Attorney to Plaintiff's counsel. This letter was not referenced in nor attached to the Amended Complaint. It is axiomatic that, at the motion to dismiss stage, the Court must consider well-pled allegations of the complaint as true and must limit its examination to the four corners of the complaint. Grossman v. Nationsbank, N.A. 225 F.3d 1228, 1231 (11th Cir. 2000). Thus, the Court will not consider the letter in ruling on the instant motion. + +is GRANTED and that citation is hereby STRICKEN. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, + +Florida, this 12th day of February, 2009. + +/en KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +copies to: All counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743805/EFTA02743805.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743805/EFTA02743805.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..617a6c7766c9bbb27c7acec307a78fe2b6c7090b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743805/EFTA02743805.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,607 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743805.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 12, + "chars": 21260, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.47, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS AND \nMOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 148.71599999999998, + 269.73 + ], + [ + 460.206787109375, + 269.73 + ], + [ + 460.206787109375, + 299.2330627441406 + ], + [ + 148.71599999999998, + 299.2330627441406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 455.22 + ], + [ + 138.34512329101562, + 455.22 + ], + [ + 138.34512329101562, + 469.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 469.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Standard of Review", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 468.18 + ], + [ + 176.71163940429688, + 468.18 + ], + [ + 176.71163940429688, + 483.11248779296875 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 483.11248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Discussion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 553.23 + ], + [ + 128.49356079101562, + 553.23 + ], + [ + 128.49356079101562, + 568.2324981689453 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 568.2324981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 241.38 + ], + [ + 132.76736450195312, + 241.38 + ], + [ + 132.76736450195312, + 256.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 256.18353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743805" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743817/EFTA02743817.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743817/EFTA02743817.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f7e90159923f1f9ee0809e48ba9864988398c015 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743817/EFTA02743817.md @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# NOTICE OF CHANGE OF NAME OF PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL + +YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that counsel of record for Plaintiff has changed its name from Herman & Mermelstein, P.A., to: + +# MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +Telephone: (305) 931-2200 + +Facsimile: (305) 931-0877 + +Please direct all future pleadings and correspondence to the above-named counsel. + +Dated: February 23, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) + +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +Tel: 305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +I hereby certify that on February 23, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743817/EFTA02743817.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743817/EFTA02743817.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c716876b8bf56d959fc612bddb6527c20a8b5e93 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743817/EFTA02743817.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,250 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743817.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 1640, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.43, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF CHANGE OF NAME OF PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 132.192, + 252.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 479.1841125488281, + 252.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 479.1841125488281, + 268.10302734375 + ], + [ + 132.192, + 268.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 218.484, + 337.77 + ], + [ + 429.6104736328125, + 337.77 + ], + [ + 429.6104736328125, + 353.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 218.484, + 353.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 713.61 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 713.61 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 727.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 727.4830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.6502685546875, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.6502685546875, + 114.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 114.43353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743817" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743820/EFTA02743820.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743820/EFTA02743820.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e33c3c11b8c8988323a042d8d80218eb237614c2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743820/EFTA02743820.md @@ -0,0 +1,116 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2 ("Jane" or "Jane Doe"), brings this Complaint against Jeffrey Epstein, as follows: + +# Parties. .lurisdiction and Venue + +- I. Jane Doe No. 2 is a citizen and resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and is sui juris. +- 2. This Complaint is brought under a fictitious name to protect the identity of the Plaintiff because this Complaint makes sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon a minor. + - 3. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein is a citizen and resident of the State of New York. + - 4. This is an action for damages in excess of \$50 million. +- 5. This Court has jurisdiction of this action and the claims set forth herein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(a), as the matter in controversy (i) exceeds \$75,000. exclusive of interest and costs; and (ii) is between citizens of different states. +- 6. This Court has venue of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(a) as a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this District. + +# Factual Allegations + +7. At all relevant times, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") was an adult male, 52 years old. Epstein is a financier and money manager with a secret clientele limited exclusively to billionaires. He is himself a man of tremendous wealth, power and influence. He maintains his principal home in New York and also owns residences in New Mexico, St. and Palm Beach, FL. The allegations herein concern Epstein's conduct while at his lavish estate in Palm Beach. + +8. Upon information and belief, Epstein has a sexual preference and obsession for underage minor girls. He engaged in a plan and scheme in which he gained access to primarily economically disadvantaged minor girls in his home, sexually assaulted these girls, and then gave them money. In or about 2004-2005, Jane Doe, then approximately 16 years old, fell into Epstein's trap and became one of his victims. + +9. Upon information and belief, Jeffrey Epstein carried out his scheme and assaulted girls in Florida, New York and on his private island, known as Little St. James, in St. + +10. Epstein's scheme involved the use of young girls to recruit underage girls. (Upon information and belief, the young girl who brought Jane Doe to Epstein was herself a minor victim of Epstein, and will therefore not be named in this Complaint). Under Epstein's plan, underage girls were recruited ostensibly to give a wealthy man a massage for monetary compensation in his Palm Beach mansion. The recruiter would be contacted when Epstein was planning to be at his Palm Beach residence or soon after he had arrived there. Epstein or someone on his behalf would direct the recruiter to bring one or more underage girls to the residence. The recruiter, upon information and belief, generally sought out economically disadvantaged underage girls from western Palm Beach County who would be enticed by the money being offered - generally \$200 to \$300 per "massage" session - and who were perceived as less likely to complain to authorities or have + +credibility if allegations of improper conduct were made. This was an important element of Epstein's plan. + +11. Epstein's plan and scheme reflected a particular pattern and method. Upon arrival at Epstein's mansion, the underage victim would be introduced to Epstein's assistant, who gathered the girl's personal information, including her name and telephone number. would then bring the girl up a flight of stairs to a bedroom that contained a massage table in addition to other furnishings. There were photographs of nude women lining the stairway and in the bedroom. The girl would then find herself alone in the room with Epstein, who would be wearing only a towel. He would then remove his towel and lie naked on the massage table, and direct the girl to remove her clothes. Epstein would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, including masturbation and touching the girl's vagina. + +12. Consistent with the foregoing plan and scheme, Jane Doe was recruited to give Epstein a massage for monetary compensation. Jane was brought to Epstein's mansion in Palm Beach. Once at the mansion, Jane was introduced to who led her up the flight of stairs to the room with the massage table. In this room, Epstein told Jane to take off her clothes and give him a massage. Jane kept her panties and bra on and complied with Epstein's instructions. Epstein wore only a towel around his waste. After a short period of time, Epstein removed the towel and rolled over exposing his penis. Epstein began to masturbate and he sexually assaulted Jane. + +13. After Epstein had completed the assault, Jane was then able to get dressed, leave the room and go back down the stairs. Jane was paid \$200 by Epstein. The young girl who recruited Jane was paid \$100 by Epstein for bringing Jane to him. + +14. As a result of this encounter with Epstein, Jane experienced confusion, shame, humiliation and embarrassment, and has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries. + +#### COUNT I Sexual Assault and Battery + +- 15. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and reallegcs paragraphs 1 through 14 above. +- 16. Epstein acted with intent to cause an offensive contact with Jane Doe, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and Jane Doe was thereby put in such imminent apprehension. +- 17. Epstein made an intentional, unlawful offer of offensive sexual contact toward Jane Doe, creating a reasonable fear of imminent peril. +- 18. Epstein intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Jane Doe, kith the intent to cause such contact or the apprehension that such contact is imminent. +- 19. Epstein tortiously committed a sexual assault and battery on Jane Doe. Epstein's acts were intentional, unlawful, offensive and harmful. +- 20. Epstein's plan and scheme in which he committed such acts upon Jane Doe were done willfully and maliciously. +- 21. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, punitive damages, costs, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +#### COUNT II Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress + +- 22. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 above. +- 23. Epstein's conduct was intentional or reckless. +- 24. Epstein's conduct with a minor was extreme and outrageous, going beyond all bounds + +of decency. + +25. Epstein committed willful acts of child sexual abuse on Jane Doe. These acts resulted in mental or sexual injury to Jane Doe, that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. + +26. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. Epstein knew or had reason to know that his intentional and outrageous conduct would cause emotional distress and damage to Jane Doe, or Epstein acted with reckless disregard of the high probability of causing severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. + +27. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's intentional or reckless conduct, Jane Doe, has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, costs, punitive damages, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +## COUNT III Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. 62422 + +28. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 above. + +29. Epstein used a facility or means of interstate commerce to knowingly persuade, induce or entice Jane Doe, when she was under the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense. + +30. On June 30, 2008, Epstein entered a plea of guilty to violations of Florida §§ 796.07 and 796.03, in the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (Case nos. 2008-cf-009381AXXXMB and 2006-cf-009454AXXXMB), for conduct involving the same plan and scheme as alleged herein. + +31. As to Plaintiff Jane Doe, Epstein could have been charged with criminal violations of + +Florida Statute §796.07(2) (including subsections (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) thereof), and other criminal offenses including violations of Florida Statutes §§798.02 and 800.04 (including subsections (5), (6) and (7) thereof). + +32. Epstein's acts and conduct are in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422. + +33. As a result of Epstein's violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422, Plaintiff has suffered personal injury, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. + +34. Plaintiff hired Herman & Mermelstein, P.A., in this matter and agreed to pay them a reasonable attorneys' fee. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for all damages available under 18 U.S.C. §2255(a), including without limitation, actual and compensatory damages, costs of suit, and attorneys' fees, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +## JURY TRIAL DEMAND + +Plaintiff demands a jury trial in this action on all claims so triable. + +Dated: February 27, 2008 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on February 27, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +### SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ United States District Court, Southern District of I. lorida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bc1claw.com + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743820/EFTA02743820.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743820/EFTA02743820.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4d46b2093f4a3df358a51d41bbdf0503d64140bb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743820/EFTA02743820.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,571 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743820.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 10616, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.37, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.856, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 405.43670654296875, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 405.43670654296875, + 296.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 206.856, + 296.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Parties. .lurisdiction and Venue", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 390.0133972167969, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 390.0133972167969, + 379.863037109375 + ], + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 379.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Factual Allegations", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 358.7720947265625, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 358.7720947265625, + 86.60302734375 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 86.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT I \nSexual Assault and Battery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 233.784, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 378.5755310058594, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 378.5755310058594, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 233.784, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT II \nIntentional Infliction of Emotional Distress", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.168, + 589.6800000000001 + ], + [ + 419.5736083984375, + 589.6800000000001 + ], + [ + 419.5736083984375, + 617.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 192.168, + 617.9830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT III \nCoercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. 62422", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 502.203857421875, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 502.203857421875, + 463.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 463.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JURY TRIAL DEMAND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 239.29200000000003, + 407.43 + ], + [ + 373.97454833984375, + 407.43 + ], + [ + 373.97454833984375, + 422.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 239.29200000000003, + 422.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 85.863037109375 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 85.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nCASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of I. lorida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.2156982421875, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.2156982421875, + 128.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 128.68353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743820" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743828/EFTA02743828.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743828/EFTA02743828.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..66d00c2a341639ef55ec4e369eabd761dd4021e5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743828/EFTA02743828.md @@ -0,0 +1,150 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-Mill + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DOCKET + +9,12.6109 + +## DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his responses and objections to Plaintiffs December 9, 2008 Amended First Set Of Interrogatories To Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, attached hereto. + +## Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent by fax and U.S. Mail to the following addressees this 26th day of January, 2009: + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ahorowitzahermanlaw.com jherman hermanlaw.com Iriveraahermanlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jaqesqabellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully submitted, + +By:                      +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. +Florida Bar No. 224162 +rcrit@bclclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +mpike@bclclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax + +*(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO +PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES** + +**Interrogatory No. 1.** Identify all employees who performed work of services inside the Palm Beach Residence. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2003 until present. Also, see "Employee" as defined in paragraph g of Plaintiff's interrogatories. + +**Interrogatory No. 2.** Identify all Employees not identified in response to interrogatory no. 1 who at any time came to Defendant's Palm Beach Residence. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for "all Employees" "who at any time" came to the residence. Also, see "Employee" as defined in paragraph g of Plaintiff's interrogatories. + +**Interrogatory No. 3.** Identify all persons who came to the Palm Beach Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +**Interrogatory No. 4.** Identify all persons who came to the New York Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +**Interrogatory No. 5.** Identify all persons who came to the New Mexico Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my + +federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +Interrogatory No. 6. Identify all persons who came to the St. !MI Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give amassage to Defen ant. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +Interrogatory No. 7. List all the time periods during which Jeffrey Epstein was present in the State of Florida, including for each the date he arrive and the date he departed. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the + +discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2003 until present. + +**Interrogatory No. 8.** Identify all of Jeffrey Epstein health care providers in the past (10) ten years, including without limitation, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, physicians, hospitals and treatment facilities. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. In addition, such information is privileged pursuant to Rule 501, Fed. Evid., and §90.503, Fla.Evid. Code. In addition, such information is protected by the provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). + +**Interrogatory No. 9.** List all items in Jeffrey Epstein's possession in Palm Beach, Florida, at any time during the period of these interrogatories, which were used or intended to be used as sexual aids, sex toys, massage aids, and/or vibrators, and for each, list the manufacturer, model number (if applicable), and its present location. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 – 2005," while Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information from + +January 1, 2003, until present. Further, the request is meant to embarrass and harass the Defendant. + +**Interrogatory No. 10.** Identify all persons who provide transportation services to Jeffrey Epstein, whether as employees or independent contractors, including without limitation, chauffeurs and aircraft crew. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff places no time limitation. + +**Interrogatory No. 11.** Identify all telephone numbers used by Epstein, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's allegations claim a time period of "in or about 2004-2005" and involve Defendant's Palm Beach residence. + +**Interrogatory No. 12.** Identify all telephone numbers of employees of Epstein, used in the course or scope of their employment, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs allegations claim a time period of "in or about 2004-2005" and involve Defendant's Palm Beach residence. + +Interrogatory No. 13. List the names and addresses of all persons who are believed or known by your, your agents, or your attorneys to have any knowledge concerning any of the issues in this lawsuit; and specify the subject matter about which the witness has knowledge. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the interrogatory seeks information that is attorney-client and work product privileged as it seeks information known by Defendant's attorneys. The interrogatory is so overbroad that Defendant cannot reasonably form a response, including the raising of additional privileges which may apply. Without waiving any objection, see Rule 26 disclosures made by Defendant's counsel in this case. + +Interrogatory No. 14. State the name and address of every person known to you, your agents, or your attorneys who has knowledge about, possession, or custody, or control of, any model, plat, map, drawing, motion picture, videotape or photograph pertaining to any fact or issue involved in this controversy; and describe as to each, what item such person has, the name and address of the person who took or prepared it, and the date it was taken or prepared. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the interrogatory seeks information that is attorney-client and work product privileged as it seeks information known by Defendant's attorneys. + +Interrogatory No. 15. Identify all persons who have made aclaim, complaint, demand or threat against you relating to alleged sexual abuse or misconduct on aminor, and for each provide the following information: + +- a. The person's full name, last known address and telephone number, +- b. The person's attorney, if represented; +- c. The date of the alleged incident(s); +- d. If a civil case has been filed by or on behalf of the person, the case number and identifying information. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges and without waiving such objection, with regard to subparagraph (d), Defendant's counsel states that such information is public record and equally attainable by Plaintiff. + +Interrogatory No. 16. State the facts upon which you intend to rely for each denial of a pleading allegation and for each affirmative defense you intend to make in these cases. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk + +losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, no answer to the Amended Complaint has been filed by defense counsel in this case; however, Defendant does not intend to waive his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination. Defendant further objects in that Plaintiff's interrogatory attempts to obtain discovery in other cases filed by her undersigned counsel. + +**Interrogatory No. 17.** Identify all witnesses from whom you have obtained or requested a written, transcribed or recorded statement relating to any issue in these cases, and for each, in addition to the witness's identifying information, state the date of the statement and identify the person taking the statement. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects to this interrogatory in that it seeks information that is attorney-client and work product privileged. In addition, the request is overbroad in that it seeks information "relating to any issue." + +![]()STATE OF Florida ) +) +COUNTY OF Palm Beach ) + +I hereby certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Jeffrey Epstein, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Interrogatories who + +acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above-named person: personally known/identification, and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this 2 is day of , 2009. + +(SEAL) + +![](_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg) + +NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF FLORIDA . "'"", Nayanira Alanis Commission • DD841844 "anal Expires: DEC. 01, 2012 BONDED TN RD ATLANTIC BONDLNG CO., DC. + +P--- INT NAME: Lta "rc n\Abn%S Notary Public/State of Florida Commission #: My Commission Expires: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743828/EFTA02743828.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743828/EFTA02743828.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e0f2b1a2a393890415befc16abe0f190684bf06a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743828/EFTA02743828.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,465 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743828.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 26473, + "elapsed_seconds": 81.33, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.064, + 83.53299999999999 + ], + [ + 413.6286926269531, + 83.53299999999999 + ], + [ + 413.6286926269531, + 112.6978759765625 + ], + [ + 201.064, + 112.6978759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS \nTO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 134.86, + 293.582 + ], + [ + 476.3587341308594, + 293.582 + ], + [ + 476.3587341308594, + 322.7811584472656 + ], + [ + 134.86, + 322.7811584472656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.59, + 416.854 + ], + [ + 381.525146484375, + 416.854 + ], + [ + 381.525146484375, + 430.92413330078125 + ], + [ + 263.59, + 430.92413330078125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.21300000000001, + 104.619 + ], + [ + 490.4, + 104.619 + ], + [ + 490.4, + 132.193 + ], + [ + 123.21300000000001, + 132.193 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 217 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 524 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 516 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 499 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743828" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743828/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743828/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..278370a3ed87ab322388a968333ce26ae4693f8f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743828/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4ff25c02723af5ee3f97540536364c7d61614e2f4e28895df44e0a7838ae83b9 +size 3034 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743839/EFTA02743839.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743839/EFTA02743839.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fc80ff3884aae933637b2e0a8fe40f3c71b453d5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743839/EFTA02743839.md @@ -0,0 +1,134 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAa. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, serves his responses and objections to Plaintiffs Amended First Request For Production To Defendant, dated December 9, 2008. + +Request No. 1. The list provided to you by the U.S. Attorney of individuals whom the U.S. Attorney was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an offense by Mr. Epstein enumerated in 18 U.S.C. §2255. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference + +under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 2. All documents referring or relating to the United States' agreement with Defendant to defer federal prosecution subject to certain conditions, including without limitation, the operative agreement between Defendant and the United States and all amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 3. All documents referring or relating to Defendant's agreement with the State of Florida on his plea of guilty to violations of Florida Criminal Statutes, including without limitation, the operative plea agreement and any amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Whatever public documents exist are in the State Court file and equally accessible to Plaintiff. + +Request No.4. All documents obtained in discovery or investigation relating to either the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal Case, including without limitation, documents obtained from any federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, the State Attorney's office and the United States Attorney's office. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the + +information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Request No. 4 seeks documents that are attorney-client and work product privileged in that it seeks "all documents obtained in discovery or investigation relating either to the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal Case ... ." In addition, such documents are privileged and confidential as they are the subject of a pending investigation. + +Request No. 5. All telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone calls made by or to Defendant, including without limitation, telephone logs and message pads. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the + +Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Defendant objects as the request is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding any and all telephone records and other documents reflecting any and all telephone calls made to or by Defendant. As phrased, the request includes attorney-client and work product privileged information, as well as records and documents of calls having absolutely no relationship to any of the allegations in this action. + +Request No. 6. All telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone calls made by or to Defendant, including without limitation, telephone logs and message pads, reflecting telephone calls made by or to employees. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce + +documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, as defined by Plaintiff in paragraph g of her request, the term employee is overly broad and encompasses information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, the request seeks information pertaining to person who are not parties to this action and whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 7. All surveillance videos, slides, film, videotape, digital recording or other audio or video depiction or image of the Palm Beach Residence. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my + +Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiff's request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding "all surveillance videos, etc., or image of the Palm Beach Residence." + +Request No. 8. All documents referring or relating to Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2, including without limitation, web pages, social networking site pages, correspondence, videotapes and audiotapes. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my + +Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. + +Request No. 9. All statements taken, transcribed or recorded from any person referring or relating to Defendant's sexual conduct, massages given to Defendant or any issue in these cases. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the + +Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. + +Request No. 10. All documents referring to or relating to air travel and aircraft used by Defendant, including without limitation, flight logs and flight manifests. + +time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding air travel and aircraft used by Defendant. + +Request No. 11. Any and all documents referring to or relating to modeling agencies, including but not limited to documents relating to or reflecting communications with female models. + +Request No. 12. All photographs, videotapes, digital images and other documents depicting or showing females who, at the time thereof, were under the age of 21, which were taken or created by or for Defendant and not intended for sale commercially to the public. + +Request No. 13. All photographs and painting of females which were displayed in any of Defendant's homes or residences in the time frame of these requests, including without limitation, photographs in standing or sitting frames or wall frames. + +Request No. 14. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 15. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and , including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 16. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and , including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 17. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 18. Any and all documents and photographs placed by Defendant at any time in the period of these requests on a social networking website, including without limitation, Facebook.com and MySpace.com. + +Request No. 19. Any and all documents reflecting or consisting of communications between Jeffrey Epstein and MC2 Models or Jean-Luc Brunel, relating or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries to pursue a career in modeling, including, but not limited to, letters, notes and emails. + +2005." In addition, the request seeks documents pertaining to females who are not non-parties, and who possess privacy rights. + +Request No. 20. Any and all documents referring or relating to gifts or loans to females under the age of 21, including, but not limited to, notes, receipts and car rental agreements. + +Request No. 21. Any and all personal calendars or schedules of or for Jeffrey Epstein from January 1, 2003 to the present. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." In addition, the request encompasses attorney-client privileged material. + +Request No. 22. All documents written by Jeffrey Epstein consisting of personal thoughts, feelings or descriptions of events, incidents or occurrences in Defendant's life, including without limitation, any diaries of Jeffrey Epstein. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 - 2005." On its fact, the request goes beyond the scope of allowable discovery and is meant to harass, embarrass and overburden the Defendant. Further, the request is so overly broad that it includes attorney-client and work product privileged materials. + +Request No. 23. All documents referring to or relating to Jeffrey Epstein's purchase or consumption of prescription medicine. + +**Certificate of Service** + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 26th day of January, 2009. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) +[jherman@hermanlaw.com](mailto:jherman@hermanlaw.com) +[lrivera@hermanlaw.com](mailto:lrivera@hermanlaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()*(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743839/EFTA02743839.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743839/EFTA02743839.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e55f167d7dc192b6b50b6ee9640df86717591f33 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743839/EFTA02743839.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,910 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743839.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 24, + "chars": 22667, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.27, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.999, + 68.124 + ], + [ + 409.2296142578125, + 68.124 + ], + [ + 409.2296142578125, + 95.40216064453125 + ], + [ + 197.999, + 95.40216064453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS \nTO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 114.01799999999999, + 272.496 + ], + [ + 491.13372802734375, + 272.496 + ], + [ + 491.13372802734375, + 302.9609680175781 + ], + [ + 114.01799999999999, + 302.9609680175781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 23, + "polygon": [ + [ + 240.909, + 66.50200000000001 + ], + [ + 364.73499999999996, + 66.50200000000001 + ], + [ + 364.73499999999996, + 80.289 + ], + [ + 240.909, + 80.289 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 231 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743839" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743863/EFTA02743863.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743863/EFTA02743863.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ae9d3b814094d3782755f30e1fb02f2a1814d635 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743863/EFTA02743863.md @@ -0,0 +1,52 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO SECOND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION, dated December 19, 2008 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his responses and objections to the Request to Produce, dated December 19, 2008 and states: + +Request No. 1. All policies of insurance, including the declarations page and all binders, amendments, and endorsements, covering Defendant's residence at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, FL 33480. + +Response: Objection, overly broad, not relevant and material and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff alleged claims occurred during a specific time period in 2004 - 2005, yet to be specifically identified. Yet, no time period whatsoever is set forth in the Request for Production. Additionally, Defendant objects in that the policies contain value and/or asset information which is not relevant, material nor calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence at this point in time; said information is both private and confidential. + +**Certificate of Service** + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 26th day of January, 2009. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) +[iherman@hermanlaw.com](mailto:iherman@hermanlaw.com) +[lrivera@hermanlaw.com](mailto:lrivera@hermanlaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()*(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743863/EFTA02743863.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743863/EFTA02743863.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..60b5b595ecc598af7654221ac91d166d00e1ece0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743863/EFTA02743863.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,162 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743863.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2127, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.34, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.83799999999997, + 65.6875 + ], + [ + 407.03200000000004, + 65.6875 + ], + [ + 407.03200000000004, + 94.16998291015625 + ], + [ + 199.83799999999997, + 94.16998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO \nSECOND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION, dated December 19, 2008", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 109.11399999999999, + 271.685 + ], + [ + 495.9088439941406, + 271.685 + ], + [ + 495.9088439941406, + 301.16998291015625 + ], + [ + 109.11399999999999, + 301.16998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 242.74800000000002, + 66.50200000000001 + ], + [ + 366.57399999999996, + 66.50200000000001 + ], + [ + 366.57399999999996, + 81.10000000000001 + ], + [ + 242.74800000000002, + 81.10000000000001 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743863" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743865/EFTA02743865.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743865/EFTA02743865.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2843849bfdd1fa973a2a0be8f4c1440b9df00a87 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743865/EFTA02743865.md @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT + +Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel, files this Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents, and Memorandum of Law in Support, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26 and 37 and S.D.Fla.L.R. 26.1(H)(2), as follows: + +# I. INTRODUCTION + +Plaintiff in this case propounded 17 interrogatories and 24 documents requests. In response, Defendant has produced no information and no documents. Defendant's principal objection concerns his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Defendant, however, fails to set forth a sufficient predicate in his responses to interrogatories or documents requests for his refusal to provide any responsive documents or information. Defendant, rather, repeats in each response an all-encompassing, blanket assertion of Fifth Amendment privilege. + +Defendant's responses also include a laundry list of objections to Plaintiffs interrogatories and documents requests, none of which serve as a basis for a denial of all discovery. For the reasons discussed below, Plaintiff requests an order compelling Defendant to answer interrogatories and produce responsive documents.' + +' This Motion addresses almost entirely general or blanket objections to discovery, which are repeated in multiple or all of the Defendant's responses to Plaintiff's discovery requests. + +#### II. EPSTEIN'S BLANKET ASSERTION OF PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION IN RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES IS INSUFFICIENT + +Defendant's response to each and every one of Plaintiff's Interrogatories2 contains the following privilege objection: + +> I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorney has counseled me that I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. + +Defendant's canned objection represents a "blanket" refusal to answer questions in this civil case. See Anglada v. Sprague, 822 F.2d 1035, 1037 (11th Cir. 1987) (rejecting a "blanket" refusal to testify as unacceptable). While Plaintiff does not dispute that Defendant Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege may be asserted in a civil case,3 the Fifth Amendment's "protection must be confined to instances where the witness has reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer." Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951) (emphasis supplied). + +"[A] witness has some minimal burden to justify invocation of the privilege." In re J.M.V. Inc., 90 F.R. 737, 739 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1988). The privilege must be asserted in response to a particular question, and in each instance "[i]t is for the court to decide whether a witness' silence is justified and to require him to answer if it clearly appears to the Court that the witness asserting the privilege is mistaken as to its validity." In re Morganroth, 718 F.2d 161, 166-167 (6th Cir. 1983) + +Accordingly, Plaintiff deviates where necessary from the format set forth in S.D.Fla.L.R. 26.1(H)(2) in the interests of clarity and efficiency. + +'Attached as Exhibit "A" is Defendant's Response and Objections to Plaintiff's Interrogatories.

' This discussion addresses the Defendant's Fifth Amendment claim of privilege. Defendant also asserts a privilege under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Sixth Amendment does not provide a basis to refuse to answer questions in a civil case as a means to preserve the Defendant's "right to effective representation", as Defendant asserts in his responses. The Fourteenth Amendment likewise is inapposite, as state action is not at issue in this federal case.

(holding that it was not sufficient for witness to answer every question with conclusory assertion of Fifth Amendment privilege). AccordAnglada, 822 F.2d at 1037 (noting that Court should not have to speculate as to which questions would tend to incriminate); See also Hoffman 341 U.S. at 486 (witness' "say-so does not of itself establish the hazard of self-incrimination"); In re Wincek 202 B.R. 161,168 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1996) (rejecting assertion of Fifth Amendment privilege in "broad, unsupported fashion").

The "reasonable cause" for invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege is not self-evident from the interrogatories propounded by Plaintiff. For example, Interrogatory no. I asks the Defendant to identify employees who performed work or services at his Palm Beach residence. It is not apparent that identifying the chef, chauffeur, gardener, etc., would tend to incriminate the Defendant. The information sought in the bulk of the Plaintiff's interrogatories may be categorized generally as follows:

Type of InformationInterrogatory No.
identification of personsI, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 17
Defendant's travel schedule and7
identification of health care providers8
telephone numbers used by EpsteinI I, 12
13, 14, le

These Interrogatories, on their face, do not infringe upon or otherwise implicate the Defendant's rights under the Fifth Amendment. It is, therefore, incumbent upon the Defendant to set forth reasonable cause for his invocation of the Fifth Amendment in response to each of these

Plaintiff does not challenge at this time Defendant's assertion of a Fifth Amendment privilege in response to interrogatory no. 9, which seeks information on Defendant's sexual aids.

Interrogatories. Absent some interrogatory-by-interrogatory showing of reasonable cause, Plaintiff asks that Defendant's claims of privilege under the Fifth Amendment be rejected and overruled.

III. DEFENDANT'S BLANKET ASSERTION OF FIFTH AMENDMENT PRIVILEGE IN RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION IS INSUFFICIENT

In response to Plaintiff's Requests for Production,5 Defendant has asserted an identical, "blanket" objection to each and every request, as follows:

I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit. However, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

Initially, it is well established that the Fifth Amendment privilege may not apply to specific documents "even though they contain incriminating assertions of fact or belief because the creation of those documents was not 'compelled' within the meaning of the privilege." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 35-36 (2000). Accordingly, a party cannot avoid discovery merely because demanded documents contain incriminating evidence, "whether written by others or voluntarily prepared by himself." Id.

Nonetheless, the act of procuring documents may be considered testimonial and protected by the Fifth Amendment privilege in two instances: (1) if the existence and location of the documents are unknown; or (2) where production would "implicitly authenticate" the documents. In re Grand Jury Subpoena 1 F.3d 87, 93 (2d Cir. 1993); see also Fisher v. United States 425 U.S. 391, 410 (1976) (issue expressed as whether compliance with a document request or subpoena "tacitly conceded" the item's authenticity, existence or possession by the defendant). It is the Defendant's

Defendant's Response to Request for Production, which sets forth each Request and the Defendant's Response, is attached hereto as Exhibit "B".

burden to demonstrate that the act of producing any particular responsive documents would entail testimonial self-incrimination. United States v. Wujkowski, 929 F.2d 981, 984 (4th Cir. 1991). It is not self-evident or apparent from the Plaintiffs requests that the act of producing responsive items would be protected under the Fifth Amendment. In particular, there is no reason to believe that production of documents in response to the following requests would compel testimonial selfincrimination:

types of Documents Requested Request Nos.

Agreements with the U.S. Attorney and State Attorney, and documents exchanged between Defendant and the U.S. Attorney or State Attorney1-4
Telephone records5-6
Videos, photographs of residence7
Documents relating to Plaintiff Jane Doe8
Air travel records10
Documents relating to modeling agencies11
Correspondence with other witnesses14, 15, 16, 17, 19
Social networking documents18
Gifts to minor females20
Personal calendars, diaries21, 22
Prescription medicines236

As to the above-listed items, it is not possession or control of these items that would prove incriminating; rather, if anything, it is their contents, which are not protected by the Fifth Amendment privilege so long as they were created voluntarily. Fisher 425 U.S. at 410; see also In

`Plaintiff concedes that the act of producing items in response to request no. 9, concerning witness statements, and request nos. 12-13, concerning photographs or images of females, may implicate the Fifth Amendment.

re , 156 B.R. 272, 177-78 (Bankr. D. Idaho 1993). Nor would production of items in response to these requests "implicitly authenticate" items that are themselves incriminating. See In re Grand Jury Subpoena I F.3d at 93-94 (holding that defendant's calendar/diary not protected from discovery by "act of production" doctrine under the Fifth Amendment).

Without more, therefore, Defendant's blanket claim of a Fifth Amendment privilege in response to all of Plaintiff's document requests should be rejected, and responsive documents ordered to be produced.

IV. DEFENDANT'S OBJECTION AND STATEMENT CONCERNING ADVERSE INFERENCE IS INAPPROPRIATE AND INCORRECT

Defendant makes the following self-serving and unnecessary assertion in response to each and every interrogatory and document request propounded by Plaintiff:

Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution.

Although a defendant's assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege cannot be used against a criminal defendant, it is well established that "an adverse inference based on a refusal to testify in a civil case is an appropriate remedy as it provides some relief to the civil litigant whose case is unfairly prejudicial by a witness' assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege ..." United States v. Custer Battles. L.L.C.,415 F. Supp. 2d 628, 632 (E.D. Va. 2006); accord Baxler v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 408, 318 (1976) ("the Fifth Amendment does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to civil actions when they refuse to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them"); Securities and Exhange Comm'n v. Graystone Nash. Inc., 25 F.3d 187, 190 (3d Cir. 1994) ("Ririe [defendant's] dilemma of choosing between complete silence and presenting a defense [in a civil case] does not fatally infect the right against compelled self-incrimination").7

'Moreover, a defendant in a civil case may not manipulate his use of the Fifth Amendment privilege by shielding himself from inquiries during discovery, and then submitting surprise testimony in a summary judgment affidavit or at trial. Id. at 191.

In any event, the issue of adverse inference, at this juncture, is premature. It is first necessary to determine whether the Fifth Amendment privilege is validly asserted in response to particular questions. This issue is typically resolved on a motion to compel. Custer Battles 415 F. Supp. 2d at 633. If it is determined that the privilege is properly asserted, then adverse inferences are admissible consistent with the Rules of Evidence, i.e., where they are relevant, reliable and not unfairly prejudicial, confusing or cumulative. Id. at 634. Such evidentiary issues concerning adverse inference are appropriately addressed at the time of summary judgment or trial. It is inappropriate and unnecessary to challenge the use of adverse inferences through self-serving statements in blanket objections to interrogatories.

V. PLAINTIFF IS ENTITLED TO DEFENDANT'S HEALTH CARE INFORMATION IN DISCOVERY

A. Interrogator at Issue

"Interrogatory No.8. Identify all of Jeffrey Epstein's health care providers in the past (10) ten years, including without limitation, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, physician, hospital and treatment facilities."

B. Pertinent Portion of Defendant's Objection

"... [s]uch information is privileged pursuant to Rule 501, Fed.Evid., and §90.503, Fla.Evd. Code. In addition, such information is protected by the provision of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)."

C. Grounds for Objection and Reasons for Mot ion

The substantive basis for Defendant's objection is a claim of privilege under state law, Florida Statute §90.503 (psychotherapist-patient privilege) and federal law, HIPAA, 42 U.S.C. §1320d et sea. Neither of these privilege claims are a basis to withhold relevant health care information in this case. Initially, Florida Statute §90.503 does not protect as privileged the identity

of health care providers, which is all that is sought in Plaintiffs interrogatory. Rather, it protects "confidential communications" with a psychotherapist. Florida Statute §90.503(2). Further, Plaintiff is ultimately entitled to discovery from the Defendant's psychotherapists because §90.503 does not apply to relevant documents in a case of child abuse under Florida Statute §39.204. This Statute abrogates the psychotherapist-patient privilege in cases involving child abuse:

Abrogation of privileged communications in cases involving child abuse, abandonment, or neglect.- the privileged quality of communication . . . between any professional person and his or her patient or client, and any other privileged communication except that between attorney and client or the privilege provided in s. 90.505, as such communication relates both to the competency of the witness and to the exclusion of confidential communications, shall not apply to any communication involving the perpetrator or alleged perpetrator in any situation involving known or suspected child abuse....

(Emphasis supplied).8 "With the exceptions of the attorney-client privilege and the clergy communications privilege, section 39.204 abrogates the various evidentiary privileges in cases involving child abuse, abandonment or neglect." Nussbaumer v. State, 882 So.2d 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). It represents a determination by the legislature that discovery of facts relating to claims of child abuse is more important than the protection of otherwise confidential psychotherapistpatient communications:

Obviously, the psychotherapist privilege provided by section 90.503(2) is intended to encourage people who need treatment for mental disorders (including child abusers) to obtain it by insuring the confidentiality of communication during treatment. We must assume, however, that the legislature, in passing [§39.204] weighed the desirability of encouraging treatment for child abusers against the desirability of discovering them and decided that the latter was more important than the former. The intent of [§39.204] is to discourage child abuse. That discouragement, in view of the statutory language, can occur by way of a civil lawsuit for damages as well as by way of

The term "child abuse" is defined broadly in the Statute to encompass the acts and conduct alleged against Epstein in this case. A "child" is a person under the age of 18, and "abuse" means "any willful or threatened act that results in any physical, mental, or sexual injury or harm that causes or is likely to cause the child's physical, mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired." Florida Statutes §39.201.

Carson v. 466 So.2d 1188, 1190 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985) (analyzing predecessor statute, §4 I 5.512, Fla. Stat.).

Defendant also asserts HIPAA, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, 42 U.S.C. §1320d et seq., as a ground for objection to Plaintiff's interrogatory. "HIPAA does not create substantive rights that act as a bar on discovery. . . . HIPAA regulations is (sic) purely procedural in nature and does not create a federal physician-patient or hospital-patient privilege." v. Woodford, 2007 WL 309485 \*1 I (E.D. Cal. 2007). Under HIPAA, health care information may be disclosed in discovery under a qualified protective order, which prohibits using or disclosing protected health care information for any purpose other than the litigation and requires return or destruction of the protected health care information. 45 C.F.R. §164.512(iXe). Accordingly, there is no basis to withhold from discovery Epstein's health care information, particularly as it relates to Plaintiff's allegations of child abuse.

VI. DEFENDANT HAS NO VALID GROUNDS FOR OBJECTION TO PRODUCTION OF INSURANCE DOCUMENTS

A. Item to be Compelled

Plaintiff's Second Request for Production contains a single request for insurance documents, as follows:

All policies of insurance, including the declarations page and all binders, amendments, and endorsements, covering Defendant's residence at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, FL 33480.

B. Specific Objections and Grounds

Defendant provided no responsive documents and objected9 on grounds that (i) no time period is specified, other than the 2004-05 time period for the events alleged in the Complaint; (ii)

9 Acopy of Defendant's Response and Objections to Second Request for Production is attached

the policies "contain value and/or asset information which is not relevant, material nor calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence."; and (iii) "said information is both private and confidential".

C. Reasons for Motion

Plaintiff's request for insurance documents is reasonable under the circumstances of this case, and well within the scope of Fed.R.Civ.P. 26. Requests for such insurance documents are common and typical in cases alleging personal injuries. Plaintiff agrees to limit such request to policies covering the years 2003, 2004 and 2005, which is reasonable. Defendant's objections should therefore be overruled.

VII. OTHER OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S DISCOVERY REOUESTS ARE MERITLESS

A. Overbroad; Relevance

In response to each and every interrogatory propounded by Plaintiff, Defendant asserts in blanket and conclusory fashion that it is "overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor dies it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." Defendant also objects to each and every document request as overbroad. These objections are groundless. Plaintiff's discovery requests fall within the scope of broad discovery and relevance under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26. All of Plaintiff's interrogatories and document requests are sufficiently narrow and tailored for Defendant to reasonably provide substantive responses. Defendant fails to indicate unfair prejudice or undue burden from any interrogatory or document request. Defendant provides no responsive information whatsoever, nor has he made any suggestion to reasonably narrow or limit any of the Plaintiff's discovery requests.

Defendant complains that the time period covered in the interrogatories is too broad. The stated time period, applicable to Plaintiff's interrogatories and documents requests generally, as

noted in Defendant's responses, is January I, 2003 to present. This time frame is sufficiently narrow, especially since the plan and scheme alleged in the Complaint to lure girls to the Defendant's Palm Beach mansion for "massages" has been in place since at least that date. Defendant's overbroad/relevance objections should, accordingly, be overruled.

B. Work Product; Attorney-Client Privilege

In response to various interrogatories and all of the documents requests, Defendant asserts in conclusory fashion objections based on the attorney work product and attorney-client communication privilege.1° In making these privilege claims, Defendant failed to provide a privilege log as required by S.D.Fla.L.R. 26.1(O)(3). These interrogatories and requests generally do not on their face implicate the work product or attorney client privileges." These privilege claims should therefore be rejected and overruled.

C. Plaintiff's Definitions of "Employee" is Reasonable

Defendant contests the definition of "Employee" in Plaintiffs document requests and interrogatories, which states as follows:

'"These privileges are asserted in response to Interrogatory nos. 13, 14, and 17, and each and every document request.

"The only possible exception would be Plaintiff's Document Request no. 9, which seeks witness statements; nonetheless, Defendant is required to comply with the Local Rule and provide a privilege log in response to this request as well as the others.

The term "Employee" appears in Interrogatory nos. 1, 2, and Document Request no. 6. The breadth of this definition is reasonable under the circumstances of this case. Upon information and belief, Defendant Epstein conducted his business and personal affairs through a labyrinth of corporate entities and other business forms. This definition of "Employee" is reasonable to encompass responsive information and documents.

D. Fed.R.Civ.P. 408 and 410 Do Not Create a Privileze in Discovery

Defendant objects to Document Request nos. 1-5, which seek the Defendant's agreements with the U.S. Attorney and State Attorney, and documents exchanged with their offices, on the grounds of Fed.R.Evid. 408 and 410. These Rules cover the admissibility in evidence of compromises and plea agreements; they do not set forth a privilege applicable to such agreements in discovery. To the extent a protective order with regard to such documents is deemed appropriate, Plaintiff's counsel agrees to limit their use to this litigation, and not to disclose documents responsive to these requests to third parties.

E. Third Part' Pris an Rights

Defendant broadly and vaguely asserts third party privacy rights in response to various document requests. To the extent that any such privacy rights are properly raised in this case, Plaintiff consents to the entry of an appropriate protective order under which such documents will not be disseminated to third parties and will be used only for purposes of this litigation.

VIII. Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff respectfully requests that Defendant's assertions of privilege and objections be denied and overruled, and that an Order be entered directing Defendant to answer the Plaintiff's Interrogatories and produce documents responsive to Plaintiff's Requests

for Production, subject to such protective order as may be necessary and appropriate. Plaintiff further requests such other relief as this Court deems just and proper.

Dated: March 2, 2009

Respectfully submitted,

By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877

CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO S.D.FLA.L.R. 7.1(A)(3)

Counsel for Plaintiff has made reasonable efforts to confer with counsel for Defendant, by letter dated February 25, 2009, seeking in good faith to resolve or narrow the issues raised in the Motion, but Defendant's counsel failed to respond to Plaintiff's letter, and Plaintiff's counsel has been unable to resolve this dispute.

s/Adam D. Horowitz

I hereby certify that on March 2, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing.

s/ Adam D. Horowitz

SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida

Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. jgoldberger@agwpa.com

Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bcIclaw.com

s/ Adam D. Horowitz

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743865/EFTA02743865.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743865/EFTA02743865.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ee293a4b7a59ecbfb1f9bdbade409631c1a0bfc3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743865/EFTA02743865.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1298 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743865.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 16, + "chars": 28057, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.02, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA \nCASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.66, + 48.599999999999994 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 48.599999999999994 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 92.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 186.66, + 92.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO \nINTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, \nAND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.29599999999999, + 243.81 + ], + [ + 485.039306640625, + 243.81 + ], + [ + 485.039306640625, + 287.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 127.29599999999999, + 287.68353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. INTRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 237.45600000000002, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 374.9649658203125, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 374.9649658203125, + 400.10302734375 + ], + [ + 237.45600000000002, + 400.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. EPSTEIN'S BLANKET ASSERTION OF PRIVILEGE \nAGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION IN RESPONSES \nTO INTERROGATORIES IS INSUFFICIENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.984, + 48.599999999999994 + ], + [ + 469.930908203125, + 48.599999999999994 + ], + [ + 469.930908203125, + 92.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 141.984, + 92.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. DEFENDANT'S BLANKET ASSERTION OF \nFIFTH AMENDMENT PRIVILEGE IN RESPONSE \nTO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION IS INSUFFICIENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 166.46400000000003, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 477.415771484375, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 477.415771484375, + 148.10302734375 + ], + [ + 166.46400000000003, + 148.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "types of Documents Requested Request Nos.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 216.27 + ], + [ + 466.31036376953125, + 216.27 + ], + [ + 466.31036376953125, + 232.10302734375 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 232.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 392.29200000000003, + 216.27 + ], + [ + 463.284, + 216.27 + ], + [ + 463.284, + 230.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 392.29200000000003, + 230.03999999999996 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IV. DEFENDANT'S OBJECTION AND STATEMENT CONCERNING \nADVERSE INFERENCE IS INAPPROPRIATE AND INCORRECT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 108.93599999999999, + 243.81 + ], + [ + 503.71588134765625, + 243.81 + ], + [ + 503.71588134765625, + 273.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 108.93599999999999, + 273.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "V. PLAINTIFF IS ENTITLED TO DEFENDANT'S \nHEALTH CARE INFORMATION IN DISCOVERY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 159.732, + 300.51 + ], + [ + 462.88507080078125, + 300.51 + ], + [ + 462.88507080078125, + 329.3035583496094 + ], + [ + 159.732, + 329.3035583496094 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. Interrogator at Issue", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 229.5, + 342.63 + ], + [ + 384.07373046875, + 342.63 + ], + [ + 384.07373046875, + 357.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 357.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Pertinent Portion of Defendant's Objection", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 175.03199999999998, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 438.4879150390625, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 438.4879150390625, + 469.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 175.03199999999998, + 469.56353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "C. Grounds for Objection and Reasons for Mot ion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 164.62800000000001, + 567.0 + ], + [ + 448.905517578125, + 567.0 + ], + [ + 448.905517578125, + 582.0635223388672 + ], + [ + 164.62800000000001, + 582.0635223388672 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Abrogation of privileged communications in cases involving child \nabuse, abandonment, or neglect.- the privileged quality of \ncommunication . . . between any professional person and his or her \npatient or client, and any other privileged communication except that \nbetween attorney and client or the privilege provided in s. 90.505, as \nsuch communication relates both to the competency of the witness \nand to the exclusion of confidential communications, shall not apply \nto any communication involving the perpetrator or alleged \nperpetrator in any situation involving known or suspected child \nabuse....", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 140.148, + 187.92000000000002 + ], + [ + 472.913818359375, + 187.92000000000002 + ], + [ + 472.913818359375, + 329.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 140.148, + 329.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VI. DEFENDANT HAS NO VALID GROUNDS FOR OBJECTION \nTO PRODUCTION OF INSURANCE DOCUMENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 120.56400000000001, + 412.29 + ], + [ + 491.6714172363281, + 412.29 + ], + [ + 491.6714172363281, + 441.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 120.56400000000001, + 441.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. Item to be Compelled", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 229.5, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 381.6160888671875, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 381.6160888671875, + 469.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 469.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Specific Objections and Grounds", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 622.08 + ], + [ + 412.26153564453125, + 622.08 + ], + [ + 412.26153564453125, + 637.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 637.4830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "C. Reasons for Motion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 235.00799999999998, + 132.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 377.156494140625, + 132.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 377.156494140625, + 148.10302734375 + ], + [ + 235.00799999999998, + 148.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VII. OTHER OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S \nDISCOVERY REOUESTS ARE MERITLESS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 174.42, + 299.70000000000005 + ], + [ + 447.69781494140625, + 299.70000000000005 + ], + [ + 447.69781494140625, + 329.60302734375 + ], + [ + 174.42, + 329.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. Overbroad; Relevance", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 341.82 + ], + [ + 385.5632629394531, + 341.82 + ], + [ + 385.5632629394531, + 357.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 357.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Work Product; Attorney-Client Privilege", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 179.316, + 160.38 + ], + [ + 433.2805480957031, + 160.38 + ], + [ + 433.2805480957031, + 176.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 179.316, + 176.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "C. Plaintiff's Definitions of \"Employee\" is Reasonable", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 154.836, + 355.59000000000003 + ], + [ + 457.9256286621094, + 355.59000000000003 + ], + [ + 457.9256286621094, + 371.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 154.836, + 371.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "D. Fed.R.Civ.P. 408 and 410 Do Not \nCreate a Privileze in Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 187.92000000000002 + ], + [ + 411.00579833984375, + 187.92000000000002 + ], + [ + 411.00579833984375, + 217.863037109375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 217.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "E. Third Part' Pris an Rights", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 215.42399999999998, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 397.9433288574219, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 397.9433288574219, + 441.363037109375 + ], + [ + 215.42399999999998, + 441.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VIII. Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 256.428, + 622.08 + ], + [ + 355.4122619628906, + 622.08 + ], + [ + 355.4122619628906, + 637.5635223388672 + ], + [ + 256.428, + 637.5635223388672 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO S.D.FLA.L.R. 7.1(A)(3)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 49.41 + ], + [ + 456.2237548828125, + 49.41 + ], + [ + 456.2237548828125, + 64.863037109375 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 64.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 49.41 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 49.41 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 63.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 63.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 47.79 + ], + [ + 455.1346740722656, + 47.79 + ], + [ + 455.1346740722656, + 92.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 92.2330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 80 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743865" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743881/EFTA02743881.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743881/EFTA02743881.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0a9d120b5a0fd261fc336a89c211bad514aa0bf6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743881/EFTA02743881.md @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@ +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### DEFENDANT's MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, (hereinafter "Epstein") by and through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which to respond to Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint dated February 27, 2009. Local General Rule 7.1 A.1 and Rule 6, Fed. R. Civ. P. (2009). Defendant seeks an extension until April 3, 2009, to file his response. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: + +- 1. Defendant's response to the Second Amended Complaint would be due on March 11, 2009 (10 days to respond, not including weekend). +- 2. Plaintiffs counsel also represents five (5) other Plaintiffs pursuing claims against Defendant, EPSTEIN. All Plaintiffs have also filed amended complaints bearing the same dates. In order to fully and adequately respond to this and the other complaints, Defendant is in need of an extension until April 3, 2009. +- 3. In addition to the multiple amended complaints, good cause for the extension also includes that counsel has been attempting to resolve discovery issues in this and + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein Page 2 + +other cases against Defendant, EPSTEIN; an associate of Defendant's undersigned counsel who works extensively on this case was out of the office for two weeks during the month February caring for two of her children who had the flu, and the associate herself also caught the flu; Defendant's counsel is also in the midst of preparing for two state court trials — one on a March trial docket and the other specially set in mid-May, (OLD MARSH GOLF CLUB, INC. v. OLD MARSH PARTNERS, et al, Case No. 50 2006CA001667)OMMBAD - set on trial docket beginning March 16, 2009; CARDIOPULMONARY & PRIMARY CARE ASSOC. OF TREASURE COAST, P.A v. , M.D., Case No. 562008CA001726, specially set for trial beginning May 13 through 15, 2009). Discovery in both of these cases is ongoing with several depositions set to prepare for trial. + +4. The requested extension is fair in reasonable under the circumstances as it will provide time to allow the Defendant, EPSTEIN, to fully and adequately respond to this and the other amended complaints. In addition, this action is still at its early stages. + +5. As certified below, counsel for Defendant conferred with counsel for Plaintiff, and Plaintiffs counsel is in agreement with the requested extension. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an order granting an Defendant an extension until April 3, 2009, in which to respond to the Second Amended Complaint. + +# Local Rule 7.1 Statement + +Counsel for the movant conferred by telephone with counsel for the Plaintiff and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested extension until April 3, 2009 for + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein +Page 3 + +Defendant to respond to the Second Amended Complaint. + +![]()**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this Day of March, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +![]()![]() + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion For Extension of Time In Which to Respond to Second Amended Complaint. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiffs counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall respond to the Second Amended Complaint on or before April 3, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743881/EFTA02743881.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743881/EFTA02743881.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..eac7bec609daa73318b8100f48e2c357a0bd765c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743881/EFTA02743881.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,315 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743881.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4816, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.86, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 406.0299987792969, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 406.0299987792969, + 115.6800537109375 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 115.6800537109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT's MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO \nPLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 297.27 + ], + [ + 511.62689208984375, + 297.27 + ], + [ + 511.62689208984375, + 324.9200134277344 + ], + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 324.9200134277344 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Local Rule 7.1 Statement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 235.00799999999998, + 630.99 + ], + [ + 372.0067443847656, + 630.99 + ], + [ + 372.0067443847656, + 645.9199981689453 + ], + [ + 235.00799999999998, + 645.9199981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 257.652, + 204.12 + ], + [ + 380.664, + 204.12 + ], + [ + 380.664, + 217.89000000000004 + ], + [ + 257.652, + 217.89000000000004 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.5253601074219, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.5253601074219, + 115.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 115.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO \nRESPOND TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.396, + 284.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 524.788818359375, + 284.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 524.788818359375, + 312.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 81.396, + 312.91998291015625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743881" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743885/EFTA02743885.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743885/EFTA02743885.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..145a7cf5265be3fb8ba64c831b30fe7ed6266a46 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743885/EFTA02743885.md @@ -0,0 +1,96 @@ +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAMMI + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, (hereinafter "Epstein") by and through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which to respond to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories And Production of Documents, dated March 2, 2009. Local General Rule 7.1 A.1 and Rule 6, Fed. R. Civ. P. (2009). Defendant seeks an extension until March 25, 2009, to file his response. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: + +1. Defendant's response to the motion to compel would be due on March 16, 2009 (10 days to respond, not including weekends). As certified below, Plaintiff's counsel is in agreement with the requested extension of March 25, 2009. + +2. Plaintiffs counsel also represents other Plaintiffs pursuing claims against Defendant, EPSTEIN. A total of four of the Plaintiffs have also filed motions to compel bearing the same dates. In order to fully and adequately respond to this and the other motions, Defendant is in need of an extension until March 25, 2009. + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein Page 2 + +3. In addition to the multiple motions to compel, good cause for the extension also includes that counsel has been attempting to resolve discovery issues in this and other cases against Defendant, EPSTEIN; an associate of Defendant's undersigned counsel who works extensively on this case was out of the office for two weeks during the month February caring for two of her children who had the flu, and the associate herself also caught the flu; Defendant's counsel is also in the midst of preparing for two state court trials — one on a March trial docket and the other specially set in mid-May, (OLD MARSH GOLF CLUB, INC. v. OLD MARSH PARTNERS, et al, Case No. 50 2006CA001667X)OO(MBAD — set on trial docket beginning March 16, 2009; CARDIOPULMONARY & PRIMARY CARE ASSOC. OF TREASURE COAST, P.A v. , M.D., Case No. 562008CA001726, specially set for trial beginning May 13 through 15, 2009). Discovery in both of these cases is ongoing with several depositions set to prepare for trial. + +4. The requested extension is fair in reasonable under the circumstances as it will provide time to allow the Defendant, EPSTEIN, to fully and adequately respond to this and the other motions to compel. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an order granting the Defendant an extension until March 25, 2009, in which to respond to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of documents. + +### Local Rule 7.1 Certification + +Counsel for the movant conferred by telephone with counsel for the Plaintiff and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested extension until March 25, 2009 + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein +Page 3 + +for Defendant to respond to the motion to compel. + +![]() + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 22 day of March, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]() + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion For Extension of Time in Which to Respond to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiffs counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall respond to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents on or before March 25, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743885/EFTA02743885.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743885/EFTA02743885.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c6e7f8fe3c210c7ff19831ce082ce88f8302bbf5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743885/EFTA02743885.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,307 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743885.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5050, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.15, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 83.8074951171875 + ], + [ + 407.592, + 83.8074951171875 + ], + [ + 407.592, + 112.28997802734375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 112.28997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND \nTO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES \nAND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 102.81600000000002, + 294.5574645996094 + ], + [ + 503.9544982910156, + 294.5574645996094 + ], + [ + 503.9544982910156, + 334.6700134277344 + ], + [ + 102.81600000000002, + 334.6700134277344 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Local Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 230.11199999999997, + 630.99 + ], + [ + 377.03558349609375, + 630.99 + ], + [ + 377.03558349609375, + 644.3240661621094 + ], + [ + 230.11199999999997, + 644.3240661621094 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.1, + 216.27 + ], + [ + 383.11199999999997, + 216.27 + ], + [ + 383.11199999999997, + 230.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 260.1, + 230.03999999999996 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 409.0253601074219, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 409.0253601074219, + 113.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 113.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO \nRESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO \nINTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.62, + 282.68999999999994 + ], + [ + 526.288818359375, + 282.68999999999994 + ], + [ + 526.288818359375, + 325.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 82.62, + 325.67999267578125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743885" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743889/EFTA02743889.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743889/EFTA02743889.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dc5eec3a6574665163b60c6514ab56c1489b7973 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743889/EFTA02743889.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +v. Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +![](_page_0_Picture_7.jpeg) + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion For Extension of Time in Which to Respond to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to (1" 4°) 4 Interrogatories and Production of Documents. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall respond to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents on or before March 25, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of Nta-r c\_k , 2009. + +Z: KeTITIettrA. %Mitt- Lk/ \ aresponse, including memorandum of law, which is in excess of 20 pages. + +## Rule 7.1 Certification + +Pursuant to communication by telephone, Plaintiff's counsel has no objection to the request to exceed 20 pages herein. + +Robert D. Critton, Jr Attorney for Epstein + +# Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of recwAjdentified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this/C5tray of March, 2009: + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) +[iherman@hermanlaw.com](mailto:iherman@hermanlaw.com) +[lrivera@hermanlaw.com](mailto:lrivera@hermanlaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey +Epstein* + +![]()![]() + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +### ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, INCLUDING SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion to Exceed Page Limitation in Response to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents, Including Supporting Memorandum of Law. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiffs counsel being in agreement with the request to exceed page limitation, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant's Response to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents, Including Supporting Memorandum of Law may exceed 20 pages. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743890/EFTA02743890.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743890/EFTA02743890.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0c1dd4830f5efa20540cb961f8281500b0f17895 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743890/EFTA02743890.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,311 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743890.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4363, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.16, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.1699981689453, + 69.5574951171875 + ], + [ + 407.592, + 69.5574951171875 + ], + [ + 407.592, + 98.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.1699981689453, + 98.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN \nRESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO \nINTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, INCLUDING \nSUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 99.144, + 276.177490234375 + ], + [ + 508.3181457519531, + 276.177490234375 + ], + [ + 508.3181457519531, + 332.7900085449219 + ], + [ + 99.144, + 332.7900085449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.02400000000003, + 400.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 362.4824523925781, + 400.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 362.4824523925781, + 415.39251708984375 + ], + [ + 246.02400000000003, + 415.39251708984375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 551.61 + ], + [ + 366.4063720703125, + 551.61 + ], + [ + 366.4063720703125, + 566.2853851318359 + ], + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 566.2853851318359 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.8099822998047, + 82.2974853515625 + ], + [ + 408.20400000000006, + 82.2974853515625 + ], + [ + 408.20400000000006, + 110.77996826171875 + ], + [ + 200.8099822998047, + 110.77996826171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN \nRESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO \nINTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, \nINCLUDING SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.42000579833984, + 279.927490234375 + ], + [ + 535.5, + 279.927490234375 + ], + [ + 535.5, + 336.15997314453125 + ], + [ + 73.42000579833984, + 336.15997314453125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 301 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743890" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743894/EFTA02743894.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743894/EFTA02743894.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a14171f41f45f32c13db79446e53676ea819de46 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743894/EFTA02743894.md @@ -0,0 +1,42 @@ +## AFFIDAVIT OF JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +1. I, Jack A. Goldberger, have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein. I am an attorney licensed to practice in the State of Florida since 1978. I am a partner with the law firm of Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A., located at One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401. + +2. My practice includes and specializes in the defense of criminal matters. I am board certified in criminal law. I have been and currently am the criminal defense attorney for JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +3. I represented Mr. EPSTEIN in the negotiation of and entering into a Non-Prosecution Agreement with the United States Attorney's Office (USAO) for the Federal Southern District of Florida. The terms and conditions of the Non-Prosecution Agreement also entailed the entering of a Plea Agreement with the State Attorney's Office, Palm Beach County, State of Florida. (The Non-Prosecution Agreement shall hereinafter be referred to as the "NPA"). + +4. By its terms, the NPA took effect on June 30, 2008. Also, pursuant to the terms of the NPA, any criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN is deferred as long as the terms and conditions of the NPA are fulfilled by EPSTEIN. + +> It EXHIBIT -0 + +5. The criminal matters against EPSTEIN remain ongoing until the NPA expires by its terms in late 2010 and as long as the USAO determines EPSTEIN has complied with those terms and conditions. The threat of criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN by USAO in the Southern District of Florida continues presently and through late 2010. + +6. Pursuant to the terms of the NPA, the USAO possesses the right to declare that the agreement has been breached, give EPSTEIN's counsel notice, and attempt to move forward with aprosecution. As of the date of this Affidavit, the USAO has taken the position on a number of occasions that it might consider the following actions by EPSTEIN to be a breach of the NPA. + +- Investigation by EPSTEIN (by and through his attorneys) of this Plaintiff and the other Plaintiffs in other pending civil cases for purposes of defending the civil actions; +- EPSTEIN's contesting damages in this action and other civil actions. +- EPSTEIN or his legal representatives making statements to the press about this Plaintiff or the other Plaintiffs. +- Using the word "jail" instead of "imprisonment" in the plea agreement with the Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office. + +7. EPSTEIN, through counsel, submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for documents relating to this and the other cases; the FBI denied the request stating the materials are at this time exempt from disclosure because they are in an investigative file, i.e. the matter is still an ongoing criminal investigation. + +8. The NPA expires in late 2010. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. + +## STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +I hereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above named person: that" rerso-nciiy\_ , and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WI2IESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this /i v" day of fm, K j , 2009. + +![](_page_2_Picture_7.jpeg) + +PRINT NA NOTARY PU LIC/STATE OF FLORIDA COMMISSION NO.: bb O MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: lI I13 /201 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743894/EFTA02743894.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743894/EFTA02743894.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e9b7135e8ba10a921e821721cc1db5510a399b0f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743894/EFTA02743894.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,195 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743894.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3801, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.76, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_2_Picture_7.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 151.776, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 441.3828430175781, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 441.3828430175781, + 95.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 151.776, + 95.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "STATE OF FLORIDA \nCOUNTY OF PALM BEACH", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.91000366210938, + 257.58 + ], + [ + 236.91073608398438, + 257.58 + ], + [ + 236.91073608398438, + 287.03997802734375 + ], + [ + 81.91000366210938, + 287.03997802734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 299 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743894" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743894/_page_2_Picture_7.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743894/_page_2_Picture_7.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8477d104c349db4d8ab39350b34105561710489e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743894/_page_2_Picture_7.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d051b9c2dd3c3f4cfdfa151c520400212a5fa2d12b9a259d67a104624b411989 +size 11162 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743897/EFTA02743897.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743897/EFTA02743897.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ac9ab4397f2e13d12128ef35642680aa5b3056ea --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743897/EFTA02743897.md @@ -0,0 +1,128 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARIal + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2 ("Jane" or "Jane Doe"), brings this Complaint against Jeffrey Epstein, as follows: + +# Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue + +- 1. Jane Doe No. 2 is acitizen and resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and is sui juris. +- 2. This Complaint is brought under afictitious name to protect the identity of the Plaintiff because this Complaint makes sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon a minor. + - 3. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein is acitizen and resident of the State of New York. + - 4. This is an action for damages in excess of \$50 million. +- 5. This Court has jurisdiction of this action and the claims set forth herein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(a), as the matter in controversy (i) exceeds \$75,000, exclusive of interest and costs; and (ii) is between citizens of different states. +- 6. This Court has venue of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(a) as asubstantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this District. + +- 1 - v EXHIBIT J9 + +# Factual Allegations + +7. At all relevant times, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") was an adult male, 52 years old. Epstein is a financier and money manager with a secret clientele limited exclusively to billionaires. He is himself a man of tremendous wealth, power and influence. He maintains his principal home in New York and also owns residences in New Mexico, St. and Palm Beach, FL. The allegations herein concern Epstein's conduct while at his lavish estate in Palm Beach. + +8. Upon information and belief, Epstein has a sexual preference and obsession for underage minor girls. lie engaged in aplan and scheme in which he gained access to primarily economically disadvantaged minor girls in his home, sexually assaulted these girls, and then gave them money. In or about 2004-2005, Jane Doe, then approximately 16 years old, fell into Epstein's trap and became one of his victims. + +9. Upon information and belief, Jeffrey Epstein carried out his scheme and assaulted girls in Florida, New York and on his private island, known as Little St. James, in St. + +I0. Epstein's scheme involved the use of young girls to recruit underage girls. (Upon information and belief, the young girl who brought Jane Doe to Epstein was herself a minor victim of Epstein, and will therefore not be named in this Complaint). Under Epstein's plan, underage girls were recruited ostensibly to give a wealthy man a massage for monetary compensation in his Palm Beach mansion. The recruiter would be contacted when Epstein was planning to be at his Palm Beach residence or soon after he had arrived there. Epstein or someone on his behalf would direct the recruiter to bring one or more underage girls to the residence. The recruiter, upon information and belief, generally sought out economically disadvantaged underage girls from western Palm Beach County who would be enticed by the money being offered - generally \$200 to \$300 per "massage" session - and who were perceived as less likely to complain to authorities or have + +credibility if allegations of improper conduct were made. This was an important element of Epstein's plan. + +1I. Epstein's plan and scheme reflected aparticular pattern and method. Upon arrival at Epstein's mansion, the underage victim would be introduced toll=1., Epstein's assistant, who gathered the girl's personal information, including her name and telephone number...3 would then bring the girl up aflight of stairs to abedroom that contained amassage table in addition to other furnishings. There were photographs of nude women lining the stairway. and in the bedroom. The girl would then find herself alone in the room with Epstein, who would be wearing only a towel. He would then remove his towel and lie naked on the massage table, and direct the girl to remove her clothes. Epstein would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, including masturbation and touching the girl's vagina. + +12. Consistent with the foregoing plan and scheme, Jane Doe was recruited to give Epstein amassage for monetary compensation. Jane was brought to Epstein's mansion in Palm Beach. Once at the mansion, Jane was introduced to , who led her up the flight of stairs to the room with the massage table. In this room, Epstein told Jane to take off her clothes and give him amassage. Jane kept her panties and bra on and complied with Epstein's instructions. Epstein wore only a towel around his waste. After ashort period of time, Epstein removed the towel and rolled over exposing his penis. Epstein began to masturbate and he sexually assaulted Jane. + +13. After Epstein had completed the assault, Jane was then able to get dressed, leave the room and go back down the stairs. Jane was paid \$200 by Epstein. The young girl who recruited Jane was paid \$100 by Epstein for bringing Jane to him. + +14. As a result of this encounter with Epstein, Jane experienced confusion, shame, humiliation and embarrassment, and has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries. + +### COUNT I Sexual Assault and Battery + +- 15. PlaintiffJane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 above. +- 16. Epstein acted with intent to cause an offensive contact with Jane Doe, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and Jane Doe was thereby put in such imminent apprehension. +- 17. Epstein made an intentional, unlawful offer of offensive sexual contact toward Jane Doe, creating a reasonable fear of imminent peril. +- 18. Epstein intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Jane Doe, with the intent to cause such contact or the apprehension that such contact is imminent. +- 19. Epstein tortiously committed asexual assault and battery on Jane Doe. Epstein's acts were intentional, unlawful, offensive and harmful. +- 20. Epstein's plan and scheme in which he committed such acts upon Jane Doe were done willfully and maliciously. +- 21. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, punitive damages, costs, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +## COUNT H Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress + +- 22. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 above. +- 23. Epstein's conduct was intentional or reckless. +- 24. Epstein's conduct with aminor was extreme and outrageous, going beyond all bounds + +of decency. + +25. Epstein committed willful acts of child sexual abuse on Jane Doe. These acts resulted in mental or sexual injury to Jane Doe, that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. + +26. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. Epstein knew or had reason to know that his intentional and outrageous conduct would cause emotional distress and damage to Jane Doe, or Epstein acted with reckless disregard of the high probability of causing severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. + +27. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's intentional or reckless conduct, Jane Doe, has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, costs, punitive damages, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +# COUNT III Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. 42422 + +28. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 above. + +29. Epstein used afacility or means of interstate commerce to knowingly persuade, induce or entice Jane Doe, when she was under the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or sexual activity for which any person can be charged with acriminal offense. + +30. On June 30, 2008, Epstein entered aplea of guilty to violations of Florida §§ 796.07 and 796.03, in the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for 1'alm Beach County (Case nos. 2008-cf-009381AXXXMB and 2006-cf-009454AXXXMB), for conduct involving the same plan and scheme as alleged herein. + +31. As to Plaintiffiane Doc, Epstein could have been charged with criminal violations of + +Florida Statute §796.07(2) (including subsections (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) thereof), and other criminal offenses including violations of Florida Statutes §§798.02 and 800.04 (including subsections (5), (6) and (7) thereof). + +32. Epstein's acts and conduct are in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422. + +33. As a result of Epstein's violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422, Plaintiff has suffered personal injury, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. + +34. Plaintiff hired Herman & Mermelstein, P.A., in this matter and agreed to pay them a reasonable attorneys' fee. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for all damages available under 18 U.S.C. §2255(a), including without limitation, actual and compensatory damages, costs of suit, and attorneys' fees, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +#### JURY TRIAL DEMAND + +Plaintiff demands a jury trial in this action on all claims so triable. + +Dated: February 27, 2008 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: 5/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssmesexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on February 27, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +### SERVICE LIST + +DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRAMM + +United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +igoldberaera.agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. + +rcritton@bc1claw.com + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743897/EFTA02743897.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743897/EFTA02743897.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6cd0ffee0fc7549ae542ba77d9084d7cd1ec59e4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743897/EFTA02743897.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,571 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743897.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 10742, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.51, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 392.6949157714844, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 392.6949157714844, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 109.35000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 279.45 + ], + [ + 390.34820556640625, + 279.45 + ], + [ + 390.34820556640625, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 295.65 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 217.26, + 356.4 + ], + [ + 376.38, + 356.4 + ], + [ + 376.38, + 372.6 + ], + [ + 217.26, + 372.6 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Factual Allegations", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 256.428, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 355.2525939941406, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 355.2525939941406, + 98.6578369140625 + ], + [ + 256.428, + 98.6578369140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT I \nSexual Assault and Battery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 236.0128173828125, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 369.036, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 369.036, + 111.3013916015625 + ], + [ + 236.0128173828125, + 111.3013916015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT H \nIntentional Infliction of Emotional Distress", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 569.4300000000001 + ], + [ + 401.8924255371094, + 569.4300000000001 + ], + [ + 401.8924255371094, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 597.78 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT III \nCoercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. 42422", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 117.50399999999999, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 482.7995300292969, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 482.7995300292969, + 454.4791259765625 + ], + [ + 117.50399999999999, + 454.4791259765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JURY TRIAL DEMAND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 235.00799999999998, + 397.71 + ], + [ + 361.0999755859375, + 397.71 + ], + [ + 361.0999755859375, + 411.48 + ], + [ + 235.00799999999998, + 411.48 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.75, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 371.48400000000004, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 371.48400000000004, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 225.75, + 99.63 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 259.488, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 341.5701904296875, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 341.5701904296875, + 100.6905517578125 + ], + [ + 259.488, + 100.6905517578125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 256 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 386 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 408 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 301 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 343 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 253 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743897" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743905/EFTA02743905.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743905/EFTA02743905.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4185f8a20323a55e01f3b26511205ce5719bd56a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743905/EFTA02743905.md @@ -0,0 +1,221 @@ +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +A.C., + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129XXXXMEIAI + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, and.. + +Defendants. + +### ORDER ON DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION, DATED FEBRUARY 6, 2009 + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Response & Objections To Plaintiffs First Request For Production, dated February 6, 2009 and the Court having heard argument of counsel and being fully advised in these premises, it is hereby + +elO/o Xo11O a."-e.\_ ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendants-Mutityrns-hcrebnretrtteeli- + +-ebarleti- Cc/54m: vkaGe. + +DONE AND ORDERED at Palm Beach County Courthouse, West Palm + +Beach, Florida, this 2y5day of fi t> + +.7k + +Edward A. Garrison Circuit Judge + +Copies furnished: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ., and MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ., 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach. FL 33401; JACK SCAROLA, ESQ., AND JACK P. II, ESQ., Seamy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A., 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd.,West Palm Beach, FL 33409, and JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A., One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +CD PoS/T-6-EXHIBIT + +t;, + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH +JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM +BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +A.C., + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129XXXXMB AI + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, and [REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +Defendants. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +**DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S AMENDED RESPONSE & +OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION** + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, +hereby files his Amended Response and Objections to Plaintiff's First Request For +Production To Defendant, served January 5, 2009 and states: + +**Introduction** + +This Amended Response amends Defendant's previously filed Response and +Objections to Plaintiff's First Request for Production, dated February 6, 2009. This +response does not change the legal objections previously raised but rather sets forth a +discussion of the law in support of Defendant's constitutional objections to production, in +particular, the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Except for the +discussion of law set forth herein, this response sets forth the identical responses and +objections previously filed and served. Accordingly, Plaintiff is in no way prejudiced by +this Amended Response. + +**Legal Basis Applicable to Each of Defendant's Objections Set Forth Below** + +In response to each of the items requested, set forth below, Defendant asserts +his Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-incrimination. The Fifth Amendment + +*cc: JEF JEFF* +*blue* + +Privilege extends to the act of production where, as here, it involves a self-incriminating testimonial communication or "a compelled testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell, 530U.S. 27, 120 S.Ct. 2037 (2000); Fisher v. United States 425U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence, Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §138 (6th Ed.). See also Malloy v. Hogan 84S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - u[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); Hoffman v. U.S. 71S.Ct. 814, 818 (1951), and progeny). + +The Fifth Amendment Privilege may be invoked in a civil action where alitigant or witness is being asked to provide information or respond to aquestion that may incriminate him in a crime. See generally DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436So.2d 1099(Fla. 4m DCA 1983). The privilege against self-incrimination may be asserted during discovery when a litigant has "reasonable grounds to believe that the response would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against a litigant." Awitness, including a civil defendant, is entitled to invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege whenever there is a realistic possibility that the answer to aquestion could be used in anyway to convict the witness of a crime or could aid in the development of other incriminating evidence that can be used at trial. Id- Pillsbury Company v. Conbov 495 U.S. 248, 103 S.Ct. 608 (1983). + +The United States Supreme Court has made clear that the scope of the Fifth Amendment Privilege includes the circumstances as here "the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena (or production request) has a compelled testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000). In explaining the application of the privilege, the Supreme Court stated: + +We have held that "the act of production" itself may implicitly communicate "statements of fact." By "producing documents in compliance with a subpoena, the witness would admit that the papers existed, were in his possession or control, and were authentic."FN19 Moreover, as was true in this case, when the custodian of documents responds to a subpoena, he may be compelled to take the witness stand and answer questions designed to determine whether he has produced everything demanded by the subpoena.FN20 The answers to those questions, as well as the act of production itself, may certainly communicate information about the existence, custody, and authenticity of the documents. Whether the constitutional privilege protects the answers to such questions, or protects the act of production itself, is a question that is distinct from the question whether the unprotected contents of the documents themselves are incriminating. + +FN19 "The issue presented in those cases was whether the act of producing subpoenaed documents, not itself the making of a statement, might nonetheless have some protected testimonial aspects. The Court concluded that the act of production could constitute protected testimonial communication because it might entail implicit statements of fact: by producing documents in compliance with a subpoena, the witness would admit that the papers existed, were in his possession or control, and were authentic. United States v. Doe, 465 U.S., at 613, and n. 11, 104 S.Ct. 1237; Fisher, 425 U.S., at 409-410, 96 S.Ct. 1569; id. at 428, 432, 96 S.Ct. 1569 (concurring opinions). See Braswell v. United States, [487 U.S.] at 104, 108 S.Ct. 2284; [id.] at 122, 108 S.Ct. 2284 (dissenting opinion). Thus, the Court made clear that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination applies to acts that imply assertions of fact."... An examination of the Court's application of these principles in other cases indicates the Court's recognition that, in order to be testimonial, an accused's communication must itself, explicitly or implicitly, relate a factual assertion or disclose information. Only then is a person compelled to be a 'witness' against himself." Doe v. United States, 487 U.S., at 209-210, 108 S.Ct. 2341 (footnote omitted). + +> FN20. See App. 62-70. Thus for example, after respondent had been duly sworn by the grand jury the prosecutor called his attention to paragraph A of the Subpoena er (reproduced in the Appendix, infra, at 2048-2049) and asked whether he had produced "all those documents." App. 65. + +Finally, the phrase "in any criminal case" in the text of the Fifth Amendment might have been read to limit its coverage to compelled testimony that is used against the defendant in the trial itself. It has, however, long been settled that its protection encompasses compelled statements that lead to the discovery of incriminating evidence even though the statements themselves are not incriminating and are not introduced into evidence. Thus, a half century ago we held that a trial judge had erroneously rejected a defendant's claim of privilege on the ground that his answer to the pending question would not itself constitute evidence of the charged offense. As we explained: + +"The privilege afforded not only extends to answers that would in themselves support a conviction under a federal criminal statute but likewise embraces those which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a federal crime." Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486, 71 S.Ct. 814. 95 L.Ed. 1118 (1951). + +Compelled testimony that communicates information that may "lead to incriminating evidence" is privileged even if the information itself is not inculpatory. Doe v. United States, 487 U.S. 201, 208, n. 6, 108 S.Ct. 2341, 101 L.Ed.2d 184 (19881. It's the Fifth Amendment's protection against the prosecutor's use of incriminating information derived directly or indirectly from the compelled testimony of the respondent that is of primary relevance in this case. + +In summarizing its holding regarding the application of the Fifth Amendment Privilege to a production request, the Hubbell Court left "no doubt that the constitutional privilege against self incrimination protects" not only "the target of a grand jury investigation from being compelled to answer questions designed to elicit information about the existence of sources of potentially incriminating evidence," but the privilege also "has the same application to the testimonial aspect of a response to a subpoena seeking discovery of those sources." At 43, and 2047. + +EPSTEIN entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") with United States Attorney General's Officer ("USAO") for the Federal Southern District of Florida. The terms and conditions of the NPA also entailed EPSTEIN entering into a Plea Agreement with the State Attorney's Office, Palm Beach County, State of Florida. By its terms, the NPA took effect on June 30, 2008. As well, pursuant to the NPA, any criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN is deferred as long as the terms and conditions of the NPA are fulfilled by EPSTEIN. Criminal matters against EPSTEIN remain ongoing until the NPA expires by its terms in late 2010 and as long as the USAO determines that EPSTEIN has complied with those terms and conditions. The threat of criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN by the USAO continues presently and through late 2010. The USAO possesses the right to declare that the agreement has been breached, give EPSTEIN's counsel notice, and attempt to move forward with the prosecution. See attached Exhibit "A", Affidavit of Jack A. Goldberger, a board certified criminal defense attorney who has in the past and is currently representing EPSTEIN. + +This is precisely the situation that the protection of the Fifth Amendment Privilege is to apply. By responding to the request as opposed to asserting his constitutional privilege, EPSTEIN would admit that the documents/items existed, were in his possession or control, and were authentic. The act of production itself, may certainly communicate information about the existence, custody, and authenticity of the documents/items. "Whether the constitutional privilege protects the answers to such questions, or protects the act of production itself, is aquestion that is distinct from the + +question whether the unprotected contents of the documents themselves are incriminating? United States v. Hubbell supra. + +Given the type of documents requested (set forth below), the collection and production of the of the items demanded would be "tantamount to answering a series of interrogatories asking a witness to disclose the existence and location of particular documents/[items] fitting certain broad descriptions." Hubbell supra at 41-2, and 2046. Responding to the requests is "the functional equivalent of the preparation of an answer to either a detailed written interrogatory or a series of oral questions at a discovery deposition." Id. As stated in Hubbell, "it is undeniable that providing a catalog of existing documents (items)" fitting within any of the requested documents "could provide a prosecutor with a 'lead to incriminating evidence,' or 'a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute.- + +Accordingly, Defendant's constitutional objection is required to be upheld. + +## Specific Requests & Responses, Including Objections + +Request No. 1: Any and all evidence required to be maintained by Epstein and the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, specifically evidence requested by or directly related to the grand jury subpoenas that have been issued in connection with the investigation referenced in the Non-Prosecution Agreement, and including certain computer equipment. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the + +Page 7 + +present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege. + +Request No. 2: Any and all documents reflecting or relating to the identity of, the scheduling of, and/or the payment of any female compensated by or on behalf of Epstein for providing any service to Epstein that required, contemplated, or included in the provisions of such service, any physical contact between Epstein and the female, any act or prostitution, any illicit sexual conduct, the exposure of breast, buttocks or genitalia, or any commercial sex act as defined in 18 U.S.C. §1591(c)(1). + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to + +effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further Defendants objects to the production as overly broad and seeking information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The Plaintiff in this instance has alleged in her complaint that she was sexually abused by the Defendant on one occasion sometime in the year 2004. The documents requested herein have no time period provided, and therefore the information sought is grossly overbroad. + +Request No. 3: Any and all documents reflecting or relating to the identity of and/or the nature and extent of any other person's participation in the communication with and/or the scheduling of and/or the payment of any person who participated in any conduct described in Request #2. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the + +present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further Defendants objects to the production as overly broad and seeking information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The Plaintiff in this instance has alleged in her complaint that she was sexually abused by the Defendant on one occasion sometime in the year 2004. The documents requested herein have no time period provided, and therefore the information sought is grossly overbroad. + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was sent b .S. Mail to the following addressees on this 19th day of February , 2009: + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack Pt Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Shipley, P.A + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +Barnhart & 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 Phone +561-383-9424 Fax +*Counsel for Plaintiff* + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendants Jeffrey Epstein* +and [REDACTED] + +**BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER +& COLEMAN, LLP** + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +(561) 842-2820 +(561) 515-3148 Fax + +By: + +![]()*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey E. Epstein)* + +*Counsel Copy: Judge Barrett* + +## AFFIDAVIT OF JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +1. I, Jack A. Goldberger, have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein. I am an attorney licensed to practice in the State of Florida since 1978. I am a partner with the law firm of Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A., located at One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401. + +2. My practice includes and specializes in the defense of criminal matters. I am board certified in criminal law. I have been and currently am the criminal defense attorney for JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +3. I represented Mr. EPSTEIN in the negotiation of and entering into a Non-Prosecution Agreement with the United States Attorney's Office (USAO) for the Federal Southern District of Florida. The terms and conditions of the Non-Prosecution Agreement also entailed the entering of a Plea Agreement with the State Attorney's Office, Palm Beach County, State of Florida. (The Non-Prosecution Agreement shall hereinafter be referred to as the "NPA"). + +4. By its terms, the NPA took effect on June 30, 2008. Also, pursuant to the terms of the NPA, any criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN is deferred as long as the terms and conditions of the NPA are fulfilled by EPSTEIN. + +EXHIBIT. + +5. The criminal matters against EPSTEIN remain ongoing until the NPA expires by its terms in late 2010, and as long as the USAO determines EPSTEIN has complied with those terms and conditions. The threat of criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN by USAO in the Southern District of Florida continues presently and through late 2010. + +6. Pursuant to the terms of the NPA, the USAO possesses the right to declare that the agreement has been breached, give EPSTEIN's counsel notice, and attempt to move forward with a prosecution. As of the date of this Affidavit, the USAO has taken the position on a number of occasions that it might consider the following actions by EPSTEIN to be a breach of the NPA. + +- Investigation by EPSTEIN (by and through his attorneys) of this Plaintiff and the other Plaintiffs in other pending civil cases for purposes of defending the civil actions: +- EPSTEIN's contesting damages in this action and other civil actions +- EPSTEIN or his legal representatives making statements to the press about this Plaintiff or the other Plaintiffs. +- Using the word "jail" instead of "imprisonment" in the plea agreement with the Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office. + +7. EPSTEIN, through counsel, submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for documents relating to this and the other cases; the FBI denied the request stating the materials are at this time exempt from disclosure because they are in an investigative file, i.e. the matter is still an ongoing criminal investigation. + +8. The NPA expires in late 2010. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +I hereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the/following form of identification of the above named person: kivowl rsal4clyr, , and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this 19 day of !ft • 6, nA ty , 2009. + +![](_page_13_Picture_7.jpeg) + +) E E- Ki-\511•-> 8-tit-NOTARY PU L.IC/STA : F FLORIDA PRINT NA • pi COMMISSION NO.: bb Li 81-74i O MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: /11(3 /2-01 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743905/EFTA02743905.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743905/EFTA02743905.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8aca44f950733061a87412bda1b42c6348a59a4c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743905/EFTA02743905.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,684 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743905.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 22588, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.39, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_13_Picture_7.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & \nOBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION, \nDATED FEBRUARY 6, 2009", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 96.084, + 281.88 + ], + [ + 494.97998046875, + 281.88 + ], + [ + 494.97998046875, + 326.21722412109375 + ], + [ + 96.084, + 326.21722412109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S AMENDED RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 268.11 + ], + [ + 495.72, + 268.11 + ], + [ + 495.72, + 299.70000000000005 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 299.70000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.996, + 392.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 332.92800000000005, + 392.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 332.92800000000005, + 406.62 + ], + [ + 264.996, + 406.62 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Basis Applicable to Each of Defendant's Objections Set Forth Below", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 100.98000000000002, + 637.47 + ], + [ + 494.4960000000001, + 637.47 + ], + [ + 494.4960000000001, + 653.6700000000001 + ], + [ + 100.98000000000002, + 653.6700000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Specific Requests & Responses, Including Objections", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 159.12, + 462.51 + ], + [ + 448.3505554199219, + 462.51 + ], + [ + 448.3505554199219, + 477.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 159.12, + 477.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 257.03999999999996, + 570.177490234375 + ], + [ + 381.37005615234375, + 570.177490234375 + ], + [ + 381.37005615234375, + 584.8199999999999 + ], + [ + 257.03999999999996, + 584.8199999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 155.448, + 77.4375 + ], + [ + 446.641845703125, + 77.4375 + ], + [ + 446.641845703125, + 92.34 + ], + [ + 155.448, + 92.34 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 242 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 234 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 339 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 316 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743905" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743905/_page_13_Picture_7.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743905/_page_13_Picture_7.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..335b00667882854e73432c57a62c00bf0c908d6a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743905/_page_13_Picture_7.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1f1b1b450470f78988704a0958bdc4f9883c5f29f08f3365f99101fb916b3330 +size 11089 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743919/EFTA02743919.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743919/EFTA02743919.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..15241f75107a6078bc5fbdc538309993ac3296c6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743919/EFTA02743919.md @@ -0,0 +1,492 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES, and RESPONSES TO 1st and 2nd PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, serves his response and supporting memorandum of law to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law In Support, dated March 2, 2009. In support of Defendant's assertion of constitutional privileges and objections to discovery and in response to Plaintiff's motion to compel, Defendant states: + +#### Introduction + +As discussed more fully herein, Defendant has asserted constitutional based protections to the discovery requests propounded by Plaintiff. In addition and in alternative to the constitutional protections afforded under the Fifth, Fourteenth and Sixth Amendments, Defendant also asserted other factual/legal objections and privileges. However, as will be evident in reviewing Plaintiffs discovery requests and Defendant's response, the constitutional assertions are required to be determined first so that Defendant does not risk rendering these protections meaningless in attempting + +to assert and argue the factual basis for the additional objections and privileges. See part ILA. herein. + +I. Defendant EPSTEIN has properly asserted his constitutional claims of privilege and effective assistance of counsel, as guaranteed under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, to each of the specified interrogatories and production requests. + +In accordance with applicable law, EPSTEIN has properly asserted his claims of privilege and effective assistance of counsel as guaranteed by the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution to each of the interrogatories propounded by Plaintiff in her first set of Interrogatories and first production request. See Exhibit A to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel for Defendant's Response and Objections to Plaintiff's Amended Interrogatories, and Exhibit B to Plaintiffs motion for production requests and Defendant's responses thereto. Contrary to Plaintiffs assertion that Defendant made an improper "blanket objection," Defendant examined and responded to each of the discovery requests and raised constitutional privileges, along with other alternative objections applicable to the specific interrogatory or production request. See Exhibit A and B to Plaintiffs motion. (Although Defendant sets forth each of the interrogatories and requests below, because Plaintiff has attached the responses as Exhibits to her motion, Defendant does not retype the responses in their entirety herein). + +The circumstances of this case (and the others) are such that not only does Defendant EPSTEIN face allegations of sexual misconduct with and abuse, exploitation, and sexual battery of alleged minors in this and other civil actions, but he also faces criminal prosecution based on the same factual allegations. The Plaintiffs attorney represents Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, in civil actions against EPSTEIN filed in + +this Court. (There are additional state and federal civil actions against EPSTEIN). In this and the other civil actions, the Plaintiffs reference federal and state criminal statutes in an attempt to allege claims ranging from sexual battery to intentional infliction of emotional distress, to a violation of 18 U.S.C. 2422, entitled "Coercion and enticement, contained in Title 18, "Crimes and Criminal Procedure," Part I — "Crimes,' Chapter 117 — "Transportation for Illegal Sexual Activity and Related Crimes'," to a cause of action pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 — which creates a civil remedy for personal injuries where a plaintiff can show a violation of specified statutory criminal statues. Plaintiff is attempting to allege a violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422. See endnote 1 for current text of 18 U.S.C. §2422, along with pre-2006 amended text. See Exhibit B hereto - copy of Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint. + +Plaintiff also alleges that "1 Epstein's assistant" was a part of "Epstein's plan and scheme (which) reflected a particular pattern and method" in the alleged recruiting of girl's to come to EPSTEIN's Palm Beach mansion and give him "massages" in exchange for money. 2nd Am. Complaint, ¶11-12. According to the complaint allegations — "Upon information and belief Epstein has a sexual preference and obsession for underage minor girls." ¶8. " would "bring the girl up a flight of stairs to a bedroom that contained a massage table ... ." The girl would be alone with EPSTEIN. EPSTEIN would "lie naked on the massage table, and direct the girl to remove her clothes." "Epstein would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, including masturbation and touching the girl's vagina." 2nd Am. Complaint, ¶11, Exhibit B. Plaintiff alleges that "in 2004-2005," she, "then approximately 16 years old, fell into Epstein's trap and became one of his victims." ¶8. + +Plaintiff alleges that Epstein "sexually assaulted" her. ¶12 Plaintiff also alleges that EPSTEIN "maintains his principal home in New York and also owns residences in New Mexico, St. and Palm Beach, FL." Id, ¶7. "Upon information and belief, Jeffrey Epstein carried out his scheme and assaulted girls in Florida, New York and on his private island, known as Little St. James, in St. ." Id, ¶9. The nature of the allegations is (obviously) serious. + +The threat of criminal prosecution is real and present as EPSTEIN remains under the scrutiny of the United States Attorney's Office (USAO) which, as explained more fully herein, possesses the power to move forward with its criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN. EPSTEIN entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") with United States Attorney General's Office for the Federal Southern District of Florida. The terms and conditions of the NPA also entailed EPSTEIN entering into a Plea Agreement with the State Attorney's Office, Palm Beach County, State of Florida. By its terms, the NPA took effect on June 30, 2008. As well, pursuant to the NPA, any criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN is deferred as long as the terms and conditions of the NPA are fulfilled by EPSTEIN. Criminal matters against EPSTEIN remain ongoing until the NPA expires by its terms in late 2010 and as long as the USAO determines that EPSTEIN has complied with those terms and conditions. The threat of criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN by the USAO continues presently and through late 2010. The USAO possesses the right to declare that the agreement has been breached, give EPSTEIN's counsel notice, and attempt to move forward with the prosecution. In other words, the fact that there exists a NPA does not mean that EPSTEIN is free from future criminal prosecution. In fact, the threat of prosecution is real, substantial, and present. See + +attached Exhibit "A", Affidavit of Jack A. Goldberger, a board certified criminal defense attorney who has in the past and is currently representing EPSTEIN. + +# A. + +# Memorandum of Law Supporting Application of Constitutional Privileges + +The Fifth Amendment provides in relevant part that "No person ... shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against himself." Hoffman v. United States 341 U.S. 479, 486, 71 S.Ct. 814 (1951), citing v United States 1944, 322 U.S. 487, 489, 64 S.Ct. 1082, 1083, 88 L.Ed. 1408." The Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination is "accorded liberal construction in favor of the right it was intended to secure." "The immediate and potential evils of compulsory selfdisclosure transcend any difficulties that the exercise of the privilege may impose on society in the detection and prosecution of a crime." Id, at 490; and In re a Financial Svcs. of Fla., Inc., 259 B.R. 391, 399 (M.D. Fla. 2000). The privilege not only extends to answers that would in themselves support a conviction under a criminal statute but likewise embraces those which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a crime. Id, citing Blau v. United States, 1950, 340 U.S. 159, 71 S.Ct. 223. The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination "permits a person not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings." Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985), citing Lefkowitz v. Turlev 414 U.S. 70, 77, 94 S.C. 316, 322 (1973). See also Ohio v. Reiner, 532 U.S. 17, 21, 121 S.Ct. 1252 (2001)(The Fifth Amendment privilege is also available to those who claim innocence. One of the Fifth Amendment's "basic functions ... is to protect innocent men ... 'who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous + +circumstances."). Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - a[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); Kastigar v. U.S., 406 U.S. 441, 444-45, 92 S.Ct. 1653 (1972)(The Fifth Amendment privilege "can be asserted in any proceeding, civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory; and it protects against any disclosures which the witness reasonably believes could be used in a criminal prosecution or could lead to other evidence that might be so used. This Court has been zealous to safeguard the values which underlie the privilege." (Emphasis added)). + +As EPSTEIN is here, "the claimant must be 'confronted by substantial and 'real,' and not merely trifling or imaginary, hazards of incrimination." See generally, United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 128, 100 S.Ct. 948, 956, 63 L.Ed.2d 250 (1980)). See also, United States v. Neff, 615 F.2d 1235, 1239 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 925, 100 S.Ct. 3018, 65 L.Ed.2d 1117 (1980)(Information is protected by the privilege not only if it would support a criminal conviction, but even if "the responses would merely 'provide a lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate."). + +The United States Supreme Court has made clear that the scope of the Fifth Amendment Privilege also encompasses the circumstance where "the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena (or production request) has a compelled testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000); see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence + +Title 6, Chap. 13. *The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination*, §138 (6th Ed.). In explaining the application of the privilege, the Supreme Court stated: + +We have held that "the act of production" itself may implicitly communicate "statements of fact." By "producing documents in compliance with a subpoena, the witness would admit that the papers existed, were in his possession or control, and were authentic."FN19 Moreover, as was true in this case, when the custodian of documents responds to a subpoena, he may be compelled to take the witness stand and answer questions designed to determine whether he has produced everything demanded by the subpoena.FN20 The answers to those questions, as well as the act of production itself, may certainly communicate information about the existence, custody, and authenticity of the documents. Whether the constitutional privilege protects the answers to such questions, or protects the act of production itself, is a question that is distinct from the question whether the unprotected contents of the documents themselves are incriminating. + +FN19. "The issue presented in those cases was whether the act of producing subpoenaed documents, not itself the making of a statement, might nonetheless have some protected testimonial aspects. The Court concluded that the act of production could constitute protected testimonial communication because it might entail implicit statements of fact: by producing documents in compliance with a subpoena, the witness would admit that the papers existed, were in his possession or control, and were authentic. *United States v. Doe*, 465 U.S., at 613, and n. 11, 104 S.Ct. 1237; *Fisher*, 425 U.S., at 409-410, 96 S.Ct. 1569; *id.*, at 428, 432, 96 S.Ct. 1569 (concurring opinions). See *Braswell v. United States*, [487 U.S.] at 104, 108 S.Ct. 2284; [*id.*] at 122, 108 S.Ct. 2284 (dissenting opinion). Thus, the Court made clear that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination applies to acts that imply assertions of fact."... An examination of the Court's application of these principles in other cases indicates the Court's recognition that, in order to be testimonial, an accused's communication must itself, explicitly or implicitly, relate a factual assertion or disclose information. Only then is a person compelled to be a 'witness' against himself." *Doe v. United States*, 487 U.S., at 209-210, 108 S.Ct. 2341 (footnote omitted). + +FN20. See App. 62-70. Thus, for example, after respondent had been duly sworn by the grand jury [redacted], the prosecutor called his attention to paragraph A of the Subpoena Rider (reproduced in the Appendix, *infra*, at 2048-2049) and asked whether he had produced "all those documents." App. 65. + +Finally, the phrase "in any criminal case" in the text of the Fifth Amendment might have been read to limit its coverage to compelled testimony that is used against the defendant in the trial itself. It has, however, long been settled that + +> its protection encompasses compelled statements that lead to the discovery of incriminating evidence even though the statements themselves are not incriminating and are not introduced into evidence. Thus, a half century ago we held that a trial judge had erroneously rejected a defendant's claim of privilege on the ground that his answer to the pending question would not itself constitute evidence of the charged offense. As we explained: + +> "The privilege afforded not only extends to answers that would in themselves support a conviction under a federal criminal statute but likewise embraces those which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a federal crime." Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486, 71 S.Ct. 814, 95 L.Ed. 1118 (1951). + +> Compelled testimony that communicates information that may "lead to incriminating evidence" is privileged even if the information itself is not inculpatory. Doe v. United States, 487 U.S. 201, 208, n. 6, 108 S.Ct. 2341, 101 L.Ed.2d 184 (1988). It's the Fifth Amendment's protection against the prosecutor's use of incriminating information derived directly or indirectly from the compelled testimony of the respondent that is of primary relevance in this case. + +In summarizing its holding regarding the application of the Fifth Amendment Privilege to a production request, the Hubbell Court left "no doubt that the constitutional privilege against self incrimination protects" not only "the target of a grand jury investigation from being compelled to answer questions designed to elicit information about the existence of sources of potentially incriminating evidence," but the privilege also "has the same application to the testimonial aspect of a response to a subpoena seeking discovery of those sources." At 43, and 2047. + +The privilege against self-incrimination may be asserted during discovery when a litigant has "reasonable grounds to believe that the response would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against a litigant." A witness, including a civil defendant, is entitled to invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege whenever there is a realistic possibility that the answer to a question could be used in anyway to convict the witness of a crime or could aid in the development of other incriminating evidence that + +can be used at trial. Id; Pillsbury Company v. Conbov 495 U.S. 248, 103 S.Ct. 608 (1983). See also, Hubbell, supra, quoted above as to what is encompassed by the phrase "in any criminal case" contained in the Fifth Amendment. + +As noted, the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is broad. Hoffman; In re Financial Svcs. supra. To deny a witness the right to invoke the privilege, the judge must be perfectly clear, from a careful consideration of all the circumstances in the case, that the witness is mistaken, and that the answers cannot possibly have such tendency to incriminate. Id, at 488, 399. Recognizing the breadth and magnitude of this constitutional privilege, the United States Supreme Court in discussing how a court is to analyze the application of the privilege stated — + +... It is for the court to say whether his silence is justified Ropers v. United States, 1951, 340 U.S. 367, 71 S.Ct. 438, and to require him to answer if 'it clearly appears to the court that he is mistaken.' Temple v. Commonwealth, 1880, 75 Va. 892, 899. However, if the witness, upon interposing his claim, were required to prove the hazard in the sense in which a claim is usually required to be established in court, he would be compelled to surrender the very protection which the privilege is designed to guarantee. To sustain the privilege, it need only be evident from the implications of the question, in the setting in which it is asked, that a responsive answer to the question or an explanation of why it cannot be answered might be dangerous because injurious disclosure could result. The trial judge in appraising the claim 'must be governed as much by his personal perception of the peculiarities of the case as by the facts actually in evidence.' + +Hoffman supra at 486-487. + +Hoffman and its progeny establish that "in view of the liberal construction of the provision [protecting against self-incrimination], after a witness has asserted the privilege, he should be compelled to provide the requested information only if it "clearly appears" to the court that the witness was mistaken in his invocation of the privilege." (Emphasis added). In re Financial Svcs., supra at 399, citing Hoffman, at 486. + +Finally, in order to preserve the privilege against self-incrimination, as EPSTEIN has properly done is response to each discovery request, the privilege must be asserted or one risks the loss or waiver of this liberty ensuring protection. See generally, U.S. v. , 846 F.2d 678, 690 (11th Cir. 1988)("First, it ignores the settled principle which requires a witness to assert his Fifth Amendment rights. A witness who testifies at any proceeding, instead of asserting his Fifth Amendment rights, loses the privilege. ... A civil deponent cannot choose to answer questions with the expectation of later asserting the Fifth Amendment."). + +In the instant case, the privilege applies as Defendant EPSTEIN "has reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer." The risk of incrimination resulting from answering each of the interrogatories and requests for production is "substantial and real" and "not trifling or imaginary haphazards of communication." See generally, In re Financial Svcs. supra at 400. Based on the nature of Plaintiffs claims, along with the ongoing scrutiny of the USAO in the criminal matters, EPSTEIN has "reasonable grounds to believe that his responses to the discovery would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against him. The very nature of the claims brought and the discovery being sought by Plaintiff in order to attempt to prove those claims establish a realistic possibility that the answer to an interrogatory or production request could be used in a type of way to convict EPSTEIN of a crime or aid in the development of other incriminating evidence that can be used at a criminal trial. Under the circumstances of this case, the threat of criminal prosecution is not imaginary. See Exhibits A and B to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel. This Court is well aware of the "peculiarities" of this action as it has before it other civil actions against + +EPSTEIN, all alleging similar underlying facts of sexual misconduct involving minors. The allegations of this action and others entail EPSTEIN allegedly "recruiting" Plaintiff and other minors to come to his home in Palm Beach to give him massages which allegedly became sexually inappropriate in nature, and EPSTEIN in turn would pay the minors. See Chapter 110 of Title 18, United States Code Annotated; and "predicate acts" specified in 18 U.S.C. §2255. + +Also applicable in upholding the assertion of Defendant's Fifth Amendment privilege is the guarantee of effective assistance of counsel by the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. See Yarborough v. Gentry, 124 S.Ct. 1, 540 U.S. 1, 157 L.Ed.2d 1 (2003)(Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants effective assistance of counsel.), on remand 381 F.3d 1219. The United States Constitutional guarantees are applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. Obviously, EPSTEIN's assertion of his constitutional privileges and protections is on the advice of counsel. EPSTEIN continues to face criminal prosecution by the USAO until the expiration of the NPA; under the constitutional guarantee of effective assistance of counsel, he is entitled to follow the recommended advice of his criminal defense attorney. See Exhibit A hereto. A review of the complaint allegations and the circumstances of this case including multiple civil actions attempting to allege claims based upon sexual abuse and exploitation of minors, parallel criminal matter under which EPSTEIN continues to face prosecution for crimes based on the same allegations until the terms of the NPA have expired and been fulfilled as determined by the USAO - establish that EPSTEIN's invocation of his constitutional protections of the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth + +Amendments be upheld; otherwise such constitutional protections would be rendered meaningless. + +#### Circuit Court, State of Florida, recently entered order upholding assertion of Fifth Amendment and constitutional based protections in response to discovery. + +Further requiring the sustaining of Defendant's assertions of his constitutional protections, the 15th Judicial Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County, State of Florida, recently entered an order sustaining Defendant's assertion of his 5th, 6th and 14th Amendment privileges and protections in response to Plaintiff A.C.'s request for production in A.C. v. Epstein Case No. 502008CA025129X)=MB Al. The Order, dated February 23, 2009, and the production requests and Defendant's responses are attached hereto as Composite Exhibit C. (Compare Requests for Production Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 in the instant case with the production request no. 1 in Composite Exhibit C hereto; compare requests nos. 20 and 21 in this case with nos. 2 and 3 in Comp. Ex. C; and compare information sought in interrogatories nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, and 15 in this case with information sought in request nos. 2 and 3 in Comp. Ex. C). + +#### B. Even if the Court were to agree with Plaintiff's assertion that Defendant has asserted a "blank privilege" under the Fifth Amendment, under the facts and circumstances of this case, such assertion would be proper. + +Plaintiff claims that Defendant has improperly asserted a "blanket privilege" to the discovery. As stated above, Defendant disagrees. Defendant evaluated each and every discovery request in asserting applicable constitutional privileges and other objections. The facts and circumstances of this case are such that in evaluating each of the interrogatories and production requests on an individual basis, the constitutional protections asserted by Defendant apply to each. The Court will note that the additional objections raised are also tailored to each interrogatory and production request. Even + +the Court's analysis of the discovery will be on an individualized basis. However, simply for the sake of argument, as to Plaintiffs assertion that Defendant has made a "blanket assertion," under the facts and circumstances of this case, such an assertion is proper. + +In allowing a blanket assertion, Courts have recognized a narrow exception to the rule that the assertion of the privilege must be to each specific question. The Courts, including this Circuit, acknowledged "an exception ... (where,) based on its knowledge of the case and of the testimony expected from the witness, (the trial court) can conclude that the witness could 'legitimately refuse to answer essentially all relevant questions." United States v. Goodwin 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir. Fla. 1980)); United States v. Tsui, 646 F.2d 365, 367-68 (9th Cir. 1981). This exception is narrow and is applicable where the trial judge has "some special or extensive knowledge of the case that allows evaluation of the claimed Fifth Amendment privilege even in the absence of specific questions to the witness." Id. See also U.S. v. , 157 Fed.Appx. 215, 218 (11th Cir. Ga. 2005)("A district court must make a particularized inquiry, evaluating whether the privilege applies with respect to each specific area that the questioning party wishes to explore. Melchor Moreno, 536 F.2d at 1049. The witness may be totally excused from testifying only if the court finds that he could legitimately refuse to answer essentially all relevant questions. United States v. Goodwin 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir.1980)."). + +See also State of Washington v. DelGado, 18 P.3d 1141 (Wa. Ct. of App. Div. 2 2001)("There is a narrow exception allowing a blanket privilege where "based on its knowledge of the case and of the testimony expected of the witness, [the trial court] can conclude that the witness could legitimately refuse to answer essentially all relevant + +questions. ... For the exception to apply, the trial judge must have 'some special or extensive knowledge of the case that allows evaluation of the claimed ... privilege even in absence of specific questions to the witness."). + +C. Plaintiffs statement of the law in section IV, (pp. 6-7), of her motion is incorrect under the circumstances. Contrary to Plaintiffs assertion, an adverse Inference from invocation of the Fifth Amendment in a civil case is not always permitted. + +In section IV, (pp. 6-7), of Plaintiffs motion to compel, Plaintiffs general claim that an adverse interest based on a defendant's invocation of the Fifth Amendment in a civil case may be made is improper under the facts and circumstances of this case. Plaintiff is correct as to the general rule that "adverse inferences may be drawn in the civil context when Defendants invoke the privilege in refusing to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them." F.T.C. v. Transnet Wireless Corp., 506 F.Supp.2d 1247, 1252, fn. 4 (S.D.Fla.,2007), citing Mitchell v. United States, 526 U.S. 314, 328, 119 S.Ct. 1307, 143 L.Ed.2d 424 (1999). However, there exists a well recognized exception to the general rule — "Courts may not draw adverse inferences, however, if it is the sole basis for Plaintiffs prima facie case, or will cause the "automatic entry of summary judgment." See generally, F.T.C., supra, at fn.4, citing United States v. Premises Located at Route 13 946 F.2d 749, 756 (11th Cir.1991) (citing Pervis v. State Farm and Cas. Co., 901 F.2d 944, 948 (11th Cir.1990)). See also S.E.C. v. Keith Group of Companies, Inc. 1998 WL 1670405 (S.D. Fla. 1998)("When a party is a defendant in both a civil and criminal case and is forced to choose between waiving his Fifth Amendment privilege ... or losing the civil case on summary judgment, an exception to the general rule ... applies. In such a situation, the Court may not make an adverse inference about the party's refusal to testify.") Accordingly, Defendant's + +assertion that an adverse interest "under the circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the constitution," is both proper and required to be upheld at this time. + +# D. Plaintiff's Amended First Set of Interrogatories to Defendant + +Listed below is each of the interrogatories propounded by Plaintiff. As noted above, Defendant responded to each interrogatory separately in raising his constitutional privileges and guarantees, and, in the alternative, raising specific other applicable objections to each. See Exhibit A to Plaintiffs motion to compel. + +No. 1. Identify all employees who performed work of services inside the Palm Beach Residence. + +No. 2. Identify all Employees not identified in response to interrogatory no. 1 who at any time came to Defendant's Palm Beach Residence. + +No. 3. Identify all persons who came to the Palm Beach Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +No. 4. Identify all persons who came to the New York Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +No. 5. Identify all persons who came to the New Mexico Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +No. 6. Identify all persons who came to the St. Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +No. 7. List all the time periods during which Jeffrey Epstein was present in the State of Florida, including for each the date he arrive and the date he departed. + +No. 8. Identify all of Jeffrey Epstein health care providers in the past (10) ten years, including without limitation, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, physicians, hospitals and treatment facilities. + +No. 9. (Not at issue.)' List all items in Jeffrey Epstein's possession in Palm Beach, Florida, at any time during the period of these interrogatories, which were used or intended to be used as sexual aids, sex toys, massage aids, and/or vibrators, and for each, list the manufacturer, model number (if applicable), and its present location. + +' Fn. 4 of Plaintiff's motion states — "Plaintiff does not challenge at this time Defendant's Fifth Amendment privilege in response to interrogatory no. 9, which seeks information of Defendant's sexual aids." + +No. 10. Identify all persons who provide transportation services to Jeffrey Epstein, whether as employees or independent contractors, including without limitation, chauffeurs and aircraft crew. + +No. 11. Identify all telephone numbers used by Epstein, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider. + +No. 12. Identify all telephone numbers of employees of Epstein, used in the course or scope of their employment, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider. + +No. 13. List the names and addresses of all persons who are believed or known by you, your agents, or your attorneys to have any knowledge concerning any of the issues in this lawsuit; and specify the subject matter about which the witness has knowledge. + +No. 14. State the name and address of every person known to you, your agents, or your attorneys who has knowledge about, possession, or custody, or control of, any model, plat, map, drawing, motion picture, videotape or photograph pertaining to any fact or issue involved in this controversy; and describe as to each, what item such person has, the name and address of the person who took or prepared it, and the date it was taken or prepared. + +No. 15. Identify all persons who have made a claim, complaint, demand or threat against you relating to alleged sexual abuse or misconduct on a minor and for each provide the following information: + +- a. The person's full name, last known address and telephone number; +- b. The person's attorney, if represented; +- c. The date of the alleged incident(s); +- d. If a civil case has been filed by or on behalf of the person, the case number and identifying information. + +No. 16. State the facts upon which you intend to rely for each denial of a pleading allegation and for each affirmative defense you intend to make in these cases. + +No. 17. Identify all witnesses from whom you have obtained or requested a written, transcribed or recorded statement relating to any issue in these cases, and for each, in addition to the witness's identifying information, state the date of the statement and identify the person taking the statement. + +(Emphasis added). + +Defendant will address interrogatories nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17, above, as the analysis as to the application of the constitutional privileges and protections is straightforward. Nos. 3 through 6 ask Defendant to identify anyone who gave "massages" or were asked to give "massages" to him. Clearly, any answer to + +these interrogatories, involve compelled statements that would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the Defendant in future criminal proceedings or even support a criminal conviction. These interrogatories seek the precise information that the USAO investigated and continues to scrutinize. See Exhibit A hereto. + +Any answer to no. 15, which seeks information "relating to alleged sexual abuse or misconduct on a minor" on its face would also lead to incriminating evidence protected under the Fifth Amendment privilege. The same is true for no. 16 — which seeks "facts upon which you intend to rely for each denial of a pleading allegation and for each affirmative defense," and Nos. 13, 14, and 17 which seek to compel EPSTEIN to list any persons or witnesses in 13 "having any knowledge concerning any of the issues in this lawsuit," in 14 having "knowledge about, possession, or custody, or control of, any model, plat, map, drawing, motion picture, videotape or photograph pertaining to any fact or issue involved in this controversy," and in 17 "whom you have obtained or requested a written, transcribed or recorded statement relating to any issue in these cases." In answering no. 16, Defendant would be compelled to testify as to his version of the facts, and, in asserting affirmative defenses, he would further be compelled to admit Plaintiffs version of the facts. In listing such person or witness, the Defendant is further compelled to describe the subject matter, nature of the items and or statements of such witness or person. Again, the allegations of this action are such that in answering these interrogatories, Defendant is being compelled to incriminate himself in crimes. By answering the specified interrogatories Defendant is being compelled to testify as to the issues and facts not only asserted in Plaintiffs complaint, but also to facts which present a real and substantial danger of self-incrimination. Again, the + +information sought all relate to claims of sexual abuse and exploitation of a minor. (See Chapter 110 of Title 18, United States Code Annotated; and "predicate acts" specified in 18 U.S.C. §2255, and 18 U.S.C. §2422). + +Any answer to nos. 1 and 2 would also be compelled testimony that "tends to show that the witness himself (EPSTEIN) committed a crime" based on the nature of the allegations. As noted above, Plaintiff alleges that at least one of EPSTEIN's employees, , was part of the scheme or plan of sexual misconduct, exploitation and abuse of the "girls." No. 1 is asking for any employee who performed work or services, and no. 2 is asking EPSTEIN to testify as to anyone who came to his Palm Beach mansion. Such compelled testimony is protected under the Fifth Amendment as the answers "would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a crime." Answering the questions as to who came and went from his Palm Beach mansion would provide a "'lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate." See also 18 U.S.C. 2422, Coercion and Enticement. This analysis also applies to interrogatory nos. 7 and 9 which seek, respectively, "all the time periods during which Jeffrey Epstein was present in the State of Florida, including for each the date he arrive and the date he departed," and "all persons who provide transportation services to Jeffrey Epstein, whether as employees or independent contractors, including without limitation, chauffeurs and aircraft crew." Plaintiff alleges a time period of 2004-05 as to when the alleged to when the sexual misconduct, including sexual assault, of a minor took place in Palm Beach, Florida. Plaintiff also alleges that EPSTEIN engaged in the same "scheme and plan" against minor girls at his other places of residence. Again, EPSTEIN's answer as to his travels to and from Florida, + +and within Florida, would be a link in the chain of evidence needed to convict him of a crime. + +The privilege against self-incrimination also applies to Nos. 11 and 12 which seek, respectively, "all telephone numbers used by Epstein, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider," and "all telephone numbers of employees of Epstein, used in the course or scope of their employment, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider." Again, such compelled testimony would self-incriminate EPSTEIN based on the elements required to establish a violation of the criminal statute 18 U.S.C. §2422. Such information would be a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute EPSTEIN for a crime. + +Finally, the compelled testimony sought in no. 8 - "all of Jeffrey Epstein health care providers in the past (10) ten years, including without limitation, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, physicians, hospitals and treatment facilities," could also lead to a link in the chain of evidence to convict EPSTEIN based on the allegations which are criminal in nature — sexual misconduct with minors, and a plan and scheme to "recruit" such minors to fulfill Epstein's "sexual preference and obsession." See ¶8 of complaint — "Upon information and belief Epstein has a sexual preference and obsession for underage minor girls." + +As explained in Hoffman EPSTEIN is not required to "prove the hazard in the sense in which a claim is usually required to be established in court." The United States Supreme Court recognized placing such a requirement on a person asserting his + +constitutional privilege is in effect tantamount compelling him "to surrender the very protection which the privilege is designed to guarantee." Under the facts and circumstances of this case, it is evident from the implications of each of the interrogatories or an explanation of why they can't be answered "might be dangerous because injurious disclosure might result." Id. + +Accordingly, under applicable law and the facts of this case, Defendant's assertion of the constitutional privilege and guarantee under the 5th, Oh and 14th Amendments of the United States Constitution are required to be upheld. + +#### E. Plaintiffs First Production Request To Defendant + +The constitutional protections are equally applicable to the request for production propounded on Defendant by Plaintiff. See Exhibit B to Plaintiffs motion to compel. The requests are as follows - + +Request No. 1. The list provided to you by the U.S. Attorney of individuals whom the U.S. Attorney was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an offense by Mr. Epstein enumerated in 18 U.S.C. §2255. + +Request No. 2. All documents referring or relating to the United States' agreement with Defendant to defer federal prosecution subject to certain conditions, including without limitation, the operative agreement between Defendant and the United States and all amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +Request No. 3. All documents referring or relating to Defendant's agreement with the State of Florida on his plea of guilty to violations of Florida Criminal Statutes, including without limitation, the operative plea agreement and any amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +Request No.4. All documents obtained in discovery or investigation relating to either the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal Case, including without limitation, documents obtained from any federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, the State Attorney's office and the United States Attorney's office. + +Request No. 5. All telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone calls made by or to Defendant, including without limitation, telephone logs and message pads. + +Request No. 6. All telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone calls made by or to Defendant, including without limitation, telephone logs and message pads, reflecting telephone calls made by or to employees. + +Request No. 7. All surveillance videos, slides, film, videotape, digital recording or other audio or video depiction or image of the Palm Beach Residence. + +Request No. 8. All documents referring or relating to Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2, including without limitation, web pages, social networking site pages, correspondence, videotapes and audiotapes. + +Request No. 9. (Not at issue) .2 All statements taken, transcribed or recorded from any person referring or relating to Defendant's sexual conduct, massages given to Defendant or any issue in these cases. + +Request No. 10. All documents referring to or relating to air travel and aircraft used by Defendant, including without limitation, flight logs and flight manifests. + +Request No. 11. Any and all documents referring to or relating to modeling agencies, including but not limited to documents relating to or reflecting communications with female models. + +Request No. 12. (Not at issue). All photographs, videotapes, digital images and other documents depicting or showing females who, at the time thereof, were under the age of 21, which were taken or created by or for Defendant and not intended for sale commercially to the public. + +Request No. 13. (Not at issue.) All photographs and painting of females which were displayed in any of Defendant's homes or residences in the time frame of these requests, including without limitation, photographs in standing or sitting frames or wall frames. + +Request No. 14. Any and all nsisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and , including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 15. Any and all consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and i, including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 16. Any and aV documents (-misting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and I I, including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 17. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 18. Any and all documents and photographs placed by Defendant at any time in the period of these requests on a social networking website, including without limitation, Facebook.com and MySpace.com. + +2 "Plaintiff concedes that the act of producing items in response to request no. 9, concerning witness statements, and requests nos. 12-13, concerning photographs or images of females, may implicate the Fifth Amendment." Plaintiff's motion, p. 5, fn. 6. + +Request No. 19. Any and all documents reflecting or consisting of communications between Jeffrey Epstein and MC2 Models or Jean-Luc Brunel, relating or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries to pursue a career in modeling, including, but not limited to, letters, notes and e-mails. + +Request No. 20. Any and all documents referring or relating to gifts or loans to females under the age of 21, including, but not limited to, notes, receipts and car rental agreements. + +Request No. 21. Any and all personal calendars or schedules of or for Jeffrey Epstein from January 1, 2003 to the present. + +Request No. 22. All documents written by Jeffrey Epstein consisting of personal thoughts, feelings or descriptions of events, incidents or occurrences in Defendant's life, including without limitation, any diaries of Jeffrey Epstein. + +Request No. 23. All documents referring to or relating to Jeffrey Epstein's purchase or consumption of prescription medicine. + +As discussed in the supporting memorandum law herein, it is well settled that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination also encompasses situations as here where the act of production itself involves a testimonial compulsion. Hubbell supra. In responding to each request, EPSTEIN would be compelled admit that such documents existed, admit that the documents were in his possession or control, and were authentic. In other words, the very act of production of the category of documents requested would implicitly communicate "statements of fact." Hubbell, supra; Hoffman, supra. The act of production might not only provide evidence to support a conviction, but also a link in the chain of evidence for prosecution. Such compulsion to produce is the same as being compelled to testify. The acts of EPSTEIN in being required to produce the requested documents imply assertions of fact — admitting the documents exist, admitting the documents are in his possession or control, and admitting the documents are authentic. Again, in reading each of the production requests in Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23, (like the + +interrogatories), it is clear that the very act of production of such documents could implicate EPSTEIN in a crime. + +As noted above, EPSTEIN is constitutionally entitled to follow the advice of counsel in asserting the applicable Fifth Amendment privilege under the guarantee of effective assistance of counsel. Accordingly, based on the facts and circumstances of this case, and under applicable law, Defendant's assertion of the protections afforded under the 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments of the United States Constitution are required to be upheld. + +### II. Defendant's objections made in addition to the constitutional based protections are required to be upheld. + +# A. Constitutional issues are required to be addressed first. + +Obviously, the constitutional issues raised in Defendant's response permeate not only discovery, but the entire action itself. Defendant would suggest to the Court that the constitutional issues be decided before the additional objections are addressed. 3 In fact, in arguing certain of the additional objections, Defendant's constitutional rights under the 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments are clearly implicated. In setting forth factual reasons to support the additional objections, Defendant is being compelled to testify in response to a specific discovery request, thus, impeding his privilege against selfincrimination and guarantee of effective assistance of counsel. The same is true if Defendant is required to prepare privilege logs. (In section IV of her motion, Plaintiff recognized, in addressing Defendant's assertion that an adverse inference would be improper, that "It is first necessary to determine whether the Fifth Amendment privilege is validly asserted in response to particular questions."). Thus, Defendant also requests + +3 Should this Court overrule Defendant's constitutional based privileges and guarantees, Defendant will likely take an immediate appeal of such ruling. + +that should this Court rule that the Fifth Amendment does not apply to certain of the discovery requests, that Defendant be given an additional 20 days from the date of the order thereon in which to assert other objections and privileges. + +In alternative and addition to the applicable constitutional based protections, Defendant also raised objections to each of the interrogatories and requests for production. (See sections V, VI, and VII, pp. 7-12, of Plaintiffs motion to compel). Defendant will address Plaintiffs arguments pertaining to the additional objections in the order presented in Plaintiff's motion. + +#### B. Interrogatory No. 8. Production Request No. 23 + +Section V. A. of plaintiffs motion pertains to interrogatory no. 8 — + +Identify all of Jeffrey Epstein health care providers in the past (10) ten years, including without limitation, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, physicians, hospitals and treatment facilities. + +In addition to the constitutional protections, Defendant also stated — + +... In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. In addition, such information is privileged pursuant to Rule 501, Fed. Evid., and §90.503, Fla.Evid. Code. In addition, such information is protected by the provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). + +Federal Rule of Evidence 401 provides that - "'Relevant evidence'" means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence." Pursuant to Rule 26(b)(1), the scope of discovery is as follows — + +Unless otherwise limited by court order, the scope of discovery is as follows: Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense—including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any documents or other tangible things and the identity and location of + +> persons who know of any discoverable matter. For good cause, the court may order discovery of any matter relevant to the subject matter involved in the action. Relevant information need not be admissible at the trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. All discovery is subject to the limitations imposed by Rule 26(b)(2)(C). + +Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of 2004-05 as to when the alleged sexual misconduct of Defendant occurred. Plaintiffs request seeks to have EPSTEIN list "all health care providers" and "hospitals and treatment facilities" over a "ten year period." On its face, the interrogatory is overbroad as it seeks information over a 10 year period that is neither relevant nor does it "appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." EPSTEIN's physical health is not in issue in this matter. Whether or not he was treated for the flu over the past ten years is not relevant to any party's claim or defense in this matter. The same is true for whether or not Defendant received treatment for a physical ailment at a hospital or facility over a 10 year period. Plaintiff fails to tailor her question such that it can be determined what type of information she is seeking regarding "health care providers" and "hospitals and treatment facilities." The 10 year period is overbroad as it seeks information approximately 5 years prior to and four years after the alleged incident. + +As to "psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors," and the "hospitals and treatment facilities" where Defendant may or may not have received treatment from such professionals, such information would be protected under Fed. Evid. Rule 501 and §90.503, Fla.R.Evid. Rule 501 provides — + +Except as otherwise required by the Constitution of the United States or provided by Act of Congress or in rules prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority, the privilege of a witness, person, government, State, or political subdivision thereof shall be governed by the principles of the common law as they may be interpreted by the courts of the United States in the light of reason and experience. However, in civil actions and proceedings, with respect to an element of a claim or defense as to which State law supplies the rule of decision, the privilege of a witness, + +> person, government, State, or political subdivision thereof shall be determined in accordance with State law. + +(Emphasis added). + +Plaintiff alleges diversity jurisdiction, and thus, state law of Florida controls application of the privilege. 2nd Am. Complaint, ¶5. The elements of Plaintiff's alleged claims in Counts I - Sexual Battery and Counts II — Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress are also controlled by state law. Erie R.Co. v. Tompkins, 58 S.Ct. 817 (1938). Accordingly, the privileges recognized under state law apply to this action under Rule 501. See, for example 1550 Brickell Associates v. Q.B.E. Ins. Co., 253 F.R.D. 697, 699 (S.D. Fla. 2008)("Attorney-client privilege is governed by state law in diversity actions."). + +§90.503(2), Fla. Stat., provides — + +(2) A patient has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent any other person from disclosing, confidential communications or records made for the purpose of diagnosis or treatment of the patient's mental or emotional condition, including alcoholism and other drug addiction, between the patient and the psychotherapist, or persons who are participating in the diagnosis or treatment under the direction of the psychotherapist. This privilege includes any diagnosis made, and advice given, by the psychotherapist in the course of that relationship. + +As summarized in C.L. v. Judd, 993 So.2d 991, 995 (2d DCA Fla. 2007): + +Under the psychotherapist-patient privilege, a patient has a privilege to refuse to disclose confidential information or records made for the purpose of diagnosis or treatment of mental conditions, including any diagnoses made by the psychotherapist. § 90.503(2), Fla. Stat. (2005); see Pauker v. Olson, 834 So.2d 198, 200 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). The psychotherapist-patient privilege does not apply: (1) during involuntary commitment proceedings, (2) when there is a court-ordered mental examination, or (3) when the patient raises and relies on the issue of his or her mental condition in litigation as part of any claim or defense. § 90.503(4); Roberson, 884 So.2d at 980; State v. Famiglietti, 817 So.2d 901, 903 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). The privilege does not allow the invasion of a patient's privileged communications with his or her psychotherapist. Roberson, 884 So.2d at 979. + +None of the three situations listed as exceptions to the privilege above exist in the present case to make the privilege inapplicable. + +Plaintiffs position is that the protection afforded under §90.503, Fla. Stat., does not apply "in a case of child abuse under Florida Statute §39.204." See endnote 2 for full text of §39.204, Fla. Stat.2 (¶'s Motion, p. 8-9). See Carson v. 466 So.2d 1188, 1192 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); and Doherty v. John Doe No. 22, 957 So.2d 1267 (4th DCA 2007). A reading of these cases establishes that §39.204 does not provide Plaintiff with a carte blanche access to Defendant's medical history. The Court is required to hold an in camera inspection to determine if the information sought by Plaintiff relates to "communications involving known or expected child abuse." Id. + +As stated above, on its face the interrogatory is overbroad and encompasses information that has no relevance to the claims or defenses nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Compelling Defendant to identify each and every health care provider, including psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, and hospital or treatment facility over the past ten year period, is not proper at this time. Plaintiff should be required to limit the information sought, as well as the time period, in her interrogatory, thus allowing the Defendant and Court to determine whether such information is relevant and discoverable. + +As to Defendant's HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) objection, as noted in the case cited in Plaintiffs motion, v. Woodford, 2007 WL 309485 (E.D. Cal. 2007), (p. 9), HIPPA institutes procedural safeguards to protect the privacy of an individual's medical information and history. In the context of HIPAA, Courts have recognized three methods of health care discovery (assuming it's relevant) + +in civil litigation: (1) Obtaining a patient authorization that complies with the requirements and criteria, tailored to the specific case, of HIPAA as set forth in 45 C.F.R. §164.508; (2) Court Order, which also complies with the requirements of HIPAA ensuring that the privacy and confidentiality of the information is protected; and (3) Subpoena or discovery request, which again comply with the strictures of HIPAA, including that the person whose records are being sought has been given proper notice. See Handbook of Federal Civil Discovery And Disclosure (2d Edition), Chap. 18, Sect. A - Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), §18.3 - Discovery of health care information in civil litigation; and Graham v. Dacheikh, 991 So.2d 932, at fn. 3 (2d DCA Fla. 2008)("Even under HIPAA, ..., if the records are produced during normal discovery they are typically produced in a manner that restricts the persons who may access the documents and requires their retum at the end of the litigation. See 45 C.F.R. §164.512(e)."). + +In production request no. 23, Plaintiff seeks — "All documents referring to or relating to Jeffrey Epstein's purchase or consumption of prescription medicine." On its face, this production request is over broad and seeks non-relevant information. For example, whether or not EPSTEIN takes prescription medicine for (purely as an example and for argument) blood pressure or cholesterol control has absolutely no relevance to this action. + +Accordingly, EPSTEIN's objections to interrogatory no. 8 and production request no. 23 are required to be upheld. Plaintiff is not entitled to carte blanche discovery of Defendant's medical information. + +# C. Plaintiffs Second Request For Production + +Regarding Plaintiffs request for - + +> All policies of insurance, including the declarations page and all binders, amendments, and endorsements, covering Defendant's residence at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, FL 33480. + +Defendant is willing to produce a "redacted version" of the policies only for the years 2003, 2004, and 2005. Plaintiff, in her motion has agreed to limit her request to those years. However, as stated in Defendant's objection, such "policies contain value and/or asset information which is not relevant, material nor calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence at this point in time; said information is both private and confidential." Plaintiffs motion does not address Defendant's additional objection concerning the "value and/or asset information." Discovery of such information is premature and not relevant at this time. The relevant purpose of Plaintiffs discovery request is to determine whether some type of coverage is provided for the claims asserted. Any additional information concerning Defendant's value and asset information is required to be redacted. Plaintiff recently filed her Second Amended Complaint; Defendant has until April 3, 2009 (pursuant to an extension) to respond to or answer the complaint if Plaintiff has sufficiently alleged her causes of action. In counts I and II of her complaint, Plaintiff also seeks punitive damages. Defendant anticipates filing a motion to bifurcate the punitive damages claim — seeking to try liability first and then, a determination as to the amount, if necessary. In this way, Defendant's private financial information is protected until and if it becomes necessary to determine the amount of punitive damages to be awarded. + +#### D. Overbroad, relevance objections to discovery. + +As to Plaintiffs argument regarding Defendant's objections based on relevancy and the over-breadth of Plaintiffs discovery requests, (Part VII. A, pp. 10-11, of ¶'s Motion To Compel), in her motion Plaintiff represents that she is seeking the discovery + +for a time period beginning January 1, 2003 to the present. As to interrogatory nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12, Defendant disagrees that time period proposed by Plaintiff is reasonable. Plaintiffs complaint alleges that the conduct involving her took place in 2004-05. The scope and breadth of these interrogatories evidences that information sought has absolutely no relevance and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The same is true for production request nos. 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 18, 20, 21, 22, and 23. As discussed more fully below, the length of the time period, along with the scope and breadth of the information and items sought, makes such requests improper under the rules governing discovery. + +Without waiving any of the other alternative and additional objections asserted, Defendant does not disagree with the time period of January 1, 2003 to present as to interrogatory nos. 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17; and production request nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 14, 15, 16, and 17. Defendant addresses the additional alternative objections below. + +Plaintiffs motion to compel fails to address each of the discovery requests on an individual basis with respect to the objections asserted. A reading of each of the discovery requests, set forth above herein, establishes that each of the interrogatories and production requests is overbroad on its face and, thus, seeks non-relevant information. All of the interrogatories and production requests are phrased such that they encompass "all persons," "all Employees," "all telephone numbers," "all documents," "any and all," and so on. Contrary to Plaintiffs assertion, the definition of "employee" is on its face over broad and encompasses non-relevant information. (pp. 11-12 of Plaintiff's motion). Plaintiff should be required to restrict the information that is + +sought to the issues relevant to this action and the claims asserted by her and defenses to those claims. + +#### E. Work Product; Attorney Client Privilege + +Plaintiff asserts that Defendant failed to provide a privilege log in asserting his objections based on attorney-client and work product privileges to interrogatories nos. 13, 14, and 17, and production requests nos. 4 — 8 and 10 - 23. First, a reading of the particular discovery requests reveals that the encompass attorney-client and work product privileged material. Secondly, as set forth above herein, in being compelled to create a privileged log is in essence compelled testimony to which Defendant's constitutional protections would apply. Again, as stated previously, it makes judicial sense to decide the constitutional issues first, before deciding the additional objections to the discovery requests. + +#### F. Rules 408 and 410. Fed. Evid. Code; 490.410, Fla. Stat - Production requests nos. 1 - 5. + +Production requests nos. 1 - 5 set forth above herein, all pertain to the negotiation and eventual entering into of a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with the United States Attorney's Office (USAO) for the Southern District of Florida. See part I above herein. Again, the constitutional issues raised in Defendant's response permeate these discovery requests. The full text of Federal Evidence Rules 408 and 410, and Florida Statute §90.410, are set forth in endnote 3.3 Under the protections afforded by these evidentiary rules such documents are not subject to discovery. + +#### G. Third Party Privacy Rights + +In production requests nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22, Defendant has raised the additional objection that the privacy rights of third + +parties are implicated. See specified requests. As noted by the United States Supreme Court in Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438, 454, 92 S.Ct. 1029, 1038, at fn. 10 (1972): + +In Stanley, 394 U.S., at 564, 89 S.Ct., at 1247, the Court stated: '(A) Iso fundamental is the right to be free, except in very limited circumstances, from unwanted governmental intrusions into one's privacy." The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man's spiritual nature, of his feelings and of his intellect. They knew that only a part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions, and their sensations. They conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone-the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized man.' [Citations omitted]. + +The fundamental right of privacy is not only guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, but also under the Constitution of the State of Florida, Art. I, Sect. 23. As summarized by the Florida Supreme Court in Shaktman v. State, 553 So.2d 148, 150-51 (Fla. 1989): + +The right of privacy, assured to Florida's citizens, demands that individuals be free from uninvited observation of or interference in those aspects of their lives which fall within the ambit of this zone of privacy unless the intrusion is warranted by the necessity of a compelling state interest. In an opinion which predated the adoption of section 23, the First District aptly characterized the nature of this right. + +A fundamental aspect of personhood's integrity is the power to control what we shall reveal about our intimate selves, to whom, and for what purpose. + +Bryon, Harless, Schaffer, Reid & Assocs., Inc. v. State ex rel, Schellenberg, 360 So.2d 83, 92 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), quashed and remanded on other grounds, 379 So.2d 633 (Fla.1980). Because this power is exercised in varying degrees by differing individuals, the parameters of an individual's privacy can be dictated only by that individual. The central concern is the inviolability of one's own thought, person, and personal action. The inviolability of that right assures its preeminence over "majoritarian sentiment" and thus cannot be universally defined by consensus. + +(Emphasis added). + +Clearly, the nature of the questions and production requests identified would require EPSTEIN to identify third parties and necessarily thwart such individuals' rights to assert their constitutional right of privacy as guaranteed under the United States and Florida Constitutions. See generally Eisenstadt v. Baird, supra at 454-455 (The right encompasses privacy in one's sexual matters and is not limited to the marital relationship.). + +## III. Conclusion + +Under applicable law and the facts and circumstances of this case, Defendant's assertions of his constitutional privileges and guarantees are required to be upheld. To rule otherwise would render EPSTEIN's constitutional protections meaningless. Also, the constitution issues so permeate this action that this Court should first decide those issues before deciding the merits of any additional objections raised by EPSTEIN. EPSTEIN is between the proverbial "rock and a hard place" in asserting is constitutional guarantees and then being compelled to make factual arguments regarding the application of his additional objections. EPSTEIN's additional objections as discussed herein are also required to be upheld. + +WHEREFORE Defendant requests that this Court deny Plaintiffs motion to compel and uphold EPSTEIN's assertion of his constitutional protections and, in the alternative or in addition to, uphold his additional objections to Plaintiffs discovery requests. + +## Certificate of Service + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 25th day of March, 2009. + +Clearly, the nature of the questions and production requests identified would require EPSTEIN to identify third parties and necessarily thwart such individuals' rights to assert their constitutional right of privacy as guaranteed under the United States and Florida Constitutions. See generally Eisenstadt v. Baird, supra at 454-455 (The right encompasses privacy in one's sexual matters and is not limited to the marital relationship.). + +### III. Conclusion + +Under applicable law and the facts and circumstances of this case, Defendant's assertions of his constitutional privileges and guarantees are required to be upheld. To rule otherwise would render EPSTEIN's constitutional protections meaningless. Also, the constitution issues so permeate this action that this Court should first decide those issues before deciding the merits of any additional objections raised by EPSTEIN. EPSTEIN is between the proverbial "rock and a hard place" in asserting is constitutional guarantees and then being compelled to make factual arguments regarding the application of his additional objections. EPSTEIN's additional objections as discussed herein are also required to be upheld. + +WHEREFORE Defendant requests that this Court deny Plaintiff's motion to compel and uphold EPSTEIN's assertion of his constitutional protections and, in the alternative or in addition to, uphold his additional objections to Plaintiff's discovery requests. + +![]()**Certificate of Service** + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 25th day of March, 2009. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) +[lrivera@hermanlaw.com](mailto:lrivera@hermanlaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: + +![]()Florida Bar No. 224162 + +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-842-2820 + +Fax: 561-515-3148 + +*(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**§ 2422. Coercion and enticement** + +(a) Whoever knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, to engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. + +--- + +1 Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure +Part I. Crimes + +Chapter 117. Transportation for Illegal Sexual Activity and Related Crimes + +(b) Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 10 years or for life. + +2006 Amendments. Subsec. (b). Pub.L. 109-248, § 203, struck out "not less than 5 years and not more than 30 years" and inserted "not less than 10 years or for life". + +2003 Amendments. Subsec. (a). Pub.L. 108-21, § 103(a)(2)(A), struck out "10' and inserted "20". + +Subsec. (b). Pub.L. 108-21, § 103(a)(2)(B), struck out "15" and inserted "30". + +Pub.L. 108-21, § 103(b)(2)(A)(i), struck out ", imprisoned" and inserted "and imprisoned not less than 5 years and". + +Pub.L. 108-21, § 103(b)(2)(A)(ii), struck out ", or both" at end of subsec. (b). + +#### 2 39.204. Abrogation of privileged communications in cases involving child abuse, abandonment, or neglect + +The privileged quality of communication between husband and wife and between any professional person and his or her patient or client, and any other privileged communication except that between attorney and client or the privilege provided in s. 90.505, as such communication relates both to the competency of the witness and to the exclusion of confidential communications, shall not apply to any communication involving the perpetrator or alleged perpetrator in any situation involving known or suspected child abuse, abandonment, or neglect and shall not constitute grounds for failure to report as required by s. 39.201 regardless of the source of the information requiring the report, failure to cooperate with law enforcement or the department in its activities pursuant to this chapter, or failure to give evidence in any judicial proceeding relating to child abuse, abandonment, or neglect. + +(Emphasis added). + +3 Relevancy and Its Limits + +# Rule 408. Compromise and Offers to Compromise + +(a) Prohibited uses.--Evidence of the following is not admissible on behalf of any party, when offered to prove liability for, invalidity of, or amount of a claim that was disputed as to validity or amount, or to impeach through a prior inconsistent statement or contradiction: + +(1) furnishing or offering or promising to furnish—or accepting or offering or promising to accept a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise the claim; and + +(2) conduct or statements made in compromise negotiations regarding the claim, except when offered in a criminal case and the negotiations related to a claim by a public office or agency in the exercise of regulatory, investigative, or enforcement authority. + +(b) Permitted uses.--This rule does not require exclusion if the evidence is offered for purposes not prohibited by subdivision (a). Examples of permissible purposes include proving a witness's bias or prejudice; negating a contention of undue delay; and proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution. + +CREDIT(S) + +(Pub.L. 93-595, § 1, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1933; Apr. 12, 2006, eff. Dec. 1, 2006). + +### Rule 410. Inadmissibility of Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements + +Except as otherwise provided in this rule, evidence of the following is not, in any civil or criminal proceeding, admissible against the defendant who made the plea or was a participant in the plea discussions: + +(1) a plea of guilty which was later withdrawn; + +(2) a plea of nob contendere; + +(3) any statement made in the course of any proceedings under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure or comparable state procedure regarding either of the foregoing pleas; or + +(4) any statement made in the course of plea discussions with an attorney for the prosecuting authority which do not result in a plea of guilty or which result in a plea of guilty later withdrawn. + +However, such a statement is admissible (i) in any proceeding wherein another statement made in the course of the same plea or plea discussions has been introduced and the statement ought in fairness be considered contemporaneously with it, or (ii) in a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement if the statement was made by the defendant under oath, on the record and in the presence of counsel. + +CREDIT(S) + +(Pub.L. 93-595, § 1, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1933; Pub.L. 94-149, § 1(9), Dec. 12, 1975, 89 Stat. 805; Apr. 30, 1979, eff. Dec. 1, 1980.) + +Florida Evidence Code + +#### 90.410. Offer to plead guilty; nob contendere; withdrawn pleas of guilty + +Evidence of a plea of guilty, later withdrawn; a plea of nob contendere; or an offer to plead guilty or nob contendere to the crime charged or any other crime is inadmissible in any civil or criminal proceeding. Evidence of statements made in connection with any of the pleas or offers is inadmissible, except when such statements are offered in a prosecution under chapter 837. + +CREDIT(S) + +Laws 1976, c. 76-237, § 1; Laws 1978, c. 78-361, § 8. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743919/EFTA02743919.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743919/EFTA02743919.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ac2f4b5d4bf37eb2cabf9d933a796732afd73221 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743919/EFTA02743919.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1941 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743919.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 37, + "chars": 76640, + "elapsed_seconds": 15.53, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.5599822998047, + 71.427490234375 + ], + [ + 406.36800000000005, + 71.427490234375 + ], + [ + 406.36800000000005, + 99.90997314453125 + ], + [ + 198.5599822998047, + 99.90997314453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO \nCOMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES, and RESPONSES TO \n1st and 2nd PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, AND INCORPORATED \nMEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 101.20000457763672, + 277.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 502.45199999999994, + 277.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 502.45199999999994, + 335.03997802734375 + ], + [ + 101.20000457763672, + 335.03997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 266.832, + 513.16748046875 + ], + [ + 335.8385314941406, + 513.16748046875 + ], + [ + 335.8385314941406, + 527.7799682617188 + ], + [ + 266.832, + 527.7799682617188 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 294.9300231933594, + 127.2974853515625 + ], + [ + 310.896, + 127.2974853515625 + ], + [ + 310.896, + 142.56 + ], + [ + 294.9300231933594, + 142.56 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Memorandum of Law Supporting Application of Constitutional Privileges", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.1199951171875, + 152.28 + ], + [ + 495.72, + 152.28 + ], + [ + 495.72, + 167.40997314453125 + ], + [ + 110.1199951171875, + 167.40997314453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Circuit Court, State of Florida, recently entered order upholding assertion of Fifth \nAmendment and constitutional based protections in response to discovery.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 535.5, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 535.5, + 154.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 154.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Even if the Court were to agree with Plaintiff's assertion that Defendant has \nasserted a \"blank privilege\" under the Fifth Amendment, under the facts and \ncircumstances of this case, such assertion would be proper.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.74, + 468.18 + ], + [ + 519.5948486328125, + 468.18 + ], + [ + 519.5948486328125, + 509.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 88.74, + 509.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "D. Plaintiff's Amended First Set of Interrogatories to Defendant", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 135.252, + 153.09 + ], + [ + 472.7407531738281, + 153.09 + ], + [ + 472.7407531738281, + 169.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 135.252, + 169.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "E. Plaintiffs First Production Request To Defendant", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 162.792, + 292.40999999999997 + ], + [ + 441.252, + 292.40999999999997 + ], + [ + 441.252, + 307.0670471191406 + ], + [ + 162.792, + 307.0670471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Defendant's objections made in addition to the constitutional based \nprotections are required to be upheld.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 22, + "polygon": [ + [ + 102.81600000000002, + 290.78999999999996 + ], + [ + 506.32232666015625, + 290.78999999999996 + ], + [ + 506.32232666015625, + 320.69451904296875 + ], + [ + 102.81600000000002, + 320.69451904296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. Constitutional issues are required to be addressed first.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 22, + "polygon": [ + [ + 147.49200000000002, + 328.86 + ], + [ + 461.8840637207031, + 328.86 + ], + [ + 461.8840637207031, + 346.5688171386719 + ], + [ + 147.49200000000002, + 346.5688171386719 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Interrogatory No. 8. Production Request No. 23", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 23, + "polygon": [ + [ + 170.13600000000002, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 434.25244140625, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 434.25244140625, + 335.1870422363281 + ], + [ + 170.13600000000002, + 335.1870422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "C. Plaintiffs Second Request For Production", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 27, + "polygon": [ + [ + 181.152, + 678.78 + ], + [ + 422.0782775878906, + 678.78 + ], + [ + 422.0782775878906, + 694.3000030517578 + ], + [ + 181.152, + 694.3000030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "D. Overbroad, relevance objections to discovery.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 28, + "polygon": [ + [ + 171.972, + 619.0388946533203 + ], + [ + 432.34320068359375, + 619.0388946533203 + ], + [ + 432.34320068359375, + 633.4235229492188 + ], + [ + 171.972, + 633.4235229492188 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "E. Work Product; Attorney Client Privilege", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.1599884033203, + 125.55000000000001 + ], + [ + 415.54800000000006, + 125.55000000000001 + ], + [ + 415.54800000000006, + 140.13 + ], + [ + 190.1599884033203, + 140.13 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "F. Rules 408 and 410. Fed. Evid. Code; 490.410, Fla. Stat - Production \nrequests nos. 1 - 5.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 102.79000091552734, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 503.06399999999996, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 503.06399999999996, + 426.79351806640625 + ], + [ + 102.79000091552734, + 426.79351806640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "G. Third Party Privacy Rights", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 230.724, + 631.8 + ], + [ + 391.28485107421875, + 631.8 + ], + [ + 391.28485107421875, + 646.1635131835938 + ], + [ + 230.724, + 646.1635131835938 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 32, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.548, + 237.5574951171875 + ], + [ + 342.56292724609375, + 237.5574951171875 + ], + [ + 342.56292724609375, + 252.53997802734375 + ], + [ + 262.548, + 252.53997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 32, + "polygon": [ + [ + 240.516, + 623.427490234375 + ], + [ + 364.49005126953125, + 623.427490234375 + ], + [ + 364.49005126953125, + 638.4199981689453 + ], + [ + 240.516, + 638.4199981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 33, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.548, + 237.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 342.72, + 237.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 342.72, + 251.10000000000002 + ], + [ + 262.548, + 251.10000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 34, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.74, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 364.14, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 364.14, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 241.74, + 84.24 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a7 2422. Coercion and enticement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 34, + "polygon": [ + [ + 64.872, + 618.84 + ], + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 618.84 + ], + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 631.8 + ], + [ + 64.872, + 631.8 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "2 39.204. Abrogation of privileged communications in cases involving child abuse, \nabandonment, or neglect", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 35, + "polygon": [ + [ + 65.484, + 349.92 + ], + [ + 541.008, + 349.92 + ], + [ + 541.008, + 379.0570373535156 + ], + [ + 65.484, + 379.0570373535156 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 408. Compromise and Offers to Compromise", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 35, + "polygon": [ + [ + 65.484, + 592.92 + ], + [ + 332.3551025390625, + 592.92 + ], + [ + 332.3551025390625, + 608.5570373535156 + ], + [ + 65.484, + 608.5570373535156 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 410. Inadmissibility of Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 36, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.096, + 238.14 + ], + [ + 472.8861083984375, + 238.14 + ], + [ + 472.8861083984375, + 253.0670166015625 + ], + [ + 66.096, + 253.0670166015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "90.410. Offer to plead guilty; nob contendere; withdrawn pleas of guilty", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 36, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.096, + 579.96 + ], + [ + 446.3006286621094, + 579.96 + ], + [ + 446.3006286621094, + 594.6870422363281 + ], + [ + 66.096, + 594.6870422363281 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 87 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 74 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 92 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 340 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743919" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743956/EFTA02743956.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743956/EFTA02743956.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7b0707db9ae7678333f2811aeb381d61634127ef --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743956/EFTA02743956.md @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +**UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA** + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-[REDACTED] + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +*J* + +| FILED by | D.C. | +|---------------------------------------------------------------------|------| +| MAR 25 2009 | | +| STEVEN M. LARIMORE
CLERK U.S. DIST. CT.
S.D. OF FLA. - W.P.B. | | + +**ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN +RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO +INTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, +INCLUDING SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW** + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion to Exceed Page Limitation in Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents, Including Supporting Memorandum of (DE# 62) Law. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the request to exceed page limitation, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents, Including Supporting Memorandum of Law may exceed 20 pages. + +DONE and ORDERED this 24th day of MARCH, 2009. + +*Kenneth A. Marra Limea R. Johnson* +Kenneth A. Marra Limea R. Johnson +United States District Judge +NAGISTRATE + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743956/EFTA02743956.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743956/EFTA02743956.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c3efb70de5110b94508074b45cd08252d26df651 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743956/EFTA02743956.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743956.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1527, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.82, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 202.95000000000002, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 410.20500000000004, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 410.20500000000004, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 202.95000000000002, + 106.92 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, INCLUDING SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.185, + 273.78000000000003 + ], + [ + 536.28, + 273.78000000000003 + ], + [ + 536.28, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 73.185, + 333.71999999999997 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "Form", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743956" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743957/EFTA02743957.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743957/EFTA02743957.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ad3be3c53c0b271de94d2cf2a0a1ffdd36051702 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743957/EFTA02743957.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +A TRUE BILL + +IN THE NAME OF AND BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA + +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA + +For Palm Beach County, at the Spring Term thereof, in the year of our Lord Two Thousand and Six, to-wit: + +The Grand Jurors of the Slate of Florida, inquiring in and for the body of said County of Palm Beach, upon their oaths do present that JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN in the County of Palm Beach aforesaid, in the Circuit and State aforesaid, + +## COUNT ONE FELONY SOLICITATION OF PROSTITUTION + +on or about or between the 1st day of August in the year of our Lord Two Thousand and Four and October 31, 2005, did solicit, induce, entice, or procure another to commit prostitution lewdness, or assignation, contrary to Florida Statute 796.07(1) on three or more occasions between August 01, 2004 and October 31, 2005, contrary to Florida Statute 796.07(2)(f) and (4)(c). (3 DEG FEL)(LEVEL 1) + +against the form of the statute, to the evil example of all others, and against the peace and dignity of the State of Florida. + +Ihereby certify that I have advised the Grand Jury returning this indictment as authorized and required by law. + +Assistant State Atf h.\* of 84--Fifteenth Judicial Circuit of the State of Florida, prosecuting for the said State + +GRAND JURY FOREPERSON DATE + +Jeffrey E. Epstein, Race: , Sex: Male, DOB: January 20, 1953, SS#: 090-44-3348; Issue Warrant + +EXHIBIT \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743957/EFTA02743957.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743957/EFTA02743957.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..245a2df431ede3131dd3113572bc0a796632915e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743957/EFTA02743957.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743957.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1434, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.84, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "INDICTMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.86, + 34.83 + ], + [ + 356.4181213378906, + 34.83 + ], + [ + 356.4181213378906, + 51.84 + ], + [ + 247.86, + 51.84 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT ONE \nFELONY SOLICITATION OF PROSTITUTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 178.704, + 259.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 412.940185546875, + 259.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 412.940185546875, + 287.54999999999995 + ], + [ + 178.704, + 287.54999999999995 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 291 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743957" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743958/EFTA02743958.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743958/EFTA02743958.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f735d822fda421c67955d1c468a742353fd8de37 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743958/EFTA02743958.md @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@ +## AFFIDAVIT OF JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +1. I, Jack A. Goldberger, have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein. I am an attorney licensed to practice in the State of Florida since 1978. I am a partner with the law firm of Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A., located at One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401. + +2. My practice includes and specializes in the defense of criminal matters. I am board certified in criminal law. I have been and currently am the criminal defense attorney for JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +3. I represented Mr. EPSTEIN in the negotiation of and entering into a Non-Prosecution Agreement with the United States Attorney's Office (USAO) for the Federal Southern District of Florida. The terms and conditions of the Non-Prosecution Agreement also entailed the entering of a Plea Agreement with the State Attorney's Office, Palm Beach County, State of Florida. (The Non-Prosecution Agreement shall hereinafter be referred to as the "NPA"). + +4. By its terms, the NPA took effect on June 30, 2008. Also, pursuant to the terms of the NPA, any criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN is deferred as long as the terms and conditions of the NPA are fulfilled by EPSTEIN. + +EXHIBITIE + +5. The criminal matters against EPSTEIN remain ongoing until the NPA expires by its terms in late 2010 and as long as the USAO determines EPSTEIN has complied with those terms and conditions. The threat of criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN by USAO in the Southern District of Florida continues presently and through late 2010. + +6. Pursuant to the terms of the NPA, the USAO possesses the right to declare that the agreement has been breached, give EPSTEIN's counsel notice, and attempt to move forward with a prosecution. As of the date of this Affidavit, the USAO has taken the position on a number of occasions that it might consider the following actions by EPSTEIN to be a breach of the NPA. + +- Investigation by EPSTEIN (by and through his attorneys) of this Plaintiff and the other Plaintiffs in other pending civil cases for purposes of defending the civil actions; +- EPSTEIN's contesting damages in this action and other civil actions. +- EPSTEIN or his legal representatives making statements to the press about this Plaintiff or the other Plaintiffs. +- Using the word "jail" instead of "imprisonment" in the plea agreement with the Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office. + +7. EPSTEIN, through counsel, submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for documents relating to this and the other cases; the FBI denied the request stating the materials are at this time exempt from disclosure because they are in an investigative file, i.e. the matter is still an ongoing criminal investigation. + +8. The NPA expires in late 2010. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +I hereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the/following form of identification of the above named person: leivo-um r\_ser vic.(y\_ , and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WILNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this /i v- day of ic-:e et 4 , 2009. + +![](_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg) + +PRINT NA + +NOTARY PUBLIC/STATE OF FLORIDA COMMISSION NO.: bb 49`x-29 O MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: e'/ /Id/ \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743958/EFTA02743958.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743958/EFTA02743958.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8dd6e7d9578ef492fd09387bedf9bb3a1e2a4ae0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743958/EFTA02743958.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,168 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743958.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3807, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.86, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.06, + 74.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 446.2628479003906, + 74.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 446.2628479003906, + 89.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 156.06, + 89.04998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 72 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743958" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743958/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743958/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bac2353974ea082c335d056bcc499ebb4532086a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743958/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c18644a1b20e8a8600845531cc9b4d54f2cf0328701853c6e5db3c440f16e775 +size 10818 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743961/EFTA02743961.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743961/EFTA02743961.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..74e8ab094c4904ba48379442b8fcc19a9694fab2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743961/EFTA02743961.md @@ -0,0 +1,379 @@ +*original plead* + +**UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA** + +**CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA** [REDACTED] + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +**DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS +TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES** + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his responses and objections to Plaintiff's December 9, 2008 Amended First Set Of Interrogatories To Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, attached hereto. + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent by fax and U.S. Mail to the following addressees this 26th day of January, 2009: + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com +iherman@hermanlaw.com +lrivera@hermanlaw.com +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +jagesq@bellsouth.net +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +*COMPOSITE EXHIBIT "C"* + +*orig. plead page +to Herman +no: 26, JE, DE* + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: \_\_\_\_\_ +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bclclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bclclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO +PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES** + +**Interrogatory No. 1.** Identify all employees who performed work of services inside the Palm Beach Residence. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2003 until present. Also, see "Employee" as defined in paragraph g of Plaintiff's interrogatories. + +**Interrogatory No. 2.** Identify all Employees not identified in response to interrogatory no. 1 who at any time came to Defendant's Palm Beach Residence. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for "all Employees" "who at any time" came to the residence. Also, see "Employee" as defined in paragraph g of Plaintiff's interrogatories. + +Page 4 + +Interrogatory No. 3. Identify all persons who came to the Palm Beach Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give amassage to Defendant. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +Interrogatory No. 4. Identify all persons who came to the New York Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give amassage to Defendant. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +Interrogatory No. 5. Identify all persons who came to the New Mexico Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give amassage to Defendant. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my + +federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +**Interrogatory No. 6.** Identify all persons who came to the St. [REDACTED] Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +**Interrogatory No. 7.** List all the time periods during which Jeffrey Epstein was present in the State of Florida, including for each the date he arrive and the date he departed. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the + +discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiffs interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2003 until present. + +Interrogatory No. 8. Identify all of Jeffrey Epstein health care providers in the past (10) ten years, including without limitation, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, physicians, hospitals and treatment facilities. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. In addition, such information is privileged pursuant to Rule 501, Fed. Evid., and §90.503, FIa.Evid. Code. In addition, such information is protected by the provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HI PAA). + +Interrogatory No. 9. List all items in Jeffrey Epstein's possession in Palm Beach, Florida, at any time during the period of these interrogatories, which were used or intended to be used as sexual aids, sex toys, massage aids, and/or vibrators, and for each, list the manufacturer, model number (if applicable), and its present location. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Amended Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005," while Plaintiffs interrogatory seeks information from + +January 1, 2003, until present. Further, the request is meant to embarrass and harass the Defendant. + +**Interrogatory No. 10.** Identify all persons who provide transportation services to Jeffrey Epstein, whether as employees or independent contractors, including without limitation, chauffeurs and aircraft crew. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff places no time limitation. + +**Interrogatory No. 11.** Identify all telephone numbers used by Epstein, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's allegations claim a time period of "in or about 2004-2005" and involve Defendant's Palm Beach residence. + +**Interrogatory No. 12.** Identify all telephone numbers of employees of Epstein, used in the course or scope of their employment, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's allegations claim a time period of "in or about 2004-2005" and involve Defendant's Palm Beach residence. + +**Interrogatory No. 13.** List the names and addresses of all persons who are believed or known by your, your agents, or your attorneys to have any knowledge concerning any of the issues in this lawsuit; and specify the subject matter about which the witness has knowledge. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the interrogatory seeks information that is attorney-client and work product privileged as it seeks information known by Defendant's attorneys. The interrogatory is so overbroad that Defendant cannot reasonably form a response, including the raising of additional privileges which may apply. Without waiving any objection, see Rule 26 disclosures made by Defendant's counsel in this case. + +**Interrogatory No. 14.** State the name and address of every person known to you, your agents, or your attorneys who has knowledge about, possession, or custody, or control of, any model, plat, map, drawing, motion picture, videotape or photograph pertaining to any fact or issue involved in this controversy; and describe as to each, what item such person has, the name and address of the person who took or prepared it, and the date it was taken or prepared. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the interrogatory seeks information that is attorney-client and work product privileged as it seeks information known by Defendant's attorneys. + +**Interrogatory No. 15.** Identify all persons who have made a claim, complaint, demand or threat against you relating to alleged sexual abuse or misconduct on a minor, and for each provide the following information: + +1. a. The person's full name, last known address and telephone number; +2. b. The person's attorney, if represented; +3. c. The date of the alleged incident(s); +4. d. If a civil case has been filed by or on behalf of the person, the case number and identifying information. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges and without waiving such objection, with regard to subparagraph (d), Defendant's counsel states that such information is public record and equally attainable by Plaintiff. + +**Interrogatory No. 16.** State the facts upon which you intend to rely for each denial of a pleading allegation and for each affirmative defense you intend to make in these cases. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk + +losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, no answer to the Amended Complaint has been filed by defense counsel in this case; however, Defendant does not intend to waive his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination. Defendant further objects in that Plaintiff's interrogatory attempts to obtain discovery in other cases filed by her undersigned counsel. + +**Interrogatory No. 17.** Identify all witnesses from whom you have obtained or requested a written, transcribed or recorded statement relating to any issue in these cases, and for each, in addition to the witness's identifying information, state the date of the statement and identify the person taking the statement. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects to this interrogatory in that it seeks information that is attorney-client and work product privileged. In addition, the request is overbroad in that it seeks information "relating to any issue." + +![]()STATE OF Florida ) +) +COUNTY OF Palm Beach ) + +I hereby certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Jeffrey Epstein, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Interrogatories who + +acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above-named person: personally known/identification, and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this 21., day of \arn-so,r..' 2009. + +(SEAL) + +![](_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg) + +PRUCICAtit Co..4rsy...- Mnr:.S Notary Public/State of Florida Commission #: My Commission Expires: + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARFtAMMI + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO SECOND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION, dated December 19, 2008 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his responses and objections to the Request to Produce, dated December 19, 2008 and states: + +Request No. 1. All policies of insurance, including the declarations page and all binders, amendments, and endorsements, covering Defendant's residence at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, FL 33480. + +Response: Objection, overly broad, not relevant and material and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff alleged claims occurred during a specific time period in 2004 - 2005, yet to be specifically identified. Yet, no time period whatsoever is set forth in the Request for Production. Additionally, Defendant objects in that the policies contain value and/or asset information which is not relevant, material nor calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence at this point in time; said information is both private and confidential. + +ec16,-\*-115 + +**Certificate of Service** + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 26th day of January, 2009. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) +[jherman@hermanlaw.com](mailto:jherman@hermanlaw.com) +[lrivera@hermanlaw.com](mailto:lrivera@hermanlaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()*(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAell + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, serves his responses and objections to Plaintiff's Amended First Request For Production To Defendant, dated December 9, 2008. + +Request No. 1. The list provided to you by the U.S. Attorney of individuals whom the U.S. Attorney was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an offense by Mr. Epstein enumerated in 18 U.S.C. §2255. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference + +under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 2. All documents referring or relating to the United States' agreement with Defendant to defer federal prosecution subject to certain conditions, including without limitation, the operative agreement between Defendant and the United States and all amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my + +constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 3. All documents referring or relating to Defendant's agreement with the State of Florida on his plea of guilty to violations of Florida Criminal Statutes, including without limitation, the operative plea agreement and any amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the + +information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Whatever public documents exist are in the State Court file and equally accessible to Plaintiff. + +Request No.4. All documents obtained in discovery or investigation relating to either the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal Case, including without limitation, documents obtained from any federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, the State Attorney's office and the United States Attorney's office. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the + +information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Request No. 4 seeks documents that are attorney-client and work product privileged in that it seeks "all documents obtained in discovery or investigation relating either to the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal Case ... ." In addition, such documents are privileged and confidential as they are the subject of a pending investigation. + +Request No. 5. All telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone calls made by or to Defendant, including without limitation, telephone logs and message pads. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the + +Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Defendant objects as the request is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding any and all telephone records and other documents reflecting any and all telephone calls made to or by Defendant. As phrased, the request includes attorney-client and work product privileged information, as well as records and documents of calls having absolutely no relationship to any of the allegations in this action. + +Request No. 6. All telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone calls made by or to Defendant, including without limitation, telephone logs and message pads, reflecting telephone calls made by or to employees. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce + +documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, as defined by Plaintiff in paragraph g of her request, the term employee is overly broad and encompasses information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, the request seeks information pertaining to person who are not parties to this action and whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 7. All surveillance videos, slides, film, videotape, digital recording or other audio or video depiction or image of the Palm Beach Residence. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my + +Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding "all surveillance videos, etc., or image of the Palm Beach Residence." + +Request No. 8. All documents referring or relating to Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2, including without limitation, web pages, social networking site pages, correspondence, videotapes and audiotapes. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my + +Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. + +Request No. 9. All statements taken, transcribed or recorded from any person referring or relating to Defendant's sexual conduct, massages given to Defendant or any issue in these cases. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the + +Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. + +Request No. 10. All documents referring to or relating to air travel and aircraft used by Defendant, including without limitation, flight logs and flight manifests. + +time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding air travel and aircraft used by Defendant. + +Request No. 11. Any and all documents referring to or relating to modeling agencies, including but not limited to documents relating to or reflecting communications with female models. + +Request No. 12. All photographs, videotapes, digital images and other documents depicting or showing females who, at the time thereof, were under the age of 21, which were taken or created by or for Defendant and not intended for sale commercially to the public. + +Request No. 13. All photographs and painting of females which were displayed in any of Defendant's homes or residences in the time frame of these requests, including without limitation, photographs in standing or sitting frames or wall frames. + +Request No. 14. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and , including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 15. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and , including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 16. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 17. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 18. Any and all documents and photographs placed by Defendant at any time in the period of these requests on a social networking website, including without limitation, Facebook.com and MySpace.com. + +Request No. 19. Any and all documents reflecting or consisting of communications between Jeffrey Epstein and MC2 Models or Jean-Luc Brunel, relating or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries to pursue a career in modeling, including, but not limited to, letters, notes and emails. + +2005." In addition, the request seeks documents pertaining to females who are not non-parties, and who possess privacy rights. + +Request No. 20. Any and all documents referring or relating to gifts or loans to females under the age of 21, including, but not limited to, notes, receipts and car rental agreements. + +Request No. 21. Any and all personal calendars or schedules of or for Jeffrey Epstein from January 1, 2003 to the present. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." In addition, the request encompasses attorney-client privileged material. + +Request No. 22. All documents written by Jeffrey Epstein consisting of personal thoughts, feelings or descriptions of events, incidents or occurrences in Defendant's life, including without limitation, any diaries of Jeffrey Epstein. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 - 2005." On its fact, the request goes beyond the scope of allowable discovery and is meant to harass, embarrass and overburden the Defendant. Further, the request is so overly broad that it includes attorney-client and work product privileged materials. + +Request No. 23. All documents referring to or relating to Jeffrey Epstein's purchase or consumption of prescription medicine. + +**Certificate of Service** + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 26th day of January, 2009. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) +[jherman@hermanlaw.com](mailto:jherman@hermanlaw.com) +[lrivera@hermanlaw.com](mailto:lrivera@hermanlaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()*(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743961/EFTA02743961.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743961/EFTA02743961.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4c97d2445befbb2a7fc3a6c5c78274ee010c5dfd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743961/EFTA02743961.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1475 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743961.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 37, + "chars": 51310, + "elapsed_seconds": 22.76, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 402.696, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 402.696, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 119.88 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 133.416, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 467.568, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 467.568, + 330.48 + ], + [ + 133.416, + 330.48 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.324, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 373.32, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 373.32, + 439.02 + ], + [ + 261.324, + 439.02 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 119.34, + 111.78000000000002 + ], + [ + 483.48, + 111.78000000000002 + ], + [ + 483.48, + 139.32 + ], + [ + 119.34, + 139.32 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.4399871826172, + 74.04742431640625 + ], + [ + 403.9200000000001, + 74.04742431640625 + ], + [ + 403.9200000000001, + 102.90997314453125 + ], + [ + 197.4399871826172, + 102.90997314453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO \nSECOND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION, dated December 19, 2008", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 108.41999816894531, + 281.427490234375 + ], + [ + 493.27200000000005, + 281.427490234375 + ], + [ + 493.27200000000005, + 311.04 + ], + [ + 108.41999816894531, + 311.04 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 238.68, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 361.692, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 361.692, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 238.68, + 90.72 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 195.84, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.7620849609375, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.7620849609375, + 104.11846923828125 + ], + [ + 195.84, + 104.11846923828125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS \nTO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 112.608, + 281.88 + ], + [ + 486.87127685546875, + 281.88 + ], + [ + 486.87127685546875, + 311.6604919433594 + ], + [ + 112.608, + 311.6604919433594 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 36, + "polygon": [ + [ + 239.29200000000003, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 362.304, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 362.304, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 239.29200000000003, + 88.28999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 534 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 522 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 228 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 307 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743961" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743961/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743961/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d2d558476dfc739b36da155c701a94eaee9eeacc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743961/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ee5c5546445004d22c72c972aa504c9d7b67a8aaccfd3e16dad8cbf7f6cd2e01 +size 11747 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743998/EFTA02743998.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743998/EFTA02743998.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0e779320dd542283e6529005a53d4a2904adfd32 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743998/EFTA02743998.md @@ -0,0 +1,145 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion To Stay And Or Continue Action For Time Certain Based On Parallel Civil And Criminal Proceedings With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby moves this Court for the entry of an order staying or continuing this action for a time certain (i.e., until late 2010 when the NPA expires), pursuant to the application of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the fact that a parallel proceeding is ongoing and being investigated. In support of his motion, EPSTEIN states: + +### I. Introduction + +At the outset, EPSTEIN notes this Court's prior Order, (DE 33), in which this Court denied a motion for stay brought by Defendant's prior counsel. In that instance, Defendant's counsel requested a mandatory stay under 18 U.S.C.A. §3509(k) which the court denied. In denying the request for the stay, this Court stated that a discretionary stay was not appropriate at the time the order was entered but also stated, in part, that "Any such issues shall be resolved as they arise in the course of litigation." As discussed herein, "special circumstances" now exist which, in the "interests of justice," merit the entry of a stay of this civil action until the criminal + +matter in the I5th Judicial Circuit is "closed" in accordance with the United States Attorney's Office ("USAO") Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") and until the NPA expires. + +Moreover, EPSTEIN was indicted by a grand jury in or around July 2006. See Exhibit "A". The Non-Prosecution Agreement is part of the record in connection with that indictment, which is signed by the State Attorney of the 15°' Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida ("SAO"). In fact, the NPA acknowledges the investigation performed by the SAO. Further, the USAO was present at the Plea hearing whereby the NPA was made part of the record. Thus, there is no question that a parallel criminal matter exists in that the SAO's case remains open and the NPA lives along side it, which places EPSTEIN under great scrutiny by the USAO. The NPA actually places an affirmative duty upon EPSTEIN to undertake discussions with the SAO to ensure compliance with the NPA. That check and balance, therefore, remains in the hands of the SAO, which has a parallel criminal proceeding. Here, the threat of prosecution is real, substantial, and present should the USAO determine that EPSTEIN somehow violated the NPA. As discussed below, because the NPA fails to define what constitutes a breach, the USAO has apparently taken it upon itself to determine whether a breach has occurred and whether to seek criminal prosecution. In fact, the USAO has already attempted to claim violations of the NPA due to, among other things, EPSTEIN defending the civil actions against him. Clearly, it is NOT simply EPSTEIN's choice as to whether he violates the NPA — that discretion apparently lies with the USAO. For this reason alone, a stay is required until the NPA expires. + +The difference between this Motion and the prior motion to stay in is due to the ripeness of the issues discussed herein. + +## II. THE NPA + +By its terms, the NPA took effect on June 30, 2008 and expires by those same terms in late 2010 so long as EPSTEIN complies with the terms and conditions — violations of which remain undefined. The NPA, which remains under seal, outlines various obligations on the part of EPSTEIN including, but not limited to, pleading guilty to the Indictment and Information before the 151h Judicial Circuit, recommendations for his sentencing before the 15th Judicial Circuit, waiver of challenges to the Information filed by the SAO, waiver of right to appeal his conviction, agreement not be afforded benefits for gain time, and the agreement to not prosecute others listed thereon so long as EPSTEIN does not breach and fulfills the requirements of the NPA. + +What the NPA does not outline or define is what constitutes a breach or what act or omission constitutes a breach thereof. Therefore, the USAO apparently believes it has the discretion to make that unwritten and undefined determination, which places an unreasonable burden upon EPSTEIN in defending the civil claims in that he has no idea what the USAO will define as a breach in the event he does not assert his 5th Amendment Rights. As an example, the USAO has already claimed that EPSTEIN violated the NPA by: + +- 1. investigating the Plaintiffs (by and though his attorneys) whom brought civil suits against him for purposes of defending those civil actions; + - 2. contesting damages in this action and in the other civil actions; +- 3. making statements to the press about this Plaintiff or other Plaintiffs by and though his attorneys; and + +office. 4. using the word "jail" instead of "imprisonment" in the plea agreement with SA's + +See Exhibit "B" Goldberger Affidavit - EPSTEIN's criminal counsel. + +These allegations are silly, unfounded and alleged violations which are not defined as violations under the NPA but arrived at by the USAO. Thus, EPSTEIN is left with "Morton's Fork" in his side - the undesirable choice of taking the 5th Amendment and having a judgment (summary or otherwise) entered against him in the civil action or the undesirable choice of subjecting himself to discovery in the civil action before the NPA expires and, thus, face the possibility of criminal prosecution by the USAO based upon some illusory breach deemed by the USAO by way of information obtained through civil discovery proceedings. This is inherently unfair, the danger is clear, and the playing field is not level in light of the NPA language or lack thereof. + +As a result, the threat of criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN by the USAO continues presently and through late 2010. + +#### Hi. Justice Requires The Entry of A Stay Because Defendant Is Being Forced To Choose Between Waiving His 5fil Amendment Privilege Or Risk Losing This Civil Case And Forfeiting Other Constitutional Guarantees Of Due Process And Effective Assistance Of Counsel + +Once the NPA expires, EPSTEIN fully intends to testify to all relevant and nonobjectionable inquiries made to him in discovery be it a deposition, in interrogatories or in production requests. (Emphasis Added) However, the current circumstances are such that by testifying or responding to discovery, EPSTEIN will be required to waive his constitutional privileges, thereby subjecting himself to criminal prosecution and scrutiny by the USAO as a + +result of matters alleged in this civil action (and others before this Court and in the State of Florida I5th Judicial Circuit Court, Palm Beach County). + +The special circumstances of this action are such that a stay or continuance for a time certain is NOT prejudicial and is required to be entered so that: + +(I) EPSTEIN is not required to waive his Fifth Amendment right against selfincrimination under the United States Constitution resulting in severe prejudice to EPSTEIN in pending criminal matters; and + +(2) EPSTEIN is not forced to choose between waiving his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination or losing the civil case. + +Here, in asserting his Fifth Amendment Privilege, the Plaintiff is afforded an opportunity rarely given - that is, to put on only her evidence without any counterevidence from Defendant resulting in a judgment of liability against EPSTEIN. This is inherently unfair and precisely the special circumstances where in the interests of justice" a stay is required. Ventura v. Brosky, 2006 WI. 3392207 (S.D. Ha. 2006), citinz United States v. Lot 5, Fox Grove 23 F.3d 359 (11th Cir. 1994). In Ventura a stay was entered where a Defendant was confronted with issue of waiving his 5th Amendment Privilege or to loose a civil case by way of motion for summary judgment. Id. Here, EPSTEIN is not requesting a mandatory stay. EPSTEIN only asks that this court recognize that "special circumstances" exists in this matter and enter a stay in the "interests of justice" and only for a specified period of time (i.e., after the NPA expires). See also Securities and Exchange Commission, 755 F.Supp. 1018, 1019 (S.D. Fla. 1990)(Defendant was in precarious position while being subject to criminal investigation and reasoning that compelling Defendant to speak by ordering an accounting of alleged illicit funds would directly + +impinge his right against self-incrimination). The court found it appropriate to grant the request for stay. (Emphasis Added). + +Citing to U.S. v. Lot 5, Fox Grove, supra, the Southern District Court, Florida, in Ventura v. Brosky, 2006 WL 3392207 (S.D. Fla. 2006), stated — + +The Eleventh Circuit has also created a test for these circumstances, stating that where there exists a concurrent civil and criminal proceeding, a court must stay a civil proceeding pending resolution of a related criminal prosecution when "special circumstances" so require in the "interests of justice." + +(Bold emphasis added). See also United States v. Kordel, 397 U.S. I, 12 & n. 27, 90 S.Ct. 763, 769-70 & n.27 (1970). The Ventura Court went on to state that "situations where a defendant in both criminal and civil proceedings must choose whether to waive his privilege against selfincrimination or to lose the civil case in summary or default judgment proceedings have met this test's burden and warrant a stay." Id. The Ventura court granted the stay. Here, the 151h Judicial Circuit action lives along with the NPA. + +In making a decision to enter such a stay, the court may consider the following factors: + +- (1) the interests of the Plaintiffs in proceeding expeditiously with litigation, or any aspect of it, and the potential prejudice of Plaintiff to the delay; +- (2) the burden which any particular aspect of the proceedings may impose on the defendant; +- (3) the convenience of the court in the management of its cases, and the efficient use of judicial resources; + - (4) the interests of persons not parties to the civil litigation; and + - (5) the interest of the public in the pending civil and criminal litigation. + +See U.S. v. Pinnacle Quest International 2008 WL 4274498 (N.D. Fla. 2008). + +First, in applying the above factors, the Plaintiff in the instant matter will not be prejudiced simply by claiming a delay in time. Second, the burden is far greater on EPSTEIN if he is forced to waive his 5i' Amendment Privilege or remain silent and have a judgment entered against him or choose to testify and face criminal prosecution. Third, efficient use of judicial resources would be rendered upon a stay by way of preventing an appeal if such a stay is not entered. The Court has broad discretion to enter such a stay. Fourth, the interests of the individuals outlined in the NPA will be served because EPSTEIN's fulfillment of NPA alleged obligations is determinative upon whether the USAO prosecutes those individuals or whether the claims will be dropped upon the expiration of the NPA. Finally, the interest of the public in the pending civil and criminal cases will not be prejudiced as EPSTEIN is already serving his term whereby a plea was entered in the 15 Judicial Circuit action. + +### a. Application of the 5th Amendment + +Next, the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination "permits a person not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings." Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (I Cir. 1985), ct rgi Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77, 94 S.C. 316, 322 (1973). See also Ohio v. Reiner, 532 U.S. 17, 21, 121 S.Ct. 1252 (2001XThe Fifth Amendment privilege is also available to those who claim innocence. One of the Fifth Amendment's "basic functions ... is to protect innocent men ... `who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances."); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards + +determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); Kastistar v. U.S., 406 U.S. 441, 444-45, 92 S.Ct. 1653 (1972)(The Fifth Amendment privilege "can be asserted in any proceeding, civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory; and it protects against any disclosures which the witness reasonably believes could be used in a criminal prosecution or could lead to other evidence that might be so used. This Court has been zealous to safeguard the values which underlie the privilege." (Emphasis added)). + +The United States Supreme Court made it clear that the scope of the Fifth Amendment Privilege includes the circumstances as here "the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena (or production request) has a compelled testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000); see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §138 (61h Ed.). The privilege against self-incrimination may be asserted during discovery when a litigant has "reasonable grounds to believe that the response would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against a litigant." A witness, including a civil defendant, is entitled to invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege whenever there is a realistic possibility that the answer to a question could be used in anyway to convict the witness of a crime or could aid in the development of other incriminating evidence that can be used at trial. Id; Pillsbury Comvanv v. Conboy, 495 U.S. 248, 103 S.Ct. 608 (1983). + +Certainly, if the USAO decides to prosecute EPSTEIN for an alleged violation of the NPA, it would undoubtedly be able to use information obtained during discovery against him or use that information to aid in the development of other evidence against him at a criminal trial. + +The USAO is already claiming violations of the NPA based upon EPSTEIN defending the civil actions and, at the same time, while EPSTEIN asserts the 5th Amendment. Imagine, because that is all we can do based on the lack of wording in the NPA, what violations the USAO will assert if EPSTEIN is forced to waive his 5th Amendment privilege to defend himself in this and the other civil actions. + +The Fifth Amendment provides, in relevant part, that "No person ... shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against himself." Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486, 71 S.Ct. 814 (1951), dila v. United States, 1944, 322 U.S. 487, 489, 64 S.Ct. 1082, 1083, 88 L.Ed. 1408." The Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination is "accorded liberal construction in favor of the right it was intended to secure." "The immediate and potential evils of compulsory self-disclosure transcend any difficulties that the exercise of the privilege may impose on society in the detection and prosecution of a crime." Id., at 490; and In re Financial Svcs. of Fla.. Inc. 259 B.R. 391, 399 (M.D. Fla. 2000). The privilege not only extends to answers that would in themselves support a conviction under a criminal statute but likewise embraces those which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a crime. Id, claw Blau v. United States, 1950, 340 U.S. 159, 71 S.Ct. 223. The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination "permits a person not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings." Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d at 669, citing Lefkowitz v. Turley 414 U.S. 70, 77, 94 S.C. 316, 322 (1973). As EPSTEIN is here, "the claimant must be `confronted by substantial and 'real,' and not merely trifling or imaginary, hazards of incrimination."' generally, United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 + +U.S. 115, 128, 100 S.Ct. 948, 956, 63 L.Ed.2d 250 (1980)). See also, United States v. Neff, 615 F.2d 1235, 1239 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 925, 100 S.Ct. 3018, 65 L.Ed.2d 1117 (1980)(Information is protected by the privilege not only if it would support a criminal conviction, but even if “the responses would merely ‘provide a lead or clue’ to evidence having a tendency to incriminate.”). EPSTEIN falls under each of the above category of cases. + +The United States Supreme Court has made clear that the scope of the Fifth Amendment Privilege also encompasses the circumstance where “the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena (or production request) has a compelled testimonial aspect.” United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000); see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976). In explaining the application of the privilege, the Supreme Court stated: + +We have held that “the act of production” itself may implicitly communicate “statements of fact.” By “producing documents in compliance with a subpoena, the witness would admit that the papers existed, were in his possession or control, and were authentic.” Moreover, as was true in this case, when the custodian of documents responds to a subpoena, he may be compelled to take the witness stand and answer questions designed to determine whether he has produced everything demanded by the subpoena. The answers to those questions, as well as the act of production itself, may certainly communicate information about the existence, custody, and authenticity of the documents. Whether the constitutional privilege protects the answers to such questions, or protects the act of production itself, is a question that is distinct from the question whether the unprotected contents of the documents themselves are incriminating. + +“The issue presented in those cases was whether the act of producing subpoenaed documents, not itself the making of a statement, might nonetheless have some protected testimonial aspects. The Court concluded that the act of production could constitute protected testimonial communication because it might entail implicit statements of fact: by producing documents in compliance with a subpoena, the witness would admit that the papers existed, were in his possession or control, and were authentic. United States v. Doe, 465 U.S., at 613, and n. 11, 104 S.Ct. 1237; Fisher, 425 U.S., at 409-410, 96 S.Ct. 1569; *id.*, at 428, 432, 96 S.Ct. 1569 (concurring opinions). See Braswell v. United States, [487 U.S.] at 104, 108 S.Ct. 2284; [*id.*] at 122, 108 S.Ct. 2284 (dissenting opinion). Thus, the Court made clear that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination applies to acts + +that imply assertions of fact."... An examination of the Court's application of these principles in other cases indicates the Court's recognition that, in order to be testimonial, an accused's communication must itself, explicitly or implicitly, relate a factual assertion or disclose information. Only then is a person compelled to be a 'witness' against himself." Doe v. United States. 487 U.S., at 209-210. 108 S.Ct. 2341 (footnote omitted). + +Finally, the phrase "in any criminal case" in the text of the Fifth Amendment might have been read to limit its coverage to compelled testimony that is used against the defendant in the trial itself. It has, however, long been settled that its protection encompasses compelled statements that lead to the discovery of incriminating evidence even though the statements themselves are not incriminating and are not introduced into evidence. Thus, a half century ago we held that a trial judge had erroneously rejected a defendant's claim of privilege on the ground that his answer to the pending question would not itself constitute evidence of the charged offense. As we explained: + +"The privilege afforded not only extends to answers that would in themselves support a conviction under a federal criminal statute but likewise embraces those which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a federal crime." Hoffman v. United States. 341 U.S. 479. 486, 71 S.Ct. 814, 95 L.Ed. 1118 (19511. + +Compelled testimony that communicates information that may "lead to incriminating evidence" is privileged even if the information itself is not inculpatory. Doe v. United States. 487 U.S. 201. 208. n. 6, 108 S.Ct. 2341, 101 L.Ed.2d 184 (19881 It's the Fifth Amendment's protection against the prosecutor's use of incriminating information derived directly or indirectly from the compelled testimony of the respondent that is of primary relevance in this case. + +The privilege against self-incrimination may be asserted during discovery when a litigant has "reasonable grounds to believe that the response would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against a litigant." A witness, including a civil defendant, is entitled to invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege whenever there is a realistic possibility that the answer to a question could be used in anyway to convict the witness of a crime or could aid in the development of other incriminating evidence that can be used at trial. Id• Pillsbury Company + +v. Conbov, 495 U.S. 248, 103 S.Ct. 608 (1983). 5te also, Hubbell, supra, as to what is encompassed by the phrase "in any criminal case" contained in the Fifth Amendment. + +As noted, the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is broad. Hoffman; In re Financial Svcs supra. To deny a witness the right to invoke the privilege, the judge must be perfectly clear, from a careful consideration of all the circumstances in the case, that the witness is mistaken, and that the answers cannot possibly have such tendency to incriminate. gI at 488, 399. Recognizing the breadth and magnitude of this constitutional privilege, the United States Supreme Court in discussing how a court is to analyze the application of the privilege stated — + +... It is for the court to say whether his silence is justified, Rogers v. United States 1951, 340 U.S. 367, 71 S.Ct. 438, and to require him to answer if 'it clearly appears to the court that he is mistaken.' Temple v. Commonwealth, 1880, 75 Va. 892, 899. However, if the witness, upon interposing his claim, were required to prove the hazard in the sense in which a claim is usually required to be established in court, he would be compelled to surrender the very protection which the privilege is designed to guarantee. To sustain the privilege, it need only be evident from the implications of the question, in the setting in which it is asked, that a responsive answer to the question or an explanation of why it cannot be answered might be dangerous because injurious disclosure could result. The trial judge in appraising the claim 'must be governed as much by his personal perception of the peculiarities of the case as by the facts actually in evidence.' + +Hoffman supra at 486-487. + +Hoffman and its progeny establish that "in view of the liberal construction of the provision [protecting against self-incrimination], after a witness has asserted the privilege, he should be compelled to provide the requested information only if it "clearly appears" to the court that the witness was mistaken in his invocation of the privilege." (Emphasis added). In re Financial Svcs.,supra at 399, Sgr ci Hoffman at 486. + +In the instant case, the privilege applies as Defendant EPSTEIN "has reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer." The risk of incrimination resulting from being subject to discovery or to testify in his own defense while the NPA exists is "substantial and real" and "not trifling or imaginary haphazards of communication." See generally In re Financial Svcs., supra at 400. Based on the nature of Plaintiff's claims, along with the ongoing scrutiny of the USA() in the criminal matters, EPSTEIN has "reasonable grounds to believe that his responses to the discovery would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against him. Finally, in order to preserve the privilege, the privilege must be asserted or one risks the loss or waiver of this liberty ensuring protection. See generally, U.S. v 846 F.2d 678, 690 (11th Cir. 1988)("First, it ignores the settled principle which requires a witness to assert his Fifth Amendment rights. A witness who testifies at any proceeding, instead of asserting his Fifth Amendment rights, loses the privilege. ... A civil deponent cannot choose to answer questions with the expectation of later asserting the Fifth Amendment."). + +Also applicable in upholding the assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege is the guarantee of effective assistance of counsel by the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. See Yarborough v. Gentry, 124 S.Ct. 1, 540 U.S. 1, 157 L.Ed.2d 1 (2003)(Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants effective assistance of counsel.), on remand 381 F.3d 1219. The United States Constitutional guarantees are applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. Obviously, EPSTEIN's assertion of his constitutional privileges and protections is on the advice of counsel. Again, EPSTEIN continues to face criminal prosecution by the USAO until the expiration of the NPA; under the constitutional guarantee of effective assistance of + +counsel, he is entitled to follow the recommended advice of his criminal defense attorney. See Goldberger Affidavit attached hereto. + +EPSTEIN's invocation of his constitutional protections of the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments must be upheld for the reasons set forth herein; otherwise such constitutional protections would be rendered meaningless. Already and recently, Defendant EPSTEIN in his Response and Objections to discovery, attached hereto as Exhibit "C", has been required to assert, on advice of counsel, his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, along with his constitutional rights afforded under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. Thus, EPSTEIN's entitlement to a stay is ripe for determination. + +Based upon the foregoing, a stay is warranted in this action as the Defendant is being forced to choose between the assertion of his Fifth Amendment right or losing this case by judgment (summary or otherwise) or waiver of his 5th Amendment right and face potential criminal prosecution. + +By: ROBERT D. CRITTO , JR., ESQ. + +# Certificate of Service + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 25th day of March, 2009. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ahorowitzehermanlaw.com Iriveraahermanlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jaqesoebellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()*(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743998/EFTA02743998.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743998/EFTA02743998.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b170c8743f12c92d29cf73bfcd813abd95289eb0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743998/EFTA02743998.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,716 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02743998.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 15, + "chars": 27357, + "elapsed_seconds": 10.61, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 406.370849609375, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 406.370849609375, + 115.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 115.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion To Stay And Or Continue Action For Time Certain Based On \nParallel Civil And Criminal Proceedings With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 67.32000000000001, + 297.27 + ], + [ + 535.6168823242188, + 297.27 + ], + [ + 535.6168823242188, + 324.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 67.32000000000001, + 324.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 475.4699999999999 + ], + [ + 355.1458740234375, + 475.4699999999999 + ], + [ + 355.1458740234375, + 490.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 490.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. THE NPA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.204, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 349.68499755859375, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 349.68499755859375, + 110.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 255.204, + 110.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Hi. Justice Requires The Entry of A Stay Because Defendant Is Being \nForced To Choose Between Waiving His 5fil Amendment Privilege Or Risk \nLosing This Civil Case And Forfeiting Other Constitutional Guarantees Of \nDue Process And Effective Assistance Of Counsel", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.384, + 481.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 499.5367126464844, + 481.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 499.5367126464844, + 540.1125030517578 + ], + [ + 111.384, + 540.1125030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. Application of the 5th Amendment", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 411.26400000000007, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 411.26400000000007, + 414.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 414.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 239.904, + 495.72 + ], + [ + 364.4913635253906, + 495.72 + ], + [ + 364.4913635253906, + 511.92352294921875 + ], + [ + 239.904, + 511.92352294921875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 68 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 76 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02743998" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744013/EFTA02744013.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744013/EFTA02744013.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..592d5b3eb1e794459a3c3cf1f0e3b824909b1ebf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744013/EFTA02744013.md @@ -0,0 +1,81 @@ +C + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRAa + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 3'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES + +Plaintiff, JANE DOE 3, by and through their undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 33, hereby responds to Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff as follows: + +# General Oblections + +1. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that the Interrogatories call for the disclosure of information protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product doctrine, or other applicable privilege or immunity, whether created by statute or common law. Plaintiff claims such privileges and protectiOns to the extent implicated by each Interrogatory, and excludes privileged and protected information from any responses to Defendant's discovery. Any disclosure is inadvertent and is not intended to waive those privileges or protections, which are specifically reserved. + +2. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that same are vague, ambiguous, Incomprehensible and/or overly broad. + +.Doe \$10.3 v. Epstein Page 13 + +C C + +your current age. Describe the lewd or lascivious exhibition, the date and whether you received money or other consideration from the person + +Answer: + +Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory as vague, overly broad, unduly burdensome, harassing, and not reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Moreover, this interrogatory is outrageous, offensive and apparently posed for the purpose of intimidating the victim. Fed.R.Evid. 412 makes any answer to this interrogatory inadmissible, and nothing In the answer could plausibly lead to discovery of admissible evidence. + +- 22. List in detail all discussions/interviews which you had with any representative from FBI, U.S. Attorneys' Office, State Attorneys' Office (Palm Beach County), Palm Beach Sheriffs Office and Palm Beach Police Department regarding your meetings with Mr. Epstein. Include dates, who was present, the details of what was discussed, whether a court reporter was present and whether a taped statement was taken or whether you provided a written statement. + +Answer: + +Plaintiff met with the Palm Beach Police Department in 2007. She believes that she provided them with a written statement, and that they also tape recorded her interview. + +Plaintiff also spoke with FBI agents in 2007 investigating the case on 2-3 occasions, including one meeting in person. Plaintiff does not believe that the statement was recorded. + +- 23. State the names, addresses, ages and phone numbers of all females whom you claim were brought by you to Mr. Epstein's home to give him a massage. As to each female, state the amount of money you claim you were paid to bring each female. + +Answer: + +(setne b ee 4) laintiff was not paid by the Defendant of bringing.. 6TAne iNoe- + +SMIS IMIS (cSaneINse Plaintiff was paid \$1 0 for bringing (rose Doe a) + +VERIFICATION + +Jane Doe 3 being duly sworn, deposes and says that the foregoing answers to interrogatories are true and correct to the best of her knowledge, information and belief. + +Jane Doe 3 + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +) +) +) + +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +ss +) + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 19 day of January, 2009 by Jane Doe 3, who is personally known to me or has produced the following identification rivers kicewa: which is current or has been issued within the past five years and bears a serial or other identifying number. + +Elizabeth Gutierrez +Print Name + +Elizabeth Gutierrez +Signature + +NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF FLORIDA +Commission Number: +My commission expires: +(Notarial Seal) + +![](_page_2_Picture_25.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744013/EFTA02744013.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744013/EFTA02744013.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..50fa4a84be457222f369d276ce248f62ee0edb3d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744013/EFTA02744013.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,256 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744013.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3812, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.04, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_2_Picture_25.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 216.239990234375, + 107.863 + ], + [ + 407.03200000000004, + 107.863 + ], + [ + 407.03200000000004, + 134.427001953125 + ], + [ + 216.239990234375, + 134.427001953125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 3'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST \nINTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 138.4499969482422, + 319.53400000000005 + ], + [ + 477.527, + 319.53400000000005 + ], + [ + 477.527, + 346.3070373535156 + ], + [ + 138.4499969482422, + 346.3070373535156 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "General Oblections", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.78199999999998, + 433.7802734375 + ], + [ + 359.05712890625, + 433.7802734375 + ], + [ + 359.05712890625, + 447.5470275878906 + ], + [ + 253.78199999999998, + 447.5470275878906 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EXHIBIT \"A\"", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 265.42900000000003, + 725.814697265625 + ], + [ + 351.3482666015625, + 725.814697265625 + ], + [ + 351.3482666015625, + 741.6429595947266 + ], + [ + 265.42900000000003, + 741.6429595947266 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VERIFICATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 277.68899999999996, + 111.91800000000002 + ], + [ + 359.21799999999996, + 111.91800000000002 + ], + [ + 359.21799999999996, + 125.705 + ], + [ + 277.68899999999996, + 125.705 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744013" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744013/_page_2_Picture_25.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744013/_page_2_Picture_25.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b245fab4d327a77dd26e540447760f1e5979d375 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744013/_page_2_Picture_25.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4bd8a9b758a92f755b1b34ad6f0fbac28e6a434164bf460fe8a35a6f3123df7c +size 9718 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744016/EFTA02744016.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744016/EFTA02744016.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..045c131b29f00f96994265d1fd290931854142fb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744016/EFTA02744016.md @@ -0,0 +1,75 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +11+1 DOCKET + +# NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION VIA VIDEO + +PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the undersigned attorney will take the deposition via video of: + +# DEPONENT DATE & TIME LOCATION OF DEPOSITION + +Jane Doe #3 Tuesday, U.S. Legal Support 18205 Biscayne Boulevard 9:00 a.m. Suite 300 + +do Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. April 14, 2008 444 West Railroad Avenue Suite 2218 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Miami, FL 33160 Phone: 561 835-0220 + +upon oral examination, before U.S. Legal Support, a Notary Public, or any other officer authorized by law to take depositions in the State of Florida. The oral examination is being taken for the purpose of discovery, for use at trial, or for Bch other purposes as are permitted under the applicable Statutes of Rules of Court. + +Robert D Critton, Jr. Attome or Defendant Epstein + +### Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was served this owon all counsel of record identified on the following Service by fax an U.S. Mail, this ilo—clay of March 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Jack Alan Goldberger + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein +Page 2 + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[iagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:iagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: \_\_\_\_\_ +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. +Florida Bar No. 224162 +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax + +*(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +Courtesy Copy: U.S. Legal \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744016/EFTA02744016.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744016/EFTA02744016.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..479d485ad7ab5b2da148d0c5d9f3e1e3c7e94edf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744016/EFTA02744016.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,227 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744016.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2279, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.64, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.80700000000002, + 68.935 + ], + [ + 419.01513671875, + 68.935 + ], + [ + 419.01513671875, + 97.750244140625 + ], + [ + 207.80700000000002, + 97.750244140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION VIA VIDEO", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 178.99599999999998, + 279.79499999999996 + ], + [ + 443.92254638671875, + 279.79499999999996 + ], + [ + 443.92254638671875, + 295.8245849609375 + ], + [ + 178.99599999999998, + 295.8245849609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 64.978, + 347.919 + ], + [ + 137.312, + 347.919 + ], + [ + 137.312, + 360.895 + ], + [ + 64.978, + 360.895 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEPONENT DATE & TIME LOCATION OF DEPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.1003189086914, + 351.16299999999995 + ], + [ + 529.5939331054688, + 351.16299999999995 + ], + [ + 529.5939331054688, + 365.9803466796875 + ], + [ + 69.1003189086914, + 365.9803466796875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 258.686, + 349.541 + ], + [ + 342.054, + 349.541 + ], + [ + 342.054, + 362.517 + ], + [ + 258.686, + 362.517 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.813, + 599.3290000000001 + ], + [ + 372.3151550292969, + 599.3290000000001 + ], + [ + 372.3151550292969, + 613.4690856933594 + ], + [ + 245.813, + 613.4690856933594 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 252 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744016" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744018/EFTA02744018.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744018/EFTA02744018.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e38fd221a780054ff2cd12b246684a67790847ef --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744018/EFTA02744018.md @@ -0,0 +1,91 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +#### MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND TO QUASH SUBPOENA FOR DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO. 3, MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY, AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT + +Non-party witness, Jane Doe No. 3, by and through undersigned counsel, files this Motion for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe No. 3, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Memorandum of Law in Support, as follows: + +# I. Introduction + +This is one of six (6) related cases in this Court against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, each alleging that the Defendant sexually assaulted the plaintiff when she was a minor. This Motion is prompted by the Defendant's efforts to take the deposition of Jane Doe No. 3 as a witness in this case. Defendant, however, does not at this time seek to take Jane Doe No. 3's deposition in her own case. The Defendant apparently intends to take Jane Doe No. 3's deposition at least twice, and as discussed below, most likely three times. + +Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 3 alleges that she is a victim of sexual assault by Defendant Epstein. To compel her to sit for deposition by Epstein's attorney more than once would be unduly traumatizing, burdensome, annoying, harassing and, most importantly, unnecessary. There is no conceivable good faith basis for Defendant's attorney to require that Jane Doe No. 3's deposition to be taken more than once. + +Accordingly, this Motion seeks to limit Defendant's counsel to a single deposition of Jane Doe No. 3, encompassing her claims as a party in her own case and as a witness in any other case pending in this Court against Defendant Epstein alleging sexual misconduct. As a corollary to this relief, Plaintiff moves for consolidation of the six (6) related cases for purposes of pretrial discovery pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 42(a). + +## H. Background and Relevant Facts + +The cases Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein, case no. 08-CV-80119-Marra, Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein, case no. 08-CV-80232- Marra, Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein, 08-CV-80380- MARRa, Jane Doe No. 5 v. Epstein case no. 08-CV-80387- Marraa, Jane Doe No. 6 v. Epstein, case no. -CV-80994- Mara and Jane Doe No. 7 v. Epstein case no. 08- 80993-CIV- Marra, are related cases in this Court.' These cases have been treated jointly for purposes of pretrial scheduling and deadlines. The Court entered a single Order Setting Trial and Discovery Deadlines et al., dated September 29, 2008, in the four cases, Jane Does 2-5 v. Epstein (DE 45). The Jane Doe No. 6 and Jane Doe No. 7 cases, which were filed later, were likewise treated jointly and a single Order Setting Trial Date and Discovery Deadlines et al. entered for those cases dated December 18, 2008. + +On September 25, 2008, the parties filed a single Joint Scheduling and Discovery Report in the four cases, Jane Doe Nos. 2-5. (DE 44). In this Report, the Plaintiff takes the position that it would be in the interests of judicial economy and efficiency to consolidate these cases at least for + +' In all of the cases Jane Doe Nos. 2-7 v. Epstein, the Plaintiffs are represented by the same counsel. There are other similar cases pending in this Court and in state court against Defendant Epstein in + +discovery purposes. (Joint Report, p. 5, §II(D)). The Defendant, however, states in this Report his position in opposition to consolidation for any purpose. (14.). + +All of the cases Jane Doe Nos. 2-7 v. Epstein allege sexual assaults by Defendant Epstein. They all make identical claims for relief for Sexual Assault and Battery (Count I); Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (Count II); and Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). Most importantly for present purposes, they all allege the same plan and scheme by Defendant Epstein to lure underage girls to his Palm Beach mansion for the purpose of giving a massage, and that he sexually molested them during the course of this massage. (See, tg,, Jane Doe No. 3 Second Amended Complaint III 7-11- Jane Doe No. 4, Second Amended Complaint, IN 8-12). + +Jane Doe No. 3 in discovery responses served on January 26, 2009 disclosed that she brought three other girls to Epstein's mansion for the purpose giving him a massage. These other girls include Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 2 and Jane Doe. No. 4. see Plaintiff Jane Doe 3's Answers to Interrogatories, no. 23, attached hereto as Exhibit "A"). + +On March 16, 2009, Defendant's counsel served a Notice of Taking Deposition of Jane Doe No. 3 in the Jane Doe No. 2 case (A copy of this Notice is attached hereto as Exhibit B).2 By letters dated March 3, 2009 and March 20, 2009, Plaintiff's counsel advised Defendant's counsel that Plaintiffs oppose the taking of their depositions more than once, and insisted that each Plaintiff's deposition be noticed in her own case as well as any other case in which she is a witness. Defendant's counsel has to date failed to respond to this correspondence, or otherwise provide any reason why he should be allowed to take a victim's deposition more than once. Absent a protective + +which the plaintiffs are represented by different counsel. + +2 The deposition was unilaterally scheduled for April 14, 2009. + +order or other relief, Defendant's counsel could take Jane Doe No. 3's deposition three times, once in her own case and as a witness in both the Jane Doe No. 2 and Jane Doe No. 4 cases. Exh. + +# III. Argument + +## A. A PLAINTIFF IN THESE CASES SHOULD NOT BE REOUIRED TO APPEAR FOR DEPOSITION MORE THAN ONCE + +The district court has discretion to fashion a protective order under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c). Farnsworth v. Procter & Gamble Co. 758 F.2d 1545 (11th Cir. 1985). This discretion "does not depend upon a legal privilege." Id.; Auto Owners Ins. Co. v. Southeast Floating Docks, Inc. 231 F.R.D. 426, 429-30 (M.D.Fla. 2005). Under Rule 26(c), "the Court may, for good cause, issue an order to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression or undue burden or expense." + +The federal rules expressly recognize that a party should not without cause be deposed more than once. Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(a)(2)(B). "[I]t is clear that the prohibition against deposing a second witness without leave of court exists to protect the witness. Indeed, cases construing Rule 30(a)(2)(B) concern protection of the deponent from, for example, undue burden or harassment." Beaulieu v. Bd. of Trustees 2007 WL 4468704 (N.D. Fla. 2007). See also Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(2)(C)(i) (directing the court to limit the frequency or extent of discovery otherwise allowed under the rules where "the discovery sought is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or can be obtained from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive"). Additionally, Fed.R.Civ.P. 45(c) provides that the party or attorney issuing a subpoena must take reasonable steps to avoid imposing an undue burden on the deponent, and that the Court may impose an appropriate sanction, including reasonable attorneys' fees, if the party or attorney fails to comply. + +In the present cases, where sexual misconduct is at issue, Jane Doe No. 3 will be unduly burdened by one or more separate depositions of her as a witness, to be followed by her deposition as a party. Miscellaneous Docket Matter #1 v. Miscellaneous Docket Matter #2, 197 F.3d 922, 925 (8th Cir. 1999) (case where sexual matters at issue, holding that district court was warranted in quashing subpoena of witness' second deposition to protect witness from embarrassment and undue burden). + +Defendant's counsel seeks to circumvent these rules by noticing Jane Doe No. 3's deposition first as a witness in the Jane Doe No. 2 case, apparently to be followed by her depositions in her own case and the Jane Doe No. 7 case. Such multiple depositions of Jane Doe No. 3 would be contrary to judicial economy and efficiency, and would serve only to unduly harass, annoy and burden her. Defendant's counsel has offered no reason whatsoever why Jane Doe No. 3's deposition should not be taken just once, encompassing her knowledge of facts and information relevant to all three related cases. It is inconceivable that Defendant's counsel would be prejudiced if Jane Doe No. 3 were to sit for deposition just once. + +Accordingly, good cause exists for a protective order preventing Defendant from taking Jane Doe No. 3's deposition piecemeal in separate cases, and requiring that the Plaintiffs deposition be taken just once, covering all of the related cases against Epstein. + +#### B. THESE RELATED CASES SHOULD BE CONSOLIDATED FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY + +As a corollary to the protective order sought by Jane Doe No. 3, the problem of multiple depositions of any Plaintiff could be avoided by consolidating the related cases for purposes of pretrial discovery pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 42(a). Consolidation may be appropriate where "actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact", and in such cases the court is authorized to issue "orders to avoid unnecessary cost or delay." Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(aX3). "Consolidation of actions in their pretrial stage, under many circumstances, will be a desirable administrative technique and is within the power of the Court." , Federal Practice & Procedure §2382 (2008). See also v. Eagle Building Technologies 209 F.R.C. 499, 501 (S.D. Fla. 2002) (noting that Court has broad discretion under Rule 42(a) to consolidate cases within its district). "In deciding whether to consolidate actions, we have instructed that district courts should consider whether doing so could lead to prejudice or confusion." Ramsay v. Broward County Sheriff's Office, 2008 WL 5237162 \*3 (11th Cir. 2008). + +The common and overlapping issues in this case, both factual and legal, are patent and obvious. Here, Plaintiff moves for limited consolidation, for purposes of pretrial discovery only. Such a consolidation is common and appropriate to further the interests of judicial economy and efficiency. See, e.g., In re Enron Corp. Securities Litigation, 206 F.R.P. 427, 438 (S.D. Tex. 2002). At the same time, there is no conceivable prejudice or confusion that would result from consolidation for purposes of pretrial discovery. To the contrary, consolidation will avoid unnecessary prejudice and confusion. For example, with regard to the instant Motion, consolidation for purposes of discovery would make it clear that each party/witness can only be deposed once, covering all issues in the related cases. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests (i) a protective order pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c) requiring that the deposition of Jane Doe No. 3 be taken no more than once, for purposes of all of the related case to which her testimony may be relevant; (ii) an order pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 45 quashing the unilateral nonparty subpoena for deposition of Jane Doe No. 3 in this case; (iii) an order pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 42(a) consolidating the Jane Doe Nos. 2-7 v. Epstein cases for purposes of pretrial discovery; and (iv) such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +Dated: March 26.2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Smart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +# CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO 7.1( k )i3) + +Counsel for Plaintiff has made reasonable efforts to confer with counsel for Defendant, by letters dated March 3, 2009 and March 20, 2009 and by telephone, seeking in good faith to resolve or narrow the issues raised in the Motion, but Defendant's counsel failed to respond to Plaintiffs letters, and Plaintiffs counsel has been unable to resolve this dispute. + +s/ Stuart S. Mennelstein + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on March 26, 2009, 1 electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +# SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bc1claw.com + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744018/EFTA02744018.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744018/EFTA02744018.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..70cefdc8bd5086075b8a0297a30a19767f7693f1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744018/EFTA02744018.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,631 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744018.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 12786, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.21, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA \nCASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.66, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 129.363037109375 + ], + [ + 186.66, + 129.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND TO QUASH \nSUBPOENA FOR DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO. 3, MOTION \nTO CONSOLIDATE CASES FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY, \nAND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.744, + 281.88 + ], + [ + 486.44183349609375, + 281.88 + ], + [ + 486.44183349609375, + 338.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 129.744, + 338.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 435.7800000000001 + ], + [ + 359.68609619140625, + 435.7800000000001 + ], + [ + 359.68609619140625, + 450.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 450.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "H. Background and Relevant Facts", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 281.88 + ], + [ + 409.5545349121094, + 281.88 + ], + [ + 409.5545349121094, + 296.6835632324219 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 296.6835632324219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. Argument", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 258.264, + 170.1 + ], + [ + 353.11187744140625, + 170.1 + ], + [ + 353.11187744140625, + 185.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 258.264, + 185.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. A PLAINTIFF IN THESE CASES SHOULD NOT BE \nREOUIRED TO APPEAR FOR DEPOSITION MORE THAN ONCE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.372, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 506.6518859863281, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 506.6518859863281, + 227.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 141.372, + 227.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. THESE RELATED CASES SHOULD BE \nCONSOLIDATED FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 178.09199999999998, + 532.98 + ], + [ + 469.61602783203125, + 532.98 + ], + [ + 469.61602783203125, + 562.1835174560547 + ], + [ + 178.09199999999998, + 562.1835174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO 7.1( k )i3)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.06, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 456.49444580078125, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 456.49444580078125, + 101.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 156.06, + 101.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 100.863037109375 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 100.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.06, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 129.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 156.06, + 129.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 18 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744018" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744028/EFTA02744028.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744028/EFTA02744028.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d197be4c61579c83eec9d01a0c040d9bc3cb397f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744028/EFTA02744028.md @@ -0,0 +1,314 @@ +Westlaw. + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 1 + +District Court of Appeal of Florida, +Fifth District. +Kimberly BALAS and Teresa Shumate, Petitioners, +v. +Marjorie A. RUZZO, and Exec., Inc., etc., Re- +spondents. +No. 97-82. + +307Ak31 k. Relevancy and Materiality. +Most Cited Cases +Party may be permitted to discover evidence that +would be inadmissible at trial, if it would lead to +discovery of relevant evidence. West's F.S.A. RCP +Rule 1.280(b)(1). + +**[3] Pretrial Procedure 307A ✉36.1** + +As Modified on Grant of Clarification Jan. 2, 1998. +rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. +Plaintiffs brought action against alleged house of 1998). +prostitution for, inter alia, coercion of prostitution. +The Circuit Court, Brevard County, █ Pound, +J., granted in part defendants' motion to compel dis- +covery. Plaintiffs filed petition for writ of certior- +ari. The District Court of Appeal, W. Sharp, J., held +that evidence of plaintiffs' past prostitution and +their revenues relating to such activities was dis- +coverable. + +307A Pretrial Procedure +307AII Depositions and Discovery +307AII(A) Discovery in General +307Ak36 Particular Subjects of Disclos- ure +307Ak36.1 k. In General. Most Cited + +Petition denied. +Harris, J., concurred specially and filed opinion. + +West Headnotes + +**[1] Pretrial Procedure 307A ✉31** +307A Pretrial Procedure +307AII Depositions and Discovery +307AII(A) Discovery in General +307Ak31 k. Relevancy and Materiality. + +Cases +Evidence of plaintiffs' past prostitution and their +revenues relating to such activities, including activ- +ities with alleged house of prostitution against +which they had filed suit, was discoverable, where +plaintiffs brought action not only for coercion of +prostitution, but also for battery, false imprison- +ment, invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of +emotional distress, violation of their civil rights, +and racketeering. Violent Crime Control and Law +Enforcement Act of 1994, § 40302, 42 U.S.C.A. § +13981; West's F.S.A. §§ 772.014, 796.09; West's +F.S.A. RCP Rule 1.280(b)(1). +\*1076 Richard E. █ and Heather Fisher Lind- +say, of Spriggs & █ Tallahassee, for Peti- +tioners. + +Most Cited Cases +Discovery in civil cases must be relevant to subject +matter of case and must be admissible or reason- +ably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. +West's F.S.A. RCP Rule 1.280(b)(1). + +Mark S. Peters of Amari, Theriac & Eisenmenger, +P.A., Cocoa, for Respondents. + +W. SHARP, Judge. + +**[2] Pretrial Procedure 307A ✉31** + +Balas and Shumate petition this court for a writ of +certiorari to review certain portions of the lower +court's order which granted, in part, a motion to +compel discovery filed by respondents Ruzzo and +Exec., Inc. Petitioners argue that those portions de- +part from the essential requirements of law and will +cause them irreparable harm because they will be + +307A Pretrial Procedure +307AII Depositions and Discovery +307AII(A) Discovery in General + +EXHIBIT "A" + +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076)compelled to disclose intimate details of their sexual history. We decline to issue the writ of certiorari. + +Balas and Shumate filed suit against Ruzzo and Exec, Inc., doing business as "The Boardroom." According to Balas and Shumate, The Boardroom operates ostensibly as **\*1077** a leisure spa but actually is a house of prostitution. Balas worked at The Boardroom from December 1993 until February 1996; Shumate worked there from October 1992 until March 1996. Ruzzo, the sole officer and shareholder of Exec, Inc., collected about fifty to sixty percent of each employees' earnings from performing sexual acts. + +According to Balas and Shumate, Ruzzo exerted mental and emotional control over her employees and thus she was able to exploit them as prostitutes. Ruzzo required her employees to pay her substantial sums of money to attend "metaphysical workshops" conducted by Ruzzo or persons associated with her. At the work place, the employees were required to participate in religious and quasi-religious "circles," rituals and incantations. These practices were allegedly designed to break down the personalities of the women who worked for Ruzzo and to ██████████ dependency and loyalty to herself. At one time when the earnings of a new employee were missing and believed to be stolen, Ruzzo required that the petitioners be strip searched and body cavity searched. Ruzzo caused the petitioners to believe their continued employment was dependent on their submission to these searches and that they might be arrested on felony charges if they refused to submit to the searches. + +Balas and Shumate's second amended complaint against Ruzzo contains seven counts. Count I is an action for coercion of prostitution pursuant to section 796.09, Florida Statutes. Petitioners allege the requirement that they perform sexual acts to retain their employment constitutes inducement and coercion to engage in prostitution. Count II is a claim for battery for the unwanted and offensive touching of the petitioners' bodies. Count III is a claim for false imprisonment for physically confining the pe- + +titioners against their will. Count IV alleges that respondents' actions constituted an invasion of petitioners' privacy. Count V is a claim for the intentional infliction of emotional distress. Count VI alleges a civil rights action-that respondents have violated petitioners' right to be free from crimes of violence motivated by gender within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. section 13981. Finally, count VII seeks civil remedies for criminal practices or racketeering pursuant to section 772.104, Florida Statutes. The petitioners claim that they suffered emotional pain, anguish, humiliation, insult, indignity, loss of self-esteem, inconvenience, hurt and emotional distress. They seek an award of general and punitive damages, among other relief. + +The discovery to which the petitioners are being required to respond is as follows: + +#### I. + +**Interrogatory 8:** Please advise how long have you been engaged in prostitution.... + +#### II. + +**Interrogatory 22:** State with specificity the manner in which the acts as described in your Complaint have materially affected how you interact with your husband, boyfriend, fiancée' [sic] or any other individual of the opposite sex. + +#### III. + +**Request for Production 30:** A copy of any photographs, movies or videotapes in which you performed sexual acts and/or simulated sexual acts in exchange for money or other consideration. + +#### IV. + +**Interrogatory 16:** Please list the names, addresses, telephone numbers and rates of pay for all employers for which you worked, including the + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 3 + +nature of the work, during the five years immediately preceding the date of employment with the Boardroom and from the date of your termination with the Boardroom to the present, providing the names of your immediate supervisors at each place of employment and the reason for your leaving each place of employment. + +V. + +**Interrogatory 26:** Please state your total income while employed at the Boardroom, and state the source of that income including any income from other employment or \*1078 income earned from prostitution other than at the Boardroom. + +VI. + +**Request for Production 34:** Business records from any selfemployment or owned business ventures in the last 5 years, including any records or list of customers, "special customer lists" or "sugar daddy's list." + +[1][2] Discovery in civil cases must be relevant to the subject matter of the case and must be admissible or reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. *See Allstate Insurance Co. v. Langston*, 655 So.2d 91 (Fla.1995); *Amente v. [REDACTED]*, 653 So.2d 1030 (Fla.1995); [REDACTED] v. *Stardust Cruisers, Inc.*, 690 So.2d 743 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). The concept of relevancy is broader in the discovery context than in the trial context and a party may be permitted to discover evidence that would be inadmissible at trial, if it would lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. *Allstate; Amente*. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(1) delineates the proper scope of discovery: + +*In General.* Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the subject matter of the pending action, whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or the claim or defense of any other party, including the existence, description, + +nature, custody, condition, and location of any books, documents, or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons having knowledge of any discoverable matter. It is not ground for objection that the information sought will be inadmissible at the trial if the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +Nonetheless, the discovery of certain kinds of information may cause material injury of an irreparable nature. This includes the "cat-out-of-the-bag" material that could be used to injure another person or party outside the context of the litigation, material protected by privilege, trade secrets or work product. Discovery was never intended to be used as a tactical tool to harass, embarrass or annoy one's adversary. Rather, pretrial discovery was implemented to simplify the issues in a case, to eliminate the elements of surprise, to encourage the settlement of cases, to avoid the cost of litigation, and to achieve a balanced search for the truth to ensure a fair trial. *Elkins v. Syken*, 672 So.2d 517 (Fla.1996). + +Here the petitioners argue that the information sought to be discovered regarding prostitution and their sexual activities was propounded solely to embarrass them and to invade their right to privacy. The petitioners also claim that this information is privileged under section 796.09 and is not calculated to lead to evidence which would be admissible at trial. + +Section 796.09 provides a person with a civil cause of action for compensatory and punitive damages against anyone who coerces that person into prostitution, who coerces that person to remain in prostitution, or who uses coercion to collect or receive any part of that person's earnings derived from prostitution. In the course of litigation under this section, any transaction about which a plaintiff testifies or produces evidence does *not* subject the plaintiff to criminal prosecution or to any penalty or forfeiture. In addition, any testimony or evidence or any information produced by the plaintiff or wit- + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 4 + +ness for the plaintiffs cannot be used against the plaintiffs or witness in any other investigation or proceeding, except one for perjury. + +Section 796.09(5) specifically provides that it is *not* a defense that the plaintiff was paid or otherwise compensated for prostitution, that the plaintiff had engaged in prostitution prior to any involvement with the defendant or that the plaintiff made no attempt to escape from the defendant. Section 796.09(6) provides that convictions for prostitution or prostitution-related offenses are *inadmissible* for the purpose of attacking the plaintiffs' credibility. + +This legislation was the result of the Florida Supreme Court Gender Bias Study Commission, which conducted an extensive investigation of prostitution in this state. The Commission's activities included interviews with law enforcement and corrections personnel, \*1079 judges, public defenders, prosecutors, drug rehabilitation counselors, social workers, medical personnel, prostitutes, clients and pimps. The Commission found prostitution to be prevalent and uniform throughout the state and law enforcement largely unable to deter it under prevailing social attitudes and judicial practices. The Commission further found that prostitutes are often victims of economic, physical, and psychological coercion, that most persons do not chose to become prostitutes, but do so to survive, and that ninety percent of street prostitutes, both adult and children, are controlled by pimps who use a variety of coercive methods to maintain this control. The Commission determined that clients and pimps are rarely prosecuted and, when prosecuted, receive light sentences; whereas prostitutes, who are mainly females, are frequently prosecuted and receive harsher treatment in the courts. The Commission recommended changes in the methods of intervention in prostitution from punitive to therapeutic, changes in the law to require more equal treatment by the courts of the prostitute in relation to the client and the pimp and to lessen the incentive to traffic in human flesh by giving the prostitute access to the judicial system without first having to be + +arrested. + +Under section 796.09, the petitioners' prior involvement in prostitution and their earnings from prostitution would be irrelevant. Hence discovery should not be permitted because such information would not be admissible at trial nor would it be reasonably calculated to lead to evidence ultimately admissible at trial. Even though the scope of discovery is generally quite broad, section 796.09 is designed to encourage prostitutes to sue their pimps. Thus the usually broad scope of discovery may be constricted so that prostitutes will not be embarrassed, harassed or hindered in their actions. + +[3] Had the petitioners brought their lawsuit against Ruzzo and The Boardroom *only* under section 796.09, evidence of petitioners' past prostitution, including with the Boardroom, and their earnings relating to such activities, may not have been discoverable. However, the petitioners filed a multi-count complaint for compensatory and punitive damages, alleging numerous causes of action against the respondents. These other causes carry no such protection from discovery. Since the information sought by discovery may be relevant or may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in one or more of these *other* causes of action or to determination of damages, we cannot conclude that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law in granting this discovery. *See* [REDACTED] v. *TIB Bank of the Keys*, 687 So.2d 895 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (by alleging fraud as well as breach of contract, purchaser placed at issue her reliance on venders' assertions, the veracity of financial documents she submitted to the vender, and the state of her mental health, including memory problems she was experiencing at the time of the alleged tortious conduct, thus deposition questions concerning her state of mind were relevant). + +Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. + +THOMPSON, J., concurs. +HARRIS, J., concurs specially with opinion.HARRIS, Judge, concurring specially: + +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076)There is a temptation in cases such as this to inquire which, the pot or the kettle, is imbued with the darker hue. Indeed that may ultimately be the question uppermost in the jurors' minds. But the issue presently before us is simply whether the pot, in order to establish the parties' comparative complexion, may discover the historical condition and the inherent characteristics of the kettle. + +We are here involved with parties that the limited record before us indicates were co-conspirators in a joint effort to violate Florida's laws against prostitution. The defendants are the owner/operators of a "social club" whose primary service is prostitution; the plaintiffs are employees of the club who provide such services. The employees are suing the owner/operators for, among other counts, taking advantage of their vulnerabilities ("coercing" them to be prostitutes) through manipulation and exploitation. In order to prepare a defense to the action, defendants have filed certain interrogatories for the employees to answer. These interrogatories\*1080 request such information as how long the employees have been engaged in prostitution; how the employees have been affected by the defendants' conduct; copies of photographs, movies, and videotapes in which the employees have performed sexual acts or simulated sexual acts; the names of previous employers and previous rates of pay; and a statement of income received from defendants. These interrogatories survived the employees' objections. I agree certiorari should be denied. + +The employees' primary cause of action is based on section 796.09(1), Florida Statutes, which provides: + +(1) A person has a cause of action for compensatory and punitive damages against: + +(a) A person who coerces that person into prostitution; + +(b) A person who coerces that person to remain in prostitution, or + +(c) A person who uses coercion to collect or receive + +any part of that person's earnings derived from prostitution. + +The employees resist discovery of their past prostitution or their past or present earning experience on the basis of subparagraph 5 of section 796.09: + +(5) It does not constitute a defense to a complaint under this section that: + +a) The plaintiff was paid or otherwise compensated for acts of prostitution; + +b) The plaintiff engaged in acts of prostitution prior to any involvement with the defendant ... + +But the question before us is not whether prior acts of prostitution (or the receipts of earnings therefrom) which might be revealed by answering the interrogatories could be used as a defense to the complaint, but rather whether evidence of such conduct or such earnings would be relevant in determining whether the employees were, in fact, "coerced" into prostitution, into remaining prostitutes, or into sharing the proceeds of their services with defendants. The relevancy of this information depends, of course, on what constitutes coercion. + +If we apply the definition of "coercion" which is commonly accepted, then the relevancy of the requested information is apparent and this appeal has no merit at all. Webster defines "coercion" as: (1) to restrain or dominate by force, (2) to compel an act or choice, or (3) to enforce or bring about by force or threat. In sexual battery cases, the legislature has adopted the common meaning of the word "coercion" and has even placed limits on it. It has provided that consent will not be recognized if submission is *coerced* by threats of force or violence *if* the victim reasonably believes the perpetrator has the present ability to execute the threat.FN1 Consent also will not be recognized if submission is *coerced* by a threat of retaliation against the victim or another *if* the victim reasonably believes that the perpetrator has the ability to execute the threat in the future.FN2 And in sexual battery cases, the legislature has vitiated what might otherwise be con- + +© 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. + +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375.23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 + +(Cite as: 703 Sold 1076) + +sidered as consensual if one exploits a known physical or mental weakness of the victim to achieve his or her goal or takes advantage of one who is physically helpless or involuntarily intoxicated." Therefore, even in sexual battery cases, before coercion or exploitation will vitiate consent, the free will of the victim must be overcome by force or threat or some unfortunate circumstance suffered by the victim. + +> FNI. Section 794.011(4)(b), Florida Statutes. + +> FN2. Section 794.011(4)(c), Florida Statutes. + +FN3. Section 794.011(4)(a),(d),(e), and (I), Florida Statutes. + +But then we get to the definition of "coercion" contained in section 796.09(3): + +:3) As used in this section, the term "coercion" means any practice of dominion, restraint, or inducement for the purpose of or with the reasonably foreseeable effect of causing another person to engage in or remain in prostitution or to relinquish earnings derived from prostitution, and includes, but is not limited to: + +:a) Physical force or threats of physical force + +:b) Physical or mental torture. + +:c) Kidnapping. + +\*1081 (d) Blackmail. + +,'e) Extortion or claims of indebtedness. + +'5) Threats of legal complaint or report of delinquency. + +,'g) Threat to interfere with parental rights or responsibilities, whether by judicial or administrative action or otherwise. + +:h) Promise of legal benefit. + +:1) Promise of greater financial rewards. + +,j) 1 Promise of marriage. + +:k) Restraint of Speech or communications with others. + +',/ ) Exploitation of a condition of developmental disability, cognitive limitation, affective disorder, or substance dependency. + +1,m) Exploitation of victimization by sexual abuse. + +',n) Exploitation of pornographic performance. + +:0) Exploitation of human needs for food, shelter, safety, or affection. + +The definition urged by the employees herein is the "promise of a greater financial reward." Whether the requested information is relevant to the issue of coercion in this case will depend on what the legislature intended by subsection (I) in the meaning of "coercion." + +I agree with Judge Altenbemd's thoughtful analysis in State v. Brigham, 694 So.2d 793 (1997): + +There can be no dispute that the legislature's unusual definition of "percent" is not a common dictionary definition. This is perhaps an appropriate case in which to remind ourselves of Learned Hand's famous observation that a "mature and developed jurisprudence" does not "make a fortress out of the dictionary." + +But even so, one would expect some nexus between the commonly accepted meaning of a word and the definition of that word ascribed by the legislature. If, for example, the legislature defined "canine" as including cats, although one might, jurisprudentially speaking, expect to hear a meow emanate from a Great Dane, the courts should nevertheless closely examine the legislative history to see if that is really what the legislature intended. The court in Young v. O'Keefe, 246 Iowa 1182, 69 N.W.2d 534, 537 (1955). stated this principle as follows: "But + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 7 + +before a definition is construed so as to expand the meaning of a well-known word to include its antonym ..., the intention of the legislature to that effect must be clear." As Judge [REDACTED] observed in *Catron v. Roger Bohn, D.C., P.A.*, 580 So.2d 814, 818 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991): + +It is our primary duty to give effect to legislative intent and, if a literal interpretation of a statute leads to unreasonable results, then we should exercise our power to interpret reason and logic to it. + +\* \* \* \* \* + +Unfortunately, it is apparent that in enacting this legislation, the legislature has, without redefining the terms for the purposes of this legislation, often used terms with commonly accepted meanings for purposes at great variance from those commonly accepted meanings. + +In our case, the legislature did define the term for the purpose of the act. But because the term (coercion) as so defined can be interpreted two ways-one consistent with the commonly accepted meaning and one at variance-we should not accept the "antonym" unless such legislative intent is clear. A free will decision, even if based on a hope of financial gain, is the opposite of a coerced decision. + +The employees urge that the mere promise of a greater reward brings them within the act. But if the mere promise of a greater reward is sufficient to establish coercion, then anyone who makes a voluntary and reasoned exercise of free will motivated by the hope of economic gain has been coerced. This definition removes the element of compulsion implicit in the commonly accepted meaning of coercion and substitutes therefor the mere desire for financial gain. The employees herein assert that since they were offered "a greater financial reward" for providing the services performed by them through defendants' establishment, they were coerced into their prostitution activities. This equates the giving + +of an opportunity to make a decision with the coercion of that decision. But subsection (I) can also mean \*1082 that the promise of a greater reward is coercion *only if* such promised reward is sufficient to overcome one's natural revulsion to selling one's body for money. If there is no such revulsion, there can be no coercion. Becoming a prostitute only because one likes the hours and wages or "because it beats the heck out of working for a living" simply should not meet the test of section 796.09(1). + +At oral argument herein, it was suggested without contradiction, that at least one of the employees has a college degree and gave up a well-paying, legitimate job in order to engage in this profession for the greater reward. Section 796.09 does not appear to be a general prostitute's relief act. It is based on a report by the Gender Bias Study Commission which recommended the equalization of treatment in relation to the prostitute, the client and the "pimp." It is based on the premise that prostitutes are generally victims of economic, physical, and psychological coercion and choose prostitution in order to survive. Further, the Commission was concerned that 90 percent of the street prostitutes are controlled by "pimps" who use a variety of coercive methods to maintain control. It seems clear that the legislature was not intending to depart from the precepts of the commonly understood meaning of "coercion" and to redefine it to include both free will decisions and compelled decisions.. The interpretation urged by the employees seems at variance with the stated goal of the legislature and the Gender Bias Commission. + +Since there is no cause of action provided for one who makes a reasoned and voluntary exercise of their free will to enter or continue in the profession solely for financial rewards (assuming "coercion" is given the definition more consistent with its commonly accepted meaning and assuming that my interpretation of legislative intent is correct), coercion becomes the critical issue in the trial of such action. The interrogatories propounded by defendants appear relevant to the issue of coercion. + +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076)This is a case of first impression based on a relatively new statute. As indicated, the legislative history of the new law suggests that the statute is designed to assist those who were forced to enter prostitution in order to keep a roof over their heads or food on their table. It does not appear to be intended to aid those who voluntarily enter the profession in order to drive a Mercedes instead of a █████. The limited record before us indicates that even beginning employees of the defendants (those who do not have an established clientele) bring in \$700 a day and can keep 50% of their earnings. Based on a five-day work week, this would reflect an income of \$87,500 a year even with a two week vacation. And the employees herein are not beginners. + +There is no indication that the legislature intended to legalize prostitution or to make it a respectable profession. It merely intended to place the prostitute on the same footing with the client and the "pimp." If a prostitute voluntarily makes the decision to participate, free from force, intimidation, or disadvantageous circumstance, then he or she is on the same footing as the other participants and should be treated the same. + +Although it might well serve a legitimate public purpose to permit the cannibalistic demise of such enterprises (and I am not unsympathetic with this view), that does not appear to be the policy behind the current statute. Therefore, in cases where coercion is not present (and this may or may not be one), the court should continue its tradition of not interceding in civil conflicts involving transactions that are either illegal or are against public policy. *See Wechsler v. Novak*, 157 Fla. 703, 26 So.2d 884 (1946); █████ v. *Ratiner*, 462 So.2d 1157, 1160 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), *rev. denied*, 472 So.2d 1182 (Fla.1985) ("An action may lie for interference with an unenforceable contract and even perhaps a voidable contract. No such cause of action lies for interference with a contract *void* as against public policy [another's representation of a client obtained by a doctor/lawyer's illegal personal injury solicitation + +in the hospital] and which makes one who is a party thereto, as the appellant in the instant case, guilty of a criminal act for entering into such an agreement.") + +We are not asked in this proceeding to rule on the admissibility of the discovered information as evidence at the trial of this cause. We are to determine only if the information might lead to admissible evidence. Even \*1083 though we deny the Writ I suggest we certify the following question: + +DOES ONE, FREE FROM FORCE, INTIMIDATION, OR DISADVANTAGEOUS CIRCUMSTANCE, WHO MAKES A REASONED DECISION TO BECOME OR REMAIN A PROSTITUTE OR TO SHARE THE PROCEEDS THEREOF BECAUSE OF A PROMISE OF A GREATER FINANCIAL REWARD HAVE A CAUSE OF ACTION UNDER SECTION 796.09(1), FLORIDA STATUTES? + +*ON MOTIONS FOR REHEARING, FOR CLARIFICATION, FOR CERTIFICATION, AND FOR REHEARING EN BANC* + +W. SHARP, Judge. + +Petitioners Balas and Shumate have filed motions for rehearing, clarification and certification. We deny the motions in full except for one regard. We delete the sentence in the last full paragraph of the opinion which reads: "These other causes of action carry no such protection from discovery." + +Motion for Clarification GRANTED as stated above; Motion for Rehearing and Certification DENIED. + +HARRIS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. + +Fla.App. 5 Dist., 1997. + +Balas v. Ruzzo + +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 + +END OF DOCUMENT \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744028/EFTA02744028.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744028/EFTA02744028.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..77fb76d6692526aa9343fdf9971afc8da681ef71 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744028/EFTA02744028.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,495 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744028.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 30060, + "elapsed_seconds": 19.68, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "[3] Pretrial Procedure 307A \u270936.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 321.3, + 204.93 + ], + [ + 484.70400000000006, + 204.93 + ], + [ + 484.70400000000006, + 217.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 321.3, + 217.07999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "West Headnotes", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 146.88, + 409.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 217.26, + 409.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 217.26, + 421.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 146.88, + 421.20000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "[2] Pretrial Procedure 307A \u270931", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.38, + 562.9499999999999 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 562.9499999999999 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 579.15 + ], + [ + 70.38, + 579.15 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 426.56399999999996, + 324.81000000000006 + ], + [ + 438.804, + 324.81000000000006 + ], + [ + 438.804, + 336.15 + ], + [ + 426.56399999999996, + 336.15 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 392.04 + ], + [ + 440.64, + 392.04 + ], + [ + 440.64, + 403.38 + ], + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 403.38 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 423.5039999999999, + 492.48 + ], + [ + 443.70000000000005, + 492.48 + ], + [ + 443.70000000000005, + 503.82 + ], + [ + 423.5039999999999, + 503.82 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IV.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 423.5039999999999, + 582.39 + ], + [ + 443.70000000000005, + 582.39 + ], + [ + 443.70000000000005, + 592.92 + ], + [ + 423.5039999999999, + 592.92 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "V.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 174.42, + 202.5 + ], + [ + 187.272, + 202.5 + ], + [ + 187.272, + 213.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 174.42, + 213.03000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VI.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 171.972, + 302.94 + ], + [ + 189.108, + 302.94 + ], + [ + 189.108, + 313.47 + ], + [ + 171.972, + 313.47 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ON MOTIONS FOR REHEARING, FOR CLARIFICATION, FOR CERTIFICATION, AND FOR REHEARING EN BANC", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 324.36, + 348.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 540.396, + 348.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 540.396, + 381.51 + ], + [ + 324.36, + 381.51 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 43 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 146 + ], + [ + "Line", + 80 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744028" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744036/EFTA02744036.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744036/EFTA02744036.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..689e0c22cb24d68a499d6842c6667e5ea9ec0054 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744036/EFTA02744036.md @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +A.C., + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129XXXXMB Al + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +Y E. EPSTEIN, and + +Defendants. + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO PLAINTIFF AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion To Compel Responses To First Request To Produce To Plaintiff And To Overrule Plaintiffs Objections, & For Defendant's Expenses, Including Attorneys' Fees and the Court having heard argument of counsel and being fully advised in these premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion is hereby granted/ denied a., 41 /7 4 4/9 &a- eloAa.2-4 ±...0 41 22 6i42../ Ovratact . Int Aivw•ga- blek. IDcQarp. + +DONE AND ORDERED at Palm Beach Cou. urthouse, West Palm Beach, Florida, this 7 5 \_day of (103 0 + +Copies furnished: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESO., and MICHAEL J. PIKE, Ear 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401; JACK SCAROLA, ESQ., AND JACK P. M, ESQ., Seamy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P,A., 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., West Palm Beach, FL 33409, and JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, PA, One Cleadake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, Ft. 33401 Ni i + +EXHIBIT + +- ed N ActA0 + +E Circuit Judge ward A. Garrison + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH +JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM +BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +A.C., + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129XXXXMB AI + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, and [REDACTED] + +Defendants. + +ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO +INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR +DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion To +Compel Answers To Interrogatories And To Overrule Plaintiff's Objections, & For +Defendant's Expenses, Including Attorneys' Fees, and the Court having heard +argument of counsel and being fully advised in these premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion is hereby granted/ +~~denied~~ as to #5, 12 #18, denied as +to #2. Responses to be served w/in +10 days. + +DONE AND ORDERED at Palm Beach County Courthouse, West Palm +Beach, Florida, this 23 day of Feb, 2009 + +![]()Copies furnished: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ., and MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ., 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, +FL 33401; JACK SCAROLA, ESQ., AND JACK P. [REDACTED], ESQ., Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A., 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., West Palm Beach, FL 33409, and JACK A. +GOLDBERGER, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A., One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 +Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +CC: JEN6, DE +CC: Joe Bernes +mailed to [REDACTED] +3/05 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744036/EFTA02744036.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744036/EFTA02744036.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3af08668c5dc63e40f0f4101fd7720462a96e7fe --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744036/EFTA02744036.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,174 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744036.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2912, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.46, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO \nFIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO PLAINTIFF AND TO OVERRULE \nPLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, \nINCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 280.9202880859375 + ], + [ + 501.5784606933594, + 280.9202880859375 + ], + [ + 501.5784606933594, + 332.9470520019531 + ], + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 332.9470520019531 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.86, + 281.88 + ], + [ + 502.45199999999994, + 281.88 + ], + [ + 502.45199999999994, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 94.86, + 320.76 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Copies furnished:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 628.5600000000001 + ], + [ + 178.09199999999998, + 628.5600000000001 + ], + [ + 178.09199999999998, + 642.33 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 642.33 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 97 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744036" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744038/EFTA02744038.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744038/EFTA02744038.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ef34458a7abca82f67c7e0acc11c8631baa63199 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744038/EFTA02744038.md @@ -0,0 +1,237 @@ +## IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 50 2008CA020614XXXXMB AF + +JANE DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and + +Defendants. + +COPY + +COURT REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS HAD BEFORE THE HONORABLE DIANA + +DATE: March 3, 2009 + +PLACE: Palm Beach County Courthouse 205 N. Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +../1 II EXHIBIT C, + +## APPEARANCES: + +LAW FIRM, P.A. 224 Datura Avenue Suite 900 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Counsel for Plaintiff BY: ISIDRO M. , ESQUIRE + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Counsel for Defendant BY: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +that but I'd just like to do that. + +THE COURT: Right. And if you want to contact the other individuals saying, you know, I'm the one that's questioning whether or not these need to be before one judge. You may have a different perspective than your colleagues who are prosecuting some of the cases. + +I understand the damages. I'm not saying consolidate. I'm saying transfer. It's not a consolidation issue. Everybody gets that confused for some reason. The words are very different out of my mouth, your mouth and how they're written. + +So let me go ahead and take a gander at this. I did read it last night. I'm not sure that we need to get -- we need names? + +MR. CRITTON: Right. Well, here's what some of the issues are is that, as an example -- if I could approach the bench. + +THE COURT: Sure. + +MR. CRITTON: This is some of the information that we've obtained through discovery from some of the -- from at least in this instance, it would be this particular Jane Doe. + +THE COURT: You know who Jane Doe is I take + +MR. CRITTON: Right. + +THE COURT: You know who the Jane Doe is? + +MR. CRITTON: Yes, correct. And so this particular lady has kept in part a diary and she -- which appears to have started some time this is not in any way significant -- but some time after she learned that she could file a lawsuit. I think she's also been to Oakwood Center some time after she learned she could file a lawsuit and seek damages from Mr. Epstein. + +There's no history of this lady beforehand other than in some of the Oakwood records where she was Baker Acted, she started drinking beer at 16, she started Xanax at 16, started marijuana at 15, that she's sexually active. + +So how she has interacted -- she has a claim for emotional damages, mental pain and anguish, psychiatric-type damages. How she's interacted with friends, with family, the events in her life, school, work, her interpersonal relationships both with men and let's -- we'll use an example men here, but other individuals. She's saying that this event with Mr. Epstein, + +this sexual assault and whatever occurred during these events is that -- has caused her damage. + +And therefore damages in the case such as the emotional, mental, psychiatric-type damages are completely subjective, I mean separate and apart from any medical bills that may be -- which are clearly intangible. So these are intangible damages. And the jury is instructed, you know, you advise the greater weight of the evidence, what's fair and reasonable under the circumstances. + +So what we would have is basically this young lady's testimony as to what she claims her damages are and what the circumstances are with her situation with Mr. Epstein. She claims on page 13, you know, I love this guy, I'm dating this guy Chris. On page 15 -- + +THE COURT: Is this part of a diary for treatment? + +MR. CRITTON: I have no idea what it is. It was just produced in response to discovery. And she apparently started in, I think this is December of '08. You know I took Jay Lyntenis' girl to the zoo, had an amazing day, I love her, i.e., the girl. We have so much fun. I want a + +1 2 3 4 baby especially with him. Okay. So I know who this person is. We are all so open together, I love him and Jay and , what do I do with Chris, who is another guy in her life. + +5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 All right. This is circumstances where this young lady is saying, look, Jeffrey Epstein has ruined my life from a damage standpoint, okay. Let me depose other individuals with whom you've had a relationship. And what if it turns out -- as with some of these girls did -- is they had relationships or had escapades or circumstances with individuals, older men similar to Mr. Epstein well before Mr. Epstein. + +14 15 16 17 18 19 And this girl, I don't know one way or the other, but let's assume she had a situation where she was assaulted or molested or raped, ' that all is going to affect her emotional and her mental pain and anguish and it will all factor into evaluating damages. + +20 21 22 23 24 25 You know, it's not something that I'm going to spread around. I'm happy to keep it, you know, within the confines of the discovery of this case. But if she says every other relationship in my life has been perfect but Jeff Epstein has done this to me and it has affected + +my ability to trust men and my sexual relationships with other men, which is part of her interpersonal relationships, okay, let's talk to + +THE COURT: When does your client allege that she had her first encounter with Mr. Epstein? + +MR. : At what age? + +THE COURT: Well, what year? + +MR. CRITTON: June of '03. + +MR. : June of '03, Judge. + +MR. CRITTON: She claims from June of '03 through November of '04. + +MR. : She was I believe 16 at the beginning and ended at 17. She was a minor during all this time. + +THE COURT: June of '03 to now is six years. + +Let me hear from Mr. + +MR. : Judge, in the criminal case that was filed against Mr. Epstein, he would not have had a right to do this type of discovery and I -- if I could hand up -- + +THE COURT: They wouldn't care about the women. + +MR. : Right. Well, I mean -- + +THE COURT: This is damages. There's no - they weren't seeking damages at the time. + +MR. .: Right. And we have not alleged in the complaint or in the answers to interrogatories that her ability to have a relationship with aman has been affected by Mr. Epstein's conduct. + +We have alleged that she has been hospitalized for depression, anxiety but we have not alleged any damages concerning -- the only reason this would be relevant is if we were making a claim at her ability to have either sexual relations or to have emotional relations with men was effected by her experience with Mr. Epstein. + +So this damages' claim is just a smoke screen to attempt to get evidence to show the jury that this woman has had other consensual relationships with young men that are approximately her age what I would characterize as a slut defense. She had it coming to her because she engaged in other voluntarily consensual -- + +THE COURT: Mr. Critton wouldn't try the slut defense in my courtroom, I'm sure. + +1 2 3 MR. : Maybe not, but certainly that's the way this discovery is going. And, Judge, what -- + +4 5 THE COURT: What are the damages you think your client is seeking? + +6 7 8 10 11 12 13 MR. : She is seeking emotional distress damages for depression and anxiety and she has been hospitalized at the Oakwood Center. Her friend -- she was on the phone to a friend who called the sheriff's office because she thought she was suicidal. The sheriffs responded. They Baker Acted her that day and they took her eventually to the Oakwood Center. + +14 15 16 THE COURT: How do we know it's not intertwined with her rejection by three other men since Mr. Epstein? + +17 18 19 MR. : Well, even if it was related to her rejection by three other men -- you mean other men's rejection of her? + +20 21 22 23 THE COURT: Yeah. Well, how do you not know that? I mean you can't do it until you do discovery. Has anybody attempted to review the records from Oakwood to find out what's going on? + +24 25 MR. CRITTON: It's like a one-time visit when she was Baker Acted and then there's some + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +other -- + +THE COURT: She didn't receive treatment? + +MR. CRITTON: She received treatment for that day and she's been back a couple of times. She's on medication. Again, I don't know what or the extent but she's got -- her medical bills are de minimis. + +Again as an example, Judge, did the Court have an opportunity to look at the case that I also attached to the motion? Because there's a case that's almost on all fours with this which I attached to our motion which is called Belles versus Russo. + +THE COURT: Right. + +MR. CRITTON: It was a case where the plaintiff was sued -- the plaintiff sued the former owners of a house of prostitution. So that part is different, but within it there were a number of claims including a sexual assault claim and they sought emotional pain, humiliation and emotional distress. + +Within the complaint that was filed in this particular case, she is seeking severe emotional distress, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, past and future, compensatory + +humiliation, loss of reputation, mental anguish, pain and suffering, the same type of damages. And what the Court said -- + +THE COURT: How old is she now? + +MR. : She's 21 now. + +MR. CRITTON: She's 21 now. What the Court said is, you know, if you'd only brought this claim under 796 evidence of past issues, it's not an issue. You can't use this defense for anything, but because you brought these other claims which include, you know, sexual assault and you're seeking damages for other causes of action since the information sought by discovery may be relevant or may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in one or more of the other causes of action or determination of damages, we cannot conclude the trial court parted from essential requirements of law in granting -- + +THE COURT: So in other words, she's not only seeking -- she's seeking current emotional damage as a result of this relationship and you're trying to find out if she had prior relationships that perhaps could be intertwined with it so that it's not just Mr. Epstein's -- + +MR. CRITTON: Right. A perfect example is + +one of the cases that I have is there's ayoung lady who claims that she was molested in the past and raped, pretty significant issues, well in advance of her even meeting with Mr. Epstein. And they seem to play a large role in her psychiatric and psychological evaluation. + +We're going to come to the Court in this case as we have others and ask for a psychological evaluation of this lady, and if she was raped or if she was molested or just she had abad experience or some -- whether it was a young or old man assaulted her in some fashion, that may play a role in her damages and what -- + +THE COURT: What I'm going to allow for discovery purposes only not necessarily getting it in at the time trial are two years before her first encounter with Mr. Epstein and anything subsequent. + +MR. IIIIII: Judge, I just wanted to say on the record because I forgot to mention it, there's also -- I did state an objection to the identity of people that are unrepresented in this courtroom. They have rights too. So what I -- + +THE COURT: Well, my suggestion is that you send those people a letter and tell them that + +you're going to disclose them and if they have a problem with it that they come to see me before you disclose it. + +So I'm going to give you 20 days to respond to this rather than the usual five and that will give you time to put these people on notice and if they want to come visit with me and have a John Doe, I'll have aJohn Doe hearing but, you know, this is her case. She's doing it. She's the one seeking damages, and he is entitled to be able to confront other individuals to find out information that may be relevant to the damages she's seeking or she can drop the damages. That's her choice. If you seek damages, you've got to do it -- if you could put that in an order so that we have atime for him to do this. + +Just fill out an order, hand it back up to me and I'll deal with it. + +(The proceedings were concluded.) + +U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +THE STATE COUNTY OF OF FLORIDA, PALM BEACH. + +REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE + +I, Teresa Bell, Court Reporter, certify that Iwas authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings and that the transcript is a true and complete record of my stenographic notes. + +Ifurther certify that the proceedings were taken at the time and place shown herein and that all counsel and persons as hereinabove shown were present. + +Ifurther certify that I am not arelative, employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor am I arelative or employee of any of the parties' attorney or counsel connected with the action, nor am Ifinancially interested in the action. + +Dated this 11th day + +TERESi BELL, Court Reporter \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744038/EFTA02744038.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744038/EFTA02744038.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0b1108aa30fa84a62e10de40b3d55a380277add8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744038/EFTA02744038.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,555 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744038.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 12936, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.83, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT \nIN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA \nCASE NO. 50 2008CA020614XXXXMB AF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 171.972, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 513.2236328125, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 513.2236328125, + 145.4710693359375 + ], + [ + 171.972, + 145.4710693359375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "APPEARANCES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.01200000000001, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 235.57574462890625, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 235.57574462890625, + 118.85107421875 + ], + [ + 123.01200000000001, + 118.85107421875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 86 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 95 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 102 + ], + [ + "Line", + 51 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 110 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 110 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 109 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 276 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 108 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 110 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 110 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 308 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 265 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 215 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 32 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744038" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744052/EFTA02744052.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744052/EFTA02744052.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ac038b4d78344c75d51937d9129e63c8a511854d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744052/EFTA02744052.md @@ -0,0 +1,175 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE NO. 2, TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE & TO OVERRULE OBJECTIONS. & FOR AN AWARD OF DEFENDANT'S REASONABLE EXPENSES + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, moves this Court for an order compelling Plaintiff, JANE DOE No. 2 To respond to specified production requests and to overrule her objections asserted in Plaintiff's Responses To Defendant's First Request To Produce, dated January 26, 2009. Defendant further seeks an award of his reasonable expenses, including expenses, associated with the making of this motion. Rule 37, Fed.R.Civ.P. (2008); Local Gen. Rules 7.1 and 26.1 H (S.D. Fla. 2008). In support of his motion, Defendant states: + +#### Introduction + +Prior to the filing of this motion, counsel for Defendant and counsel for Plaintiff corresponded with each other and were able to resolve some of the discovery issues related to Defendant's First Request to Produce and Plaintiffs Response thereto. By letter, dated March 3, 2009, the Plaintiff agreed to withdraw her "General Objections" set forth in her response. As well, issues as to production request no. 14 are presently + +resolved. This motion addresses those requests on which the parties were unable to come to an agreement. + +Also, Defendant has filed simultaneously with this motion a Motion To Compel directed to certain of Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories, also dated January 26, 2009, and which addresses identical discovery issues. Both motions should be determined at the same time. + +#### Motion To Compel Responses to Nos. 1. 10. 11. 17, & 18 + +#### Production Request No. 1 + +1. Individual and/or joint income tax retums and supporting documentation including W-2 and 1099 forms for 2002-2007 and, as well as all records or documentation relative to the Plaintiffs earnings for the current year. + +#### Response: + +Plaintiff objects to this request as overbroad, unduly burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving this objection, copy of Plaintiffs 2006 and 2007 1040 forms are attached. + +#### Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery Sought in No. 1 + +Plaintiff does not make a relevancy objection, but instead claims that the request is "not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." Plaintiff also claims that the request is "overbroad" and "unduly burdensome," but fails to make any showing whatsoever how the request is overbroad or unduly burdensome as required under Rule 26(c) and Local Gen. Rule 26.1 H (S.D. Fla. (2008). On its face, the six year time period of 2002-2007 for Plaintiff's tax return's and supporting documentation is reasonable. Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint alleges that the alleged sexual abuse and exploitation of her by Defendant occurred in "in 2004-2005." 2d Am. Complaint, ¶8. (Plaintiff did produce copies of her 2006 and 2007 1040 forms, but nothing else.) + +Page No. 3 + +Also, such information is both relevant and reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. It is well settled that relevant information is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P.; Donahav v. Palm Beach Tours & trans.. Inc., 242 F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). Discoverability of such information is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery is broad. Donahav supra, at 686, and cases cited therein. "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claims or defense of any party involved in the pending action." Id. + +Plaintiffs tax returns, along with the requested supporting documentation, for the six year period are relevant to Plaintiffs damages claims detailed below herein. Such information would show Plaintiff's employment and earning history, as well as provide evidence as to how Plaintiff has been able to function in her daily life before, during and after the alleged incident. Was she self-sufficient? Was she able to get out of bed each morning and support herself? What type of job did she hold? One's ability to earn a living and be self-supporting has not only a financial component, but also an emotional/psychological/mental component. + +In her Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiff attempts to allege claims in Count I for "Sexual Assault and Battery," Count II for "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress," and in Count III for "Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C.A. §2422," and seeks damages pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255(a). (Plaintiff alleges diversity of citizenship as a basis for this Court's jurisdiction. 2d Am. Complaint, ¶5). Counts I and II are brought pursuant to state law. + +Page No. 4 + +In her complaint, Plaintiff alleges that "she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages," and "severe mental anguish and pain." In her answers to interrogatories nos. 9 and 10, Plaintiff further states that: + +Plaintiff has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries, including without limitation, anxiety, low self-esteem, feelings of guilt, self-blame, distrustfulness, burdened often by sadness and depression, suicidal thoughts, difficulty trusting others (particularly men), irritability, anger, feeling helpless and powerless, escapism through excessive partying, lack of confidence, loss of innocence. (Interrog. No. 9). + +... she seeks damages arising from her psychological and emotional injuries. These damages include pain and suffering, costs of psychological care and treatment, and loss of earning capacity. ... (Interrog. No. 10). + +As discussed above, the tax returns, and supporting documentation, will provide direct evidence as to Plaintiffs claimed damages, not only her loss of earning capacity claim, but also her emotional/psychological/mental health type damages. The time period will allow Defendant to compare how Plaintiff was doing in her life prior to, during, and after the alleged incident. Accordingly, Plaintiff's objection is required to be overruled, and Defendant is entitled to the documents requested for each of the years 2002-2007. + +## Production Requests Nos. 10, 11, 17, & 18 + +10. All photographs, movies, dvds, and videotapes in which you performed sexual acts or simulated sexual acts. + +11. All photographs, movies, dvds, and videotapes in which you performed sexual acts or simulated sexual acts in exchange for money or other consideration. + +17. All documents reflecting the names and addresses of other individuals with whom you have had sexual activity from January 1, 2000 — December 31, 2005. + +18. All documents reflecting the names and addresses of other individuals with whom you have had sexual activity from January 1, 2006 through November 30, 2008. + +Plaintiff asserted the identical answer to each of the above stated interrogatories: + +#### Response: + +Plaintiff objects to this request as harassing and not reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence. More over, this interrogatory [sic] is outrageous, offensive and is apparently posed for the purpose of intimidating the Plaintiff. My evidence that could conceivably be obtained through this request would not be admissible under Fed.R.Evid. 412. Without waiving this objection, none to Plaintiff's knowledge. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery Sought in 10, 11, 17, & 18 + +Plaintiff does not make a relevancy objection, but instead claims that the requests are "not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence," claiming that such "evidence ... would not be admissible under Fed.R.Evid. 412." Plaintiff further claims, without making any showing in her answer and without moving for a protective order in accordance with Rule 26(c) and Local Gen. Rule 26.1 H (S.D. Fla. 2008), that the interrogatory is "harassing,' "outrageous, offensive and is apparently posed for the purpose of intimidating Plaintiff." See Defendant's Motion to Compel directed to Plaintiffs Answers to Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories, addressing identical discovery issues. Both Defendant's interrogatories and production requests seek information regarding Plaintiffs sexual conduct and history; Plaintiff raised the same objections. + +In each of her responses, Plaintiff also states that — "Without waiving this objection, none to Plaintiffs knowledge." Plaintiff's response is evasive — either the requested items exist or do not exist. Defendant is entitled to a better response specifically indicating whether the items requested in each of the production requests nos. 10, 11, 17, and 18 - (1) exist or do not exist; (2) are in the possession or control of Plaintiff or some other person that Plaintiff is able to identify; and (3) why Plaintiff + +qualifies her answer of "none" with the phrase "to Plaintiff's knowledge." (Did such items exist and Plaintiff destroyed or deleted them?) + +As to the relevance of the information sought, it is well settled that relevant information is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P.; Donahav v. Palm Beach Tours & trans., Inc., 242 F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). Contrary to Plaintiffs assertion, Rule 412 does not automatically result in a determination that such sexual history and sexual activity/behavior information is never admissible. In fact, written into the Rule are the procedures to follow in determining when such information is admissible at trial. The Advisory Committee Notes to Rule 412, Fed.R.Evid, makes clear that the procedures to determine admissibility of an alleged victim's/plaintiffs sexual conduct or activity in civil cases does not apply to discovery of such information. Rather, discoverability of such information is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery is broad. Donahav, supra, at 686, and cases cited therein. "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claims or defense of any party involved in the pending action." Id. + +Rule 412, entitled "Sex Offense Cases; Relevance of Alleged Victim's Past Sexual Behavior or Alleged Sexual Predisposition," provides in relevant part - + +- (a) Evidence generally inadmissible.--The following evidence is not admissible in any civil ... proceeding involving alleged sexual misconduct except as provided in subdivisions (b) and (c): +- (1) Evidence offered to prove that any alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior. + - (2) Evidence offered to prove any alleged victim's sexual predisposition. + +Page No. 7 + +(b) Exceptions.— + +(2) In a civil case, evidence offered to prove the sexual behavior or sexual predisposition of any alleged victim is admissible if it is otherwise admissible under these rules and its probative value substantially outweighs the danger of harm to any victim and of unfair prejudice to any party. Evidence of an alleged victim's reputation is admissible only if it has been placed in controversy by the alleged victim. + +(c) Procedure to determine admissibility.— + +(1) A party intending to offer evidence under subdivision (b) must- + +(A) file a written motion at least 14 days before trial specifically describing the evidence and stating the purpose for which it is offered unless the court, for good cause requires a different time for filing or permits filing during trial; and + +(B) serve the motion on all parties and notify the alleged victim or, when appropriate, the alleged victim's guardian or representative. + +(2) Before admitting evidence under this rule the court must conduct a hearing in camera and afford the victim and parties a right to attend and be heard. The motion, related papers, and the record of the hearing must be sealed and remain under seal unless the court orders otherwise. + +In confirming that Rule 412 does not control the discoverability of such information, the Advisory Committee Notes (1994 Amendments) state - + +The procedures set forth in subdivision (c) do not apply to discovery of a victim's past sexual conduct or predisposition in civil cases, which will be continued to be governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26. In order not to undermine the rationale of Rule 412, however, courts should enter appropriate orders pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 (c) to protect the victim against unwarranted inquiries and to ensure confidentiality. Courts should presumptively issue protective orders barring discovery unless the party seeking discovery makes a showing that the evidence sought to be discovered would be relevant under the facts and theories of the particular case, and cannot be obtained except through discovery. In an action for sexual harassment, for instance, while some evidence of the alleged victim's sexual behavior and/or predisposition in the workplace ma erhaps be relevant, non-work place conduct will usually be irrelevant. Cf. v. McGregor Electronic Industries, inc., 989 F.2d 959, 962- 63 (8th Cir. 1993) posing for a nude magazine outside work hours is irrelevant + +> to issue of unwelcomeness of sexual advances at work). Confidentiality orders should be presumptively granted as well. + +(Emphasis added). + +In accordance with Rule 412 and Rule 26, the discovery sought regarding any photos, movies, dvds, and videotapes as decscribed in requests nos. 10 and 11, and Plaintiff's sexual activity with males, as described in nos. 17 and 18, including whether she received any compensation or consideration therefore, are all relevant to Plaintiffs damages claims and the type of injury she claims she has suffered. Defendant has no other means of obtaining such information and obtaining such information through Plaintiff will better protect the confidentiality until the Court can make a determination in accordance with the procedures under Rule 412(c) whether such information will be admissible at trial. See Rule 412(c) quoted above. Defendant will agree to an order keeping the confidentiality of the information obtained through discovery. + +The evidence sought is relevant based on the facts and theories of this action. In her Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiff attempts to allege claims in Count I for "Sexual Assault and Battery," Count II for "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress," and in Count III for "Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C.A. §2422," and seeks damages pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255(a). (Plaintiff alleges diversity of citizenship as a basis for this Court's jurisdiction. 2d Am. Complaint, ¶5). Counts I and II are brought pursuant to state law. + +In her complaint, Plaintiff alleges that "she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages," and "severe mental anguish and pain." In her answers to interrogatories nos. 9 and 10, dated January 26, 2009, Plaintiff further states that: + +Plaintiff has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries, including without limitation, anxiety, low self-esteem, feelings of guilt, self-blame, distrustfulness, burdened often by sadness and depression, suicidal thoughts, difficulty trusting others (particularly men), irritability, anger, feeling helpless and powerless, escapism through excessive partying, lack of confidence, loss of innocence. (Interrog. No. 9). + +... she seeks damages arising from her psychological and emotional injuries. + +These damages include pain and suffering, costs of psychological care and treatment, and loss of earning capacity. ... (Interrog. No. 10). + +Plaintiff also alleges that , Epstein's assistant" was apart of "Epstein's plan and scheme (which) reflected a particular pattern and method" in the alleged recruiting of girl's to come to EPSTEIN's Palm Beach mansion and give him "massages" in exchange for money. 2nd Am. Complaint, ¶11-12. According to the complaint allegations — "Upon information and belief Epstein has a sexual preference and obsession for underage minor girls." ¶8. ' would "bring the girl up a flight of stairs to a bedroom that contained a massage table ... ." The girl would be alone with EPSTEIN. EPSTEIN would "lie naked on the massage table, and direct the girl to remove her clothes." "Epstein would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, including masturbation and touching the girl's vagina." 2nd Am. Complaint, ¶11. Plaintiff alleges that "in 2004-2005," she, "then approximately 16 years old, fell into Epstein's trap and became one of his victims." ¶8. Plaintiff alleges that Epstein exposed himself to her and "sexually assaulted" her. ¶12 Plaintiff further alleges that "Epstein committed willful acts of child sexual abuse" on her, which resulted in "mental or sexual injury," and "caused or likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired." 2d Am. Complaint, ¶25. + +The items sought are clearly relevant to the injuries and damages claimed by Plaintiff. The nature of her claimed injuries and damages are such that Defendant is + +entitled to evidence which would show the nature of her relationship with males, whether she has suffered other acts of sexual misconduct, including exploitation and abuse, as alleged in her complaint, whether she suffered injury and damages as a result of the other claimed sexual misconduct with males, and whether she has willingly or not willingly engaged in sexual activity that has been photographed, or filmed by means of movie, dvd or videotapes. See United States v. Bear Stops, 997 F.2d 451 (8th Cir. 1993)(Defendant charged with sexual abuse of six year old boy was entitled to admission of evidence relating to victim's sexual assault by 3 older boys to establish alternative explanation for why victim exhibited behavioral manifestations of sexually abused child.). + +In further support of Defendant's motion, a copy of Balas v. Ruzzo, 703 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1998), is attached hereto as Exhibit A as it is on point to the discovery issues in this action, and the relevancy and discoverability of Plaintiffs history of sexual activity and any payment, therefore. See interrogatories 8, 22 and 30 propounded in the Balas case and footnote 1 herein. Additionally and significantly, in other pending state court civil actions against Defendant EPSTEIN attempting to assert similar claims and damages, the Circuit Court Judges have already ruled that such information is discoverable as it is relevant to the damages claims of Plaintiff. See Composite Exhibits B and C hereto. Composite Exhibit B are the Orders, dated February 23, 2009, entered in the case of A.C. v. Epstein, and + +1 In Balas v. Ruzzo, supra, the Plaintiffs alleged a multicount complaint including claims for "coercion of prostitution" pursuant to §796.09, Fla. Stat.; for battery for the unwanted and offensive touching of petitioners' bodies; false imprisonment for physically confining the petitioners against their will; invasion of privacy; and intentional infliction of emotional distress. + +Case No. 502008CA025129 MB AI, 15th Judicial Circuit, In and For Palm Beach County, State of Florida, which granted Defendant's motion to compel therein directed to discovery identical to interrogatory no. 18 above, and to requests for production nos. 17 and 18 addressed below herein. (In the A.C. case, the Plaintiff answered without objection interrogatories identical to nos. 19, 20, and 21 herein.) Composite Exhibit C is a portion the transcript from a March 3, 2009 hearing on Defendant's motion to compel discovery in the case of Jane Doe II v. Epstein, and I= Case No. 502008CA020614 MB AF, 1591 Judicial Circuit Court, In and For Palm Beach County, State of Florida. Again, the Circuit Court Judge determined that the information sought is relevant to the issue of damages and, thus, discoverable. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an order granting Defendant's motion to compel, overruling Plaintiffs objections, and compelling Plaintiff be to produce the items sought and/or to better respond to the requests as specified above. Defendant further requests that this Court award his attorney's fees and costs, associated with this motion, in accordance with Rule 37, Fed.R.Civ.P., and applicable Local Rules. + +### Rule 7.1 Certification + +I hereby certify that counsel for the respective parties communicated by letters in a good faith effort to resolve the discovery issues prior to the g of this motion to compel. Some of the issues were resolved. + +> Robert D Critton, Jr. Attome for Defendant Epstein + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 2/10 day of April, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()*(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744052/EFTA02744052.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744052/EFTA02744052.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b233078f7b0b9b05638027b93e8ba2870c414816 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744052/EFTA02744052.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,737 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744052.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 12, + "chars": 22126, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.5, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.7753601074219, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.7753601074219, + 101.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 101.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE NO. \n2, TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE & TO \nOVERRULE OBJECTIONS. & FOR AN AWARD OF DEFENDANT'S \nREASONABLE EXPENSES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 277.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 507.3553466796875, + 277.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 507.3553466796875, + 331.66998291015625 + ], + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 331.66998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 273.564, + 536.22 + ], + [ + 345.22320556640625, + 536.22 + ], + [ + 345.22320556640625, + 551.8000030517578 + ], + [ + 273.564, + 551.8000030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Motion To Compel Responses to Nos. 1. 10. 11. 17, & 18", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 158.50799999999998, + 236.8074951171875 + ], + [ + 456.97174072265625, + 236.8074951171875 + ], + [ + 456.97174072265625, + 252.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 158.50799999999998, + 252.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No. 1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 236.84400000000002, + 262.44 + ], + [ + 380.2043762207031, + 262.44 + ], + [ + 380.2043762207031, + 277.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 236.84400000000002, + 277.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 341.82 + ], + [ + 138.34115600585938, + 341.82 + ], + [ + 138.34115600585938, + 357.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 357.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery Sought in No. 1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.62400000000002, + 423.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 496.0714416503906, + 423.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 496.0714416503906, + 439.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 123.62400000000002, + 439.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Requests Nos. 10, 11, 17, & 18", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 195.84, + 527.3100000000001 + ], + [ + 422.87261962890625, + 527.3100000000001 + ], + [ + 422.87261962890625, + 543.9199981689453 + ], + [ + 195.84, + 543.9199981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.708, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 138.35116577148438, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 138.35116577148438, + 116.78997802734375 + ], + [ + 66.708, + 116.78997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery Sought in 10, 11, 17, & 18", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 96.696, + 221.94 + ], + [ + 518.8616943359375, + 221.94 + ], + [ + 518.8616943359375, + 240.16998291015625 + ], + [ + 96.696, + 240.16998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 368.0840759277344, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 368.0840759277344, + 530.4199829101562 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 530.4199829101562 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.712, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 383.724, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 383.724, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 260.712, + 84.24 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 382 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744052" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744064/EFTA02744064.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744064/EFTA02744064.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..554baaf08ee3679a0ab12e0b03c2eb6810394280 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744064/EFTA02744064.md @@ -0,0 +1,313 @@ +Westlaw. + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 1 + +District Court of Appeal of Florida, +Fifth District. +Kimberly BALAS and Teresa Shumate, Petitioners, +v. +Marjorie A. RUZZO, and Exec., Inc., etc., Re- +spondents. +No. 97-82. + +307Ak31 k. Relevancy and Materiality. +Most Cited Cases +Party may be permitted to discover evidence that +would be inadmissible at trial, if it would lead to +discovery of relevant evidence. West's F.S.A. RCP +Rule 1.280(b)(1). + +**[3] Pretrial Procedure 307A ✉36.1** + +As Modified on Grant of Clarification Jan. 2, 1998. +rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. +Plaintiffs brought action against alleged house of 1998). +prostitution for, inter alia, coercion of prostitution. +The Circuit Court, Brevard County, █ Pound, +J., granted in part defendants' motion to compel dis- +covery. Plaintiffs filed petition for writ of certior- +ari. The District Court of Appeal, W. Sharp, J., held +that evidence of plaintiffs' past prostitution and +their revenues relating to such activities was dis- +coverable. + +307A Pretrial Procedure +307AII Depositions and Discovery +307AII(A) Discovery in General +307Ak36 Particular Subjects of Disclos- ure +307Ak36.1 k. In General. Most Cited + +Petition denied. +Harris, J., concurred specially and filed opinion. + +West Headnotes + +**[1] Pretrial Procedure 307A ✉31** +307A Pretrial Procedure +307AII Depositions and Discovery +307AII(A) Discovery in General +307Ak31 k. Relevancy and Materiality. + +Cases +Evidence of plaintiffs' past prostitution and their +revenues relating to such activities, including activ- +ities with alleged house of prostitution against +which they had filed suit, was discoverable, where +plaintiffs brought action not only for coercion of +prostitution, but also for battery, false imprison- +ment, invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of +emotional distress, violation of their civil rights, +and racketeering. Violent Crime Control and Law +Enforcement Act of 1994, § 40302, 42 U.S.C.A. § +13981; West's F.S.A. §§ 772.014, 796.09; West's +F.S.A. RCP Rule 1.280(b)(1). +\*1076 Richard E. █ and Heather Fisher Lind- +say, of Spriggs & █ Tallahassee, for Peti- +tioners. + +Most Cited Cases +Discovery in civil cases must be relevant to subject +matter of case and must be admissible or reason- +ably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. +West's F.S.A. RCP Rule 1.280(b)(1). + +Mark S. Peters of Amari, Theriac & Eisenmenger, +P.A., Cocoa, for Respondents. +W. SHARP, Judge. + +**[2] Pretrial Procedure 307A ✉31** + +Balas and Shumate petition this court for a writ of +certiorari to review certain portions of the lower +court's order which granted, in part, a motion to +compel discovery filed by respondents Ruzzo and +Exec., Inc. Petitioners argue that those portions de- +part from the essential requirements of law and will +cause them irreparable harm because they will be + +307A Pretrial Procedure +307AII Depositions and Discovery +307AII(A) Discovery in General + +EXHIBIT "A" + +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076)compelled to disclose intimate details of their sexual history. We decline to issue the writ of certiorari. + +Balas and Shumate filed suit against Ruzzo and Exec, Inc., doing business as "The Boardroom." According to Balas and Shumate, The Boardroom operates ostensibly as **\*1077** a leisure spa but actually is a house of prostitution. Balas worked at The Boardroom from December 1993 until February 1996; Shumate worked there from October 1992 until March 1996. Ruzzo, the sole officer and shareholder of Exec, Inc., collected about fifty to sixty percent of each employees' earnings from performing sexual acts. + +According to Balas and Shumate, Ruzzo exerted mental and emotional control over her employees and thus she was able to exploit them as prostitutes. Ruzzo required her employees to pay her substantial sums of money to attend "metaphysical workshops" conducted by Ruzzo or persons associated with her. At the work place, the employees were required to participate in religious and quasi-religious "circles," rituals and incantations. These practices were allegedly designed to break down the personalities of the women who worked for Ruzzo and to ██████████ dependency and loyalty to herself. At one time when the earnings of a new employee were missing and believed to be stolen, Ruzzo required that the petitioners be strip searched and body cavity searched. Ruzzo caused the petitioners to believe their continued employment was dependent on their submission to these searches and that they might be arrested on felony charges if they refused to submit to the searches. + +Balas and Shumate's second amended complaint against Ruzzo contains seven counts. Count I is an action for coercion of prostitution pursuant to section 796.09, Florida Statutes. Petitioners allege the requirement that they perform sexual acts to retain their employment constitutes inducement and coercion to engage in prostitution. Count II is a claim for battery for the unwanted and offensive touching of the petitioners' bodies. Count III is a claim for false imprisonment for physically confining the pe- + +titioners against their will. Count IV alleges that respondents' actions constituted an invasion of petitioners' privacy. Count V is a claim for the intentional infliction of emotional distress. Count VI alleges a civil rights action-that respondents have violated petitioners' right to be free from crimes of violence motivated by gender within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. section 13981. Finally, count VII seeks civil remedies for criminal practices or racketeering pursuant to section 772.104, Florida Statutes. The petitioners claim that they suffered emotional pain, anguish, humiliation, insult, indignity, loss of self-esteem, inconvenience, hurt and emotional distress. They seek an award of general and punitive damages, among other relief. + +The discovery to which the petitioners are being required to respond is as follows: + +#### I. + +**Interrogatory 8:** Please advise how long have you been engaged in prostitution.... + +#### II. + +**Interrogatory 22:** State with specificity the manner in which the acts as described in your Complaint have materially affected how you interact with your husband, boyfriend, fiancée' [sic] or any other individual of the opposite sex. + +#### III. + +**Request for Production 30:** A copy of any photographs, movies or videotapes in which you performed sexual acts and/or simulated sexual acts in exchange for money or other consideration. + +#### IV. + +**Interrogatory 16:** Please list the names, addresses, telephone numbers and rates of pay for all employers for which you worked, including the + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 3 + +nature of the work, during the five years immediately preceding the date of employment with the Boardroom and from the date of your termination with the Boardroom to the present, providing the names of your immediate supervisors at each place of employment and the reason for your leaving each place of employment. + +V. + +**Interrogatory 26:** Please state your total income while employed at the Boardroom, and state the source of that income including any income from other employment or \*1078 income earned from prostitution other than at the Boardroom. + +VI. + +**Request for Production 34:** Business records from any selfemployment or owned business ventures in the last 5 years, including any records or list of customers, "special customer lists" or "sugar daddy's list." + +[1][2] Discovery in civil cases must be relevant to the subject matter of the case and must be admissible or reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. *See Allstate Insurance Co. v. Langston*, 655 So.2d 91 (Fla.1995); *Amente v. [REDACTED]*, 653 So.2d 1030 (Fla.1995); [REDACTED] v. *Stardust Cruisers, Inc.*, 690 So.2d 743 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). The concept of relevancy is broader in the discovery context than in the trial context and a party may be permitted to discover evidence that would be inadmissible at trial, if it would lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. *Allstate; Amente*. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(1) delineates the proper scope of discovery: + +*In General.* Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the subject matter of the pending action, whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or the claim or defense of any other party, including the existence, description, + +nature, custody, condition, and location of any books, documents, or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons having knowledge of any discoverable matter. It is not ground for objection that the information sought will be inadmissible at the trial if the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +Nonetheless, the discovery of certain kinds of information may cause material injury of an irreparable nature. This includes the "cat-out-of-the-bag" material that could be used to injure another person or party outside the context of the litigation, material protected by privilege, trade secrets or work product. Discovery was never intended to be used as a tactical tool to harass, embarrass or annoy one's adversary. Rather, pretrial discovery was implemented to simplify the issues in a case, to eliminate the elements of surprise, to encourage the settlement of cases, to avoid the cost of litigation, and to achieve a balanced search for the truth to ensure a fair trial. *Elkins v. Syken*, 672 So.2d 517 (Fla.1996). + +Here the petitioners argue that the information sought to be discovered regarding prostitution and their sexual activities was propounded solely to embarrass them and to invade their right to privacy. The petitioners also claim that this information is privileged under section 796.09 and is not calculated to lead to evidence which would be admissible at trial. + +Section 796.09 provides a person with a civil cause of action for compensatory and punitive damages against anyone who coerces that person into prostitution, who coerces that person to remain in prostitution, or who uses coercion to collect or receive any part of that person's earnings derived from prostitution. In the course of litigation under this section, any transaction about which a plaintiff testifies or produces evidence does *not* subject the plaintiff to criminal prosecution or to any penalty or forfeiture. In addition, any testimony or evidence or any information produced by the plaintiff or wit- + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 4 + +ness for the plaintiffs cannot be used against the plaintiffs or witness in any other investigation or proceeding, except one for perjury. + +Section 796.09(5) specifically provides that it is *not* a defense that the plaintiff was paid or otherwise compensated for prostitution, that the plaintiff had engaged in prostitution prior to any involvement with the defendant or that the plaintiff made no attempt to escape from the defendant. Section 796.09(6) provides that convictions for prostitution or prostitution-related offenses are *inadmissible* for the purpose of attacking the plaintiffs' credibility. + +This legislation was the result of the Florida Supreme Court Gender Bias Study Commission, which conducted an extensive investigation of prostitution in this state. The Commission's activities included interviews with law enforcement and corrections personnel, \*1079 judges, public defenders, prosecutors, drug rehabilitation counselors, social workers, medical personnel, prostitutes, clients and pimps. The Commission found prostitution to be prevalent and uniform throughout the state and law enforcement largely unable to deter it under prevailing social attitudes and judicial practices. The Commission further found that prostitutes are often victims of economic, physical, and psychological coercion, that most persons do not chose to become prostitutes, but do so to survive, and that ninety percent of street prostitutes, both adult and children, are controlled by pimps who use a variety of coercive methods to maintain this control. The Commission determined that clients and pimps are rarely prosecuted and, when prosecuted, receive light sentences; whereas prostitutes, who are mainly females, are frequently prosecuted and receive harsher treatment in the courts. The Commission recommended changes in the methods of intervention in prostitution from punitive to therapeutic, changes in the law to require more equal treatment by the courts of the prostitute in relation to the client and the pimp and to lessen the incentive to traffic in human flesh by giving the prostitute access to the judicial system without first having to be + +arrested. + +Under section 796.09, the petitioners' prior involvement in prostitution and their earnings from prostitution would be irrelevant. Hence discovery should not be permitted because such information would not be admissible at trial nor would it be reasonably calculated to lead to evidence ultimately admissible at trial. Even though the scope of discovery is generally quite broad, section 796.09 is designed to encourage prostitutes to sue their pimps. Thus the usually broad scope of discovery may be constricted so that prostitutes will not be embarrassed, harassed or hindered in their actions. + +[3] Had the petitioners brought their lawsuit against Ruzzo and The Boardroom *only* under section 796.09, evidence of petitioners' past prostitution, including with the Boardroom, and their earnings relating to such activities, may not have been discoverable. However, the petitioners filed a multi-count complaint for compensatory and punitive damages, alleging numerous causes of action against the respondents. These other causes carry no such protection from discovery. Since the information sought by discovery may be relevant or may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in one or more of these *other* causes of action or to determination of damages, we cannot conclude that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law in granting this discovery. *See* [REDACTED] v. *TIB Bank of the Keys*, 687 So.2d 895 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (by alleging fraud as well as breach of contract, purchaser placed at issue her reliance on venders' assertions, the veracity of financial documents she submitted to the vender, and the state of her mental health, including memory problems she was experiencing at the time of the alleged tortious conduct, thus deposition questions concerning her state of mind were relevant). + +Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. + +THOMPSON, J., concurs. +HARRIS, J., concurs specially with opinion.HARRIS, Judge, concurring specially: + +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076)There is a temptation in cases such as this to inquire which, the pot or the kettle, is imbued with the darker hue. Indeed that may ultimately be the question uppermost in the jurors' minds. But the issue presently before us is simply whether the pot, in order to establish the parties' comparative complexion, may discover the historical condition and the inherent characteristics of the kettle. + +We are here involved with parties that the limited record before us indicates were co-conspirators in a joint effort to violate Florida's laws against prostitution. The defendants are the owner/operators of a "social club" whose primary service is prostitution; the plaintiffs are employees of the club who provide such services. The employees are suing the owner/operators for, among other counts, taking advantage of their vulnerabilities ("coercing" them to be prostitutes) through manipulation and exploitation. In order to prepare a defense to the action, defendants have filed certain interrogatories for the employees to answer. These interrogatories\*1080 request such information as how long the employees have been engaged in prostitution; how the employees have been affected by the defendants' conduct; copies of photographs, movies, and videotapes in which the employees have performed sexual acts or simulated sexual acts; the names of previous employers and previous rates of pay; and a statement of income received from defendants. These interrogatories survived the employees' objections. I agree certiorari should be denied. + +The employees' primary cause of action is based on section 796.09(1), Florida Statutes, which provides: + +(1) A person has a cause of action for compensatory and punitive damages against: + +(a) A person who coerces that person into prostitution; + +(b) A person who coerces that person to remain in prostitution, or + +(c) A person who uses coercion to collect or receive + +any part of that person's earnings derived from prostitution. + +The employees resist discovery of their past prostitution or their past or present earning experience on the basis of subparagraph 5 of section 796.09: + +(5) It does not constitute a defense to a complaint under this section that: + +a) The plaintiff was paid or otherwise compensated for acts of prostitution; + +b) The plaintiff engaged in acts of prostitution prior to any involvement with the defendant ... + +But the question before us is not whether prior acts of prostitution (or the receipts of earnings therefrom) which might be revealed by answering the interrogatories could be used as a defense to the complaint, but rather whether evidence of such conduct or such earnings would be relevant in determining whether the employees were, in fact, "coerced" into prostitution, into remaining prostitutes, or into sharing the proceeds of their services with defendants. The relevancy of this information depends, of course, on what constitutes coercion. + +If we apply the definition of "coercion" which is commonly accepted, then the relevancy of the requested information is apparent and this appeal has no merit at all. Webster defines "coercion" as: (1) to restrain or dominate by force, (2) to compel an act or choice, or (3) to enforce or bring about by force or threat. In sexual battery cases, the legislature has adopted the common meaning of the word "coercion" and has even placed limits on it. It has provided that consent will not be recognized if submission is *coerced* by threats of force or violence *if* the victim reasonably believes the perpetrator has the present ability to execute the threat.791 Consent also will not be recognized if submission is *coerced* by a threat of retaliation against the victim or another *if* the victim reasonably believes that the perpetrator has the ability to execute the threat in the future.792 And in sexual battery cases, the legislature has vitiated what might otherwise be con- + +© 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. + +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375. 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 + +(Cite as: 703 Sold 1076) + +sidered as consensual if one exploits a known physical or mental weakness of the victim to achieve his or her goal or takes advantage of one who is physically helpless or involuntarily intoxicated." Therefore, even in sexual battery cases, before coercion or exploitation will vitiate consent, the free will of the victim must be overcome by force or threat or some unfortunate circumstance suffered by the victim. + +> FN1. Section 794.011(4)(b), Florida Statutes. + +> FN2. Section 794.01I(4)(c), Florida Statutes. + +FN3. Section 794.011(4)(a),(d),(e). and (I), Florida Statutes. + +But then we get to the definition of "coercion" contained in section 796.09(3): + +;3) As used in this section, the term "coercion" means any practice of dominion, restraint, or inducement for the purpose of or with the reasonably foreseeable effect of causing another person to engage in or remain in prostitution or to relinquish earnings derived from prostitution, and includes, but is not limited to: + +;a) Physical force or threats of physical force + +,b) 1 Physical or mental torture. + +;c) Kidnapping. + +\*1081 (d) Blackmail. + +:e) Extortion or claims of indebtedness. + +;f) Threats of legal complaint or report of delinquency. + +,'g) Threat to interfere with parental rights or responsibilities, whether by judicial or administrative action or otherwise. + +;h) Promise of legal benefit. + +',I) Promise of greater financial rewards. + +,j) 1 Promise of marriage. + +;k) Restraint of Speech or communications with others. + +',/ ) Exploitation of a condition of developmental disability, cognitive limitation, affective disorder, or substance dependency. + +;m) Exploitation of victimization by sexual abuse. + +,n) 1 Exploitation of pornographic performance. + +:0) Exploitation of human needs for food, shelter, safety, or affection. + +The definition urged by the employees herein is the "promise of a greater financial reward." Whether the requested information is relevant to the issue of coercion in this case will depend on what the legislature intended by subsection (I) in the meaning of "coercion." + +I agree with Judge Altenbemd's thoughtful analysis in State v. Brigham, 694 So.2d 793 (1997): + +There can be no dispute that the legislature's unusual definition of "percent" is not a common dictionary definition. This is perhaps an appropriate case in which to remind ourselves of Learned Hand's famous observation that a "mature and developed jurisprudence" does not "make a fortress out of the dictionary." + +But even so, one would expect some nexus between the commonly accepted meaning of a word and the definition of that word ascribed by the legislature. If, for example, the legislature defined "canine" as including cats, although one might, jurisprudentially speaking, expect to hear a meow emanate from a Great Dane, the courts should nevertheless closely examine the legislative history to see if that is really what the legislature intended. The court in Young v. O'Keefe, 246 Iowa 1182, 69 N.W.2d 534, 537 (1955), stated this principle as follows: "But + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 7 + +before a definition is construed so as to expand the meaning of a well-known word to include its antonym ..., the intention of the legislature to that effect must be clear." As Judge [REDACTED] observed in *Catron v. Roger Bohn, D.C., P.A.*, 580 So.2d 814, 818 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991): + +It is our primary duty to give effect to legislative intent and, if a literal interpretation of a statute leads to unreasonable results, then we should exercise our power to interpret reason and logic to it. + +\* \* \* \* \* + +Unfortunately, it is apparent that in enacting this legislation, the legislature has, without redefining the terms for the purposes of this legislation, often used terms with commonly accepted meanings for purposes at great variance from those commonly accepted meanings. + +In our case, the legislature did define the term for the purpose of the act. But because the term (coercion) as so defined can be interpreted two ways-one consistent with the commonly accepted meaning and one at variance-we should not accept the "antonym" unless such legislative intent is clear. A free will decision, even if based on a hope of financial gain, is the opposite of a coerced decision. + +The employees urge that the mere promise of a greater reward brings them within the act. But if the mere promise of a greater reward is sufficient to establish coercion, then anyone who makes a voluntary and reasoned exercise of free will motivated by the hope of economic gain has been coerced. This definition removes the element of compulsion implicit in the commonly accepted meaning of coercion and substitutes therefor the mere desire for financial gain. The employees herein assert that since they were offered "a greater financial reward" for providing the services performed by them through defendants' establishment, they were coerced into their prostitution activities. This equates the giving + +of an opportunity to make a decision with the coercion of that decision. But subsection (I) can also mean \*1082 that the promise of a greater reward is coercion *only if* such promised reward is sufficient to overcome one's natural revulsion to selling one's body for money. If there is no such revulsion, there can be no coercion. Becoming a prostitute only because one likes the hours and wages or "because it beats the heck out of working for a living" simply should not meet the test of section 796.09(1). + +At oral argument herein, it was suggested without contradiction, that at least one of the employees has a college degree and gave up a well-paying, legitimate job in order to engage in this profession for the greater reward. Section 796.09 does not appear to be a general prostitute's relief act. It is based on a report by the Gender Bias Study Commission which recommended the equalization of treatment in relation to the prostitute, the client and the "pimp." It is based on the premise that prostitutes are generally victims of economic, physical, and psychological coercion and choose prostitution in order to survive. Further, the Commission was concerned that 90 percent of the street prostitutes are controlled by "pimps" who use a variety of coercive methods to maintain control. It seems clear that the legislature was not intending to depart from the precepts of the commonly understood meaning of "coercion" and to redefine it to include both free will decisions and compelled decisions.. The interpretation urged by the employees seems at variance with the stated goal of the legislature and the Gender Bias Commission. + +Since there is no cause of action provided for one who makes a reasoned and voluntary exercise of their free will to enter or continue in the profession solely for financial rewards (assuming "coercion" is given the definition more consistent with its commonly accepted meaning and assuming that my interpretation of legislative intent is correct), coercion becomes the critical issue in the trial of such action. The interrogatories propounded by defendants appear relevant to the issue of coercion. + +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076)This is a case of first impression based on a relatively new statute. As indicated, the legislative history of the new law suggests that the statute is designed to assist those who were forced to enter prostitution in order to keep a roof over their heads or food on their table. It does not appear to be intended to aid those who voluntarily enter the profession in order to drive a Mercedes instead of a █████. The limited record before us indicates that even beginning employees of the defendants (those who do not have an established clientele) bring in \$700 a day and can keep 50% of their earnings. Based on a five-day work week, this would reflect an income of \$87,500 a year even with a two week vacation. And the employees herein are not beginners. + +There is no indication that the legislature intended to legalize prostitution or to make it a respectable profession. It merely intended to place the prostitute on the same footing with the client and the "pimp." If a prostitute voluntarily makes the decision to participate, free from force, intimidation, or disadvantageous circumstance, then he or she is on the same footing as the other participants and should be treated the same. + +Although it might well serve a legitimate public purpose to permit the cannibalistic demise of such enterprises (and I am not unsympathetic with this view), that does not appear to be the policy behind the current statute. Therefore, in cases where coercion is not present (and this may or may not be one), the court should continue its tradition of not interceding in civil conflicts involving transactions that are either illegal or are against public policy. *See Wechsler v. Novak*, 157 Fla. 703, 26 So.2d 884 (1946); █████ v. *Ratiner*, 462 So.2d 1157, 1160 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), *rev. denied*, 472 So.2d 1182 (Fla.1985) ("An action may lie for interference with an unenforceable contract and even perhaps a voidable contract. No such cause of action lies for interference with a contract *void* as against public policy [another's representation of a client obtained by a doctor/lawyer's illegal personal injury solicitation + +in the hospital] and which makes one who is a party thereto, as the appellant in the instant case, guilty of a criminal act for entering into such an agreement.") + +We are not asked in this proceeding to rule on the admissibility of the discovered information as evidence at the trial of this cause. We are to determine only if the information might lead to admissible evidence. Even \*1083 though we deny the Writ I suggest we certify the following question: + +DOES ONE, FREE FROM FORCE, INTIMIDATION, OR DISADVANTAGEOUS CIRCUMSTANCE, WHO MAKES A REASONED DECISION TO BECOME OR REMAIN A PROSTITUTE OR TO SHARE THE PROCEEDS THEREOF BECAUSE OF A PROMISE OF A GREATER FINANCIAL REWARD HAVE A CAUSE OF ACTION UNDER SECTION 796.09(1), FLORIDA STATUTES? + +*ON MOTIONS FOR REHEARING, FOR CLARIFICATION, FOR CERTIFICATION, AND FOR REHEARING EN BANC* + +W. SHARP, Judge. + +Petitioners Balas and Shumate have filed motions for rehearing, clarification and certification. We deny the motions in full except for one regard. We delete the sentence in the last full paragraph of the opinion which reads: "These other causes of action carry no such protection from discovery." + +Motion for Clarification GRANTED as stated above; Motion for Rehearing and Certification DENIED. + +HARRIS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. + +Fla.App. 5 Dist., 1997. + +Balas v. Ruzzo + +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 + +END OF DOCUMENT \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744064/EFTA02744064.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744064/EFTA02744064.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ffeb72a568aeea31baa7e7dd702bf4134e75cf69 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744064/EFTA02744064.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,495 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744064.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 30064, + "elapsed_seconds": 19.66, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "[3] Pretrial Procedure 307A \u270936.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 321.3, + 204.93 + ], + [ + 485.31600000000003, + 204.93 + ], + [ + 485.31600000000003, + 217.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 321.3, + 217.07999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "West Headnotes", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 146.88, + 409.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 217.26, + 409.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 217.26, + 419.58000000000004 + ], + [ + 146.88, + 419.58000000000004 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "[2] Pretrial Procedure 307A \u270931", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.38, + 562.9499999999999 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 562.9499999999999 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 579.15 + ], + [ + 70.38, + 579.15 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 426.56399999999996, + 324.81000000000006 + ], + [ + 438.804, + 324.81000000000006 + ], + [ + 438.804, + 336.15 + ], + [ + 426.56399999999996, + 336.15 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 392.04 + ], + [ + 440.64, + 392.04 + ], + [ + 440.64, + 403.38 + ], + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 403.38 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 423.5039999999999, + 491.66999999999996 + ], + [ + 444.31199999999995, + 491.66999999999996 + ], + [ + 444.31199999999995, + 503.82 + ], + [ + 423.5039999999999, + 503.82 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IV.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 423.5039999999999, + 582.39 + ], + [ + 444.31199999999995, + 582.39 + ], + [ + 444.31199999999995, + 592.92 + ], + [ + 423.5039999999999, + 592.92 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "V.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 174.42, + 202.5 + ], + [ + 187.272, + 202.5 + ], + [ + 187.272, + 213.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 174.42, + 213.03000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VI.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 171.972, + 302.94 + ], + [ + 189.108, + 302.94 + ], + [ + 189.108, + 313.47 + ], + [ + 171.972, + 313.47 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ON MOTIONS FOR REHEARING, FOR CLARIFICATION, FOR CERTIFICATION, AND FOR REHEARING EN BANC", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 323.74800000000005, + 348.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 539.784, + 348.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 539.784, + 381.51 + ], + [ + 323.74800000000005, + 381.51 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 43 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 151 + ], + [ + "Line", + 80 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744064" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744072/EFTA02744072.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744072/EFTA02744072.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d64b8b64ac51560a8661b61c9d161d5aa7c4f0b0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744072/EFTA02744072.md @@ -0,0 +1,76 @@ +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +A.C., + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129XXXXMB Al + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +iiralY E. EPSTEIN, and + +Defendants. + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO PLAINTIFF AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion To Compel Responses To First Request To Produce To Plaintiff And To Overrule Plaintiffs Objections, & For Defendant's Expenses, Including Attorneys' Fees and the Court having heard argument of counsel and being fully advised in these premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion is hereby granted/ decried 41 1 7 4 4 / 9 go,s-Le-4 Ga ±...0 41 2 2 6L4L., f kilddiaet . l ip\_Crtotazas at) Lk AEAtusa- 1,O NA- 10d aye • + +DONE AND ORDERED at Palm Beach Cou urthouse, West Palm Beach, Florida, this 7 ,\_day of f-Lif3 + +> Edward A. Garrison Circuit Judge + +Copies furnished: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESO., and MICHAEL J. PIKE, Ea515 North Flagfer Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401; JACK SCAROLA, ESQ., AND JACK P. M, ESQ., Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P,A., 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., West Palm Beach, FL 33409, and JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A., One Cleadake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 i Art". Ni + +EXHIBIT + +1 1 N pte A i))°\ 0 + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH +JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM +BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +A.C., + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129XXXXMB AI + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, and [REDACTED] + +Defendants. + +ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO +INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR +DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion To +Compel Answers To Interrogatories And To Overrule Plaintiff's Objections, & For +Defendant's Expenses, Including Attorneys' Fees, and the Court having heard +argument of counsel and being fully advised in these premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion is hereby granted/ +~~denied~~ as to #5, 12 #18, denied as +to #2. Responses to be served w/in +10 days. + +DONE AND ORDERED at Palm Beach County Courthouse, West Palm +Beach, Florida, this 23 day of Feb, 2009 + +![]()Copies furnished: +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ., and MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ., 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, +FL 33401; JACK SCAROLA, ESQ., AND JACK P. [REDACTED], ESQ., Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A., 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., West Palm Beach, FL 33409, and JACK A. +GOLDBERGER, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A., One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 +Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +CC: JEN6, DE +CC: Joe Benzer +mailed to F +3/05 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744072/EFTA02744072.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744072/EFTA02744072.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a9ac886aa3e0ad152f2ee26ee4d83b5a72e87bda --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744072/EFTA02744072.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744072.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2946, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.36, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO \nFIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO PLAINTIFF AND TO OVERRULE \nPLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, \nINCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 280.4288635253906 + ], + [ + 501.7212219238281, + 280.4288635253906 + ], + [ + 501.7212219238281, + 333.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 333.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.86, + 279.45 + ], + [ + 501.84000000000003, + 279.45 + ], + [ + 501.84000000000003, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 94.86, + 319.95000000000005 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 117 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744072" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744074/EFTA02744074.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744074/EFTA02744074.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..19e7a264ad7d0532efec6a38acbd4095f2914de0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744074/EFTA02744074.md @@ -0,0 +1,289 @@ +## IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 50 2008CA020614XXXXMB AF + +JANE DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and + +Defendants. + +COPY + +COURT REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS HAD BEFORE THE HONORABLE DIANA + +DATE: March 3, 2009 + +PLACE: Palm Beach County Courthouse 205 N. Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +../1 II EXHIBIT CI:. + +P + +## APPEARANCES: + +LAW FIRM, P.A. 224 Datura Avenue Suite 900 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Counsel for Plaintiff BY: ISIDRO M. , ESQUIRE + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Counsel for Defendant BY: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +that but I'd just like to do that. + +THE COURT: Right. And if you want to contact the other individuals saying, you know, I'm the one that's questioning whether or not these need to be before one judge. You may have a different perspective than your colleagues who are prosecuting some of the cases. + +I understand the damages. I'm not saying consolidate. I'm saying transfer. It's not a consolidation issue. Everybody gets that confused for some reason. The words are very different out of my mouth, your mouth and how they're written. + +So let me go ahead and take a gander at this. I did read it last night. I'm not sure that we need to get -- we need names? + +MR. CRITTON: Right. Well, here's what some of the issues are is that, as an example -- if I could approach the bench. + +THE COURT: Sure. + +MR. CRITTON: This is some of the information that we've obtained through discovery from some of the -- from at least in this instance, it would be this particular Jane Doe. + +THE COURT: You know who Jane Doe is I take + +MR. CRITTON: Right. + +THE COURT: You know who the Jane Doe is? + +MR. CRITTON: Yes, correct. And so this particular lady has kept in part a diary and she -- which appears to have started some time this is not in any way significant -- but some time after she learned that she could file a lawsuit. I think she's also been to Oakwood Center some time after she learned she could file a lawsuit and seek damages from Mr. Epstein. + +There's no history of this lady beforehand other than in some of the Oakwood records where she was Baker Acted, she started drinking beer at 16, she started Xanax at 16, started marijuana at 15, that she's sexually active. + +So how she has interacted -- she has a claim for emotional damages, mental pain and anguish, psychiatric-type damages. How she's interacted with friends, with family, the events in her life, school, work, her interpersonal relationships both with men and let's -- we'll use an example men here, but other individuals. She's saying that this event with Mr. Epstein, + +this sexual assault and whatever occurred during these events is that -- has caused her damage. + +And therefore damages in the case such as the emotional, mental, psychiatric-type damages are completely subjective, I mean separate and apart from any medical bills that may be -- which are clearly intangible. So these are intangible damages. And the jury is instructed, you know, you advise the greater weight of the evidence, what's fair and reasonable under the circumstances. + +So what we would have is basically this young lady's testimony as to what she claims her damages are and what the circumstances are with her situation with Mr. Epstein. She claims on page 13, you know, I love this guy, I'm dating this guy Chris. On page 15 -- + +THE COURT: Is this part of a diary for treatment? + +MR. CRITTON: I have no idea what it is. It was just produced in response to discovery. And she apparently started in, I think this is December of '08. You know I took Jay Lyntenis' girl to the zoo, had an amazing day, I love her, i.e., the girl. We have so much fun. I want a + +1 2 3 4 baby especially with him. Okay. So I know who this person is. We are all so open together, I love him and Jay and , what do I do with Chris, who is another guy in her life. + +5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 All right. This is circumstances where this young lady is saying, look, Jeffrey Epstein has ruined my life from a damage standpoint, okay. Let me depose other individuals with whom you've had a relationship. And what if it turns out -- as with some of these girls did -- is they had relationships or had escapades or circumstances with individuals, older men similar to Mr. Epstein well before Mr. Epstein. + +14 15 16 17 18 19 And this girl, I don't know one way or the other, but let's assume she had a situation where she was assaulted or molested or raped, ' that all is going to affect her emotional and her mental pain and anguish and it will all factor into evaluating damages. + +20 21 22 23 24 25 You know, it's not something that I'm going to spread around. I'm happy to keep it, you know, within the confines of the discovery of this case. But if she says every other relationship in my life has been perfect but Jeff Epstein has done this to me and it has affected + +my ability to trust men and my sexual relationships with other men, which is part of her interpersonal relationships, okay, let's talk to + +THE COURT: When does your client allege that she had her first encounter with Mr. Epstein? + +MR. : At what age? + +THE COURT: Well, what year? + +MR. CRITTON: June of '03. + +MR. : June of '03, Judge. + +MR. CRITTON: She claims from June of '03 through November of '04. + +MR. : She was I believe 16 at the beginning and ended at 17. She was a minor during all this time. + +THE COURT: June of '03 to now is six years. + +Let me hear from Mr. + +MR. : Judge, in the criminal case that was filed against Mr. Epstein, he would not have had a right to do this type of discovery and I -- if I could hand up -- + +THE COURT: They wouldn't care about the women. + +MR. : Right. Well, I mean -- + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +THE COURT: This is damages. There's no - they weren't seeking damages at the time. + +MR. .: Right. And we have not alleged in the complaint or in the answers to interrogatories that her ability to have a relationship with aman has been affected by Mr. Epstein's conduct. + +We have alleged that she has been hospitalized for depression, anxiety but we have not alleged any damages concerning -- the only reason this would be relevant is if we were making a claim at her ability to have either sexual relations or to have emotional relations with men was effected by her experience with Mr. Epstein. + +So this damages' claim is just a smoke screen to attempt to get evidence to show the jury that this woman has had other consensual relationships with young men that are approximately her age what I would characterize as a slut defense. She had it coming to her because she engaged in other voluntarily consensual -- + +THE COURT: Mr. Critton wouldn't try the slut defense in my courtroom, I'm sure. + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +1 2 3 MR. : Maybe not, but certainly that's the way this discovery is going. And, Judge, what -- + +4 5 THE COURT: What are the damages you think your client is seeking? + +6 7 8 10 11 12 13 MR. : She is seeking emotional distress damages for depression and anxiety and she has been hospitalized at the Oakwood Center. Her friend -- she was on the phone to a friend who called the sheriff's office because she thought she was suicidal. The sheriffs responded. They Baker Acted her that day and they took her eventually to the Oakwood Center. + +14 15 16 THE COURT: How do we know it's not intertwined with her rejection by three other men since Mr. Epstein? + +17 18 19 MR. : Well, even if it was related to her rejection by three other men -- you mean other men's rejection of her? + +20 21 22 23 THE COURT: Yeah. Well, how do you not know that? I mean you can't do it until you do discovery. Has anybody attempted to review the records from Oakwood to find out what's going on? + +24 25 MR. CRITTON: It's like a one-time visit when she was Baker Acted and then there's some + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +other -- + +THE COURT: She didn't receive treatment? + +MR. CRITTON: She received treatment for that day and she's been back a couple of times. She's on medication. Again, I don't know what or the extent but she's got -- her medical bills are de minimis. + +Again as an example, Judge, did the Court have an opportunity to look at the case that I also attached to the motion? Because there's a case that's almost on all fours with this which I attached to our motion which is called Belles versus Russo. + +THE COURT: Right. + +MR. CRITTON: It was a case where the plaintiff was sued -- the plaintiff sued the former owners of a house of prostitution. So that part is different, but within it there were a number of claims including a sexual assault claim and they sought emotional pain, humiliation and emotional distress. + +Within the complaint that was filed in this particular case, she is seeking severe emotional distress, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, past and future, compensatory + +humiliation, loss of reputation, mental anguish, pain and suffering, the same type of damages. And what the Court said -- + +THE COURT: How old is she now? + +MR. : She's 21 now. + +MR. CRITTON: She's 21 now. What the Court said is, you know, if you'd only brought this claim under 796 evidence of past issues, it's not an issue. You can't use this defense for anything, but because you brought these other claims which include, you know, sexual assault and you're seeking damages for other causes of action since the information sought by discovery may be relevant or may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in one or more of the other causes of action or determination of damages, we cannot conclude the trial court parted from essential requirements of law in granting -- + +THE COURT: So in other words, she's not only seeking -- she's seeking current emotional damage as a result of this relationship and you're trying to find out if she had prior relationships that perhaps could be intertwined with it so that it's not just Mr. Epstein's -- + +MR. CRITTON: Right. A perfect example is + +one of the cases that I have is there's ayoung lady who claims that she was molested in the past and raped, pretty significant issues, well in advance of her even meeting with Mr. Epstein. And they seem to play a large role in her psychiatric and psychological evaluation. + +We're going to come to the Court in this case as we have others and ask for a psychological evaluation of this lady, and if she was raped or if she was molested or just she had abad experience or some -- whether it was a young or old man assaulted her in some fashion, that may play arole in her damages and what -- + +THE COURT: What I'm going to allow for discovery purposes only not necessarily getting it in at the time trial are two years before her first encounter with Mr. Epstein and anything subsequent. + +MR. IIIIII: Judge, I just wanted to say on the record because I forgot to mention it, there's also -- I did state an objection to the identity of people that are unrepresented in this courtroom. They have rights too. So what I -- + +THE COURT: Well, my suggestion is that you send those people a letter and tell them that + +you're going to disclose them and if they have a problem with it that they come to see me before you disclose it. + +So I'm going to give you 20 days to respond to this rather than the usual five and that will give you time to put these people on notice and if they want to come visit with me and have a John Doe, I'll have aJohn Doe hearing but, you know, this is her case. She's doing it. She's the one seeking damages, and he is entitled to be able to confront other individuals to find out information that may be relevant to the damages she's seeking or she can drop the damages. That's her choice. If you seek damages, you've got to do it -- if you could put that in an order so that we have atime for him to do this. + +Just fill out an order, hand it back up to me and I'll deal with it. + +(The proceedings were concluded.) + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +THE STATE COUNTY OF OF FLORIDA, PALM BEACH. + +REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE + +I, Teresa Bell, Court Reporter, certify that Iwas authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings and that the transcript is a true and complete record of my stenographic notes. + +Ifurther certify that the proceedings were taken at the time and place shown herein and that all counsel and persons as hereinabove shown were present. + +Ifurther certify that I am not arelative, employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor am I arelative or employee of any of the parties' attorney or counsel connected with the action, nor am Ifinancially interested in the action. + +Dated this 11th day + +TERESi BELL, Court Reporter \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744074/EFTA02744074.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744074/EFTA02744074.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d271ef224a9048470d13443ed63f28acb2850abf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744074/EFTA02744074.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,555 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744074.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 13031, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.04, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT \nIN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA \nCASE NO. 50 2008CA020614XXXXMB AF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 172.58399999999997, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 513.2236328125, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 513.2236328125, + 145.4710693359375 + ], + [ + 172.58399999999997, + 145.4710693359375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "APPEARANCES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.01200000000001, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 235.57574462890625, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 235.57574462890625, + 118.85107421875 + ], + [ + 123.01200000000001, + 118.85107421875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 88 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 95 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 102 + ], + [ + "Line", + 51 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 110 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 108 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 109 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 276 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 108 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 110 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 109 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 308 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 265 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 215 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 32 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744074" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744088/EFTA02744088.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744088/EFTA02744088.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..37c6d2153d542b266e25293c50825cd2c2f64158 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744088/EFTA02744088.md @@ -0,0 +1,132 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE NO. 2, To ANSWER DEFENDANT'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE OBJECTIONS, AND FOR AN AWARD OF DEFENDANT'S REASONABLE EXPENSES + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, moves this Court for an order compelling Plaintiff, JANE DOE No. 2 to answer Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories and to overrule her objections asserted in Plaintiff's Answers To Defendant's First Interrogatories, dated January 26, 2009. Defendant further seeks an award of his reasonable expenses, including expenses, associated with the making of this motion. Rule 37, Fed.R.Civ.P. (2008); Local Gen. Rules 7.1 and 26.1 H (S.D. Fla. 2008). In support of his motion, Defendant states: + +## Introduction + +Prior to the filing of this motion, counsel for Defendant and counsel for Plaintiff corresponded with each other and were able to resolve some of the discovery issues related to Defendant's First Interrogatories and Plaintiffs answers and objections thereto. By letter, dated March 3, 2009, the Plaintiff agreed to withdraw her "General Objections" set forth in her response. As well, issues as to interrogatories nos. 10 and 14 are presently resolved. + +Also, Defendant has filed simultaneously with this motion a Motion To Compel directed to certain of Plaintiff's Responses to Defendant's First Request To Produce, also dated January 26, 2009, and which addresses identical discovery issues. Both motions should be determined at the same time. + +# Motion To Compel Answers to Interrogatories Nos. 18. 19, 20, and 21 + +- 18. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding Mr. Epstein, with whom you have had sexual activity since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual activity, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. +- 19. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding your claims against Mr. Epstein, whom you have claimed (formally or informally) committed sexual assault or battery on you since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual assault or battery, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. +- 20. State the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding your claims against Mr. Epstein, whom you have claimed (formally or informally) committed lewd or lascivious conduct to you since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the lewd or lascivious conduct, the date and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. +- 21. State the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding your claims against Mr. Epstein, whom you have claimed (formally or informally) committed lewd or lascivious exhibition to you since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the lewd or lascivious exhibition, the date and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. + +Plaintiff asserted the identical answer to each of the above stated interrogatories: + +# Answer: + +Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory as vague, overly broad, unduly burdensome, harassing, and not reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Moreover, this interrogatory is outrageous, offensive and apparently posed for the purpose of intimidating the victim. Fed.R.Evid. 412 makes any answer to this interrogatory inadmissible, and nothing in the answer could plausibly lead to discovery of admissible evidence. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Plaintiff does not make a relevancy objection, but instead claims that the requests are "not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence," claiming that such "evidence ... would not be admissible under Fed.R.Evid. 412." Plaintiff further claims, without making any showing in her answer and without moving for a protective order in accordance with Rule 26(c) and Local Gen. Rule 26.1 H (S.D. Fla. 2008), that the interrogatory is "harassing,' "outrageous, offensive and is apparently posed for the purpose of intimidating Plaintiff." + +It is well settled that relevant information is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P.; Donahay v. Palm Beach Tours & trans. Inc., 242 F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). Contrary to Plaintiff's assertion, Rule 412 does not automatically result in a determination that such sexual history and sexual activity/behavior information is never admissible. In fact, written into the Rule are the procedures to follow in determining when such information is admissible at trial. The Advisory Committee Notes to Rule 412, Fed.R.Evid, makes clear that the procedures to determine admissibility of an alleged victim's/plaintiffs sexual conduct or activity in civil cases does not apply to discovery of such information. Rather, discoverability of such information is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery is broad. Donahav supra, at 686, and cases cited therein. "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claims or defense of any party involved in the pending action." Id. + +Rule 412, entitled "Sex Offense Cases; Relevance of Alleged Victim's Past Sexual Behavior or Alleged Sexual Predisposition," provides in relevant part - + +> (a) Evidence generally inadmissible.--The following evidence is not admissible in any civil ... proceeding involving alleged sexual misconduct except as provided in subdivisions (b) and (c): + +> (1) Evidence offered to prove that any alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior. + +(2) Evidence offered to prove any alleged victim's sexual predisposition. + +(b) Exceptions.— + +(2) In a civil case, evidence offered to prove the sexual behavior or sexual predisposition of any alleged victim is admissible if it is otherwise admissible under these rules and its probative value substantially outweighs the danger of harm to any victim and of unfair prejudice to any party. Evidence of an alleged victim's reputation is admissible only if it has been placed in controversy by the alleged victim. + +(c) Procedure to determine admissibility.-- + +(1) A party intending to offer evidence under subdivision (b) must— + +(A) file a written motion at least 14 days before trial specifically describing the evidence and stating the purpose for which it is offered unless the court, for good cause requires a different time for filing or permits filing during trial; and + +(B) serve the motion on all parties and notify the alleged victim or, when appropriate, the alleged victim's guardian or representative. + +(2) Before admitting evidence under this rule the court must conduct a hearing in camera and afford the victim and parties a right to attend and be heard. The motion, related papers, and the record of the hearing must be sealed and remain under seal unless the court orders otherwise. + +In confirming that Rule 412 does not control the discoverability of such information, the Advisory Committee Notes (1994 Amendments) state - + +The procedures set forth in subdivision (c) do not apply to discovery of a victim's past sexual conduct or predisposition in civil cases, which will be continued to be governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26. In order not to undermine the rationale of Rule 412, however, courts should enter appropriate orders pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 (c) to protect the victim against unwarranted inquiries and to ensure confidentiality. Courts should presumptively issue protective orders barring discovery unless the party seeking discovery makes a showing that + +> the evidence sought to be discovered would be relevant under the facts and theories of the particular case, and cannot be obtained except through discovery. In an action for sexual harassment, for instance, while some evidence of the alleged victim's sexual behavior and/or predisposition in the workplaceadLperhaps be relevant, non-work place conduct will usually be irrelevant. Cf. v. McGregor Electronic Industries, Inc., 989 F.2d 959, 962- 63 (8th Cir. 1993) (posing for a nude magazine outside work hours is irrelevant to issue of unwelcomeness of sexual advances at work). Confidentiality orders should be presumptively granted as well. + +(Emphasis added). + +In accordance with Rule 412 and Rule 26, the discovery sought regarding Plaintiff's sexual activity with males, including whether she received any compensation or consideration therefore, in interrogatory no. 18, whether she claims other males committed sexual assault or battery on her in no. 19, whether she claims other males committed lewd and lascivious conduct to her in no. 20, and whether other males committed lewd or lascivious exhibition to her in no. 21, are all relevant to Plaintiff's damages claims and the type of injury she claims she has suffered. Defendant has no other means of obtaining such information and obtaining such information through Plaintiff will better protect the confidentiality until the Court can make a determination in accordance with the procedures under Rule 412(c) whether such information will be admissible at trial. See Rule 412(c) quoted above. Defendant will agree to an order keeping the confidentiality of the information obtained through discovery. + +The evidence sought is relevant based on the facts and theories of this action. In her Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiff attempts to allege claims in Count I for "Sexual Assault and Battery," Count II for "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress," and in Count III for "Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C.A. §2422," and seeks damages pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255(a). (Plaintiff alleges + +diversity of citizenship as a basis for this Court's jurisdiction. 2d Am. Complaint, ¶5). Counts I and II are brought pursuant to state law. + +In her complaint, Plaintiff alleges that "she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages," and "severe mental anguish and pain." In her answers to interrogatories nos. 9 and 10, Plaintiff further states that: + +Plaintiff has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries, including without limitation, anxiety, low self-esteem, feelings of guilt, self-blame, distrustfulness, burdened often by sadness and depression, suicidal thoughts, difficulty trusting others (particularly men), irritability, anger, feeling helpless and powerless, escapism through excessive partying, lack of confidence, loss of innocence. (Interrog. No. 9). + +... she seeks damages arising from her psychological and emotional injuries. These damages include pain and suffering, costs of psychological care and treatment, and loss of eaming capacity. ... (Interrog. No. 10). + +Plaintiff also alleges that " Epstein's assistant" was a part of "Epstein's plan and scheme (which) reflected a particular pattern and method" in the alleged recruiting of girl's to come to EPSTEIN's Palm Beach mansion and give him "massages" in exchange for money. 2nd Am. Complaint, ¶11-12. According to the complaint allegations — "Upon information and belief Epstein has a sexual preference and obsession for underage minor girls." ¶8. " ' would "bring the girl up a flight of stairs to a bedroom that contained a massage table ... ." The girl would be alone with EPSTEIN. EPSTEIN would "lie naked on the massage table, and direct the girl to remove her clothes." "Epstein would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, including masturbation and touching the girl's vagina." 21.4 Am. Complaint, ¶11, Exhibit B. Plaintiff alleges that "in 2004-2005," she, "then approximately 16 years old, fell into Epstein's trap and became one of his victims." ¶8. Plaintiff alleges that + +Epstein exposed himself to her and "sexually assaulted" her. ¶12 Plaintiff further alleges that "Epstein committed willful acts of child sexual abuse" on her, which resulted in "mental or sexual injury," and "caused or likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired." 2d Am. Complaint, ¶25. + +The information sought is clearly relevant to the injuries and damages claimed by Plaintiff. The nature of her claimed injuries and damages are such that Defendant is entitled to evidence which would show the nature of her relationship with males, whether she has suffered other acts of sexual misconduct as alleged in her complaint, and whether she suffered injury and damages as a result of the other claimed sexual misconduct with males. See United States v. Bear Stops, 997 F.2d 451 (8th Cir. 1993)(Defendant charged with sexual abuse of six year old boy was entitled to admission of evidence relating to victim's sexual assault by 3 older boys to establish alternative explanation for why victim exhibited behavioral manifestations of sexually abused child.). + +In further support of Defendant's motion, a copy of Balas v. Ruzzo, 703 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1998), is attached hereto as Exhibit A as it is on point to the discovery issues in this action, and the relevancy and discoverability of Plaintiffs history of sexual activity and any payment, therefore. See interrogatories 8, 22 and 30 propounded in the Bales case and footnote 1 herein. 1 Additionally and significantly, in other pending state court civil actions against Defendant + +1 In Bales v. Ruzzo, supra, the Plaintiffs alleged a multicount complaint including claims for "coercion of prostitution" pursuant to §796.09, Fla. Stat.; for battery for the unwanted and offensive touching of petitioners' bodies; false imprisonment for physically confining the petitioners against their will; invasion of privacy; and intentional infliction of emotional distress. + +EPSTEIN attempting to assert similar claims and damages, the Circuit Court Judges have already ruled that such information is discoverable as it is relevant to the damages claims of Plaintiff. See Composite Exhibits B and C hereto. Composite Exhibit B are the Orders, dated February 23, 2009, entered in the case of A.C. v. Epstein, and Case No. 502008CA025129 MB Al, 15th Judicial Circuit, In and For Palm Beach County, State of Florida, which granted Defendant's motion to compel therein directed to discovery identical to interrogatory no. 18 above, and to requests for production nos. 17 and 18 addressed below herein. (In the A.C. case, the Plaintiff answered without objection interrogatories identical to nos. 19, 20, and 21 herein.) Composite Exhibit C is a portion the transcript from a March 3, 2009 hearing on Defendant's motion to compel discovery in the case of Jane Doe II v. Epstein, and Case No. 502008CA020614 MB AF, le Judicial Circuit Court, In and For Palm Beach County, State of Florida. Again, the Circuit Court Judge determined that the information sought is relevant to the issue of damages and, thus, discoverable. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court grant his motion to compel and award his attorney's fees and costs, associated with this motion, in accordance with Rule 37, Fed.R.Civ.P., and applicable Local Rules. + +## Rule 7.1 Certification + +I hereby certify that counsel for the respective parties communicated by letters in a good faith effort to resolve the discovery issues prior to the filing of this motion to compel. Some of the issues were resolved. + +> Robert D. C on, Jr. Attorney fo Defendant Epstein + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 2/24 day of April, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com +Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +jagesq@bellsouth.net +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()*(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744088/EFTA02744088.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744088/EFTA02744088.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e061a8a00aeb41a5406aeb657e1ce5757e26bfbc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744088/EFTA02744088.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,539 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744088.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 16739, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.06, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.7699890136719, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.7699890136719, + 100.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 100.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF, \nJANE DOE NO. 2, To ANSWER DEFENDANT'S FIRST SET OF \nINTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE OBJECTIONS, AND \nFOR AN AWARD OF DEFENDANT'S REASONABLE EXPENSES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 126.68399999999998, + 279.1875 + ], + [ + 492.66278076171875, + 279.1875 + ], + [ + 492.66278076171875, + 335.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 126.68399999999998, + 335.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.788, + 541.3074951171875 + ], + [ + 345.2459411621094, + 541.3074951171875 + ], + [ + 345.2459411621094, + 555.9199981689453 + ], + [ + 274.788, + 555.9199981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Motion To Compel Answers to Interrogatories Nos. 18. 19, 20, and 21", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.62400000000002, + 181.3074951171875 + ], + [ + 491.714111328125, + 181.3074951171875 + ], + [ + 491.714111328125, + 197.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 123.62400000000002, + 197.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.768, + 567.0 + ], + [ + 124.87642669677734, + 567.0 + ], + [ + 124.87642669677734, + 582.5500030517578 + ], + [ + 69.768, + 582.5500030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 164.62800000000001, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 448.8654479980469, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 448.8654479980469, + 87.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 164.62800000000001, + 87.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 541.08 + ], + [ + 366.57135009765625, + 541.08 + ], + [ + 366.57135009765625, + 555.9199981689453 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 555.9199981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.548, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 386.17199999999997, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 386.17199999999997, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 262.548, + 84.24 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744088" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744097/EFTA02744097.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744097/EFTA02744097.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..319245ae588048a2675bb15e236712bf13b07419 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744097/EFTA02744097.md @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA- + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S ANSWER & AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, files his Answer to the Second Amended Complaint and states: + +- 1. Without knowledge and deny. + +2. As to the allegations in paragraphs 2, Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)• Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - lilt would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court"); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny - Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting + +the privilege [against self-incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief' which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +- 3. As to the allegations in paragraph 3, deny. +- 4. As to the allegations in paragraph 4, deny. +- 5. As to the allegations in paragraph 5, without knowledge and deny. + +6. As to the allegations in paragraphs 6, Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)• Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. — "... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against self-incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief' which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +7. As to the allegations in paragraphs 7 through 14 of Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint, Defendant exercises his Fifth Amendment Privilege against self- + +incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court.")• 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. —"... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against self-incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief' which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +8. In response to the allegations of paragraph 15, Defendant realleges and adopts his responses to paragraphs 1 through 14 of the Second Amended Complaint set forth in paragraphs 1 through 6 above herein. + +9. Defendant asserts the Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-incrimination to the allegations set forth in paragraphs 16 through 21 of the Second Amended Complaint. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "lilt would be incongruous to have different standards determine the + +validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 FIa.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. —"... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against selfincrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief' which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +10. In response to the allegations of paragraph 22, Defendant realleges and adopts his responses to paragraphs 1 through 14 of the Second Amended Complaint set forth in paragraphs 1 through 6 above herein. + +11. Defendant asserts the Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-incrimination to the allegations set forth in paragraphs 23 through 27 of the Second Amended Complaint. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court"); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 + +Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. —"... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against selfincrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief" which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +12. In response to the allegations of paragraph 28, Defendant realleges and adopts his responses to paragraphs 1 through 14 of the Second Amended Complaint set forth in paragraphs 1 through 6 above herein. + +13. Defendant asserts the Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-incrimination to the allegations set forth in paragraphs 29 through 34 of the Second Amended Complaint. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendments Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court.")• 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny - Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. —"... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against selfincrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary + +application for affirmative relief" which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court deny the relief sought by Plaintiff. + +## Affirmative Defenses + +- 1. As to all counts, Plaintiff consented to and was a willing participant in the acts alleged. +- 2. As to all counts alleged, Plaintiff consented to and participated in conduct similar and/or identical to the acts alleged with other persons which were the sole or contributing cause of Plaintiff's alleged damages +- 3. As to all counts, Defendant reasonably believed that the Plaintiff had attained the age of 18 years old at the time of the alleged acts. + - 4. Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. + +WHEREFORE Defendant requests that this Court deny the reef sought by Plaintiff. + +Robert D. itton, Jr. Attorney f r Defendant Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record i entitled on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this ay of April , 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +![]()![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744097/EFTA02744097.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744097/EFTA02744097.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3f0ed292f0c4c68812551cf023074cd07224437a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744097/EFTA02744097.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,379 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744097.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 10298, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.82, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 413.1600036621094, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 413.1600036621094, + 114.16998291015625 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 114.16998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S ANSWER & AFFIRMATIVE \nDEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.90799999999999, + 281.88 + ], + [ + 490.0802917480469, + 281.88 + ], + [ + 490.0802917480469, + 312.16998291015625 + ], + [ + 127.90799999999999, + 312.16998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Affirmative Defenses", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 243.57600000000002, + 189.54000000000002 + ], + [ + 369.85687255859375, + 189.54000000000002 + ], + [ + 369.85687255859375, + 205.98248291015625 + ], + [ + 243.57600000000002, + 205.98248291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.996, + 604.26 + ], + [ + 390.1553649902344, + 604.26 + ], + [ + 390.1553649902344, + 620.7324981689453 + ], + [ + 264.996, + 620.7324981689453 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744097" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744104/EFTA02744104.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744104/EFTA02744104.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8d5a6808e08ffd8142ac9ad679de37ea8f6a4691 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744104/EFTA02744104.md @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA=M + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I -MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +ORDER + +Upon Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Reply Memoranda in Support of Motions to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents, and good cause being shown, it is hereby + +ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs shall have an enlargement of time of two (2) weeks, until April 20, 2009, to file reply memoranda in support of the Motions to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents. + +DONE AND ORDERED in in Ft. Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this day of 2009. + +DISTRICT COURT JUDGE \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744104/EFTA02744104.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744104/EFTA02744104.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..62f06fcfc7863148de58bb5c5460e5d5873190a9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744104/EFTA02744104.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744104.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1005, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.13, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744104" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744106/EFTA02744106.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744106/EFTA02744106.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b3ecba3f6b55c94503014b8220ee071ea473ebc6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744106/EFTA02744106.md @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MAR + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME + +## TO FILE REPLY MEMORANDA IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONS TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS + +Plaintiffs, JANE DOES 2-5, by and through undersigned counsel, file this Motion for Enlargement to Time to File Reply Memoranda in Support of Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents, pursuant to S.D. Fla.L.R. 7.1 and Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b), and state as follows: + +I. Plaintiffs in the above-styled cases filed Motions to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents on March 2, 2009. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein served Memoranda in opposition to these Motions on March 25, 2009. + +2. Plaintiffs move for an enlargement of time to prepare and file their replies in support of the Motions because of demands on Plaintiffs' counsel in other cases and matters. In particular, Plaintiffs' counsel has an initial appeal brief due in Doe v. School Bd. of Broward County and Scavella case no. 09 -10394-E, Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiffs' counsel also has an impending discovery deadline in v. Archdiocese of New York, case no. 10069-06, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York. + +3. The Plaintiffs' replies in support of the subject Motions are presently due on April 6, 2009. Plaintiffs request an enlargement of time of two (2) weeks, until April 20, 2009. + +4. Pursuant to S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1(A), Plaintiffs' counsel has conferred with counsel for Defendant regarding the relief sought in this Motion, who has advised Plaintiffs' counsel that Defendant has no objection to the enlargement of time requested. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request an enlargement of time to file reply memoranda in support of the Motions to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents, until and including April 20, 2009. + +Dated: April 3, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintifs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on April 3, 2009. I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Is/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. inoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744106/EFTA02744106.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744106/EFTA02744106.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4672f31eca749522c6820929684a16100b0ed4cd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744106/EFTA02744106.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,303 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744106.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 3394, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.34, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 406.76995849609375, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 406.76995849609375, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TO FILE REPLY MEMORANDA IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONS TO COMPEL \nANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.86, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 517.73095703125, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 517.73095703125, + 115.863037109375 + ], + [ + 94.86, + 115.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 386.50201416015625, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 386.50201416015625, + 100.863037109375 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 100.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 129.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 129.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744106" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744111/EFTA02744111.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744111/EFTA02744111.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..adf329eef211e71f28011dc4c225760439324c63 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744111/EFTA02744111.md @@ -0,0 +1,91 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## Defendant's Motion For Extension Of Time In Which To Respond To Plaintiffs Motion For Protective Order And To Quash Subpoena For Deposition Of Jane Doe No. 3, Motion To Consolidate Cases For Purposes Of Discovery, And Incorporated Memorandum Of Law + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, (hereinafter "Epstein") by and through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which to respond to Plaintiffs Motion For Protective Order And To Quash Subpoena For Deposition Of Jane Doe No. 3, Motion To Consolidate Cases For Purposes Of Discovery, And Incorporated Memorandum Of Law ("Motion"). Local General Rule 7.1 A.1 and Rule 6, Fed. R. Civ. P. (2009). Defendant seeks an extension until April 13, 2009 to file his response. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: + +- 1. Defendant's response to the Motion is due on or about April 6, 2009. +- 2. Plaintiff's counsel also represents five (5) other Plaintiffs pursuing claims against Defendant, EPSTEIN, most of which have filed similar Motions. In order to fully and adequately respond to this and the other motions, Defendant is in need of an extension until April 13, 2009. + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein Page 2 + +3. In addition to the multiple motions, good cause for the extension also includes that counsel has been attempting to resolve discovery issues in this and other cases against Defendant, EPSTEIN; an associate of Defendant's undersigned counsel who works extensively on this case is currently out of the office and the undersigned was working on and has filed between 12-15 motions and responses in the various cases during the time these motions were filed. + +4. The requested extension is fair and reasonable under the circumstances as it will provide time to allow the Defendant, EPSTEIN, to fully and adequately respond to this and the other motions. In addition, this action is still at its early stages. + +5. As certified below, counsel for Defendant conferred with counsel for Plaintiff, and Plaintiffs counsel is in agreement with the requested extension. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an order granting an Defendant an extension until April 13, 2009, in which to respond to the Above Motion. + +## Local Rule 7.1 Statement + +Counsel for the movant conferred by telephone with counsel for the Plaintiff and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested extension until April 13, 2009 for Defendant to respond to the Motion. + +Rob Attorney for + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein +Page 3 + +served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of April, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +![]()By: + +![]()Florida Bar No. 224162 + +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +*(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744111/EFTA02744111.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744111/EFTA02744111.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d79dc8b841406490fa8c8a94b9c5c949c1c726f7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744111/EFTA02744111.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,227 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744111.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 4006, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.43, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 411.2753601074219, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 411.2753601074219, + 115.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 115.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant's Motion For Extension Of Time In Which To Respond To Plaintiffs \nMotion For Protective Order And To Quash Subpoena For Deposition Of Jane Doe \nNo. 3, Motion To Consolidate Cases For Purposes Of Discovery, And \nIncorporated Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 67.932, + 296.46 + ], + [ + 545.2286987304688, + 296.46 + ], + [ + 545.2286987304688, + 354.53997802734375 + ], + [ + 67.932, + 354.53997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Local Rule 7.1 Statement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 233.784, + 464.12999999999994 + ], + [ + 382.65643310546875, + 464.12999999999994 + ], + [ + 382.65643310546875, + 479.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 233.784, + 479.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.384, + 644.4375 + ], + [ + 388.9452819824219, + 644.4375 + ], + [ + 388.9452819824219, + 659.0500030517578 + ], + [ + 264.384, + 659.0500030517578 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 55 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744111" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744114/EFTA02744114.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744114/EFTA02744114.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3cbef8497309ea7a9a16700c1786b08b393ab078 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744114/EFTA02744114.md @@ -0,0 +1,72 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAMIll + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## Defendant's Amended Motion For Extension Of Time In Which To Respond To Plaintiff's Motion For Protective Order And To Quash Subpoena For Deposition Of Jane Doe No. 3, Motion To Consolidate Cases For Purposes Of Discovery, And Incorporated Memorandum Of Law + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, (hereinafter "Epstein") by and through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which to respond to Plaintiffs Motion For Protective Order And To Quash Subpoena For Deposition Of Jane Doe No. 3, Motion To Consolidate Cases For Purposes Of Discovery, And Incorporated Memorandum Of Law ("Motion"). Local General Rule 7.1 A.1 and Rule 6, Fed. R. Civ. P. (2009). Defendant seeks an extension until April 16, 2009to file his response. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: + +1. Defendant's response to the Motion is due on or about April 6, 2009, and an extension was given to April 13, 2009. + +2. Plaintiffs counsel also represents five (5) other Plaintiffs pursuing claims against Defendant, EPSTEIN, most of which have filed similar Motions. In order to fully and + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein Page 2 + +adequately respond to this and the other motions, Defendant is in need of an extension until April 16, 2009. + +3. In addition to the multiple motions, good cause for the extension also includes that counsel has been attempting to resolve discovery issues in this and other cases against Defendant, EPSTEIN; an associate of Defendant's undersigned counsel who works extensively on this case is currently out of the office and the undersigned was working on and has filed between 12-15 motions and responses in the various cases during the time these motions were filed. + +4. The requested extension is fair and reasonable under the circumstances as it will provide time to allow the Defendant, EPSTEIN, to fully and adequately respond to this and the other motions. In addition, this action is still at its early stages. + +5. As certified below, counsel for Defendant conferred with counsel for Plaintiff, and Plaintiff's counsel is in agreement with the requested extension. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an order granting an Defendant an extension until April 16, 2009, in which to respond to the Above Motion. + +## Local Rule 7.1 Statement + +Counsel for the movant conferred by telephone with counsel for the Plaintiff and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested extension until April 16, 2009 for Defendant to respond to the Motion. + +Robert D Attorney fo S of + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein +Page 3 + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 10 day of April, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()*(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744114/EFTA02744114.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744114/EFTA02744114.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9889201850d874a772107c66e036e50af8a9e76c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744114/EFTA02744114.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,219 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744114.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3803, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.6, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 196.0264129638672, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 401.5078430175781, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 401.5078430175781, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 196.0264129638672, + 114.20999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant's Amended Motion For Extension Of Time In Which To Respond To \nPlaintiff's Motion For Protective Order And To Quash Subpoena For Deposition \nOf Jane Doe No. 3, Motion To Consolidate Cases For Purposes Of Discovery, And \nIncorporated Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.096, + 298.89 + ], + [ + 537.336, + 298.89 + ], + [ + 537.336, + 355.7423095703125 + ], + [ + 66.096, + 355.7423095703125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Local Rule 7.1 Statement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 522.1875 + ], + [ + 377.03643798828125, + 522.1875 + ], + [ + 377.03643798828125, + 537.1800079345703 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 537.1800079345703 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 258.264, + 701.4375 + ], + [ + 384.025390625, + 701.4375 + ], + [ + 384.025390625, + 716.0500030517578 + ], + [ + 258.264, + 716.0500030517578 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 240 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744114" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744117/EFTA02744117.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744117/EFTA02744117.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f4a72ebe333b31f45e5d459203b240701a494337 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744117/EFTA02744117.md @@ -0,0 +1,59 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA=M + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +Upon Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Memorandum in Opposition to Motion to Stay and/or Continue Action, and good cause being shown, it is hereby + +ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs shall have an enlargement of time of ten (10) days, until April 23, 2009, to file a reply memorandum in opposition to the Defendant's Motion to Stay and/or Continue Action. + +DONE AND ORDERED in in Ft. Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this day of 2009. + +DISTRICT COURT JUDGE \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744117/EFTA02744117.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744117/EFTA02744117.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..82c5530f238295f7b0e74b20becb59a694c6b705 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744117/EFTA02744117.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744117.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1130, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.19, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 330.3381042480469, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 330.3381042480469, + 408.363037109375 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 408.363037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744117" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744119/EFTA02744119.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744119/EFTA02744119.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..171378a264d0822a59056fc67cb703aaa41d02c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744119/EFTA02744119.md @@ -0,0 +1,85 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MAR + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STAY AND/OR CONTINUE ACTION + +Plaintiffs, JANE DOES 2-7, by and through undersigned counsel, file this Motion for Enlargement to Time to File Memorandum in Opposition to Motion to Stay and/or Continue Action, pursuant to S.D. Fla.L.R. 7.1 and Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b), and state as follows: + +- 1. Defendant Epstein filed a Motion to Stay and/or Continue Action for Time Certain Based on Parallel Civil and Criminal Proceedings, in each of the above-captioned cases, on March 25, 2009. Plaintiffs response to this Motion is due on April 13, 2009. +- 2. Plaintiffs move for an enlargement of time to prepare and file their responses to the Motion because of demands on Plaintiffs' counsel in other cases and matters. In particular, Plaintiffs' counsel has an initial appeal brief due in Doe v. School Bd. of Broward County and + +Scavella, case no. 09 -10394-E, Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. + +- 3. Plaintiffs request an enlargement of time of ten (10) days, until April 23, 2009. +- 4. Pursuant to S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1(A), Plaintiffs' counsel has conferred with counsel for Defendant regarding the relief sought in this Motion, who has advised Plaintiffs' counsel that Defendant has no objection to the enlargement of time requested. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request an enlargement of time to file their response to the Motion to Stay et al., until and including April 23, 2009. + +Dated: April 23, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintifs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on April 23, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Is/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@belclaw.com + +Is/ Stuart S. MenneIstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744119/EFTA02744119.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744119/EFTA02744119.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..06c8ed1aecd03f4fff9ff05ab6e5b845cea470ac --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744119/EFTA02744119.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,319 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744119.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 3196, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.51, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 406.76995849609375, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 406.76995849609375, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT \nOF TIME TO FILE MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION \nTO MOTION TO STAY AND/OR CONTINUE ACTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 136.476, + 421.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 475.5215759277344, + 421.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 475.5215759277344, + 464.60302734375 + ], + [ + 136.476, + 464.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 386.50201416015625, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 386.50201416015625, + 100.863037109375 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 100.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.6081237792969, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.6081237792969, + 128.947021484375 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 128.947021484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744119" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744124/EFTA02744124.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744124/EFTA02744124.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f3621c3fc2f203596794b3512d4f2eeeba85007f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744124/EFTA02744124.md @@ -0,0 +1,90 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA- + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## Defendant's Amended Motion For Extension Of Time In Which To Respond To Plaintiffs Motion For Protective Order And To Quash Subpoena For Deposition Of Jane Doe No. 3, Motion To Consolidate Cases For Purposes Of Discovery, And Incorporated Memorandum Of Law + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, (hereinafter "Epstein") by and through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which to respond to Plaintiff's Motion For Protective Order And To Quash Subpoena For Deposition Of Jane Doe No. 3, Motion To Consolidate Cases For Purposes Of Discovery, And Incorporated Memorandum Of Law ("Motion"). Local General Rule 7.1 A.1 and Rule 6, Fed. R. Civ. P. (2009). Defendant seeks an extension until April 24, 2009 to file his response. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: + +- 1. Defendant's response to the Motion is due on or about April 6, 2009, and an extension was given to April 13, 2009. +- 2. Plaintiff's counsel also represents five (5) other Plaintiffs pursuing claims against Defendant, EPSTEIN, most of which have filed similar Motions. In order to fully and + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein +Page 2 + +adequately respond to this and the other motions, Defendant is in need of an extension until April 24, 2009. + +3. In addition to the multiple motions, good cause for the extension also includes that counsel has been attempting to resolve discovery issues in this and other cases against Defendant, EPSTEIN; an associate of Defendant's undersigned counsel who works extensively on this case is currently out of the office and the undersigned was working on and has filed between 12-15 motions and responses in the various cases during the time these motions were filed. + +4. The requested extension is fair and reasonable under the circumstances as it will provide time to allow the Defendant, EPSTEIN, to fully and adequately respond to this and the other motions. In addition, this action is still at its early stages. + +5. As certified below, counsel for Defendant conferred with counsel for Plaintiff, and Plaintiff's counsel is in agreement with the requested extension. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an order granting Defendant an extension until April 24, 2009, in which to respond to the Above Motion. + +### **Local Rule 7.1 Statement** + +Counsel for the movant conferred by telephone with counsel for the Plaintiff and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested extension until April 24, 2009 for Defendant to respond to the Motion. + +![]()Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein +Page 3 + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 17 day of April, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +![]()By: + +![]()Florida Bar No. 224162 + +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +*(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744124/EFTA02744124.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744124/EFTA02744124.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..65ca2e38390b4444adb65eace08d81cd0bec22f8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744124/EFTA02744124.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,235 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744124.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 4058, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.3, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 196.452, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 404.10198974609375, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 404.10198974609375, + 116.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 196.452, + 116.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant's Amended Motion For Extension Of Time In Which To Respond To \nPlaintiffs Motion For Protective Order And To Quash Subpoena For Deposition \nOf Jane Doe No. 3, Motion To Consolidate Cases For Purposes Of Discovery, And \nIncorporated Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.096, + 298.89 + ], + [ + 536.9072265625, + 298.89 + ], + [ + 536.9072265625, + 355.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 66.096, + 355.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Local Rule 7.1 Statement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 522.45 + ], + [ + 374.544, + 522.45 + ], + [ + 374.544, + 537.0300000000001 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 537.0300000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.204, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 378.216, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 378.216, + 123.12 + ], + [ + 255.204, + 123.12 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744124" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744127/EFTA02744127.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744127/EFTA02744127.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f536e0cdf46118076a0d0fad9fc92f27b53ed28c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744127/EFTA02744127.md @@ -0,0 +1,102 @@ +*Diac* + +**UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA** + +**CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA-[REDACTED]** + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +**PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 3'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST +INTERROGATORIES** + +Plaintiff, JANE DOE 3, by and through their undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 33, hereby responds to Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff as follows: + +**General Objections** + +1. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that the Interrogatories call for the disclosure of information protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product doctrine, or other applicable privilege or immunity, whether created by statute or common law. Plaintiff claims such privileges and protections to the extent implicated by each Interrogatory, and excludes privileged and protected information from any responses to Defendant's discovery. Any disclosure is inadvertent and is not intended to waive those privileges or protections, which are specifically reserved. + +2. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that same are vague, ambiguous, incomprehensible and/or overly broad. + +**"A"** + +*CC: JANE, DI* + +Doe No. 3 v. Epstein + +Page 6 + +Palm Beach, FL + +- 4. Have you ever been convicted of a crime, other than any juvenile adjudication, which under the law under which you were convicted was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of 1 year, or that involved dishonesty or a false statement regardless of the punishment? If so, slate as to each conviction the specific crime and the date and place of conviction. + +Answer: + +No. + +- 5. Please provide the name, address, telephone number, place of employment and job title of any person who has, claims to have or whom you believe may have knowledge or information pertaining to any fact alleged in the pleadings (as defined In Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(a) filed in this action, or any fact underlying the subject matter of this action. + +Answer: + +Plaintiff + +Other victims making similar allegations of sexual misconduct against Defendant Epstein who have brought civil claims against Epstein in Florida State and Federal courts. + +Defendant + +a Defendant's assistant + +Unknown staff members of Defendant, including the chefIM, gardener, and maid + +Accompanied Plaintiff to Defendant's estate on at least one occasion + +Accompanied Plaintiff to Defendant's estate on at least one occasion + +laintiff to Defendants estate on at least one occasion + +an + +Accompanied tPlaintiff to Defendant's estate on at least one occasion + +111111NINIP + +Doe No. 3 v. Epstein +Page 7 + +[REDACTED] 9 + +Plaintiff has seen Dr. [REDACTED] for therapy since Jan. 2008. + +[REDACTED] n + +Plaintiff has seen Dr. [REDACTED] for medication management since Nov. 2007. + +[REDACTED] er +4 +[REDACTED] who treated Plaintiff from Aug. 2007-Dec. 2007. + +Discovery is ongoing and will be supplemented in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +- 6. Please state the specific nature and substance of the knowledge that you believe the person(s) identified in your response to interrogatory no. 5 may have. + +**Answer:** + +See Plaintiff's Answer to Interrogatory No. 5. + +- 7. Were you suffering from physical infirmity, disability, disease, sickness, or psychiatric/psychological condition at the time of the incident(s) described in the complaint? If so, what was the nature of the infirmity, disability, or sickness? + +**Answer:** + +[REDACTED] + +- 8. Did you consume any alcoholic beverages or take any drugs or medications within 12 hours before the time of each incident(s) described in the complaint? If so, state the type and amount of alcoholic beverages, drugs, or medication which were consumed, and when and where you consumed them. + +**Answer:** \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744127/EFTA02744127.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744127/EFTA02744127.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0c317b3c5c52b8a8b0d9006e162abb7f72e32680 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744127/EFTA02744127.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,212 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744127.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3847, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.6, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 401.47200000000004, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 401.47200000000004, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 103.68 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 3'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 117.50399999999999, + 298.89 + ], + [ + 482.25600000000003, + 298.89 + ], + [ + 482.25600000000003, + 325.62 + ], + [ + 117.50399999999999, + 325.62 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "General Objections", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 243.57600000000002, + 417.96 + ], + [ + 355.57199999999995, + 417.96 + ], + [ + 355.57199999999995, + 430.9200000000001 + ], + [ + 243.57600000000002, + 430.9200000000001 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744127" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744130/EFTA02744130.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744130/EFTA02744130.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1806ab591493f44046ad5377d911f6f7c505d0f4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744130/EFTA02744130.md @@ -0,0 +1,85 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAMIMMI + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND TO OUASH SUBPOENA FOR DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO.3, MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY, AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, serves his Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe no.3, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (hereinafter, the Motion"), with incorporated memorandum of law. In support, Defendant states: + +### I. RESPONSE WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW AS TO DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE. NO.3 AND MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE + +### a. The Depositions + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2, filed this federal lawsuit against Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein. In another separate matter, a Plaintiff, Jane Doe, No. 3., filed her own separate lawsuit against Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein. Plaintiff's counsel represents all Jane Does in cases Jane Doe Nos. 2 through 7 before this court. + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe. No. 3, served answers to interrogatories wherein she lists certain witness that may have knowledge regarding the facts and allegations alleged in her complaint including, but not limited to, Jane Doe No. 2. See Exhibit "A", Answer to Interrogatories, No. 5, in redacted form. An unredacted copy of the responses will be provided to the court upon the court's request and/or in camera. In particular, the response to interrogatory number 5 states that Jane Doe numbers 2 and 3 accompanied each other to Defendant's estate. Plaintiff admits this much in her Motion. Defendant seeks to take the deposition of Jane Doe. No. 3 as a witness in the instant matter and as a party in Plaintiff her own case, which she is an unidentified Plaintiff traveling under Jane Doe. No. 3. + +In an attempt to resolve this matter by letter correspondence, Defendant agreed and offered only to take the deposition of Jane Doe. No. 3 as a witness in all Jane Doe 2-7 cases only one time and separately one time as a Party Plaintiff in the matter Jane Doe No. 3 filed against Jeffrey Epstein. While this is a reasonable compromise in that Defendant has agreed not to take her deposition three (3) times as Plaintiff suspected, Plaintiff's counsel refused to agree. Plaintiff cannot file a lawsuit and then expect this court to protect her from being deposed as a party for the time period proscribed under the federal rules while at the same time asking this court to limit or prevent her deposition testimony as a witness in the instant matter or other Jane Doe matters where she has been identified as a witness. + +It is well settled that a Defendant may take the deposition of a party and/or a witness before trial. Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ. P., Rule 30, Fed.R. Civ.,P. and Leve v. General Motors Corp., 43 F.R.D. 508 (S.D.N.Y. 2967). Jane Doe. Nos. 2 and 3 commenced separate civil actions upon the filing of same against Jeffrey Epstein. Therefore, Defendant is entitled to depose Jane Doe Nos. 2 and 3 in their own cases at least one time for the proscribed time periods and then as a witness in the instant matter or any matter they have knowledge of as reflected in the interrogatory responses. Therefore, Defendant has a right to depose each party-plaintiff separately and then as a witness at least once. Deposing Jane Doe No. 3 as a witness in the instant matter is necessary as that deposition will be tailored toward facts known by Jane Doe. No. 3 as those facts pertain to Jane Doe. No. 2's claims in her complaint as opposed to the facts alleged by Jane Doe. No. 3 in her individual action. + +Plaintiff's attorneys claim that sitting for more than one deposition will be traumatizing does not modify the rules and/or the law with regard to the right to take party and witness depositions. Plaintiff offers no expert medical or psychological support, by an affidavit of an expert or the Plaintiff herself, to support her position. In almost all instances, none of the Plaintiff's sought or received any psychological counseling until the concept of a lawsuit and money was introduced. A party may, by oral questions take the deposition of any person, without leave of court. Rule 30, Fed.R. Civ.,P. Conducting these depositions separately will allow for the proper preparation as to each deponent's knowledge as that knowledge pertains to the specific case at hand (i.e., whether the deponent is a witness and/or a party plaintiff). Again, Defendant is willing to conduct one (1) deposition in connection with each matter before this court wherein a party to one matter is listed as a "witness" in another. That is, if Jane Doe No. 3 has knowledge as a witness to one or more matters, one "witness" deposition will be held. However, Defendant is also permitted to separately take a party-plaintiff deposition of any partyplaintiff that happens to be a witness of and/or have knowledge of any other party-plaintiff's deposition. As such, only two depositions will occur. + +There is no legal basis supporting Plaintiff's proposition that Defendant not be allowed to take the deposition of Jane Doe. No. 3 as a witness in the instant matter and as a party-plaintiff in Jane Doe. No.3's separately filed action. In fact, Plaintiff's theory flies in the face of the Federal Rules. Despite Plaintiff's contention, Defendant is not attempting to depose or call a witness for a second deposition without leave of court. Quite the opposite, Plaintiff is simply doing what the rules allow for — the taking of a deposition of a party and a witness. + +# b. Consolidation For Discovery Is Not Practical + +Next, if this case is consolidated for discovery purposes and depositions are limited only to one (1) deposition for a party plaintiff and for a witness that happens to be a party plaintiff in another matter, then confusion will result and motions in limine will undoubtedly be filed at a later date preventing the use of certain testimony at particular hearings and ultimately at trial. Further, since there remain separate party-plaintiffs, admissions or answers to discovery by one party, arguably, cannot be iced by the Defendant in a consolidated discovery matter against another party-plaintiff. As such, consolidation in the instant matter is not warranted in that not all common issues of fact are present and the parties are not identical. Kelly v. Kelly, 911 F.Supp. 66 (N.D. NY 1996)(consolidation refused because it would only serve purpose of convenience of some witnesses, actions did not share all witnesses and parties were not identical); Borough of Olvphant v. PPL Corporation et al., 153 Fed.Appx. 80, 2005 WL 2673489 (C.A.3 (P.A.)); Motor Credit Company v. Chiorazzo, 529 F.Supp.2d 535 (D. N.J. 2008). + +Under Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 42, the decision to consolidate cases for discovery is not mandatory but that decision remains within the sound discretion of the court. In this instance, various Jane Does seek to consolidate the cases for discovery purposes. Very clearly, the facts and circumstances, as pled and as is reflected in answers to interrogatories, are different for each individual, i.e. the dates, the ages, the events, their experiences, witnesses, medical and/or psychological treatment, etc. Each of the Plaintiffs alleged incident history and post incident history and background is unique to those individuals. While Jane Doe Plaintiffs may wish to serve a"standard" set of interrogatories, request for production, or any other type of discovery, the Defendant's discovery to the individual Plaintiffs, and certainly their responses, is unique to that individual. There will be multiple instances where the discovery is applicable only to a specific Jane Doe and not all, such as, physicians, psychologists, parents, siblings, friends, employers, teachers, individuals with whom the Plaintiff has had relationships — many of these depositions will go to damage related issues wherein the Plaintiffs seek millions of dollars in the form of compensation. + +There are some instances where the deposition of a particular individual may be applicable to all cases, and defense counsel will suggest, as he did in correspondence directed to Plaintiff's counsel that that particular deposition be used in all cases. However, in avast majority of the instances where discovery, deposition and/or paper discovery is being utilized, including subpoena which will be sent to many different sources for each of the six Jane Does, consolidation serves no purpose. + +Even if this court consolidated the matters requested by Plaintiff, the undersigned would still be entitled to additional time to depose any party-plaintiff that is also listed or who has knowledge of any aspect of any other party-plaintiff's claim against Jeffrey Epstein. In addition, this Court has before it each of the cases filed by certain Plaintiffs against Jeffrey Epstein. Therefore, there is no chance of "conflicting results" as to rulings made by the same court and the same judge. As such, no true need exists for consolidation. Under Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 42, consolidation for discovery is not required, but remains within the sound discretion of the court. + +## II. Conclusion + +In sum, if Jane Doe No. 3 has knowledge as a witness to one or more matters, one "witness" deposition will be held as to her witness knowledge. However, Defendant is also permitted to separately take Jane Doe. No. 3's deposition as a party-plaintiff. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court deny the Motion, enter an order allowing for the relief requested herein and for such other relief is court deems just and proper. + +obert D. Critton, Jr. Attorney for Defendant Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this Lay of April, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermeistein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com ahorowitz®sexabuseattommcom Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 lagesqAbellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein Respectfully subm + +By: / + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744130/EFTA02744130.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744130/EFTA02744130.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..abaf618841ff67387e414d844d8c21b5f7dd5487 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744130/EFTA02744130.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,436 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744130.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 11043, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.45, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 413.646484375, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 413.646484375, + 103.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 103.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR \nPROTECTIVE ORDER AND TO OUASH SUBPOENA FOR \nDEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO.3, MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE \nCASES FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY, AND INCORPORATED \nMEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.16, + 279.45 + ], + [ + 505.5246276855469, + 279.45 + ], + [ + 505.5246276855469, + 352.10302734375 + ], + [ + 110.16, + 352.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. RESPONSE WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW AS TO \nDEPOSITION OF JANE DOE. NO.3 AND MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 101.59200000000001, + 499.77 + ], + [ + 535.1232299804688, + 499.77 + ], + [ + 535.1232299804688, + 531.35302734375 + ], + [ + 101.59200000000001, + 531.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. The Depositions", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 258.876, + 543.51 + ], + [ + 359.8993225097656, + 543.51 + ], + [ + 359.8993225097656, + 559.1030120849609 + ], + [ + 258.876, + 559.1030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "b. Consolidation For Discovery Is Not Practical", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 181.152, + 185.49 + ], + [ + 432.1847839355469, + 185.49 + ], + [ + 432.1847839355469, + 202.85302734375 + ], + [ + 181.152, + 202.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.384, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 345.6722717285156, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 345.6722717285156, + 119.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 264.384, + 119.9730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 350.73 + ], + [ + 382.96051025390625, + 350.73 + ], + [ + 382.96051025390625, + 367.85302734375 + ], + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 367.85302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 353 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 33 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744130" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744137/EFTA02744137.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744137/EFTA02744137.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..249055139d4f6a714f557a36132b81bc5ed94a6f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744137/EFTA02744137.md @@ -0,0 +1,59 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRA. + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +Upon Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Enlargement to Time to File Memorandum in Opposition to Motions to Compel Plaintiffs to Respond to Defendant's First Request to Produce and First Set of Interrogatories, et al., and good cause being shown, it is hereby + +ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs shall have an enlargement of time of until April 29, 2009, to respond to the Defendant's Motions to Compel, et al. + +DONE AND ORDERED in in Ft. Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this day of 2009. + +DISTRICT COURT JUDGE \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744137/EFTA02744137.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744137/EFTA02744137.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..462f0578a0b71d84f4b0e834350db1d018f3e03a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744137/EFTA02744137.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744137.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1156, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.39, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.744, + 380.7 + ], + [ + 330.7633361816406, + 380.7 + ], + [ + 330.7633361816406, + 394.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 282.744, + 394.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744137" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744139/EFTA02744139.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744139/EFTA02744139.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5fe9b31a365b04c6c0b47c50d1de086c0c4b8b2d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744139/EFTA02744139.md @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MAR + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO MOTIONS TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE AND FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, ET AL. + +Plaintiffs, JANE DOES 2-7, by and through undersigned counsel, file this Motion for Enlargement to Time to File Memorandum in Opposition to Motions to Compel Plaintiffs to Respond to Defendant's First Request to Produce and First Set of Interrogatories, et al., pursuant to S.D. Fla.L.R. 7.1 and Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b), and state as follows: + +I. On April 2, 2009, Defendant Epstein filed two Motions to Compel in each of the above-captioned cases: (1) Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Respond to Defendant's First Request to Produce and to Overrule Objections, and for an Award of Defendant's Reasonable Expenses; and (2) Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Answer Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories, and to Overrule Objections, and for an Award of Defendant's Reasonable Expenses. Plaintiffs' responses to these + +Motions are due on April 20, 2009. + +2. Plaintiffs move for an enlargement of time to prepare and file their response to the Motions because of demands on Plaintiffs' counsel in this case and in other cases and matters. This includes an initial appellate brief presently due on April 24, 2009, in Doe v. School Bd. of Broward County and Scavella, case no. 09 -10394-E, Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. + +3. Plaintiffs request an enlargement of time until April 29, 2009. + +4. Pursuant to S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1(A), Plaintiffs' counsel has conferred with counsel for Defendant regarding the relief sought in this Motion, who has advised Plaintiffs' counsel that Defendant has no objection to the enlargement of time requested. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request an enlargement of time to file their response to the Motions to Compel et al., until and including April 29, 2009. + +Dated: April 17, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on April 17, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court. Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. izoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744139/EFTA02744139.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744139/EFTA02744139.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4db2b3fd8860822ffe9e97e34fe0f67af7baaaa0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744139/EFTA02744139.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,303 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744139.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 3632, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.32, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 406.76995849609375, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 406.76995849609375, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME \nTO FILE MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO MOTIONS TO COMPEL \nPLAINTIFFS TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST REQUEST \nTO PRODUCE AND FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, ET AL.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.652, + 408.24 + ], + [ + 508.1982116699219, + 408.24 + ], + [ + 508.1982116699219, + 464.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 104.652, + 464.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 386.50201416015625, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 386.50201416015625, + 100.863037109375 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 100.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court. Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.68365478515625, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.68365478515625, + 129.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 129.43353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744139" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744144/EFTA02744144.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744144/EFTA02744144.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..97ff49f1490544b906b2c3047aefbb616f705d87 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744144/EFTA02744144.md @@ -0,0 +1,85 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAi + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS + +Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel, files this Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents, as follows: + +## I. ❑rtroduction + +Defendant relies upon generalizations regarding the nature of the case and the allegations in the pleadings in justifying his assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege in response to each and every interrogatory and document request propounded by Plaintiffs. This blanket assertion of the privilege is insufficient to deny Plaintiffs all discovery in these cases. Defendant otherwise fails to set forth any basis for denying Plaintiffs any and all answers to its written discovery under the psychotherapist-patient privilege, the Federal Rules of Evidence, on grounds of relevance, third party privacy rights, or other grounds. Accordingly, Plaintiffs respectfully request an Order compelling answers to interrogatories and production of documents. + +### II. Argument in Reidy + +#### A. Defendant Has Made a Blanket Assertion of the Privilege Against Self-Incrimination That Is Insufficient + +#### 1. Defendant Cannot Rely on its Blanket Objections to Interrogatories on Fifth Amendment Grounds + +Defendant Epstein insists that he has not asserted a "blanket privilege" to discovery under the Fifth Amendment, even though he has repeated the identical objection to each of Plaintiff's discovery request on this ground. The federal courts have noted that "[t]he term 'blanket assertion' is not limited to the situation where the defendant makes a single response to numerous questions." United States v. Buaiz 2008 WL 5050102 (E.D. Tenn. 2008). Rather, as here, where the defendant refuses to answer on fifth amendment grounds each and every question, such repeated assertions are fairly characterized as a "blanket assertion". Id.; Capitol Products Corp. v. Herron, 457 F.2d 541 (8th Cir. 1972). + +Accordingly, it is not sufficient to support the invocation of the Fifth Amendment with nothing more than sweeping generalizations applicable to all questions that were asked in discovery. See United States v. Pierce, 561 F.2d 735 (9th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 923 (1978) ("a blanket refusal to answer any question is unacceptable"). + +Defendant Epstein's Response does not set forth reasonable cause for a concern of selfincrimination in response to specific interrogatories. It is particularly deficient with regard to interrogatory, nos. 1-2 (identity of employees who worked or came to Palm Beach residence), no. 7 (Defendant's presence in Florida), no. 8 (identity of health care providers), no. 9 (persons providing transport services), no. 11 (Epstein's telephone numbers) and no. 12 (employees' telephone numbers). Epstein's references to allegations of sexual abuse, exploitation and battery in the Complaints in this and other civil actions against him, along with the alleged plan and scheme of recruiting girls to come to Epstein's Palm Beach mansion to give him "massages", fall well short of demonstrating that any interrogatory asked of Epstein that is relevant and within the broad scope of Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(1) would realistically and necessarily furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against him. + +Epstein alternatively points out that there is a "narrow exception" which allows a blanket assertion of the privilege where the trial court determines it to be legitimate based on the court's knowledge of the case and the expected testimony. United States v. Goodwin 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir. 1980); United States v. Tsui 646 F.2d 365 (9th Cir. 1981). This is not a case, however, where this narrow exception should apply. In Tsui, the Court allowed a blanket assertion of the privilege only because it was clear that the witness would only be questioned about the real estate transactions that were at the heart of his criminal liability concerns, and the proponent of the testimony argued only that the witness did not have a reasonable fear of prosecution. Id. at 368. Such unusual circumstances are not present in the instant cases. Because a blanket assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege is not legitimate in these cases, the Court must make a "particularized inquiry", and "only as to genuinely threatening questions should [the witness's] silence be sustained." Goodwin, 625 F.2d at 701 (quoting United States v. Melchor Moreno, 536 F.2d 1042, 1049 (5th Cir. 1976)). + +Defendant further asserts that Plaintiff's interrogatories requesting that he identify employees may lead to evidence tending to incriminate him because one of his employees, is identified in the Complaint. (Defendant Memorandum (DE 56), p. 18). This does not, however, support a blanket refusal to answer on Fifth Amendment grounds. It does not demonstrate how answers to these interrogatories, seeking the identities of all employees who were assigned or came to the Palm Beach residence, could realistically furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute Epstein. + +Similarly, the allegations of the Complaints alone do not reveal the danger of selfincrimination from answers to interrogatories seeking information on when Epstein was in the State of Florida, who provided transportation services to Epstein, his telephone numbers, his employees' telephone numbers, and his health care providers.' Discovery requests that seek background information or information on events and experiences of the witness for which he cannot realistically or genuinely be expected to be charged with a crime are not subject to Fifth Amendment protection. Sse Krause v. 390 F.Supp 1070, 1071-72 (N.D. Ohio 1974) (allowing questions to be asked regarding personal backgrounds and experiences excluding the event at issue in the pending criminal indictment). + +#### 2. Defendant Has Not Demonstrated That the Act of Producing Documents in Response to Specific Requests Would be Sufficiently Testimonial and Incriminating + +Defendant Epstein makes a general assertion that a response to any of Plaintiff's document requests would entail testimonial self-incrimination. (Defendant's Response (DE 56), pp. 22-23). Whether the act of producing a particular document would be sufficiently testimonial and incriminatory to support the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is a "fact dependent inquiry." United States v. Wujkowski,929 F.2d 981, 985 (4th Cir. 1991). It is the burden of the party asserting the privilege to "explain how the act of producing documents would pose a real danger of incrimination." Bear Stems & Co. v. Wyler, 182 F.Supp. 2d 679, 681 (N.D. III. 2002). + +Defendant's reliance on United States v. Hubbell 530 U.S. 27 (2000), is inadequate. In Hubbell it was apparent from the breadth of the description of documents demanded in the government's subpoena that "the prosecutor needed respondent's assistance both to identify + +' See Interrogatory nos. 7, 8, 10, 11, 12. + +potential sources of information and to produce those sources." Id. at 41. In Bear Sterns, the Court explained that the facts of Hubbell were unique and do not support a blanket, all-encompassing assertion by a witness or party that the production of documents would be testimonial and incriminating: + +> To begin with, in Hubei!, the incriminatory nature of the production of the document sought was obvious. The respondent was already incarcerated as a result of one investigation and he was the target of a second. Indeed, the second investigation was directed at whether the respondent was in compliance with a plea agreement-resulting from the first investigation-requiring him to produce information relating to the Whitewater investigation. If the respondent had produced such information in response to the subpoena, it would have constituted testimony that he had Whitewater information that he had not provided-it would be an admission that he failed to comply with the plea agreement. Accordingly, it was the testimonial aspect of the production that concerned the Court in Hubbell, 530 U.S. at 36-44 120 S.Ct. at 2043-48. At the appellate court level, the court specifically found that respondent's acknowledgment of the existence of certain records sought in the government's subpoena would be directly incriminating. Hubbell, 167 F.3d at 582. + +Id. at 683. + +As noted by the Court in Bear Stems, a determination that the production of documents would be testimonial cannot be premised on the witness's say so: + +> A witness is not exonerated from answering merely because he declares that in so doing he would incriminate himself; his assertion does not of itself establish the hazard of incrimination. + +Id. at 684. In Bear Sterns the Court found that the defendant failed to meet his burden in asserting the privilege against self-incrimination in response to a request for production that included wire transfer records, telephone records, bank records, and records pertaining to specific investment firms. Id. Plaintiffs seek in their document requests, among other things, telephone records, travel records, correspondence and communications, and personal calendars and diaries. The act of producing such records is not a crime. See id. ("[a]s the plaintiff notes, it is not a crime to make a + +wire transfer, use the phone, or possess corporate records"). Defendant Epstein has failed to meet his burden of demonstrating that the document requests made by Plaintiffs in these cases would pose a real danger of incrimination. As in Bear Sterns the Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Documents should accordingly be granted. N. + +### B. Defendant Epstein Fails to Demonstrate Why His Invocation of the Fifth Amendment Would Not Warrant an Adverse Interest In These Civil Cases + +Defendant Epstein does not dispute the general rule that an adverse inference may be drawn in a civil case from a defendant's refusal to testify or respond to discovery by invoking the privilege against self incrimination. Baxter v. Palmigiano 425 U.S. 308, 318-20 (1976). He instead asserts that there is a "recognized exception" that applies in a case where the adverse inference is the sole basis for the plaintiff's prima facie case or will cause the automatic entry of summary judgment. (Defendant's Response, (DE 56), pp. 14-15); Federal Trade Comm'n v. Transnet Wireless Corp., 506 F.Supp. 2d 1247, 1252 n. 4 (S.D. Fla. 2007). This exception plainly would not apply here. There are witnesses other than Defendant to the acts and conduct alleged in these cases, including Plaintiffs and other victims. See Transnet Wireless, 506 F.Supp. 2d at 1252 n. 4 (holding that the Court "will draw adverse inferences where appropriate" in reviewing a motion for summary judgment, "in light of the myriad evidence presented by plaintiff'). + +In any event, it would be premature at this stage of the case for the Court to foreclose the use of an adverse inference from the Defendant's invocation of the privilege against self-incrimination. This issue would arise either in a motion for summary judgment or a motion in limine. Accordingly, based on the foregoing, Defendant's self-serving assertion in his discovery responses concerning the drawing of an adverse inference is improper, and should be rejected and stricken. + +## C. Plaintiff Is Entitled to Discovery of Health Care Information Requested In Interrogatory No. 8 + +Defendant Epstein argues that Plaintiffs Interrogatory no. 8 is overbroad because it seeks information over a ten year period. As to Defendant Epstein's psychological condition, particularly any problem of a sexual nature, ten years is more than reasonable. Any psychosexual condition has likely existed for most or all of Defendant Epstein's adult life. + +Defendant Epstein next asserts Florida's psychotherapist-patient privilege under Florida Statute §90.503(2). As set forth in Plaintiff's Motion, the allegations of child sexual abuse in this case bring into play the exception to the psychotherapist-patient privilege of Florida Statute §39.204. Defendant asserts that this Court is required to hold an in camera inspection of documents to determine, as to each document, whether Florida Statute §39.204 is applicable. See Doherty v. John Doe No. 22, 957 So.2d 1267 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). Plaintiff agrees that such an in camera inspection would be appropriate to evaluate whether the documents relate to allegations of child sexual abuse. In this regard, any notes or records relating to Epstein's sexual interests or tendencies produced in an in camera inspection would be relevant and should be turned over to Plaintiff as falling within the exception of §39.204. + +### D. Third Party Privacy Rights Are Not a Basis to Deny Discovery + +The right to privacy discussed in Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438, 454 (1972), has nothing to do with the discovery issues in this case. Eisenstadt concerns the distribution of a contraceptive device. Yet Defendant relies entirely on Eisenstadt in contending that third party privacy rights provide a basis for Defendant to object to discovery in this case. The vague argument and unsupported assertion raised by Defendant in this case, "that the privacy rights of third parties are implicated", is frivolous and must be rejected. + +### E. Plaintiff Is Entitled In Discovery to Documents Relating to Plea Agreements and Criminal Proceedings + +Defendant asserts that Plaintiff should not be entitled to receive any documents responsive to her Request nos. 1-4 for the sole reason that these documents would not themselves be admissible under Fed.R.Evid. 408 and 410. It is well established that broad discovery under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26 should not, without more, be limited on the basis of admissibility at trial. amFed.R.Civ.P. 26 (1946 Advisory Committee Note). (Rule 26(b) "may cover not only evidence for use at the trial but also inquiry into matters in themselves inadmissible as evidence but which will lead to the discovery of such evidence. The purpose of discovery is to allow a broad search for facts, the names of witnesses, or any other matters which may aid a party in the preparation or presentation of his case"). Accordingly, the fact alone that plea agreements and related documents may not be admissible at trial is not a basis to deny their production in discovery.2 In Cupac. Inc. v. Mid-West Agency. Inc., 100 F.R.D. 440 (S.D. Ohio 1983), the Court held on these grounds that a party could obtain discovery relating to a criminal plea, including the answers to questions asked by the prosecutor, even though this information would be inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 410. Any concerns regarding the disclosure of documents responsive to request nos. 1-4 could be addressed in an appropriate protective order. Plaintiffs and their counsel, however, should have these documents in discovery. + +### F. An In Camera Hearing May Be Appropriate To Determine Whether Defendant Properly Claims Privilege In Response To Interrogatories And Document Requests + +Given the fact intensive nature of the inquiry into whether a defendant has met his burden in asserting a privilege against self-incrimination, some courts have conducted in camera, ex pane hearings to determine whether assertions of the privilege are valid in each instance. See United + +'Plaintiff further notes that her document request no. 4 seeks documents obtained in discovery and investigation of the criminal cases, not documents pertaining to the plea agreement. Accordingly, Rules 408 and 410 could not serve as a basis to object to these requests.

States v. Duncan 704 F.Supp 820 (N.D. Ill. 1989); see also United States v. Wujkowski 929 F.2d 981, 986 (4th Cir. 1991) ("[w]e hold only that the district court must undertake a more careful examination of the documents in question and provide a basis for its findings"). To the extent that this Court is in doubt as to whether to uphold the Defendant's privilege claim as to any particular document request or interrogatory, then an in camera hearing would be appropriate.

III. Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, and for the reasons stated in Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, Plaintiff requests that Defendant Epstein be ordered to answer interrogatories and produce responsive documents.

Dated: April 20, 2009 Respectfully submitted,

By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on April 202009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing.

s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein

SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida

Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. jgoldberger@agwpa.com

Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bcIclaw.com

s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744144/EFTA02744144.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744144/EFTA02744144.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f5c00f86358edba0fc84736ba1915432180cc85d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744144/EFTA02744144.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,788 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744144.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 17984, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.34, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA \nCASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAi", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.66, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 114.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 186.66, + 114.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL \nANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 95.47200000000001, + 266.49 + ], + [ + 517.73095703125, + 266.49 + ], + [ + 517.73095703125, + 296.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 95.47200000000001, + 296.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. \u2751rtroduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 363.3482360839844, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 363.3482360839844, + 379.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 379.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Argument in Reidy", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 235.62, + 72.29888916015625 + ], + [ + 375.96356201171875, + 72.29888916015625 + ], + [ + 375.96356201171875, + 87.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 235.62, + 87.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. Defendant Has Made a Blanket \nAssertion of the Privilege Against \nSelf-Incrimination That Is Insufficient", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 100.42889404296875 + ], + [ + 425.2178649902344, + 100.42889404296875 + ], + [ + 425.2178649902344, + 142.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 142.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "1. Defendant Cannot Rely on its Blanket Objections \nto Interrogatories on Fifth Amendment Grounds", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.156, + 156.67889404296875 + ], + [ + 364.19281005859375, + 156.67889404296875 + ], + [ + 364.19281005859375, + 184.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 69.156, + 184.56353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "2. Defendant Has Not Demonstrated That the Act of \nProducing Documents in Response to Specific Requests \nWould be Sufficiently Testimonial and Incriminating", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 350.73 + ], + [ + 394.15472412109375, + 350.73 + ], + [ + 394.15472412109375, + 393.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 393.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Defendant Epstein Fails to Demonstrate Why His \nInvocation of the Fifth Amendment Would Not \nWarrant an Adverse Interest In These Civil Cases", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 159.12, + 183.06 + ], + [ + 455.59759521484375, + 183.06 + ], + [ + 455.59759521484375, + 226.863037109375 + ], + [ + 159.12, + 226.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "C. Plaintiff Is Entitled to Discovery of Health Care \nInformation Requested In Interrogatory No. 8", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 181.152, + 686.0699999999999 + ], + [ + 449.9920654296875, + 686.0699999999999 + ], + [ + 449.9920654296875, + 716.6030197143555 + ], + [ + 181.152, + 716.6030197143555 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "D. Third Party Privacy Rights Are \nNot a Basis to Deny Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 476.28 + ], + [ + 408.57537841796875, + 476.28 + ], + [ + 408.57537841796875, + 506.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 506.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "E. Plaintiff Is Entitled In Discovery to Documents \nRelating to Plea Agreements and Criminal Proceedings", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 165.24, + 686.0699999999999 + ], + [ + 468.684814453125, + 686.0699999999999 + ], + [ + 468.684814453125, + 715.8630142211914 + ], + [ + 165.24, + 715.8630142211914 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "F. An In Camera Hearing May Be Appropriate To Determine \nWhether Defendant Properly Claims Privilege In \nResponse To Interrogatories And Document Requests", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 518.4000000000001 + ], + [ + 477.5069580078125, + 518.4000000000001 + ], + [ + 477.5069580078125, + 562.1030120849609 + ], + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 562.1030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.81599999999997, + 210.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 355.80950927734375, + 210.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 355.80950927734375, + 226.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 255.81599999999997, + 226.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 386.52947998046875, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 386.52947998046875, + 85.863037109375 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 85.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.06, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 455.1346740722656, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 455.1346740722656, + 114.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 156.06, + 114.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744144" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744155/EFTA02744155.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744155/EFTA02744155.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aff5b2d3cf5e762ea9831a8e6f9688d9c391df85 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744155/EFTA02744155.md @@ -0,0 +1,73 @@ +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STAY AND OR CONTINUE ACTION + +Plaintiffs, JANE DOES 2-7, by and through undersigned counsel, file this Memorandum in Opposition to Stay and or Continue Action, as follows: + +# L Introduction + +In moving for stay, Defendant has the burden of demonstrating that, due to a parallel criminal proceeding, if he exercises his right against self incrimination he will certainly lose on summary judgment unless a stay is granted. Defendant has failed to satisfy this burden. There is no pending motion for summary judgment. There is also no criminal proceeding at this time arising from Epstein's acts against the Plaintiffs or other victims. Indeed, whether such a criminal proceeding is ever commenced is entirely within the Defendant's control, by complying with the terms of his Non-Prosecution Agreement with the U.S. Attorney's Office. Defendant relies upon an amorphous possible breach of his Non-Prosecution Agreement with the U.S. Attorney, which does not give rise to the "special circumstances" necessary to warrant a stay. Finally, even if there were grounds for a stay, it would not be appropriate in these cases because Plaintiffs would be severely prejudiced by the delay occasioned by a stay. + +# II. Argument + +#### A. Defendant Has Not Demonstrated that He Faces a Certain Loss on Summary Judgment If a Stay Is Not Granted + +The Constitution doe not require a stay of civil proceedings pending the outcome of criminal proceedings involving a common defendant. Shell Oil Co. v. Altina Associates. Inc. 866 F.Supp. 536, 540 (M.D. Fla. 1994). A stay pending resolution of related criminal proceedings is warranted only when the defendant demonstrates that " 'special circumstances' so require in the 'interests of justice.' " United States v. Lot 5. Fox Grove 23 F.3d 359, 365 (11th Cir. 1994). + +In the Eleventh Circuit, the "special circumstances" which may support a stay are limited. The fact that the Defendant may "risk a non-criminal disadvantage by remaining silent for fear of self incrimination in a parallel criminal proceeding does not rise to the level of an unconstitutional infringement."2 Shell Oil 866 F.Supp. at 540. Accordingly, the Defendant's right to silence is not a basis to stay the civil case pending resolution of a criminal action. Id. There is one exception applicable where a stay would be necessary to prevent an unconstitutional infringement of the + +' Defendant Epstein filed an identical Motion to Stay in the case Jane Doe v. Epstein, case no. 08- CIV 80893 MARIa. Plaintiffs concur in the arguments made by Jane Doe's counsel in that case in opposition to Defendant's Motion. (Case no. 08-CIV 80893, DE 31). The same reasoning and arguments apply in the instant cases. Plaintiffs in this Memorandum will attempt to stream line and limit its arguments to avoid unnecessary repetition and duplication with the response in Jane Doe. + +'In this regard, The Defendant's silence by invoking the Fifth Amendment does not prohibit adverse inferences against him in the civil case. Shell Oil, 866 F.Supp. at 40.

defendant's right against self incrimination: "[T]he law in the Eleventh Circuit requires consideration of whether, as a result of invoking the privilege, the defendant faces certain loss of the civil proceeding on summary judgment if the civil proceeding were to continue." In re Financial Federation Title & Trust. Inc. 252 B.R. 834, 837 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2000)3 (citing United States v. Lot 5 23 F.3d at 364); accord Shell Oil 866 F.Supp. at 540 (noting that there is a "recognized exception to this general rule: the Fifth Amendment is violated when a person, who is a defendant in both a civil and criminal case, is forced to choose between waiving his privilege against selfincrimination or losing the civil case in [summary proceedings]").

The cases relied upon by Defendant are consistent with these authorities. In Ventura v. Broskv, 2006 WL 3392207 (S.D. Fla. 2006), the Court stated the rule that a stay is warranted to avoid a situation "where a defendant in both criminal and civil proceedings must choose between whether to waive his privilege against self-incrimination or to lose the civil case in summary or default judgment proceedings." Id. at \* I. Moreover, the stay in Ventura was granted on motion of the defendant Miami-Dade County Police Department because it would be prejudiced by its codefendant, a former police officer, asserting the Fifth Amendment and refusing to answer "in response to the civil Complaint and any discovery directed at him in the case." Id. Such concerns involving prejudice to a codefendant are not present here. In Securities and Exchange Comm' n v. Rehtorik 755 F.Supp. 1018 (S.D. Fla. 1990), another case relied upon by Defendant, the Court denied a stay of the case, and made clear in its holding that the defendant had not demonstrated that it would be subject to "automatic liability" on a motion for summary judgment:

'The Court in Financial Federation Title & Trust noted that the standard in the Eleventh Circuit is "more narrow and less subjective" than in other Circuits where a multi-factor test is used. Id. at 837.

The defendants can exercise their Fifth Amendment rights in the face of the S.E.C.'s summary judgment motion by not presenting evidence which would implicate them in the alleged securities fraud. Though an adverse inference may be drawn due to their silence, the S.E.C. must still carry its burden of proving fraud committed by the defendants; their silence alone will not give rise to automatic liability.

As such, the defendants would not be compelled to speak. To speak or not to speak becomes, in such a case, a question of strategy rather than one of unconstitutional compulsion.

1.4. at 1020.

Accordingly, the Defendant's Motion to Stay is, at best, premature. Defendant Epstein fails to demonstrate that he is certain to lose on summary judgment if he exercises his constitutional right against self-incrimination. Indeed, there is no summary judgment motion pending. Defendant's Motion to Stay must accordingly be denied.

B. This Court Has Previously Made It Clear That a Stay is Not Warranted, and Circumstances Have Not Changed

Defendant previously moved for a mandatory stay pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3509(k). This Court denied that Motion on the grounds that there was no criminal action pending, a requirement for a stay under §3509(k). (DE 33). The Court in its Opinion also stated that a discretionary stay was not warranted:

The Court also does not believe a discretionary stay is warranted ... [T]he Court sees no reason to delay this litigation for the next thirtythree months. After all, Defendant is in control of his own destiny it is up to him (and him alone) whether the plea agreement reached with the State of Florida is breached. If Defendant does not breach the agreement, then he should have no concerns regarding his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The fact that the U.S. Attorney (or other law enforcement officials) may object to some discovery in these civil cases is not, in an of itself, a reason to stay the civil action. Any such issues shall be resolved as they arise in the course of this litigation.

(Order Denying Motion to Stay, p. 4). In again seeking a stay, Defendant seized on the last sentence

quoted above and takes it out of context in contending that the time is now ripe for a stay. The Court stated that issues arising in the event that the U.S. Attorney or other law enforcement officials object to discovery can be resolved during the course of the litigation. (DE 33, p. 4). The Court was not inviting the Defendant to file another motion for stay later in the course of discovery. In any event, there are no changed circumstances which would warrant a different analysis and conclusion from that reached by the Court last August.

C. The Defendant Cannot Meet His Burden of Demonstrating Grounds for a Stay on the Basis of Vague Assertions of the Position of the USAO

There is no criminal prosecution pending for the acts of Epstein against any of the Plaintiffs in these civil cases. Epstein's Motion thus fails at the outset because them is no parallel criminal action.4 In any event, the Defendant vaguely asserts, without supporting documentation. that the "USAO has already attempted to claim violations of the Non-Prosecution Agreement." (Motion to Stay (DE 57), p. 2). The Defendant submits the Affidavit of his criminal attorney, Jack Goldberger, who asserts that "the USAO has taken the position on a number of occasions that it might consider" various actions by Epstein to be a breach of the Non-Prosecution Agreement. Nowhere does the Motion or this supporting Affidavit assert that the USAO has declared a breach of the Non-Prosecution Agreement, nor does it indicate that the issue of breach has been raised by either party in any court. It is therefore difficult to understand how this can be grounds for a stay. Defendant does nothing more than speculate on the intentions of the USAO. The Motion to Stay is therefore, at best, premature.

D. Plaintiffs Would Be Prejudiced by a Stay

' The cases discussing the stay issues are premised on a pending criminal action parallel to the civil proceeding. See gag, Rehtorik, 755 F.Supp. at 1019-1020; United States v. Lot 5 23 F.3d at 364 (quoting United States v. Little Al 712 F.2d 133, 136 (5th Cir. 1983)).

Because Defendant has failed to set forth circumstances that would support a stay, there is no need to proceed further. Nonetheless, Plaintiffs note that they will be severely prejudiced if a stay is granted. First, the stay requested is a lengthy one, to the end of 2010. Such a delay is simply unfair to the Plaintiffs, who are entitled to civil remedies for the wrongs that were committed by Epstein.

Additionally, the delay in discovery will be prejudicial to Plaintiffs. Investigation and discovery will become more difficult with the passage of time. The bulk of the allegations occurred in 2004-05, when the Plaintiffs were minors. Plaintiffs should not have to wait to engage in discovery. Finally, the delay occasioned by a stay would prejudice these Plaintiffs vis-a-vis other victims of Epstein who brought their claims in state court and would not be stayed, particularly if these other victims recover punitive damage judgments against Epstein before Plaintiffs have even had an opportunity to litigate their claims.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs respectfully request that Defendant's Motions to Stay and/or Continue Action be denied in their entirety.

Dated: April 23, 2009 Respectfully submitted,

By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on April 23, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing.

/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein

SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida

Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com

Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bc1claw.com

/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744155/EFTA02744155.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744155/EFTA02744155.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ad5e399351a6a64f156bb8d57c273e28120afac1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744155/EFTA02744155.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,628 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744155.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 13134, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.88, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 406.76995849609375, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 406.76995849609375, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION \nTO MOTION TO STAY AND OR CONTINUE ACTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.06, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 456.7173767089844, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 456.7173767089844, + 422.60302734375 + ], + [ + 156.06, + 422.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "L Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 491.66999999999996 + ], + [ + 359.27581787109375, + 491.66999999999996 + ], + [ + 359.27581787109375, + 506.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 506.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Argument", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 258.876, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 353.089599609375, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 353.089599609375, + 212.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 258.876, + 212.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. Defendant Has Not Demonstrated that He Faces a Certain \nLoss on Summary Judgment If a Stay Is Not Granted", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 136.476, + 225.99000000000004 + ], + [ + 475.96673583984375, + 225.99000000000004 + ], + [ + 475.96673583984375, + 254.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 136.476, + 254.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. This Court Has Previously Made It Clear That a Stay is \nNot Warranted, and Circumstances Have Not Changed", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 142.596, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 469.9051513671875, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 469.9051513671875, + 394.863037109375 + ], + [ + 142.596, + 394.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "C. The Defendant Cannot Meet His Burden of Demonstrating Grounds \nfor a Stay on the Basis of Vague Assertions of the Position of the USAO", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 252.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 509.4212951660156, + 252.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 509.4212951660156, + 283.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 283.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "D. Plaintiffs Would Be Prejudiced by a Stay", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 179.928, + 630.99 + ], + [ + 431.7899169921875, + 630.99 + ], + [ + 431.7899169921875, + 646.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 179.928, + 646.4830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.788, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 337.7822265625, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 337.7822265625, + 408.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 274.788, + 408.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 386.50201416015625, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 386.50201416015625, + 100.863037109375 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 100.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 129.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 129.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 72 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744155" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744164/EFTA02744164.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744164/EFTA02744164.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5591bef35031dc27cf66918549d0ddceca9e03ce --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744164/EFTA02744164.md @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@ +![](_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg) + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAIMM + +Plaintiff; vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRAMM + +Plaintiff. vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/Mil + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRAMM + +ORDER + +Upon Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Reply Memoranda in (Q9 rl Support of Motions to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documenttand good cause being shown, it is hereby + +ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs shall have an enlargement of time of two (2) weeks, until April 20, 2009, to file reply memoranda in support of the Motions to Compel + +Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents. ak5i P A4 gencf./ DONE AND ORDERED in EMI in PrtairclentatertIrSWATt etrairty, Florida, this ael day of AM.?, , 2009 + +0 41- to hinatv-•—• Awsiateet- CO JUDGE 6.k%i vat 4-c. AA< a R.. . rbkn 649.,3 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744164/EFTA02744164.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744164/EFTA02744164.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0309ee3793610ec8f95e973ff6688167e1433968 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744164/EFTA02744164.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,126 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744164.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1145, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.49, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.715, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 397.8023681640625, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 397.8023681640625, + 127.98000000000002 + ], + [ + 209.715, + 127.98000000000002 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 110 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 162 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744164" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744164/_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744164/_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d6ac43e9dafa474c7c6b2d31dc4b39469d509219 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744164/_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a1ba0f9ce41d671cfda37fcb9f8766b4c57b065148feebe769e4b7048d8a40ef +size 10560 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744166/EFTA02744166.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744166/EFTA02744166.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4ec3e1c1a388bfe8bc60fc480ba8204eed8e63fc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744166/EFTA02744166.md @@ -0,0 +1,75 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +STEVEN M. LARIMORE CLERK U.S. DIST. CT. S.D. OE FLA. - W.P.B. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA • + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MAR + +Plaintiff vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRAJ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRA [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +**ORDER** + +Upon Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Enlargement to Time to File Memorandum in Opposition to Motions to Compel Plaintiffs to Respond to Defendant's First Request to Produce and First Set of Interrogatories, et al., (OC#80) and good cause being shown, it is hereby + +ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs shall have an enlargement of time of until April 29, 2009, to respond to the Defendant's Motions to Compel, et al. + +DONE AND ORDERED in [REDACTED], in Et Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this + +27 day of April, 2009. + +*[Handwritten signatures and stamps: Linne Johnson, DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, Maystret, Lines R. Johnson]* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744166/EFTA02744166.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744166/EFTA02744166.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ae9918f05d2254ee5d59aa1694ac0a770a2a7360 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744166/EFTA02744166.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744166.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1381, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.43, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 211.39999389648438, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 397.922607421875, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 397.922607421875, + 129.9735107421875 + ], + [ + 211.39999389648438, + 129.9735107421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 277.98, + 382.32 + ], + [ + 322.26, + 382.32 + ], + [ + 322.26, + 395.28 + ], + [ + 277.98, + 395.28 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744166" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744168/EFTA02744168.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744168/EFTA02744168.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8c6a793a12261b308d9905ff34a5f1712934b318 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744168/EFTA02744168.md @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARIZA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### PLAINTIFF'S REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND TO QUASH SUBPOENA, AND MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY + +Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel, files this Reply Memorandum In Support of Motion for Protective Order, and to Quash Subpoena, and Motion to Consolidate for Purposes of Discovery, as follows: + +#### I. DEFENDANT FAILS TO SET FORTH ANY PREJUDICE OR CONFUSION THAT WOULD MILITATE AGAINST CONSOLIDATING THESE CASES FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY + +In response to Plaintiffs' Motion to Consolidate, Defendant asserts that not all common issues of fact are present and the parties are not identical. These are not reasons to deny consolidation, particularly the limited consolidation for purposes of discovery sought here. Rule 42(a), Fed.R.Civ.P., requires only a common question of law or fact, and there need not be an identity of parties. Defendant also asserts without support or explanation that "confusion will result and motions in limine will undoubtedly be filed. . ." In Ramsay v. Broward County Sheriff's Office, 303 Fed. Appx. 761, 2008 WL 5237162 (11th Cir. 2008), the Court affirmed the District + +&#x27; In a case relied upon by Defendant, Kelly v. Kelly 911 F.Supp. 66 (N.D.N.Y. 1996), the issue was consolidation for purposes of joint trial, so that case is inapposite here. + +Court's consolidation of two employment discrimination actions, noting that the party opposing consolidation "has failed to show that the district court abused its discretion by consolidating the two actions insofar as she has introduced no evidence establishing confusion or prejudice." Id. at \*3 & n. 5. + +The risk of confusion or prejudice is generally more likely to arise when there is consolidation for purposes of trial, which is not being sought in the present cases at this time. See Hendrix v. Raybestos — Manhattan. Inc. 776 F.2d 1492, 1495 (11th Cir. 1985). Here, the common and overlapping motion practice in these cases attests to the efficiencies to be gained by consolidating for purposes of discovery. Additionally, these cases are on the same or similar discovery tracks, so there would be no prejudice or confusion arising from the cases being at different stages of litigation. See Borough of Olvphant v. PPL Corp., 153 Fed. Appx. 80, 2005 WL 2673489 (3d Cir. 2005) (a case cited by Defendant, the Court noted that it has discretion to deny a motion to consolidate "if it would cause delay in one of the cases or if one of the cases is further into discovery than the other case"); see also Motor Credit Co. v. Chiorazzo, 529 F.Supp. 2d 535, 542 (D.N.J. 2008) (denying consolidation of two actions because discovery was nearly complete in one while the other was in its preliminary stages). + +It is within this Court's broad discretion to consolidate: "[Rule 42(a)] is a codification of a trial court's inherent managerial power 'to control disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.' " Hendrix 776 F.2d at 1495 (citation omitted). Given the nature of these cases, the common facts alleged and the common issues of law, consolidation for purposes of discovery would be in the interests of judicial economy and efficiency. Defendant fails to set forth anything to the contrary. + +# II. THERE SHOULD BE ONLY ONE DEPOSITION FOR EACH PLAINTIFF + +In response to Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order to limit Defendant to a single deposition of each Plaintiff, Defendant fails to set forth any reason why it needs to take two separate depositions of each Plaintiff. Defendant asserts that it has the right to take both party depositions and witness depositions, which Plaintiff does not dispute. Where the same person is both party and witness in related cases, however, it makes eminent sense that there should be only one deposition of that person. The Court's authority to grant a protective order in this regard falls squarely within Rule 26(c), which allows such an order to be issued to protect a party from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense. The unnecessary burden and harassment that would arise from more than one deposition of a plaintiff/victim in these cases is patent and obvious, particularly since these cases concern sensitive fact issues of sex with minors. + +In opposition to the Motion, Defendant makes a vague reference to "proper preparation", but fails to articulate how its preparation will be prejudiced or otherwise adversely affected by a single deposition of each Plaintiff.2 To the contrary, separate depositions would create an artificial, awkward dividing line between which questions are of the deponent as a witness and which are of the deponent as a party, likely giving rise to unnecessary disputes and motion practice. Given the common and overlapping facts in these cases, there is no reason why a party witness cannot be questioned in a single sitting on all facts pertinent to Epstein. A protective order is therefore warranted in these cases so that each Plaintiff has her deposition taken only once. + +## Conclusion + +Based on the foregoing, and for the reasons set forth in Plaintiff's Motion for Protective + +2 Defendant offers as a "compromise" to limit each Plaintiff to two depositions. This would not sufficiently ameliorate the problem and concern raised in the Motion. Defendant fails to proffer any reason why it is necessary to take two separate depositions of the same witness. + +Order, Motion to Quash Subpoena, and Motion to Consolidate for purposes of discovery, Plaintiff respectfully requests an Order (i) consolidating these cases for purposes of discovery; (ii) limiting the Defendant to a single deposition of each Plaintiff; and (iii) such other and further relief this Court deems just and proper. + +Dated: April 27, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) + +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. + +Attorneys for Plaintiff + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +Tel: 305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on April 27 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +### SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. jgoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744168/EFTA02744168.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744168/EFTA02744168.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5d48f172006b9be51ebfab4ee6856dd728462fad --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744168/EFTA02744168.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,414 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744168.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 7110, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.07, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA \nCASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARIZA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.66, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 114.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 186.66, + 114.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION \nFOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND TO QUASH SUBPOENA, AND \nMOTION TO CONSOLIDATE FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 120.56400000000001, + 266.49 + ], + [ + 492.0091552734375, + 266.49 + ], + [ + 492.0091552734375, + 310.4830627441406 + ], + [ + 120.56400000000001, + 310.4830627441406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. DEFENDANT FAILS TO SET FORTH ANY PREJUDICE \nOR CONFUSION THAT WOULD MILITATE AGAINST \nCONSOLIDATING THESE CASES FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 132.804, + 407.43 + ], + [ + 515.2720336914062, + 407.43 + ], + [ + 515.2720336914062, + 450.363037109375 + ], + [ + 132.804, + 450.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. THERE SHOULD BE ONLY ONE DEPOSITION FOR EACH PLAINTIFF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.74, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 523.8997802734375, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 523.8997802734375, + 86.60302734375 + ], + [ + 88.74, + 86.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.788, + 602.64 + ], + [ + 337.7822265625, + 602.64 + ], + [ + 337.7822265625, + 617.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 274.788, + 617.9830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 386.52947998046875, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 386.52947998046875, + 85.863037109375 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 85.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.1346740722656, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.1346740722656, + 114.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 114.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744168" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744174/EFTA02744174.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744174/EFTA02744174.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e232a25a9a7d602d3301488ac2c06c522586dc8b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744174/EFTA02744174.md @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 013-CV-80232-MARRA + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRA/M. + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CTV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order Against Piecemeal Depositions of Jane Doe No.'s 2, 3, 4, and 7 and Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery (DE 66 in 08-80119; DE 58 in 08-80232; DE 73 in 08-80380; DE 23 in 08-80993). The Court has reviewed the motions, responses, replies, and is otherwise fully advised in the premesis. It is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: + +Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order Against Piecemeal Depositions is GRANTED, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). As to each of the ten above-styled cases, Defendant is limited to a single deposition of each Plaintiff, during which Defendant may depose the plaintiff as both a party and a witness to all other cases of a similar nature of which the plaintiff deposed is aware. Defendant should not expect to be able to re-depose any plaintiff relative to any new cases that may be filed. Therefore, Defendant should examine each plaintiff about the facts relating to all individuals of whom they are aware, regardless of whether an individual has in fact filed a claim against Defendant. In the event additional cases are filed, upon a showing of good cause, the Court will determine whether Defendant will be permitted to re-depose any of the plaintiffs as witnesses to the allegations made in those newly filed cases. + +Plaintiffs' Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery is GRANTED. In the interests of judicial economy and efficiency, cases 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, and 08-80993 are hereby CONSOLIDATED for purposes of discovery only. + +Additionally, the parties in the other six above-styled causes (08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893 09-80469, 09-80591) are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE on or before May 5, 2009 why all of the cases should not be consolidated for discovery purposes. + +DONE AND ORDERED in Florida, this 28th day of April, 2009 at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744174/EFTA02744174.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744174/EFTA02744174.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f0d31b8ee8b9ecdf492a21f22a24c2d95b55adb3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744174/EFTA02744174.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744174.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3037, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.42, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 280.296, + 439.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 329.2633361816406, + 439.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 329.2633361816406, + 454.863037109375 + ], + [ + 280.296, + 454.863037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744174" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744178/EFTA02744178.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744178/EFTA02744178.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0ca48ff8a8860c5019ea8ed0636e6db7f4d555e8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744178/EFTA02744178.md @@ -0,0 +1,59 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARM4M. + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +## ORDER + +Upon Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Response to Motions to Compel Plaintiffs to Respond to Defendant's First Request to Produce and First Set of Interrogatories, et al., and good cause being shown, it is hereby + +ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs shall have an enlargement of time of until May 6, 2009, to respond to the Defendant's Motions to Compel, et al. + +DONE AND ORDERED in , at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this day of 2009. + +DISTRICT COURT JUDGE \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744178/EFTA02744178.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744178/EFTA02744178.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7fd57204f7ff2024ab153762cc4390d71c37d477 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744178/EFTA02744178.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744178.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1146, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.15, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.744, + 380.7 + ], + [ + 330.7633361816406, + 380.7 + ], + [ + 330.7633361816406, + 394.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 282.744, + 394.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744178" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744180/EFTA02744180.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744180/EFTA02744180.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a174fc7fa12d4a14c61e25d1b0b12173d1559de3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744180/EFTA02744180.md @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO MOTIONS TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE AND FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES. ET AL. + +Plaintiffs, by and through undersigned counsel, file this Motion for Enlargement to Time to File Responses to Motions to Compel Plaintiffs to Respond to Defendant's First Request to Produce and First Set of Interrogatories, et al., pursuant to S.D. Fla.L.R. 7.1 and Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b), and states as follows: + +I. On April 2, 2009, Defendant Epstein filed two Motions to Compel in each of the above-captioned cases: (1) Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Respond to Defendant's First Request to Produce and to Overrule Objections, and for an Award of Defendant's Reasonable Expenses; and (2) Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Answer Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories, and to Overrule Objections, and for an Award of Defendant's Reasonable Expenses. Plaintiffs' responses to these + +Motions are due on April 29. 2009. + +2. Plaintiffs move for an enlargement of time to prepare and file their response to the Motions because of demands on Plaintiffs' counsel in this case and in other cases and matters. This includes an appellate brief presently due on May 1, 2009, in Doe v. School Bd. of Broward County and Scavella, case no. 09 -10394-E, Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals; and post-judgment motions and briefs in Elk v. United States, case no. 05-186L, Court of Federal Claims. + +3. Plaintiffs request an enlargement of time until May 6, 2009. + +4. Pursuant to S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1(A), Plaintiffs' counsel has conferred with counsel for Defendant regarding the relief sought in this Motion, who has advised Plaintiffs' counsel that Defendant has no objection to the enlargement of time requested. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request an enlargement of time to file their response to the Motions to Compel et al., until and including May 6, 2009. + +Dated: April 29, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattornev.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on April 29, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. reritton@bc1claw.com + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744180/EFTA02744180.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744180/EFTA02744180.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..85e381c7c46e42ab82800d2c2eda1ed0d87afbeb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744180/EFTA02744180.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,303 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744180.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 3668, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.29, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 406.76995849609375, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 406.76995849609375, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME \nTO FILE RESPONSE TO MOTIONS TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF \nTO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST REQUEST TO \nPRODUCE AND FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES. ET AL.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 109.548, + 407.43 + ], + [ + 502.9916076660156, + 407.43 + ], + [ + 502.9916076660156, + 464.60302734375 + ], + [ + 109.548, + 464.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 386.50201416015625, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 386.50201416015625, + 100.863037109375 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 100.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 129.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 129.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744180" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744185/EFTA02744185.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744185/EFTA02744185.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f7c0967b5b4be1674b7fb44b2d8a2de363334ed1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744185/EFTA02744185.md @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FL CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS COURT'S ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AS WHY ALL CASES SHOULD NOT BE CONSOLIDATED FOR DISCOVERY PURPOSES AND MOTION TO CLARIFY THE COURT'S ORDER DATED APRIL 28. 2009 + +Defendant, JEFFERY EPSTEIN, (EPSTEIN), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Response in Opposition to this Court's Order to Show Cause as to Why All Cases Should Not be Consolidated for Purposes of Discovery and Motion for Clarification of this Court's Order on general consolidation of discovery (DE 86), and states: + +# I. Response In Opposition + +Defendant has no further objections to consolidating these cases for purposes of depositions as outlined in this Court's April 28, 2009 Order. + +However, to consolidate the cases for purposes of all "discovery" including, but not limited to, motion practice and related orders thereto will, without question, confuse many of the individual discovery issues raised not only by Epstein as to the individual Plaintiffs that have brought separate lawsuits against him, but will also confuse the individual discovery issues raised by those same individual Plaintiffs as to Epstein. This + +will undoubtedly lead to several motions to clarify certain orders which will seek explanation from the court as to how those orders affect Epstein as to each individual Plaintiffs discovery requests and vice versa (i.e., how those future orders affect the individual Plaintiffs' discovery requests directed to Epstein). + +It is important to note that each related Federal matter before this court has its very own distinct set of facts and defenses thereto. As such, the discovery served and the responses received are particular and individualized as to both Plaintiff and Defendant. As such, discovery of gall" cases for general discovery consolidation (separate and apart from depositions) will only cloud rulings on discovery and will result in more attorney labor and judicial resources, which will inevitably be spent on motions for clarification. + +Each Plaintiff and Epstein have served and will in the future serve separate requests for production, separate interrogatories, separate requests for admissions, and separate motions to compel, responses and replies addressing certain discovery issues. Obviously, both Plaintiff and Defendant will base their discovery related arguments on the particularized facts of each case, which are separate and distinct from one another. Moreover, the Plaintiffs will likely seek to retain different experts to support their individual claims. In that regard, how will a general consolidation of discovery impact discovery related to those experts' individualized opinions? + +As this court is aware, certain case management orders are in place setting the parameters of discovery. It is unclear how Plaintiffs' Motion to Consolidate and the Courts Order will handle the potential problems and any other potential discovery related issues outlined above. In fact, it appears that Jane Doe, in Case No. 08-CV- + +80893 (DE 47), has expressed her own reasons for opposing the consolidation all the cases for discovery purposes. Obviously, Jane Doe's counsel, like the undersigned, anticipates that discovery issues will present themselves if general consolidation occurs and does not want it to impact her case. In fact, the debates have already begun in light of this Court's April 29, 2009 Order and the responses filed addressing same. This provides the court with a glimpse of what will occur if general consolidation occurs, in particular, how attorney resources and judicial resources will be unnecessarily used. + +In addition, the initial style of each case should be maintained in pleadings and in orders in an effort to maintain organization and application of the rulings this court espouses for each case. Utilizing a compound multiple-type style will only confuse cases that should be kept separate for all discovery purposes. + +# II. Motion for Clarification of this Court's April 28, 2009 Order + +This Court ruled that cases 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380 and 08-80993 are consolidated for discovery purposes. Epstein not only objects to the court's consolidation order but seeks clarification from this Court as to how consolidation of general discovery will impact motion practice and orders in the above cases. What does the court mean when it says the above cases are consolidated "for purposes of discovery only?" How does consolidation operate? The concerns addressing general discovery consolidation are set out above and are therefore incorporated herein. Likewise, for those reasons, the court should reverse its ruling on consolidation and issue a new order maintaining the individuality of each case for discovery purposes. + +In addition, Epstein not only objects to the court's potential consolidation of case numbers 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469 and 09-80591 for + +general discovery purposes, but respectfully requests that this court clarify how consolidation of general discovery will impact motion practice and orders in the above cases should this court choose to consolidate same for discovery. Again, how does consolidation operate? The concerns addressing general discovery consolidation are set out above and are therefore incorporated herein. + +In short, the Motions seeking consolidation for discovery purposes only do not delineate how consolidation operates. As such, the Order granting the Motions to Consolidate for discovery purposes only does not provide any additional information addressing how consolidation will operate. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court not consolidate case numbers 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469 and 09-80591, that it clarify its order as to consolidation of case numbers 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380 and 08- 80993 (or the future consolidation of other cases) and that it reverse its April 28, 2009 ruling on general consolidation in light of the potential problems presented in this response, that an order be entered requiring the parties to utilize the style secured by the initial case filing and not a compound-case style incorporating all case styles in one particular document, and for such other and further relief as tpQ Court deems just and proper. + +Rol IX Cr o , Jr. Attorney for Defendant Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being + +served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 4 day of May, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744185/EFTA02744185.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744185/EFTA02744185.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3a3eddcb24e0c522af95aeab7e63831d2c0a8864 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744185/EFTA02744185.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,314 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744185.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 7463, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.34, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FL \nCASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 178.09199999999998, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 430.84799999999996, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 430.84799999999996, + 147.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 178.09199999999998, + 147.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS COURT'S ORDER TO \nSHOW CAUSE AS WHY ALL CASES SHOULD NOT BE CONSOLIDATED FOR DISCOVERY \nPURPOSES AND MOTION TO CLARIFY THE COURT'S ORDER DATED APRIL 28. 2009", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.992, + 299.70000000000005 + ], + [ + 546.9249877929688, + 299.70000000000005 + ], + [ + 546.9249877929688, + 341.78997802734375 + ], + [ + 70.992, + 341.78997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Response In Opposition", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 219.70799999999997, + 490.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 401.37255859375, + 490.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 401.37255859375, + 507.16998291015625 + ], + [ + 219.70799999999997, + 507.16998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Motion for Clarification of this Court's April 28, 2009 Order", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 138.312, + 399.9375 + ], + [ + 513.4051513671875, + 399.9375 + ], + [ + 513.4051513671875, + 415.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 138.312, + 415.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.996, + 662.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 389.62005615234375, + 662.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 389.62005615234375, + 677.8000030517578 + ], + [ + 264.996, + 677.8000030517578 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744185" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744190/EFTA02744190.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744190/EFTA02744190.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2e89d2182c92f1e8ad67a3a2e1cf54b603642d17 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744190/EFTA02744190.md @@ -0,0 +1,73 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO FILE REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, (hereinafter "Epstein") by and through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which to file his Reply to Plaintiffs Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay Complaint. + +- 1. On April 23, 2009 Plaintiff filed a Response [DE 82] in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay [DE 65]. Defendant's reply would be due on May 5, 2009 (5 days to reply excluding weekends + mailing). Defendant is requesting a fifteen (15) day extension to May 20, 2009 to reply. +- 2. There are several other cases filed with this Court in which Jeffrey Epstein is named a Defendant. In those cases, the undersigned has been handling other matters associated therewith. +- 3. Additionally, Defendant's counsel is in the midst of preparing for a state court trial, CARDIOPULMONARY & PRIMARY CARE ASSOC. OF TREASURE COAST, P.A +- v. , M.D., Case No. 562008CA001726, specially set for trial beginning May 13 + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein Page 2 + +through 15, 2009). Discovery in that case is ongoing with several depositions set to prepare for trial. + +4. The requested extension is fair and reasonable under the circumstances as it will provide time to allow the Defendant, EPSTEIN, to fully and adequately reply. + +5. An extension until May 20, 2009, is fair and reasonable under the circumstances. The undersigned is in need of the additional time in order to fully and adequately prepare a response on behalf of EPSTEIN. + +6. As certified below, counsel for Defendant conferred with counsel by e-mail, and Plaintiffs counsel is in agreement with the requested extension. + +WHEREFORE Defendant respectfully requests that this Court enter an order granting an extension until May 20, 2009, to file a Reply to Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay Complaint. + +## Local Rule 7.1 Statement + +Counsel for the movant conferred by e-mail with counsel for the Plaintiff and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested extension until May 20, 2009 for Defendant to reply to Plaintiffs Response to Defendant's Motion to Stay Complaint. + +Rob .,, Clittpn, Jr. Attorney for Defendant Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 5th day of May 2009: + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein +Page 3 + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744190/EFTA02744190.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744190/EFTA02744190.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..22bf507ba0ac5c989558fdff9f5bb18e912cec74 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744190/EFTA02744190.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,227 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744190.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3496, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.39, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.39200000000002, + 82.62 + ], + [ + 410.5253601074219, + 82.62 + ], + [ + 410.5253601074219, + 111.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.39200000000002, + 111.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO FILE REPLY \nTO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.06599999999999, + 292.6875 + ], + [ + 538.2932739257812, + 292.6875 + ], + [ + 538.2932739257812, + 320.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 73.06599999999999, + 320.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Local Rule 7.1 Statement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 237.004, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 375.0084533691406, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 375.0084533691406, + 449.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 237.004, + 449.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.95, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 387.4452819824219, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 387.4452819824219, + 641.8000030517578 + ], + [ + 260.95, + 641.8000030517578 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 40 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744190" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744193/EFTA02744193.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744193/EFTA02744193.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..347ed259bc91cf15590414e01071e6d67814fa31 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744193/EFTA02744193.md @@ -0,0 +1,105 @@ +• + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAMMI + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# PLAINITFF'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES + +Plaintiff, JANE DOE 2, by and through her undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 33, hereby responds topsefendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff as faoWs: + +### General Objections + +1. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that the Interrogatories call for the disclosure of information protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product doctrine, or other applicable privilege or immunity, whether created by statute or common law. Plaintiff claims such privileges and protections to the extent implicated by each Interrogatory, and excludes privileged and protected information from any responses to Defendant's discovery. Any disclosure is inadvertent and is not intended to waive those privileges or protections, which are specifically reserved. + +2. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that same are vague, ambiguous, incomprehensible and/or overly broad. + +Doe No. 2 v. Epstein + +Page 8 + +- 9. Describe each injury (physical, emotional, mental) for which you are claiming damages in this case, specifying the part of your body that was injured, the nature of the injury, and as to any injuries you contend are permanent, the effects on you that you claim are permanent. + +Answer: + +Plaintiff has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries, including without limitation, anxiety, low self-esteem, feelings of guilt, self-blame, distrustfulness, burdened often by sadness and depression, suicidal thoughts, difficulty trusting others (particularly men), irritability, anger, feeling helpless and powerless, escapism through excessive partying, lack of confidence, loss of innocence. + +Plaintiffs psychological and emotional injuries will be analyzed by aforensic expert, whose opinions and related information will be disclosed in accordance with the expert discovery rules of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement this response in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +- 10. Please state each item of damage that you claim, and include in your answer: the count to which the item of damages relates; the factual basis for each item of damages; and an explanation of how you computed each item of damages, including any mathematical formula used. + +Answer: + +Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory as calling for an expert opinion and calculation. Subject to said objection, Plaintiff states that she seeks damages arising from her psychological and emotional injuries. These damages include pain and suffering, costs of psychological care and treatment, and loss of earning capacity. The pecuniary elements of these damages will be analyzed and computed by an appropriate expert. + +- 11. List the names and business addresses of each physician (including psychiatrist, psychologist, etc.) or medical provider (including chiropractors) who has treated or examined you, and each medical facility where you have received any treatment or examination for the injuries for which you seek damages in this + +**VERIFICATION** + +[REDACTED] being duly sworn, deposes and says that the foregoing answers to interrogatories are true and correct to the best of her knowledge, information and belief. + +[REDACTED] + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) +) ss +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 17 day of Jan, 2009 by [REDACTED], who is personally known to me or has produced the following identification Florida D.L which is current or has been issued within the past five years and bears a serial or other identifying number. + +Evelyn G. Goens +Print Name + +Evelyn D. Goens +Signature + +NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF FLORIDA +Commission Number: +My commission expires: +(Notarial Seal) + +State of Virginia +249663 + +**Certificate of Service** + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 20 day of January, 2009. + +Robert D. Critton, Jr, Esq. +Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Michael R. Tein, Esq. +██████████ Tein, P.L. +3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 +Coconut Grove, FL 33133 +305-442-1101 +Fax: 305 442 6744 +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* +[tein@lewistein.com](mailto:tein@lewistein.com) + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744193/EFTA02744193.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744193/EFTA02744193.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fda8943a34ec8b947f0c30972f934560e7424201 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744193/EFTA02744193.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,288 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744193.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4980, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.16, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.24085998535156, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 410.04, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 410.04, + 105.30000000000001 + ], + [ + 200.24085998535156, + 105.30000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINITFF'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.92, + 306.18 + ], + [ + 520.2, + 306.18 + ], + [ + 520.2, + 328.05 + ], + [ + 97.92, + 328.05 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "General Objections", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 419.58000000000004 + ], + [ + 368.0454406738281, + 419.58000000000004 + ], + [ + 368.0454406738281, + 433.361572265625 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 433.361572265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VERIFICATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 353.124, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 353.124, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 85.85999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.8, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 370.87199999999996, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 370.87199999999996, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 244.8, + 115.83 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 205 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 367 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744193" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744197/EFTA02744197.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744197/EFTA02744197.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..776af9ab2450e6b641130e7f3ebd182286350e9f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744197/EFTA02744197.md @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@ +• W. + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRall + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# PLAINITFF'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES + +Plaintiff, JANE DOE 2, by and through her undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 33, hereby responds toAefendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff as faoWs: + +### General Objections + +1. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that the Interrogatories call for the disclosure of information protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product doctrine, or other applicable privilege or immunity, whether created by statute or common law. Plaintiff claims such privileges and protections to the extent implicated by each Interrogatory, and excludes privileged and protected information from any responses to Defendant's discovery. Any disclosure is inadvertent and is not intended to waive those privileges or protections, which are specifically reserved. + +2. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that same are vague, ambiguous, incomprehensible and/or overly broad. + +Doe No. 2 v. Epstein + +Page 8 + +- 9. Describe each injury (physical, emotional, mental) for which you are claiming damages in this case, specifying the part of your body that was injured, the nature of the injury, and as to any injuries you contend are permanent, the effects on you that you claim are permanent. + +Answer: + +Plaintiff has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries, including without limitation, anxiety, low self-esteem, feelings of guilt, self-blame, distrustfulness, burdened often by sadness and depression, suicidal thoughts, difficulty trusting others (particularly men), irritability, anger, feeling helpless and powerless, escapism through excessive partying, lack of confidence, loss of innocence. + +Plaintiffs psychological and emotional injuries will be analyzed by aforensic expert, whose opinions and related information will be disclosed in accordance with the expert discovery rules of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement this response in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +- 10. Please state each item of damage that you claim, and include in your answer: the count to which the item of damages relates; the factual basis for each item of damages; and an explanation of how you computed each item of damages, including any mathematical formula used. + +Answer: + +Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory as calling for an expert opinion and calculation. Subject to said objection, Plaintiff states that she seeks damages arising from her psychological and emotional injuries. These damages include pain and suffering, costs of psychological care and treatment, and loss of earning capacity. The pecuniary elements of these damages will be analyzed and computed by an appropriate expert. + +- 11. List the names and business addresses of each physician (including psychiatrist, psychologist, etc.) or medical provider (including chiropractors) who has treated or examined you, and each medical facility where you have received any treatment or examination for the injuries for which you seek damages in this + +# VERIFICATION + +being duly sworn, deposes and says that the foregoing answers to interrogatones are true and correct to the best of her knowledge, information and belief. + +411111111111,---. + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) ss COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +CRIBED before me this LL day of -7it g".Sk\_. , 2009 by who is personally known to me or has prOduced the following identification ic/nt;c/ P. I "- which is current or has been issued within the past five years and bears a serial or other identifying number. + +> edelty G . G-5 ea, 5 Print Name + +tn-e-r -- 'b. IJ-frensa— Signature + +NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF FLORIDA Commission Number: My commission expires: (Notarial Seal) + +,s-hvit a v;g7;m; n-07 ef 9 4 G3 + +**Certificate of Service** + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 20 day of January, 2009. + +Robert D. Critton, Jr, Esq. +Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Michael R. Tein, Esq. +██████████ Tein, P.L. +3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 +Coconut Grove, FL 33133 +305-442-1101 +Fax: 305 442 6744 +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* +[tein@lewistein.com](mailto:tein@lewistein.com) + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744197/EFTA02744197.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744197/EFTA02744197.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..60cda03f1d90dd059f727edf048563689b38a711 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744197/EFTA02744197.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,288 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744197.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4967, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.89, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.24085998535156, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 410.04, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 410.04, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 200.24085998535156, + 104.49 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINITFF'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.92, + 306.18 + ], + [ + 520.2, + 306.18 + ], + [ + 520.2, + 328.05 + ], + [ + 97.92, + 328.05 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "General Objections", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 419.58000000000004 + ], + [ + 368.0454406738281, + 419.58000000000004 + ], + [ + 368.0454406738281, + 433.361572265625 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 433.361572265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VERIFICATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.548, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 358.7732238769531, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 358.7732238769531, + 87.05352783203125 + ], + [ + 262.548, + 87.05352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.412, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 370.87199999999996, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 370.87199999999996, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 245.412, + 114.20999999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 208 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 367 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744197" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744201/EFTA02744201.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744201/EFTA02744201.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6ed35c65cfd2c7f04fc5c02d85645c0d0ac6d463 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744201/EFTA02744201.md @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +MOTION TO COMPEL AND/OR IDENTIFY JANE DOE IN THE STYLE OF THIS CASE AND MOTION TO IDENTIFY JANE DOE IN THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY. OR ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO DISMISS SUA SPONTE, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein" or "Defendant"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby requests that this Court enter an order identifying in the style of this case the complete legal name of the Plaintiff, JANE DOE, to substitute her complete legal name in this case in place of "JANE DOE" and, equally important, allowing Defendant to identify her in various subpoenas that Epstein must serve so Epstein can defend this case or, alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Entire Action Sua Sponte. In support, Mr. Epstein states as follows: + +## I. Motion And Incorporated Memorandum Of Law + +## a. Background + +- 1. On February 6, 2008, Plaintiff, a 21-year-old female, filed this action against Epstein. + - 2. On February 27, 2009, Plaintiff filed her Second Amended + +Complaint against Epstein, which alleges three causes of action against him: Count I — Sexual Assault and Battery; Count II — Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; and Count III — Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422. + +3. The Second Amended Complaint appears to raise both Federal and Florida State substantive issues (DE 56). + +4. Plaintiff alleges, among other things, that she is entitled to money damages pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. §2422 and 2255 (in the wherefore clause) and by virtue her claims that Epstein sexually battered her and caused her emotional distress. Plaintiff alleges separate counts against Mr. Epstein, on which he must conduct discovery to defend this case. + +5. In particular, JANE DOE claims, in Count I for sexual battery, that she has and will suffer ". . .severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages." ¶21, 2nd Am. Comp. DE 56. In Count II for Sexual Battery, plaintiff claims entitlement to recover for ". . .severe mental anguish and pain" ¶27, 2nd Am. Comp., DE 56. In Count III for Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422, plaintiff claims entitlement to recover for ". . .personal injury, including mental, psychological and emotional damages" ¶33, 2nd Am. Comp., DE 56. Plaintiff also claims entitlement to "punitive damages" and "actual and compensatory damages". DE. 56. See also Exhibit "A" Interrogatory Response Number 9. + +6. Epstein has a constitutional due process right to defend himself and to seek the production of information that will assist in his defense of the allegations in the 2nd Amended Complaint. In this case, Plaintiff's counsel objected to Epstein serving subpoenas on Plaintiff's treating physicians and other third parties. Thus, this motion seeks to identify JANE DOE in the style of this case, to identify JANE DOE in various third-party subpoenas for discovery purposes and, alternatively, to dismiss this entire action sua sponte. The undersigned's experience in "Jane Doe" lawsuits is that once a Plaintiff is identified, other individuals come forward in the discovery phase with information which often directly contradicts allegations as to the events and damages. For instance, witnesses may testify that Plaintiff was paid by others for similar sexual acts she claims Mr. Epstein forced upon her or that she willingly participated in certain act(s) that would negate or lessen her damages. This goes directly to Plaintiff's damage claim. + +7. Likewise, subpoenas must be issued to third-party treaters and current and former employers, and those subpoenas will seek to obtain records related directly to Plaintiffs claims and her damages (i.e., her claim for severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages" and loss of self-esteem and dignity as referenced above). Cherenfant v. Nationwide Credit, Inc. 2004 WL 5315889 (S.D. Fla. 2004)(order allowing discovery of medical records consistent with Plaintiffs allegations in complaint). This too goes directly to Plaintiffs damage claims. Medical providers, employers, co-employees, etc...have direct and relevant personal knowledge and observations regarding damages, i.e., emotional state, activities, self-esteem, etc.... + +8. Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 26 allows for broad discovery. Epstein is not required to rely solely on Plaintiff's discovery responses in defending this case, nor is Epstein required by any statute or law to rely only upon what Plaintiff produces in discovery or may obtain from her own medical treaters through her counsel, and to then provide to Epstein only after Plaintiff has reviewed same. In certain related state court actions involving Epstein, the undersigned offered to serve certain subpoenas on the medical treaters and other third-parties with full name, date of birth and Plaintiffs social security number (last four digits), but agreed that the subpoenas filed with the clerk would be redacted. Several attorneys agreed to this procedure in those cases. In Federal Court, subpoenas are not filed with the clerk. Thus, in this matter, the undersigned offered to serve the third-party subpoenas with plaintiffs full name, date of birth and social security number (last four digits) and would agree to redact any identifying information on any documents filed with this court if that ultimately became necessary. As discussed below, Plaintiffs counsel did not agree. Further, Plaintiff's counsel claims a HIPPA complaint protective order is necessary. Such is not the case when a Plaintiff places her mental, emotional, psychological and physical condition at issue. Moreover, when an order from the court is attached to the Subpoena, treaters and other third parties produce the records and show up to the depositions with the records requested because the deponent knows what to bring by virtue of knowing the identity of the Plaintiff. + +9. Epstein's counsel intends to serve and depose witnesses duces tecum. If Epstein is not permitted to identify JANE DOE, how will any deponent know who the parties are and what to bring to the deposition pursuant to the duces tecum? Further, how will Epstein be able to defend the claims. Just like the Plaintiff, Epstein is entitled to due process. + +10. While it is within the sound discretion of this court to allow a party to proceed anonymously, Plaintiff should not attempt to utilize that discretion as a shield from legitimate and necessary discovery. Epstein has a fundamental due process right to conduct discovery. + +# b. Motion To Identify JANE DOE In Style Of This Case + +11. As discussed below, Epstein has fundamental due process right to defend himself in this civil litigation. While JANE DOE travels under a pseudonym, various newspaper articles identifying Epstein have been released discussing the alleged claims against him. Allowing JANE DOE to litigate this matter under a pseudonym is preventing Epstein from defending this suit including, but not limited to, preventing him from locating individuals that may have information about this lawsuit and information about JANE DOE that may discredit her allegations and/or lessen the monetary damages she seeks to recover. It is the undersigned's experience that once identified, witnesses begin to come forward. See supra. + +12. In Doe v. Leplev, 185 F.R.D. 605 (D. Ct. NV 1999), a sexual harassment case, the court reasoned that there is no express or implied right to bring an action anonymously. Id. at 606. Moreover, Fed. R. Civ. P 10(a) requires that the complaint include the names of the parties. Id. When Plaintiffs are permitted to proceed anonymously, the court must employ a balancing test to + +decide if the plaintiff has a substantial privacy interest that outweighs the presumption of openness in judicial proceedings. Id., citing, Doe v. 951 F.2d 320, 323 (11th Cir. 1992)(requiring complaint to include the names of the parties serves more than administrative convenience, it protects the public's legitimate interests in knowing all the facts involved, including the identity of the parties - thus denying request to proceed anonymously). The factors include: + +- a. whether the plaintiff is challenging governmental activity; +- b. whether the party defending the suit would be prejudiced; +- c. whether the plaintiff is required to disclose information of utmost intimacy; +- d. whether the plaintiff is compelled to admit an intention to engage in illegal conduct, thereby risking criminal prosecution; +- e. whether the Plaintiff would risk suffering injury if identified; +- f. whether the interests of children are at stake; and +- g. whether there are less drastic means of protecting the legitimate interests of either party. + +Doe v. S 951 F.2d at 323. + +Plaintiff does not fall under any of the factors. Moreover, even if she did meet one of the factors, "[t]he fact that [a] Doe [Plaintiff] may suffer some personal embarrassment, standing alone, does not require the granting of a request to proceed under a pseudonym." Id• see also Doe v. Rostker 89 F.R.D. 159 (ND. Calif. 1981). Any substantial privacy interests JANE DOE has must outweigh the customary and constitutionally embedded presumption of openness to judicial proceedings. Doe v. 951 F.2d at 323; Doe v. Berqstron 2009 WL 528623 (C.A.9(Or.))(denying request to proceed anonymously in civil action by Plaintiff where Plaintiffs arrest, prosecution and acquittal were matters of public record). + +13. In Sweetland v. State, 535 So.2d 646 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), the court reasoned that the purpose of discovery is to eliminate the likelihood of surprise and to insure a fair opportunity to prepare for trial. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(1); see also Surf Drugs, Inc., v. Vermette, 236 So.2d 108, 111 (Fla. 1970)(stating that the rules of discovery should be afforded broad and liberal treatment to effectuate their purpose), citing Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 501, 507 (1947). + +14. Next, the right to go to court to resolve disputes is a fundamental right. D.R. Lakes, Inc. v. Brandsmart U.S.A. of West Palm Beach, 819 So.2d 971 (Fla. 4 th DCA 2002). All litigants are afforded an equal opportunity. Lingle v. Dion, 776 So.2d 1073 (Fla. 4 th DCA 2001). The Florida Constitution establishes the right commonly known as access to courts. Mitchell v. Moore 786 So.2d 521 (Fla. 2001). Courts shall be open to any person for the redress of any injury and justice shall be administered without sale, denial or delay. Art. I, §21, Fla. Const.; 10A Fla. Jur. 2d, Constitutional Law, §360. + +15. If Jane Doe's name is not disclosed and identified, Mr. Epstein will not be afforded his fundamental right to fairly litigate this dispute and prepare for trial. Accordingly, Epstein requests that JANE DOE be identified by her legal name in the pleadings. + +## c. Motion To Identify JANE DOE In Third-Party Subpoenas + +16. While discovery in this matter is underway; Epstein is effectively being denied due process rights by Plaintiff's counsel from conducting broad, open and liberal discovery in that Plaintiffs counsel has objected to, among other things, Epstein identifying JANE DOE in various third-party subpoenas to her medical providers and other third parties. + +17. The undersigned must serve subpoenas on medical doctors to obtain medical information on JANE DOE's alleged psychological and physical damages as same goes to the heart of Epstein's defenses and Plaintiffs damages. Plaintiff is claiming emotional/psychological damages. See Exhibit "A", Interrogatory Response Number 9. Therefore, Epstein is entitled to know her psychological condition(s) before and after the alleged incident(s) she references in the Second Amended Complaint. In particular, JANE DOE alleges specific disorders as a result of Epstein's alleged conduct — anxiety, depression, low self-esteem, guilt, distrustfulness, suicidal thoughts, difficulty trusting men, irritability, anger, feeling helpless, powerless, escapism lack of confidence, loss of innocence, etc... (Emphasis Added). Id. Epstein is also entitled to know, among other things, whether she had any physical complaints or whether there was ever any evidence of physical battery on JANE DOE's body from the acts she complains of in the 2nd Amended Complaint. The need to serve third-party subpoenas on medical doctors is a basic discovery need related to the claims alleged by JANE DOE for which Plaintiffs counsel refuses to compromise. Balas v. Ruzzo 703 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1998)(discoverability of Plaintiffs history of sexual activity is relevant to damages); United States v. Bear Stops, 997 F.2d 451 (8th Cir. 1993)(deals with "admissibility of other acts of sexual abuse by individuals other than the defendant to explain why a victim of abuse exhibited behavioral manifestations of a sexually abused child.") If Plaintiff saw a psychologist or other physician during or after the time periods she claims she was assaulted by Epstein but either did not discuss or did discuss the incidents (or lack thereof) would be directly relevant to her damage claims. Plaintiff seeks physical and emotional/mental personal injury type damages, and the Epstein must conduct his own discovery thereon. See supra. No valid discovery objections or exemptions exist preventing necessary and reasonable discovery. To hold otherwise prevents Mr. Epstein from preparing and defending this matter. + +18. In defending this lawsuit, Mr. Epstein should be permitted broad discovery, whether admissible at trial or not. Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 26 provides, in pertinent part, that "parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action." Plaintiffs counsel's refusal to identify JANE DOE in the third-party subpoenas referenced above is prejudicing Mr. Epstein by virtue of preventing discovery all together, which is in complete contradiction of the discovery rules and Epstein's substantive due process rights. + +19. In addition, subpoenas must also be served upon various local and state institutions in order to determine what crimes, if any, JANE DOE has committed (i.e., crimes that involve dishonesty and/or false statement). Obviously, this goes directly to the heart of JANE DOE's damages she claims (emotional distress, psychological trauma, loss of self-esteem, anxiety, depression, low self-esteem, guilt, distrustfulness, suicidal thoughts, difficulty trusting men, irritability, anger, feeling helpless, powerless, escapism lack of confidence, loss of innocence — caused by Epstein or other events in her life) for which a jury is entitled to hear about at trial, and certified records must be obtained from the clerk should JANE DOE answer certain questions regarding her crimes incorrectly. + +20. At this time, the undersigned is aware that Jane Doe has information regarding a certain burglary. If Jane Doe was involved in crimes, Epstein is entitled to obtain certified copies of those crimes and other crimes Plaintiff may have committed for purposes of discovery and impeachment. To hold otherwise would not only prevent broad discovery but would ultimately result in reversible error at any trial. + +## II. Conclusion + +- 21. Epstein requests the following relief: + - a. That JANE DOE be identified by her legal name in the style of this case; + - b. That Epstein be granted leave to identify JANE DOE by her legal name in Third-Party Subpoenas (but not file them in Court or, if required, in a redacted form); and + - c. That, on an alternative basis, this court dismiss this action Sua Sponte until such time as JANE DOE identifies herself in the style of this matter. Doe v. Rostker 89 F.R.D.at 163. + +WHEREFORE, Epstein, Jeffrey Epstein, respectfully requests that this Court enter said order granting the relief requested above, and for such other + +and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper. + +![]() + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 5 day of May, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com +Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +jagesq@bellsouth.net +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +![]()![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744201/EFTA02744201.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744201/EFTA02744201.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8aeb0d3947c98d736382318dcb07f84a39047af6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744201/EFTA02744201.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,600 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744201.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 17058, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.23, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 408.2753601074219, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 408.2753601074219, + 113.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 113.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Motion And Incorporated Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 164.01600000000002, + 585.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 449.33489990234375, + 585.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 449.33489990234375, + 600.9199981689453 + ], + [ + 164.01600000000002, + 600.9199981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.308, + 613.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 362.9698486328125, + 613.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 362.9698486328125, + 628.3000030517578 + ], + [ + 250.308, + 628.3000030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "b. Motion To Identify JANE DOE In Style Of This Case", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 137.7, + 265.68 + ], + [ + 470.8794860839844, + 265.68 + ], + [ + 470.8794860839844, + 282.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 137.7, + 282.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "c. Motion To Identify JANE DOE In Third-Party Subpoenas", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 121.78800000000001, + 72.9375 + ], + [ + 485.2137145996094, + 72.9375 + ], + [ + 485.2137145996094, + 88.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 121.78800000000001, + 88.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 349.2530822753906, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 349.2530822753906, + 472.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 472.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 259.488, + 153.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 382.5, + 153.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 382.5, + 167.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 259.488, + 167.67000000000002 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744201" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744212/EFTA02744212.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744212/EFTA02744212.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3f59d1353fd5cf2a62a4f5636ebf5747d1a92d35 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744212/EFTA02744212.md @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MAR + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND FOR AN AWARD OF REASONABLE EXPENSES + +Plaintiffs, JANE DOES 2-7, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby file this Memorandum in Opposition to Epstein's Motion to Compel Plaintiffs to Answer First Set of Interrogatories and for an Award of Reasonable Expenses, and state as follows: + +# I. Introduction + +Defendant Epstein served an Interrogatory (# 18) seeking to unearth explicit information on every bit of possible sexual conduct and activity in chronological order which each Jane Doe might have engaged in since age 10, including the names and phone numbers of all persons with whom they had sexual contact.' Plaintiffs properly objected to these interrogatories in that discovery on + +Plaintiffs also object to Interrogatory nos. 19, 20, and 21, served on each of them, which seek the identities and contact information of any men whom Plaintiffs' claim committed sexual assault or + +the sexual history of a childhood abuse victim is substantially limited in federal court, "courts should presumptively issue protective orders barring discovery unless the party seeking discovery makes a showing that the evidence sought to be discovered would be relevant under the facts and theories of the particular case and cannot be obtained except through discovery." See Fed. R. Evid. 412, Advisory Committee Notes to 1994 Amendments, subdivision (c). Defendant has made no such showing in his Motion to Compel to overcome this presumption. Accordingly, Defendant's Motion to Compel must be denied in its entirety. + +# H. Argument + +Epstein incorrectly argues that Fed.R.Evid 412 is strictly an evidentiary rule and that Rule 26(b) must be read exclusively to determine whether information about an abuse victim's sexual history is discoverable. The Rule 412 Advisory Committee Notes, however, instruct that Rule 412 affects not only the admissibility of evidence at trial, but must also "inform the discovery process." Barta v. City and County of Honolulu, 169 F.R.D. 132 (D. Haw. 1996). The Committee Notes state, in relevant part, as follows: + +> Courts should presumptively issue protective orders barring discovery unless the party seeking discovery makes a showing that the evidence sought to be discovered would be relevant under the + +battery, or engaged in lewd and lascivious conduct or exhibition, against them. Unlike interrogatory no. 18, which asks for information regarding all men other than Epstein with whom the Plaintiffs have had sexual activity, interrogatory nos. 19-21 are at least limited to criminal conduct. Nonetheless, these interrogatories are overbroad and unnecessarily infringe on the Plaintiffs' privacy interests, particularly since they seek identity and contact information of men other than Epstein whom Plaintiffs claim committed sexual crimes against them. As discussed infra, discovery on a victim in a case of this nature is tempered by Fed.R.Evid., 412, and, as a result, a party is not entitled to carte blanche discovery on sexual matters involving the victim. There must be a balancing of interests based on the discovery sought. Here, Defendant contends that the information it seeks in interrogatory nos. 19-21 is relevant to Plaintiffs' damages claims, but fails to state in this regard why the perpetrator's identity and contact information specifically is relevant and should be discoverable. This discovery should not therefore be allowed. + +facts and theories of the particular case and cannot be obtained except through discovery. + +Nowhere in Defendant's Motion is it explained how or why this presumption should be overcome. It is well established under Fed.R.Evid. 412 that a victim's past sexual behavior is wholly irrelevant to the credibility of her testimony, and that her prior and subsequent sexual activity with third parties has no bearing on the issue of whether she consented to or complied with the sexual acts charged. ee United States v. M, 472 F.2d 909, 919 (5th Cir. 1973).Virgin Islands v. =, 634 F.Supp. 933, 936-37 (D. V.I. 1986) (policy of rule disallowing evidence to show character of assault victim); Dept. of Professional Regulation v. Wise 575 So.2d 713 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (holding that evidence of sexual relations with a person other than an accused is not relevant). One commentator has noted that once the identity of persons and similarity of circumstances are removed, "probative value all but disappears." See Ordover, Admissibility of Patterns of Similar Sexual Conduct: The Unlamented Death of Character for Chastity, 63 Cornell L. Rev. 96, 106 (1977). The discovery at issue is not limited to sexual contact involving similar circumstances, and is therefore lacking in probative value. Defendant fails in his Motion to demonstrate otherwise. + +Defendant's argument that Rule 412 is merely an evidentiary rule that should be disregarded in discovery disputes has been routinely rejected in federal courts. See eg., Barta v. City and County of Honolulu, 169 F.R.D. 132 (D. Haw. 1996) (granting protective order pursuant to Rule 412 to prevent a sexual battery and harassment victim from having to disclose off-duty sexual contacts with persons other than defendant in discovery); Herron v. Eastern Industries. Inc. 2007 WL 2781211 (N.D. Fla. Sept. 19, 2007); Gibbons v. Food Lion, Inc. 1999 WL 33226474 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 19, 1999); P.J. Herchenroeder v. John Univ. Applied Physical Lab, 171 F.RD. 179 (D. Md. 1997) (looking at both Rule 26 and Rule 412 in resolving discovery motion); v. 166 F.R.D. 500 (D. N.M. 1996) (explaining that lallthough the present motion arises in the context + +of discovery under Rule 26, the Court must remain mindful of Rule 412 and its implications); Stalnaker v. Kmart Co\_rp,, 1996 WL 397563 (D. Kan. 19%) (noting that Rule 412 "is applicable and has significance in deciding certain discovery motions"). + +As the above-referenced cases make abundantly clear, childhood sexual abuse cases are not garden-variety litigation subject to traditional broad discovery concerning a victim's sexual history. Rule 412 is designed to protect victims of sexual misconduct from undue embarrassment and intrusion into their private affairs. See Fed R.Evid. 412. The committee notes explain that the Rule is also intended to prevent "sexual stereotyping that is associated with public disclosure of intimate sexual details and the infusion of sexual innuendo into the factfinding process." Rule 412, Advisory Committee Notes to 1994 Amendments. Common sense dictates that requiring a sexual abuse victim to disclose the intimate details sought by Epstein during the discovery process — which then would presumably lead to additional discovery of the victim's other sexual partners — would be at least as embarrassing and intrusive during the discovery process as it would be if the victim were questioned about these facts at trial, if not more. Thus, in order to carry out its purpose, Rule 412 "must inform the discovery process" and the Court "must impose certain restriction on discovery to preclude inquiry into areas which will clearly fail to satisfy the balancing test" set forth in Rule 412. See Barta v. City and County of Honolulu, 169 F.R.D. at 135. + +In Barta the Court confronted this issue in the context of a discovery motion in a civil case. 169 F.R.D. at 133. A former employee brought a sexual harassment and battery claim against her former employer and individual employees. Id. The defendants asked questions at deposition which delved into the plaintiff's sexual conduct outside the workplace. Id. at 134. The Court did not allow these questions and wait until trial to determine admissibility. Id. at 135. Instead, the Court sustained the plaintiff's objections. Id. The Court based its decision on Fed.R.Evid. 412. Id. + +Although noting that Rule 412 controls the admissibility of evidence, the Court explained that it must also apply Rule 412 to "impose certain restrictions on discovery to preclude inquiry into areas which will clearly satisfy the balancing test of 412(b)(2)..." Id. Thus, the Court concluded that the defendants should not be permitted to inquire into the plaintiffs conduct while she was off-duty, outside the workplace, and which did not involve the same defendants. The same rationale should apply here. The Defendant should not be permitted to seek intimate details of Plaintiff's sexual conduct throughout her life — particularly if it did not involve similar criminal circumstances such as those involving Epstein. + +Defendant attached three Florida state court orders to its Motion, two of which are trial court decisions. These cases do not serve as precedent for this Court, and in any event, they are not persuasive. Unlike state courts, federal courts must focus on the interplay between Fed.R.Evid. 412 and Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), and in this regard must be concerned with embarrassment to the victim and protection of her privacy. Indeed, it does not appear that an analogous argument was made in any of the state court cases relied upon by Defendant. Furthermore, the discovery in Balas v. Russo, 703 So.2d 1076 (Ha. 3d DCA 1997) was far narrower than that which is at issue here. It was limited to asking plaintiffs for their employment history (which admittedly included prostitution), employment records, electronic recording of the conduct which was the subject of the complaint, and a description of her damages. 703 So.2d 1077-78. At no time were the plaintiffs in Balas asked to disclose their entire sexually history beginning at age 10. Id. Thus, the three state court cases cited in the Motion are not helpful to the Defendant, and should not deflect attention from the burden placed on the party in federal court seeking discovery of a victim's other sexual contacts. + +Finally, Defendant's request for attorney's fees and costs is completely unwarranted. The present motion and response involve good-faith, timely and well-founded objections by Plaintiffs to over-reaching and harassing discovery efforts. Accordingly, Defendant's request for award of reasonable expenses should be denied. + +### Conclusion + +Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs respectfully request that Defendant Epstein's Motions to Compel Plaintiffs to Answer First Set of Interrogatories and for an Award of Reasonable Expenses be denied in their entirety. + +Dated: May 6, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on May 6, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. reritton@bc1claw.com + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744212/EFTA02744212.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744212/EFTA02744212.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..52effa05ba852c09f508c4c55ad04e2928d4025a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744212/EFTA02744212.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,516 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744212.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 12105, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.71, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.26995849609375, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.26995849609375, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION \nTO EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO FIRST SET OF \nINTERROGATORIES AND FOR AN AWARD OF REASONABLE EXPENSES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.86, + 392.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 517.7341918945312, + 392.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 517.7341918945312, + 436.863037109375 + ], + [ + 94.86, + 436.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 532.98 + ], + [ + 359.24761962890625, + 532.98 + ], + [ + 359.24761962890625, + 548.3035125732422 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 548.3035125732422 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "H. Argument", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.324, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 353.97564697265625, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 353.97564697265625, + 296.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 261.324, + 296.68353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.788, + 142.56 + ], + [ + 337.39495849609375, + 142.56 + ], + [ + 337.39495849609375, + 157.10302734375 + ], + [ + 274.788, + 157.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 387.2200622558594, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 387.2200622558594, + 100.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 100.56353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.68365478515625, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 455.68365478515625, + 129.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 129.43353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744212" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744221/EFTA02744221.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744221/EFTA02744221.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7b02f1a8c130a629155d07c9d7148ff3372d98e7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744221/EFTA02744221.md @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@ +## MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ pA + +AI FOHNLYS AI LAW + +March 3, 2009 + +## Via Facsimile + +Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esq. Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Stuart S. Mennelstein Tel 305.931.2200 Fax 305.931.0877 ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +18205 Biscayne Blvd. Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 WYM.sexabuseattomey.com + +Re: Jane Does 2-7 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Dear Mr. Critton: + +This letter addresses the matters raised in your letter dated February 25, 2009, as follows: + +- 1. The Plaintiffs agree to withdraw the General Objections set forth in their interrogatory responses. +- 2. The Plaintiffs' responses to interrogatory no. 10 provide as much information as is available to them at this time. Further specificity regarding the amounts of damages claimed will necessarily be the subject of expert testimony. Plaintiffs do not have this information. By their nature, these are not breach of contract or commercial cases in which damages are easily calculated. +- 3. As to interrogatories nos. 18-21 and document request nos. 10, 11, 17 and 18, Plaintiffs maintain their objections as stated. It is the Plaintiffs' position that you are not entitled to discovery from the Plaintiffs, either in interrogatories, documents requests or depositions, relating to other sexual behavior not involving Mr. Epstein. Your interrogatories and document requests are squarely at odds with the purpose and intent of Fed.R.Evid. 412. hi this regard the Comment to the 1994 Amendments to Rule 412 states as follows: + +Rule 412 applies to both civil and criminal proceeding. The rule aims to safeguard the alleged victim against the invasion of privacy, potential embarrassment and sexual stereotyping that is associated with public disclosure of intimate sexual details and the + +Robert Critton, Esq. March 3, 2009 Page 2 + +> infusion of sexual innuendo into the factfinding process. By affording victims protection in most instances, the rule also encourages victims of sexual misconduct to institute and to participate in legal proceedings against alleged offenders. + +If Rule 412 is to have any meaning, then the protections it affords to victims of sexual misconduct must be considered and applied in discovery proceedings as well as the trial. + +4. We disagree that the Plaintiffs' answers to request for production no. 14 is evasive. How would any of the Plaintiffs' know whether photographs and pictures taken of Mr. Epstein or Mr. Epstein's home exist? All they are required to do in response to document requests is produce those documents that are responsive and that are in their possession, custody or control. As we believe it is made clear, none of the Plaintiffs have any documents that are responsive to request no. 14. + +5. As to Request for Production no. 1, you state in your letter that tax returns are relevant to "whether Plaintiff has been and continues to be gainfully employed" and "the type of employment in which Plaintiff engaged in." In a separate interrogatory, you request the Plaintiffs' complete employment history. Additionally, we have advised you that the Plaintiffs do not make any claims for lost wages. As a result, we do not understand your argument that the Plaintiffs' tax returns are relevant. Clearly, the discovery you seek on employment history can and should be obtained in a more direct means than through the Plaintiff's tax returns, which necessarily include information that is private and not relevant. + +As to the matters discussed above that are in dispute, please be advised that we will oppose any motion to compel and any request by Defendant for expenses and attorneys' fees. + +Very truly urs + +tuart S. elstein + +SSMilr \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744221/EFTA02744221.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744221/EFTA02744221.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b0b0c1e18751eacdaedc51f30c027ef0e3acec7d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744221/EFTA02744221.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,151 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744221.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 3695, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.78, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ pA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.173, + 77.66986083984375 + ], + [ + 378.6148681640625, + 77.66986083984375 + ], + [ + 378.6148681640625, + 100.19647216796875 + ], + [ + 74.173, + 100.19647216796875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Via Facsimile", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.33399999999999, + 240.05599999999998 + ], + [ + 151.70401000976562, + 240.05599999999998 + ], + [ + 151.70401000976562, + 255.49200439453125 + ], + [ + 72.33399999999999, + 255.49200439453125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744221" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744223/EFTA02744223.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744223/EFTA02744223.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e23e582f33d8a0bb9461713a1b4301d91120c797 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744223/EFTA02744223.md @@ -0,0 +1,113 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232- + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARla + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE TO FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE, OVERRULE OBJECTIONS AND FOR AN AWARD OF REASONABLE EXPENSES + +Plaintiffs, JANE DOES 2-7, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby file this Memorandum in Opposition to Epstein's Motion to Compel Response to First Request to Produce, Overrule Objections, and for an Award of Reasonable Expenses, and state as follows: + +# I. Introduction + +Defendant Epstein served a Request for Production, which includes (Request #s 10, 11, 17 and 18) requests that seek to unearth all recordings and depictions of every instance of sexual conduct and activity which each Jane Doe might have engaged and documents evidencing the names and contact information of each sexual partner over the past nine years. Plaintiffs properly objected to these Requests, in that discovery on the sexual history of a childhood abuse victim is substantially limited in federal court; "courts should presumptively issue protective + +orders barring discovery unless the party seeking discovery makes a showing that the evidence sought to be discovered would be relevant under the facts and theories of the particular case and cannot be obtained except through discovery." See Fed. R. Evid. 412, Advisory Committee Notes to 1994 Amendments, subdivision (c). Defendant has made no such showing in his Motion to Compel to overcome this presumption. Accordingly, Defendant's Motion to Compel must be denied in its entirety. + +Defendant also seeks in Request #1 "all tax returns and supporting documentation" dating back to 2002. Plaintiffs properly objected to this harassing and burdensome request, which is not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence in the present sexual abuse case, particularly since Plaintiffs are not making a lost wages or lost income claim. Plaintiffs have already disclosed their entire employment history and the request at issue is far broader than necessary to determine Plaintiffs' employment or earnings history. + +# II. Argument + +Initially, it must be brought to the Court's attention that Epstein's request for depictions or recordings of the plaintiff engaged in sexual or simulated sexual activity since the year 2000 includes materials which are unlawful for anyone to possess, particularly a registered sex offender such as Epstein. The notion that a registered sex offender is seeking child pornography should disturb this Court as much as it irks the Plaintiffs. + +Epstein incorrectly argues that Fed.R.Evid 412 is strictly an evidentiary rule and that Rule 26(b) must be read exclusively to determine whether information about an abuse victim's sexual history is discoverable. The Rule 412 Advisory Committee Notes, however, instruct that Rule 412 affects not only the admissibility of evidence at trial, but must also "inform the discovery process." Barta v. City and County of Honolulu, 169 F.R.D. 132 (D. Haw. 19%). The Committee Notes state, in relevant pan, as follows: + +Courts should presumptively issue protective orders barring discovery unless the party seeking discovery makes a showing that the evidence sought to be discovered would be relevant under the facts and theories of the particular case and cannot be obtained except through discovery. + +Nowhere in Defendant's Motion is it explained how or why this presumption should be overcome. It is well established under Fed.R.Evid. 412 that a victim's past sexual behavior is wholly irrelevant to the credibility of her testimony, and that her prior and subsequent sexual activity with third parties has no bearing on the issue of whether she consented to or complied with the sexual acts charged. See United States v. 472 F.2d 909, 919 (5th Cir. 1973); Virgin Islands v. , 634 F.Supp. 933, 936-37 (D. V.I. 1986) (policy of rule disallowing evidence to show character of assault victim); Dept. of Professional Regulation v. Wise 575 So.2d 713 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (holding that evidence of sexual relations with a person other than an accused is not relevant). One commentator has noted that once the identity of persons and similarity of circumstances are removed, "probative value all but disappears." Ordover, Admissibility of Patterns of Similar Sexual Conduct: The Unlamented Death of Character for Chastity, 63 Cornell L. Rev. 96, 106 (1977). The discovery at issue is not limited to sexual contact involving similar circumstances, and is therefore lacking in probative value. Defendant fails in his Motion to demonstrate otherwise. + +Defendant's argument that Rule 412 is merely an evidentiary rule that should be disregarded in discovery disputes has been routinely rejected in federal courts. See, e.g., Barta v. City and County of Honolulu 169 F.R.D. 132 (D. Haw. 1996) (granting protective order pursuant to Rule 412 to prevent a sexual battery and harassment victim from having to disclose off-duty sexual contacts with persons other than defendant in discovery); Herron v. Eastern + +Industries. Inc. 2007 WL 2781211 (N.D. Ha. Sept. 19, 2007); Gibbons v. Food Lion, Inc. 1999 WL 33226474 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 19, 1999)• P.J. Herchenroeder v. John Univ. Applied Physical Lab, 171 F.RD. 179 (D. Md. 1997) (looking at both Rule 26 and Rule 412 in resolving discovery motion); v. Zabihi, 166 F.R.D. 500 (D. N.M. 19%) (explaining that "[ajlthough the present motion arises in the context of discovery under Rule 26, the Court must remain mindful of Rule 412 and its implications); Stalnaker v. Kmart Corp. 1996 WL 397563 (D. Kan. 1996) (noting that Rule 412 "is applicable and has significance in deciding certain discovery motions"). + +As the above-referenced cases make abundantly clear, childhood sexual abuse cases are not garden-variety litigation subject to traditional broad discovery concerning a victim's sexual history. Rule 412 is designed to protect victims of sexual misconduct from undue embarrassment and intrusion into their private affairs. See Fed R.Evid. 412. The committee notes explain that the Rule is also intended to prevent "sexual stereotyping that is associated with public disclosure of intimate sexual details and the infusion of sexual innuendo into the factfinding process." Rule 412, Advisory Committee Notes to 1994 Amendments. Common sense dictates that requiring a sexual abuse victim to disclose the intimate details and recordings sought by Epstein during the discovery process — which then would presumably lead to additional discovery of the victim's other sexual partners — would be at least as embarrassing and intrusive during the discovery process as it would be if the victim were questioned about these facts at trial, if not more. Thus, in order to carry out its purpose, Rule 412 "must inform the discovery process" and the Court "must impose certain restriction on discovery to preclude inquiry into areas which will clearly fail to satisfy the balancing test" set forth in Rule 412. See Barta v. City and County of Honolulu, 169 F.R.D. at 135. + +In Barta the Court confronted this issue in the context of a discovery motion in a civil case. 169 F.R.D. at 133. A former employee brought a sexual harassment and battery claim against her former employer and individual employees. Id. The defendants asked questions at deposition which delved into the plaintiffs sexual conduct outside the workplace. Id. at 134. The Court did not allow these questions and wait until trial to determine admissibility. Id. at 135. Instead, the Court sustained the plaintiff's objections. Id. The Court based its decision on Fed.R.Evid. 412. Id. Although noting that Rule 412 controls the admissibility of evidence, the Court explained that it must also apply Rule 412 to "impose certain restrictions on discovery to preclude inquiry into areas which will clearly satisfy the balancing test of 4 I 2(b)(2)..." Id. Thus, the Court concluded that the defendants should not be permitted to inquire into the plaintiffs conduct while she was off-duty, outside the workplace, and which did not involve the same defendants. The same rationale should apply here. The Defendant should not be permitted to seek intimate details and recordings of Plaintiff's sexual conduct throughout her life. + +Defendant attached three Florida state court orders to its Motion, two of which are trial court decisions. These cases do not serve as precedent for this Court, and in any event, they are not persuasive. Unlike state courts, federal courts must focus on the interplay between Fed.R.Evid. 412 and Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b), and in this regard must be concerned with embarrassment to the victim and protection of her privacy. Indeed, it does not appear that an analogous argument was made in any of the state court cases relied upon by Defendant. Furthermore, the discovery in Balas v. Russo, 703 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) was far narrower than that which is at issue here. It was limited to asking plaintiffs for their employment history (which admittedly included prostitution), employment records, electronic recording of the conduct which was the subject of the complaint, and a description of her damages. 703 So.2d + +1077-78. At no time were the plaintiffs in Balas asked to disclose their entire sexually history beginning at age 10. Id. Thus, the three state court cases cited in the Motion are not helpful to the Defendant, and should not deflect attention from the burden placed on the party in federal court seeking discovery of a victim's other sexual contacts. + +With regard to Request #1 for "all tax returns and supporting documentation", the Defendant has not (and cannot) show how these documents are conceivably relevant. Plaintiffs are not making a claim for lost income or wages. See Exhibit "A". Moreover, Plaintiffs have disclosed their entire employment history and agreed to execute authorizations allowing Defendant to obtain their employment personnel records. Given the nature of the claim involving sexual assault, it is inconceivable how the tax returns, W-2s, and 1099s, and all other "supporting documentation" could be relevant. Cases in which the plaintiff has been ordered to produce tax returns is limited to situations involving transactions or in which the plaintiff is seeking to recover lost wages, lost profits, royalty payments, or similar relief. See Bellose v. Universal Tile Restoration 2008 WL 2620735 (S.D. Fla. June 30, 2008)• United States v. Certain Real Property ,444 F.Supp.2d 1258 (S.D. Fla. 2006). The instant case involving sexual assault is readily distinguishable and the mere filing of a lawsuit does not place all of one's income and earnings at issue. Further, if it is Plaintiff's employment history or earnings that Defendants are seeking to discover, a request for all "supporting documentation" pertaining to their tax returns is overbroad and far more burdensome than necessary to acquire this information. + +Finally, Defendant's request for attorney's fees and costs is completely unwarranted. The present motion and response involve good-faith, timely and well-founded objections by Plaintiffs to over-reaching and harassing discovery efforts. Accordingly, Defendant's request for award of reasonable expenses should be denied. + +# Conclusion + +Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs respectfully request that Defendant's Motion to Compel Response to First Request to Produce, Overrule Objections, and for an Award of Reasonable Expenses be denied in their entirety. + +Dated: May 6, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on May 6, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. iaoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744223/EFTA02744223.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744223/EFTA02744223.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..53561bbcf2b11700b9e2e46b55e0dc43c43e7f19 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744223/EFTA02744223.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,550 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744223.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 13115, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.72, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.26995849609375, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.26995849609375, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO \nCOMPEL RESPONSE TO FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE, OVERRULE \nOBJECTIONS AND FOR AN AWARD OF REASONABLE EXPENSES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 89.964, + 375.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 523.6605224609375, + 375.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 523.6605224609375, + 417.363037109375 + ], + [ + 89.964, + 417.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 512.9288940429688 + ], + [ + 360.2470703125, + 512.9288940429688 + ], + [ + 360.2470703125, + 527.6835327148438 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 527.6835327148438 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Argument", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.1, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 355.0387878417969, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 355.0387878417969, + 417.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 260.1, + 417.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.176, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 338.6424865722656, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 338.6424865722656, + 113.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 274.176, + 113.68353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 386.50201416015625, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 386.50201416015625, + 85.863037109375 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 85.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744223" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744233/EFTA02744233.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744233/EFTA02744233.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..63f3f985a489dab522794524dab97f5aa4ab88f6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744233/EFTA02744233.md @@ -0,0 +1,125 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARFtAIMMEI + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR ORDER REQUIRING THAT PLAINTIFF USE PROPER CASE STYLE IN ALL FILINGS + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves this Court for the entry of an order requiring that the Plaintiff in the above-styled action use the proper case-style in all filings in this action, as opposed to improperly including all other Jane Does, (Jane Doe No. 2, Jane Doe No. 3, Jane Doe No. 4, Jane Doe No. 5, Jane Doe No. 6, and Jane Doe No. 7), who are represented by the same counsel. Rule 10(a), Fed.R.Civ.P. (2009), Loc. Gen. Rule 7.1 (S.D. Fla. 2009). In support of his motion, Defendant states: + +- 1. Rule 10(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, pertaining to "Caption; Names of Parties," provides that — + +Every pleading must have a caption with the court's name, a title, a file number, and a Rule 7(a) designation. The title of the complaint must name all the parties; the title of other pleadings, after naming the first party on each side, may refer generally to other parties. + +- 2. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is the case style which Plaintiff recently used in filing papers with this Court. This action has not been consolidated with any of the other + +Doe 2 v. Epstein Page 2 + +Jane Doe actions filed by Plaintiffs counsel. Rule 10(a) makes clear that only the parties to this action are to be included in the caption. + +3. By including case styles from five additional cases makes it appear as though the cases have been consolidated. Further, the case style used by Plaintiff is not only misleading, but confusing in that there is no clear delineation as to in which action the matter is properly filed. Each case has different facts and should proceed on those facts. Each Plaintiff is claiming personal injury type damages which must be decided separately. + +4. Accordingly, Defendant is entitled to an order requiring that Plaintiff uses the proper caption and case style in this action and not list every case in which her counsel represents other Jane Does. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court grant Defendant's motion, and enter the requested order. + +# Rule 7.1 Certffication + +Pursuant to letter communication, Plaintiffs counsel did not agree with the relief request in Defendant's motion. + +Robert D. C Attorney for Eps ein + +# Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this j i day of May, 2009: + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South + +Doe 2 v. Epstein +Page 3 + +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) +[iherman@hermanlaw.com](mailto:iherman@hermanlaw.com) +[lrivera@hermanlaw.com](mailto:lrivera@hermanlaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey +Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()*(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380- + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRAJ + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +Ati EXHIBIT H + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRA1 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STAY AND OR CONTINUE ACTION + +Plaintiffs, JANE DOES 2-7, by and through undersigned counsel, file this Memorandum in Opposition to Stay and or Continue Action, as follows: + +### I. Introduction + +In moving for stay, Defendant has the burden of demonstrating that, due to a parallel criminal proceeding, if he exercises his right against self incrimination he will certainly lose on summary judgment unless a stay is granted. Defendant has failed to satisfy this burden. There is no pending motion for summary judgment. There is also no criminal proceeding at this time arising from Epstein's acts against the Plaintiffs or other victims. Indeed, whether such a criminal proceeding is ever commenced is entirely within the Defendant's control, by complying with the terms of his Non-Prosecution Agreement with the U.S. Attorney's Office. Defendant relies upon an amorphous \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744233/EFTA02744233.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744233/EFTA02744233.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2e3494cafa6e3fc80b872e08145a49d195b5edd1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744233/EFTA02744233.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,372 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744233.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 5093, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.03, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 414.2799987792969, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 414.2799987792969, + 106.28997802734375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 106.28997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR ORDER REQUIRING \nTHAT PLAINTIFF USE PROPER CASE STYLE IN ALL FILINGS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 143.82, + 281.88 + ], + [ + 474.26239013671875, + 281.88 + ], + [ + 474.26239013671875, + 311.4200134277344 + ], + [ + 143.82, + 311.4200134277344 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certffication", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 433.35 + ], + [ + 367.30859375, + 433.35 + ], + [ + 367.30859375, + 449.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 449.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.412, + 584.01 + ], + [ + 373.1952819824219, + 584.01 + ], + [ + 373.1952819824219, + 600.1699981689453 + ], + [ + 245.412, + 600.1699981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 210.52799999999996, + 106.11000000000001 + ], + [ + 400.9476013183594, + 106.11000000000001 + ], + [ + 400.9476013183594, + 134.46 + ], + [ + 210.52799999999996, + 134.46 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION \nTO MOTION TO STAY AND OR CONTINUE ACTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 153.0, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 439.2815246582031, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 439.2815246582031, + 421.7335510253906 + ], + [ + 153.0, + 421.7335510253906 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.8, + 486.80999999999995 + ], + [ + 347.53033447265625, + 486.80999999999995 + ], + [ + 347.53033447265625, + 500.8535461425781 + ], + [ + 244.8, + 500.8535461425781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 120 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744233" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744238/EFTA02744238.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744238/EFTA02744238.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..70cf24380cc1dbb8aff958eed8e0a91a00931b4d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744238/EFTA02744238.md @@ -0,0 +1,100 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAal + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Reply to Plaintiff's Response In Opposition To Defendant's Motion To Stay And/Or Continue Action For Time Certain With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Reply to Plaintiffs Response In Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay and/or Continue Action, and states: + +### I. Introduction and Argument + +Plaintiffs Response in Opposition challenging the stay should not prevail when 5th Amendment principles are at issue and when there exists a real, substantial and not remote possibility that Epstein may face criminal prosecution by the United States Attorneys' Office ("USAO") if the USAO unilaterally determines that Epstein somehow violated that certain Non-Prosecution Agreement dated June 30, 2008 ("NPA") and/or if Epstein is forced to waive those 5th Amendment rights and participate in civil discovery in order to defend this civil action. + +Epstein should not be confronted with the substantial risk of loosing this civil action by virtue of asserting his 5th Amendment privileges. Despite Plaintiff's contention, Epstein's Motion does not concentrate solely on the fact that the pleadings are not at the summary judgment stage. The motion also concentrates on Epstein's risk of loosing + +this entire civil action as a result of Epstein invoking his 5th Amendment rights. Severino v. Klytie's Developments, Inc., 2008WL 1782637, \*2 (D. ColoXrecognizing that a stay is appropriate under similar circumstances as in the instant case); see also infra. + +In fact, waiver of Epstein's 5th Amendment privileges should not be compelled to defend this civil action (and could be remedied by areasonable stay), especially when civil discovery may lead to the USAO unilaterally declaring aviolation of the NPA. + +The USAO has already unilaterally claimed that EPSTEIN violated the NPA by, among other things, "investigating the Plaintiffs (by and though his attorneys) whom brought civil suits against him for purposes of defending those civil actions" and "by contesting damages in this action and in the other civil actions." See Motion to Stay and Jack Goldberger Affidavit attached thereto as Exhibit "B". Thus, these are not vague assertions as Plaintiff claims. How can Epstein truly defend these matters and be afforded his due process rights when to do so might result in the USAO claiming abreach of the NPA? The fact is that he cannot. Notwithstanding the allegations against Epstein, this Court has an obligation to ensure his due process rights are upheld in both the civil and criminal contexts. + +Next, in her response, Plaintiff claims that a stay should not be entered because aparallel criminal proceeding against Epstein does not exist. Not only is Plaintiffs theory incorrect for reasons set out herein and in the Epstein's Motion to Stay, but her response ignores the significant fact that a stay may be issued in light of an ongoing investigation. It is clear from the NPA and Jack Goldberger's Affidavit (attached to the Motion to Stay) ". . .that the criminal matters against Epstein remain ongoing until the + +NPA expires by its terms in late 2010. .., and the threat of criminal prosecution against Epstein by the USAO continues presently and through late 2010." See Jack Goldberger's Affidavit, ¶5 (attached to the Motion to Stay). In fact, the FBI refused to provide information regarding this case and other related cases filed against Epstein ". . .stating the materials are at this time exempt from disclosure because they are in an investigative file, i.e., the matter is still an ongoing criminal investigation." See Jack Goldberger's Affidavit, ¶7 (attached to the Motion to Stay) + +Additionally, Plaintiff's response downplays the fact that civil discovery may result in the USAO claiming abreach of the NPA. Epstein wishes to vigorously defend this case and others filed against him; however, he does not wish to risk waiver of his 5th Amendment privileges, at least before the NPA expires or any investigation is closed. + +Further, Plaintiff adopts the arguments set forth in Jane Doe's Response to the Motion to Stay filed in 08-CIV-80893, which asserts that the NPA is not attached to Epstein's Motion to Stay. The Court has a copy of the NPA. While it may be sealed, this Court may review same, in camera. As such, Plaintiffs Best Evidenth argument (as adopted in the instant response) is entirely misplaced and should be disregarded. + +# a. Justice Requires The Entry of A Stay + +As set out in the Motion to Stay, once the NPA expires, EPSTEIN intends to testify to all relevant and non-objectionable inquiries made to him in discovery be it a deposition, in interrogatories or in production requests. However, the current circumstances are such that by testifying or responding to discovery, EPSTEIN will be required to waive his constitutional privileges, thereby subjecting himself to scrutiny by + +the USAO as a result of matters alleged in this civil action (and others before this Court and in the State of Florida 15th Judicial Circuit Court, Palm Beach County). + +When an ongoing criminal investigation exists, courts have granted motions to stay civil proceedings. In St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company v. U.S., 24CI.Ct 513(1991), the court held that staying acivil action for 6-9 months was reasonable in light of a pending criminal investigation so long as the movant met certain elements (see infra) and the stay was not immoderate or unreasonable. Taking into consideration the Motion to Stay and this Reply as well as facts alleged by Plaintiff in her operative pleading against Epstein, it is clear that Epstein has met the elements of St. Paul Fire necessary for this Court to enter a stay: + +- 1. Epstein has made a clear showing, by direct or indirect proof, that the issues in the civil action are "related" as well as "substantially similar" to the issues in the criminal investigation. +- 2. Epstein has made a clear showing of hardship or inequity if required to go forward with this civil case while the NPA and/or the ongoing investigation exist. (see supra and see also Motion to Stay and attached affidavit of Jack Goldberger, Esq. discussing Epstein's 5th Amendment Rights and how those rights affect this civil litigation — see supra); and +- 3. Epstein, in light of the stays granted by other courts, has shown that a stay in the instant matter until late 2010 (the date the NPA expires) and the likely date any ongoing investigation will be closed is not immoderate or unreasonable. + +St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company v. U.S., 24CI.Ct at 515-16; see also Wilson v. National Association of Letter Carriers, 2006WL 3791313, \*1 (E.D. La. 2006)(granting motion to stay civil proceeding for 2 years and 7 months pending criminal investigation). Ostrow v. U.S., 1986WL 6855, \*1 (M.D. Fla.)(recognizing a + +defendant's constitutional rights and allowing for a stay of the civil case until the criminal aspects/investigation of Defendant's companion case are closed). + +Here, Epstein is not required to "contemplate an in haec verba iron-clad comparison of separate issues by direct proof." St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company v. U.S., 24CI.Ct at 516. Instead, a reading of the complaint, the NPA (in camera), the pleadings in support of and against Epstein's Motion to Stay along with other pleadings in the clerk's file, makes it clear that the facts in the instant matter and those in the ongoing investigation are "related" and/or "substantially similar." Id. As such, permitting this civil action to go forward would create a hardship on Epstein in that he will be forced to invoke his 5th Amendment Privilege and risk loosing this case by virtue of not being able to present evidence, or waive that right and risk a potential criminal prosecution. Eastwood v. U.S., 2008WL 5412857, \*1 (E.D. Tenn.))("When a party to a civil action is subject to criminal proceedings and/or investigations that relate to such civil action, courts will often stay the civil proceeding so as to prevent the use of civil discovery and evidentiary procedures to obtain evidence for use in the criminal matter). Id. Courts will also stay acivil case to preserve 5th Amendment rights. Id. Further, a comparison of Fed.R.Civ. Pro. 26 may expand the rights of criminal discovery beyond the limits of Fed.R.Crim.Pro. 16(b). Epstein satisfies the requirements to stay this action as set forth in St. Paul Fire and in Eastwood including the similarity of issues underlying the civil litigation and ongoing criminal investigation. As such, a stay should be entered in the instant matter. See also U.S. v. \$75,020.00 In United States Funds, et al., 2009 WL 1010359 (M.D. G.a. 2009). + +# Ill. Conclusion and Request for Relief + +Based upon the foregoing, Epstein is entitled to a full stay of this proceeding (and other related matters) until such time as the NPA expires and until the ongoing investigation by the USAO is closed (i.e., until late 2010). Alternatively, in an effort to protect Epstein's 5th Amendment and his due process rights in connection with defending these civil matters, this court should enter a stay of any discovery directed to Epstein and strike this case from the trial docket until the NPA and the ongoing investigation are both concluded and/or expired. In this manner, Plaintiffs investigation and discovery as to third parties will continue and will not be delayed. Epstein is invoking his 5th Amendment rights in the first place, which means that objections to discovery and deposition questions are being asserted so as not to waive those 5th Amendment rights. Once the NPA and the ongoing investigation terminate, this court could allow additional time for Plaintiff to complete Epstein's deposition and discovery directed to him, and then set this case on the Court's most available docket. Despite Plaintiff's contentions, Epstein's 5th Amendment rights and his due process rights associated therewith and in connection with defending this civil case should trump any civil claim for money damages when it comes to timing. Eastwood v. U.S., 2008WL 5412857, \*6 (reasoning that a stay is warranted when the risk to an individual's constitutional rights is magnified). + +WHEREFORE, Epstein requests the following relief set forth above, and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +![]()**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 12 day of May, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +![]()By: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. +Florida Bar No. 224162 +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +*(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744238/EFTA02744238.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744238/EFTA02744238.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d688997a8ac2f636ea830b70af4dd4e39f2b06d0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744238/EFTA02744238.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,406 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744238.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 12107, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.09, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.1304016113281, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.1304016113281, + 124.44989013671875 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 124.44989013671875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction and Argument", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 211.75199999999995, + 411.48 + ], + [ + 410.60565185546875, + 411.48 + ], + [ + 410.60565185546875, + 427.6713562011719 + ], + [ + 211.75199999999995, + 427.6713562011719 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. Justice Requires The Entry of A Stay", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 187.272, + 547.5600000000001 + ], + [ + 438.7791748046875, + 547.5600000000001 + ], + [ + 438.7791748046875, + 564.7914886474609 + ], + [ + 187.272, + 564.7914886474609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Ill. Conclusion and Request for Relief", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 212.36399999999998, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 436.79205322265625, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 436.79205322265625, + 121.6539306640625 + ], + [ + 212.36399999999998, + 121.6539306640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.324, + 160.38 + ], + [ + 384.948, + 160.38 + ], + [ + 384.948, + 174.96 + ], + [ + 261.324, + 174.96 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 264 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 352 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 344 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 392 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 356 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 315 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 242 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744238" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744245/EFTA02744245.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744245/EFTA02744245.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b5a5c57a02dd449ca4d8e03d06c8485e561c88d5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744245/EFTA02744245.md @@ -0,0 +1,164 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 013-CV-80232-MARRA + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/M. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-8081 I-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CTV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY AND PROCEDURAL MOTIONS THAT RELATE TO MULTIPLE CASES + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court sua spouse. In the interests of judicial economy and + +efficiency, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: + +I. The above-styled cases are hereby CONSOLIDATED for purposes of discovery and for procedural motions that relate to multiple cases. + +2. Hereinafter, all motions and other court filings that relate to discovery and all procedural motions that relate to multiple cases shall be styled with all of the case names and numbers, consistent with the styling of this Order, and shall be FILED ONLY IN Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein, case no. 08-80119, which is the lowest-numbered pending case. Any motions styled incorrectly or filed in multiple cases will be stricken from the docket for failure to follow the Court's Order. + +3. The parties may file separate motions to dismiss, answers to the complaint, summary judgment motions, motions in limine and other substantive motions that pertain to their individual cases and their individual trials under their individual case styles. + +4. Production of documents by any party or non-party that relate to multiple cases need be produced only once. + +5. Defendant is limited to a single deposition of each Plaintiff, during which Defendant may depose the Plaintiff as both a party and a witness. + +6. Defendant(s) may be deposed only once. + +7. Any other witnesses common to multiple cases may be deposed only once. + +8. For depositions, Local Rule 26.1 K (limiting deposition time to one day of seven hours) is waived so as to allow each party an adequate opportunity to develop fully the record as it may relate to that party. However, this waiver shall not be construed as authority for any party to take unnecessarily long depositions, or abuse the process. Any abuses of this waiver + +shall result in the imposition of appropriate sanctions against the offending party. + +**DONE AND ORDERED** in [REDACTED] at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, + +Florida, this 14th day of May, 2009 + +![]() + +--- + +KENNETH A. MARRA +United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: + +all counsel of record + +Magistrate Judge Linnea R. [REDACTED] \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744245/EFTA02744245.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744245/EFTA02744245.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7cdff7943b46e1fd466df22cce58c5f16d91d4cf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744245/EFTA02744245.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,253 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744245.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 3322, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.6, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY AND \nPROCEDURAL MOTIONS THAT RELATE TO MULTIPLE CASES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 99.144, + 594.54 + ], + [ + 513.4083862304688, + 594.54 + ], + [ + 513.4083862304688, + 625.1030120849609 + ], + [ + 99.144, + 625.1030120849609 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744245" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744250/EFTA02744250.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744250/EFTA02744250.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5388d8758a5bd87562b7f7c58b1100442c047aeb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744250/EFTA02744250.md @@ -0,0 +1,385 @@ +**UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA** + +**CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/ [REDACTED]** + +C.M. A., + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and [REDACTED] +[REDACTED], + +Defendants, + +**Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion To Stay And Or Continue Action For Time Certain Based On Parallel Civil And Criminal Proceedings With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law** + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby moves this Court for the entry of an order staying or continuing this action for a time certain (i.e., until late 2010 when the NPA expires), pursuant to the application of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the fact that a parallel proceeding is ongoing and being investigated. In support of his motion, EPSTEIN states: + +**I. Introduction** + +At the outset, EPSTEIN notes this Court's prior Order, dated December 16, 2008, (Document 28), in which this Court denied a motion for stay brought by Defendant's prior counsel. In that instance, Defendant's counsel requested a mandatory stay under 18 U.S.C.A. §3509(k) which the court denied. In denying the request for the stay, this Court stated that a discretionary stay was not appropriate at the time the order was entered but also stated, in part, that "Any such issues shall be resolved as they arise in the course of litigation." As discussed herein, "special circumstances" now exist which, in the "interests of justice," merit the entry of a stay of this civil action until the criminal matter in the 15th Judicial Circuit is "closed" in + +accordance with the United States Attorney's Office ("USAO") Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") and until the NPA expires. + +Moreover, EPSTEIN was indicted by a grand jury in or around July 2006. See Exhibit "A". The Non-Prosecution Agreement is part of the record in connection with that indictment, which is signed by the State Attorney of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida ("SAO"). In fact, the NPA acknowledges the investigation performed by the SAO. Further, the USAO was present at the Plea hearing whereby the NPA was made part of the record. Thus, there is no question that a parallel criminal matter exists in that the SAO's case remains open and the NPA lives along side it, which places EPSTEIN under greatscrutiny by the USAO. The NPA actually places an affirmative duty upon EPSTEIN to undertake discussions with the SAO to ensure compliance with the NPA. That check and balance, therefore, remains in the hands of the SAO, which has a parallel criminal proceeding. Here, the threat of prosecution is real, substantial, and present should the USAO determine that EPSTEIN somehow violated the NPA. As discussed below, because the NPA fails to define what constitutes a breach, the USA() has apparently taken it upon itself to determine whether abreach has occurred and whether to seek criminal prosecution. In fact, the USAO has already attempted to claim violations of the NPA due to, among other things, EPSTEIN defending the civil actions against him. Clearly, it is NOT simply EPSTEIN's choice as to whether he violates the NPA — that discretion apparently lies with the USAO. For this reason alone, a stay is required until the NPA expires. + +The difference between this Motion and the prior motion to stay is solely due to the ripeness of the issues discussed herein. + +### H. THE NPA + +By its terms, the NPA took effect on June 30, 2008 and expires by those same terms in late 2010 so long as EPSTEIN complies with the terms and conditions — violations of which remain undefined. The NPA, which remains under seal, outlines various obligations on the part of EPSTEIN including, but not limited to, pleading guilty to the Indictment and Information before the 15th Judicial Circuit, recommendations for his sentencing before the 15th Judicial Circuit, waiver of challenges to the Information filed by the SAO, waiver of right to appeal his conviction, agreement not be afforded benefits for gain time, and the agreement to not prosecute others listed thereon so long as EPSTEIN does not breach and fulfills the requirements of the NPA. + +What the NPA does not outline or define is what constitutes abreach or what act or omission constitutes abreach thereof. Therefore, the USAO apparently believes it has the discretion to make that unwritten and undefined determination, which places an unreasonable burden upon EPSTEIN in defending the civil claims in that he has no idea what the USAO will define as abreach in the event he does not assert his 5th Amendment Rights. As an example, the USAO has already claimed that EPSTEIN violated the NPA by: + +- 1. investigating the Plaintiffs (by and though his attorneys) whom brought civil suits against him for purposes of defending those civil actions; + - 2. contesting damages in this action and in the other civil actions; +- 3. making statements to the press about this Plaintiff or other Plaintiffs by and though his attorneys; and + +4. using the word "jail" instead of "imprisonment" in the plea agreement with SA's office. + +See Exhibit "B" Goldberger Affidavit - EPSTEIN's criminal counsel. + +These allegations are silly, unfounded and alleged violations which are not defined as violations under the NPA but arrived at by the USAO. Thus, EPSTEIN is left with "Morton's Fork" in his side - the undesirable choice of taking the 5h Amendment and having a judgment (summary or otherwise) entered against him in the civil action or the undesirable choice of subjecting himself to discovery in the civil action before the NPA expires and, thus, face the possibility of criminal prosecution by the USAO based upon some illusory breach deemed by the USAO by way of information obtained through civil discovery proceedings. This is inherently unfair, the danger is clear, and the playing field is not level in light of the NPA language or lack thereof + +As a result, the threat of criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN by the USAO continues presently and through late 2010. + +### III, Justice Requires The Entry of A Stay Because Defendant Is Being Forced To Choose Between Waiving His 51h Amendment Privilege Or Risk Losing This Civil Case And Forfeiting Other Constitutional Guarantees Of Due Process And Effective Assistance Of Counsel + +Once the NPA expires, EPSTEIN fully intends to testify to all relevant and nonobjectionable inquiries made to him in discovery be it a deposition, in interrogatories or in production requests. (Emphasis Added) However, the current circumstances are such that by testifying or responding to discovery, EPSTEIN will be required to waive his constitutional privileges, thereby subjecting himself to criminal prosecution and scrutiny by the USAO as a + +Page 5 + +result of matters alleged in this civil action (and others before this Court and in the State of Florida 15th Judicial Circuit Court, Palm Beach County). + +The special circumstances of this action are such that a stay or continuance for atime certain is NOT prejudicial and is required to be entered so that: + +(1) EPSTEIN is not required to waive his Fifth Amendment right against selfincrimination under the United States Constitution resulting in severe prejudice to EPSTEIN in pending criminal matters; and + +(2) EPSTEIN is not forced to choose between waiving his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination or losing the civil case. + +Here, in asserting his Fifth Amendment Privilege, the Plaintiff is afforded an opportunity rarely given - that is, to put on only her evidence without any counterevidence from Defendant resulting in a judgment of liability against EPSTEIN. This is inherently unfair and precisely the special circumstances where "in the interests of justice" a stay is required. Ventura v. Brosky, 2006WL 3392207 (S.D. Fla. 2006), citing United States v. Lot 5, Fox Grove, 23F.3d 359 (11th Cir. 1994). In Ventura, astay was entered where aDefendant was confronted with issue of waiving his 5th Amendment Privilege or to loose acivil case by way of motion for summary judgment. Id. Here, EPSTEIN is not requesting a mandatory stay. EPSTEIN only asks that this court recognize that "special circumstances" exists in this matter and enter a stay in the "interests of justice" and only for a specified period of time (i.e., after the NPA expires). See al.22 Securities and Exchange Commission, 755F.Supp. 1018, 1019 (S.D. Fla. 1990)(Defendant was in precarious position while being subject to criminal investigation and reasoning that compelling Defendant to speak by ordering an accounting of alleged illicit funds would directly + +Page 6 + +impinge his right against self-incrimination). The court found it appropriate to grant the request for stay. (Emphasis Added). + +Citing to U.S. v. Lot 5, Fox Grove supra, the Southern District Court, Florida, in Ventura v. Brosky 2006 WL 3392207 (S.D. Fla. 2006), stated — + +The Eleventh Circuit has also created a test for these circumstances, stating that where there exists a concurrent civil and criminal proceeding, a court must stay a civil proceeding pending resolution of a related criminal prosecution when "special circumstances" so require in the "interests of justice." + +(Bold emphasis added). au also United States v. Kordel, 397 U.S. I, 12 & n. 27, 90 S.Ct. 763, 769-70 & n.27 (1970). The Ventura Court went on to state that "situations where a defendant in both criminal and civil proceedings must choose whether to waive his privilege against selfincrimination or to lose the civil case in summary or default judgment proceedings have met this test's burden and warrant a stay." Id. The Ventura court granted the stay. Here, the 15'h Judicial Circuit action lives along with the NPA. + +In making a decision to enter such a stay, the court may consider the following factors: + +- (I) the interests of the Plaintiffs in proceeding expeditiously with litigation, or any aspect of it, and the potential prejudice of Plaintiff to the delay; +- (2) the burden which any particular aspect of the proceedings may impose on the defendant; +- (3) the convenience of the court in the management of its cases, and the efficient use of judicial resources; + - (4) the interests of persons not parties to the civil litigation; and + - (5) the interest of the public in the pending civil and criminal litigation. + +See U.S. v. Pinnacle Ouest International, 2008 WL 4274498 (N.D. Fla. 2008). + +First, in applying the above factors, the Plaintiff in the instant matter will not be prejudiced simply by claiming a delay in time. Second, the burden is far greater on the EPSTEIN if he is forced to waive his 5th Amendment Privilege or remain silent and have a judgment entered against him or choose to testify and face criminal prosecution. Third, efficient use of judicial resources would be rendered upon a stay by way of preventing an appeal if such a stay is not entered. The Court has broad discretion to enter such a stay. Fourth, the interests of the individuals outlined in the NPA will be served because EPSTEIN's fulfillment of NPA alleged obligations is determinative upon whether the USAO prosecutes those individuals or whether the claims will be dropped upon the expiration of the NPA. Finally, the interest of the public in the pending civil and criminal cases will not be prejudiced as EPSTEIN is already serving his term whereby a plea was entered in the 15 Judicial Circuit action. + +# a. Application of the 5th Amendment + +Next, the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination "permits a person not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings." Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985), citin Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77, 94 S.C. 316, 322 (1973). See also Ohio v. Reiner, 532 U.S. 17, 21, 121 S.Ct. 1252 (2001)(The Fifth Amendment privilege is also available to those who claim innocence. One of the Fifth Amendment's "basic functions ... is to protect innocent men ... 'who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances."); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process + +Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "(i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); Kastigar v. U.S., 406 U.S. 441, 444-45, 92 S.Ct. 1653 (1972XThe Fifth Amendment privilege "can be asserted in any proceeding, civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory; and it protects against any disclosures which the witness reasonably believes could be used in a criminal prosecution or could lead to other evidence that might be so used. This Court has been zealous to safeguard the values which underlie the privilege." (Emphasis added)). + +The United States Supreme Court made it clear that the scope of the Fifth Amendment Privilege includes the circumstances as here "the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena (or production request) has a compelled testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000); see alp:, Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence, Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §138 (6th Ed.). The privilege against self-incrimination may be asserted during discovery when a litigant has "reasonable grounds to believe that the response would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against a litigant." A witness, including a civil defendant, is entitled to invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege whenever there is a realistic possibility that the answer to a question could be used in anyway to convict the witness of a crime or could aid in the development of other incriminating evidence that can be used at trial. Id; Pillsbury Company v. Conbov, 495 U.S. 248, 103 S.Ct. 608 (1983). + +Certainly, if the USAO decides to prosecute EPSTEIN for an alleged violation of the NPA, it would undoubtedly be able to use information obtained during discovery against him or + +Page 9 + +use that information to aid in the development of other evidence against him at a criminal trial. The USAO is already claiming violations of the NPA based upon EPSTEIN defending the civil actions and, at the same time, while EPSTEIN asserts the 5th Amendment. Imagine, because that is all we can do based on the lack of wording in the NPA, what violations the USAO will assert if EPSTEIN is forced to waive his 5th Amendment privilege to defend himself in this and the other civil actions. + +The Fifth Amendment provides, in relevant part, that "No person ... shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against himself." Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486, 71 S.Ct. 814 (1951), citing v. United States, 1944, 322 U.S. 487, 489, 64 S.Ct. 1082, 1083, 88 L.Ed. 1408." The Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination is "accorded liberal construction in favor of the right it was intended to secure." "The immediate and potential evils of compulsory self-disclosure transcend any difficulties that the exercise of the privilege may impose on society in the detection and prosecution of a crime." Id., at 490; and In re Financial Svcs. of Fla.. Inc., 259 B.R. 391, 399 (M.D. Fla. 2000). The privilege not only extends to answers that would in themselves support a conviction under a criminal statute but likewise embraces those which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a crime. Id citing Blau v. United States 1950, 340 U.S. 159, 71 S.Ct. 223. The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination "permits a person not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings." Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d at 669, citing Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77, 94 S.C. 316, 322 (1973). As EPSTEIN is here, "the claimant must be 'confronted by substantial and `real,' and not merely + +trifling or imaginary, hazards of incrimination."' See generally United States v. Apfelbatun, 445 U.S. 115, 128, 100 S.Ct. 948, 956, 63 L.Ed.2d 250 (1980)). See also, United States v. Neff, 615 F.2d 1235, 1239 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 925, 100 S.Ct. 3018, 65 L.Ed.2d 1117 (1980X1nformation is protected by the privilege not only if it would support a criminal conviction, but even if "the responses would merely `provide a lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate."). EPSTEIN falls under each of the above category of cases. + +The United States Supreme Court has made clear that the scope of the Fifth Amendment Privilege also encompasses the circumstance where "the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena (or production request) has a compelled testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000); see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976). In explaining the application of the privilege, the Supreme Court stated: + +We have held that "the act of production" itself may implicitly communicate "statements of fact." By "producing documents in compliance with a subpoena, the witness would admit that the papers existed, were in his possession or control, and were authentic." Moreover, as was true in this case, when the custodian of documents responds to a subpoena, he may be compelled to take the witness stand and answer questions designed to determine whether he has produced everything demanded by the subpoena. The answers to those questions, as well as the act of production itself, may certainly communicate information about the existence, custody, and authenticity of the documents. Whether the constitutional privilege protects the answers to such questions, or protects the act of production itself, is a question that is distinct from the question whether the unprotected contents of the documents themselves are incriminating. + +"The issue presented in those cases was whether the act of producing subpoenaed documents, not itself the making of a statement, might nonetheless have some protected testimonial aspects. The Court concluded that the act of production could constitute protected testimonial communication because it might entail implicit statements of fact: by producing documents in compliance with a subpoena, the witness would admit that the papers existed, were in his possession or control, and were authentic. United States v. Doe, 465 U.S., at 613, and n. 11, 104 S.Ct. 1237. Fisher, 425 U.S., at 409-410. 96 S.Ct. 1569; id., at 428, 432, 96 S.Ct. 1569 + +> (concurring opinions). See Braswell v. United States. 1487 U.S.,1 at 104. 108 S.Ct. 2284; f id..I at 122. 108 S.Ct. 2284 (dissenting opinion). Thus, the Court made clear that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination applies to acts that imply assertions of fact."... An examination of the Court's application of these principles in other cases indicates the Court's recognition that, in order to be testimonial, an accused's communication must itself, explicitly or implicitly, relate a factual assertion or disclose information. Only then is a person compelled to be a 'witness' against himself." Doe v. United States. 487 U.S., at 209-210, 108 S.Ct. 2341 (footnote omitted). + +> Finally, the phrase "in any criminal case" in the text of the Fifth Amendment might have been read to limit its coverage to compelled testimony that is used against the defendant in the trial itself. It has, however, long been settled that its protection encompasses compelled statements that lead to the discovery of incriminating evidence even though the statements themselves are not incriminating and are not introduced into evidence. Thus, a half century ago we held that a trial judge had erroneously rejected a defendant's claim of privilege on the ground that his answer to the pending question would not itself constitute evidence of the charged offense. As we explained: + +> "The privilege afforded not only extends to answers that would in themselves support a conviction under a federal criminal statute but likewise embraces those which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a federal crime." Hoffman v. United States. 341 U.S. 479, 486, 71 S.Ct. 814, 95 L.Ed. 1118 (1951). + +> Compelled testimony that communicates information that may "lead to incriminating evidence" is privileged even if the information itself is not inculpatory. Doe v. United States. 487 U.S. 201. 208. n. 6, 108 S.Ct. 2341, 101 L.Ed.2d 184 (1988). It's the Fifth Amendment's protection against the prosecutor's use of incriminating information derived directly or indirectly from the compelled testimony of the respondent that is of primary relevance in this case. + +The privilege against self-incrimination may be asserted during discovery when a litigant has "reasonable grounds to believe that the response would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against a litigant." A witness, including a civil defendant, is entitled to invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege whenever there is a realistic possibility that the answer to a question could be used in anyway to convict the witness of a crime or could aid in + +the development of other incriminating evidence that can be used at trial. Id; Pillsbury Company v. Conboy, 495 U.S. 248, 103 S.Ct. 608 (1983). See also, Hubbell supra, as to what is encompassed by the phrase "in any criminal case" contained in the Fifth Amendment. + +As noted, the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is broad. Hoffman; In re Financial Svcs., supra. To deny a witness the right to invoke the privilege, the judge must be perfectly clear, from a careful consideration of all the circumstances in the case, that the witness is mistaken, and that the answers cannot possibly have such tendency to incriminate. Id at 488, 399. Recognizing the breadth and magnitude of this constitutional privilege, the United States Supreme Court in discussing how a court is to analyze the application of the privilege stated — + +... It is for the court to say whether his silence is justified, Rogers v. United States, 1951, 340 U.S. 367, 71 S.Ct. 438, and to require him to answer if 'it clearly appears to the court that he is mistaken.' Temple v. Commonwealth 1880, 75 Va. 892, 899. However, if the witness, upon interposing his claim, were required to prove the hazard in the sense in which a claim is usually required to be established in court, he would be compelled to surrender the very protection which the privilege is designed to guarantee. To sustain the privilege, it need only be evident from the implications of the question, in the setting in which it is asked, that a responsive answer to the question or an explanation of why it cannot be answered might be dangerous because injurious disclosure could result. The trial judge in appraising the claim 'must be governed as much by his personal perception of the peculiarities of the case as by the facts actually in evidence.' + +Hoffman, supra at 486-487. + +Hoffman and its progeny establish that "in view of the liberal construction of the provision [protecting against self-incrimination], after a witness has asserted the privilege, he should be compelled to provide the requested information only if it "clearly appears" to the court + +Page 13 + +that the witness was mistaken in his invocation of the privilege." (Emphasis added). In re MI Financial Svcs.,supra at 399, .gr Hoffman, at 486. + +In the instant case, the privilege applies as Defendant EPSTEIN "has reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer." The risk of incrimination resulting from being subject to discovery or to testify in his own defense while the NPA exists is "substantial and real" and "not trifling or imaginary haphazards of communication." See generally, In re Financial Svcs., supra at 400. Based on the nature of Plaintiff's claims, along with the ongoing scrutiny of the USAO in the criminal matters, EPSTEIN has "reasonable grounds to believe that his responses to the discovery would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against him. Finally, in order to preserve the privilege, the privilege must be asserted or one risks the loss or waiver of this liberty ensuring protection. See generally, U.S. v.M, 846 F.2d 678, 690 (11th Cir. 1988)("First, it ignores the settled principle which requires a witness to assert his Fifth Amendment rights. A witness who testifies at any proceeding, instead of asserting his Fifth Amendment rights, loses the privilege. ... A civil deponent cannot choose to answer questions with the expectation of later asserting the Fifth Amendment."). + +Also applicable in upholding the assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege is the guarantee of effective assistance of counsel by the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. See Yarborough v. Gentry 124 S.Ct. 1, 540 U.S. 1, 157 L.Ed.2d 1 (2003)(Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants effective assistance of counsel.), on remand 381 F.3d 1219. The United States Constitutional guarantees are applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. Obviously, EPSTEIN's assertion of his constitutional privileges and protections is on the advice of counsel. Again, EPSTEIN continues to face criminal prosecution by the USAO + +until the expiration of the NPA; under the constitutional guarantee of effective assistance of counsel, he is entitled to follow the recommended advice of his criminal defense attorney. See Goldberger Affidavit attached hereto. + +EPSTEIN's invocation of his constitutional protections of the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments must be upheld for the reasons set forth herein; otherwise such constitutional protections would be rendered meaningless. Already and recently, Defendant EPSTEIN in his Response and Objections to discovery, attached hereto as Exhibit "C", has been required to assert, on advice of counsel, his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, along with his constitutional rights afforded under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. Thus, EPSTEIN's entitlement to a stay is ripe for determination. + +Based upon the foregoing, a stay is warranted in this action as the Defendant is being forced to choose between the assertion of his Fifth Amendment right or losing this case by judgment (summary or otherwise) or waiver of his 5ih Amendment right and face potential criminal prosecution. + +By: ROBERT D. C Florida Bar No. 24162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 ., ESQ. + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this + +day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by + +CM/ECF on this 24th day of March , 2009 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10`h Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. reelrhw@botmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.MI, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barthian & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686.6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsx(asearcvlaw.com jtahQsearcvlaw.com Co-Counsel for Plaintiff + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 iagescAbellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ec f bru cere nhart I aw Couns• fo 'efendant + +Florida = ar No. 224 rcrit@bcIclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike(4bc1claw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein) + +A TRUE BILL + +06-9454-CF +A2 + +IN THE NAME OF AND BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA + +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL +CIRCUIT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA + +For Palm Beach County, at the Spring Term thereof, in the year of our Lord Two Thousand and Six, to-wit: +The Grand Jurors of the State of Florida, inquiring in and for the body of said County of Palm Beach, upon their +oaths do present that JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN in the County of Palm Beach aforesaid, in the Circuit and State +aforesaid, + +### COUNT ONE FELONY SOLICITATION OF PROSTITUTION + +on or about or between the 1st day of August in the year of our Lord Two Thousand and Four and October 31, +2005, did solicit, induce, entice, or procure another to commit prostitution lewdness, or assignation, contrary to +Florida Statute 796.07(1) on three or more occasions between August 01, 2004 and October 31, 2005, +contrary to Florida Statute 796.07(2)(f) and (4)(c). (3 DEG FEL)(LEVEL 1) + +against the form of the statute, to the evil example of all others, and against the peace and dignity of the State +of Florida. + +I hereby certify that I have advised the Grand Jury returning this indictment as authorized and required by law. + +*[Handwritten signature]* +Assistant State Attorney of the +Fifteenth Judicial Circuit of the State +of Florida, prosecuting for the said +State + +*[Handwritten signature]* +GRAND JURY FOREPERSON +DATE + +Jeffrey E. Epstein, Race: [Redacted], Sex: Male, DOB: January 20, 1953, SS#: 090-44-3348; Issue Warrant + +EXHIBIT "A" + +# AFFIDAVIT OF JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +1. I, Jack A. Goldberger, have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein. I am an attorney licensed to practice in the State of Florida since 1978. I am a partner with the law firm of Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A., located at One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401. + +2. My practice includes and specializes in the defense of criminal matters. I am board certified in criminal law. I have been and currently am the criminal defense attorney for JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +3. I represented Mr. EPSTEIN in the negotiation of and entering into a Non-Prosecution Agreement with the United States Attorney's Office (USAO) for the Federal Southern District of Florida. The terms and conditions of the Non-Prosecution Agreement also entailed the entering of a Plea Agreement with the State Attorney's Office, Palm Beach County, State of Florida. (The Non-Prosecution Agreement shall hereinafter be referred to as the "NPA"). + +4. By its terms, the NPA took effect on June 30, 2008. Also, pursuant to the terms of the NPA, any criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN is deferred as long as the terms and conditions of the NPA are fulfilled by EPSTEIN. + +EXHIBIT + +5. The criminal matters against EPSTEIN remain ongoing until the NPA expires by its terms in late 2010, and as long as the USAO determines EPSTEIN has complied with those terms and conditions. The threat of criminal prosecution against EPSTEIN by USAO in the Southern District of Florida continues presently and through late 2010. + +6. Pursuant to the terms of the NPA, the USAO possesses the right to declare that the agreement has been breached, give EPSTEIN's counsel notice, and attempt to move forward with a prosecution. As of the date of this Affidavit, the USAO has taken the position on a number of occasions that it might consider the following actions by EPSTEIN to be a breach of the NPA. + +- Investigation by EPSTEIN (by and through his attorneys) of this Plaintiff and the other Plaintiffs in other pending civil cases for purposes of defending the civil actions; +- EPSTEIN's contesting damages in this action and other civil actions. +- EPSTEIN or his legal representatives making statements to the press about this Plaintiff or the other Plaintiffs. +- Using the word "jail" instead of "imprisonment" in the plea agreement with the Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office. + +7. EPSTEIN, through counsel, submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for documents relating to this and the other cases; the FBI denied the request stating the materials are at this time exempt from disclosure because they are in an investigative file, i.e. the matter is still an ongoing criminal investigation. + +8. The NPA expires in late 2010. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT + +![]()STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +I hereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above named person: Known Personally, and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this 19th day of February, 2009. + +(SEARCHED + +![](_page_18_Picture_19.jpeg) + +![]()*only +pley* + +**UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA** + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/ [REDACTED] + +C.M. A., + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and [REDACTED] +[REDACTED] + +Defendants, + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +**DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS +TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION** + +![](_page_19_Picture_28.jpeg) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby responds to Plaintiff's First Request For Production To Defendant, served January 8, 2009 and states: + +**Request No. 1:** Any and all evidence required to be maintained by Epstein and the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, specifically evidence requested by or directly related to the grand jury subpoenas that have been issued in connection with the investigation referenced in the Non-Prosecution Agreement, and including certain computer equipment. + +**Response:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this + +**EXHIBIT "C"** + +*rp: JE, J6, DT +n. court* + +lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege. + +Request No. 2: Any and all documents reflecting or relating to the identity of, the scheduling of, and/or the payment of any female compensated by or on behalf of Epstein for providing any service to Epstein that required, contemplated, or included in the provisions of such service, any physical contact between Epstein and the female, any act or prostitution, any illicit sexual conduct, the exposure of breast, buttocks or genitalia, or any commercial sex act as defined in 18 U.S.C. §1591(c)(1). + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the + +Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further Defendants objects to the production as overly broad and seeking information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The Plaintiff in this instance has alleged in her complaint that she was sexually abused by the Defendant on one occasion sometime in the year 2004. The documents requested herein have no time period provided, and therefore the information sought is grossly overbroad. + +Request No. 3: Any and all documents reflecting or relating to the identity of and/or the nature and extent of any other person's participation in the communication with and/or the scheduling of and/or the payment of any person who participated in any conduct described in Request #2. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this + +lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further Defendants objects to the production as overly broad and seeking information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The Plaintiff in this instance has alleged in her complaint that she was sexually abused by the Defendant on one occasion sometime in the year 2004. The documents requested herein have no time period provided, and therefore the information sought is grossly overbroad. + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was sent by U.S. mail to the following addressees, on this 6th day of February , 2009 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 + +Page 5 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +reelrhwehotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. El Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Bamhart Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isxO.searcvlaw.com + +jph searcylaw.com + +Co-Counsel for Plaintiff + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jaaesqe.bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendants Jeffrey Epstein and + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +& 250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecfe.brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Respectfully sub + +By: + +ROBERT D. RITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar o. 224162 + +rcritabcIclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike(d)bcIclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744250/EFTA02744250.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744250/EFTA02744250.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..25f73626059198fc7cf16e42b6900b3093b59001 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744250/EFTA02744250.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1206 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744250.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 24, + "chars": 41043, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.21, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_18_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_19_Picture_28.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 187.575, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 398.52, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 398.52, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 187.575, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion To Stay And Or Continue Action For Time Certain Based On Parallel Civil And Criminal Proceedings With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 58.425000000000004, + 307.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 531.9749999999999, + 307.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 531.9749999999999, + 336.15 + ], + [ + 58.425000000000004, + 336.15 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.0, + 486.0 + ], + [ + 350.54999999999995, + 486.0 + ], + [ + 350.54999999999995, + 502.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 246.0, + 502.20000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "H. THE NPA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.23000000000002, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 340.71000000000004, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 340.71000000000004, + 118.25999999999999 + ], + [ + 247.23000000000002, + 118.25999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III, Justice Requires The Entry of A Stay Because Defendant Is Being \nForced To Choose Between Waiving His 51h Amendment Privilege Or Risk \nLosing This Civil Case And Forfeiting Other Constitutional Guarantees Of \nDue Process And Effective Assistance Of Counsel", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 99.63, + 492.48 + ], + [ + 490.9073791503906, + 492.48 + ], + [ + 490.9073791503906, + 550.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 99.63, + 550.4830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. Application of the 5th Amendment", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 185.73, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 402.99127197265625, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 402.99127197265625, + 451.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 185.73, + 451.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 236.77499999999998, + 601.8299999999999 + ], + [ + 350.70050048828125, + 601.8299999999999 + ], + [ + 350.70050048828125, + 617.6030120849609 + ], + [ + 236.77499999999998, + 617.6030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "INDICTMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 237.39, + 30.78 + ], + [ + 343.1700000000001, + 30.78 + ], + [ + 343.1700000000001, + 49.41 + ], + [ + 237.39, + 49.41 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT ONE FELONY SOLICITATION OF PROSTITUTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 166.66500000000002, + 257.58 + ], + [ + 400.365, + 257.58 + ], + [ + 400.365, + 286.74 + ], + [ + 166.66500000000002, + 286.74 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 145.14, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 440.9711608886719, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 440.9711608886719, + 87.05352783203125 + ], + [ + 145.14, + 87.05352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.8, + 251.10000000000002 + ], + [ + 230.01, + 251.10000000000002 + ], + [ + 230.01, + 279.45 + ], + [ + 73.8, + 279.45 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 183.26999999999998, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 389.2950000000001, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 389.2950000000001, + 129.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 183.26999999999998, + 129.60000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 101.47500000000001, + 348.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 470.47499999999997, + 348.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 470.47499999999997, + 380.7 + ], + [ + 101.47500000000001, + 380.7 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 22, + "polygon": [ + [ + 242.925, + 549.99 + ], + [ + 369.775390625, + 549.99 + ], + [ + 369.775390625, + 565.6800079345703 + ], + [ + 242.925, + 565.6800079345703 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 370 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 339 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 364 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 118 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 312 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 180 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 41 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744250" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744250/_page_18_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744250/_page_18_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4b3207c6a025ea6390e42085803ef1a82e534a59 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744250/_page_18_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1036f7258fa97d89b56e6d0e93f02be7cfd93d8e95cb864235af6c577e440dc1 +size 10682 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744250/_page_19_Picture_28.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744250/_page_19_Picture_28.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..22d7f7babc991f334e883d2b9622af3e6d742768 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744250/_page_19_Picture_28.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b368de9dde08f67853ea756dd6684113d08a3c3922355196ac8f28b48901cb40 +size 1928 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744274/EFTA02744274.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744274/EFTA02744274.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..92285becd64303eb54937171a0923df8e5af7d4b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744274/EFTA02744274.md @@ -0,0 +1,137 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA, + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/M. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-8081 I -CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CTV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER REQUESTING THE UNITED STATES TO PROVIDE ITS POSITION REGARDING DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO STAY/CONTINUE THE CIVIL CASES PENDING AGAINST HIM + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the motions filed in several cases by Defendant + +Jeffrey Epstein to Stay and/or Continue the Action for Time Certain Based on Parallel Civil and Criminal Proceedings. See, e.g., docket entry 51 in C.M.A. v. Epstein and =, case no. 08- 80811 (attached). Epstein moves for a stay until the expiration of the Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") with the United States Attorney's Office (USAO) because, he claims, the USAO has taken the position that he is violating the NPA by defending the civil actions filed against him. Therefore, he argues that he cannot defend the civil actions without subjecting himself to criminal prosecution. + +While the Court recognizes that the United States is not a party to these actions and is not obligated to comment on this matter, the position of the United States would greatly assist the Court in resolving the merits of these motions to continue/stay the case. Accordingly, the Court requests that the United States provide its position on the matter. The Court would appreciate the governments position within 15 days if possible. If the United States is unwilling to state its position, the Court would also appreciate being so advised. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 14th day of May, 2009 + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record Ann Villafana \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744274/EFTA02744274.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744274/EFTA02744274.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6947d2a9cc93c69aafeb4372885810d51051c45e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744274/EFTA02744274.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744274.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 2664, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.47, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER REQUESTING THE UNITED STATES TO PROVIDE ITS POSITION \nREGARDING DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO STAY/CONTINUE THE CIVIL \nCASES PENDING AGAINST HIM", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.216, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 539.7191162109375, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 539.7191162109375, + 638.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 72.216, + 638.9830169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744274" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744278/EFTA02744278.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744278/EFTA02744278.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b49d15f8c20b3a7e16392f0c9e41745ff4316d4e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744278/EFTA02744278.md @@ -0,0 +1,341 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/EM + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRAMM + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A. + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/MM + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/MMI + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/M= + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA/BM + +DOE II + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRALME + +JANE DOE NO. 101 CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/M. + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/M. + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO FILE A RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO IDENTIFY C.M.A. IN THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY, OR ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO DISMISS SUA SPONTE, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through her undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which file to a response to Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Identify C.M.A. in Third Party Subpoenas For Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. Local General Rule 7.1 A.1 and Rule 6, Fed. R. Civ. P. (2009). Plaintiff seeks an extension until May 25, 2009, to file her response. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Plaintiff states: + +- 1. Defendant's Motion to Identify C.M.A was electronically filed and dated April 29, 2009. Pursuant to Rule 15(3), Fed.R.Civ.P., Plaintiff's response would be due on May 18, 2009. + - 2. Defendant's counsel is in agreement with the requested extension until + +- May 25, 2009, for Plaintiff to file a response to Defendant's Motion to Identify C.M.A. +- 3. Defendant's motion seeks to publicly identify C.M.A, a victim of Defendant's sexual abuse. + +- 4. The undersigned has been busy researching and drafting responsive memorandums in opposition to dispositive motions for summary judgment in a pending state court wrongful death case which are set for hearing next week. + +- 5. The requested extension is fair and reasonable under the circumstances as it will provide time to allow Plaintiff, C.M.A., to fully and adequately prepare a response to Defendant's motion. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, C.M.A., requests that this Court enter an order granting Plaintiff an extension until May 25, 2009, to file a response to Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Identify C.M.A. in Third Party Subpoenas For Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. + +## CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1 + +Counsel for the movant conferred in person with counsel for the Defendant and counsel for the Defendant is in agreement with requested extension until May 25, 2009, for Plaintiff to file a response to Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Identify C.M.A. in Third Party Subpoenas For Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. + +s/ Jack P + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 15th day of May, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of electronic filing to all counsel of record on the attached service list. + +> is/Jack P Jack Scaro Florida Bar No.: 169440 Jack P. Florida fiNo.: 0547808 Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9424 Attorneys for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Phone: (561) 582-7600 + +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Robert Critton, Esquire + +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP + +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 + +Phone: (561) 842-2820 + +Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire + +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 South Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 202-6360 + +Fax: (561) 828-0983 + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/M. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRAMME + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7 CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/ + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A. CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DOE II CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 101 CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA/ M. + +Plaintiff, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## AGREED ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO FILE A RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO IDENTIFY C.M.A. IN THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY, OR ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO DISMISS SUA SPONTE, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +This matter came before the Court upon the Plaintiffs Motion for Extension of Time in Which to File a Response to Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Identify C.M.A. in Third Party Subpoenas For Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. Having considered the motion and the agreement with the requested extension, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Plaintiffs motion is hereby granted. Plaintiff has until May 25, 2009, to file a response to Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Identify C.M.A. in Third Party Subpoenas For Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. + +DONE AND ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies to all Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744278/EFTA02744278.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744278/EFTA02744278.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a357418d15ea972a8e365b5d52f9efc33283d897 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744278/EFTA02744278.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,550 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744278.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 6910, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.7, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.856, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 400.1094665527344, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 400.1094665527344, + 125.93701171875 + ], + [ + 206.856, + 125.93701171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO FILE A RESPONSE \nTO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO IDENTIFY C.M.A. IN THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS \nFOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY, OR ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO DISMISS \nSUA SPONTE, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.096, + 532.98 + ], + [ + 542.2614135742188, + 532.98 + ], + [ + 542.2614135742188, + 592.2899932861328 + ], + [ + 66.096, + 592.2899932861328 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 484.7821960449219, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 484.7821960449219, + 118.66998291015625 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 118.66998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 322.38 + ], + [ + 385.5113220214844, + 322.38 + ], + [ + 385.5113220214844, + 339.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 339.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 346.39199999999994, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 346.39199999999994, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 115.83 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 398.2319030761719, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 398.2319030761719, + 104.5570068359375 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 104.5570068359375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AGREED ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH \nTO FILE A RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO \nIDENTIFY C.M.A. IN THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS FOR PURPOSES OF \nDISCOVERY, OR ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO DISMISS SUA SPONTE, WITH \nINCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.768, + 492.48 + ], + [ + 537.68701171875, + 492.48 + ], + [ + 537.68701171875, + 566.7899932861328 + ], + [ + 69.768, + 566.7899932861328 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 48 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744278" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744288/EFTA02744288.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744288/EFTA02744288.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f0cec91c25b1fe8c19d4792d984b8a0d8639bbda --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744288/EFTA02744288.md @@ -0,0 +1,135 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEH'REY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/J + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-114ARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +• Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-8081I-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-J + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA-J + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/J + +Plaintiff, + +JEM-REY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOE 2 -7 RESPONSES IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO 151. SET OF INTERROGATORIES ANDIS1. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, (hereinafter "Epstein") by and through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which to reply to Plaintiffs' Responses In Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories And Production of Documents, dated March 2, 2009. Local General Rule 7.1 A.1 and Rule 6, Fed. R. Civ. P. (2009). Defendant seeks an extension until May 22, 2009, to file his response. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: + +I. Defendant's reply to the Plaintiffs Responses in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to compel would be due on May 18, 2009. As certified below, Plaintiffs counsel is in agreement with the requested extension of May 20, 2009. + +2. Plaintiffs counsel also represents five other Plaintiffs pursuing claims against Defendant, EPSTEIN. A total of five of the Plaintiffs have also filed Responses In Opposition to Defendant's Motions to Compel bearing the same dates. In order to fully and adequately respond to this and the other motions, Defendant is in need of an extension until May 20, 2009. + +3. The requested extension is fair in reasonable under the circumstances as it will provide time to allow the Defendant, EPSTEIN, to fully and adequately reply to this and the other Responses in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Compel. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an order granting the Defendant an extension until May 20, 2009, in which to respond to Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of documents. + +## Local Rule 7.1 Certification + +Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested extension until May 20, 2009 for Defendant to respond to the motion to compel. + +Robert D. Critton, Jr. Attorney for Defendant Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 181" day of May, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattorney.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 'mesa @bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectf By: ROBERTD CR TTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@ belclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744288/EFTA02744288.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744288/EFTA02744288.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..10dcaf7e152e2619c003afcc93c705067c8a17ca --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744288/EFTA02744288.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,276 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744288.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 4232, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.41, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 410.98565673828125, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 410.98565673828125, + 103.863037109375 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 103.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Local Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 239.904, + 681.21 + ], + [ + 375.4845275878906, + 681.21 + ], + [ + 375.4845275878906, + 696.3630142211914 + ], + [ + 239.904, + 696.3630142211914 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 381.45050048828125, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 381.45050048828125, + 226.863037109375 + ], + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 226.863037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 93 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744288" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744293/EFTA02744293.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744293/EFTA02744293.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..21eae03aa7b129f066733176475d16e1f283a2c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744293/EFTA02744293.md @@ -0,0 +1,162 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO.2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-801I9-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO.3, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO.4, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Ail + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80994-MARRA/ + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80993-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.; 08-CV-80811-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80893-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendants. + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80469-MARRA/JOHNSON + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80591-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80656-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## AFFIDAVIT OF MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQUIRE + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +SS + +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +PERSONALLY APPEARED before the undersigned Notary Public, Michael + +J. Pike, Esq., who after being sworn states the following: + +1. My name is Michael Pike, and I am one of the attorneys assigned to this matter. Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP, Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esq., J. Michael Burman, Esq., and I represent Jeffrey Epstein. I have knowledge of the facts outlined in the Motion to Strike Cases from Current Trial Dockets and/or Motion to Continue Cases and/or Motion to Modify Trial and Scheduling Orders ("Motion to Strike"). I have fully read the Motion, and I personally drafted the Motions and Replies to various discovery responses identified by docket entry in the Motion to Strike. + +2. The information set forth in the Motion to Strike is true and accurate in that the undersigned law firm, on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein, has attempted in good faith to obtain discovery in preparation for trial and in accordance with this Court's Order Setting Trial Date and Discovery Deadlines, Referring Case to Mediation and Referring Discovery Motions to the United States Magistrate Judge. + +3. Unfortunately, due to the Plaintiff's delays, objections to relevant discovery and refusal to allow Jeffrey Epstein to identify Plaintiffs in other Third-Party Subpoenas, the undersigned has a good faith belief that it will be impossible to complete discovery pursuant to the Court's Scheduling Order. In fact, as outlined in the Motion to Strike, it is abundantly clear that Jeffrey Epstein has not been afforded any meaningful discovery and cannot properly prepare the cases for trial. It will also be impossible to satisfy the remaining schedules referenced in the Motion. + +4. In short, Plaintiffs have refused and/or failed to produce any + +meaningful discovery and/or answer any meaningful discovery responses. As a result, the undersigned has not had an opportunity to depose any individuals that may have information about the allegations made by Plaintiffs. + +5. Next, as stated in the Motion to Strike, Plaintiffs' counsel refuses to allow the undersigned law firm to identify Plaintiffs by their true legal names in the style of the case and/or identify the Plaintiffs in any third party subpoenas, which has effectively prevented the undersigned law firm from obtaining any meaningful discovery about the Plaintiffs and/or the damages they seek. As stated in the Motion to Strike, Brad EM has agreed to such a procedure relative to third party subpoenas. + +6. As a result, good cause has been shown to continue the actions or modify the schedules. Therefore, the cases should be struck from the current trial dockets, continued to the next available trial dockets or, alternatively, the discovery schedules and other related schedules outlined in the Court's Scheduling Orders should be modified as requested in the Motion. Without the granting of the Continuance and/or a Modified Scheduling Order, Mr. Epstein's due process rights will be violated in that he will not be able to prepare and properly defend the cases for trial. This will substantially prejudice Jeffrey Epstein. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGH + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH Mich YI J. Pi e, sq. + +I hereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Michael J. Pike, Esquire, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above named person: MICHAEL J. PIKE, and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this 1st day of MAY, 2009. + +(SEAL) + +![](_page_5_Picture_11.jpeg) + +*Jessica Cadwell* + +PRINT NAME: JESSICA CADWELL +NOTARY PUBLIC/STATE OF FLORIDA +COMMISSION NO.: +MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744293/EFTA02744293.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744293/EFTA02744293.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7ff1436c84169bdbbee20f5d667acad10778338c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744293/EFTA02744293.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,281 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744293.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 5095, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.76, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_5_Picture_11.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 413.646484375, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 413.646484375, + 105.35302734375 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 105.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQUIRE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 179.928, + 515.97 + ], + [ + 433.8089294433594, + 515.97 + ], + [ + 433.8089294433594, + 530.6835327148438 + ], + [ + 179.928, + 530.6835327148438 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744293" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744293/_page_5_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744293/_page_5_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c2368d0ca28a88b6a58524a0c6a3c07d5ef1a976 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744293/_page_5_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:da652484bf353ebfac5c6aa4974401da3c4504452856df270928ca7c5d1de57a +size 12069 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744299/EFTA02744299.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744299/EFTA02744299.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..26dfb22930f6a6437c26c407096c3fe30fba541b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744299/EFTA02744299.md @@ -0,0 +1,250 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO.2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80119-MARRAMMI + +JANE DOE NO.3, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO.4, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80381-MARRAMII + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80994-MARRA/JOHNSON + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80993-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.; 08-CV-80811-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80893-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendants. + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80469-MARRa + +vs. + +JEFI-TREY EPSTEIN, et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80591-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80656-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion To Strike Cases From Current Trial Docket And Motion to Continue Case And/Or Alternative Motion to Modify Trial and Scheduling Order Deadlines + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby moves this Court for the entry of an order Striking These Cases (i.e., C.M.A., Jane Doe (80893) and Jane Does 2-7) From The Current Trial Docket(s), Continuing The Trials And Setting Them On New Trial Dockets At Least + +Three Months After The Current Trial Dates As Set Or, Alternatively, Modifying The Current Trial Schedule To Allow For An Additional 3 Months From Current Dates Within Which To Complete Discovery, An Additional 2 Months From The Current Dates Within Which To Complete All Substantive Pretrial Motions and Expert Discovery, An Additional Month From The Current Dates Within Which To Mediate the Matters and An Additional Month to Complete the Remaining Scheduling Deadlines under this Court's Trial Orders. In support, EPSTEIN states: + +## I. Procedural Background and Argument' With Incorporated Memorandum of Lawl + +1. C.M.A. was filed on February 23, 2008. C.M.A. filed her First Amended Complaint on February 10, 2009. (C.M.A. DE 39-40). Epstein's Motion to Dismiss same was filed on March 12, 2009. (C.M.A. DE 47). The Motion to Dismiss remains outstanding. + +2. Jane Doe (80893) was filed on August 13, 2008. On April 17, 2009, Jane Doe filed her First Amended Complaint. + +3. The Jane Doe 2-7 cases were filed between February 6, 2008 and September 10, 2008. Jane Does 2-7 filed their Second Amended Complaints on February 2009. + +4. Pursuant to the court's Orders Setting Trial And Discovery Deadlines, Referring Case To Mediator And Referring Discovery Motions To U.S. Magistrate Judge (the + +In an effort not to repeat certain legal arguments set out in various Motions and Replies referenced below and identified herein by Docket Number, those motions and replies, with legal arguments, are specifically incorporated herein by reference. + +"Trial Orders"), these matters are currently set on this court's Trial Dockets commencing January 25, 2010, February 8, 2010 and February 22, 2010. + +5. Pursuant to the Trial Orders, discovery cutoff is August 2009 for C.M.A. and Jane Does 2-5, and October 2009 for Jane Doe and Jane Does 6-7. Substantive pretrial motions must be completed in August 2009 for C.M.A. and Jane Does 2-5, and October 2009for Jane Doe and Jane Does 6-7. Mediation must be completed on November 2009for Jane Does 2-5, and December 2009 for C.M.A., Jane Doe and Jane Does 6-7. Finally, Expert discovery must be completed on June 29, 2009 for C.M.A. + +6. As to C.M.A., Jane Doe and Jane Does 2-7, each has objected to relevant discovery. C.M.A. has even refused to produce certain information that she agreed to produce in discovery. The foregoing delay tactics has prevented Epstein from conducting meaningful discovery in order to defend these matters and prepare for trial. At this juncture, Plaintiffs wish for Epstein to try this case without any discovery whatsoever. See infra. + +7. For example, in adiligent effort to obtain discovery, Epstein filed substantive motions addressing C.M.A.'s objections to discovery, and those motions remain outstanding? See (C.M.A. - DE 54 — Motion to Compel Responses to First Request to Produce and First Set of Interrogatories and DE 70 — Epstein's Reply to Plaintiff's Opposition Motion thereto). Epstein's Motion to Compel (C.M.A. DE 54) and Reply + +The same discovery requests were served upon Jane Doe and Jane Does 2-7. Substantive Motions to Compel seeking production of similar information in those cases were filed and remain outstanding. See Jane Doe DE 27 & 28and Jane Doe 2-7 (specifically, Jane Doe 2 - DE 67-68, Jane Doe 3 — DE 59-60, Jane Doe 4 - DE 74-75, Jane Doe 5 — DE 69-70. Jane Doe 6 - DE 24-25. and Jane Doe 7 — DE 26-27). Those Motions are incorporated herein by reference. + +(C.M.A. DE 70) are incorporated herein by reference. The Motion and the Reply seek basic and elementary discovery. For instance, the Motion and the Reply seek: + +- a. individual and/or joint income tax returns and supporting documentation including W-2 and 1099 forms for 2002-2007 and, as well as all records or documentation relative to the Plaintiff's earnings for the current year; +- b. All bills/expenses from any medical doctor, chiropractor, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors (including any members of the healing arts and related , i.e. drugs, prescriptions, etc.) you claim you incurred as a result of the injuries which are or may be the subject matter of this lawsuit; +- c. All medical reports and/or records from doctors, physicians, (including psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors), hospitals, drug or alcohol facilities or any other person or entity who has rendered treatment to or examined you for any reason after the incident(s) which is the subject matter of this lawsuit; +- d. the names, business addresses, telephone and cell phone numbers, dates of employment, immediate supervisor (name and address) and rates of pay regarding all employers, including selfemployment, for whom you have worked in the past 10 years; this includes listing all sources of income you have received. Answer this question by year, i.e. 1998 — 2009; and +- e. the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding Mr. Epstein, with whom you have had sexual activity since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual activity, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. + +(DE 54 & 70) + +8. C.M.A. objected to producing the tax information requested in 4(a) above, which will show where C.M.A. worked, and she also speciously objected to the companion interrogatory (4(d) above) wherein she refuses to identify where she worked for the requested time period. Epstein needs the requested information so his attorneys can + +conduct the appropriate discovery on C.M.A.'s supervisors and co-workers (and others that may be identified during those depositions) in connection with the allegations C.M.A. has made against Epstein in her 89-page Amended Complaint. By virtue of C.M.A. and the other Plaintiffs concealing the above information, Epstein has been prevented from conducting any meaningful discovery, including the taking of any depositions of C.M.A.'s supervisors, co-workers, acquaintances, friends and other third parties. + +9. As stated above, Jane Doe and Jane Does 2-7 made similar objections which are the subject of various Motions to Compel. Epstein needs this information to defend the Plaintiffs' allegations and to prepare for trial. + +10.Next, C.M.A. concedes in her Opposition Motion to Discovery (DE 62) that Epstein is entitled to the information set out in 4(b) & (c) above; however, C.M.A. refuses to produce the information and/or allow the undersigned to list C.M.A.'s full name, date of birth and last four digits of her social security number in any third-party subpoenas in order to obtain those records.3 While this case was filed by C.M.A. on February 23, 2008, Epstein has been prevented from deposing any of the individuals that treated Plaintiff at one time or another.4 This results directly from C.M.A.'s tactics to delay and prevent meaningful discovery in hopes that C.M.A. will be able to prevent Epstein from putting on any evidence in defense of his case. The remaining Plaintiffs + +&#x27; Attorney, Brad , in case number 08-CIV-080893, agreed to such a procedure. Counsel for Jane Does 2-7, Stuart Mermelstein, refuses to agree to such a procedure and, therefore, continues to substantially delay discovery. Note, many of the Plaintiffs are witnesses in the related cases. Therefore, Plaintiffs' discovery delays negatively effect the progress and trial preparation of each case. + +4 This same argument applies to Jane does 2-7. + +have the same exact goal. Epstein cannot defend this matter with the element of unfair and prejudicial "surprise" is ever so present. Schearbrook Land and Livestock Company v. U.S. et. al, 124 F.R.D. 221 (M.D. Fla. 1988). + +11.ln an effort to move these cases forward and obtain meaningful discovery, Epstein filed his Motion to Compel and Motion to Compel and/or Identify CMA (and Jane Does 2-7) in the Style of this Case and Motion to Identify Them in Third-Party Subpoenas ("Motions to Identify"). The Motions to Identify are incorporated herein by reference and, for the court's edification, same remain outstanding. Should this Court grant the Motions to Identify, Epstein will be able to obtain discovery he does not currently have in his possession and will be able to take certain depositions of individuals that have yet to be identified.5 Based upon the court's consolidation order, the motion to identify equally applies to C.M.A. and the other Plaintiffs. + +12. Plaintiffs must be identified in other third-party subpoenas (unrelated to those discussed above concerning medical treatment) in order for Epstein to conduct meaningful discovery. Epstein's right to conduct discovery and confront the witnesses has, up through today's date, been unreasonably and unduly restricted as a result of Plaintiffs' delay tactics. + +13. Finally, the information sought in number 4(e) above has not been produced by C.M.A. or the remaining Plaintiffs, despite the case law favoring production. United + +5 In a state court matter filed against Epstein, E.W. v. Epstein, Case No.: 50.2008-CA-028058 XXXXMB AD, the undersigned learned through discovery that the Plaintiff in that case worked at Platinum Gold, Curves Cabaret, Platinum Showgirls, Cheetah, Diamond Dolls, Vegas Cabaret, Spearmint Rhino, T's Lounge, Pure Platinum, Solid Gold, and The Body Shop. Substantial discovery will take place in that matter of E.W.'s co-workers, supervisors and others that may have information regarding the claims she asserted against Epstein. Epstein should be afforded that same right in the instant matters. + +States v. Bear Stops, 997F.2d 451 (8'h Cir. 1993); Balas v. Ruzzo, 703So.2d 1076 (Fla. 5'h DCA 1997), rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1998). The information sought in 4(e) is relevant and discoverable even if not admissible at trial. See Motion to Compel and Reply (C.M.A. DE 54 & 70). Once Plaintiffs are required to fully answer the interrogatories, the answers may yield (at alater deposition or through paper discovery): (a) the names of individuals that may have information about Plaintiffs that negate the allegations in their Complaints, (b) how certain acts alleged in their Complaints materially affected their relationships with others or how those acts did not have such an affect on those relationships, and (3) whether Plaintiffs suffered from disorders (e.g., C.M.A.'s claims of bi-polar disorder and manic depression) as a result of other sexual acts prior to the acts alleged in the Complaints. Here, evidence of Plaintiffs' sexual activity with others may show that those sexual activities (which could include assaults once delineated) produced the behaviors that, for instance, C.M.A. attributes to Epstein (e.g., bi-polar and manic depression disorders). Accordingly, answers to the above discovery requests go the heart of Plaintiffs' damages or lack thereof. + +14. Further, pursuant to this Courts Order (C.M.A. DE 68 and in the related matters), Epstein is permitted only to take the Plaintiffs' depositions one time, both as a witness in the other related matters and as aplaintiff in their particular matters. As a result, the discovery schedule coupled with Plaintiffs' delay tactics and the Order (DE 68) is forcing Epstein to take each of the Plaintiffs' depositions without the benefit of other discovery and depositions of individuals that may have knowledge of the claims asserted by Plaintiffs. As such, in the event Plaintiffs produce information after their depositions, this Court's order (DE 68) and the Federal Rules effectively prevent Epstein from taking Plaintiffs' depositions a second time. This is inherently unfair and prejudicial to Epstein. + +# a. Memorandum of Law + +15.Modifying a trial order and the deadlines/schedules thereunder is within the sound discretion of this court. Under the circumstances outlined above, failure to strike these cases from the current docket, continue the trials, and/or to modify the court's scheduling order will prejudice Epstein. Epstein has diligently attempted to comply with the Court's scheduling order but has effectively been prevented from doing so in light of the Plaintiffs' delay tactics during discovery. See supra; Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 16(b)(4)• Altadis USA, Inc. v. NPR, Inc., 2004 WL 444533 (M.D. Fla.)(granting motion to extend discovery and continue trial). + +16. Epstein has shown good cause to obtain a continuance of the trial of this matter and, as well, has shown good cause in order for this court to modify the scheduling order. Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 16(b)(4)("A [scheduling order] may be modified only for good cause and with the judge's consent."). Epstein's counsel has complied with Local Rule 7.6 of the U.S. Southern District by executing and providing the attached Affidavit. Exhibit "A". Epstein cannot, despite his diligence, timely complete discovery by the times outlined in the current scheduling order as a result of the Plaintiffs' delay tactics. Thus, as outlined above, failure to strike these cases from the docket, continue this case to the next available docket and to extend the discovery schedule and remaining deadlines will prejudice Epstein. Epstein has simply not been given the opportunity to obtain and/or conduct any meaningful discovery, which violates Epstein's constitutional + +due process right to defend himself and to seek the production of information that will assist in his defense of the allegations in respective complaints. Plaintiffs cannot reasonably expect Epstein to try these matters with having only been afforded the opportunity to take the deposition of one Plaintiff and not conduct any meaningful discovery on others. + +WHEREFORE, Epstein, through his counsel, requests that this court enter and Order: + +- a. striking these cases from the current trial docket; +- b. continuing the trials of these matters and setting same on new trial dockets at least three months after the current trial dates; or, alternatively, +- c. modifying the current trial schedule to allow for an additional 3 months from the currently set date within which to complete discovery, an additional 2 months from the currently set date within which to complete all substantive pretrial motions, an additional month from the currently set date within which to mediate this matter; and an additional month to complete the remaining deadlines under each of the Court's Trial Orders; and +- d. for such other and further relief as this co deems just and proper. + +By: ROBERT ON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bcIclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 19 day of May, 2009 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +jagesq@bellsouth.net +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +jsx@searcylaw.com +jph@searcylaw.com +Co-Counsel for Plaintiff + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com +Counsel for Defendant [REDACTED] + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744299/EFTA02744299.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744299/EFTA02744299.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b4e08265f5caa5c6e9171321fd472fb430346e5f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744299/EFTA02744299.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,626 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744299.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 13, + "chars": 17699, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.0, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 406.36800000000005, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 406.36800000000005, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion To Strike Cases From Current Trial Docket \nAnd Motion to Continue Case And/Or Alternative Motion to Modify Trial and \nScheduling Order Deadlines", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.784, + 554.04 + ], + [ + 536.7239999999999, + 554.04 + ], + [ + 536.7239999999999, + 597.2388763427734 + ], + [ + 80.784, + 597.2388763427734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Procedural Background and Argument'\nWith Incorporated Memorandum of Lawl", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 172.58399999999997, + 306.18 + ], + [ + 442.476, + 306.18 + ], + [ + 442.476, + 334.7320556640625 + ], + [ + 172.58399999999997, + 334.7320556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. Memorandum of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.1, + 168.48 + ], + [ + 405.4081726074219, + 168.48 + ], + [ + 405.4081726074219, + 185.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 260.1, + 185.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 113.4 + ], + [ + 364.75199999999995, + 113.4 + ], + [ + 364.75199999999995, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 127.17 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 154 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 287 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 373 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 369 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 353 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744299" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744312/EFTA02744312.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744312/EFTA02744312.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8e3c2b95ea02bb5d90ed1641833bbb3013160f97 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744312/EFTA02744312.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +/ + +## ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO WITHDRAW AS CO-COUNSEL + +THIS CAUSE having come to be heard on the Motion for Leave to Withdraw as Co-Counsel, and this Court being fully advised, it is hereby: + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion is hereby granted. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this day of 2009. + +> KENNETH A. MARRA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE + +Copies furnished to: All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744312/EFTA02744312.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744312/EFTA02744312.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1ca5dd7d712eaed3c8546a12b6a93d607812e4b1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744312/EFTA02744312.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744312.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 592, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.68, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 202.572, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 435.3429260253906, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 435.3429260253906, + 104.6214599609375 + ], + [ + 202.572, + 104.6214599609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE \nTO WITHDRAW AS CO-COUNSEL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 164.62800000000001, + 327.24 + ], + [ + 449.387939453125, + 327.24 + ], + [ + 449.387939453125, + 360.3714599609375 + ], + [ + 164.62800000000001, + 360.3714599609375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744312" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744313/EFTA02744313.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744313/EFTA02744313.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e89d980e3baae8f89d55fa00b9b1c8e78e70c741 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744313/EFTA02744313.md @@ -0,0 +1,51 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +## MOTION FOR LEAVE TO WITHDRAW AS CO-COUNSEL + +TEIN, P.L. hereby moves for leave to withdraw as co-counsel for defendant Jeffrey Epstein, stating as follows: + +- I . On December 30, 2008, Tein filed its notice of withdrawal as counsel for Mr. Epstein [DE 53], noting that two other law firms who previously entered their appearance on Mr. Epstein's behalf would remain as co-counsel. +- 2. We have since learned through discussions with the Clerk of Court that absent a formal order of withdrawal by this Court, Tein will continue to be listed as counsel for Mr. Epstein on the CM/ECF. +- 3. Accordingly, Tein respectfully requests that this Court enter an order allowing it to withdraw as counsel for Mr. Epstein. + +MILTein + +Respectfully submitted, + +TEIN, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 Tel: 305 442 1101 Fax: 305 442 6744 + +By: Is/Michael R. Tein + +GUY A. Fla. Bar No. 623740 + +MICHAEL R. TEIN Fla. Bar No. 993522 tein@lewistein.com + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on May 19, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system. I further certify that plaintiff's attorneys are CM/ECF participants, as indicated by the CM/ECF Attorney Listings for this case. + +Is/ Michael R. Tein + +Michael R. Tein + +## Service List + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. Atterbery, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman, LLP 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +![](_page_2_Picture_7.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744313/EFTA02744313.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744313/EFTA02744313.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..50836d583ae7c72cfebb12989f0b58045d7c3e25 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744313/EFTA02744313.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,245 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744313.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 1928, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.89, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_2_Picture_7.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 417.3464050292969, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 417.3464050292969, + 104.75091552734375 + ], + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 104.75091552734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MOTION FOR LEAVE TO WITHDRAW AS CO-COUNSEL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 116.28, + 338.58 + ], + [ + 496.6091613769531, + 338.58 + ], + [ + 496.6091613769531, + 355.6209411621094 + ], + [ + 116.28, + 355.6209411621094 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 402.6063232421875, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 402.6063232421875, + 378.5009460449219 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 378.5009460449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Service List", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 268.05600000000004, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 344.5530700683594, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 344.5530700683594, + 88.62091064453125 + ], + [ + 268.05600000000004, + 88.62091064453125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744313" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744313/_page_2_Picture_7.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744313/_page_2_Picture_7.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..64e0f7f3b1cfeb6fa54507c7ed25c873c75b0e45 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744313/_page_2_Picture_7.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7a97c0a1af9727a542ac5e0f08a56c80f1ab8a14d07bd78db94f30df0d2fdc74 +size 2468 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744316/EFTA02744316.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744316/EFTA02744316.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4f8d0a5e4019d7a46ec2e5e79abdfaf86161cf92 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744316/EFTA02744316.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-MARRA I + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +## ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO WITHDRAW AS CO-COUNSEL + +THIS CAUSE having come to be heard on the Motion for Leave to Withdraw as Co-Counsel, and this Court being fully advised, it is hereby: + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion is hereby granted. + +DONE AND ORDERED in .= at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this c.,1-c V C-IaY of May , 2009. + +> KENNETH A. MARRA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE + +Copies furnished to: All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744316/EFTA02744316.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744316/EFTA02744316.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b66604c8d615ca0b01c36bee2f8ec1e8e128825e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744316/EFTA02744316.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744316.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 611, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.67, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.6699981689453, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 432.3449999999999, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 432.3449999999999, + 105.7314453125 + ], + [ + 199.6699981689453, + 105.7314453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE \nTO WITHDRAW AS CO-COUNSEL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 160.00999450683594, + 329.66999999999996 + ], + [ + 444.645, + 329.66999999999996 + ], + [ + 444.645, + 363.7314453125 + ], + [ + 160.00999450683594, + 363.7314453125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744316" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744317/EFTA02744317.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744317/EFTA02744317.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f0bf676a2b5bd5bc47afb3d67cbec6648889d181 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744317/EFTA02744317.md @@ -0,0 +1,199 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA' + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA I + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A. + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +DOE II + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRM + +PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF FILING WITHDRAWAL OF PREVIOUSLY RAISED OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, MOTION TO COMPEL AND/OR IDENTIFY C.M.A. IN THE STYLE OF THIS CASE AND MOTION TO IDENTIFY C.M.A. IN THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY, OR, ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO DISMISS SUA SPONTE, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through her undersigned attorneys, hereby files notice of withdrawal of previously raised objections to Defendant, JEFRREY EPSTEIN'S, Motion + +to Compel and/or Identify C.M.A. in the Style of This Case and Motion to Identify C.M.A. in Third-Party Subpoenas For Purposes of Discovery, or, Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law, and further states as follows: + +1. Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, filed a Motion to Compel and/or Identify C.M.A. in the Style of This Case and Motion to Identify C.M.A. in Third-Party Subpoenas For Purposes of Discovery, or, Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (D.E. 67) on April 29, 2009. + +2. EPSTEIN's Motion seeks the following relief (taken verbatim from the conclusion of his Motion): + +- a) "That C.M.A. be identified by her legal name in the style of this case; +- b) That Epstein be granted leave to identify C.M.A. by her legal name in Third-Party Subpoenas (but not file them in Court, or, if required, in a redacted form); and +- c) That on an alternative basis, this court dismiss this action Sua Sponte until such time as C.M.A. identifies herself in the style of this matter. + +Doe v. Rostker 89 F.R.D at 163." + +3. Plaintiff withdraws her objection to a) and b) requested above. The request to have C.M.A.'s case dismissed is rendered moot given C.M.A.'s acquiescence to a) and b). To the extent that it is not, however, C.M.A. continues to object to c) above. + +4. Counsel for EPSTEIN is free to prepare a proposed agreed order reflecting the above for the Court's consideration following the undersigned's review of same. + +## CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1 + +Counsel for the movant conferred via telephone with counsel for the Defendant regarding the filing of the instance Notice and he has no objection to Plaintiff filing same. + +s/ Jack P. + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 20th day of May, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of electronic filing to all counsel of record on the attached service list. + +> /c/.lack P ■ **Jack Scarola Florida Bar No.: 169440 Jack P. Florida ar No.: 0547808 Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9424 Attorneys for Plaintiff, C.M.A.** + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Phone: (561) 582-7600 + +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Robert Critton, Esquire + +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP + +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 + +Phone: (561) 842-2820 + +Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire + +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 South Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 202-6360 + +Fax: (561) 828-0983 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744317/EFTA02744317.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744317/EFTA02744317.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..029d7ee47f38d48133f57dede95392a4240c7f0e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744317/EFTA02744317.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,333 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744317.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 4496, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.0, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 406.3868103027344, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 406.3868103027344, + 114.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 114.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 159.12, + 170.91 + ], + [ + 484.9326477050781, + 170.91 + ], + [ + 484.9326477050781, + 186.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 159.12, + 186.91998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 336.15 + ], + [ + 385.1254577636719, + 336.15 + ], + [ + 385.1254577636719, + 351.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 351.91998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 102.87 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 48 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744317" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/EFTA02744323.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/EFTA02744323.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..95b3c31c537116d75c051bcc9ffb1d40b61f256d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/EFTA02744323.md @@ -0,0 +1,410 @@ +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAa + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# PLAINITFF'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES + +Plaintiff, JANE DOE 2, by and through her undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 33, hereby responds toppfendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff as folioWs: + +#### General Objections + +1. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that the Interrogatories call for the disclosure of information protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product doctrine, or other applicable privilege or immunity, whether created by statute or common law. Plaintiff claims such privileges and protections to the extent implicated by each Interrogatory, and excludes privileged and proteded information from any responses to Defendant's discovery. Any disclosure is inadvertent and is not intended to waive those privileges or protections, which are specifically reserved. + +2. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that same are vague, ambiguous, incomprehensible and/or overly broad. + +QOM? C)( A" U.) + +- 9. Describe each injury (physical, emotional, mental) for which you are claiming damages in this case, specifying the part of your body that was injured, the nature of the injury, and as to any injuries you contend are permanent, the effects on you that you claim are permanent. + +Answer: + +Plaintiff has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries, including without limitation, anxiety, low self-esteem, feelings of guilt, self-blame, distrustfulness, burdened often by sadness and depression, suicidal thoughts, difficulty trusting others (particularly men), irritability, anger, feeling helpless and powerless, escapism through excessive partying, lack of confidence, loss of innocence. + +Plaintiffs psychological and emotional injuries will be analyzed by aforensic expert, whose opinions and related information will be disclosed in accordance with the expert discovery rules of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement this response in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +- 10. Please state each item of damage that you claim, and include in your answer the count to which the item of damages relates; the factual basis for each item of damages; and an explanation of how you computed each item of damages, including any mathematical formula used. + +Answer: + +Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory as calling for an expert opinion and calculation. Subject to said objection, Plaintiff states that she seeks damages arising from her psychological and emotional injuries. These damages include pain and suffering, costs of psychological care and treatment, and loss of earning capacity. The pecuniary elements of these damages will be analyzed and computed by an appropriate expert. + +- 11. List the names and business addresses of each physician (including psychiatrist, psychologist, etc.) or medical provider (including chiropractors) who has treated or examined you, and each medical facility where you have received any treatment or examination for the injuries for which you seek damages in this + +## VERIFICATION + +being duly sworn, deposes and says that the foregoin ers o in ories are true and correct to the best of her knowledge, information and belief. + +![](_page_2_Picture_3.jpeg) + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) ss COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +SWO following identification within the past five years IRIBED before me this / 7 day of at 2009 by who is personally known to me or has pr6duced the P/s4;d P.A-- which is current or has been issued and bears a serial or other identifying number. + +> eve/4,u . G - 6erit) Print Name + +Signature + +NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF FLORIDA Commission Number: My commission expires: (Notarial Seal) + +S4/44-e. P V; g7;,O ; oz ef q 4 3 + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CW30232-MARRA-MEM + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 3'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES + +Plaintiff, JANE DOE 3, by and through their undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 33, hereby responds to Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff as follows: + +# General Objections + +1. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that the Interrogatories call for the disclosure of information protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product doctrine, or other applicable privilege or immunity, whether created by statute or common law. Plaintiff claims such privileges and protections to the extent implicated by each Interrogatory, and excludes privileged and protected information from any responses to Defendant's discovery. Any disclosure is inadvertent and is not intended to waive those privileges or protections, which are specifically reserved. + +2. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that same are vague, ambiguous, incomprehensible and/or overly broad. + +No. + +- 9. Describe each injury (physical, emotional, mental) for which you are claiming damages in this case, specifying the part of your body that was injured, the nature of the injury, and as to any injuries you contend are permanent, the effects on you that you claim are permanent. + +Answer: + +Plaintiff has suffered severe psychological, emotional and psychical injuries, including without limitation, anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, guilt, selfblame, feelings of being degraded, feeling unattractive, diminished sense of feminity, fluctuations in weight/appetite, sexual/intimacy problems, flashbacks, disturbing memories, stress, irritability, feelings of being isolated and trapped, diminished trust, social problems, problems in personal relationships, indecisiveness, lower energy, lower ambition and initiative, headaches, back pain, feels stress (particularly around men), obsessive thoughts, problems concentrating, alcohol abuse, corruption of morals and values, loss of innocence. and cries alot. + +Plaintiffs psychological and emotional injuries will be analyzed and explained by aforensic expert, whose opinions and related information will be disclosed in accordance with the expert discovery rules of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement this response in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +- 10. Please state each item of damage that you claim, and include in your answer: the count to which the item of damages relates; the factual basis for each item of damages; and an explanation of how you computed each item of damages, including any mathematical formula used. + +Answer: + +Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory as calling for an expert opinion and calculation. Subject to said objection, Plaintiff states that she seeks damages arising from her psychological and emotional injuries. These damages include pain and suffering, costs of psychological care and treatment, and loss of earning capacity. The pecuniary elements of these damages will be analyzed and computed by an appropriate expert. + +Discovery is ongoing and will be supplemented in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +**VERIFICATION** + +[REDACTED] being duly sworn, deposes and says that the foregoing answers to interrogatories are true and correct to the best of her knowledge, information and belief. + +![](_page_5_Picture_14.jpeg) + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) ss ) + +[REDACTED] SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 19 day of January, 2009 by [REDACTED], who is personally known to me or has produced the following identification Rivers Kicews which is current or has been issued within the past five years and bears a serial or other identifying number. + +Elizabeth Gutierrez +Print Name + +Elizabeth Gutierrez +Signature + +NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF FLORIDA +Commission Number: +My commission expires: +(Notarial Seal) + +![](_page_5_Picture_20.jpeg) + +Pldg 2 + +**UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA** + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA-[REDACTED] + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/\_\_\_\_\_ + +**PLAINTIFF'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES** + +Plaintiff, JANE DOE 6, by and through her undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 33, hereby responds to Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff as follows: + +**General Objections** + +1. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that the Interrogatories call for the disclosure of information protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product doctrine, or other applicable privilege or immunity, whether created by statute or common law. Plaintiff claims such privileges and protections to the extent implicated by each Interrogatory, and excludes privileged and protected information from any responses to Defendant's discovery. Any disclosure is inadvertent and is not intended to waive those privileges or protections, which are specifically reserved. + +2. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that same are vague, ambiguous, incomprehensible and/or overly broad. + +ne:JG:NEDT +also. + +> Discovery is ongoing and will be supplemented in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +- 6. Please state the specific nature and substance of the knowledge that you believe the person(s) identified in your response to interrogatory no. 5 may have. + +Answer + +See Plaintiffs Answer to Interrogatory No. 5. + +- 7. Were you suffering from physical infirmity, disability, disease, sickness, or psychiatric/psychological condition at the time of the incident(s) described in the complaint? If so, what was the nature of the infirmity, disability, or sickness? + +Answer: + +Plaintiff was diagnosed with PTSD following acar accident in 2003. + +- 8. Did you consume any alcoholic beverages or take any drugs or medications within 12 hours before the time of each incident(s) described in the complaint? If so, state the type and amount of alcoholic beverages, drugs, or medication which were consumed, and when and where you consumed them. + +Answer: + +No. + +- 9. Describe each injury (physical, emotional, mental) for which you are claiming damages in this case, specifying the part of your body that was injured, the nature of the injury, and as to any injuries you contend are permanent, the effects on you that you claim are permanent. + +Answer: + +Plaintiff has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries, including without limitation, anxiety, anger, distorted and disrupted development, restlessness, distrust, self destructive behaviors, suicidal behavior, substance abuse, severe Xanax addiction beginning after her encounter with Epstein, corruption of morals, antisocial behaviors, premature teenage pregnancy, loss of normal adolescent ideals, loss of innocence. + +> Plaintiffs psychological and emotional injuries will be analyzed by aforensic expert, whose opinions and related information will be disclosed in accordance with the expert discovery rules of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement this response in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +- 10. Please state each item of damage that you claim, and include in your answer: the count to which the item of damages relates; the factual basis for each item of damages; and an explanation of how you computed each item of damages, including any mathematical formula used. + +Answer: + +Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory as vague, overly broad, unduly burdensome, calling for speculation, and calling for an expert opinion. Subject to said objections, Plaintiff states: + +Discovery is ongoing and will be supplemented in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +- 11. List the names and business addresses of each physician (including psychiatrist, psychologist, etc.) or medical provider (including chiropractors) who has treated or examined you, and each medical facility where you have received any treatment or examination for the injuries for which you seek damages in this case; and state as to each the date of treatment or examination and the injury or condition for which you were examined or treated. + +Answer: + +![](_page_8_Picture_9.jpeg) + +- 12. List the names and business addresses of all other physicians, medical facilities, rehab facilities (drug, alcohol or psychiatric) or other health care providers including psychiatrist, psychologist, mental health counselor and chiropractors by whom or at which you have been examined or treated in the past 10 years; and state as to each the dates of examination or treatment and the condition or injury for which you were examined or treated. + +VERIFICATION + +[REDACTED] being duly sworn, deposes and says that the foregoing answers to interrogatories are true and correct to the best of her knowledge, information and belief. + +[REDACTED] + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) +) ss +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 14th day of January, 2009 by [REDACTED] who is personally known to me or has produced the following identification \_\_\_\_\_ which is current or has been issued within the past five years and bears a serial or other identifying number. + +Deborah DiFloria +Print Name + +[Signature] +Signature + +NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF FLORIDA +Commission Number: +My commission expires: November 8, 2010 +(Notarial Seal) + +![](_page_9_Picture_230.jpeg) + +By: \_\_\_\_\_ +Adam Horowitz +Jeffrey M. Herman +Stuart Mermelstein +Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Blvd. +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +(305) 931-2200 +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +**Certificate of Service** + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 26 day of January, 2009. + +Robert D. Critton, Jr, Esq. +Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Michael R. Tein, Esq. +██████████ Tein, P.L. +3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 +Coconut Grove, FL 33133 +305-442-1101 +Fax: 305 442 6744 +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* +[tein@lewistein.com](mailto:tein@lewistein.com) + +![]() + +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRAMM + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 7'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES + +Plaintiff, JANE DOE 7, by and through their undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 33, hereby responds to Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff as follows: + +# General Objections + +1. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that the Interrogatories call for the disclosure of information protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product doctrine, or other applicable privilege or immunity, whether created by statute or common law. Plaintiff claims such privileges and protections to the extent implicated by each Interrogatory, and excludes privileged and protected information from any responses to Defendant's discovery. Any disclosure is inadvertent and is not intended to waive those privileges or protections, which are specifically reserved. + +2. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that same are vague, ambiguous, incomprehensible and/or overly broad. + +Jane Doe 1 (who is not represented by the undersigned attorneys) + +HayleyS. Plaint' s classmate who brought Plaintiff to Defendant's estate on 2 occasions + +aintiffs classmate who accompanied Plaintiff to Defendant's estate on at lest one occasion + +r er or accompanied Plaintiff to Defendant's estate on at least one oc sion, ut Plaintiff is unable to recall which sister it was. + +Discovery is ongoing and may be supplemented in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +- 6. Please state the specific nature and substance of the knowledge that you believe the person(s) identified in your response to interrogatory no. 5 may have. + +Answer: + +See Plaintiffs Answer to Interrogatory No. 5. + +- 7. Were you suffering from physical infirmity, disability, disease, sickness, or psychiatric/psychological condition at the time of the incident(s) described in the complaint? If so, what was the nature of the infirmity, disability, or sickness? + +Answer: + +No. + +- 8. Did you consume any alcoholic beverages or take any drugs or medications within 12 hours before the time of each incident(s) described in the complaint? If so, state the type and amount of alcoholic beverages, drugs, or medication which were consumed, and when and where you consumed them. + +Answer: + +No. + +- 9. Describe each injury (physical, emotional, mental) for which you are claiming damages in this case, specifying the part of your body that was injured, the + +> nature of the injury, and as to any injuries you contend are permanent, the effects on you that you claim are permanent. + +# Answer: + +Plaintiff has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries, including °without limitation, anxiety, disturbed sleep, depression, alcohol abuse, panicky, hypersexuality/promiscuity, inability to trust, diminished judgment regarding others, diminished sense of future prospects, corruption of morals, distorted and disrupted development, loss of normal adolescent ideals. + +r Plaintiffs psychological and emotional injuries will be analyzed by aforensic expert, whose opinions and related information will be disclosed in accordance with the expert discovery rules of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement this response in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +- 10. Please state each item of damage that you claim, and include in your answer the count to which the item of damages relates; the factual basis for each item of damages; and an explanation of how you computed each item of damages, including any mathematical formula used. + +# Answer: + +Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory as calling for an expert opinion and calculation. Subject to said objection, Plaintiff states that she seeks damages arising from her psychological and emotional injuries. These damages include pain and suffering, costs of psychological care and treatment, and loss of earning capacity. The pecuniary elements of these damages will be analyzed and computed by an appropriate expert. + +Discovery is ongoing and will be supplemented in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +- 11. List the names and business addresses of each physician (including psychiatrist, psychologist, etc.) or medical provider (including chiropractors) who has treated or examined you, and each medical facility where you have received any treatment or examination for the injuries for which you seek damages in this case; and state as to each the date of treatment or examination and the injury or condition for which you were examined or treated. + +# Answer: + +![](_page_13_Picture_12.jpeg) + +Jane Doe No. 7 v. Epstein +Page 15 + +against Mr. Epstein and regarding whether there would be any benefit from your voluntary cooperation with law enforcement. + +**VERIFICATION** + +[REDACTED] being duly sworn, depose and says that the foregoing answers to interrogatories are true and correct to the best of her knowledge, information and belief. + +[REDACTED] + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +) ss + +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +[REDACTED] SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 23rd day of January 2008 by [REDACTED] who is personally known to me or has produced the following identification [REDACTED] which is current or has been issued within the past five years and bears a serial or other identifying number. + +Juan Fernandez +Print Name +[Signature] +Signature + +NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF FLORIDA +Commission Number: D106715802 +My commission expires: 9/18/2011 +(Notarial Seal) + +![](_page_14_Picture_25.jpeg) + +**Certificate of Service** + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 26 day of January, 2009. + +Robert D. Critton, Jr, Esq. +Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Michael R. Tein, Esq. +██████████ Tein, P.L. +3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 +Coconut Grove, FL 33133 +305-442-1101 +Fax: 305 442 6744 +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* +[tein@lewistein.com](mailto:tein@lewistein.com) + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/EFTA02744323.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/EFTA02744323.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f89f7c3369d928ba5dde5ad0102d35df6d8b8a82 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/EFTA02744323.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1160 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 16, + "chars": 21599, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.9, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_2_Picture_3.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_14.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_8_Picture_9.jpeg", + "_page_9_Picture_230.jpeg", + "_page_13_Picture_12.jpeg", + "_page_14_Picture_25.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.304, + 66.42 + ], + [ + 417.9960000000001, + 66.42 + ], + [ + 417.9960000000001, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 209.304, + 93.15 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINITFF'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 526.3199999999999, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 526.3199999999999, + 314.28000000000003 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 314.28000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "General Objections", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 257.03999999999996, + 410.6700000000001 + ], + [ + 374.48822021484375, + 410.6700000000001 + ], + [ + 374.48822021484375, + 423.63 + ], + [ + 257.03999999999996, + 423.63 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VERIFICATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.772, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 354.3311767578125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 354.3311767578125, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 263.772, + 85.05 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 68.03999999999999 + ], + [ + 415.62664794921875, + 68.03999999999999 + ], + [ + 415.62664794921875, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 95.58 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 3'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST \nINTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 125.46000000000001, + 299.70000000000005 + ], + [ + 499.57427978515625, + 299.70000000000005 + ], + [ + 499.57427978515625, + 328.1861267089844 + ], + [ + 125.46000000000001, + 328.1861267089844 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "General Objections", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 372.4232177734375, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 372.4232177734375, + 441.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 441.45000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VERIFICATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 265.608, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 353.736, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 353.736, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 265.608, + 86.67 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 414.93600000000004, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 414.93600000000004, + 113.4 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 113.4 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 100.36800000000001, + 317.52 + ], + [ + 523.872, + 317.52 + ], + [ + 523.872, + 334.53 + ], + [ + 100.36800000000001, + 334.53 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "General Objections", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 369.64799999999997, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 369.64799999999997, + 443.88 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 443.88 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VERIFICATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 354.96, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 354.96, + 117.44999999999999 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 117.44999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.63600000000002, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 372.096, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 372.096, + 130.41 + ], + [ + 246.63600000000002, + 130.41 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 208.07999999999998, + 68.85000000000001 + ], + [ + 419.79150390625, + 68.85000000000001 + ], + [ + 419.79150390625, + 94.43731689453125 + ], + [ + 208.07999999999998, + 94.43731689453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 7'S ANSWERS TO \nDEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.66, + 299.70000000000005 + ], + [ + 443.7873840332031, + 299.70000000000005 + ], + [ + 443.7873840332031, + 332.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 186.66, + 332.09999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "General Objections", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 257.03999999999996, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 374.659423828125, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 374.659423828125, + 441.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 257.03999999999996, + 441.45000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 108.93599999999999, + 120.69 + ], + [ + 166.07516479492188, + 120.69 + ], + [ + 166.07516479492188, + 134.5367431640625 + ], + [ + 108.93599999999999, + 134.5367431640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.384, + 397.71 + ], + [ + 168.09637451171875, + 397.71 + ], + [ + 168.09637451171875, + 411.6642150878906 + ], + [ + 111.384, + 411.6642150878906 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 114.44400000000002, + 660.96 + ], + [ + 169.98257446289062, + 660.96 + ], + [ + 169.98257446289062, + 675.2917327880859 + ], + [ + 114.44400000000002, + 675.2917327880859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VERIFICATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 269.28000000000003, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 359.24399999999997, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 359.24399999999997, + 312.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 269.28000000000003, + 312.65999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.86, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 373.93199999999996, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 373.93199999999996, + 123.93 + ], + [ + 247.86, + 123.93 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 206 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 368 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 163 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 206 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 382 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 207 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 303 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 347 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 176 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 172 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 208 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 277 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 382 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 174 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744323" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_13_Picture_12.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_13_Picture_12.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4a7a04fe1a53b855e6e24292381437cfa6acaff8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_13_Picture_12.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a509dcee0578c62f1cadf72857bb17f0274089faebd18513dfac25edc7b2fd26 +size 7287 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_14_Picture_25.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_14_Picture_25.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..eed1ee864117d82cb2abfb6a81b208e83496a265 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_14_Picture_25.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:640ae537a05a2c658d0366a75e9d7dbd980c8491e3f7d74e5dd1a4e2a59eebd4 +size 13649 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_2_Picture_3.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_2_Picture_3.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0836cb03f4a948a995d9d30a1c1998906f8d6709 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_2_Picture_3.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:70d7bf0a700631a0e4ac8a4054ee9337dd6a63ccd34cf5d276408cc73e4aed96 +size 3885 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_5_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_5_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3b685f13312ae505cea20e08961c8b8c2dc820c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_5_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6338b916bbf062baef8ac6a2193cc351efda391b3aaa69db78b4920e6bda7eb9 +size 9863 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_5_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_5_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d59c281c83646ed08d612d566e716bedab709d56 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_5_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f1c17fa17dff0e469469ca1ff3aac955a0d6add7bce29f1059b0c66eb3538959 +size 10822 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_8_Picture_9.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_8_Picture_9.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..98e6a86ad8cfa3dc0c9a3d2bca7a7e6747501515 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_8_Picture_9.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1a89c28810feadbaa75457d95ad5084ae9b347a7ee8924de18ba444538069dc4 +size 12263 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_9_Picture_230.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_9_Picture_230.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ecc0c6ad166ae95f62d09302de65965b606b1a25 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744323/_page_9_Picture_230.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:cd7700f4d1535c205a08c1667d500542ce9b79ea34a7b48f5f560374c91803ee +size 13503 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744339/EFTA02744339.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744339/EFTA02744339.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7b3208ac6f2cab119244e69bf9dd71f71c35e36d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744339/EFTA02744339.md @@ -0,0 +1,106 @@ +![](_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg) + +![](_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg) + +SD#3 + +IDENTIFYING DATA + +NAME [redacted] SSN: [ ] - [ ] - [ ] - [ ] [redacted] DOB: 3/5/88 SEX: F + +PRESENTING PROBLEM + +Pt 1s a 19 yls co/3/5 who reported would eventually sole as episodes of depression informingled by owning spells, anger, low foundational fathered dysphoric mood, poor noncentration, steep disturbance and surrounded ideas arout SIB such as contrag her skin on orans, leps etc. she took [au o.d. of pitts about 2 weeks ago she also inflicted burns on her skin in a injurery for lighter. Pt tooke up in her burning 3 months ago after being together for 2 years she had been angry for the brankup and + +FAMILY AND PAST PSYCHIATRIC HISTORY + +negatives to contact him because of her anger. she has no possible hospitalization. she was in the past in cynobafta and roleflip (2N). she was sexually interested by her friend's brother at age 13 and was raped at age 15. she \* + +SOCIAL AND DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY + +founded H.S. and is currently working for a Rent Estate Procurery for the past 4N. Pt had a 23 yls fister. Parents got divorced when she was 11 yls. Father has Ethilisu. Mother: father has Ethili's w. + +SUBSTANCE ABUSE HISTORY + +Pt had been surrounding Paulabis on a daily basis. She began at age 12-13 yls. she also abused Eccliasy occasionally. + +| MEDICAL HISTORY | MEDICATIONS | ALLERGIES | +|-----------------|-----------------------------|-----------| +| None | acute O. 25mg Birth Counter | | + +RISK FACTORS OF SUICIDE + +| Affective disorders.
Schizophrenia.
Alcoholism.
Ages between 7 and 29.
Healthy support system unavailable.
Unemployment.
Recent death in family. | No friends to talk to.
Premeditated suicide.
Recent suicidal attempt.
Marital estrangement.
Impulsive lethal suicidal attempt.
Previous suicidal attempt.
Current suicidal ideas. | Chronic physical illness.
Family history of suicide.
Divorced / widowed.
Previous history of violence.
Other: _____ | +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +APPEARANCE Limp Relaxed Tense At ease Groomed Unkempt Poised Comfortable Angry Cooperative Anxious. Depressed Attentive Evasive Hostile Paranoid. Apathetic Playful Guarded Evasive Other: \_\_\_\_\_ + +BEHAVIOR Tense Rigid Retarded Agitated Combative Gestures Tics Distracted Stereotype Other: \_\_\_\_\_ + +SPEECH Slow Monotonous Hesitant Rapid Slow Loud Stuttered Dysarthric Other: \_\_\_\_\_ + +MOOD Happy Elated Irritable Guilty Anxious Fearful Despairing Other: \_\_\_\_\_ + +AFFECT Flat Constricted Inappropriate Racing Confabulation Dysphoric Appropriate Euphoric Other: \_\_\_\_\_ + +PERCEPTION Illusions: Yes No Derealization: Yes No + +Content: \_\_\_\_\_ Hallucinations: Yes No Auditory Visual Olfactory Gustatory Other: \_\_\_\_\_ Content: \_\_\_\_\_ THOUGHT PROCESS Loose Poverty Racing Confabulation Relevant Tangential Avoidant Perseveration Content: \_\_\_\_\_ Logical Directed Incoherent Circumstantial Person Incoherent Time Place Orientation: Person Time Place Insight: Poor Good Judgment: Poor Good + +Obsessions: Yes No Content: \_\_\_\_\_ Delusions: Yes No Content: \_\_\_\_\_ Suicidal Ideas: Yes No Content: Not at this time. Homicidal Ideas: Yes No Content: \_\_\_\_\_ Other: \_\_\_\_\_ + +COGNITIVE FUNCTION Memory: Poor Good Attention: Poor Good Abstraction: Poor Good Concentration: Poor Good Alert: Yes No Orientation: Person Time Place Insight: Poor Good Judgment: Poor Good + +DIAGNOSIS AXIS I: 1. Major Dep. Rep. Med. AXIS III: 799.9 AXIS IV: Confused 60 AXIS V: 799.9 AXIS VI: - AXIS II: R/O PT = D + +RECOMMENDATION 1. are discussed to aptrous. I feel start pt all cold to 25 mg and trithate up to 10 mg ad. 2. 3/8 of cold to explain. pt agreed to D/C confusible 3. R/O un 2-4 wks. + +NAME: \_\_\_\_\_ + +DOB: \_\_\_\_\_ + +| Date | Name of Medication | Dose | Frequency | Amount | Refill | +|----------|--------------------|-------|-------------|--------|--------| +| 10/26/07 | TRatedace | 500mg | it gd | 60 | X | +| | TRatedace | 500mg | it ls | 30 | X | +| 11/7/07 | Lexapron sample | 100mg | up to it gd | 400kgs | X | +| 11/30/07 | Lexapron | 200mg | it gd | 30 | 1 | +| | TRatedace | 100mg | it ls | 30 | 1 | +| 2/13/08 | Lexapron | 200mg | it gd | 30 | 2 | +| 3/30/08 | Pekeula (5) | 200mg | it gd | 28 | X | +| | | 200mg | it gd | 30 | X | +| 6/3/08 | Lexapron | 200mg | it gd | 30 | 4 | +| | TRatedace | 100mg | it ls | 30 | 4 | +| 11/25/08 | Lexapron | 200mg | it gd | 30 | 5 | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744339/EFTA02744339.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744339/EFTA02744339.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3f98a2a2d5ee141f012a9ca867887dd0744eee36 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744339/EFTA02744339.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,322 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744339.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 9726, + "elapsed_seconds": 145.9, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "FSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 395.964, + 50.22 + ], + [ + 567.936, + 50.22 + ], + [ + 567.936, + 63.17999999999999 + ], + [ + 395.964, + 63.17999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IDENTIFYING DATA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 95.58 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRESENTING PROBLEM", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 240.516, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 356.18399999999997, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 356.18399999999997, + 130.41 + ], + [ + 240.516, + 130.41 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "FAMILY AND PAST PSYCHIATRIC HISTORY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 329.66999999999996 + ], + [ + 415.54800000000006, + 329.66999999999996 + ], + [ + 415.54800000000006, + 341.01 + ], + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 341.01 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SOCIAL AND DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 194.61599999999999, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 407.592, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 407.592, + 439.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 194.61599999999999, + 439.83000000000004 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUBSTANCE ABUSE HISTORY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 229.5, + 527.3100000000001 + ], + [ + 375.15599999999995, + 527.3100000000001 + ], + [ + 375.15599999999995, + 537.0300000000001 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 537.0300000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "RISK FACTORS OF SUICIDE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 231.948, + 654.48 + ], + [ + 372.70799999999997, + 654.48 + ], + [ + 372.70799999999997, + 663.39 + ], + [ + 231.948, + 663.39 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MENTAL STATUS EXAM", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 12.24, + 28.35 + ], + [ + 590.5799999999999, + 28.35 + ], + [ + 590.5799999999999, + 52.650000000000006 + ], + [ + 12.24, + 52.650000000000006 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 13 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 50 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 31 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744339" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744339/_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744339/_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b839c1f1690b1eb450a6c8c350b64e93e9dc2e4c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744339/_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ecfb0728410c62423e67aa318e6cf43b9ad2702b3d7ef9f0c8843b9fd34d57d5 +size 5699 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744339/_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744339/_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6f9c8871adffc2941d5bedab62aa2e1e0536792e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744339/_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0977f539391bf38d9d96fce206798b18d0cd0cefa2e56205ad36c45058d69ff8 +size 2573 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744342/EFTA02744342.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744342/EFTA02744342.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..10c243a5f0574eb06384a69d599439db8af68c8e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744342/EFTA02744342.md @@ -0,0 +1,185 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO.2, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO.3, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO.4, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80994-MARRA/ + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80993-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.; 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80893-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendants. DOE II, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80469-MARRA/ + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al, + +Defendants. + +I + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80591-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +I + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80656-MARRia + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Reply To Memorandums In Opposition To Epstein's Motion To Compel Answers To First Set Of Interrogatories And First Request To Produce Directed To Jane Doe Numbers 2-7 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Reply to the Memorandums In Opposition To Epstein's Motions To Compel Answers To First Set Of Interrogatories And First Request To Produce (DE 83 and 85 80232-KAM). In support, EPSTEIN states: + +#### I. Epstein's Motion To Compel Should Be Granted Because The Information Sought Goes To The Heart Of Plaintiffs' Claims For Damages + +## a. Introduction + +1. Plaintiffs forget Epstein has due process rights to defend himself in these lawsuits. As set forth in Epstein's Motion to Compel, Plaintiffs allege they suffered and will continue to suffer + +severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages, and severe mental anguish and pain and suffering. See Composite Exhibit "A", Interrogatory Response Number 9. Each of the Jane Does seek to recover in excess of one (1) million dollars in damages. The discovery sought goes directly to the heart of Plaintiffs' alleged damage claims. + +2. As to the interrogatories, Epstein seeks discovery regarding Plaintiffs sexual activity with males since age 10, including whether she received any compensation or consideration therefore, in interrogatory no. 18, whether she claims other males committed sexual assault or battery on her in no. 19, whether she claims other males committed lewd and lascivious conduct to her in no. 20, and whether other males committed lewd or lascivious exhibition to her in no. 21, which are all relevant to Plaintiffs' damage claims and the type of injuries they claim to have suffered. Significantly, as stated in the Motion to Compel, Plaintiffs did NOT object to relevancy. + +3. As to the requests for production numbers 1, 10, 11, 17 and 18, Epstein seeks tax information, and photographs, videos and the like wherein Plaintiffs performed sexual acts or simulated sexual acts as well as documents related to Plaintiffs' sexual histories. See Motion to Compel. + +4. Despite the specific wording of the discovery requests, Plaintiffs attempt to dissuade this court from allowing Epstein to discover any information that will directly negate or reduce Plaintiffs' alleged damage claims by citing a host of wholly irrelevant cases that deal specifically with employer liability for workplace sexual harassment claims. Plaintiffs rely on those cases to bolster their misplaced argument that Rule 412 prevents Epstein from obtaining all the discovery sought; however, this court must note that Plaintiffs' argument is intended to apply only to + +interrogatory number 18 and requests numbers 17 and 18 (i.e., discovery regarding sexual history, not instances where Plaintiffs have been assaulted, prostituted, or the subject of lewd and lascivious acts). As mentioned below, Plaintiffs' Response consents to discovery involving claims similar to the ones alleged in the complaints. See infra. + +## b. Argument + +5. The information sought above is relevant and discoverable even if not admissible at trial. United States v. Bear Stops, 997 F.2d 451 (8th Cir. 1993) deals with "admissibility of other acts of sexual abuse by individuals other than the defendant to explain why a victim of abuse exhibited behavioral manifestations of a sexually abused child." In Bear Stops, the Defendant was entitled to admission of evidence relating to victim's (a six-year old) sexual assault by 3 older boys to establish alternative explanation for why victim exhibited behavioral manifestations of a sexually abused child. United States v. Bear Stops, 997 F.2d at 451. That is exactly what Epstein seeks to obtain in the instant matter. For example, Epstein is entitled to know whether Plaintiffs were molested or the subject of other "sexual activity" or "lewd and lascivious conduct" in order to determine whether there is an alternative basis for the psychological disorders Plaintiffs' claim to have sustained. See infra. The discovery requests specifically seek to determine whether Plaintiffs exhibited any of their alleged behavioral manifestations as a result of incidents that occurred prior to those alleged in their complaints. While the information sought is relevant and admissible or may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, we are not at the "admissibility" stage of these proceedings. We are in the discovery phase. See Composite Exhibit "A". + +6. Plaintiffs claim that inquiring of instances from the age of 10 years is unreasonable. Yet, if the Plaintiffs had no sexual experiences (good or bad) until their alleged contact with Epstein, their objections are meaningless in that they could answer "none." On the other hand, Plaintiffs allege they were between the ages of 13-16 at the time of their alleged contacts with Epstein. Therefore, asking questions in interrogatories or at deposition beginning at age 10 is not unreasonable in that obtaining a 10 year history in personal injury matters is standard. All of the Plaintiffs in the Epstein related matters alleged that his actions caused all of their claimed damages. But a 10, or 11 or 12 year old who may have had a sexual experience or some form of sexual activity with another person (minor, young adult, older adult, male, female, guardian, family member) could have a profound impact on them psychologically which may explain their alleged damages (in whole or in part), rather than their alleged contact with Epstein. In fact, Jane Doe 3, in responding to her First Request to Produce, produced a psychiatric evaluation (Exhibit "B") dated October 26, 2007 in which she told a doctor: (a) she was sexually molested at age 13 by her friend's brother; and (b) raped at age 15. Jane Doe 3 did not claim to see Epstein until age 16. In light of the foregoing, can Plaintiffs' counsel legitimately assert to this court that the requested information is not relevant? + +7. Next, despite Plaintiffs' strained interpretation and application of the discovery requests in Balas v. Ruzzo, 703 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1998), that case is instrumental in that, once again, we are at the "discovery" phase, not the "admissibility" phase of the proceedings. The discovery requests in Balas seek to obtain similar information as those in the instant matter. For example, answers to the interrogatories may yield that Plaintiffs did engage in prostitution or other similar type acts (Interrogatory No. 9 Balas), + +how certain acts alleged in the complaint materially affected Plaintiffs' relationships with others or how those acts did not have such an affect on those relationships (Interrogatory No. 22 Batas), and/or whether Plaintiffs suffered from the alleged emotional and psychological disorders as a result of other sexual acts prior to the acts alleged in their respective complaints. The probative value of obtaining full and complete answers to interrogatory numbers 18-21 is outweighed by any danger of harm to the Plaintiff in that the answer goes to the heart of Plaintiffs' damages or lack thereof. United States v. Begay, 937 F.2d 515, 523-24 (10th Cir.1991) (error to prevent defendant from cross-examining child about prior sexual contacts that might have caused the child's physical conditions) citira, Fed.R.Evid. 403, 412 and 412(b)(1). Further, Epstein cannot obtain the discovery from any other persons but the Plaintiffs. + +8. The cases cited by Plaintiffs to support their argument that Rule 412 prevents the discoverability of Plaintiffs' sexual activities is misplaced. Each of the cases cited by Plaintiff in support of their argument that Rule 412 prevents discovery of Plaintiffs' sexual activities deal specifically with employer liability for workplace sexual harassment claims. See Lg., Barta v. City and County of Honolulu, 169 F.R.D. 132 (D. Haw. 1996)(reasoning in a sexual harassment case, employer was entitled to Plaintiff's sexual history while on-duty but not her entire sexual history off-duty). While those cases are distinguishable from the instant matters on a factual and Title VII basis, if this court accepted Plaintiffs' strained interpretation of Barta then employers would not be able to ask plaintiffs bringing sexual harassment claims whether they filed similar claims in the past. If this court applies Plaintiffs' interpretation of Barta and its companion cases to the instant matter, then Epstein will be prevented from learning whether the Plaintiffs were + +battered, sexually assaulted, or the subject of other lewd and lascivious acts prior to the acts alleged in their complaints. These questions go to the heart of Plaintiffs' damage claims. + +9. Next, the discovery requests here seek not only Plaintiffs' sexual history, but also specific instances wherein the Plaintiffs (a) received compensation or consideration for sex acts, (b) claim other males committed sexual assault or battery on them, (c) claim other males committed lewd and lascivious conduct/acts on them, and (d) claim other males committed lewd or lascivious acts on them. On page 6 of Plaintiffs' Response, they each concede that discovery should be had if it "involve[s] similar criminal circumstances such as those involving Epstein." Here, the majority of the discovery sought centers around similar incidents. See supra. As such, it is without question that interrogatory numbers 19-21 must be fully answered, and documents responsive to request for production numbers 10-11 must be supplied. + +10. Interrogatory number 18 must be fully answered and documents responsive to request for production numbers 17-18 must be supplied in connection with Plaintiffs' sexual activities from age 10. See Alberts v. Wickes Lumber Co., 1995 WL 117886 at •5(N.D. 111.)(evidence of victim's sexual relationships after alleged assault were held admissible where effects on such relationships were part of plaintiffs damage claims; to allow plaintiff "to use these alleged experiences as evidence of her damages, but at the same time deny [defendant] the opportunity to prove that these claims are not true, would be to turn the rape `shield' law into a sword solely for the plaintiffs benefit"). + +11. In Interrogatory Response Number 9, Plaintiffs place their sexual history at issue given their claims that their relationships have been affected by, among other things, "distrust in men," "sexual intimacy problems," "diminished trust," "social problems," "problems in personal + +relationships," "feelings of stress around men," "premature teenage pregnancy," "antisocial behaviors," and "hyper-sexuality and promiscuity." Composite Exhibit "A". Plaintiffs should not be permitted to turn the rape "shield" law into a sword solely for the plaintiffs' benefits. If Plaintiffs choose to base their case for damages on events taking place after and as a result of the alleged Epstein incidents (e.g., intimacy problems), then Rule 412 cannot be deemed to bar Epstein from mounting a defense against such claims by the m'.•' direct and traditional of methods, i.e., proof that such claims are simply not true. Id. + +> Robert D. Critton, Jr. Attorney for Defendant Epstein + +# Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on thi , day of May 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattorney.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +> Res submitted, + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +D. •RITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744342/EFTA02744342.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744342/EFTA02744342.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..32a5561bf6ea0499df38f7ae8bbb8f5469b190f3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744342/EFTA02744342.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,519 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744342.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 13527, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.94, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.5064392089844, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.5064392089844, + 102.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 102.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Reply To \nMemorandums In Opposition To Epstein's Motion To Compel \nAnswers To First Set Of Interrogatories And First Request To Produce Directed To Jane Doe \nNumbers 2-7", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.456, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 529.9945068359375, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 529.9945068359375, + 479.1035461425781 + ], + [ + 84.456, + 479.1035461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Epstein's Motion To Compel Should Be Granted Because The Information Sought Goes To \nThe Heart Of Plaintiffs' Claims For Damages", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 89.964, + 602.64 + ], + [ + 544.068, + 602.64 + ], + [ + 544.068, + 630.2335510253906 + ], + [ + 89.964, + 630.2335510253906 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 256.428, + 640.71 + ], + [ + 358.63653564453125, + 640.71 + ], + [ + 358.63653564453125, + 655.3535461425781 + ], + [ + 256.428, + 655.3535461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "b. Argument", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 270.504, + 217.89000000000004 + ], + [ + 341.86187744140625, + 217.89000000000004 + ], + [ + 341.86187744140625, + 232.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 270.504, + 232.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 268.668, + 369.36 + ], + [ + 382.6169738769531, + 369.36 + ], + [ + 382.6169738769531, + 385.10302734375 + ], + [ + 268.668, + 385.10302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744342" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744352/EFTA02744352.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744352/EFTA02744352.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9995b57712b65387bed7a399567febef25baf308 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744352/EFTA02744352.md @@ -0,0 +1,158 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARR.A + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08- CV-80811 -MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 08-CV- 80469-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, + +CASE NO.: 08- CV-80893-MARRA + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al., + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80591-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOES 2-7 MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL AND/OR IDENTIFY JANE DOE IN THE STYLE ET AL. + +Plaintiffs, JANE DOES 2-7, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby file this Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motion to Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe in the Style of this Case and Motion to Identify Jane Doe in Third Party Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, and state as follows: + +- I. Defendant Epstein filed his Motion to Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe in the Style, a al., in the cases brought by Jane Does No. 2-7 ("Does 2-7") on May 5 and 6, 2009. Under S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1(C), Does No. 2-7' response is due on May 22, 2009. + - 2. Plaintiffs request an additional twenty (20) days to respond to the Motion to + +Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe in the Style, et at This request for enlargement of time of twenty (20) days is necessitated primarily by Plaintiffs desire to have the psychiatric expert who examined the Plaintiffs consider the issue of their public identification and, if appropriate, submit an expert declaration in response to the relief sought in the Defendant's Motion. The enlargement of time requested is sought to provide the expert with adequate time to perform this work. + +3. Additionally, Plaintiffs' counsel has conflicts with other cases and matters which necessitate additional time for a response, including, without limitation, a special set hearing and upcoming trial in John Doe 6 v. Diocese of Orlando, case no. 48-2005-010138-0, Ninth Judicial Circuit for Orange County, Florida; and an upcoming deadline to file Appellant's initial Brief in Jane Doe v. Florida International University Board of Trustees case no. 3D09-414, Florida Third District Court of Appeals. + +4. Plaintiffs' counsel has conferred with Defendant's counsel, Robert Critton and Michael Pike, regarding this request for extension of time. While Defendant's counsel represented that Defendant would consent to an extension of time of one (1) week, until May 29, 2009, Defendant opposes any further extension of time. The grounds stated by Defendant's counsel for opposing the extension of time requested concern the relief sought in Defendant's Motion to Strike Cases from the Current Trial Docket, filed on May 19, 2009. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-7 respectfully request an enlargement of time until June 11, 2009 to file their response to Defendant's Motion to Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe in the Style, et at, and for such other and further relief this Court deems just and proper. + +Dated: May 21, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) + +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com + +MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on May 21, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bc1claw.com + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744352/EFTA02744352.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744352/EFTA02744352.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..499aa3d42543fbf6ac634716200aa5ff2c886985 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744352/EFTA02744352.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,345 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744352.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 4831, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.63, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.24017333984375, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.24017333984375, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOES 2-7 MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT \nOF TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL \nAND/OR IDENTIFY JANE DOE IN THE STYLE ET AL.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 118.116, + 443.88 + ], + [ + 495.03021240234375, + 443.88 + ], + [ + 495.03021240234375, + 486.363037109375 + ], + [ + 118.116, + 486.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 262.44 + ], + [ + 386.89947509765625, + 262.44 + ], + [ + 386.89947509765625, + 277.10302734375 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 277.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744352" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744358/EFTA02744358.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744358/EFTA02744358.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..34552231af5882a47a5904ba4c752a5a3a862db6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744358/EFTA02744358.md @@ -0,0 +1,227 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO.2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +JANE DOE NO.3, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80232-MARRAMMI + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO.4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80380-MARRARIMI + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80381-MARRAMM + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80994-MARRAIIMI + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendants. + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80993-MARRAMM + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80811-MARRAMM + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80893-MARRAMIIII + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80469-MARRN + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80591-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80656-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Notice Of Compliance with S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1(A)(3). In Connection with Previously Filed Motion To Strike Cases From Current Trial Docket And Motion to Continue Case And/Or Alternative Motion to Modify Trial and Scheduling Order Deadlines + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his notice of compliance with S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1(A)(3) in connection with the Previously Filed Motion To Strike Cases From Current Trial + +Docket And Motion to Continue Case And/Or Alternative Motion to Modify Trial and Scheduling Order Deadlines (the "Motion to Strike and/or Continue"): + +- 1. Defendant filed his Motion to Strike and/or Continue (DE 104). +- 2. Defendant has conferred with counsel for Jane Does 2-7 regarding same. + +Counsel for Jane Does 2-7 agreed to the following schedule: + +- a. Discovery Cutoff December 11, 2009; +- b. Substantive Pretrial Motions January 8, 2010; +- c. Proposed Calendar Call June 4, 2010; +- d. Proposed Trial Calendar June, 2010; and +- e. All other deadlines will be triggered by the dates set by the Court for calendar call and trial, as provided in the current scheduling Order. + +3. By e-mail correspondence, the undersigned contacted counsel for Jane Doe (80893) and C.M.A. regarding the foregoing; however, the undersigned has not heard back from either of the attorneys. Additionally, the undersigned discussed the foregoing with counsel for Jane Doe this morning at a State Court hearing in Palm Beach County, Florida. + +## Rule 7.1 Certification + +I hereby certify that counsel for the respective parties communicated by letters (e-mail) in a good faith effort to resolve the issues prior to th ruling on the above motion. Some of the issues were resolved as set o + +Florida Bar #617296 + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 11 day of May, 2009 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A.* +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +jagesq@bellsouth.net +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. █ Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +jsx@searcylaw.com +jph@searcylaw.com +*Co-Counsel for Plaintiff* +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com +*Counsel for Defendant* █ + +Fax: 305-931-0877 +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com +Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +bedwards@rra-law.com +Counsel for Plaintiff + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +cassellp@law.utah.edu +Co-counsel for Plaintiff + +![]()![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744358/EFTA02744358.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744358/EFTA02744358.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dab969259eb1835d621485249d77505befa5e1fb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744358/EFTA02744358.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,302 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744358.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 4844, + "elapsed_seconds": 43.69, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 412.4107360839844, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 412.4107360839844, + 106.28997802734375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 106.28997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.63600000000002, + 564.5699999999999 + ], + [ + 374.00628662109375, + 564.5699999999999 + ], + [ + 374.00628662109375, + 581.0399932861328 + ], + [ + 246.63600000000002, + 581.0399932861328 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 242.964, + 183.06 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 183.06 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 196.82999999999998 + ], + [ + 242.964, + 196.82999999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744358" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744364/EFTA02744364.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744364/EFTA02744364.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0cff422b810b8f8fd9068ec2a4ac822a65f46cfe --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744364/EFTA02744364.md @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@ +## EXHIBIT A to Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's Motion for No-Contact Order + +## IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CRIMINAL DIVISION + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) ) vs ) CASE NO. 06 CF9454AMB ) 08 9381CFAMB JEFFREY EPSTEIN Defendant. ) ) ) ) + +## • PLEA CONFERENCE + +11PRESIDING: HONORABLE DEBORAH DALE PUCILLO + +12 APPEARANCES: + +ON BEHALF OF THE STATE: BARRY E. KRISCHER, ESQUIRE State Attorney 401 North Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 By: LANNA BELOHLAVEK, ESQUIRE Assistant State Attorney + +17ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT: ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS,P.A. 18250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 19West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 By: JACK GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE + +June 30, 2008 24 Palm Beach County Courthouse West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 25Beginning at 8:40 o'clock, a.m. + +CERTIFIED COPY + +1 regularly congregate? + +2 3 know. MS. BELOHLAVEK: I personally do not + +4 THE COURT: Neither do I, which is 5 why I'm asking. Has that been 6 investigated? + +7 MR. GOLDBERGER: We have done our due 8 diligence, for what it's worth, there is a 9 residential street. There are not children 10 congregating on that street. We think the 11 address applies, if it doesn't, we fully 12 recognize that he can't live there. + +13 THE COURT: Okay. D is, you shall 14 not have any contact with the victim, are 15 there more than one victim? + +16 MS. BELOHLAVEK: There's several. + +17 THE COURT: Several, all of the 18 victims. So this should be plural. I'm 19 making that plural. You are not to have 20 any contact direct or indirect, and in this 21 day and age I find it necessary to go over 22 exactly what we mean by indirect. By 23 indirect, we mean no text messages, no 24 ezmail, no Face Book, no My Space, no 25 telephone calls, no voice mails, no + +1 messages through carrier pigeon, no 2 messages through third parties, no hey 3 would you tell so and so for me, no having 4 a friend, acquaintance or stranger approach 5 any of these victims with a message of any 6 sort from you, is that clear? + +THE DEFENDANT: Yes, Me + +8 THE COURT: And then it states, 9 unless approved by the victim, the 10 therapist and the sentencing court. Okay. + +11 THE DEFENDANT: I understand. + +12 THE COURT: And the sentencing court. 13 So, if there is a desire which, I would 14 think would be a bit strange to have 15 contact with any of the victims the court 16 must approve it. + +17 MS. BELOHLAVEK: Correct. + +18 THE COURT: If the victim was under 19 the age of 18, which was the case, you 20 shall not until you have successfully 21 attended and completed the sex offender 22 program. So, is this sex offender program 23 becoming a condition of probation? + +24 MS. BELOHLAVEK: That is not. I 25 don't believe I circled that one. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744364/EFTA02744364.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744364/EFTA02744364.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5fd93c069310f693ad23f17b011a1df82ca78db1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744364/EFTA02744364.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,234 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744364.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 2823, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.88, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A \nto \nPlaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's \nMotion for No-Contact Order", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 167.008, + 316.71000000000004 + ], + [ + 451.65631103515625, + 316.71000000000004 + ], + [ + 451.65631103515625, + 393.5093688964844 + ], + [ + 167.008, + 393.5093688964844 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE \nFIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT \nIN AND FOR \nPALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA \nCRIMINAL DIVISION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.40493774414062, + 57.50999999999999 + ], + [ + 495.25372314453125, + 57.50999999999999 + ], + [ + 495.25372314453125, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 192.40493774414062, + 110.16000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u2022 PLEA CONFERENCE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 270.62738037109375, + 286.74 + ], + [ + 411.09869384765625, + 286.74 + ], + [ + 411.09869384765625, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 270.62738037109375, + 298.08 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 222 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744364" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744368/EFTA02744368.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744368/EFTA02744368.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..015c77e1f979d73ecf845164956812fb51c51943 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744368/EFTA02744368.md @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +## EXHIBIT B + +to + +Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's Motion for No-Contact Order + +## Podhurst Orseck TRIAL & APPELLATE LAWYERS + +Aaron S. Podhurst Robertnsefsberg Joel DM. Steven Victor ar Jr. Katherine W. Ezell Stephen a Ricardo Cld Ramon A. Raeco Alexander T. Rundlet John Gravantc, nl Carolina Maharbiz + +April 17, 2009 + +## VIA FACSIMILE + +David Spicer, Esq. 11000 Prosperity Farms Road Suite 104 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +Robert Critton, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Gentlemen: + +Robert Orseck (19341978) + +Walter H. Beckham, Jr. Karen Podhurst Dan Of Counsel + +During our recent meeting with Mr. Black, we were told that it is your client's position that the no-contact order agreed to during the state plea colloquy does not apply to any of our clients except for those victims who were part of Mr. Epstein's state plea. Our understanding is that AUSA Villafana and Messrs. Thin and Goldberger entered averbal agreement at the time that the list of victims was provided to those defense counsel that Mr. Epstein, including his agents, would have no direct or indirect contact with the victims named on this list. In addiditon, under applicable Florida Bar Rules governing contact by attomeys and their agents with persons represented by counsel, any contact with any of our clients or their family members by Mr. Epstein, his counsel and/or his agents must strictly be through us. Mr. Lefkowitz had previously reassured us that Mr. Epstein would not contact any of our clients as long as I am "representing them in connection with settlement discussions." Due to our differences regarding the retroactivity issue and the "per plaintiff" v. per incident/count issue, we have apparently reached adead end regarding settlement + +We are concerned that Mr. Epstein could misconstrue our impasse in conjunction with Mr. Lefkowitz' e-mail to mean that now that we are no longer "representing them in connection with settlement discussions," he may contact them. Please be assured that it is our position that regardless of whether we are representing our clients during settlement discussions and/or trial preparation, we, and the rules of professional conduct, prohibit contact. + +In order to be crystal clear as to whom we is pIwent, we have attached a list of our present clients. We expect each member of Mr. Epstein's defense team to abide by the applicable rules of professional conduct. We request written confirmation from Mr. Epstein that neither he nor his agents will contact any of the victims represented by us. + +If this correspondence is in any way unclear, please contact us. + +Sincerely, + +Robert C. Joseasbag + +cc: Roy Black, Esq. w/ enclosures Jay Lefkowitz, Esq. w/ enclosures + +## List of Clients Represented by Podhurst\_Orserit P.A. as of April 17, 2009' + +![](_page_3_Picture_2.jpeg) + +I We will supplement this list as necessary. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744368/EFTA02744368.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744368/EFTA02744368.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..840c8b937b63e79f656806fc1eceaabe6047434e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744368/EFTA02744368.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,279 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744368.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3074, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.88, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_3_Picture_2.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT B", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 268.318, + 318.33 + ], + [ + 353.80670166015625, + 318.33 + ], + [ + 353.80670166015625, + 337.6393737792969 + ], + [ + 268.318, + 337.6393737792969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Podhurst Orseck \nTRIAL & APPELLATE LAWYERS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 194.83641052246094, + 68.03999999999999 + ], + [ + 428.4813232421875, + 68.03999999999999 + ], + [ + 428.4813232421875, + 108.53999999999999 + ], + [ + 194.83641052246094, + 108.53999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VIA FACSIMILE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.02, + 282.68999999999994 + ], + [ + 354.1829833984375, + 282.68999999999994 + ], + [ + 354.1829833984375, + 294.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 264.02, + 294.84000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "List of Clients Represented by Podhurst_Orserit P.A. \nas of April 17, 2009'", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 180.516, + 123.12 + ], + [ + 442.54400634765625, + 123.12 + ], + [ + 442.54400634765625, + 154.10302734375 + ], + [ + 180.516, + 154.10302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 402 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744368" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744368/_page_3_Picture_2.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744368/_page_3_Picture_2.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4711309a478470360060ad86f5de418490a5be4c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744368/_page_3_Picture_2.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0b55a9485d7982abf62f3cb0101aea02dbb8cfaf97d8aac1b52e834cb21e066d +size 9610 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744372/EFTA02744372.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744372/EFTA02744372.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0a84ee77c6bde0bd8aaa098222644f4b7eb8acd5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744372/EFTA02744372.md @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +## EXHIBIT C to Plaintiffs Jane Doc 101 and Jane Doe 102's Motion For No-Contact Order + +## ROBERT C. JOSEFSBERG + +Fnmn: Sent: To: Subject: Importance: Attachments: No Contact Letter of April 17.pdf ROBERT C. JOSEFSBERG Monday, May 18, 2009 4:46 PM ircrit©bc1cJaw.com% lagesg@bellsouth.net Epstein No Contact Letter High + +Gentlemen: + +On April 17, 2009 we sent your team the attached No Contact Letter. To date, we have not heard back from you or any other members of Mr. Epstein's defense team. If we don't hear back from you by Wednesday, May 20, 2009, we will seek relief in court. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. + +Robert C. Josefsberg \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744372/EFTA02744372.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744372/EFTA02744372.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..694cdf87e3848ae490881a9b00dda5e4d575cd9f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744372/EFTA02744372.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744372.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 668, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.51, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT C \nto \nPlaintiffs Jane Doc 101 and Jane Doe 102's \nMotion For No-Contact Order", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 167.008, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 450.589111328125, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 450.589111328125, + 396.8893737792969 + ], + [ + 167.008, + 396.8893737792969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ROBERT C. JOSEFSBERG", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 77.36399999999999, + 93.96000000000001 + ], + [ + 225.75433349609375, + 93.96000000000001 + ], + [ + 225.75433349609375, + 108.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 77.36399999999999, + 108.43353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744372" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744374/EFTA02744374.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744374/EFTA02744374.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..43197fbbf56cd7f37810853b7a761b21143db1d3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744374/EFTA02744374.md @@ -0,0 +1,76 @@ +## EXHIBIT D + +to + +Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's Motion for No-Contact Order + +![](_page_1_Picture_165.jpeg) + +**BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER +& COLEMAN LLP** + +A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP + +J. MICHAEL BURMAN, P.A.1 +GREGORY W. COLEMAN, P.A. +ROBBICT D. CRITTON, JR., P.A.1 +BERNARD LEBEDEKER +MARK T. LUTTIER, P.A. +JEFFREY C. PEPIN +MICHAEL J. PIKE +HEATHER McNAMARA RUDA + +1 FLORIDA BOARD CRITICIZED +CIVIL TRIAL LAWYER + +May 18, 2009 + +ADELQUI J. BENAVENTE +PARALEGAL / INVESTIGATOR + +BARBARA M. McKENNA +ASHLEB STOKEN-BARING +BETTY STOKES +PARALEGALS + +RITA H. BUDNYK +OF COUNSEL + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Robert Josefsberg, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 + +Re: [REDACTED] + +Dear Kathy and Bob: + +[REDACTED] + +Additionally, Bob, you wrote a letter on April 17, 2009 stating your position regarding "No Contact" with any of your firm's clients based on your interpretation of the Non-Prosecution Agreement. I do not concede that your position is correct nor that the Non-Prosecution Agreement prevents some forms of contact with your clients. + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +515 N. FLAGLER DRIVE / SUITE 400 / WEST PALM BRACH, FLORIDA 33401 +TELEPHONE (561) 842-2820 FAX (561) 844-6929 +mail@bclclaw.com + +May 18, 2009 +Page 2 + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +![]()![]()RDC/clz + +cc: Jack Goldberger, Esq. + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744374/EFTA02744374.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744374/EFTA02744374.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1653e81e7dd9258a74b64100ee67ceb279ae42e6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744374/EFTA02744374.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,187 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744374.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 1426, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.17, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_1_Picture_165.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT D", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 267.704, + 317.52 + ], + [ + 353.939453125, + 317.52 + ], + [ + 353.939453125, + 337.6393737792969 + ], + [ + 267.704, + 337.6393737792969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN LLP", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 214.89999999999995, + 136.89000000000001 + ], + [ + 413.83599999999996, + 136.89000000000001 + ], + [ + 413.83599999999996, + 169.29 + ], + [ + 214.89999999999995, + 169.29 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 96 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 38 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744374" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744374/_page_1_Picture_165.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744374/_page_1_Picture_165.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3c18b8a8ad79be1cfe22a7e327857dbdede1b362 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744374/_page_1_Picture_165.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:50797d3f8b51db5afe4078d109b40bf37268230aa935360e3c68f80d028107fb +size 6747 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744377/EFTA02744377.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744377/EFTA02744377.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..74ae302a22ea4bf3df38ecd3d13fff1f69d989a4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744377/EFTA02744377.md @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@ +## EXHIBIT E to Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's Motion for No-Contact Order + +![](_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg) + +I. MICHAEL BURMAN, PA.' GREGORY W. COLEMAN, PA. ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., PA., BERNARD LEBEDEKER MARX T. LITITIER. PA. JEFFREY C. PEPIN MICHAEL J. PIKE HEATHER McNAMARA RUDA + +PLOIUDA ROARD (=MED OVILTIUAL LAWYER + +## BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN LLP + +A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP + +## Sent by E-Mail and U.S. Mail + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 + +Dear Bob: + +May 21, 2009 + +ADELQUI J. BENAVEINTE PARALBGAL/INVESIIOAIDIt + +BARBARA M. Me..KENNA ASHLJE STOKEN-BARING BETTY STOKES MRALOGALS + +RITA H. BUDNYK OP COUNSEL + +As I advised you yesterday, I am responding to your April 17, 2009 letter. As I stated in my e-mail, I think your request is unnecessary. Despite what Roy may have said to you, my client has had no contact with any of your clients. To my knowledge, the only one who has "breached" any agreement regarding contact is your own client, S who, as I advised you in a letter last week, contacted Jack Goldberger's office looking for her settlement check. Mr. Goldberger, of course, did not speak with her. + +Lawyers who represent Mr. Epstein are well familiar with the Rules of Professional Conduct, including Rule 4-4.2. At the same time, I am certain you are equally familiar with that Rule. The Comment provides "Parties to a matter may communicate directly with each other...". + +To my knowledge, neither Mr. Epstein nor any attomey or agent of those attorneys who represent Mr. Epstein, have contacted or attempted to contact your clients. Given that it is not Mr. Epstein's intention to have direct contact with your clients, it is unnecessary to respond point by point to statements attributed to my cocounsel. + +May 21, 2009 + +Page 2 + +Rather than to be concerned about what my client is doing, I would ask that you advise your clients not to contact Mr. Epstein's lawyers directly. Neither I nor the attorneys who represent Mr. Epstein want to be put in a position where we are set up by any of your clients. + +RDC/msc + +cc: Roy Black, Esq. Jay Lefkowitz, Esq. J. Michael Burman, Esq. Jack Goldberger, Esq. + +Josefsberg.01 -Lax \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744377/EFTA02744377.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744377/EFTA02744377.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c55744462cdc63203cfcf6808182736864ad4507 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744377/EFTA02744377.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,202 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744377.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2246, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.01, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT E \nto \nPlaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's \nMotion for No-Contact Order", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 167.008, + 316.71000000000004 + ], + [ + 450.9591369628906, + 316.71000000000004 + ], + [ + 450.9591369628906, + 393.5093688964844 + ], + [ + 167.008, + 393.5093688964844 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER \n& COLEMAN LLP", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.462, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 421.4896545410156, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 421.4896545410156, + 138.53033447265625 + ], + [ + 204.462, + 138.53033447265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Sent by E-Mail and U.S. Mail", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.41599999999998, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 245.0030517578125, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 245.0030517578125, + 319.1835632324219 + ], + [ + 88.41599999999998, + 319.1835632324219 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 104 + ], + [ + "Line", + 51 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744377" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744377/_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744377/_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..22c36126149543cc7f21f08b9443de6d06486234 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744377/_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:26b728574a61301815e4cc87c93eaa326e7751c3034750e704140ed4a70628ae +size 7630 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744380/EFTA02744380.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744380/EFTA02744380.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3207d9a63f409cc3d9bd3f3a1c87ff0f3fab9858 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744380/EFTA02744380.md @@ -0,0 +1,127 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119- + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: OR-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-8081I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. If CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80391-MARREJOHNSON + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion for No-Contact Order (DE #\_J, filed May 22, 2009. Plaintiffs represent that Defendant has not agreed to the relief + +requested in this motion. Defendant was given reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard sufficient to protect Defendant's right to due process before this order was issued. The Court has carefully considered the motion and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +It is ORDERED AND ADJUGED that Plaintiffs' Motion for No-Contact Order (DE # \_) is GRANTED. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, is prohibited from communicating with Plaintiffs Jane Doc No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102, either personally or through investigators or agents, by telephone, writing or any other means, except that Defendant may communicate with Plaintiffs only through Plaintiffs' attorneys of record for the duration of the order. This order applies immediately to Defendant and shall remain in full force and effect until modified or terminated by this Court after notice and hearing. + +DONE AND ORDERED in -at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this f 2009. + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Court Judge + +Copies to: All counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744380/EFTA02744380.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744380/EFTA02744380.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b50e02d5c40bbd013a257c6aa8445256e4757bd6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744380/EFTA02744380.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744380.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 2276, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.33, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 213.67199999999997, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 402.42523193359375, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 402.42523193359375, + 113.103515625 + ], + [ + 213.67199999999997, + 113.103515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 286.738, + 639.9000000000001 + ], + [ + 332.7264404296875, + 639.9000000000001 + ], + [ + 332.7264404296875, + 653.8535461425781 + ], + [ + 286.738, + 653.8535461425781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744380" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744384/EFTA02744384.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744384/EFTA02744384.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4f8f4df4c38fc7b081ade9c5904e68102b54bd7f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744384/EFTA02744384.md @@ -0,0 +1,297 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232- + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRAi + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRAJ + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811- + +Plaintiffs + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO. 101 and JANE DOE NO. 102'S MOTION FOR NO-CONTACT ORDER + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 (together, the "Plaintiffs") hereby move this Court for a No-Contact Order directed to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and, as grounds, state as follows: + +1. After investigations by the Palm Beach Police Department, the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (the "USAO"), Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, in June 2008, entered pleas of "guilty" in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach Count, Florida, to various Florida state crimes involving the solicitation of minors for prostitution and the procurement of minors for the purposes of prostitution. + +2. During the course of Defendant's state plea conference of June 30, 2008, Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillo ordered Defendant "not to have any contact, direct or indirect" with any victims. (Transcript of the Plea Conference at 20, relevant pages attached hereto as Exhibit A). Judge Dale Pucillo went on to clarify that, by "indirect," she meant that Defendant should not send any text messages, c-mails, Facebook contact, My Space contact, telephone calls, voicemails, or messages through third parties to "any of these victims." Id. Judge Dale Pucillo expressly stated that the no-contact order should apply to "all of the victims." Id. + +3. In addition, after Defendant entered into a non-prosecution agreement with the USAO, Assistant United States Attorney Villafaiia provided Defendant's attorneys with a list of individuals whom the USAO had identified as victims of child sex exploitation as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2255 (the "USA() List"). The USAO was prepared to indict Defendant based upon Defendant's sexual exploitation of these minor victims. It was the intent of the USAO to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Defendant been convicted at trial. Thus, upon information and belief, AUSA Villafafia and Mr. Michael Tein, former counsel for Defendant, along with Mr. Jack Goldberger, who still represents Defendant, entered into a verbal agreement at the time AUSA Villafafia provided the USAO List to them, whereby neither Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, nor his agents would have any direct or indirect contact with the victims named on the USAO List. + +4. Nevertheless, during a March 25th meeting with Defendant's counsel, Defendant's counsel told Plaintiffs' counsel that it is Defendant's position that the no-contact order agreed to during the state plea conference does not apply to anyone other than those three victims who were officially part of Defendant's state plea. + +5. Upon Plaintiffs' counsel seeking reassurance from Defendant's counsel that neither Defendant nor his agents would contact victims on the USAO List, Defendant's counsel responded that Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, would not contact any of undersigned counsel's clients as long as Mr. Josefsberg was representing them in connection with settlement discussions. + +6. As a result, on April 17, 2009, Plaintiffs' counsel sent defense counsel a letter requesting that Defendant provide written confirmation that neither he nor his agents will directly or indirectly contact any of the victims represented by Plaintiffs' counsel (the "No-Contact Letter") (April 17, 2009 Letter attached hereto as Exhibit B). On May 18, 2009, Plaintiffs' counsel again requested this written confirmation (E-mail correspondence attached hereto as Exhibit C). Despite Plaintiffs' reasonable requests, Defendant's counsel first responded by stating that the Non-Prosecution Agreement does not prevent some form of contact with undersigned counsel's clients. (Redacted May 18, 2009 Letter from Mr. Robert Critton is attached hereto as Exhibit D). Defendant's counsel then sent a letter on May 21, 2009 citing the Comment to Rule 4-4.2 of the Rules of Professional Conduct that states that "[p]arties to a matter may communicate directly with each other." (Redacted May 21, 2009 Letter from Mr. Critton is attached hereto as Exhibit E). Thus, despite Mr. Critton's statement that it is not Defendant's intention to have direct contact with undersigned counsel's clients, Defendant obviously believes he can change his intentions if he so chooses. + +7. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, is a designated sexual offender who sexually abused Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 when the victims were minors. As a result of his abuse, Plaintiffs have in the past suffered, now suffer, and will in the future continue to suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological and/or psychiatric trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, confusion, embarrassment, loss of educational opportunities, loss of selfesteem, loss of dignity, and invasion of their privacy. Any further direct or indirect contact with Defendant and/or his agents would cause a great deal of additional damages. Moreover, any desire or need on the part of Defendant to contact these victims—implied by virtue of his refusal to unambiguously confirm that he will not contact them—is disturbing and suspect, at best. At a minimum, Defendant's refusal to avoid contact works as a ploy to attempt to keep Plaintiffs in "victim mode." + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court to enter an order prohibiting Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and any of his agents from any direct or indirect contact with Plaintiffs, except through Plaintiffs' attorney of record through the duration of this Court's order. + +## Memorandum In Support + +As previously stated, during the course of Defendant's state plea conference of June 30, 2008, Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillo ordered Defendant "not to have any contact, direct or indirect" with any of Defendant's victims. However, for what could only be dubious purposes, Defendant seeks to take advantage of the fact that only three of Defendant's numerous victims were officially a part of the State of Florida's criminal prosecution of Defendant and that he entered into a non-prosecution agreement with the USAO. Thus, despite the no-contact order being considered a standard condition of probation or community control for sex offenders such as Defendant, and despite his counsel having agreed to a no-contact order with AUSA Villafaiia for all of Defendant's victims on the USAO List, Defendant is now taking the position that neither Judge Dale Pucillo's no-contact order nor his agreement with the USAO via his counsel restricts him from contacting any of the victims except for the three victims directly involved in the state plea. Because of the non-prosecution agreement, there is no federal conviction against Defendant with respect to Plaintiffs and other victims on the USAO List who are similarly situated and, thus, no accompanying sentencing court to issue a no-contact order. However, each of the victims on the USAO List is supposed to be in the same position as if Defendant had been convicted in federal court. In crimes involving victims, at the time of sentencing, a sentencing judge generally has wide discretion to order that the defendant have no contact with the victim or victims of the crime or crimes for which the defendant is being sentenced. Where the defendant is given a sentence of probation or community control, the nocontact order can be made a condition of the defendant's supervision. The case for judicial intervention is heightened in cases such as this one, where Defendant has sexually exploited numerous minors. Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102, like all of the other young women on the USAO List, were sexually abused by Defendant; any further direct contact with Defendant and/or his agents would cause a great deal of additional damages. Previous contact by Defendant and his agents with other victims has had a terrible effect on the young women's ability to heal the scars of Defendant's abuse. Additionally, Defendant's contacting his victims also has the predictable effect of undermining the victims' willingness to proceed with their civil actions against Defendant. Defendant's demonstrated use of his wealth, power, and influence has the immediate effect of intimidating young women who have already been traumatized by his sexual exploitation. Indeed, any desire or need on the part of Defendant to contact his victims, implied by virtue of his refusal to confirm that he will not contact them directly or indirectly, is disturbing and suspect, at best. Plaintiffs thus ask this Court to provide the protection and peace of mind that each of them needs. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully move this Court to enter an order granting Plaintiffs' Motion for No-Contact Order prohibiting Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, from any contact or communication with Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102, either directly or indirectly, except through Plaintiffs' attorney of record for the duration of the order. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.I.A.3 + +On May 18, 2009, undersigned counsel conferred with counsel for Defendant in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this motion, and Defendant's counsel advised that Defendant opposes this motion. + +Date: May 22, 2009 + +/s/Pobert C. Josefsberg + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856 Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771 Podhurst Orseck, P.A. City National Bank Building 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, Florida 33130 (305) 358-2800 (305) 358-2382 (fax) riosefsberzOnodhurstcom kezellOnodhuist.com + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +# Certificate of Service + +I hereby certify that, on May 22, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other + +authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Robert Josejsberg + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856 + +Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771 + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +City National Bank Building + +25 West Flaglcr Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, Florida 33130 + +(305) 358-2800 + +(305) 358-2382 (fax) + +rjosefsbergkpodhurst.com + +kezeMpodhurst.com + +Attorneys jor Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 + +and Jane Doe No. 102 + +### SERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820 Fax: (561) 515-3148 rerijabcklaw.corn mpikeAbcklaw.com Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300 Fax: (561) 835-8691 iattesaAbellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360 Fax: (561) 828-0983 eef@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9456 jsxasearcvlaw.com inhasearcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff + +Adam Horowitz, Esq. + +Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +Phone: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +ahorowitzasexabuseattomev.com + +smermelsteinasexabuseattomey.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,08-80232, 08-80380, 08- + +80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. + +Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. + +Leopold Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +Phone: (561) 515-1400 + +Fax: (561) 515-1401 + +skuvinOleopoldkuvin.com + +tleovoldgeopoldlmvin.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 1016 Ave North, Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Phone: (561) 582-7600 + +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +lawyerwillitsWaol.com + +reelrhw(4hotmail.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +Brad M, Esq. + +Law Office of Brad & Associates, LLC + +2028 Street, Suite 202 + +Hollywood, FL 33020 + +Phone: (954) 4148033 + +Fax: (954) 924-1530 + +bedwards0Irra-law.com + +beQbradedwardslaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Isidro Manuel =, Esq. + +Elkins & Boehringer + +224 Datum Avenue, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 832-8033 + +Fax: (561) 832-7137 + +isidrogarciaQbellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744384/EFTA02744384.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744384/EFTA02744384.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4597bd4ab75c78d8edf8b98123ed6257a307809f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744384/EFTA02744384.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,591 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744384.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 12, + "chars": 14048, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.89, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 210.602, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 398.29522705078125, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 398.29522705078125, + 114.9735107421875 + ], + [ + 210.602, + 114.9735107421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO. 101 and JANE DOE NO. 102'S \nMOTION FOR NO-CONTACT ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 154.72799999999998, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 461.0287170410156, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 461.0287170410156, + 114.10406494140625 + ], + [ + 154.72799999999998, + 114.10406494140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Memorandum In Support", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 242.53, + 556.47 + ], + [ + 372.48614501953125, + 556.47 + ], + [ + 372.48614501953125, + 570.9735412597656 + ], + [ + 242.53, + 570.9735412597656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.I.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 159.64, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 489.9250793457031, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 489.9250793457031, + 311.1035461425781 + ], + [ + 159.64, + 311.1035461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 254.80999999999997, + 635.04 + ], + [ + 361.40936279296875, + 635.04 + ], + [ + 361.40936279296875, + 649.7335510253906 + ], + [ + 254.80999999999997, + 649.7335510253906 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 267.09, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 351.27130126953125, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 351.27130126953125, + 102.603515625 + ], + [ + 267.09, + 102.603515625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 90 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 39 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744384" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744396/EFTA02744396.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744396/EFTA02744396.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d7c75ace011a22d30d569f3a98e3dadeedb3405a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744396/EFTA02744396.md @@ -0,0 +1,342 @@ +DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE + +Page 3 of 8 + +PROPERTY RECEIPT + +DETECTIVE BUREAU + +Page Form #52 + +| PROPERTY | FOUND | DECEASED (Probated) | PERSONAL | CONFISCATED | DESTROY | +|----------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|----------------------------------| +| EVIDENCE | TRIAL | LABORATORY | STOLEN/RECOVERED | OTHER | | + +| INCIDENT/CITATION NUMBER
05-368 | DATE/TIME RECOVERED
10-20-2005 | PROPERTY NUMBER (Leave Blank)
05-1024 | BIN NUMBER (Leave Blank) | +|-------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|--------------------------| +|-------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|--------------------------| + +| ADDRESS WHERE PROPERTY IMPOUNDED
258 FL-Bullo | | | | +|---------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--| +|---------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--| + +| DISCOVERED BY / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +|------------------------|---------|--------|------|-----|--------------| +|------------------------|---------|--------|------|-----|--------------| + +| OWNER / VICTIM'S NAME / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +|--------------------------------|---------|--------|------|-----|--------------| +|--------------------------------|---------|--------|------|-----|--------------| + +| SUSPECT'S NAME / D.O.B.
Eostein Seff | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE | +|------------------------------------------------|---------|--------|------|-----|-------| +|------------------------------------------------|---------|--------|------|-----|-------| + +| ADDT IN SUSPECT / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE | +|--------------------------|---------|--------|------|-----|-------| +|--------------------------|---------|--------|------|-----|-------| + +| SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS | FOUND PROPERTY | CLAIM | +|----------------------|----------------|-----------| +| | DO DAYS | NOT CLAIM | + +![](_page_0_Picture_25.jpeg) + +ITEM # QUANTITY VALUE DESCRIPTION + +| 1 | 1 | | Phone message book (kitchen) | +|----|----|--|-----------------------------------------------------| +| 2 | 2 | | Phone message book (office off kitchen) | +| 3 | 3 | | File folder (messages) w/ 2 mire files (Pure Paper) | +| 4 | 1 | | Shreddered Paper marked message | +| 15 | 11 | | orange kit folder marked message | +| | | | x times 2-5 from office off kitchen | +| 16 | | | Big message table off from c/os to off | +| 7 | | | Brown message table for off | +| 8 | 1 | | Black framed photo of nude girl | +| 9 | 99 | | Pictures in frame from off | +| 10 | | | from yellow/blue room off kitchen to fork | +| 10 | 8 | | Photos from office off Parl area | +| 11 | 2 | | Photos from take/up and left to Heading Room off | +| 12 | 2 | | Photos in table on right to Parl area | + +TOTAL PACKAGE WEIGHT + +I hereby acknowledge that the above list represents all property taken from me and that this receipt. + +I hereby acknowledge that the above list represents all property impounded by me in the official performance of my duty as a police officer. + +| SIGNATURE | DATE | SIGNATURE | ID# | UNIT | +|-----------|------|-------------|-------|------| +| | | [Signature] | 79 15 | DZ | + +RECEIVED BY REASON DATE/TIME RECEIVED + +| I, Joseph Becaray, the officer by whom this warrant was executed, do swear that the above inventory contains a true and detailed account of all the property taken by me, under the authority of this warrant. Sworn to and subscribed before me this 21 day of October 2005. | [Signature] | [Signature] | Jim A. Bunn | +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------|-------------| +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------|-------------| + +![](_page_0_Picture_34.jpeg) + +Document 12-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2008 Page 4 of 8 + +**PLAN BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT** + +**PROPERTY RECEIPT +SEARCH WARRANT RETURN** + +**DETECTIVE BUREAU** + +Per Po Form #22 + +| PROPERTY | FOUND | DECEASED (Prebeloded) | PERSONAL | CONFISCATED | DESTROY | +|----------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|----------------------------------| +| EVIDENCE | TRIAL | LABORATORY | STOLEN/RECOVERED | OTHER | | +| INCIDENT/CITATION NUMBER | DATE/TIME RECOVERED | PROPERTY NUMBER (Leave Blank) | BIN NUMBER (Leave Blank) | | | +| 05-368 | 10-20-05 | 05-1024 | | | | + +ADDRESS WHERE PROPERTY IMPOUNDED +358 EL-Ballo + +| DISCOVERED BY / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +|----------------------------------|----------------------------------|--------|------|-----|--------------| +| OWNER / VICTIM'S NAME / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| SUSPECT'S NAME / D.O.B. 07-20-13 | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| ADDITIONAL SUSPECT / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS | FOUND PROPERTY 60 DAYS NOT CLAIM | | | | | + +| ITEM# | QUANTITY | VALUE | DESCRIPTION | +|----------------------|----------|---------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------| +| 13 | 2 | ✓ | VHS trapes from (e data on fed By roof) | +| 14 | 2 | * | CDS cacked High Birchdam ↑ Creditors page (3) | +| 15 | 3 | | Photos framed from Catharina | +| 16 | 1 | ✓ | message book 1st floor S/W corner (top data) | +| 17 | 1 | ✓ | message book (from inside e) | +| 18 | 3 | | CDS from desk | +| 19 | 1 | * | DV from desk (from * 1st floor 2) | +| 20 | | unframed Photos from desk | from 1st floor S/W | +| 21 | 2 | | framed Photos from desk | +| 22 | 2 | ✓ | framed Photos from table in S/W corner (e data) | +| 23 | 3 | | Soap on Rope (NE Bedroom) (wh to room) | +| 24 | 2 | | Tulla Torpedo in Brown box | +| 25 | 2 | | Soap on Rope (middle Bedroom) (not framed) | +| | 1 | | large framed Picture (from foyet into Master Bedroom) | +| TOTAL PACKAGE WEIGHT | | | Bedroom | + +I hereby acknowledge that the above let represents all property taken from me and that I have received a copy of this receipt. I hereby acknowledge that the above let represents all property impounded by me in the official performance of my duty as a police officer. + +SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE ID# UNIT NO. + +| RECEIVED BY | REASON | DATE/TIME RECEIVED | +|-------------|--------|--------------------| +| | | | +| | | | +| | | | +| | | | +| | | | + +Document 12-2 + +Entered on FLSD Docket 08/24/2008 + +Page 5 of 8 + +**POLICE DEPARTMENT** + +3 of 6 + +**PROPERTY RECEIPT +SEARCH WARRANT RETURN** + +DETECTIVE BUREAU + +| PROPERTY | | FOUND | DECEASED (Probated) | PERSONAL | CONFISCATED | DESTROY | +|--------------------------|---------------------|-------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|----------------------------------| +| EVIDENCE | | TRIAL | LABORATORY | STOLEN/RECOVERED | OTHER | (ab) | +| INCIDENT/CITATION NUMBER | DATE/TIME RECOVERED | PROPERTY NUMBER (Leave Blank) | BIN NUMBER (Leave Blank) | | | | +| 05-368 | 10-20-05 | 05-1024 | | | | | + +ADDRESS WHERE PROPERTY IMPOUNDED +358 El Banllo + +| DISCOVERED BY D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +|----------------------------------|---------------|--------|----------------|-----|--------------| +| OWNER / VICTIM'S NAME / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| SUSPECT'S NAME / D.O.B. 05-20-05 | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| Eastern Joeff | 358 El Banllo | | | | | +| ADDITIONAL SUSPECT / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| | | | | | | +| SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS | | | FOUND PROPERTY | | | +| | | | 80 DAYS | | | +| | | | NOT CLAIM | | | + +| ITEM # | QUANTITY | VALUE | DESCRIPTION | +|----------------------|----------|-------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| (2) 23 | 1 | NCV | School TRANSCRIPT, ALEXANDER HALL, MASTER BROTHER DE SK | +| (2) 25 | 1 | NCV | BOTTLE OF TOY JAILLY, MASTER BROTHER CARDINAL AND MASTER BROTHER | +| (2) 29 | 3 | NCV | UNIDEOTAPES 1/2", SEX IN CITY, EASTERN JANINE, HONG KONG SHIANG FOUR, MASTER BROTHER | +| (2) 30 | 6 | NCV | FRAMED PHOTO FROM NEWS BABY SM - MASTER BROTHER | +| (3) 31 | 1 | NCV | GREEN MASSACRE TABLE, DENT'S BABY SM - MASTER BROTHER → DNA test 3 (COP) | +| (3) 32 | 1 | NCV | THREFTY RENTAL AGREEMENT FROM CHEVROLET SUPERMARK (COPIED) | +| (3) 33 | 1 | NCV | NOTE FROM JOHN AND FROM CHEVROLET SUPERMARK | +| (3) 34 | 11 | CDS | from office of K. Edward | +| (3) 35 | 6 | | ZIP CDS from Book case RETURN | +| (3) 36 | 2 | | 8 MM + deo top ps from Book case RETURN | +| (3) 37 | 4 | | Compact Flash cards from Book case RETURN | +| (3) 38 | 1 | | Flash card from Camera on back case → RETURN TO OWNER | +| (3) 39 | 3 | | ZIP CDS from Book case RETURN | +| (3) 40 | 36 | | CDS from Book case (it was 35-40 from Buest house) RETURN | +| TOTAL PACKAGE WEIGHT | | | | + +I hereby acknowledge that the above list represents all property taken from me and that I have received a copy of this receipt. + +I hereby acknowledge that the above list represents all property impounded by me in the official performance of my duty as a police officer. + +![]()**FLM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT** + +**PROPERTY RECEIPT** + +**DETECTIVE BUREAU** + +| PROPERTY | | FOUND | DECEASED (Probated) | PERSONAL | CONFISCATED | DESTROY | +|----------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|----------------------------------| +| EVIDENCE | | TRIAL | LABORATORY | STOLEN/RECOVERED | OTHER | lab | +| INCIDENT/CITATION NUMBER
05-368 | DATE/TIME RECOVERED
10-20-05 | PROPERTY NUMBER (Leave Blank)
05-1024 | BIN NUMBER (Leave Blank) | | | | + +ADDRESS WHERE PROPERTY IMPOUNDED +**258 El Bullo** + +| DISCOVERED BY / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +|-------------------------------------------------|---------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------|-----|--------------| +| OWNER'S NAME / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| SUSPECT'S NAME / D.O.B.
Eostein, Jeff | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| ADDRING SUSPECT / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS | | FOUND PROPERTY CLAIM
60 DAYS NOT CLAIM | | | | + +| ITEM # | QUANTITY | VALUE | DESCRIPTION | +|--------|----------|-------|----------------------------------------------| +| 41 | 1 | | Floppy disks from desk middle Shelf Return | +| 42 | 1 | | 2 in drive disk front bust room Return | +| 43 | 1 | | Power Cord for CPU from bust room | +| 44 | 1 | | CPU from bust Bedroom | +| 45 | 10 | | 8 mm video Tapes in bust Bedroom Return | +| 46 | 1 | | Maxell CD-R in bust bedroom Return (correct) | +| 47 | BAIL | | Disks in clear Box Return | +| 48 | 7 | | ZIA DISKS from bust room Return | +| 49 | 1 | | Items # 35-48 from bust Bedroom Return | +| 50 | 1 | | Missage book from bust house office Return | +| 51 | 2 | | nicsage book Return | +| 52 | 6 | | Compact flash cards from Return | +| 53 | 1 | | CD's return #49-54 Return office Return | + +TOTAL PACKAGE WEIGHT + +I hereby acknowledge that the above liet represents all property taken from me and that I have received a copy of this receipt. + +I hereby acknowledge that the above liet represents all property impounded by me in the official performance of my duty as a police officer. + +SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE ID# UNIT + +| RECEIVED BY | REASON | DATE/TIME RECEIVED | +|-------------|--------|--------------------| +| | | | +| | | | +| | | | +| | | | +| | | | + +Document 12-2 Entered on FLSD Date 08/21/2008 Page 7 of 8 +**PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT** +**PROPERTY RECEIPT** +**DETECTIVE BUREAU** + +PORD Form #52 + +| PROPERTY | | FOUND | DECEASED (Probable) | PERSONAL | CONFISCATED | DESTROY | +|----------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|----------------------------------| +| EVIDENCE | | TRIAL | LABORATORY | STOLEN/RECOVERED | OTHER | Cab | +| INCIDENT/CITATION NUMBER
05-368 | DATE/TIME RECOVERED
10-20-05 | PROPERTY NUMBER (Leave Blank)
05-1024 | | BIN NUMBER (Leave Blank) | | | + +ADDRESS WHERE PROPERTY IMPOUNDED +**358 EL Brillo Palm Beach** + +| DISCOVERED BY / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +|------------------------------------------------|---------|--------|----------------|-----|--------------| +| OWNER'S NAME / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| SUSPECT'S NAME / D.O.B.
Epstein Jeff | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| ADDITIONAL SUSPECT / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS | | | FOUND PROPERTY | | CLAIM | +| | | | 90 DAYS | | NOT CLAIM | + +| ITEM # | QUANTITY | VALUE | DESCRIPTION | +|-----------|----------|-------|----------------------------------------------------------| +| 54 | 1 | | Power cord to CPU #53 | +| 55 | 1 | | CPU from office off Kitchen (Hall & Robinson) | +| 56 | 1 | | Power cord to item #55 | +| 57 | 3 | | CD's Arm #55-57 from office off Kitchen (Kitchen Detent) | +| 58 | 1 | | Peach mappage table upstages (Board & Board) | +| | | | RETURN | +| | | | RETURN | +| | | | RETURN | +| | | | RETURN | +| | | | RETURN | +| | | | RETURN | + +![]()Document 12-2 + +Entered on FLSD Date 08/21/2008 + +Page 8 of 8 + +**PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT** + +MAE 6 of 6 + +**PROPERTY RECEIPT** + +*s/w Return* + +DETECTIVE BUREAU + +PRINT Form #82 + +| PROPERTY | FOUND | DECEASED (Probated) | PERSONAL | CONFISCATED | DESTROY | +|----------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|----------------------------------| +| EVIDENCE | TRIAL | LABORATORY | STOLEN/RECOVERED | OTHER | (ab) | +| INCIDENT/IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
05- | DATE/TIME RECOVERED
10 2005 14/0 | PROPERTY NUMBER (Last Blank)
05-1024 | BIN NUMBER (Last Blank) | | | + +ADDRESS WHERE PROPERTY IMPOUNDED +*358 FL Bullo* + +| DISCOVERED BY / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +|---------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|------|-----|--------------| +| OWNER'S NAME / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| SUSPECT'S NAME / D.O.B. / RETURN JEF | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| ADDITING SUSPECT / D.O.B. | ADDRESS | Street | City | Zip | PHONE NUMBER | +| SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS | FOUND PROPERTY 80 DAYS CLAIM NOT CLAIM | | | | | + +| ITEM # | QUANTITY | VALUE | DESCRIPTION | +|--------|----------|-------|-------------------------------| +| 9 | 1 | * | GREEN DATO FLAVOR with Return | +| | | | DALOD GIRL Return | +| | | | Return | +| | | | Return | +| | | | Return | +| | | | Return | +| | | | Return | +| | | | Return | +| | | | Return | +| | | | Return | +| | | | Return | +| | | | Return | +| | | | Return | +| | | | Return | +| | | | Return | + +**TOTAL PACKAGE WEIGHT** + +I hereby acknowledge that the above list represents all property taken from me and that I have received a copy of this receipt. + +DATE \_\_\_\_\_ SIGNATURE \_\_\_\_\_ ID# \_\_\_\_\_ UNIT \_\_\_\_\_ + +RECEIVED BY *AB 8338* REASON *6* DATE/TIME RECEIVED *10-20-05 1500 kg* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744396/EFTA02744396.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744396/EFTA02744396.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..398b5206027a5178123f1c86fa5c3c9f50d196c6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744396/EFTA02744396.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,582 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744396.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 27004, + "elapsed_seconds": 57.74, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_25.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_34.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "PROPERTY RECEIPT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.67000000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 362.25999999999993, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 362.25999999999993, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 248.67000000000002, + 85.05 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ITEM # QUANTITY VALUE DESCRIPTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 57.102, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 552.6, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 552.6, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 57.102, + 319.95000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TOTAL PACKAGE WEIGHT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 165.78, + 558.9 + ], + [ + 276.3, + 558.9 + ], + [ + 276.3, + 571.05 + ], + [ + 165.78, + 571.05 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "RECEIVED BY REASON DATE/TIME RECEIVED", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 49.12, + 635.85 + ], + [ + 552.6, + 635.85 + ], + [ + 552.6, + 652.0500000000001 + ], + [ + 49.12, + 652.0500000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAN BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 211.82999999999998, + 68.85000000000001 + ], + [ + 414.45000000000005, + 68.85000000000001 + ], + [ + 414.45000000000005, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 211.82999999999998, + 85.05 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROPERTY RECEIPT SEARCH WARRANT RETURN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.67000000000002, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 365.33, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 365.33, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 248.67000000000002, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "POLICE DEPARTMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 211.82999999999998, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 399.1, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 399.1, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 211.82999999999998, + 85.05 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROPERTY RECEIPT SEARCH WARRANT RETURN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.67000000000002, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 365.33, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 365.33, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 248.67000000000002, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "FLM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 208.76, + 60.75 + ], + [ + 405.23999999999995, + 60.75 + ], + [ + 405.23999999999995, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 208.76, + 81.0 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROPERTY RECEIPT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.60000000000002, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 362.25999999999993, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 362.25999999999993, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 245.60000000000002, + 93.15 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Document 12-2 Entered on FLSD Date 08/21/2008 Page 7 of 8 PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT PROPERTY RECEIPT DETECTIVE BUREAU", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 208.76, + 55.08000000000001 + ], + [ + 546.4599999999999, + 55.08000000000001 + ], + [ + 546.4599999999999, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 208.76, + 93.15 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 208.76, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 405.23999999999995, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 405.23999999999995, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 208.76, + 89.1 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROPERTY RECEIPT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.284, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 362.87399999999997, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 362.87399999999997, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 249.284, + 102.06 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TOTAL PACKAGE WEIGHT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 171.92000000000002, + 579.15 + ], + [ + 282.44, + 579.15 + ], + [ + 282.44, + 591.3 + ], + [ + 171.92000000000002, + 591.3 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "Form", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "Form", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Table", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Form", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "Form", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "Form", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Form", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744396" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744396/_page_0_Picture_25.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744396/_page_0_Picture_25.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8fc0a50dd70fb34a3d4aa7d1fcbbf5bac9d20167 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744396/_page_0_Picture_25.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:989af1732e2c6a3a8564af6b29148cf49c9896df20b9f4855b2f1210ef4fccfe +size 11204 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744396/_page_0_Picture_34.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744396/_page_0_Picture_34.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..86e7cb65165f2839d880f25f4a9bc4dc3071bb11 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744396/_page_0_Picture_34.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8cb960072acbfaece439089410d0b95a2e098264a45cc53fb5908888333da18e +size 9015 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744402/EFTA02744402.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744402/EFTA02744402.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a1da5bc97b2acde53e2c8e066c4194186e8de5f5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744402/EFTA02744402.md @@ -0,0 +1,78 @@ +## Podhurst Orseck + +## TRIAL & APPELLATE LAWYERS + +Aaron S. Podhurst Robert C, Joel D. Steven C. Marks VictorM. Jr . Katherine W. Hull Stephen F. Rosenthal Ricardo M. Martinez-CM Ramon A. Rasco Alexander T. Rundlet John Cravante, ILI Carolina Maharblz + +Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esq. Bunnan Critton Luttier & Coleman 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-2918 + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +May 15, 2009 + +Robert Orseck (1934-1978) + +Re: Preservation of Evidence Relevant to Actions for Civil Remedies Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 + +Gentlemen: + +Walter H. Beckham, Jr. Karen Podhurst Dem Of Counsel + +As you know, we represent a number of the young women on the list of names provided to Messrs. Goldberger and Tein by the U.S. Attorney's Office regarding the Jeffrey Epstein Non-Prosecution Agreement and Addendum. In order to bo crystal clear as to whom wo represent, we have attached a list of our present clients. By this letter, we want to ensure that discoverable information relating to each of their civil actions is being properly preserved, as is required under Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. You are required to take the neceqqaty steps to preserve all paper documents, tangible objects (including, but not limited to, film, videos, DVDs, photographs, whether in hard copy, negatives or digital images), and electronically stored information related to any threatened action by my clients, whether found inside or outside of the United States, including any information held by third parties. Although we may bring a motion %r an order preserving documents and other data from destruction or alteration, your client's obligation to preserve documents and other data discovery in This case arises independently from any order on such motion. + +As you know, the Non-Prosecution Agreement also requires your client "to maintain [his] evidence, specifically evidence requested by or directly related to the grand jury subpoenas that have been issued, and including certain computer equipment, inviolate until all of the terms of + +![](_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg) + +this agreement have been satisfied." We will seek information related to Mr. Epstein's sexual exploitation of our clients in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2421, 2422, 2423, 2251, 2252, and/or 2252A, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2255. Your client reasonably should have known of potential criminal prosecution and/or civil litigation since, at least, October 25, 2005. This duty to preserve evidence extends to evidence beyond that which was seized from Mr. Epstein's residence on October 25, 2005. It also extends to evidence that was seized on October 25, 2005 and later returned to him if it may be relevant and discoverable in any of these civil actions. + +Because of the nature of these violations, we consider electronically stored information to be a critical and irreplaceable source of discovery and/or evidence in this matter. You should anticipate that much of the information subject to disclosure or responsive to discovery in this cause is stored on your current *and former* computer systems and other media and devices (including handheld devices, personal digital assistants, voice-messaging systems, online repositories and cell phones). Electronically stored information should be afforded the broadest possible meaning and includes (*by way of example and not as an exclusive list*) potentially relevant information electronically, magnetically, optically or otherwise stored as: + +1. 1. Digital communication (*e.g.*, e-mail, voice mail, instant messaging); +2. 2. E-mail Server Stores (*e.g.*, Lotus Domino .NSF or Microsoft Exchange .EDB) +3. 3. Word-processed documents (*e.g.*, Word or WordPerfect files and drafts); +4. 4. Spreadsheets and tables (*e.g.*, Excel or Lotus 123 worksheets); +5. 5. Accounting Application Data (*e.g.*, QuickBooks, Money, Peachtree data); +6. 6. Image and Facsimile Files (*e.g.*, .PDF, .TIFF, .JPG, .GIF images); +7. 7. Sound Recordings (*e.g.*, .WAV and .MP3 files); +8. 8. Video and Animation (*e.g.*, .AVI and .MOV files); +9. 9. Databases (*e.g.*, Access, Oracle, SQL Server data, SAP); +10. 10. Contact and Relationship Management Data (*e.g.*, Outlook, ACTI); +11. 11. Calendar and Diary Application Data (*e.g.*, Outlook PST, blog entries); +12. 12. Online Access Data (*e.g.*, Temporary Internet Files, History, Cookies); +13. 13. Presentations (*e.g.*, PowerPoint, Corel Presentations); +14. 14. Network Access and Server Activity Logs; +15. 15. Project Management Application Data; +16. 16. Computer Aided Design/Drawing Files; and +17. 17. Backup and archival files (*e.g.*, Veritas, Zip, .GHO). + +Electronically stored information resides not only in areas of electronic, magnetic, and optical storage media reasonably accessible to you and your client, but also in areas you may deem *not* reasonably accessible. You are obliged to preserve potentially relevant evidence from *both* sources of electronically stored information, even if you do not anticipate *producing* such electronically stored information. Similarly, you and your client are obligated to preserve all potentially relevant evidence even if you do not intend to produce such evidence because you anticipate raising your client's Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. + +The laws and rules prohibiting destruction of evidence apply to electronically stored information in the same manner that they apply to other evidence. Because of its format, + +electronically stored information is easily deleted, modified or corrupted. Accordingly, your client must take every reasonable step to preserve this information until the final resolution of this matter. Adequate preservation of electronically stored information requires more than simply refraining from efforts to destroy or dispose of such evidence. You must intervene to prevent lass due to routine operations or malfeasance and you must employ proper techniques and protocols to preserve electronically stored information. Booting a drive, examining its contents, or running any application may irretrievably alter the evidence it contains and constitute unlawful spoliation of evidence. Preservation requires preemptive immediate intervention. + +With regard to electronically stored information created subsequent to the date of delivery of this letter, relevant evidence should not be destroyed, and your client is to take appropriate steps required to avoid destruction of such evidence. + +Please forward a copy of this letter to all persons and entities with custodial responsibility for the evidence referred to in this letter. + +Failure to abide by this request could result in penalties and/or sanctions against your client and could form the basis of legal claims for spoliation. + +if this correspondence is in any way unclear, please contact us immediately. We look forward to receiving written confirmation from you that you have taken the necessary steps to fulfill these preservation obligations by Thursday, May 21, 2009 in order to alleviate the need for us to seek a court order. + +Sincerely, + +Robert C. + +josoa."---- + +cc: Roy Black, Esq. • Jay I.efkowitz, Esq. + +List of Clients Represented by Podhurst Orseck, P.A., +as of May 15, 20091 + +[REDACTED] + +--- + +1 We will supplement this list as necessary. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744402/EFTA02744402.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744402/EFTA02744402.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..26ec533a09c7af3faae9c691c638f94498ba4614 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744402/EFTA02744402.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,244 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744402.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 7404, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.81, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Podhurst Orseck", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.93599999999998, + 60.75 + ], + [ + 430.382568359375, + 60.75 + ], + [ + 430.382568359375, + 96.642822265625 + ], + [ + 198.93599999999998, + 96.642822265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TRIAL & APPELLATE LAWYERS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.93599999999998, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 424.9778137207031, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 424.9778137207031, + 104.715576171875 + ], + [ + 198.93599999999998, + 104.715576171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "List of Clients Represented by Podhurst Orseck, P.A., as of May 15, 2009 1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 183.58599999999998, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 440.8519999999999, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 440.8519999999999, + 132.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 183.58599999999998, + 132.03000000000003 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 112 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 9 + ], + [ + "Line", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744402" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744402/_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744402/_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4ad5b9aad871fd1c79bcadc4b726106cf8d85e53 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744402/_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8fed4b673b16d7915c20b22d17cd8c4e52dc7e75de657c55d817d4b174848cd6 +size 11622 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744406/EFTA02744406.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744406/EFTA02744406.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ac397955f02f0e7dbdafa2b7cd0a5f6c9caf95f4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744406/EFTA02744406.md @@ -0,0 +1,142 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA. + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence and Incorporated Memorandum of + +Law (DE #j, filed May 26, 2009. Plaintiffs represent that Defendant has not agreed to the relief requested in this motion. The Court has carefully considered the motion and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +It is ORDERED AND ADJUGED that Plaintiffs' Motion (DE # 3 is GRANTED. + +A. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and his employees, his agents, his attorneys, and other nonparties are directed to take every reasonable step to preserve all evidence, including, but not limited to, evidence related to the October 25 search, documents, data, and tangible things, which includes, but is not limited to, writings; records; files; correspondence; digital or chemical process photographs (including negatives); reports; memoranda; calendars; diaries; minutes; electronic messages; voicemail; email; telephone message records or logs; computer and network activity logs; hard drives; backup data; removable computer storage media, such as tapes, disks, and cards; printouts; document image files; web pages; databases; spreadsheets; software; books; ledgers; journals; orders; invoices; bills; vouchers; checks; statements; worksheets; summaries; compilations; computations; charts; diagrams; graphic presentations; drawings; films; charts; video, phonographic, tape, or digital recordings or transcripts thereof; drafts; jottings; and notes. Information that serves to identify, locate, or link such material, such as file inventories, file folders, indices, and metadata, is also included. Specifically, Defendant must preserve the following evidence: records of phone communications; records of domestic and international travel, including travel in Defendant's private airplanes; former and current employee records; tax returns; medical bills; bills regarding any other expenses; all documents evidencing payment by Defendant of U.S. currency and/or merchandise to each victim; any evidence stored in Defendant's storage unit; photos of Defendant's + +mansions; any diary, log, memo pad, calendar, or other writing reflecting date of each victim's visit(s) to Defendant's mansions; any diary or document wherein each victim wrote regarding a victim's visit to Defendant's mansions; all documents sent to or by the PBPD, the FBI, the USAO, or the PBSAO; and all computers used by Defendant and/or his agents and/or employees since 1998. + +- 13. The duty extends to documents, data, and tangible things in the possession, custody, and/or control of the parties to this action and any employees, agents, contractors, carriers, bailees, or other nonparties who possess materials reasonably anticipated to be subject to discovery in these actions. Counsel is under an obligation to exercise reasonable efforts to identify and notify such nonparties. +- C. "Preservation" is to be interpreted broadly to accomplish the goal of maintaining the integrity of all documents, data, and tangible things reasonably anticipated to be subject to discovery in these actions under Rules 26, 45, and 56(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Preservation includes taking reasonable steps to prevent the partial or full destruction, alteration, testing, deletion, shredding, incineration, wiping, relocation, migration, theft, or mutation of such material, as well as negligent or intentional handling that would make material incomplete or inaccessible. +- D. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and his employees, agents, and attorneys shall preserve any evidence from the October 25, 2005 execution of a search warrant at his mansion at 358 El Brillo Way in Palm Beach, Florida, that has already been returned to him by the Palm Beach Police Department. +- E. If an objection or privilege is raised, the parties may raise the issue with this Court and shall preserve the evidence in question pending resolution by the Court. + +F. The parties, without leave of Court, may agree in writing that certain documents or categories of evidence need not be preserved as otherwise required by this Order. If such agreement is reached, such agreement is effective upon signing and without further order of this Court. + +G. This Order shall not be deemed to create any "safe harbors" for the destruction of evidence. If this Court determines that evidence has been destroyed or lost, whether knowingly or not, it will impose appropriate sanctions. + +H. Each party shall bear its own costs for complying with this Order. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this of 2009. + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Court Judge + +Copies to: All counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744406/EFTA02744406.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744406/EFTA02744406.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..50b4a8c6368d99c898476ce8687c712b64ac93e7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744406/EFTA02744406.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,291 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744406.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 5800, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.51, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 208.14600000000002, + 65.61 + ], + [ + 406.44390869140625, + 65.61 + ], + [ + 406.44390869140625, + 96.11248779296875 + ], + [ + 208.14600000000002, + 96.11248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 283.054, + 644.76 + ], + [ + 331.8678894042969, + 644.76 + ], + [ + 331.8678894042969, + 660.7330169677734 + ], + [ + 283.054, + 660.7330169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 34 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744406" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744412/EFTA02744412.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744412/EFTA02744412.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e92f5d3c34d7c5588dbdb19372b12ae39a9c4509 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744412/EFTA02744412.md @@ -0,0 +1,331 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARIZA=M + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232- + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/Mil + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRAI + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA/JOHIVSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO. 101 AND JANE DOE NO. 102's MOTION FOR AN ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 (the "Plaintiffs"), pursuant to Rules 26, 34, and 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby move this Court for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence directed to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and, as grounds, state as follows: + +1. After investigations by the Palm Beach Police Department ("PBPD"), the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office ("PBSAO"), the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI"), and the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("USAO"), Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, in June 2008, entered pleas of "guilty" in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach County, Florida, to various Florida state crimes involving the solicitation of minors for prostitution and the procurement of minors for the purposes of prostitution. + +2. As outlined in detail in the relevant complaints, beginning in or around 1998 through in or around September 2007, Defendant used his resources and his influence over vulnerable minor children to engage in a systematic pattern of sexually exploitative behavior. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, sexually abused Plaintiffs while Plaintiffs were under the age of 18 years old. + +3. As a result of Defendant's sexual abuse, Plaintiffs filed their actions, alleging multiple violations of federal statutes condemning the coercion and enticement of a minor to engage in prostitution or sexual activity, travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct, sex trafficking of children, sexual exploitation of minor children, transport of visual depictions of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct, transport of child pornography, child exploitation enterprises, and other crimes, specifically including, but not limited to, those crimes designated in 18 U.S.C. § 2421, § 2422(a), § 2422(b), § 2423(a), § 2423(b), § 2423(e), § 2251, § 2252, § 2252A(a)(1), and § 2252A(g)(1). + +4. On October 25, 2005, the PBPD executed a search warrant at Defendant's Palm Beach, Florida mansion at 358 El Brillo Way. Thus, Defendant reasonably should have known of potential criminal prosecution and/or civil litigation since at least that date. + +5. According to the PBPD Property Receipt, evidence seized during the October 25, 2005 search included phone message books, photographs of nude underage females, VHS tapes, CDs, and school transcripts of underage girls. See PBPD Property Receipt (attached hereto as Exhibit A). While still incarcerated, Defendant filed a Motion for Return of Property with the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County on July 23, 2008. On September 5, 2008, this Court entered an Order in Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, et al., Case No. 08-80804-CIV-MARRa directing Defendant to preserve the evidence listed in the PBPD Property Receipt and to provide duplicates to the plaintiff should this evidence be returned to Defendant by the State of Florida (DE# 20). + +6. According to the PBPD Property Receipt, at least some of the evidence has already been returned to Defendant, including zip CDs, 8mm videotapes, floppy disks, zip drive disks, CPUs from various areas throughout the mansion, and phone message books. Upon information and belief, one or more sexually explicit printed photographs of Plaintiffs and other minor girls taken by Defendant and/or his agents when Plaintiffs were minors were confiscated during the search and may have been returned to him. In addition, the zip CDs, 8mm videotapes, floppy disks, zip drive disks, and CPUs that were returned to Defendant may have contained, and may still contain, pornographic images of these and other minors. Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court clarify that the Order of September 5, 2008 requires returned evidence to be preserved. + +7. In addition, Plaintiffs respectfully request this Court to take judicial notice that, in the event that such evidence includes child pornography, it is imperative for the PBPD, the FBI, + +the USAO, and the PBSAO not to return any photographs that may be child pornography (including files, electronic or otherwise) to Defendant or his counsel. Pursuant to the Adam Walsh Protection and Safety Act, Pub. L. No. 109-248, 120 Stat. 587 (2006), any property or material that constitutes child pornography shall remain in the care, custody, and control of either the government or the court. Defendant has no right to seek its return. See 18 U.S.C. § 3509(m) (2008). In addition, copying evidence that constitutes child pornography is not permissible as long as the Government makes the property or material reasonably available to the defendant. See 18 U.S.C. § 3509(mX2XA) (2008). + +8. In addition to evidence related to the October 25 search, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, exercises sole custody and control over specific evidence relevant and material to this lawsuit relating to Defendant's sexual abuse of Plaintiffs, including, but not limited to, documents, data, and tangible things, including, but not limited to, writings; records; files; correspondence; digital or chemical process photographs (including negatives); reports; memoranda; calendars; diaries; minutes; electronic messages; voicemail; e-mail; telephone message records or logs; computer and network activity logs; hard drives; backup data; removable computer storage media, such as tapes, disks, and cards; printouts; document image files; web pages; databases; spreadsheets; software; books; ledgers; journals; orders; invoices; bills; vouchers; checks; statements; worksheets; summaries; compilations; computations; charts; diagrams; graphic presentations; drawings; films; charts; video, phonographic, tape, or digital recordings or transcripts thereof; drafts; jottings; and notes. Information that serves to identify, locate, or link such material, such as file inventories, file folders, indices, and metadata, is also included. Specifically, Plaintiffs consider the following evidence relevant: records of phone communications; records of domestic and international travel, including travel in Defendant's private airplanes; former and current employee records; tax returns; medical bills; bills regarding any other expenses; all documents evidencing payment by Defendant of U.S. currency and/or merchandise to each victim; any evidence stored in Defendant's storage unit; photographs of Defendant's mansions; any diary, log, memo pad, calendar, or other writing reflecting date of each victim's visit(s) to Defendant's mansions; any diary or document wherein each victim wrote regarding a victim's visit to Defendant's mansions; all documents sent to or by the PBPD, the FBI, the USAO, or the PBSAO; and all computers used by Defendant and/or his agents and/or employees since 1998. + +9. Other relevant evidence includes, but is not limited to, electronically-stored information stored on Defendant's current and former computer systems and other media and devices (including handheld devices, personal digital assistants, voice-messaging systems, online repositories, and cellular telephones). Electronically-stored information should be afforded the broadest possible meaning and includes (by way of example and not as an exclusive list) potentially relevant information electronically, magnetically, optically, or otherwise stored as: + +- I. Digital communication (e.g., e-mail, voice mail, instant messaging); +- 2. E-mail Server Stores (e.g., Lotus Domino .NSF and Microsoft Exchange .EDB) +- 3. Word-processed documents (e.g., Word and WordPerfect files and drafts); +- 4. Spreadsheets and tables (e.g., Excel or Lotus 123 worksheets); +- 5. Accounting Application Data (e.g., QuickBooks, Money, Peachtree data); +- 6. Image and Facsimile Files (e.g., .PDF, .TIFF, JPG, .GIF images); +- 7. Sound Recordings (e.g., .WAV and .MP3 files); +- 8. Video and Animation (e.g., .AVI and .MOV files); +- 9. Databases (e.g., AorPtc, Oracle, SQL Server data, SAP); +- 10. Contact and Relationship Management Data (e.g., Outlook, ACTI); +- 11. Calendar and Diary Application Data (e.g., Outlook PST, blog entries); +- 12. Online Access Data (e.g., Temporary Internet Files, History, Cookies); +- 13. Presentations (e.g., PowerPoint, Corel Presentations); +- 14. Network Access and Server Activity Logs; +- 15. Project Management Application Data; +- 16. Computer Aided Design/Drawing Files; and +- 17. Backup and archival files (e.g., Veritas, Zip, .GHO). + +10. Plaintiffs also respectfully request this Court to order Defendant to preserve all potentially relevant evidence, even if Defendant does not intend to produce such evidence because he anticipates raising his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. + +11. As more fully set forth in Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 102's Complaint (DE # 1 in Case No.: 09-CV-80656-MARRS), Defendant is a designated sexual offender who sexually exploited minor girls all over the world, including in some or all of his six mansions. Thus, there is reason to believe that relevant evidence, including many photographs of other nude underage females, exists in some or all of Defendant's six mansions, with all but one of his mansions located outside the State of Florida. + +12. On May 15, 2009, Plaintiff's counsel sent a letter to Defendant's counsel detailing the numerous sources of relevant evidence in this matter (the "Preservation Letter," attached hereto as Exhibit B). Despite requests for a written response confirming Defendant's duty to take the nes-awry steps to preserve all relevant evidence, Defendant and his counsel have neither acknowledged this letter nor confirmed their duty to preserve all relevant evidence under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +13. In the past, Defendant's counsel have asserted that a motion requesting to preserve evidence would be moot because of an order previously entered in Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, et at, Case No. 08-80804-CIV-MARRa. Plaintiffs respectfully submit that an enforceable order is needed in their particular cases and that the binding order needs to cover evidence other than evidence related to the October 25, 2005 search of Defendant's Palm Beach mansion. The sole focus of the previous order is seized evidence identified in the PBPD Property Receipt. There is great need to preserve all evidence (physical and electronic), especially with respect to potential evidence related to Defendant's possession, production, and/or transportation of child pornography. In addition, there is reason to believe that relevant + +evidence, including many photographs of other nude minor girls, exist in some or all of Defendant's six mansions and/or on some or all of his computers. Given Defendant's efforts to gain control over evidence in the custody of the PBPD, as well as Defendant's unwillingness to acknowledge or respond to Plaintiff's Preservation Letter, a legitimate concern remains for the continuing existence and maintenance of the integrity of the evidence in question absent an order preserving the evidence. This evidence, some of which is in the sole custody, dominion, and control of Defendant, is critical and indispensable to Plaintiffs' cases. + +## Memorandum of Law + +When there is a good faith belief that evidence may be lost, the Court has the authority to enter an order preserving such evidence. See AT & T Mobility LLC v. Dynamic Cellular Corp., No. 08-20537-Civ., 2008 WL 2139518, at \*2 (S.D. Fla. May 7, 2008); see also Tracfone Wireless, Inc. v. Trading, Inc., No. 3-08-CV-0398-B, 2008 WI, 918243, at \*1 (N.D. Tex. Mar. 13, 2008) (finding "a legitimate concern for the continuing existence and maintenance of the integrity of the evidence in question absent an order preserving the evidence"). 'This evidence, some of which is in the sole custody, dominion, and control of Defendant, is critical and indispensable to Plaintiffs' cases. The evidence that Plaintiffs seek to protect is relevant and critical to the prosecution not only of their actions, but for the prosecution of at least ten other filed actions against Defendant and twenty-two other as-yet-unfiled actions by Defendant's victims listed on the USAO List. Plaintiffs' concerns outweigh any harm to Defendant that may result from a preservation order. Given Defendant's vast wealth and demonstrated willingness to incur expenses, Defendant will not be unduly burdened by such an order. See Tracfone Wireless, Inc., 2008 WI, 918243, at \*I. + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, is a designated sexual offender who was convicted of violating various Florida state crimes involving the solicitation of minors for prostitution and the + +procurement of minors for the purposes of prostitution, and is currently serving his sentence based on the charges that form the foundation of Plaintiffs' claims. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that both the evidence seized by the PBPD and other relevant evidence in Defendant's custody and control is extremely harmful to Defendant's position in his civil cases. Defendant's successful efforts to obtain the return of some of the seized property causes Plaintiffs grave concern regarding his willingness to comply with his duty to preserve all evidence relevant to Plaintiffs' actions. Without a protective order, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, may seek to destroy records and information to thwart this lawsuit and many other lawsuits and thus perpetuate the wrongs that the federal laws regarding the sexual exploitation of children intend to protect. + +Because of the nature of the relevant violations, which include allegations of production and transportation of child pornography, electronically-stored information is a valuable and irreplaceable source of discovery and/or evidence in these matters. Plaintiffs anticipate that much of the information subject to disclosure or responsive to discovery in this cause is stored on Defendant's former computer systems and other media and devices. In addition, as previously stated, Plaintiffs believe that crucial relevant evidence may be present in some or all of the computers in perhaps each of his six mansions (in Palm Beach, New York City, Santa Fe, London, Paris, and the U.S. Virgin Islands). + +Finally, in the other pending Jane Doe cases with active discovery, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, has objected to the production of any evidence on Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendment grounds. Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 challenge Defendant's objections to discovery and, more relevant to the matter at hand, request that this Court issue an order clearly stating that Defendant has a duty to preserve all relevant evidence, regardless of whether he intends to raise his privilege against self-incrimination. See Capricorn Power Co. v. Siemens Westinghouse Power Corp., 220 F.R.D. 429, 434 (W.D. Pa. 2004) (A motion for a + +preservation order can be granted with regard to all items of evidence that are discoverable in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, without the necessity of establishing that the evidence will necessarily be relevant and admissible at trial.) + +WHEREFORE, in light of the above-stated duty to preserve all relevant evidence, Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102, move this Court to enter an Order granting Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for the Preservation of Evidence. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.I.A.3 + +Undersigned counsel conferred with counsel for Defendant in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this motion. Despite requests for a written response acknowledging Defendant's duty to take the necessary steps to preserve all relevant evidence to alleviate the need for this motion, Defendant's counsel have failed to respond or acknowledge in any way Defendant's duty to preserve all relevant evidence under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Date: May 26, 2009 + +> s/Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856 Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771 Podhurst Orseck, P.A. City National Bank Building 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, Florida 33130 (305) 358-2800 (305) 358-2382 (fax) rjosefsberg@podhurst.com kezell@podhurst.oam + +Attorneys for Plaint:\* Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +#### Certificate of Service + +I hereby certify that, on May 26, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> A/ Robert Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856 Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771 Podhurst Orseck, P.A. City National Bank Building 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, Florida 33130 (305) 358-2800 (305) 358-2382 (fax) riosefsberg@oodhurst.com kezell®podhurst.com + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +## SERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. + +Michael J. Pike, Esq. + +Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman LLP + +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 842-2820 + +Fax: (561) 515-3148 + +rcrit@bc1claw.com + +mpike(pciclaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 659-8300 + +Fax: (561) 835-8691 + +jagesoObellsouth.net + +Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 202-6360 + +Fax: (561) 828-0983 + +ecfRbrucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +Phone: (561) 686-6300 + +Fax: (561) 383-9456 + +jsx(Wscarcvlaw.com + +iPh@searcylaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.44. + +Adam Horowitz, Esq. +Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +Phone: (305) 931-2200 +Fax: (305) 931-0877 +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +[smermelstein@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:smermelstein@sexabuseattorney.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Case Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. +Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. +Leopold Kuvin, P.A. +2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +Phone: (561) 515-1400 +Fax: (561) 515-1401 +[skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com](mailto:skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com) +[tleopold@leopoldkuvin.com](mailto:tleopold@leopoldkuvin.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804* + +Richard Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +Phone: (561) 582-7600 +Fax: (561) 588-8819 +[lawyerwillits@aol.com](mailto:lawyerwillits@aol.com) +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Law Office of Brad [REDACTED] & Associates, LLC +2028 [REDACTED] Street, Suite 202 +Hollywood, FL 33020 +Phone: (954) 414-8033 +Fax: (954) 924-1530 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +[be@bradedwardslaw.com](mailto:be@bradedwardslaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Isidro Manuel MB Esq. + +Elkins & Boehringer + +224 Datura Avenue, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 832-8033 + +Fax: (561) 832-7137 + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744412/EFTA02744412.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744412/EFTA02744412.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..65a3f5499f5948346c52b0496d63f62d9ea226f7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744412/EFTA02744412.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,670 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744412.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 15, + "chars": 21074, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.04, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 208.14600000000002, + 65.61 + ], + [ + 406.44390869140625, + 65.61 + ], + [ + 406.44390869140625, + 95.36248779296875 + ], + [ + 208.14600000000002, + 95.36248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Memorandum of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.67000000000002, + 260.82 + ], + [ + 366.4810791015625, + 260.82 + ], + [ + 366.4810791015625, + 275.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 248.67000000000002, + 275.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.I.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 108.678, + 233.27999999999997 + ], + [ + 459.7662658691406, + 233.27999999999997 + ], + [ + 459.7662658691406, + 249.11248779296875 + ], + [ + 108.678, + 249.11248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.12599999999995, + 68.905029296875 + ], + [ + 364.5437316894531, + 68.905029296875 + ], + [ + 364.5437316894531, + 82.99249267578125 + ], + [ + 251.12599999999995, + 82.99249267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.02, + 68.03999999999999 + ], + [ + 352.9582824707031, + 68.03999999999999 + ], + [ + 352.9582824707031, + 83.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 264.02, + 83.2330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 39 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 43 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744412" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744427/EFTA02744427.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744427/EFTA02744427.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a9fa77f8229c7795a0ab62aa31ac58a0d583e622 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744427/EFTA02744427.md @@ -0,0 +1,191 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 3 CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MAR + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4 CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +vs. Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5 CASE NO.: 0B-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, vs. + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 6 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A. + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARAMMI + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRAIIIMI + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRAMIIIII + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRAMM + +DOE II + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MAR + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARR + +PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF FILING WITHDRAWAL OF PREVIOUSLY RAISED OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANT. JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, MOTION TO COMPEL AND/OR IDENTIFY C.M.A. IN THE STYLE OF THIS CASE AND MOTION TO IDENTIFY C.M.A. IN THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY, OR, ALTERNATIVELY. MOTION TO DISMISS SUA SPONTE, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through her undersigned attorneys, hereby files notice of withdrawal of previously raised objections to Defendant, JEFRREY EPSTEIN'S, Motion + +to Compel and/or Identify C.M.A. in the Style of This Case and Motion to Identify C.M.A. In Third-Party Subpoenas For Purposes of Discovery, or, Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sue Sponte, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law, and further states as follows: + +1. Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, filed a Motion to Compel and/or Identify C.M.A. in the Style of This Case and Motion to Identify C.M.A. in Third-Party Subpoenas For Purposes of Discovery, or, Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (D.E. 67) on April 29, 2009. + +2. EPSTEIN's Motion seeks the following relief (taken verbatim from the conclusion of his Motion): + +- a) "That C.M.A. be identified by her legal name in the style of this case; +- b) That Epstein be granted leave to identify C.M.A. by her legal name in Third-Party Subpoenas (but not file them in Court, or, if required, in a redacted form); and +- c) That on an alternative basis, this court dismiss this action Sua Sponte until such time as C.M.A. identifies herself in the style of this matter. + +Doe v. Rostker, 89 F.R.D at 163." + +3. Plaintiff withdraws her objection to a) and b) requested above. The request to have C.M.A.'s case dismissed is rendered moot given C.M.A.'s acquiescence to a) and b). To the extent that it is not, however, C.M.A. continues to object to c) above. + +4. Counsel for EPSTEIN is free to prepare a proposed agreed order reflecting the above for the Court's consideration following the undersigned's review of same. + +## CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1 + +Counsel for the movant conferred via telephone with counsel for the Defendant regarding the filing of the instance Notice and he has no objection to Plaintiff filing same. + +si Jack P. + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 20th day of May, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of electronic filing to all counsel of record on the attached service list. + +/Wank P ■ + +**Jack Scarola** + +**Florida UAL No.: 169440** + +**Jack P. IN** + +**Florida Bar No.: 0547808** + +**Searcy Denney Scarola Bamhart & Shipley, P.A.** + +**2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard** + +**West Palm Beach, Florida 33409** + +**Phone: (561) 686-6300** + +**Fax: (561) 383-9424** + +**Attorneys for Plaintiff, C.MA.** + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +Phone: (561) 582-7600 +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Robert Critton, Esquire +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 +Phone: (561) 842-2820 +Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 South Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 202-6360 +Fax: (561) 828-0983 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744427/EFTA02744427.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744427/EFTA02744427.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fc9c67826dad972ee37d8c12156c0802f130cec2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744427/EFTA02744427.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,333 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744427.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 4576, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.63, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 403.00360107421875, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 403.00360107421875, + 129.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 129.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 165.24, + 179.82 + ], + [ + 478.0233154296875, + 179.82 + ], + [ + 478.0233154296875, + 195.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 165.24, + 195.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.44, + 338.58 + ], + [ + 382.33612060546875, + 338.58 + ], + [ + 382.33612060546875, + 354.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 226.44, + 354.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 257.03999999999996, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 116.63999999999999 + ], + [ + 257.03999999999996, + 116.63999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 98 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744427" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744433/EFTA02744433.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744433/EFTA02744433.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6d518cf079de6c55aff4e0a30b4ddefde74563d6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744433/EFTA02744433.md @@ -0,0 +1,171 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO.2, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO.3, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO.4, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80994-MARRASEra + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendants. + +/ + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80993-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80811-MARRAIMIE + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80893-MARRA/ + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, vs. CASE NO.; 08-CV-80469-MARRA/, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80591-MARRA/. + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80656-MARRA/MM + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEWREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT, EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS' LANE DOE'S 2 THROUGH 7, MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL AND/OR IDENTIFY PANE DOE IN THE STYLE ET AL. + +Defendant, JEFFERY EPSTEIN, (EPSTEIN), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond to Epstein's Motion to Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe in the style + +of this case and Motion to Identify Jane Doe in Third-Party Subpoenas for purposes of Discovery, or alternatively Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, and states as follows: + +1. Epstein filed the Motion to Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe's 2 through 7 on May 5, and 6, 2009. + +2. Plaintiffs' Response is due on May 22, 2009. While the undersigned counsel agreed that Plaintiffs could have an extension of time of one week to file and serve their opposition Motion (i.e., until May 29, 2009), Plaintiffs do not find it a reasonable agreement. Plaintiffs have requested an additional twenty (20) days to respond to the Motion to Compel and/or Identify. As set forth in the Motion to Compel and/or Identify, the failure and/or refusal to allow Epstein to identify Jane Doe's 2 through 7 in various third-party subpoenas is preventing meaningful discovery and the preparation of Epstein's defenses in this matter in anticipation of trial. The Motion to Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe is incorporated herein by reference. Therefore, all those arguments apply herein. + +3. As set forth in the Motion to Compel and/or Identify, Jane Doe Numbers 2 through 7, these cases have been filed for some time. Therefore, discovery should have been permitted so that Epstein would be able to properly prepare and defend the claims brought against him by Jane Doe Numbers 2 through 7. Plaintiffs, and their counsel, have not agreed to the relief set forth in the Motion to Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe Numbers 2 through 7. CMA agreed to such relief. Exhibit "A". Therefore, any extension granted to Jane Doe's Numbers 2 through 7 will further delay discovery + +in this matter. Such a delay has been addressed by Epstein filing his Motion to Strike cases from the current trial docket, dated May 19, 2009. + +- 4. Discovery should not be delayed in these matters any longer. + +WHEREFORE, Epstein hereby respectfully requests that an Order be entered requiring Plaintiffs, Jane Doe's #2 through #7 to file their opposition Motion to the Motion to Compel and/or Identify on or before May 29, 2009, for such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +> Mic e Esq. At me 'efendant Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 71 day of May, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomey.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully + +By: RO ON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 24162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpikeacIclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744433/EFTA02744433.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744433/EFTA02744433.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8ac83317bbf0fab35bacf7d06dce9b3522bdf087 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744433/EFTA02744433.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,318 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744433.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 4860, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.61, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 416.7268981933594, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 416.7268981933594, + 108.86248779296875 + ], + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 108.86248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT, EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS' \nLANE DOE'S 2 THROUGH 7, MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME \nTO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL \nAND/OR IDENTIFY PANE DOE IN THE STYLE ET AL.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 116.28, + 562.9499999999999 + ], + [ + 502.33612060546875, + 562.9499999999999 + ], + [ + 502.33612060546875, + 620.9730072021484 + ], + [ + 116.28, + 620.9730072021484 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.996, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 386.8733215332031, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 386.8733215332031, + 400.61248779296875 + ], + [ + 264.996, + 400.61248779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 94 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 78 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 33 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744433" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744439/EFTA02744439.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744439/EFTA02744439.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c9c5bd1c8fb0fe771636ed7ff407f2ceead31cc8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744439/EFTA02744439.md @@ -0,0 +1,113 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MAR + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80993-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08- CV-80811 -MARRAi l + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80893-MARIZA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 08-CV- 80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al., + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80591-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80656-MARRAr + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +Upon Plaintiffs' Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motion to Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe in the Style of this Case and Motion to Identify Jane Doe in Third Party Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, and good cause being shown, it is hereby + +ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs shall have an enlargement of time of twenty (20) days until June 11, 2009, to respond to the Defendant's Motions to Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe in the Style, a at. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this day of 2009. + +DISTRICT COURT JUDGE \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744439/EFTA02744439.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744439/EFTA02744439.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c3e796c022f31d5f6032ad1bf6bf596a079f8f3f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744439/EFTA02744439.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,177 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744439.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 1728, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.41, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 408.26995849609375, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 408.26995849609375, + 115.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 115.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 280.908, + 379.89 + ], + [ + 330.7633361816406, + 379.89 + ], + [ + 330.7633361816406, + 394.863037109375 + ], + [ + 280.908, + 394.863037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744439" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744442/EFTA02744442.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744442/EFTA02744442.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5c6c58b8fa403cac746765bff1d003a0a337cbc1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744442/EFTA02744442.md @@ -0,0 +1,133 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARR + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08- CV-80811 -MARRA/ I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08- CV-80993-MARRA + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 08-CV- 80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al., + +Defendant. / + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80591-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +## NOTICE OF FILING PROPOSED ORDER + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-7, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby file the attached Proposed Order in reference to document no. 111 filed in case no. 08-80119 on May 21, 2009. + +Dated: May 27, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on May 27, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bc1claw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iah@searcvlaw.com Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744442/EFTA02744442.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744442/EFTA02744442.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cd3f044d2a93d073dc8321a8c56a97a62f8fd08c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744442/EFTA02744442.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,337 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744442.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 2701, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.46, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 406.3418273925781, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 406.3418273925781, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF FILING PROPOSED ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.46800000000002, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 440.6433410644531, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 440.6433410644531, + 472.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 207.46800000000002, + 472.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 386.0939636230469, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 386.0939636230469, + 85.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.56353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 454.7248229980469, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 454.7248229980469, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744442" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744448/EFTA02744448.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744448/EFTA02744448.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..feb56ddd350ecd60a1fd88ccb169b3b3ee5950f8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744448/EFTA02744448.md @@ -0,0 +1,1171 @@ +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +E.W., ) + +) + +) + +Plaintiff, ) + +) + +vs. )Case No. 502008CA028058 + +)XXXXMB AD + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, ) + +) + +Defendant. ) + +X + +# PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE + +HONORABLE JUDGE DONALD W. HAFELE + +May 22, 2009 + +8:30 a.m. - 9:30 a.m. + +205 N. Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Jennifer DiLorenzo, court reporter + +Ohat 14"111 + +1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL +2 +3 On behalf of the Plaintiff: +4 ROTHSTEIN, ROSENFELDT & ADLER +5 BY: WILLIAM J. BERGER, ESQ., +6 Mizner Park Office Tower +Suite 675 +7 225 NE Mizner Boulevard +Boca Raton, FL 33432 +8 561-322-7761 +wberger@rra-law.com + +9 ROTHSTEIN, ROSENFELDT & ADLER +10 BY: [REDACTED] ESQ., +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +11 Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33394 +954-522-3456 +bedwards@rra-law.com + +12 On behalf of the Defendant: +13 BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN +14 BY: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ., +and MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ., +15 515 North Flagler Drive +16 Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +17 561-842-2820 +rcrit@bclclaw.com +18 mpike@bclclaw.com + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +1 MR. BERGER: We have a couple of arguments +2 to make and I just want to go through them - and +3 Counsel has a copy of what I'm displaying to the +4 Court - I just want to do an overview. + +5 These parties, parties and nonparties, +6 they should not be deposed until the Defendant, +7 until his deposition has been completed, that's +8 the first point. Also, now with regard to the +9 number of times that our client should be +10 deposed, we've reached an agreement on that, I'm +11 not going to dwell on that. + +12 Next, with regard to the actual questions +13 themselves, our objection has to do with +14 questions that go to the names of consensual +15 sexual partners since the age of 10, the nature +16 of consent -- + +17 THE COURT: Well, is consensual one of the +18 conditions? I don't recall seeing that. + +19 MR. BERGER: Well, what they've asked for +20 is all. + +21 THE COURT: Right, all. + +22 MR. BERGER: And we're objecting to +23 consensual - obviously if our clients were raped +24 by somebody else, we're not objecting to that +25 discovery -- + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +1 Proceedings in the Matter of W.E. vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +2 May 22, 2009 + +3 THE COURT: Good morning, gentlemen. I +4 have read the materials. I am familiar +5 generally with the matters that are involved +6 here, so we can get started. + +7 Mr. Berger, go right ahead. + +8 MR. BERGER: Good morning, Your Honor. +9 William J. Berger and Brad [REDACTED] for the +10 moving parties, and that's E.W., who's the +11 Plaintiff in one case today, and then there's +12 L.M., who's a Plaintiff in another case that's +13 in your division, and then there's Jane Doe, +14 who's a Plaintiff in a federal case. + +15 Judge, these are motions for protective +16 orders by three young women who have sued the +17 Defendant for sexually molesting them starting +18 when they were 13 years old. + +19 Judge, there's several reasons why these +20 young women should not have to undergo what we +21 think would be abusive discovery, and I would +22 like to just present that to the Court -- + +23 THE COURT: Fine. + +24 MR. BERGER: -- in an overview fashion. + +25 THE COURT: Thank you. + +1 THE COURT: Well, I wasn't aware that you +2 were not objecting to that aspect of discovery. +3 Thank you for that clarification. + +4 MR. BERGER: -- and the nature of the +5 consensual sexual activities and whether they +6 received money. We feel that those types of +7 questions are completely irrelevant, I'll argue +8 that. + +9 Our clients have federal and state privacy +10 rights. There's no record showing, in other +11 words, there's no evidence that's been presented +12 to show that any of this discovery is needed. + +13 The probative value, even if it is +14 relevant, is outweighed by its unfair prejudice, +15 and there's a tremendous problem with regard to +16 third-party privacy rights of the consensual +17 sexual partners since the age of 10 of our +18 clients. + +19 Now, going to the point about the timing +20 of the deposition, we took Mr. Epstein's +21 deposition on April 30th, a month ago. We got +22 approximately 153 refusals to answer in 155 +23 pages of questions. + +24 Let me back up a minute. Under Rule +25 1.280(d), the Court has the discretion, upon a + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 showing of injustice or in the interest of justice, to regulate the timing of discovery. Typically it's done without relation to other discovery, but the Court does have the power on ashowing of justice to regulate the timing. So Mr. Epstein's deposition has started, it was terminated a couple of hours into it when it was not even halfway finished by Counsel for the Defendant. They terminated his deposition, didn't like the questions, and didn't like what he was going to say. He refused to answer about 153questions in that deposition. We got virtually nothing out of him. + +14 15 16 17 18 19 20 It's amanifest injustice for our clients to have to be deposed - and they want to depose our clients as soon as next week. They wanted to depose them this week. It's amanifest injustice for our clients to have to be deposed while Mr. Epstein's deposition is still open; he's refused to answer all those questions. + +21 22 23 24 25 We have propounded written discovery on Mr. Epstein, Request for Admissions, Request to Produce, Interrogatories. He's refused to answer every single one of those, Your Honor. It's amanifest injustice that we would have our + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +2 3 clients deposed while those issues of the validity of his refusals to answer have not been addressed. + +4 5 6 THE COURT: Let's talk about this for a minute. Let's simplify the issue as far as chronology or protocols of a deposition. + +7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 0 8 Typically, in the most simplest of cases, which I understand this is not, but let's talk about an auto accident and it's acontested liability case, the burden of proof initially is on the Plaintiff with regard to the allegations that are made, and so as aresult - and the same thing typically with experts in accident reconstruction-type of battle, let's say - I will require the Plaintiff to be deposed first because they have the burden of proof, and typically the Defendant does not have to prove anything, so I'm not really terribly concerned about order of depositions unless they come before me. If it's not an issue, better for me, I don't have to worry about it. + +2 3 4 But if I'm not mistaken, there was at least one of the cases that came before me before they were all transferred into this division and we dealt at some issue with the ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +**Fifth Amendment privilege, and we dealt with that - Mr. Kuvin, I think, was the plaintiff attorney in that particular case - and I believe Iruled that, under the circumstances of Mr. Epstein's agreement at the time with the federal government, he would have had the right to invoke his Fifth Amendment right.** + +**Now, where is that at this juncture in terms of that federal agreement?** + +**MR. BERGER: Judge, I don't understand how the Court could have reached that conclusion. Judge, this is asealed envelope that is in front of the criminal division of this court. This contains the federal agreement, it is under seal. I don't understand how it was proffered to you berance it's under seal by the criminal division of this court.** + +**Imight add that it was illegally and improperly sealed. It was done in violation of all of the rules of judicial administration, and we have a hearing before Judge Colbath to unseal it, but Mr. Epstein faces no criminal charges whatsoever.** + +**MR. CRITFON: Just note my objection. I** ≥5 **think he's completely off base, I think -- Well,** + +**ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044** + +**I'll sit down. THE COURT: That's all right, just one at atime. I don't understand why both of you have to stand.** + +**5 MR. BERGER: And this is anon-prosecution 6 agreement, it's asealed agreement.** + +**7 THE COURT: Well, I understand -- 8 MR. BERGER: I don't understand how it was 9 discussed in front of you, and then there was a t0 sealed addendum to the non-prosecution L1 agreement.** + +**THE COURT: It wasn't discussed in terms of its -- Well, there was some discussion as far as its terms were concerned, but nothing personal to any of the alleged victims here.** + +**MR. BERGER: Then it seems impossible for them to have been an evaluation of whether he I. 8 was properly invoking his Fifth Amendment rights if the substance of this agreement; that is, a secret agreement between Mr. Epstein, the State Auomey in this County, and the Federal U.S. District Attorney.** + +**23 THE COURT: Well, to my recollection - and 24 it was done at an 8:45, so we didn't have the 25chance to fully explore the matter, but it was** + +1 done in a very efficient fashion, I can assure +2 you - I don't recall Mr. Kuvin being critical of +3 the sealing of the agreement. I don't recall +4 him being necessarily, tremendously adamant +5 about the situation as it stood at that time, +6 and this is going back now probably 30 or 45 +7 days, so I don't know if anything has changed. + +8 But clearly, though, we do have to resolve +9 that threshold issue, and I'm certainly not +10 averse - particularly where I believe that case +11 is already settled - I'm not averse at all to +12 having a hearing on that issue instead of +13 respectfully being critical of Judge Colbath +14 being critical of me -- + +15 MR. BERGER: Judge Colbath didn't enter +16 the order, judge. + +17 THE COURT: Well, whoever it was, being +18 critical of the judge in the criminal division +19 being critical of me when, frankly, you may not +20 know the entire facts and you may not be +21 apprised of the Defense's argument and -- + +22 MR. BERGER: I read the plea colloquy, +23 Your Honor. It's all in the plea colloquy, it's +24 in the record. Maybe that's why Mr. Kuvin's +25 client did not - or maybe that's why my client + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +1 did not retain Mr. Kuvin but retained me and my +2 firm. + +3 We have our own case, Your Honor. I was +4 not privy and I did not have an opportunity to +5 participate in Mr. Kuvin's argument. + +6 THE COURT: And that's precisely why I -- + +7 MR. BERGER: And we have -- + +8 THE COURT: Excuse me for a moment, +9 please, that's precisely why I'm suggesting to +10 you that I am willing to revisit the issue, but +11 why don't we go ahead and move on to the +12 substantive -- + +13 MR. BERGER: Okay. + +14 THE COURT: The substantive issue right +15 now, if I'm understanding correctly, is trying +16 to determine the protocol as far as the +17 depositions are going to take place. + +18 MR. BERGER: There's a motion to compel +19 the continuation of his deposition set in front +20 of you on June 8th. + +21 THE COURT: But what I'm trying to get to, +22 and perhaps I'm not making myself terribly +23 clear, is that to compel him to sit there and +24 essentially invoke his Fifth Amendment rights +25 without having a full hearing on whether that + +1 invocation is appropriate, to me, from your own +2 statements here and in this mini blowup, which +3 is significantly and seriously testing my +4 eyesight even with glasses -- + +5 MR. BERGER: May I approach with a copy of +6 it? + +7 THE COURT: Sure -- is probably better +8 off, as I said, having the hearing on the Fifth +9 Amendment privilege as opposed to worrying about +10 whether or not his deposition should or should +11 not go forward in its current context and in the +12 current fashion that it's already begun. + +13 MR. BERGER: Judge, the case law that we +14 read said that you have to take the deposition +15 and ask specific questions. He invokes it with +16 regard to specific questions and those are +17 brought in front of the Court, not a question in +18 a vacuum, that's how we read the cases, that's +19 why we proceeded the way we did. + +20 THE COURT: And you may be right. We'll +21 hear that hearing. I'm just trying to make a +22 recommendation that seems to make practical +23 sense to me more so than perhaps being familiar +24 with the specific cases -- + +25 MR. BERGER: We -- + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +1 THE COURT: -- and the matter -- + +2 MR. BERGER: We -- + +3 THE COURT: -- which the Court may +4 proceed. + +5 MR. BERGER: We gave great consideration +6 as to how that issue should be brought in front +7 of you, and our decision was that the questions +8 have to be asked and objected to individually, +9 and that's how we proceeded - without objection, +10 really, in principal from the opposing side. +11 They were prepared to sit there for two days, +12 but they terminated the deposition early, and +13 that's set for June 8th. + +14 So it's manifestly unjust for our clients, +15 we believe, to have their depositions taken +16 while these issues remain pending. + +17 Moving on to the substance of the +18 questions themselves and whether they're +19 relevant, probative, et cetera, Your Honor, the +20 questions that we're objecting to have to do +21 with consensual sexual activities of our +22 clients. + +23 Judge, I would like to analogize it to +24 this: If this were a car accident - using your +25 example, Your Honor - and the Plaintiff was + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 claiming either physical or mental injuries as a result of the car accident, it would definitely be relevant to find out how many accidents she's had in the past, the nature of those accidents, and what type of injuries she suffered as a result of those accidents, but it would not be relevant and it would not be probative to find out how and when she drove her car everyday from the day she was 10 years old or whenever she could drive. + +11 1.2 13 14 15 In other words, the driving of the car successfully and normally in the normal course of her daily affairs is irrelevant to either the liability issue in the auto case or the damages issue. + +16 17 1.8 19 20 21 22 Likewise, it's completely relevant for the Defendant to ask each of our clients: Have you ever been raped before? Have you ever had forcibly aman insert his fingers in your vagina? Have you ever forcibly been required to give oral sex to aman? Those are legitimate questions, but -- + +23 24 25 THE COURT: Let me ask you something, because you talk about normalcy, and I would agree if were dealing with adults how they + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +2 3 4 6 7 8 9 drive their car arguably may not be relevant or at least lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, but when we're dealing with minors, are you suggesting to me that there's ever normalcy with regard to sexual activity, and should the Court simply put aside what a complainant in acase like this suggests is normal if she has engaged in sexual activity at 10 years of age? + +0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 MR. BERGER: I think it's completely appropriate for the Court to allow only questioning with regard to forcible and nonconsensual sexual activities -- Let me back up aminute. If it's with an adult, yes, perhaps that questioning is proper. We're talking about adult and minor sexual activities, but not minor and minor, Your Honor, and certainly not -- I think our girls are 20 years old, our young ladies, and not even normal consensual or consensual sexual activity now. + +1 We're asking that this Court agree with the Court - and this is on the second page of my display here - Judge, in acase called D.S. The Court said that, "The law should not force plaintiffs, particularly women, who will be the ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES + +888.486.4044 + +primary targets of such discovery to disclose their entire sexual and reproductive histories whenever they claim that they have sustained psychiatric problems or atraumatic event that is the subject of the lawsuit." + +Below that, "There's no logical correlation between avictim's willingness to have engaged in sexual activities with others and avictim's claim that he or she did not consent to the sexual activity that is the subject of the current proceedings." + +1.2 The Mendez case, "No evidence was t3 presented" - this is when I said there's been no 1.4 showing - "by any mental health professional 15 that such evidence; that is, other sexual l.6 activity by the plaintiff, would be relevant and 17necessary for adetermination of the cause of 1.8 the plaintiffs emotional distress. It's based 19solely on the speculative presumption that 20infidelity may lead to emotional distress. 21 Nowhere have defendants demonstrated factual 22support for this presumption? + +23 So the consensual sexual activity of the 24plaintiffs with other men is completely 25analogous to the normal driving of the plaintiff + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +in my hypothetical case and, of course, the mere questioning of somebody about that is a traumatic experience itself to ask them to undergo that. + +These Plaintiffs should not be robbed of their dignity and their Constitutional rights simply because they have sued this Defendant, so there's no relevancy to this, to this type of questioning, and it would not lead to admissible evidence. Our clients have — + +11THE COURT: I'll give you acouple minutes 12 to wrap up, please. + +MR. BERGER: -- State and Constitutional rights. There's no probative value, or rather, the probative value is outweighed by the prejudice. + +7 + +Judge, the last point is there's a 8 tremendous problem with third parties' rights, 19 and we've cited -- + +20 THE COURT: I'm familiar. + +21 MR. BERGER: -- those caws with regard to 2 that. + +3 Thank you, Judge. + +24 THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Berger. 25 MR. CRITTON: Good morning, Your Honor. + +1 Judge, as you know, I represent Mr. +2 Epstein. Let me just take it in the order, the +3 issues associated with the termination or the +4 adjournment of Mr. Epstein's deposition, Mr. +5 Burman was there, along with Jack Goldberger, +6 his criminal attorney. Although it wasn't said, +7 he didn't refuse to answer, he refused based on +8 the Fifth Amendment. + +9 The Court was right with regard to the +10 stay issue, the entire stay issue that came in +11 front of you there. I disagree with Mr. +12 Berger's assessment with regard to the +13 non-prosecution agreement and what happened. + +14 If the Court will also recall, the NPA is +15 under, basically, a freeze order. Mr. [REDACTED] +16 on behalf of two of his Jane Does, tried to get +17 that order so it would become public. Judge +18 Marra said, no, and they keep trying and trying +19 and trying, but that's another issue. I did +20 raise that with you, and I believe Mr. Kuvin was +21 aware at the time. + +22 We do have a motion to stay, I believe +23 that's going to be heard in June, and I will +24 provide you a copy of the transcript to see what +25 you did before, so with regard to that issue, + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +1 the same person. + +2 MR. CRITTON: Correct. L.M. is L.M., E.W. +3 is C.W. in that statement, and I don't think +4 Jane Doe was referenced in that statement. + +5 THE COURT: Why is Jane Doe mentioned in +6 this motion? It says, "and Jane Doe in federal +7 court," because L.M. and Jane Doe are the same +8 person? + +9 MR. BERGER: May I explain that? + +10 MR. CRITTON: No. + +11 THE COURT: Hold on. + +12 MR. BERGER: We have three clients. One +13 is in federal court, Jane Doe. Mr. Critton +14 wants to take Jane Doe's deposition in these two +15 cases, E.W. and L.M., so she's in front of you +16 as a nonparty on a motion for protective order. + +17 THE COURT: I see, but she is your client +18 in the federal court case. + +19 MR. BERGER: Yes. + +20 THE COURT: The motion for protective +21 order references her as a witness to the matters +22 involving E.W. and L.M. + +23 MR. BERGER: Correct. + +24 THE COURT: Thank you for that +25 clarification. + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +1 that's going to be in front of you. +2 I think Mr. Berger was wrong, I think he +3 claimed the Fifth Amendment 200 out of 270 +4 questions. He was no more going to answer the +5 question than they thought that there was some +6 great elucidation that the sky would open up, +7 so, therefore, we would like to be able to +8 proceed to take these depositions. + +9 What's also important here is I haven't +10 asked one question to anybody yet in terms of +11 the deposition. What I did was, is I set +12 E.W. -- + +13 THE COURT: And E.W. is the same lady who +14 the transcript -- + +15 MR. CRITTON: Transcript has C.W. E.W. +16 and C.W. are the same person, L.M. is the same +17 person, and Jane Doe I think she's just +18 referenced as Jane Doe, although she has other +19 initials. + +20 THE COURT: Well, the transcript that was +21 provided to the Court relative to this taped +22 statement says L.M. Is L.M. the named Plaintiff +23 at the top of this -- + +24 MR. CRITTON: Correct. + +25 THE COURT: -- particular motion, that's +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +1 Go right head. + +2 MR. CRITTON: And they represent all three +3 of those individuals. + +4 The depositions that were set were set +5 solely in the state court cases, and I think the +6 agreement, so I want to be clear so it's on +7 record is - one of the exhibits I attached was +8 an agreement between Mr. [REDACTED] and I - I'm +9 going to take Jane Doe, E.W., and L.M. one time +10 as a witness and deal with specifically witness +11 questions, on a second occasion separate and +12 apart -- + +13 THE COURT: As a witness in a specific +14 case? + +15 MR. CRITTON: No. I don't want -- And +16 maybe there was a misunderstanding. + +17 THE COURT: Well, you're going to have to +18 set the deposition in a case. + +19 MR. CRITTON: I will set, as an example, +20 Jane Doe's deposition in E.W. I will ask her, +21 Jane Doe, whatever questions in any case that's +22 applicable under those circumstances so I only +23 depose her one time as witness, and then we can +24 agree among ourselves that that deposition can +25 be used in all cases. + +2 3 4 5 Iwill take L.M.'s deposition say in E.W. as awitness. I will agree that L.M.'s deposition, we take it one time. I'll ask her whatever questions I have in any case that I have. + +6 THE COURT: As a witness. + +7 8 10 MR. CRITTON: Solely as awitness, and then I'll subsequently come back and I will take them one time as aplaintiff in their respective cases + +11 12 THE COURT: That protocol has essentially been agreed to, correct? + +13 14 15 16 17 MR. BERGER: It's been agreed to, and what Mr. Critton means is that he will take LM., for example, as awitness in all of the state cases, whether it's our cases, Mr. cases, and all the others; is that correct? + +18 19 THE COURT: All the cases that he's aware of. + +20 MR. CRITTON: I'm going to ask -- + +21 2 MR. BERGER: Not just the ones that we represent. + +3 24 25 MR. CRITTON: Correct, all cases, whether they're in state or federal court. Pm going to depose that lady one time as awitness from my + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +1 perspective. + +2 MR. BERGER: Agreed. + +3 MR. EMI Were on the same page. + +THE COURT: Very well. I'm going to leave that to the attorneys' stipulation as potentially or hopefully clarified on the 7 record. + +I think it is incumbent, and I'm sure 1 don't have to say this, but simply to make sure the record is clear, that when you notice these witnesses - or they probably should be noticed through Counsel. I would hopefully have it where it's a global agreement between all of the state and federal court plaintiffs' counsels that are involved in this so that we don't have piecemeal agreements, that could create problems in and of itself, but I trust that all of the cases before Judge Marra, all the cases that are before me in state court - those in front of Judge Marra, of course, are in federal court - so we're going to be working under this omnibus order, for lack of abetter term, that hopefully will be agreed to by all of plaintiffs counsels involved because, if not, we're going to run into difficulties with others. + +MR. CRITTON: We reached an agreement with regard to that. I'm happy to notice every one of them. Without knowing what L.M. is going to say, I have no idea whether she's involved in some federals. I'll notice everybody in federal. + +7The flip side of that is what Judge Marra 8 said in aconsolidation order is you get to 9depose Mr. Epstein one time, all riil iircady t0 Mr. Epstein's been deposed by Sid in the t1 State, he's been set by in B.B., which is one of 2your cases, by Mr. Kuvin and the State, and Mr. L3 Berger and Mr. have started his t4 deposition, so this of like my t5 goose/gander issue. + +16If I'm going to be limited and it's bawd L7 on an agreement, then I would also like Mr. 18Epstein not to be thrown up 50 times or 20 times L 9 for deposition, and I'm not sure -- That's 20really not in front of you right now. + +23. THE COURT: Right. + +22 MR. CRITTON: I raised it in my motion and 23probably will raise it and touch on it at the 24hearing on the 8th or whatever date it is. + +25 THE COURT: That's fine. Let's go ahead ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +> 6 7 + +9 ILO LI. L2 L3 L4 15 L6 L7 L8 L9 20 al 22 23 24 25 and -- I think right now, as I said before, I really think that at this juncture to deal with Mr. Epstein's deposition would be premature because, number one, I don't have the transcript in front of me, number two, I don't have a detailed motion setting forth exactly what and why his testimony is needed prior to any of the women being deposed, so I would like to move on from that. I would like to get into the substantive issues relative to discovery. + +Iwill say right now for the record my ruling on the deposition protocol is going to be this: I have no problem and I will allow the Plaintiffs and/or witnesses to be deposed prior to the presumption or conclusion of Mr. Epstein's deposition in its most basic form and in light of the broad discretion that the Court has relative to discovery. + +Iam not going to treat this case any differently than I would any other case where discovery issues become problematic and are raised before the Court. Again, not that I do not understand the delicate nature of these cases and the issues that are germane to this case that are different than the generic case, + +but at the same time, simply as it concerns the protocol relative to scheduling the depositions, I don't think that that needs to be deviated from and, therefore, I am not going to do that. + +So my ruling is that on the issue of essentially whether Epstein's deposition has to be concluded prior to the tatting of the Plaintiffs' depositions, either as Plaintiffs or as witnesses, that aspect of the motion is respectfully denied. + +Let's move on now to the substantive issues relative to discovery of prior sexual activity or current sexual activity of the Plaintiff complainants. + +MR. CR1TPON: As the Court is aware, this is acivil ease for damages. Mr. Epstein has a tight irrespective of his - certainly has a right to claim his Fifth Amendment privilege, he also has constitutional due process rights for a full and fair hearing in order to defend him. + +What the Plaintiffs want to do in this instance, which are L.M. and E.W., which are in front of you, what they want to do is they want to restrict the testimony that comes in about 5 them. + +> ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +2 3 4 5 6 7 0 By their own testimony, these young ladies either were or currently are prostitutes, they're strippers that have worked at Flash Dance, Platinum Gold, Spearmint Rhino, all adult male clubs. My guess is they probably worked in the champagne mom, they prostituted themselves, and they've also brought, by their own testimony and by their own - at least certainly by L.M.'s statement, she brought 50 other girls to Mr. Epstein's home. + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 They are claiming various counts, but included within the count, significant, intentional infliction of emotional distress. Intentional infliction of emotional distress, based on most of the cases that are read, Your Honor, deal with some outrageous act that occurs on one °erasion with that person, and then, as you know, it's a very high standard to prove intentional infliction of emotional distress, but it's that one event that's so outrageous, that's so inflamed that it's beyond the conscience of all reasonableness of really the community or anyone who would look at it. + +All of these ladies, including L.M. - L.M. came to Mr. Epstein's house, by her own, ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +admission more than 100 times. In her statement or in her - she says, "I brought over 50 girls there." E.W. brought girls and she was there on multiple, tens upon tens of occasions. Jane Doe was there on multiple occasions. + +It's important to know these young ladies' prior sexual history, whether it's consensual, whether it's rape, whether it's molestation by a family member, by an older person, by even a fellow minor under the circumstances, maybe another person of the same sex, you know, what were this individual's experiences, what were their experiences with their families, did she -- Again, I've seen alot of records in this case from other individuals, it's not just these two, and I attached some that talked about rape. talk about molestation. I've seen records that deal with where the parents had sex with other individuals in front of these young ladies. Jane Doe in this instance claims prior traumatic stress disorder. From what? I don't know. + +It's relevant, it's material, we're entitled to get that type of information. Again, we're not dealing with admissibility at this point, what we're dealing with is: Are we + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +1entitled to get the information? + +Did Mr. Epstein cause these outrageous damages or these horrific damages that they're claiming, and, again, emotional distress under psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of their privacy, then they talk about loss of income, aloss of capacity to earn income in the future, aloss of capacity to enjoy life. + +What the Court's going to see over the 1.2 next couple of weeks as we bring motions to compel with regard to interrogatories, they 1.4 won't tell me where they live, they won't give the names and addresses of parents and their siblings - they're serking millions of dollars - they won't give me tax returns, all right. + +They don't want to provide any of that information. What they want to do is this: They want to control, in this instance, exactly what information comes in front of this Court, exactly what information comes in front of the Fact Finder, so that they can dump it all onto Mr. Epstein. + +25 We believe that the evidence in this case ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +1 is going to show that these young girls, even +2 prior to Mr. Epstein, had very unusual sex +3 lives, had very unusual sex experiences, which +4 will go to what did Mr. Epstein do under the +5 circumstances or what did they claim he did +6 under the circumstances that caused them +7 damages; that is, what did Mr. Epstein do, +8 separate and apart maybe from an 18-year-old +9 person or a 15-year-old person who may have used +10 an object or a 12-year-old person when they were +11 10 or 11 or 12 or a 40-year-old person like Mr. +12 Epstein, separate and apart from Mr. Epstein, +13 may have done with them at some point in time at +14 an age from 10 up? +15 If they had no sexual experience from age +16 10 to 14, which in their complaints is the first +17 time they allege that they went to Mr. Epstein's +18 house, it's going to be an easy question to +19 answer, "none," that's going to end the inquiry. +20 I don't think that's true, but that's going to +21 end the inquiry. +22 We will not be in a position to defend +23 this case and say, "Okay, you say that Mr. +24 Epstein caused all these problems, well, how +25 about John ██████ who you had sex with when you +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +1 the circumstances, as to what may be typical or +2 usual. We may have six people in the box and +3 what may be typical sex for the people in this +4 room may be very different from them. They may +5 think that we're a bunch of prudes or they may +6 think that this is usual or it's unusual. +7 Each of these girls has their own +8 experiences, they're strippers, they're +9 prostitutes by their own admission. They don't +10 want to give information. They don't want to +11 talk even about their income. +12 Well, wait a minute now. My guess is -- +13 Now, again, I certainly won't speak from +14 personal experiences, but I've heard at strip +15 clubs that men actually pay \$20 or \$30 maybe for +16 a lap dance, and I've heard that some of these +17 strippers and people who work at these clubs +18 similar to E.W. and L.M. and S.R., they have +19 something called a champagne room and that even +20 costs more money and even more things happen +21 back there. +22 Again, that's what their livelihood is, +23 that may have been their prior experience, I +24 don't know. I'm certainly not suggesting that +25 their lifestyle is any worse than we as lawyers; +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +1 were 12? How old was Mr. ██████?" +2 "Well, he was 20 years old." +3 "What did you do?" +4 "We did X, Y, and Z." +5 "Now, did you find that horrific? Did you +6 find that unusual? What was different about it +7 under the circumstances than the circumstances +8 that you had with Mr. Epstein?" +9 This is a very different case. This is +10 not your typical automobile accident case, and +11 if someone was claiming psychological damages as +12 a result of an automobile accident you would +13 often say, "Okay, they have pain and suffering, +14 but they're really not claiming mental anguish," +15 so the fact that they may have been treated +16 20 years ago or even 10 years ago for depression +17 because they had the death of a child, you would +18 say, "Wait a minute, death of a child, don't +19 think it's relevant to what the person's problem +20 is right now, or maybe I'll let you look at it +21 in camera and I, as the judge, will determine +22 whether it's relevant under the circumstances." +23 This is a sex case and sex is a big issue +24 in here, and what's usual, what's unusual? I +25 guess it depends on the person or the couple or +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +1 that's their lifestyle, they've chosen it. But +2 they're bringing a case seeking millions of +3 dollars under the circumstances, they want +4 millions of dollars, but they want the jury or +5 the Fact Finder to see them through ██████ colored +6 glasses. +7 I would say one of the best examples is +8 L.M.'s statement. She basically says, "You +9 know, I love Jeffrey, he was good to us. I told +10 every girl I brought, including E.W., you have +11 to do a topless massage and maybe the more you +12 do, the more money you'll get." +13 Okay, so what caused E.W. to say, "Okay, +14 I'll do it"? Did she decide right then, did she +15 decide when she got in the car, did she decide - +16 because she's been having to make decisions +17 every place along the way, when she got in Mr. +18 Epstein's house, when she went up the stairs, as +19 she claims in the complaint when she saw Mr. +20 Epstein and he had a towel around him? She +21 could have said at any of those times, "You know +22 what, this isn't for me." So what in her +23 background made it okay under the circumstances +24 or that she felt so comfortable? +25 If it was this outrageous act, this +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +2 3 1 5 6 outrageous act with severe, emotional damages, which is the crux of an intentional infli on of emotional distress, it was so severe,, but Iwent back 99 more times, maybe 100 times, or I went back 20 more times or I went back 10 more times under the circumstances. + +What we're looking for is to be able to ask - again, number one, I don't have the time, but, secondly, I set it forth in the motion, but we're in the discovery stage, we're only in the discovery stage, not the admissibility stage. + +THE COURT: Two minutes to wrap up, please. + +MR. CRITTON: And the Ballast case is probably really a good description. + +This same issue came in front of Judge Garrison, it's Question 18 with A.C., it was the identical question that said: List separately the names, addresses, and phone numbers of all males with whom you have had sexual activity since the age of 10, and A.C. set forth — You don't have it, but -- + +THE COURT: And that's the amazing thing, I've got to tell you - and I won't take your time up - but Wednesday afternoon I had six + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +6 7 motions for summary judgment set in ahalf day set, and the incredible thing that happens is I get the response to the Movant's motion for Summary Judgment, a Reply to the Response to the Motion for Summary Judgment, but oftentimes I don't get the motion. In other words, it's stuck, in that case now a39-volume file. + +8 9 0 1 2 So, you know, and it's the same thing here, I don't really have the discovery in my hands to know precisely what's being asked. I know there are snippets that have been referenced in both sides respective memoranda, but I don't have the actual discovery in front of me, so that would be helpful. + +5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 MR. CANTON: May I approach? THE COURT: But it's not unusual, even among the best lawyers in the area, that it seems to be an interesting dynamic though that you all argue so passionately and at length in your responses and generically how this stuff is important, yet the actual questions or the actual production requests are not included, and you guys are not the only ones, it happens with frequency. + +MR. CRITTON: May I approach? ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +1 THE COURT: Thanks. Is that the same? + +2 MR. CRITTON: This is the Garrison case, 3it was Question 18, which the Judge directed -- + +4 MR. BERGER: Judge, our objection is to 5Interrogatory 19, which is quoted in our motion. + +6 MR. CR1TION: It's the same. + +7 THE COURT: I know it's quoted, don't get 8me wrong, but I like to get the context of the 9entire discovery before I take questions sort of , 0 out of sequence, but this doesn't have a ,1 question 19, by the way. + +L2 This question says, quote - and, Mr. + +L3 Berger, follow along if this is the same L4 question No. 18 of the A C. case - "list L5 separately the names, addresses, and phone 16 numbers of all males with whom you have had L7 sexual activities since the age of 10, by year, L8 up through your current age. Describe the L9 nature of sexual activity, the dates, and 10whether you received money or consideration from ?.1 the person," and is that the same question? + +12 MR. BERGER: Yes. + +23 THE COURT: So that was simply 18 in this, 4 19 in the one that you are objecting to. + +25Now, are there any other questions, Mr. + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +Berger, that you are objecting to, because, again, you dealt with it globally, and while you dealt with it very well globally, I want to know what the specific questions are. + +5 MR. BERGER: Well, there are objections 6that are the subject of motions to compel that 7 the Defense filed, so there arc additional -- + +8 THE COURT: Which other ones are they? + +9MR. BERGER: Now we get into the topic of L0 hearings that are coming up. + +THE COURT: Well, I don't want to get into L2 topics of hearings that are coming up. I just L3 want to know: Are there specific questions L4 raised that are on the table that I need to rule 15 on? + +L6 MR. BERGER: That is the specific t7 question -- + +8 THE COURT: That is the specific question. + +L9 MR. BERGER: -- of most importance to us. 20THE COURT: All right. Very well. That's 23. what I'm interested in. + +22 MR. BERGER: That's why we quoted it. + +23 THE COURT: And I'm not taking issue with 24that, it's just that I didn't actually see it in 25 context with the rest of the interrogatories, so + +2 3 it leads me with alittle bit of a handicap, I hope you can appreciate that. MR. CRITTON: Judge also dealt with + +4 5 this issue; I attached a copy of her order. THE COURT: I read that also. + +6 7 MR. CRITTON: And her transcript dealt specifically with the same imie. + +8 9 10 In the Ballast case that we cited, I don't know whether the Court had achance to look at it -- + +11 THE COURT: I have. + +12 13 14 MR. CRITTON: -- again, it was aclaim among other claims, but an intentional infliction of emotional distress. + +is 16 THE COURT: Is there a statutory claim similar to the Ballast claim in this case? + +17 MR. BERGER: Yes. + +18 MR. CRITTON: Yes. + +19 MR. BERGER: Sorry. + +20 23. 22 23 THE COURT: In the Ballast case, there are other claims that had been made, as you mentioned, one being the intentional infliction of emotional distress. + +24 25 MR. CRITTON: And battery, and where I quoted Paragraph 26 with the litany of damages + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +2 3 4 that are being claimed, that's essentially the same damage claim that's being made in all three counts in both L.M., E.W., and by Jane Doe, at least in federal court. + +5 6 7 9 0 1 2 3 4 The Ballast case, of course, as the Court noted and the Court said, Fifth District said, Look, if that was your only claim, the 769.09 claim, we might look at this differently, but because you asked for intentional infliction, you know, they require a listing of the names, telephone numbers, rates of pay, they talked about how has this affected you both before and after, and that's another party to — Let's assume they have boyfriends right now. + +5 6 7 8 9 0 2 3 4 As you saw from L.M.'s statement, E.W.'s boyfriend's father is like her baby's father, so many of these individuals are well connected, but they talk about what's your total income, request for production, give us your special list of customers - now these are questions from the Ballast case, you know, in terms of questions that the Court actually dealt with give us your list of customers, your special customer list or your sugar daddy list, so the names and addresses are important. + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +So what happened to these ladies, these females beforehand, is certainly relevant, what their relationship is now, became they're saying severe and emotional distress. Well, how do you getalong with your boyfriends or various male friends that you've had, whether they're economic friends or whether they're boyfriends? Do you still have normal sexual relationships, do you getalong fine? To depose those individuals and say, Okay, you were L.M.'s boyfriend for six months, did she ever mention L.2 Mr. Epstein, what were the circumstances? What did you do? + +14 Well, we went to movies, you know, we went 15out boating, you know, I would meet her at the L6 club because she was working at Flash Dance at L7 the time, she said she would -- + +L8 THE COURT: Okay. You've got to wrap up, L9 please. Thank you, Mr. Critton. + +Z0 Mr. Berger, give you 3 minutes for 21 rebuttal. + +22 MR. BERGER: On the Ballast case I would 23 point out that -- + +Z4 THE COURT: You know that both sides were 25 well advised and, in fact, mentioned in the + +> ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +1 2 3 4 5 notice of hearing that this was a30-minute hearing. I am giving you some extra time, so I don% want to be suggestive that I'm rushing anybody in terms of the length of time of the hearing. Go ahead. + +6 7 8 9 L0 11 L2 L3 14 MR. BERGER: Thank you, Your Honor. Iwould point out that the Ballast case, as far as I read the questions, and I tried to read them very carefully, on Page 3 of 9 and on Page 4 of 9 of the decision, those questions relate specifically to prostitution. They do not relate to consensual sexual activities with other male partners. They deal specifically with prostitution. + +15 L6 L7 18 L9 20 21 l'HE COURT: Well, Interrogatory 22 on this Page 2 of the opinion states, quote, "state with specificity the manner in which the acts described in the complaint that materially affected how you interacted with your husband, boyfriend, fiance, or any other individual of the opposite sex." + +22 23 MR. BERGER: I wouldn't even object to that question. + +24 THE COURT: Pardon me? + +25 MR. BERGER: I wouldn't object to that ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +1 question. +2 THE COURT: You would. +3 MR. BERGER: No, I wouldn't. He can ask +4 our clients what Mr. Epstein did to them, if +5 sexually molesting them affects their +6 relationship, we're not objecting to that type +7 of question. + +8 Also Ballast does not deal with third +9 party rights, which the Court indicated you're +10 familiar with that issue, so I didn't go on +11 about it. There are significant cases that deal +12 with third party rights and protecting them. + +13 You know, Judge, I can't think of anything +14 more outrageous as acts than sexually molesting +15 13 and 14-year-old girls repeatedly, dozens and +16 dozens of times, and so to deal lightly, which +17 is the tenor of Defense Counsel's approach, I +18 think is improper. + +19 I would just finally point out, Your +20 Honor, that in the course of the deposition of +21 Mr. Epstein -- Let me back up. + +22 Judge, we're dealing I think with, and I +23 think we need to be specific, as you pointed +24 out, the consensual sexual activity of these +25 girls from the age of 10 is not relevant to + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +1 being complained of by these Plaintiffs. + +2 Now, balanced with that is the obvious +3 concerns for the Court in terms of trying to, on +4 the one hand, not expose the alleged victims to +5 unfettered invasions of their privacy, but at +6 the same time recognize that the allegations +7 here and the nature of the facts that have been +8 developed thus far are quite different than what +9 would be a rape case by a stranger, different +10 from a sexual assault case on a one-time basis +11 by a stranger or someone known to the victim. + +12 Here we have elements of prostitution that +13 are ingrained in the facts of the case. While I +14 understand the privacy nature of sexual +15 activity, when we have cases like this - I think +16 as Mr. Critton aptly pointed out, without trying +17 to be disrespectful to the alleged victims - +18 we're not necessarily dealing, as far as the +19 information known to date, with what would +20 otherwise be considered traditional or normal +21 high school-aged women relative to the things +22 that went on here as contended by L.M. in her +23 statement. + +24 I mean, her statement, and it's not been +25 sought to be stricken from the Court's + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +1 either their emotional distress damages or to +2 the liability issues. It's the same thing as +3 the normal driving habits of a person getting in +4 the car in that discovery, I want to just +5 emphasize that point, and it's unfairly +6 prejudicial even if it has any kind of probative +7 value. + +8 This is a pure fishing expedition into +9 people's lives. What women can bring cases of +10 this nature and not be subjected to further +11 trauma by the discovery process? The Court must +12 be able to fashion some type of relief for these +13 types of problems. + +14 Thank you, Judge. + +15 THE COURT: Thank you to both sides. I +16 certainly appreciate your presentations and +17 arguments. + +18 Obviously, as I earlier mentioned, these +19 are sensitive issues, but several things that we +20 have to keep in mind - I think Judge [REDACTED] +21 indicated in the transcript - that, first and +22 foremost, these are claims that are being made +23 by Plaintiffs, and the Plaintiff will have the +24 burden of proof in this case to prove how these +25 acts proximately caused the damages that are + +1 consideration, so I read it, it repeatedly says, +2 quote, "Jeffrey is an awesome man," end quote. +3 It got to the point where she was praising him +4 with such regularity and extent that the +5 detective finally asked her at the conclusion of +6 a 58-page statement, "Are you in love with him +7 at all?" That was the question that the +8 detective after the accolades and praise that +9 she was heaping on Mr. Epstein. + +10 She relates incidents where her boyfriend +11 told her to continue to go over there and do +12 these massages, just bring home the bacon; a +13 scenario where she cared for Epstein so much +14 based on not only the way he treated her in +15 terms of food and drink at the home, and I'm not +16 speaking about alcoholic beverages, she didn't +17 mention that at all, but how awesome it was that +18 when she had a baby Epstein sent over gifts and +19 how special those gifts were to her, so we're +20 not talking about what is typically involved in +21 these rape shield cases. + +22 Again, I don't want this Court's responses +23 simply based on reading this particular +24 statement of one of the particular Plaintiffs +25 involved in the motions here today to be seen as + +1 my simply glossing over the seriousness of the +2 events that transpired at this gentleman's home, +3 but I do have to consider both sides and each +4 side's rights here as a completely neutral +5 arbiter of a very sensitive case and +6 unfortunately a very high profile case as well, +7 but everyone that comes before this Court, and I +8 trust my colleagues as well, no matter what +9 court they sit, is going to be entitled to a +10 fair shake and a fair trial and entitled to the +11 responses and decisions made by a completely and +12 absolute neutral arbiter; anything less than +13 that would be inappropriate. + +14 If I'm going to sit here and be overly +15 empathic to the allegations made by a plaintiff +16 in any type of case, or conversely, where a +17 defendant claims that those allegations are +18 absurd and unfounded and be empathic simply +19 based on those generic claims made typically by +20 counsel as opposed to the parties themselves at +21 these hearings, then I would not be doing the +22 community and the office that I hold the service +23 that I believe that they are entitled to. + +24 So taking that balance in mind, I feel +25 compelled to follow the law that is set forth in +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +1 the Ballast vs. Ruzzo case. For the record, the +2 citation is 703 So.2d. 1076, and that was a +3 decision of the Fifth District Court of Appeal, +4 and I will quote headnote 3, "had the +5 Petitioners brought their lawsuit against Ruzzo +6 and the Board Room only under Section 769.09, +7 evidence of Petitioner's past prostitution +8 including with the Board Room and their earnings +9 related to such activities may not have been +10 discoverable. However, the Petitioners filed a +11 multi-count complaint for compensatory and +12 punitive damages alleging numerous causes of +13 action against the Respondents. These other +14 causes carry no such protection from discovery. +15 Since the information sought by discovery may be +16 relevant or may lead to discovery of admissible +17 evidence of one or more of the other causes of +18 action or to determination of damages, we cannot +19 conclude that the trial court departed from the +20 essential requirement of law in granting this +21 discovery," and it refers to a case called +22 vs. TIB Bank of the Keys, 687 So.2d. 895, a +23 Third District case, 1997, and that quotation +24 then from that case by the Fifth in the Ballast +25 case says "by alleging fraud as well as breach + +1 of contract, purchaser placed at issue her +2 reliance on vendor's assertions the veracity of +3 financial documents submitted to the vendor and +4 the state of her mental health, including memory +5 problems she was experiencing at the time of the +6 alleged tortious conduct; thus, deposition +7 questions concerning her state of mind were +8 relevant." + +9 And here, again, the Court can't ignore +10 its own common sense when making these types of +11 decisions and can't rule in a vacuum, but has to +12 extend at least some common sense considerations +13 to these claims as well. + +14 The nature of the allegations here and the +15 allegations do contain references to, in many of +16 these cases, multiple visits to this +17 individual's home; that is, Mr. Epstein's home, +18 by the very Plaintiffs who are claiming +19 psychological damage, mental anguish, +20 embarrassment, loss of dignity, psychological +21 trauma, an intentional infliction of emotional +22 distress, where the language contained in the +23 cases - I think the first case really speaks to +24 that at length where the cause of action was +25 delineated and discussed fully - I think goes + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES +888.486.4044 + +1 back to the McCarson case and then its prodigy, +2 but to prove a claim for intentional infliction +3 of emotional distress, the word "outrageous" +4 comes to mind, in other words, the acts must be +5 so outrageous that it is beyond the bounds of +6 decent society, as I recollect, just from +7 memory. + +8 When we're dealing with those kinds of +9 claims it is my opinion and the ruling of the +10 Court that, within the bounds of reasonableness, +11 the Defendant is entitled to the information +12 contained in Interrogatory 19. + +13 Now, with regard to the John Doe issue +14 relative to partners or Jane Doe, whoever may be +15 involved, I will permit, as did Judge [REDACTED] in +16 her analysis, anyone who is named to be able to +17 approach the Court and to have the opportunity +18 to protect their identity, so we will follow the +19 same directives as Judge [REDACTED] did. I'm not +20 going to go through it at length here, it's +21 enclosed in the papers prepared by the +22 Defendant, and you all can set forth that type +23 of protection within the order, and I will +24 provide that same type of protection to any of +25 the individuals who are listed. + +Clearly the Rasmussen case is - the primary distinction that I find there is that in that case, there was no question that the probative value, any probative value, was greatly outweighed by the prejudice to any patients in the blood donor area or any people who donated blood, and the chilling effect it would have had on the very necessity, communally and throughout this world, of blood donations, and the risk that the industry would have taken had those names been identified. + +On top of that, and I think without saying so, in that opinion, at least as I recall it having not read it in full, but noting the citation and noting the quotations from the case that was utilized, any damages that needed to be dealt with and any proofs that needed to be dealt with were well defined within the case brought against the blood bank, so I think there was also arelevance issue as well. + +In other words, there was no real question about the transmission aspect and that the blood was tainted, and really was more of acollateral matter as to who provided the blood, than it was an issue of responsibility of the blood bank per + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +broader than admissibility. Fm not suggesting at this juncture that any of this information will necessarily be admissible, but, again, with the broad discretion of the Court relative to discovery matters and following the well established law in Florida, that discovery is far broader than admissibility, I am going to require that the answer be provided to Question 19 in the interrogatory set that have a0 been sent to the two Plaintiffs at issue in this particular case. + +Mr. Critton, will you kindly provide an IL3 order? Well, I guess it's amotion for IL4 protective order. I guess if you all have an IL 5 order that simply says that the motion for IL6 protective order is denied for the reasons 4.7 stated on the record and the amended protective 4.8 order in E.W.'s case is denied for reasons 9 stated on the record, that will be fine. + +'L + +0 MR. BERGER: Judge, I've just drafted - I ?3. know Mr. Critton wants to comment about it - an ≥2 **order that says "denied for reasons stated on 23 the record," and then lillitird-party ?4 protection as in Judge order submitted 25by Defendant in his response."** + +> **ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044** + +**se, and the names were not important even for Fabre reasons, in my opinion, in that particular case.** + +**So I do think that this information is relevant. I do think the information will go not only to issues of proof regarding the substantive legal matters that we've touched on; that is, the causative action that we've spoken about, but also and perhaps even most importantly, they will go to these very serious and significant and extensive psychological damages that the Plaintiffs are claiming here.** + +**I am well aware that when we're dealing with sexual issues, and it's ataboo that this society continues to hold over such issues, and Ifully recognize the privacy interest involved. However, in these types of situations, sometimes those types of taboos have to be, and to a degree, subverted in the interest of justice, the interest of fairness, and the interest that both sides receive, as I mentioned earlier, a fair consideration of their case.** + +**Ido temper my comments today with the understanding as the Fifth District in the Ballast case made clear, that discovery is far ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044** + +**MR. CRITION: I'm okay with that as long as this is all on the record because you dealt with anumber of issues that won't be necessarily in this order, but we'll both want a copy of the transcript, so I can live with that, Mr. Berger.** + +**Can I ask one other question? Can we submit asimilar order? This was on E.W. today, we have it at 4:30 next week, they have a L 0 similar motion on L.M., can Counsel agree --** + +**11 MR. BERGER: Can I talk to -- 12 THE COURT: E.W. and L.M. were both 13 mentioned in this particular motion.** + +**L4 MR. BERGER: Correct, and L.M. has, who L5 has her own case, has an identical motion as a 16 party aweek from today.** + +**L7 THE COURT: Well, again, unless there are 8 issues that would be significantly different L9 than those that we dealt with today, of course, t0 you can speak to her and find out, but the a1 ruling is not going to change, so I don't want 22to necessarily waste anybody's time as it 23concerns having to re-hear the same issues.** + +**24 MR. BERGER: Again, I may reach that 25conclusion, I just want an opportunity to talk ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES** 888.486.4044 + +to the client and talk to Mr. Critton, that's all. + +THE COURT: If that is the case, for appellate purposes, the parties stipulate that I'm not going to rehash my ruling, but it would have the same applicability to L.M. + +MR CRITTON: Right. We would agree with that. I will put that on the record. + +THE COURT: Thank you. + +O MR. CRITTON: Can we put one other thing on the record? + +THE COURT: Sure. + +MR. CRITTON: Judge transcript, the portion I put in, that portion that dealt with the specific topic. May we supplement, by agreement of counsel and certain/ Court, the entire transcript of Judge + +THE COURT: Yes. + +MR. CRITTON: We also have motions on 8:45 O next week, we'll see if we can get those resolved. + +MR. BERGER: May I approach? + +THE COURT: Yes. + +Thanks, Mr. Berger. Nice to see you all. + +(The hearing concluded at 9:30 a.m.) + +ESQUIRE CORPORATE SERVICES 888.486.4044 + +Page 55 + +CERTIFICATE + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF BROWARD ) + +I, JENNIFER D. DiLORENZO, Shorthand + +Reporter, certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings and Othat the transcript is atrue and complete record of my stenographic notes. + +Dated this 22nd day of May, 2009. + +JENNIFER D. DiLORENZO, COURT REPORTER \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744448/EFTA02744448.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744448/EFTA02744448.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..495c8fc8a4657b781ffbbbc6717b7a98c8cf946a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744448/EFTA02744448.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,534 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744448.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 15, + "chars": 61297, + "elapsed_seconds": 24.52, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 180.45999145507812, + 379.89 + ], + [ + 348.7896728515625, + 379.89 + ], + [ + 348.7896728515625, + 392.94415283203125 + ], + [ + 180.45999145507812, + 392.94415283203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 900 + ], + [ + "Line", + 151 + ], + [ + "Text", + 70 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1110 + ], + [ + "Line", + 185 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1026 + ], + [ + "Line", + 161 + ], + [ + "Text", + 59 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1050 + ], + [ + "Line", + 160 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 62 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1100 + ], + [ + "Line", + 162 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1068 + ], + [ + "Line", + 156 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1103 + ], + [ + "Line", + 157 + ], + [ + "Text", + 34 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1055 + ], + [ + "Line", + 185 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 38 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1115 + ], + [ + "Line", + 164 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 355 + ], + [ + "Line", + 59 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744448" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744463/EFTA02744463.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744463/EFTA02744463.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3557df8013e4377edc6c2ad70040b890534c8d00 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744463/EFTA02744463.md @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ +## IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +## CIVIL DIVISION + +CASE NO.: 50 2008 CA 028058 X3CX3CMB AD + +E.W., + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFF'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S INTERROGATORIES + +COMES NOW the Plaintiff, E.W., by and through her undersigned counsel, and serves her Answers to Defendants Interrogatories, numbered 1 and 26, inclusive, propounded to said Plaintiff on or about December 10, 2008. + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that the original of the above and foregoing has been provided by United States mail to: Robert D. Critton, Esquire and Michael J. Pike, Esquire, Burman, Critton, et al., Attorneys for Defendant, 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, Florida nn r 33401, this zap day of January, 2009. + +> THE LAW OFFICE OF BRAD ASSOCIATES, LLC Attorneys for Plaintiff 2028 EMI Street Suite 202 Hollywood, Florida 33020 Telephone: 954-414-8033 Facsimile: 954-924-1530 + +Jay Howell, Esquire + +Florida Bar #225657 + +JAY HOWELL & ASSOCIATES, P.A. + +Co-Counsel for Plaintiff + +644 Cesery Boulevard + +Suite 250 + +Jacksonville, Florida 32211 + +Telephone: 904-680-1234 + +Facsimile: 904-680-1238 + +By: + +![]()![]()Florida Bar #542075 + +- 18. State the amount of monies (or anything else of value, including gifts) you claim were given or paid to you by Mr. Epstein (or someone paid/gave you on his behalf and that person's name, address and phone number) by year from 2000 - 2006. + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, paid me \$200 for each time I went to his house and he sexually touched and/or fondled me. One time he gave me \$300 instead of \$200. Additionally, he paid me \$200 each time I brought another minor girl to his house and he sexually molested or abused them too. I went to his house more than 100 times. + +- 19. List separately the names, address and phone number of all males, excluding Mr. Epstein, with whom you have had sexual activity since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual activity, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. + +Objection, harassing; irrelevant, not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence, violation of privacy interests and rights of Plaintiff and other innocent persons. + +- 20. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding your claims against Mr. Epstein, whom you have claimed (formally or informally) committed sexual assault or battery on you since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual assault or battery, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. + +Objection, harassing; irrelevant, not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence, violation of privacy interests and rights of other persons. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744463/EFTA02744463.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744463/EFTA02744463.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..71e7ba0801b4ddc14166baddefc2901610d93550 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744463/EFTA02744463.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,208 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744463.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2828, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.01, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH \nJUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM \nBEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 89.91 + ], + [ + 475.0450744628906, + 89.91 + ], + [ + 475.0450744628906, + 135.35302734375 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 135.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CIVIL DIVISION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 147.42000000000002 + ], + [ + 350.05633544921875, + 147.42000000000002 + ], + [ + 350.05633544921875, + 163.10302734375 + ], + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 163.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S ANSWERS TO \nDEFENDANT'S INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 366.93 + ], + [ + 423.7564697265625, + 366.93 + ], + [ + 423.7564697265625, + 397.85302734375 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 397.85302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "Span", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 318 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744463" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744466/EFTA02744466.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744466/EFTA02744466.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..205112e1814bbc5713a6bedd543aa0baaffef1bf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744466/EFTA02744466.md @@ -0,0 +1,412 @@ +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH +JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM +BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129XXXXMB AI + +A.C., + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, and [REDACTED] + +Defendants. + +ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO +FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO PLAINTIFF AND TO OVERRULE +PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, +INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion To +Compel Responses To First Request To Produce To Plaintiff And To Overrule +Plaintiff's Objections, & For Defendant's Expenses, Including Attorneys' Fees +and the Court having heard argument of counsel and being fully advised in these +premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion is hereby granted/ +denied as to #17 + #18; and denied +as to #22 as phrased. Response to +he for send w/in 10 day. + +DONE AND ORDERED at Palm Beach County Courthouse, West Palm +Beach, Florida, this 23 day of FEB, 2008. + +Edward A. Garrison +Circuit Judge + +Copies furnished: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ., and MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ., 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, +FL 33401; JACK SCAROLA, ESQ., AND JACK P. [REDACTED] ESQ., Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A., 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., West Palm Beach, FL 33409, and JACK A. +GOLDBERGER, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A., One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 +Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +EXHIBIT + +Comp. EXHIBIT "B" + +CC EN +2/2 + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH +JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM +BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129XXXXMB AI + +A.C., + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFERY E. EPSTEIN, and [REDACTED] + +Defendants. + +ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO +INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR +DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion To +Compel Answers To Interrogatories And To Overrule Plaintiff's Objections, & For +Defendant's Expenses, Including Attorneys' Fees, and the Court having heard +argument of counsel and being fully advised in these premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion is hereby granted/ + +~~done~~ as to #5, 12 #18, denied as +to #2. Responses to be served w/in +10 days. + +DONE AND ORDERED at Palm Beach County Courthouse, West Palm +Beach, Florida, this 23 day of Feb 2009 + +![]()Copies furnished: +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ., and MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ., 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, +FL 33401; JACK SCAROLA, ESQ., AND JACK P. [REDACTED], ESQ., Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A., 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., West Palm Beach, FL 33409, and JACK A. +GOLDBERGER, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A., One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 +Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +CC: JEN6 DJ +Cf: field board +m [unclear] +2 Part 3 + +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE +FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND +FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 50 2008CA025129XXXXMB AI + +A.C., + +Plaintiff(s), + +vs. + +JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN and [REDACTED] +[REDACTED], + +Defendant(s). + +PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF SERVING AMENDED ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES +#5, #12 AND #18 OF DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES + +COMES NOW the Plaintiff, A.C., by and through undersigned counsel, and hereby files this Notice with the Court that Amended Answers to Interrogatories #5, #12 and #18 of Defendant's First Interrogatories propounded by the Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, on November 13, 2008, have been furnished to the attorney for the Defendant. + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been furnished by mail this 6th day of March, 2009, to: See attached list of counsel. + +*Jack P. [Signature]* + +JACK SCAROLA +Florida Bar No.: 169440 +JACK P. [REDACTED] +Florida Bar No.: 0547808 +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 +Phone: (561) 686-6300 +Fax: (561) 383-9424 +Attorney for Plaintiff(s) + +RDC +DC JTE V6.DI +also + +A.C. v. Epstein + +Case No.: 50 2008CA025129)CaXMB Al Plaintiff's Notice of Serving Amended Answers to Interrogatories #5, #12 and #18 of Defendant's First Interrogatories. + +- 18. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males with whom you have had sexual activity since the age of 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual activity, the date(s) and whether you received money or consideration from the person + +Answer: A. + +- onot know his current address or phone number. Sexual intercourse, oral sex and heavy petting (2001) +- B. Ido not know his current address or phone number. Sexual intercourse (2002) +- C. Ido not know his current address or phone number. Heavy petting (2002 +- D. 410.1. Ido not know his current address or phone number. Sexual intercourse (2003) +- E. ININIMI Ido not know his current address or phone number. Sexual intercourse and oral sex ( 2003) F ISM Ido not know his current address or phone number. Sexual intercourse (late 2003) +- G. Ido not know his current address or phone number. Sexual intercourse, oral sex and heavy petting (2004) + - I. Ido not know is current address or phone number. Sexual intercourse, oral sex and heavy petting (2004) + +IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 502008CA020614XXXXMB AF + +JANE DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and + +Defendants. + +COPY + +COURT REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS HAD BEFORE THE HONORABLE DIANA + +DATE: March 3, 2009 + +PLACE: Palm Beach County Courthouse 205N. Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +> U.S. Legal. Support (561) 835-0220 EXHIBIT + +. EXHIBIT LeLe + +7 + +B + +9 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +1.4 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +# APPEARANCES: + +LAW FIRM, P.A. 224Datura Avenue Suite 900 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Counsel for Plaintiff BY: TSIDRO M. , ESQUIRE + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515N. Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Counsel for Defendant BY: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE + +a + +9 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +one of the cases that I have is there's a young lady who claims that she was molested in the past and raped, pretty significant issues, well in advance of her even meeting with Mr. Epstein. And they seem to play alarge role in her psychiatric and psychological evaluation. + +We're going to come to the Court in this case as we have others and ask for a psychological evaluation of this lady, and if she was raped or if she was molested or just she had abad experience or some -- whether it was a young or old man assaulted her in some fashion, that may play arole in her damages and what -- + +THE COURT: What I'm going to allow for discovery purposes only not necessarily getting it in at the time trial are two years before her first encounter with Mr. Epstein and anything subsequent. + +MR. : Judge, I just wanted to say on the record because I forgot to mention it, there's also -- I did state an objection to the identity of people that are unrepresented in this courtroom. They have rights too. So what I -- + +THE COURT: Well, my suggestion is that you send those people a letter and tell them that + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +2.0 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +you're going to disclose them and if they have a problem with it that they come to see me before you disclose it. + +So I'm going to give you 20 days to respond to this rather than the usual five and that will give you time to put these people on notice and if they want to come visit with me and have aJohn Doe, I'll have aJohn Doe hearing but, you know, this is her case. She's doing it. She's the one seeking damages, and he is entitled to be able to confront other individuals to find out information that may be relevant to the damages she's seeking or she can drop the damages. That's her choice. If you seek damages, you've got to do it -- if you could put that in an order so that we have atime for him to do this. + +Just fill out an order, hand it back up to me and I'll deal with it. + +(The proceedings were concluded.) + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE + +THE STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PALM BEACH. + +I, Teresa Bell, Court Reporter, certify that Iwas authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings and that the transcript is a true and complete record of my stenographic notes. + +Ifurther certify that the proceedings were taken at the time and place shown herein and that all counsel and persons as hereinabove shown were present. + +Ifurther certify that I am not arelative, employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor am I a relative or employee of any of the parties' attorney or counsel connected with the action, nor am Ifinancially interested in the action. + +Dated this 11th day + +TERESA BELL, Court Reporter IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +JANE DOE II, + +CASE NO. 502008CA020614)OMMB AF + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, and + +Defendants. + +### DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF SERVING FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES DIRECTED TO PLAINTIFF + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, (hereinafter "Mr. Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys hereby files this Notice of Serving First Set of Interrogatories Directed to Plaintiff Jane Doe II, pursuant to Rule 1.340, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, and request the Plaintiff to answer said interrogatories in writing within thirty (30) days from date of service hereof. + +# Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was sent by fax and U.S. Mail to the following addressees on this 10th day of December , 2008: + +Isidro M. =, Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F Counsel for Plaintiff + +Page 10 + +- 16. State in detail how you came to be at Mr. Epstein's home on each occasion, i.e. did someone bring you or ask you if you would or wanted to go: if so, state the name and address of that individual and what he/she told you and the purpose of your visit. +- 17. State the date you began engaging in prostitution, where (City and State), and whether you are still engaged in prostitution. +- 18. State the amount of monies (or anything else of value, including gifts) you claim were given or paid to you by Mr. Epstein (or someone paid/gave you on his behalf and that person's name, address and phone number) by year from 2000 — 2006 +- 19. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding Mr. Epstein, with whom you have had sexual activity since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual activity, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744466/EFTA02744466.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744466/EFTA02744466.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b0d5d444df1494be48611e85f39b27cc1a369fd6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744466/EFTA02744466.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,580 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744466.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 11132, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.16, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO PLAINTIFF AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 118.116, + 277.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 506.124, + 277.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 506.124, + 338.58 + ], + [ + 118.116, + 338.58 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 116.28, + 279.45 + ], + [ + 504.9, + 279.45 + ], + [ + 504.9, + 328.05 + ], + [ + 116.28, + 328.05 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.13200000000006, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 519.588, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 519.588, + 116.63999999999999 + ], + [ + 282.13200000000006, + 116.63999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF SERVING AMENDED ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES #5, #12 AND #18 OF DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 77.724, + 307.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 527.544, + 307.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 527.544, + 341.01 + ], + [ + 77.724, + 341.01 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "APPEARANCES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 129.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 244.04183959960938, + 129.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 244.04183959960938, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 149.85000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF SERVING FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES \nDIRECTED TO PLAINTIFF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 77.724, + 311.85 + ], + [ + 511.7784729003906, + 311.85 + ], + [ + 511.7784729003906, + 341.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 77.724, + 341.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 233.17200000000003, + 490.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 359.58013916015625, + 490.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 359.58013916015625, + 506.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 233.17200000000003, + 506.79998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 207 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 271 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 126 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 145 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 351 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 288 + ], + [ + "Line", + 51 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 229 + ], + [ + "Line", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 32 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 211 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744466" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744477/EFTA02744477.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744477/EFTA02744477.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a191aad92517751532f3cee4f5ccc5bde497f275 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744477/EFTA02744477.md @@ -0,0 +1,251 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRAI + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRN I + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +CASE N 08-80893-CIV-MARR + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY IN CONNECTION WITH THE VARIOUS MOTIONS TO COMPEL DISCOVERY AND REPLIES THERETO SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO THE DISCOVERABILITY OF PLAINTIFFS' PAST SEXUAL HISTORY + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Notice of Supplemental Authority In Connection With The Various Motions To Compel Discovery And Replies Filed By Epstein Specifically Related To The Discoverability Of Plaintiffs' Past Sexual History: + +1. A hearing was recently held in a related state court proceeding in connection with the above discovery requests: Case No.: 502008CA028058, E.W. v. Epstein. The Trial Court ruled that the past sexual history of the Plaintiff was discoverable. The transcript is attached hereto as Supplemental Authority in connection with the Several Motions to Compel and Replies associated with the same discovery requests pending before this Federal Court concerning the Plaintiffs' past sexual history. See Composite Exhibit "A" with attached discovery response number 19. + +2. Two additional related state court matters were held in connection with the same discovery requests, and similar rulings were made. See Composite Exhibit "B" (the Orders and related discovery response number 18 in Case No.: 502008CA025129)OOO(MBAI, A.C. v. Epstein) and Composite Exhibit "C" (the Transcript (see pages 20-21) and with attached discovery request number 19 in Case No.: 502008CA020614XXXXMBAI, Jane Doe II v. Epstein et al) + +**Certificate of Service** + +![]()I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 28 day of May, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. +Florida Bar No. 224162 +rcrit@bclclaw.com +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +mpike@bclclaw.com +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +bedwards@rra-law.com +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. █ Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +jsx@searcylaw.com +jph@searcylaw.com +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com +*Counsel for Defendant* █ + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 +Fax: 561-515-2610 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-08804* +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +cassellp@law.utah.edu +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. █ Esq. +█ Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case* +*No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +rjosefsberg@podhurst.com +kezell@podhurst.com +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +jagesq@bellsouth.net +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744477/EFTA02744477.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744477/EFTA02744477.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f1e7d18d116baa6e99d603b6f5565b6ccce93142 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744477/EFTA02744477.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,317 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744477.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 5904, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.48, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 202.572, + 71.17889404296875 + ], + [ + 412.0008544921875, + 71.17889404296875 + ], + [ + 412.0008544921875, + 99.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 202.572, + 99.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL \nAUTHORITY IN CONNECTION WITH THE VARIOUS MOTIONS TO COMPEL \nDISCOVERY AND REPLIES THERETO SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO THE \nDISCOVERABILITY OF PLAINTIFFS' PAST SEXUAL HISTORY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 85.6875 + ], + [ + 522.00390625, + 85.6875 + ], + [ + 522.00390625, + 142.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 142.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 242.964, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 242.964, + 100.44 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.66, + 445.5 + ], + [ + 428.4, + 445.5 + ], + [ + 428.4, + 486.0 + ], + [ + 186.66, + 486.0 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 51 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744477" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744483/EFTA02744483.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744483/EFTA02744483.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bd1a19c76e8f6630f4613e40324d41c183ca833d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744483/EFTA02744483.md @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 013-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/M. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-8081 I-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER RESETTING TRIAL DATES AND PRETRIAL DEADLINES FOR JANE DOE'S 2-7 + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant Epstein's Motion to Strike Cases + +from Current Trial Docket and Motion to Continue Case and/or Alternative Motion to Modify Trial and Scheduling Order Deadlines for C.M.A, Jane Doe (80893), and Jane Does 2-7, filed May 19, 2009. (DE 104). Jane Does 2-7 agree to modify the trial and scheduling order deadlines. See DE 112. The Court having reviewed the motion and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Epstein's Motion to Continue (DE 104) is GRANTED as to Jane Does 2-7, as follows: + +- 1. These cases are reset for trial on the two-week calendar commencing Tuesday, June 1 2010. Counsel for all parties shall appear at a calendar call commencing at 10:00 a.m. on Friday, May 28, 2010. +- 2. The pretrial deadlines set forth in the scheduling orders for Jane Doe's 2-7 are amended as follows: Discovery Cutoff - December 11, 2009; Substantive Pretrial Motions - January 8, 2010 +- 3. All other aspects of the previously-entered scheduling orders remain in full force and effect. + +Epstein's Motion to Continue (DE 104) is RESERVED as to C.M.A. and to Jane Doe (80893) until a response is filed or the deadline to respond has passed. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 28" day of May, 2009. + +Cz KENNETH A. MARRA Copies furnished to: United States District Judge + +all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744483/EFTA02744483.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744483/EFTA02744483.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4fb58a4ff2f0364f5adb8f6da79898462e395607 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744483/EFTA02744483.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,223 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744483.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 2590, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.44, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER RESETTING TRIAL DATES AND PRETRIAL DEADLINES FOR JANE \nDOE'S 2-7", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 523.8994750976562, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 523.8994750976562, + 624.7330169677734 + ], + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 624.7330169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744483" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744487/EFTA02744487.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744487/EFTA02744487.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..79fd0d5e81d36ceca4916d599110ebd36e5d44f4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744487/EFTA02744487.md @@ -0,0 +1,113 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +I + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +C.M.A., Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +JANE DOE, Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, Defendants. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +DOE II, Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, Defendants. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +## UNITED STATES' NOTICE OF LIMITED APPEARANCE AS AMICUS CURIAE TO FILE RESPONSE TO COURT'S ORDER REOUESTING POSITION ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY (DE 991 + +Comes now the United States, by and through the undersigned Assistant United States Attorney, and makes this limited appearance to file via CM/ECF its response to the Court's Order requesting the position of the United States on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Stay Proceedings [DE 99]. By filing this notice of limited appearance and its response, the United States does not make itself a party to this litigation and takes no position with respect + +to the outcome of any of the civil suits. By filing this notice of limited appearance and response, the United States also does not waive any procedural or statutory bars to suit. + +Respectfully submitted, + +R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY + +By: s/A. Villa aiia A. VILLAFANA Assistant United States Attorney Florida Bar No. 0018255 500 East Broward Boulevard, 7th Floor Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33394 Telephone: 954-356-7255 Facsimile: 954-356-7230 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on May 28, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. According to the Court's website, counsel for all parties are able to receive notice via the CM/ECF system. + +> s/A. Villa aiia A. VILLAFARA Assistant United States Attorney \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744487/EFTA02744487.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744487/EFTA02744487.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a3b8c98e75cc55882ab89d3e671df8f378d0c015 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744487/EFTA02744487.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,242 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744487.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 2459, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.12, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 414.0744934082031, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 414.0744934082031, + 102.62200927734375 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 102.62200927734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES' NOTICE OF LIMITED APPEARANCE \nAS AMICUS CURIAE TO FILE RESPONSE TO COURT'S ORDER \nREOUESTING POSITION ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY (DE 991", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 85.68, + 477.9 + ], + [ + 528.49462890625, + 477.9 + ], + [ + 528.49462890625, + 524.4919738769531 + ], + [ + 85.68, + 524.4919738769531 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 355.59000000000003 + ], + [ + 388.9211730957031, + 355.59000000000003 + ], + [ + 388.9211730957031, + 371.73248291015625 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 371.73248291015625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744487" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744491/EFTA02744491.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744491/EFTA02744491.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aacc5969be5baf2b56883d9d433f9713f999ef0e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744491/EFTA02744491.md @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +C.M.A., Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +JANE DOE, Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, Defendants. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +DOE II, Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, Defendants. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRAIMM + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +#### UNITED STATES' RESPONSE TO COURT'S ORDER REQUESTING POSITION ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY IDE 991 + +Comes now the United States, by and through the undersigned Assistant United States Attorney, and files this response to the Court's Order requesting the position of the United States on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Stay Proceedings [DE 99]. For the reasons set forth below, it is the United States' position that a stay of the proceedings is not necessary and was not contemplated by the Non-Prosecution Agreement between the United States and Defendant Jeffrey Epstein. + +## ISSUE PRESENTED + +The United States is not a party to these lawsuits and, accordingly, is not fully aware of the scope of the proceedings, the range of arguments presented by counsel, and any correspondence or oral communications between the parties in these civil suits. Based on the information presented by the Court and a review of Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Stay and/or Continue Action for Time Certain Based on Parallel Civil and Criminal Proceedings with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Court File No. 08-CV-80811- MARRA/JOHNSON DE 51-1), and responses thereto filed by various plaintiffs in their suits, the undersigned understands that the Court has requested the position of the United States on the following issue: + +Are there "special circumstances" that require the imposition of a stay of the civil proceedings in the "interests of justice" until the "expiration" of the Non-Prosecution Agreement ["NPA"] between the United States and Epstein? + +By filing this response, the United States does not make itself a party to this litigation and takes no position with respect to the outcome of any of the civil suits; nor does the United States take any position regarding Defendant Epstein's performance of his obligations pursuant to the NPA. The United States also declines to comment on Defendant Epstein's representations regarding past allegations of violations of the NPA by Epstein. The United States files this response solely as amicus curiae at the Court's request and does not waive any procedural or statutory bars to suit. + +# I. STANDARD FOR IMPOSING A DISCRETIONARY STAY + +### A. The Defendant Must Show that the Assertion of His Fifth Amendment Privilege Against Self-Incrimination Would Automatically Result in the Entry of Summary Judgment Against Him. + +"The decision whether or not to stay civil litigation in deference to parallel criminal proceedings is discretionary.... A movant must carry a heavy burden to succeed in such an endeavor." Microfinancial, Inc. v. Premier Holidays Interne', Inc., 385 F.3d 72, 77 (1st Cir. 2004) (citations omitted). When a defendant facing possible criminal liability invokes his Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination in connection with civil litigation, a court can stay discovery or the entire civil case. v. Jenne, 2007 WL 624286 \*1 (S.D. Fl. Feb. 23, 2007) (Cooke, J.). "However, `the Constitution does not require a stay of civil proceedings pending the outcome of related criminal proceedings. Forcing an individual to risk non-criminal disadvantage by remaining silent for fear of self incrimination in a parallel criminal proceeding does not rise to the level of an unconstitutional infringement?" Id. (quoting Shell Oil Co. v. Altina Assocs., Inc., 866 F. Supp. 536, 540 (M.D. Fl. 1994)). + +As this Court has previously explained: + +The law regarding stays of civil actions is well-settled in the Eleventh Circuit. In United States v. Lot 5, Fox Grove, Alachua County, Fla, 23 F.3d 359, 363- 65 (11th Cir. 1994) ("Lot 5"), the Court articulated the following principles of law with respect to a stay of a civil action pending resolution of a related criminal action: + +[A] blanket assertion of the privilege is an inadequate basis for the issuance of a stay. Rather, a court must stay a civil + +proceeding pending resolution of a related criminal prosecution only when "special circumstances" so require in the "interests of justice." The court may deny a stay so long as the privilege's invocation does not compel an adverse judgment against the claimant. + +[T]he standard set by the Eleventh Circuit as to when a stay should be granted to prevent unconstitutional infringement is more narrow. The law in the Eleventh Circuit requires consideration of whether, as a result of invoking the privilege, the defendant faces certain loss of the civil proceeding on summary judgment if the civil proceeding were to continue. Lot 5, 23 F.3d at 364; Pervis v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 901 F.2d 944 (1 1 th Cir. 1990). Under this standard, Movants must show that invocation of the privilege in the instant matter will result in certain loss by automatic summary judgment. United States v. Two Parcels of Real Property, 92 F.3d 1123, 1129 (11th Cir. 1996); Pervis, 901 F.2d at 946-47. This must be an actual adverse judgment, and not "merely the loss of the defendant's most 'effective defense.' Securities & Exchange Comm. v. lncendy, 936 F. Supp. at 955 (S.D. H. 1996); Shell Oil Co., 866 F. Supp. at 540-41. + +Court-Appointed Receiver of Lancer Mgt. Group LLC v. Lauer, 2009 WL 800144 (S.D. H. Mar. 25, 2009) (Marra, J.). + +Thus, before reaching the relative benefit and prejudice to each of the parties caused by staying the cases, the Court must determine whether, if defendant Epstein were to invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination' and the Court were to allow an adverse inference to be drawn therefrom, an adverse judgment against Epstein would be automatically compelled. The United States respectfully submits that it would not. + +&#x27;It appears from a brief review of some of Epstein's discovery responses that Epstein has made a blanket assertion of the privilege. For example, Epstein has asserted his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to a plaintiff's request to produce the NPA and the United States' list of identified victims although these documents were provided to Epstein by the United States. + +From a review of the Complaints filed by the plaintiffs in these cases, it appears that some have filed claims based upon Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, some have filed claims based upon common law torts, and some have filed a combination of the two. Under general principles of tort law, a plaintiff is required to prove: (1) that the defendant committed a bad act; (2) that the plaintiff suffered damages; and (3) that the damages were caused by the defendant's bad act. To succeed on a claim under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, a plaintiff must show: (I) that the plaintiff is a person who, while a minor, was a victim of an enumerated offense committed by the defendant; (2) that the person suffered personal injury as a result of that violation; and (3) the amount of damages she sustained. + +Epstein's assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege could result in the drawing of a negative inference only as to the first element under both of these claims. Therefore, to succeed on summary judgment (or at trial), the plaintiffs would still have to prove that they suffered personal injury/damages as a result of the defendant's bad act. Cf. In re Financial Federated Title & Trust, Inc., 252 B.R. 834, 838 (S.D. Fl. Bank. Ct. 2000) (Stay not warranted in bankruptcy proceeding where criminal indictment was pending because negative inference related only to defendant's receipt of allegedly fraudulent transfers, but "Trustee must still carry the burden of proving all of the elements of his complaint for fraudulent transfers . includ[ing] fraudulent intent, insolvency, and financial condition at the time of the transfers to the Defendants."). + +While Epstein may believe that his arguments and proof as to the first element are his "most effective defense," that alone is insufficient to warrant the imposition of a stay of the + +litigation. There are two other items for the Court to consider in deciding this issue. First, pursuant to the terms of the NPA, as to those victims identified by the United States, Epstein has already made a concession that they are victims of an enumerated offense committed by Epstein. Thus, this inference is drawn not due to his invocation of the right against selfincrimination but due to his entry into a contractual agreement with the United States for which the identified victims are third-party beneficiaries.' Second, in Lot 5, the Eleventh Circuit pointed out the wealth of evidence other than the defendant's testimony that could be used to defeat a liability claim. See Lot 5, 23 F.3d at 364 ("Thus, Claimant's assertion that only her own testimony could vindicate her is groundless; other participants to the illegal acts that gave rise to the forfeiture were available to testify at trial. Claimant's failure to indicate with precision why she did not use other parties' testimony to substantiate her defense was fatal."). For example, Epstein could mount a defense using effective cross-examination, telephone records, travel records, documents within the possession of the plaintiffs or third parties, and/or the testimony of third parties to rebut the plaintiffs' proof. + +&#x27;The United States notes that it is not aware of the identities of all of the plaintiffs in the civil suits. To the extent that any are not "identified victims" under the NPA, this contractual provision would not apply.

B. Additional Factors to Consider in Balancing the Prejudice to the Parties

If the Court is persuaded that the negative inference drawn from Epstein's assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege would result in an automatic grant of summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, then the Court must engage in a balancing of equities in determining whether there are "special circumstances" warranting the imposition of a stay "'to prevent a party from suffering substantial and irreparable prejudice." Securites and Exchange Comm'n v. Incendy, 936 F. Supp. 952, 956 (S.D. FL 1996) (quoting S.E.C. v. First Financial Group of Texas, Inc., 659 F.2d 660, 668 (5th Cir. 1981) (add'/ citations omitted).

Examples of "special circumstances" provided by the Supreme Court in [United States v. Kordel] are: (1) if the Government brought the civil action solely to obtain evidence for its criminal prosecution, (2) if the Government failed to advise the defendant in the civil proceeding that it contemplates his criminal prosecution; (3) if the defendant is without counsel or reasonably fears prejudice from adverse pretrial publicity or other unfair injury; or (4) any other special circumstances indicating unconstitutionality or even impropriety.

Incendy at 956 (citing United States v. Kordel, 397 U.S. 1, 11 (1970)). See also Securities and Exchange Comm'n v. 261 Fed. Appx. 259, 263 (11th Cir. 2008) ("[N]o 'special circumstances' existed in this case warranting a stay, as there is no record evidence suggesting the Government had brought the civil case solely to obtain evidence for the criminal prosecution or that the criminal case against [defendant] was unconstitutional or inappropriately instituted.").

No "special circumstances" exist here. First, unlike and Incendy, the United States Government is not a party to the civil litigation. Each suit is brought on behalf of an

individual plaintiff represented by private counsel. Some of those plaintiffs are adverse to the United States and have filed suit against the Government based upon its handling of the criminal case against Epstein. (See In re Jane Doe Litigation, Court File No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra.) There has been no allegation, and certainly no showing, that the civil litigation is a ruse to obtain discovery on behalf of the criminal investigation.

As some of the plaintiffs have mentioned, one purpose of the NPA was to place the identified victims in the same position where they would have been if Epstein had been convicted after trial of an offense enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 2255. (See, e.g., Court File No. 08-CV-80119 DE 49-2.) If Epstein had proceeded to trial and been convicted, those victims would have been entitled to restitution and to file suit pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255, and would have been entitled to the same sorts of discovery that they now seek. None of the plaintiffs has contacted the United States about passing on materials gathered through discovery to any criminal investigators or about seeking discovery that would be relevant only to the criminal proceedings, rather than to their individual cases. If Epstein has legitimate concerns that the civil discovery process is being abused in some way, he can ask the Court for a protective order limiting the scope of discovery or its distribution. Furthermore, if at some time in the future, Epstein were the subject of a criminal indictment and he alleged that the evidence to be used against him was gathered improperly, he could file a motion to suppress or to dismiss the indictment in that criminal action. See, e.g., United States, ex. rel. Westrick v. Second Chance, 2007 WL 1020808 \*4 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 2007) (Defendant in civil False Claims Act suit moved to stay civil action pending criminal

investigation where no indictment had been returned. The district court denied the motion, noting that while "allowing civil discovery to proceed may afford the government [who was the real party in interest in the civil case] the opportunity to gain evidence that it may not be entitled to under the more restrictive criminal discovery rules, if and when discovery becomes necessary, protective orders and other remedial measures may be taken.") (citations omitted).

By entering into the NPA, with its explicit discussion of 18 U.S.C. § 2255, Epstein acknowledged that the United States was trying to protect the victims' rights to restitution and that civil claims would likely follow. Epstein did not bargain for a stay of those proceedings. Instead, both parties received benefits and gave consideration for the bargain that was struck — while Epstein is faced with answering discovery requests that he would not face during criminal proceedings, he also is entitled to the identification of and extensive discovery from the victims, which he would not have received in the criminal case. Based upon a review of the discovery requests he has promulgated thus far, it appears that Epstein is taking full advantage of this benefit and if a criminal case were ever filed, he would, no doubt, seek to use that information in his defense.'

&#x27;With respect to the other "special circumstances" mentioned in Incendy, the government obviously advised Epstein of the potential for criminal charges, and that knowledge led to the negotiation of the NPA. Epstein also has a number of attorneys listed on the Service List for the civil cases and has retained a similarly large number of attorneys to handle the criminal investigation and negotiation of the NPA. Epstein alleges a fear of adverse publicity, but as the plaintiffs have pointed out, during the course of the state and federal criminal investigations, Epstein's personal publicist distributed stories to the press impugning the credibility of the victims and other witnesses and averring that the victims' allegations of abuse were made solely to extract money from the defendant. In the context of some of the civil suits currently pending, Epstein has asked the Court

Unlike and Incendy, Epstein also has not been criminally indicted. In some districts, this alone is virtually dispositive. See, e.g., Sterling Nat'l Bank v. A-I Hotels Jnternat'l, 175 F. Supp. 2d 573, 576-77 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) ("district courts in this Circuit `generally grant the extraordinary remedy of a stay only after the defendant seeking a stay has been indicted.'" (quoting Citibank, N.A. v. 1993 VVL 481335 \*1 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 18, 1993) (add'l citations omitted). As one court explained:

the consensus that a party seeking a stay bears a heavier burden when he has not yet been indicted derives logically from the balancing test set out by the courts of appeals that have considered the question. When a defendant has been indicted, his situation is particularly dangerous, and takes a certain priority, for the risk to his liberty, the importance of safeguarding his constitutional rights, and even the strain on his resources and attention that makes defending satellite civil litigation particularly difficult, all weigh in favor of his interest. Moreover, if the potential prejudice to the defendant is particularly high post-indictment, the prejudice to the plaintiff of staying proceedings is somewhat reduced, since the criminal litigation has reached a crisis that will lead to a reasonably speedy resolution. Furthermore, at that stage in the criminal proceeding, the contours of the indictment will provide the Court with a reasonable basis for determining the extent of the threat to the defendant's Fifth Amendment rights, and the likely extent and timing of the criminal litigation.

Pre-indictment, these factors must be balanced significantly differently. Though many of the same risks to the civil defendant are present, the dangers are at least somewhat more remote, and it is inherently unclear to the Court just how much the unindicted defendant really has to fear. Conversely, the delay imposed on the plaintiff is potentially indefinite. There is no telling how complicated the government's investigation may be, whether the allegations of the particular civil plaintiff are merely the tip of an iceberg that will result in a lengthy and open-ended investigation, what priority the government assigns to the investigation, whether it will result in charges that will have to

to unseal the victims' names so that he may make use similar press efforts to impugn their credibility.

be litigated, or how time-consuming the resulting criminal case will be. Under these circumstances, the likelihood that a civil party can make the necessary showing to obtain the "extraordinary" remedy of a stay is inevitably much reduced.

Sterling Nat'l Bank, 175 F. Supp. 2d at 577 (internal citations omitted).

The First Circuit has noted that the decision whether to grant a stay "is highly nuanced . [and) involves competing interests. Balancing these interests is a situation-specific task, and an inquiring court must take a careful look at the idiosyncratic circumstances of the case before it." Microfinancial, supra, 385 F.3d at 78. Epstein's case is more idiosyncratic than most.

As the Court aptly noted in its Order denying Epstein's first motion to stay the civil proceedings, Epstein has not been indicted and there are no criminal proceedings pending against him.' The resurrection of criminal proceedings against Epstein lies entirely within Epstein's own hands, by performing or not performing under the terms of the NPA. This tips the balance of equities even further in favor of the plaintiffs. Epstein makes allegations that the U.S. Attorney's Office has unfettered discretion in determining breaches of the NPA, but this is no different than in any contractual setting. If one party believes that there has been a breach, it may seek the remedy set forth in the contract. If the other party believes that

&#x27;Epstein points to provisions requiring him to maintain certain evidence "inviolate" as proof that the grand jury investigation is still active. These provisions are meant only to insure that easily destroyed evidence identified through the investigation, such as computer equipment, that is still in Epstein's control, will still be available to investigators if Epstein does, in fact, breach the NPA. Epstein is well aware that litigation concerning those matters have been removed from the Court's docket, at the insistence of the United States, because it fully halted its investigation in accordance with the terms of the NPA.

there has been no breach, it has a remedy at law or equity. In this situation, Epstein would be entitled to seek dismissal of the indictment. See United States v. Beeks, 167 Fed. Appx 777 (1 1 th Cir. 2006); United States v. 138 Fed. Appx. 965 (9th Cir. 2005); United States v. , 393 F.3d 540 (5th Cir. 2004).

Epstein argues that because he is seeking a finite period of delay — until the time that he asserts that the NPA "expires" — and that, thereafter, he will promptly provide full and complete responses to all discovery, the harm to the plaintiffs is de minitnis. With all respect, this overlooks a number of obvious issues. First, if a stay is imposed until Epstein's proposed "expiration date," it affords Epstein one of two incentives: (a) to delay any intended breach until a time when he believes that the United States has no remedy and then to breach the agreement with impunity (Le, to use the NPA as a shield and a sword); or (b) to delay the civil litigation as long as possible (until shortly before the "expiration" of the NPA), and then, after criminal charges have been filed, to seek a mandatory stay of the civil cases until the criminal case is resolved. Thus, contrary to the assertions of Epstein, the delay is not limited but, instead, is "potentially indefinite," as Sterling Bank warns. If the U.S. Attorney's Office were to proceed criminally, the litigation would likely be very lengthy, and would result in an even greater delay to the plaintiffs.5

&#x27;The United States also notes that this finite termination to Epstein's exposure to potential criminal consequences is illusory. The NPA addresses only certain victims identified during the course of the government's investigation. To the extent that any of the plaintiffs who have already filed suit against Epstein do not fall within that group, the NPA does not address potential charges based upon crimes committed against them. The NPA also does not bind any other state or federal prosecutor from pursuing charges for criminal acts committed within their jurisdiction(s). The federal statute of limitations for offenses against children is ten years or the life of the child,

The factors to consider include: "(i) the interests of the civil plaintiff in proceeding expeditiously with the civil litigation, including the avoidance of any prejudice to the plaintiff should a delay transpire; (ii) the hardship to the defendant, including the burden placed upon him should the cases go forward in tandem; (iii) the convenience of both the civil and criminal courts; (iv) the interests of third parties; . (v) the public interest[;] (vi) the good faith of the litigants (or the absence of it) and (vii) the status of the cases." Microfinancial, 385 F.3d at 78 (citations omitted).

In considering those factors, the United States respectfully recommends to the Court that all of the factors weigh against a stay. In making its decision, the Court should consider that, unlike all of the cases cited herein, Epstein seeks to stay not one suit involving a single plaintiff, but more than a dozen suits filed by individual plaintiffs. Each of those plaintiffs, in turn, impliedly asserts that she is a "crime victim" with the "right to full and timely restitution" and the "right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(6) & (7). As noted above, one of the purposes of the NPA was to provide these rights to victims identified in the Government's investigation. Thus, this factor weighs more heavily for the plaintiffs than in the average civil dispute as it embodies both the plaintiffs' and the public's interests. The victims who were identified in the government investigation, by and large, were without financial assets and had significant counseling needs that could

whichever is longer. 18 U.S.C. § 3283. Thus, for Epstein (or any other person accused of sexually abusing children) to "wait out" any chance of criminal liability, the court would have to stay civil litigation until all of the plaintiffs have died.

be remedied through obtaining restitution from Epstein. In addition to those needs, they have legitimate concerns about memories fading, witnesses becoming unavailable, and dissipation of Epstein's assets while the matter is stayed. On the other hand, while the potential harm to the defendant normally weighs in the defendant's favor, in this case, Epstein has significant control over whether the criminal investigation remains in abeyance and whether criminal charges are ever filed.

CONCLUSION

In accordance with the Court's Order, the United States hereby submits that it is not aware of any "special circumstances" that warrant staying all of the civil cases pending the "expiration" of the NPA.

Respectfully submitted,

R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

By: Villafafia A. VILLAFASA Assistant United States Attorney Florida Bar No. 0018255 500 East Broward Boulevard, 7th Floor Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33394 Telephone: 954-356-7255 Facsimile: 954-356-7230

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on May 28, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. According to the Court's website, counsel for all parties are able to receive notice via the CM/ECF system.

ti a lVILLAFAFIA Assistant United States Attorney Villqfaiia

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744491/EFTA02744491.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744491/EFTA02744491.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..91bd655a40bd5be5c828e8794308091dc5cde280 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744491/EFTA02744491.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,839 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744491.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 17, + "chars": 27494, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.14, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 414.0744934082031, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 414.0744934082031, + 102.62200927734375 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 102.62200927734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES' RESPONSE TO COURT'S ORDER \nREQUESTING POSITION ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY IDE 991", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 85.68, + 478.71 + ], + [ + 530.0853271484375, + 478.71 + ], + [ + 530.0853271484375, + 509.1664733886719 + ], + [ + 85.68, + 509.1664733886719 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ISSUE PRESENTED", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.188, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 368.74652099609375, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 368.74652099609375, + 87.62200927734375 + ], + [ + 244.188, + 87.62200927734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. STANDARD FOR IMPOSING A DISCRETIONARY STAY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 483.5920715332031, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 483.5920715332031, + 87.99200439453125 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 87.99200439453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. The Defendant Must Show that the Assertion of His Fifth \nAmendment Privilege Against Self-Incrimination Would \nAutomatically Result in the Entry of Summary Judgment Against \nHim.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 140.76, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 543.322509765625, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 543.322509765625, + 163.74200439453125 + ], + [ + 140.76, + 163.74200439453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Additional Factors to Consider in Balancing the Prejudice to the \nParties", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.372, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 543.5120849609375, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 543.5120849609375, + 102.99200439453125 + ], + [ + 141.372, + 102.99200439453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 259.488, + 251.91 + ], + [ + 353.4713134765625, + 251.91 + ], + [ + 353.4713134765625, + 268.74200439453125 + ], + [ + 259.488, + 268.74200439453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.9223937988281, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.9223937988281, + 86.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 86.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 38 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744491" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744508/EFTA02744508.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744508/EFTA02744508.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7d85b077d8d8670f5b04946404d1dfbf06a62dc6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744508/EFTA02744508.md @@ -0,0 +1,151 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PROPOSED ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN's, Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to file Reply to Plaintiffs' Jane Does 2-7 Responses in Opposition to Motion to Compel Answers to 1" Set of Interrogatories and 1" Request to Produce, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall have until May 20, 2009 to file a Reply to Plaintiffs' Jane Does 2-7 Responses in Opposition to Motion to Compel Answers to 1" Set of Interrogatories and 1" Request to Produce + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this % day of May, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomey.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein Respectf + +By: ROB D. N, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bc1claw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mike@ bcIclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744508/EFTA02744508.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744508/EFTA02744508.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5c304df021bee92294472aa214bcb79fd1f97f58 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744508/EFTA02744508.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,276 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744508.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 2848, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.49, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 414.35565185546875, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 414.35565185546875, + 103.85302734375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 103.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROPOSED ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 640.71 + ], + [ + 369.0133361816406, + 640.71 + ], + [ + 369.0133361816406, + 655.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 655.4830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 268.05600000000004, + 417.96 + ], + [ + 383.3669738769531, + 417.96 + ], + [ + 383.3669738769531, + 432.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 268.05600000000004, + 432.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 33 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744508" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744513/EFTA02744513.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744513/EFTA02744513.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..700438260b1ed6fcad939036e5afb3b9306e36ba --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744513/EFTA02744513.md @@ -0,0 +1,157 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO.2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80119-MARRAMIIII + +JANE DOE NO.3, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80232-MARRAIME + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO.4, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80381-MARRAIMIll + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Page 2 + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80994-MARRAMME + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80993-MARRAWM + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.; 08-CV-80811-MARRAMM + +Plaintiff, vs. + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80893-MARRAMM + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendants. + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80469-MARRAMMI + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al, + +Page 3 + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80591-MARRS + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80656-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## NOTICE OF FILING + +The Defendant, EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby tiles this Proposed Order Granting Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply to Plaintiffs' Jane Does 2-7 Responses in Opposition to Motion to Compel Answers to lu set of Interrogatories and In Request to Produce (DE 102). + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of May, 2009: + +Page 4 + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomey.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar Nb. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744513/EFTA02744513.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744513/EFTA02744513.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..23d63334113ee7a9f2610727a6c4097e657ea61b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744513/EFTA02744513.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,238 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744513.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 2612, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.44, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 194.00400000000002, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 411.876, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 411.876, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 194.00400000000002, + 106.92 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF FILING", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 432.54 + ], + [ + 369.1011047363281, + 432.54 + ], + [ + 369.1011047363281, + 449.60302734375 + ], + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 449.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 270.504, + 571.05 + ], + [ + 385.59051513671875, + 571.05 + ], + [ + 385.59051513671875, + 587.6030120849609 + ], + [ + 270.504, + 587.6030120849609 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 101 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744513" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744517/EFTA02744517.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744517/EFTA02744517.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c22d8961abe8213cea4847cc1b8426c86ec6ab66 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744517/EFTA02744517.md @@ -0,0 +1,231 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119- MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232- MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380- MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381- MARIZA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994- MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993- MA RRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469- + +MA RRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591- + +MARRAI + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656- + +MARR + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO. 101 AND JANE DOE NO. 102's REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO PROCEED ANONYMOUSLY AND RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO COMPEL AND/OR IDENTIFY JANE DOE NO. 101 AND JANE DOE NO. 102 IN THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY' + +Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 (together, "Plaintiffs"), by and through their undersigned attorneys, hereby file their Reply in Support of Motion to Proceed Anonymously and Response in Opposition to Motion to Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 in Third-Party Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery, and, as grounds, state as follows: + +I. Exposure of Plaintiffs to the public disclosure of their identity and the resultant shame and humiliation accompanying their sexual exploitation is wholly unnecessary and premature, and may cause further damage. Plaintiffs respectfully assert that this Court should first decide the threshold issues of retroactivity and calculation of damages. Plaintiffs, and all other victims of Defendant who have filed an action against Defendant in federal court, will have to litigate these two following threshold issues being reviewed by the Court in the C.M.A. action against Defendant (Case No. 08-CV-80811-MARRA/ a): 1) whether the most recent version of the statute, which provides for a minimum recovery of \$150,000 (instead of the previous minimum of + +a Plaintiffs respectfully file this Reply in the consolidated action, as the issue at hand pertains to discovery issues. + +\$50,000) applies to cases arising from incidents predating the 2006 amendment to the statute; and 2) whether the applicable minimum amount is recoverable per incident and/or per count, or per victim. Defendant has attempted to force settlements on any victims as possible without considering the possibility that the minimum amount recoverable under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 is \$150,000 per count and/or per incident. Much of this Court's caseload will be alleviated once the Court resolves these issues related to the minimum recovery; at that point, many of Defendant's victims will likely agree to settle for the minimum statutory damages to which they are entitled, thus obviating Defendant's specified need to destroy his victims' anonymity and expose them to further harm and humiliation. + +2. This Court has discretion to deny Defendant's Motion to Compel and/or Identify Plaintiffs in Third Party Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery. See Doe v. Stegall, 653 F.2d 180, 184 (5th Cir. Aug. 10, 1981)2 ("Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c) vests in the trial court discretion over litigants' requests for protection from 'annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense' in the discovery process.") (internal quotation omitted). As more fully discussed in Plaintiffs' Response to Defendant's Motion to Stay, which is adopted and incorporated herein, Defendant waived his right to contest liability in actions filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255. Thus, third party discovery is relevant only if Plaintiffs seek recovery of damages in excess of the statutory minimum. Additionally, if and when the parties are ready to proceed with discovery from non-party sources, the Court can put numerous measures in place to maximize Plaintiffs' anonymity. At the outset, Defendant can obtain records from + +2 In Bonner v. City of Prichard. 661 F.2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc). this circuit adopted as binding precedent all decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down before October 1, 1981. + +various non-party sources through Plaintiffs' counsel, who can demonstrate and certify that they have obtained the very records being sought, or through an independent special who could be given releases by Plaintiffs to obtain such records on behalf of Defendant to eliminate any question of authenticity or completeness. If Defendant nevertheless insists on conducting his own third-party discovery (needlessly increasing the cost of litigating these actions and causing unnecessary delay), subpoenas seeking documents from sources such as health care providers or employers should not disclose the type of action or identify Defendant. Because of the highly-publicized nature of Defendant's crimes as well as his designation as a sexual offender, the mere mention of Defendant's name in any subpoena or deposition notice will automatically expose the subject Plaintiff as one of Defendant's victims and may result in unnecessary public humiliation. Similarly, records custodian depositions do not require the disclosure of the nature of the action and/or the identity of the defendant in the action.3 + +3. Defendant's only purpose in opposing Plaintiffs' motions is harassment. Defendant's intentions are clear. He seeks to destroy these young women by outing them as being among his many victims, a pattern of behavior consistent with his status as a designated sex offender. Defendant openly admits to his desire to reveal the victims' names in newspapers so that individuals in their community can come forward to assault their credibility and tarnish their reputations (and, as a result, their dignity). See Defendant's Response in Opposition to Motion to Proceed Anonymously (DE# 5) at 16 ("[Dine the Plaintiff is identified, other individuals come forward in the discovery phase with information which often directly contradicts allegations as to the events and + +Depending upon claims of Plaintiffs, certain documents will be relevant. At this point, however, Plaintiffs do not waive their privilege to prevent the release of each of their names under the doctor-patient relationship. + +damages. For instance, witnesses may testify that Plaintiff was paid by others for similar sexual acts she claims Mr. Epstein forced upon her or that she willingly participated in certain acts(s) that would negate or lessen her damages"). Each of Defendant's victims whom undersigned counsel represents continues to experience trauma and humiliation associated with sexual abuse. See Ellen Bass & Laura M, The Courage to Heal: A Guide for Women Survivors of Child Sexual Abuse 3 (4th ed. 2008) ("The long-term effects of child sexual abuse can be so pervasive that it's sometimes hard to pinpoint exactly how the abuse affected you. It can permeate everything: your sense of self, intimate relationships, sexuality, parenting, working, even your sanity.")4 The U.S. Supreme Court in Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584, 597 (1977), discussed the grave nature of the crimes at issue in the cases against Defendant, stating: + +[Rape] is highly reprehensible, both in a moral sense and in its almost total contempt for the personal integrity and autonomy of the female victim ... Short of homicide, it is the "ultimate violation of self." + +Defendant committed crimes constituting the "ultimate violation of self" against minors. Because of the disdainful nature of these types of crimes, courts, including the Eleventh Circuit, "have carved out a limited number of exceptions to the general requirement of disclosure, which permit plaintiffs to proceed anonymously." Roe v. Aware Woman Or. for Choice, Inc., 253 F.3d 678, 685 (11th Cir. 2001) (internal citation omitted). "The + +4 Although some Plaintiffs no longer live in the Palm Beach area, this should not undermine Plaintiffs' need for anonymity. As the Court in Doe No. 2 v. Kolko, 242 F.R.D. 193, 197 (E.D.N.Y. 2006) (internal citation omitted), points out, "flit is now possible to 'determine whether a given individual is a party to a lawsuit in federal court anywhere in the country by the simplest of computer searches, to access the docket sheet of any such case electronically, and ... that entire case files will be accessible over the Internet." Given the ease with which the public could access court files in these cases, it is reasonable that Plaintiffs' fears extend beyond ostracism in the Palm Beach community. The Palm Beach Post is available online all over the world. In addition, many of Plaintiffs' family members remain in the Palm Bcach area and remain unaware of their daughter/granddaughter/nicce's involvement in Defendant's sordid child sex exploitation enterprise. Furthermore. Plaintiffs are exposed to harassment through social networking sites such as Faccbook and MySpacc as well as other forms of online harrassment. + +ultimate test for permitting a plaintiff to proceed anonymously is whether the plaintiff has a substantial privacy right which outweighs the customary and constitutionally-embedded presumption of openness in judicial proceedings." Id. (internal quotation and citation omitted). + +4. Cases regarding sexual assault are the paradigmatic examples of the type of highly sensitive and personal matter that warrant a grant of anonymity. See Doe No. 2 v. Kolko, 242 F.R.D. 193, 195-98 (E.D.N.Y. 2006) (adult plaintiff, who, many years later, alleged that he was sexually abused by rabbi at private Jewish school when he was a child, was entitled to proceed anonymously because he feared retaliation and ostracism from his community); Doe v. 202 F.R.D. 173, 176 (E.D. Pa. 2001) (sexual assault victim granted use of pseudonym); Doe v. M, 105 F. Supp. 2d 40, 44 (E.D.N.Y. 1999) (victim of assault, molestation, and sexual abuse granted anonymity because victim otherwise psychologically and emotionally unable to proceed with action); Roe v. Borup, 500 F. Supp. 127, 130 (E.D. Wis. 1980) ("It is beyond argument that [a suit involving charges of sexual abuse of a child] is a highly sensitive issue"; thus, plaintiffs were entitled to use fictitious names in prosecuting the suit); see also Doe v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield United of Wis., 112 F.3d 869, 872 (7th Cir. 1997) ("[F]ictitious names are allowed when necessary to protect the privacy of children, rape victims, and other particularly vulnerable parties or witnesses."). The intensely personal nature of sexual exploitation creates an unusual case, and, in such a case, the general policy of full disclosure should give way to a policy of protecting privacy in a very private matter. This protection is especially necessary when the Court is dealing with young women who recently were sexually abused as minors. + +5. Defendant is using the threat of publicity to attempt to intimidate victims to cause them not to file suit or to settle their claims for the absolute minimum in order for them to avoid being held up to public ridicule and hostility. His intention to attack the victims is at the heart of the protection afforded by numerous rape shield statutes, of which Defendant and his counsel are surely aware. In 1994, Congress amended the Federal Rules of Evidence to promote the strong social policy of protecting a victim's privacy and encouraging victims of crime to come forward. "The reason for extending Rule 412 to civil cases is equally obvious. The need to protect alleged victims against invasions of privacy, potential embarrassment, and unwarranted sexual stereotyping, and the wish to encourage victims to come forward when they have been sexually molested do not disappear because the context has shifted from a criminal prosecution to a claim for damages or injunctive relief." Fed. R. Evid. 412 advisory committee's note. Rule 412 now provides that, in civil trials in federal court involving alleged sexual misconduct, evidence that the victim engaged in other sexual behavior or evidence offered to prove any alleged victim's sexual predisposition can be admitted only in unusual circumstances, none of which apply to Plaintiffs' cases. Fed. R. Evid. 412 (a), (b). "The rule aims to safeguard the alleged victim against the invasion of privacy, potential embarrassment and sexual stereotyping that is associated with public disclosure of intimate sexual details and the infusion of sexual innuendo into the factfinding process. By affording victims protection in most instances, the rule also encourages victims of sexual misconduct to institute and to participate in legal proceedings against alleged offenders." Fed. R. Evid. 412 advisory committee's note; see also Michigan v. Lucas, 500 U.S. 145, 149-50 (1991) (Rape shield statutes represent the valid legislative determination that victims of rape and + +attempted rape "deserve heightened protection against surprise, harassment, and unnecessary invasions of privacy."); United States v. Elbert, 561 F.3d 771, 776-77 (8th Cir. 2009) (evidence that child plaintiffs had previously engaged in prostitution was rightfully excluded in federal sex trafficking suit); Stephens v. M, 13 F.3d 998, 1010 (7th Cir. 1994) (Cummings, C.J., dissenting) ("The Indiana rape shield statute furthers laudable and pragmatic goals. It protects victims from needless exposure of their sexual past conduct; [and] ensures that the focus of rape trials remains the guilt or innocence of the accused rather than the sexual history of the complainant."); United States v. Kasto, 584 F.2d 268, 271-72 n.3 (8th Cir. 1978) ("[U]nchastity of a victim has no relevance whatsoever to [the victim's] credibility as a witness. Such a proposition would `necessarily imply the absurd (corollary) that the extramarital sexual history of a female witness would be admissible to impeach her credibility in any case in which she testified.") (internal citation omitted). Procedural protections such as the rape shield statutes reduce the embarrassment and anguish of trial, encouraging victims to report sexual offenses and offendors. "Without the protection provided by rape shield statutes, victims may find trial an ordeal not worth enduring." Stephens, 13 F.3d at 1010 (Cummings, C.J., dissenting) (quoting 124 Cong. Rec. HI1944 (1978) (statement of Rep. Elizabeth Holtzman)); see Fed. R. Evid. 412 advisory committee's note ("Too often in this country victims of rape are humiliated and harassed when they report and prosecute the rape. ... [R]ape trials become inquisitions into the victim's morality, not trials of the defendant's innocence or guilt ...."). Indeed, "many [victims] find the trial almost as degrading as the rape itself." Fed. R. Evid. 412 advisory committee's note. + +6. In addition, Congress enacted the Child Victims' and Child Witnesses' Rights Act (18 U.S.C. § 3509) in an effort to provide protection for victims who, while minors, were victims of physical abuse, sexual abuse, or sexual exploitation, or who have witnessed a crime committed upon another. One of the primary protections provided by the statute is the restriction on the disclosure of the name of, or other information concerning, the victim. See 18 U.S.C. § 3509(d)(3) (2008). Further, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3509(d)(2), "[a]ll papers to be filed in court that disclose the name of or any other information concerning a child shall be filed under seal without necessity of obtaining a court order." + +7. Indeed, numerous states, including Florida and New York, have enacted laws to protect the anonymity of sexual assault victims. See Fla. Stat. §§ 794.024, 794.026 (2008); N.Y. Civ. Rights Law § 50-b (McKinney 2009). In 1994, the Florida Legislature passed The Crime Victims Protection Act. The legislative stated purpose for passage of the Act was "to protect the identity of victims of sexual crimes." Ha. AGO 2003-56, 2003 WL 22971082 (Dec. 15, 2003) ("[T]he Legislature intended to make the identity of a victim of a sexual crime confidential in a court record or proceeding.") Under Florida Section 794.024 of the Florida Statutes, court records that identify the name and/or address of a victim of a sexual crime are presumed to be confidential and exempt from public access. Id. That statute further imposes criminal and civil liability for the disclosure or communication of information identifying the victim of a sexual crime. Ha. AGO 2003-56, 2003 WL 22971082 (citing Fla. Stat. §§ 794.024, 794.026 (2008)). Similarly, upon approving New York's rape shield law, then Governor Mario stated, "[S]exual assault victims have unfortunately had to endure a terrible + +invasion of their physical privacy. They have a right to expect that this violation will not be compounded by a further invasion of their privacy." 1991 N.Y. Sess. Laws page nos. 2211-12, quoted in Kolko, 242 F.R.D. at 1% (internal citations omitted). + +8. Finally, Defendant should be estopped from outing his victims. Plaintiffs attempted to utilize the process established by the Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") with the reasonable expectation that a specific purpose of the NPA was to allow Defendant's victims to maintain anonymity, only to be subjected to deliberate and unreasonable delays and Defendant's failure to engage in meaningful, good faith settlement discussions. This left Plaintiffs no choice but to file suit. Under these circumstances, Defendant should be estopped from seeking to lift anonymity. + +9. Many of Defendant's victims are awaiting this Court's decision regarding whether they will be allowed to proceed anonymously before making the difficult decision as to whether to pursue their claims against Defendant. All of Defendant's victims and any future victims of sexual exploitation must know that they can protect what remains of their personal dignity when appealing to the Federal Courts for justice. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully move this Court to grant Plaintiffs' Motion to Proceed Anonymously and to deny Defendant's Motion to Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 in Third-Party Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery. + +Date: May 29, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: s/Katherine W. Ezell Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Bar No. 040856 riosefsberit@podhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell@podhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that, on this 29th day of May, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: s/Katherine W. Ezell Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Bar No. 040856 rjosefsberg@podhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell@podhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## SERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRa United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820 Fax: (561) 515-3148 rcrit@bc1claw.com mpike@bciclaw.com Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300 Fax: (561) 835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360 Fax: (561) 828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9456 jsx@searcylaw.com jph@searcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Adam Horowitz, Esq. Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Phone: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com smermelstein@sexabuseattoney.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Case Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,08-80232, 08-80380, 08- 80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. Leopold Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Phone: (561) 515-1400 Fax: (561) 515-1401 skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com tleopold@leopoldkuvin.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 Phone: (561) 582-7600 Fax: (561) 588-8819 lawyerwillits@aol.com reelrhw@hotmail.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +Brad Esq. Law Office of Brad & Associates, LLC 2028 Street, Suite 202 Hollywood, FL 33020 Phone: (954) 414-8033 Fax: (954) 924-1530 bedwardserra-law.com be@bradedwardslaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Isidro Manuel Esq. Elkins & Boehringer 224 Datum Avenue, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 832-8033 + +Fax: (561) 832-7137 + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744517/EFTA02744517.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744517/EFTA02744517.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3587a32960da364c020c5160b0bd7fdc64e42b5a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744517/EFTA02744517.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,700 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744517.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 17, + "chars": 22268, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.48, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 99.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 99.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 388.5423889160156, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 388.5423889160156, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.712, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 351.0882873535156, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 351.0882873535156, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 260.712, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 87 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744517" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744534/EFTA02744534.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744534/EFTA02744534.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3bc7ffd4fc4076433d095bff285dcfaf63da0daa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744534/EFTA02744534.md @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 013-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRAi + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/M. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-8081 1 -CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +/ + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +## ORDER + +The above-styled cause has been set for a hearing on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Defendant")'s Motion to Stay (DE 65 in 08-80119) on Friday, June 12, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. before United States District Judge Kenneth A. Marra, 701 Clematis Street, Courtroom 4, West Palm Beach, Florida. + +This hearing shall be limited to the issue of whether Defendant Epstein's defense of the civil actions filed against him violates the non-prosecution agreement between Epstein and the United States. + +The United States' position in this matter would be very helpful to the Court and, accordingly, the Court requests that the United States appear at the hearing. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 29th day of May, 2009 + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record Ann Villafana \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744534/EFTA02744534.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744534/EFTA02744534.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dbd61f511b5d4722ee959516edad76d5fd3263f1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744534/EFTA02744534.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744534.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1965, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.41, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 330.7379150390625, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 330.7379150390625, + 610.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 610.4830169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 36 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744534" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744538/EFTA02744538.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744538/EFTA02744538.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ac01e812cbc95677966410f12c2063fc33825549 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744538/EFTA02744538.md @@ -0,0 +1,47 @@ +Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-6 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 2 of 3 + +![](_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg) + +MICHAEL 81.114MAK PA' =WORT W. COLEMAN, PA. ROBERT P.aurros.a.ra) SERNARD12211M3(13R MARX T. urna PA. WPM C. ?SPIN WOIABL J. PIKE HPICTHRII Met 4 AMARA RUDA KM:IDA 10.AD COMM OVILTRIAL Afl + +## BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN LLP + +AUTAITIID LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP + +Sent by E-Mail and U.S. Mail Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, PA 25West Fiagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 + +Dear Bob: + +May 21, 2009 + +ADILQUISSEXAVENTE WALIZAI. I INVEMIOROR + +SAMARA ?A IAMENNA ASHUBSTOXIN-11ARD\*3 NM( STOCK PAULO:MIS + +PRA H. BUOttfIC cc comae. . + +As I advised you yesterday, lam responding to your April 17, 2009 letter. As I stated in my e-mail, I think your request Is unnecessary. Despite what Roy may have said to you, my client has had no contact with any of your clients. To my knowledge, the only one who has "breached" any agreementregarding contact Is your own dent, as who, as I advised you in a letter last week, contacted Jack Goldbergets office looking for her settlement check. Mr. Goldberger, of course, did not speak with her. + +Lawyers who represent Mr. Epstein are well familiar with the Rules of Professional Conduct, including Rule 4-42. At the same time, I am certain you are equally familiar with that Rule. The Comment provides 'Parties to a matter may communicate directly with each other...'. + +To my knowledge, neither Mr. Epstein nor any attorney or agent of those attorneys who represent Mr. Epstein, have contacted or attempted to contact your clients. Given that It Is not Mr. Epstein's Intention to have direct contact with your clients, it is unnecessary to respond point by point to statements attributed to my cocounsel. + +EXHIBIT 4. + +L•A•W•Y•B•R•9 + +51.5 N. PLAGUE DRIP/BIM= 400 I Wan PALM BRACH, FLORIDA 33401 TELEPHONE (561) 842-2= PAX (561) 844-6929 + +in Ile bola sw.o om + +Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-6 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 3 of 3 + +May 21, 2009 Page 2 + +Rattler than to be concerned about what my client is doing, ;would ask that you advise your clients not to contact Mr. Epstein's lawyers directly. Neither I nor the attorneys who represent Mr. Epstein want to be put In a position where we are set up by any of your clients. + +RDC/msc + +cc: Roy Black, Esq. Jay Lefkowltz, Esq. J. Michael Burman, Esq. Jack Goldberger, Esq. + +JOSItiberS01140° \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744538/EFTA02744538.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744538/EFTA02744538.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..39e3c174d56766bde3285635237636ff3bb000b3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744538/EFTA02744538.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,126 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744538.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2523, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.98, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER \n& COLEMAN LLP", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 216.64799999999997, + 141.3739013671875 + ], + [ + 407.7760314941406, + 141.3739013671875 + ], + [ + 407.7760314941406, + 171.851806640625 + ], + [ + 216.64799999999997, + 171.851806640625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 391 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 115 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744538" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744538/_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744538/_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..543989dfdc19d9002192d35eeeab023ecc347f91 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744538/_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c9187276689e994afccaf2a7223f057bb5bb6e224b8144a6866e76ca19c29b2b +size 6764 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744540/EFTA02744540.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744540/EFTA02744540.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b732e77937610b90f910647285e97b5facccf0ce --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744540/EFTA02744540.md @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ +I. MICHAEL BURMAN. GREGORY W. COLEMAN, PA. ROBERT D. CRITTOK JR.. PA.' BERNARD LEBEDEKER MARK T. LUTTIER. PA. IEFTREY C. PEPIN MICHAEL J. PIKE HEATHER McNAMARA RUDA + +PlaJDA BOARD =OM OWL TIJAL LAWYER + +![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg) + +## BURMAN, C RITTON LUTTIER & COLEMAN LLP + +A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Robert Josefsberg, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 + +May 18, 2009 + +ADELQIB1. BENAVENTE PARALEGAL rarvtarnakrat + +BARBARA M. MCKENNA ASHUR STIECEN-BARING BETTY STOKES MICALROALS + +RITA H. BUDNYK CE Cana + +Re: Lagege PS. + +Dear Kathy and Bob: + +in the settlement check made payable to your firm and your client, MI in the amount of \$50,000.00. Upon clearance of the funds, forward the original re ease to me. + +Additionally, Bob, you wrote a letter on April 17, 2009 stating your position regarding "No Contact" with any of your firm's clients based on your interpretation of the Non-Prosecution Agreement. I do not concede that your position is correct nor that the Non-Prosecution Agreement prevents some forms of contact with your clients. However, based on the position that you, Bob, have taken, I am providing/serving you with the subpoena for Le sat Pais deposition on June 11. + +If that date and time does not work for you, please let me know and we will recoordinate a date within a reasonable time frame. + +As I advised you in our conversation today, May 18, 2009, there is a No-Bond Warrant for Ms. Pees arrest. Apparently your client was arrested in March of this year for one count of battery and two counts of domestic violence based upon the Palm Beach County Sheriffs office booking records. She apparently violated her SOR, and therefore a Warrant Is outstanding. + +While I have an obligation to provide you our firm's check made payable to your firm and Ms. Pita we are specifically opposed to the disbursement of any funds to her which would in any way suggest that Mr. Epstein or his attorneys are aiding a fugitive. Because there is a Warrant for her arrest and she is a fugitive, disbursement of any funds to her maybe considered by the Palm Beach Sheriff's office to be "aiding a + +L'A•W•Y•E•R•S + +EXHIBIT 02 + +May 18, 2009 + +Page 2 + +fugitive". With the funds now under your control, you must make your own decision on disbursement. + +Finally as I also indicated in our telephone conversation, your client contacted Jack Goldberger's office last week suggesting that Jack was holding up the settlement. He did not speak with her. I don't know where Ms. Pita fr got that idea. + +Cordially + +Robe P. Craton, Jr. + +RDC/clz + +cc: Jack Goldberger, Esq. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744540/EFTA02744540.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744540/EFTA02744540.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f3cf9f505f632322cf8f875125e6bd227b5e3ded --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744540/EFTA02744540.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,126 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744540.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2658, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.1, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "BURMAN, C RITTON LUTTIER \n& COLEMAN LLP", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 418.3920593261719, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 418.3920593261719, + 133.80621337890625 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 133.80621337890625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 464 + ], + [ + "Line", + 59 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744540" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744540/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744540/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6cbb927190582f6cb17685412c1afdd030e524e9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744540/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1f6dfd702f333b03f13da19d16c740bcdcbaf96a23bc1bcc19a33a7cde359581 +size 7716 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744542/EFTA02744542.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744542/EFTA02744542.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..28d6ccceea7a0e00b56708253245504bbec84fa0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744542/EFTA02744542.md @@ -0,0 +1,177 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRAJJOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 6, Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-C1V-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff JEFFREY EPSTEIN Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff; + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA-. + +CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, RESPONSE TO JANE DOE NO. 101 AND JANE DOE NO. 102'S MOTION FOR A NO CONTACT ORDER + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, ("MR. EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys responds to the Plaintiffs' Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 ("Plaintiffs") Motion for a No Contact Order [DE 113] and states: + +1. Plaintiffs' Motion was completely unnecessary and a waste of attorney time and judicial resources. Plaintiffs' motion was filed to cast a false light on Mr. Epstein and his attorneys, and to draw attention away from the fact that many of the alleged "victims" on the referenced "list" were or are admitted prostitutes, dancers at strip clubs (Platinum Gold, Cheetah, Diamond Dolls, T's Lounge, Flashdance, etc.) or have criminal records or warrants for their arrests, to reference only a few issues about them. + +2. Plaintiffs seek an advisory opinion on an issue which does not exist. Neither Mr. Epstein nor his attorneys have initiated any contact, direct or indirect, with any alleged "victims", nor does Plaintiffs' counsel or any alleged person by way of affidavit alleged any type of contact, direct or indirect. The undersigned's May 21, 2009 (Exhibit 1 hereto) letter could not have been clearer as to the position of Mr. Epstein and his attorneys, i.e. "To my knowledge, neither Mr. Epstein nor any attorney or agent of those attorneys who represent Mr. Epstein, have contacted or attempted to contact your clients. Given that it is not Mr. Epstein's intention to have any direct contact with your clients, it is unnecessary to respond point by point to any statements attributed to my co-counsel." To the extent it was not clear in the undersigned's letter, neither Mr. Epstein nor his attorneys, nor their agents intend to have any direct or indirect contact with Plaintiffs counsels' clients. What else is there to say? + +3. Is Plaintiffs' counsel suggesting that Mr. Epstein cannot even be at the depositions of his clients as parties or witnesses? That certainly will be direct `eye' contact at a + +minimum. If that is Plaintiffs' position then Jane Doe 101 and 102, and any other matters where Plaintiffs' firm's clients are involved, should be stayed until expiration of the Non-Prosecution Agreement, otherwise Mr. Epstein will be denied his due process right of any civil party to be present at opposing party's deposition. + +4. Rather than to mislead the court by providing a substantially redacted copy of the undersigned's May 18, 2009 letter, a full copy of the letter redacting only the client's full name is attached as Exhibit 2. The letter is important in that the Defendant and his attorneys recognize that no contact included not serving his client with a deposition subpoena through a process server, i.e. potentially an "agent" by serving her attorney. As this court will note from paragraph 2 of Exhibit 1, a very cautious approach was taken by Defendant and his attorneys, in stating "However, based on the position that you, Bob, have taken, I am providing/serving you with the subpoena for L.S.P.'s deposition on June 1 I." + +5. Plaintiffs' counsel further tries to obfuscate Defendant's position by redacting the last paragraph of the May 18, 2009 letter, which states "Finally as I also indicated in our telephone conversation, your client contacted Jack Goldberger's [one of Mr. Epstein's attorneys] office last week suggesting that Jack was holding up the settlement. He did not speak with her. I don't know where Ms. P got that idea." Plaintiffs' counsel should be more concerned about controlling their own clients. + +6. Rather than the Plaintiffs filing this needless, unwarranted and excessive motion where they take another shot at Mr. Epstein so they can remind the court of their alleged damages, maybe, they should focus more on the background of their own clients, including the individual referenced in the May 18, 2009 letter. + +7. Finally, Mr. Epstein pled guilty to one count of felony solicitation (which was not related to a minor), under §796.07(2)(f), F.S. and one count of procuring a minor for prostitution under §796.03 F. S. Plaintiffs' reference to both counts being related to "minors" is again misleading and incorrect. + +8. At the time of the state court plea on June 30, 2008, neither Defendant nor his counsel nor the state attorney's office had seen the "secret" list of alleged victims, i.e. Mr. Epstein was forced to agree to a list of individuals that the USAO refused to provide pre-plea. The list was not provided to Mr. Epstein's attorney until after the plea and Mr. Epstein was in jail. With the parties to the plea completely unaware who would be on the list, how then could the state plea be construed as a limitless no contact order. Mr. Epstein is doing more than the law requires. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant, Mr. Epstein, requests this court deny the motion as premature and unnecessary based on the current state of the facts. + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 296 day of May , 2009 + +Respectfully sub + +By: ROBERT D. RITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar o. 224162 + +rcrit@bc1claw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +moikeabc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +Doe 101 v. Epstein + +Page 8 + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08- 80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsx@searcvlaw.com inhQsearcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Brad , Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax casselltalaw.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarciaabellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf bnicereinhar v.com Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Ricci-Leopold, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 skuvin@riccilaw.com tleovold@riccilaw.com + +riosefsberg@nodhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagese@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744542/EFTA02744542.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744542/EFTA02744542.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..412213303abd5c223641cae2260cfb926c9ab8f7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744542/EFTA02744542.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,412 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744542.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 9070, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.77, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 412.8449401855469, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 412.8449401855469, + 99.603515625 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 99.603515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 270.504, + 497.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 385.9969787597656, + 497.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 385.9969787597656, + 514.85302734375 + ], + [ + 270.504, + 514.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.86, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 359.24399999999997, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 359.24399999999997, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 247.86, + 141.75 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 326 + ], + [ + "Line", + 75 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744542" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744551/EFTA02744551.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744551/EFTA02744551.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d15b6f1bb67cf48d500a490a2df106665006eaa5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744551/EFTA02744551.md @@ -0,0 +1,197 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119- MARIZA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232- MARR I + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380- MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381- MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994- MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +r + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993- MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +J + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469- MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591- MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656- MARRA, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO 101 AND JANE DOE NO 102's MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO UNSEAL THE NONPROSECUTION AGREEMENT + +Pursuant to Rule 5.4 of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 (together, the "Plaintiffs") by and through their undersigned attorneys, hereby file this Motion For Leave to File Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay and/or Continue Action for Time Certain Based on Parallel Civil and Criminal Proceedings With Incorporated Memorandum of Law Under Seal, and, as grounds, state as follows: + +I. Undersigned counsel seek to file this Response in Opposition to Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Stay under seal in order to abide by this Court's August 21, 2008 Order to Compel Production and Protective Order entered in Case No. 08-80736- CIV-MARRa (the "Protective Order"). The Protective Order prohibits Plaintiffs from disclosing the Non-Prosecution Agreement (the "NPA") or its terms to any third party. The sealed document should be maintained under seal for the duration of this Court's August 21, 2008 Protective Order. + +2. Undersigned counsel recognize that this Court has previously unsealed documents referring to the NPA. We seek to comply with the Protective Order for this new and independent filing in an abundance of caution, until directed otherwise by the Court. + +3. If this Court denies Plaintiffs' instant motion, Plaintiffs seek appropriate disclosure of the NPA pursuant to this Court's recent order in Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRa (DE #36) denying Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2's motion to unseal the NPA. As stated in that Order, the NPA has not been filed with the Court. Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 would then have "a specific tangible need to be relieved of the restrictions" of the Protective Order because consideration of the terms of the NPA is necessary for this Court to resolve Defendant's Motion to Stay. + +WHEREFORE, + +I. Plaintiffs respectfully request this Court to enter an Order granting Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 the right to file under seal their Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay and/or Continue Action for Time Certain Based on Parallel Civil and Criminal Proceedings With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. + +2. In the alternative, Plaintiffs respectfully request this Court to unseal the Non-Prosecution Agreement in order to allow Plaintiffs to concretely respond to Defendant's Motion to Stay. + +3. Finally, Plaintiffs respectfully request this Court to grant such other and further relief to which this Court finds the Plaintiff otherwise entitled. + +Date: May 29, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: s/Katherine W. Ezell Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Bar No. 040856 rjosefsberg@podhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell@podhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A.3 + +On May 29, 2009, undersigned counsel conferred with counsel for Defendant in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this motion, and Defendant's counsel advised that Defendant opposes this motion. + +Date: May 29, 2009 + +### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that, on this 29th day of May, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: s/Katherine W. Ezell Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Bar No. 040856 rjosefsberg@podhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell@podhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Hagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +# SERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRa United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP 515 North Hagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820 Fax: (561) 515-3148 rcrit@bcIclaw.com mpike@bciclaw.com Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL, 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300 Fax: (561) 835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360 Fax: (561) 828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9456 jsx@searcylaw.com jph@searcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Adam Horowitz, Esq. Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Phone: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com smermelstein@sexabuseattomey.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Case Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,08-80232, 08-80380, 08- 80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. Leopold Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Phone: (561) 515-1400 Fax: (561) 515-1401 skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com tleopold@leopoldkuvin.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 Phone: (561) 582-7600 Fax: (561) 588-8819 lawyerwillits@aol.com reelrhw@hotmail.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +Brad Esq. Law Office of Brad & Associates, LLC 2028 Street, Suite 202 Hollywood, FL 33020 Phone: (954) 414-8033 Fax: (954) 924-1530 bedwards@rra-law.com be@bradedwardslaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Isidro Manuel Esq. Elkins & Boehringer + +224 Datum Avenue. Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 832-8033 Fax: (561) 832-7137 isidrogarcia@hellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744551/EFTA02744551.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744551/EFTA02744551.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1a081bfa3741221094d2fa049b721732791e55cd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744551/EFTA02744551.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,500 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744551.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 7936, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.88, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.63200000000003, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 406.3418273925781, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 406.3418273925781, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 205.63200000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO 101 AND JANE DOE NO 102's MOTION FOR \nLEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO \nDEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO UNSEAL \nTHE NONPROSECUTION AGREEMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.74, + 250.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 523.7517700195312, + 250.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 523.7517700195312, + 307.10302734375 + ], + [ + 88.74, + 307.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.62400000000002, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 477.2323303222656, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 477.2323303222656, + 376.10302734375 + ], + [ + 123.62400000000002, + 376.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.5423889160156, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.5423889160156, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.712, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 351.0882873535156, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 351.0882873535156, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 260.712, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 87 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744551" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744561/EFTA02744561.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744561/EFTA02744561.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..185f13cae6d7d956e087076fc7acbf23e28d2816 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744561/EFTA02744561.md @@ -0,0 +1,255 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: l-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 11, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +MOTION TO RESCHEDULE HEARING + +COMES NOW Robert C. Josefsberg, as co-counsel for Jane Doe 101 and 102, and respectfully requests either a rescheduling of this Court's hearing (just rescheduled for June, 12, 2009) or in the alternative, permission to appear by telephone at said hearing, on the following grounds: + +I) On Wednesday, June 10, 2009, undersigned counsel, his wife and two granddaughters will be traveling to Hanover, New Hampshire for counsel's 50th College Reunion, and an opportunity for his two high school granddaughters to visit colleges in the Northeast. Counsel is scheduled to return to South Florida on Tuesday, June 16". + +2) Counsel is very appreciative and supportive of the Court's scheduling a hearing on the Defendants' Motion to Stay. That hearing was scheduled ( within the last 3 hours) for Friday, June 12th at 10:00 a.m. , right in the middle of Robert Josefsberg's reunion visit. + +3) If Robert Josefsberg cannot attend, Jane Doe 101 and 102 will be well represented by co-counsel who can and will appear in person at said hearing on June 12, 2009. However, Robert Josefsberg is lead counsel and would prefer to be present during said hearing. + +4) In the event that this hearing cannot be rescheduled for June 4, 5, 8 or 9th, or June I , le or 19", Robert Josefsberg requests permission to appear at said June 12th hearing by telephone. + +WHEREFORE, Robert Josefsberg requests the relief requested above. + +Dated May 29, 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: s/ Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Br No. 040856 rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +> Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell@podhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Hagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day of May, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: s/Katherine W. Ezell Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Br No. 040856 rjosefsberg@podhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell@podhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## SERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRa United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820 Fax: (561) 515-3148 Krit@bc1claw.com moike@bciclaw.com Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300 Fax: (561) 835-8691 jagesq@belisouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360 Fax: (561) 828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.coni Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9456 jsx@searcylaw.com jph@searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Adam Horowitz, Esq. + +Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +Phone: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com + +smermelstein@sexabuseattornev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,08-80232, 08-80380, 08- 80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. + +Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. + +Leopold Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +Phone: (561) 515-1400 + +Fax: (561) 515-1401 + +skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com + +tleopold@leopoldkuvin.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Phone: (561) 582-7600 + +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Jawverwillits@aol,com + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +Brad , Esq. + +Law Office of Brad & Associates, LLC + +2028 Street, Suite 202 + +Hollywood, FL 33020 + +Phone: (954) 414-8033 + +Fax: (954) 924-1530 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +be@bradedwartislaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Isidro Manuel Esq. + +Elkins & Boehringer + +224 Datum Avenue, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 832-8033 + +Fax: (561) 832-7137 + +isidro arcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744561/EFTA02744561.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744561/EFTA02744561.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..28115f78238c13d15c461f7c8a6e354655eb9dc8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744561/EFTA02744561.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,412 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744561.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 6259, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.22, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.520263671875, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.520263671875, + 86.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 86.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.324, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 351.1353759765625, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 351.1353759765625, + 86.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 261.324, + 86.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 41 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 13 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744561" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744570/EFTA02744570.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744570/EFTA02744570.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d1282aece93b670558d2a12668c74a6220034b5c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744570/EFTA02744570.md @@ -0,0 +1,73 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +![](_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg) + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRAME + +Plaintiff vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRARM + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRAMM + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRAMII + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRA/ [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +**ORDER** + +Upon Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Response to Motions to Compel Plaintiffs to Respond to Defendant's First Request to Produce and First Set of Interrogatories, et al., and good cause being shown, it is hereby (P.E. 87) + +ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs shall have an enlargement of time of until May 6, 2009, to respond to the Defendant's Motions to Compel, et al. + +DONE AND ORDERED in [REDACTED], at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 1 day of JUNE, 2009. + +*Jane Doe Johnson* +DISTRICT COURT JUDGE *Jane R. Johnson* +U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744570/EFTA02744570.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744570/EFTA02744570.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..503c913ce0f80ac58686a22304b741aefd6d63fc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744570/EFTA02744570.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,153 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744570.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1305, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.08, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.87, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 394.83000000000004, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 394.83000000000004, + 127.98000000000002 + ], + [ + 207.87, + 127.98000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.67, + 381.51 + ], + [ + 326.565, + 381.51 + ], + [ + 326.565, + 394.47 + ], + [ + 281.67, + 394.47 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 118 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 159 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744570" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744570/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744570/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1241c938947c8265c08ea432fc9482fe1d786030 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744570/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1f9cf100878090d43a8280d27e3e02e912e0c6526024eed8591c3934827e69db +size 10462 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744572/EFTA02744572.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744572/EFTA02744572.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..18b42bd802d053dd01398a746ccad6bc29a75eb4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744572/EFTA02744572.md @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +## COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS + +SUFFOLK, SS. + +--- + +BE IT REMEMBERED, that at the Supreme Judicial Court holden at Boston within and for said County of Suffolk, on the twenty-fourth day of April A.D. 1972, said Court being the highest Court of Record in said Commonwealth: + +Martin G. Weinberg + +being found duly qualified in that behalf, and having taken and subscribed the oaths required by law, was admitted to practice as an Attorney, and, by virtue thereof, as a Counsellor at Law, in any of the Courts of the said Commonwealth: that said Attorney is at present a member of the Bar, and is in good standing according to the records of this Court\*. + +In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said Court, this second day of June in the year of our Lord two thousand and nine. + +![](_page_0_Picture_89.jpeg) + +![]()EXHIBIT "A" + +\* Records of private discipline, if any, such as a private reprintand imposed by the Board of Bar Overseers or by any court, are not covered by this certification. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744572/EFTA02744572.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744572/EFTA02744572.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b6fe3f22c3d9eb230d4ff3f7790f8fad2e2cad34 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744572/EFTA02744572.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,96 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744572.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1024, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.6, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_89.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 151.776, + 105.30000000000001 + ], + [ + 453.49199999999996, + 105.30000000000001 + ], + [ + 453.49199999999996, + 122.30999999999999 + ], + [ + 151.776, + 122.30999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744572" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744572/_page_0_Picture_89.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744572/_page_0_Picture_89.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cd8f7cede496022f6049327e4e2f7ec5f7e03a34 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744572/_page_0_Picture_89.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2e13245498b11a643025bed9ee497eed2a8f3a2e21e286eee190acfbaedc9607 +size 24075 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744573/EFTA02744573.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744573/EFTA02744573.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d5468961d53910b9d591de58e368251cf485107a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744573/EFTA02744573.md @@ -0,0 +1,119 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEEPREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE 11, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PROPOSED ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR LIMITED APPEARANCE BY TELEPHONE + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion For Limited Appearance By Telephone. Having considered Defendant's Motion, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Attorney lall G. Weinberg shall appear by telephone for the hearing on the Defendant's Motion to Stay currently scheduled on June 12, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744573/EFTA02744573.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744573/EFTA02744573.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..47db9720d739eaadbf0cd0b0f0ed364bdecf49a6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744573/EFTA02744573.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744573.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1645, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.48, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA \nWEST PALM BEACH DIVISION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 411.7103576660156, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 411.7103576660156, + 116.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 116.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROPOSED ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR \nLIMITED APPEARANCE BY TELEPHONE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 151.164, + 610.74 + ], + [ + 462.063232421875, + 610.74 + ], + [ + 462.063232421875, + 640.8630218505859 + ], + [ + 151.164, + 640.8630218505859 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744573" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744577/EFTA02744577.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744577/EFTA02744577.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a78211bd125e3b2395fd7e0bcdf9ddfe93373fc5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744577/EFTA02744577.md @@ -0,0 +1,152 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-1VIARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +/ + +DOE H, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MAFtRAa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +/ + +## MOTION FOR LIMITED APPEARANCE BY TELEPHONE + +In accordance with Local Rule 4(B) of the Special Rules Governing the Admission and Practice of Attorneys of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, the undersigned respectfully moves for the admission of G. Weinberg, State of Massachusetts Bar Number 519480, 20 Park Plaza, Boston, ■ **02116, ( for the purposes of limited appearance by telephone on June 13, 2009 at 10:00 a.m., as co-counsel on behalf of JEFFREY EPSTEIN, herein, in the above-styled case only, and pursuant to Rule 2(13), Southern District of Florida, CM/ECF Administrative Procedures, to permit Weinberg to appear by telephone on June 13, 2009 at 10:00 a.m., in this case, and in support thereof as follows:** + +**1. Michael G. Weinberg while not admitted to practice in the Southern District of Florida and is a member in good standing of the Bar for the State of Massachusetts (See Attached Exhibit "A").** + +**2. Movant, Robert D. Critton, of the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier, & Coleman, 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401, is a member in good standing of The Florida Bar and the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, and represents the Defendant in this matter.** + +**4. G. Weinberg, has served as one of JEFFREY EPSTEIN's attorneys and may have information not known to the undersigned, which may assist the Court in deciding issues raised at the June 12, 2009 hearing.** + +**WHEREFORE, Robert D. Critton, moves this Court to enter an Order permitting G. Weinberg to appear by telephone before this Court on behalf of JEFFREY EPSTEIN, for the hearing currently scheduled on June 13, 2009 at 10:00 a.m relating to the proceedings in the above-styled matter.** + +Dated: June 3, 2009 + +![]() + +--- + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. + +FBN: 224162 + +**BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER +& COLEMAN** + +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Telephone: (561) 842-2820 + +Facsimile: (561) 844-6929 + +blebedeker@bclclaw.com + +*Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein.* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744577/EFTA02744577.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744577/EFTA02744577.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..98ef179c148860b3d6b25e8bf45235a2be6626b7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744577/EFTA02744577.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,241 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744577.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 3142, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.62, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.136474609375, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.136474609375, + 103.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 103.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MOTION FOR LIMITED APPEARANCE BY TELEPHONE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 145.04399999999998, + 625.3199999999999 + ], + [ + 471.0602111816406, + 625.3199999999999 + ], + [ + 471.0602111816406, + 641.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 145.04399999999998, + 641.2330169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744577" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744582/EFTA02744582.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744582/EFTA02744582.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..850e75e1b58c737095b102d4c33f805766e91cba --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744582/EFTA02744582.md @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@ +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE LT, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV- D.C. + +![](_page_0_Picture_5.jpeg) + +CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRa + +CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRAa + +CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +## MIS ORDER + +This mauer came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN's, Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to file Reply to Plaintiffs' Jane Does 2-7 Responses in Opposition to Motion to Compel Answers to et Set of Interrogatories and CZ:V.0 l ola + +1" Request to Produce, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall have until May 20, 2009 to file a Reply to Plaintiffs' Jane Does 2-7 Responses in Opposition to Motion to Compel Answers to 1" Set of Interrogatories and 1" Request to Produce + +DONE and ORDERED this 3 day of , 2009. + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record + +o Ann dn.—. AAIN64 f- iirriat/ United States Biala Judge AWir714476- + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 31) day of May, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam I). Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jaaesq@bellsouttnet Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein Respec + +By: ROB D. N, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bcMaw.corn + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +molke@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTITER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744582/EFTA02744582.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744582/EFTA02744582.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b36c8cb5124150fc1f7cfe0ba10cddd0aec50613 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744582/EFTA02744582.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,187 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744582.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2224, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.33, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_5.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "MIS ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.651, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 360.3559265136719, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 360.3559265136719, + 642.3170471191406 + ], + [ + 248.651, + 642.3170471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 265.31, + 417.040283203125 + ], + [ + 374.9155578613281, + 417.040283203125 + ], + [ + 374.9155578613281, + 430.4370422363281 + ], + [ + 265.31, + 430.4370422363281 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 36 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744582" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744582/_page_0_Picture_5.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744582/_page_0_Picture_5.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8cdd8f50a9b257cb2a946842b4ef992e64227b83 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744582/_page_0_Picture_5.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0c0a5ce964201996bfdfa850ce564d239986490b674489c6a1231e940150eada +size 11824 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744585/EFTA02744585.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744585/EFTA02744585.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f8a5635de167a5d0cfc59f0a7275608264563fba --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744585/EFTA02744585.md @@ -0,0 +1,262 @@ +## -UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119- + +MA + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANI DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380- + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: OS-CV-80993- MAR + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-8081 -MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARR A + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591 MARRA A - + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656- + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO. 101 AND JANE DOE NO. 102's REPLY TO DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO. 101 AND JANE DOE NO. 102'S MOTION FOR A NO-CONTACT ORDER + +Plaintiffs, JANE DOE No. 101 and JANE DOE No. 102 (together, the "Plaintiffs"), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby reply to Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Response to Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for a No-Contact Order (" Response") as follows: + +1. Plaintiffs have not, and will not, engage in any name-calling. For purposes of Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for a No-Contact Order ("Motion"), it does not matter whether "many of the alleged victims . were or are admitted prostitutes, dancers at strip clubs . . . or have criminal records or warrants for their arrests . . .," Def.'s Resp. 4, or whether they were living in a monastery or planning on becoming nuns, lawyers, or judges. This matter is quite simple: The allegations are that, when these victims were minors, Defendant sexually exploited, abused, molested, and/or battered them. Regardless of the victims' character or Defendant's character, it is obvious that Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, a 55-year-old designated sexual offender and convicted felon, should have no contact with his victims. + +2. Defendant makes much ado that one victim allegedly telephoned Jack Goldberger's office to complain that Mr. Goldberger was holding up the matter. Def.'s Resp. 5. We have no reason to doubt the truth of that statement by defense counsel. Unsurprisingly, a 21-year-old homeless, ill, and desperate victim who had waited for settlement funds for seven weeks regretfully may have called Mr. Goldberger's office; hut whether she did so has nothing to do with Plaintiffs' Motion. Likewise, if Defendant attempts to telephone undersigned counsel to complain or have any other contact with undersigned counsel, undersigned counsel will handle the matter as professionally as Jack Goldberger did—by refusing to speak to the opposing party. + +3. The troublesome part of Defendant's position is his counsel's statement in the attached correspondence that, pursuant to Rule 4-4.2 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, "parties to a matter may communicate directly with each other . ." In this case, Plaintiffs' counsel are concerned that Defendant or his agents may assert that alleged right, and we vehemently disagree that they should have that prerogative in these Plaintiffs' cases. No legal justification exists for Defendant or his agents to have any direct communications with victims whom Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, sexually exploited, abused, molested, and/or battered. + +In his Response, see Def.'s Resp. 4, and in his letter, counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, professes that "it is not Mr. Epstein's intention to have any direct contact with [our] clients." This statement poses two significant problems. First, it leaves the door open for Defendant's investigator(s) or other agent(s) to contact the victims. Such contact would not be direct and would not be inconsistent with his professed intention to refrain from direct contact with his victims. See, e.g., v. All State Home Mortgage, Inc., No. 08-3564, 2009 WL 1391527, at \*1 (6th Cir. May 15, 2009) (intimidation of plaintiffs-loan officers with contentious relationship with defendant-mortgage company + +through threatening phone calls by defendant's employees considered indirect contact in violation of no-contact order in civil suit claiming violation of Fair Labor Standards Act); Commonwealth v. = 661 N.E. 2d 666, 666-67 (Mass. App. Ct. 1996) (defendant's anonymous delivery of flowers to victim considered indirect contact in violation of nocontact order). Second, Defendant's counsel does not state that Defendant will not have any contact with his victims. He merely states Defendant's intentions. Unfortunately, the last five months is replete with other incidents in which Defendant, through his counsel, has stated his intentions and thereafter changed his mind. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, feels free—and actually is free—to change his mind and his stated intentions. His victims deserve more than that. Because they are traumatized and fearful, they require for their security a firm, unambiguous commitment that Defendant will not directly or indirectly contact either of them; considering the situation, any secure commitment is attainable only via a Court order. Plaintiffs cannot emotionally afford to be in a position in which Defendant can unilaterally change his mind. + +4. In the event that Defendant wants to be present at the deposition of a Plaintiff or at a Court hearing where a Plaintiff is to attend, the Court can easily resolve such situations at that time. Meanwhile, the sole purpose of Defendant's refusal to agree to not contact these Plaintiffs is to leave them intimidated and in fear of being in the presence of the man who has sexually exploited, abused, molested, and/or battered them. One would think that, instead, Defendant would have voluntarily agreed with Plaintiff? prior request to have no contact directly or indirectly, including through his agents, and would want to demonstrate to the Court that he will not contact his victims; his refusal to stay away from them is nothing short of disturbing. + +5. Although not requested, if Defendant's counsel seeks some type of reciprocity, Plaintiffs' counsel would agree in writing, and would not oppose a Court order prohibiting Plaintiffs from contacting Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein. It is obvious to undersigned counsel that there should be absolutely no contact between the parties to these lawsuits. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request this Court to enter an Order prohibiting Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and/or his agents from directly or indirectly contacting them. + +Dated: June 4, 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: s/ Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Bar No. 040856 riosefsbera@podhurst.corn Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell©podhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Ste. 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that, on this 4th day of June, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECIC, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: s/Katherine W. Ezell Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Bar No. 040856 riosefsbera@podhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell@podhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Ste. 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +**SERVICE LIST** + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED] +United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. +Michael J. Pike, Esq. +Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 842-2820 +Fax: (561) 515-3148 +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein* + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 659-8300 +Fax: (561) 835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein* + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 202-6360 +Fax: (561) 828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Co-Defendant, [REDACTED]* + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 +Phone: (561) 686-6300 +Fax: (561) 383-9456 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A.* + +Adam Horowitz, Esq. +Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +Phone: (305) 931-2200 +Fax: (305) 931-0877 +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +[smermelstein@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:smermelstein@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Case Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. +Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. +Leopold Kuvin, P.A. +2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +Phone: (561) 515-1400 +Fax: (561) 515-1401 +[skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com](mailto:skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com) +[tleopold@leopoldkuvin.com](mailto:tleopold@leopoldkuvin.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804* + +Richard Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +Phone: (561) 582-7600 +Fax: (561) 588-8819 +[lawyerwillits@aol.com](mailto:lawyerwillits@aol.com) +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Law Office of Brad [REDACTED] & Associates, LLC +2028 [REDACTED] Street, Suite 202 +Hollywood, FL 33020 +Phone: (954) 414-8033 +Fax: (954) 924-1530 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +[be@bradedwardslaw.com](mailto:be@bradedwardslaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Isidro Manuel [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Elkins & Boehringer + +224 Datura Avenue, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 832-8033 + +Fax: (561) 832-7137 + +isidrogarcia(abellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744585/EFTA02744585.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744585/EFTA02744585.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c11e40808219cb8c5ea690835c47247081546a43 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744585/EFTA02744585.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,491 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744585.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 11290, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.05, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "-UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.91799999999998, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 409.08184814453125, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 409.08184814453125, + 101.36248779296875 + ], + [ + 206.91799999999998, + 101.36248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO. 101 AND JANE DOE NO. 102's \nREPLY TO DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS \nJANE DOE NO. 101 AND JANE DOE NO. 102'S MOTION FOR A NO-\nCONTACT ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.32799999999999, + 198.45000000000002 + ], + [ + 520.7969360351562, + 198.45000000000002 + ], + [ + 520.7969360351562, + 255.86248779296875 + ], + [ + 93.32799999999999, + 255.86248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 243.758, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 408.38812255859375, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 408.38812255859375, + 89.73248291015625 + ], + [ + 243.758, + 89.73248291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.178, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 350.59399999999994, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 350.59399999999994, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 262.178, + 89.1 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 49 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744585" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744596/EFTA02744596.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744596/EFTA02744596.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4a20373353e1883433f0e01175f1f830aaafe856 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744596/EFTA02744596.md @@ -0,0 +1,354 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARFtA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-C1V-MARRA/1 + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/a + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09.80469-CIV-MARRA-al + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA-a + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEPI-KEY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## NOTICE TO STRIKE + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Notice to Strike: + +- 1. Defendant filed his Motion for Limited Appearance by Telephone (DE 133) on June 3, 2009. +- 2. Pursuant to Clerk's instructions on June 3, 2009, Defendant hereby filed his Notice to Strike DE 133. + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service list in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 2 day of June, 2009 + +Respectfully su ted, + +By: + +ROBERT D. CR N, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTTER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/. + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomev.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P.•, Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcylaw.com + +joh@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. =, Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsbera@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iagesq@bellsouth.net + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +tleopold@riccilaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744596/EFTA02744596.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744596/EFTA02744596.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..15417f3bc5aa94a087bebaec715d4e5eae21bb99 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744596/EFTA02744596.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,341 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744596.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 4561, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.71, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 411.73565673828125, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 411.73565673828125, + 103.863037109375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 103.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE TO STRIKE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 625.3199999999999 + ], + [ + 368.6708679199219, + 625.3199999999999 + ], + [ + 368.6708679199219, + 640.8630218505859 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 640.8630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 196.82999999999998 + ], + [ + 363.8669738769531, + 196.82999999999998 + ], + [ + 363.8669738769531, + 211.863037109375 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 211.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 570.24 + ], + [ + 364.58050537109375, + 570.24 + ], + [ + 364.58050537109375, + 584.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 584.9830169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 167 + ], + [ + "Line", + 83 + ], + [ + "Text", + 80 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744596" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744602/EFTA02744602.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744602/EFTA02744602.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..198a400ba1ed42a56e6dfe7d79a242edcccf7a96 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744602/EFTA02744602.md @@ -0,0 +1,170 @@ +FILING O roc 2 I ," 0",,e,cr- ; m, 1.0 ice %even + +UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, /CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +STEVEN M. LARIM0RE CLERK. I1.S. °1ST. CT S.O. Cr r1A • WPB + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-8059I-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## MOTION FOR LIMITED APPEARANCE BY TELEPHONE + +In accordance with Local Rule 4(B) of the Special Rules Governing the Admission and Practice of Attorneys of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, the + +undersigned respectfully moves for the admission of= G. Weinberg, State of Massachusetts Bar Number 519480, 20 Park Plaza, Boston,. 02116, ( for the purposes of limited appearance by telephone on June 13, 2009 at 10:00 a.m., as co-counsel on behalf of JEFFREY EPSTEIN, herein, in the above-styled case only, and pursuant to Rule 2(B), Southern District of Florida, CM/ECF Administrative Procedures, to permit= Weinberg to appear by telephone on June 13, 2009 at 10:00 a.m., in this case, and in support thereof as follows: + +- 1. Michael G. Weinberg while not admitted to practice in the Southern District of Florida and is a member in good standing of the Bar for the State of Massachusetts (See Attached Exhibit "A"). +- 2. Movant, Robert D. Critton, of the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier, & Coleman, 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401, is a member in good standing of The Florida Bar and the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, and represents the Defendant in this matter. +- 4. G. Weinberg, has served as one of JEFFREY EPSTEIN's attorneys and may have information not known to the undersigned, which may assist the Court in deciding issues raised at the June 12, 2009 hearing. + +WHEREFORE, Robert D. Critton, moves this Court to enter an Order permitting G. Weinberg to appear by telephone before this Court on behalf of JEFFREY EPSTEIN, for the hearing currently scheduled on June 13, 2009 at 10:00 a.m relating to the proceedings in the above-styled matter. + +Dated: June 5, 2009 + +![]() + +--- + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. + +FBN: 224162 + +**BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER +& COLEMAN** + +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Telephone: (561) 842-2820 + +Facsimile: (561) 844-6929 + +blebedeker@bclclaw.com + +*Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein.* + +## CERTIFICATION OFD G. WEINBERG + +G. Weinberg, pursuant to Rule 4(B) of the Special Rules Governing the Admission and Practice of Attorneys, hereby certifies that (1) I have studied the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida; and (2) I am a member in good standing of the State of Massachusetts. + +Date: June Li , 2009. + +G. Weinberg, Esquire + +## COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS + +SUFFOLK, SS. + +BE IT REMEMBERED, that at the Supreme Judicial Court holden at Boston within and for said County of Suffolk, on the twenty-fourth day of April A.D. 1972 , said Court being the highest Court of Record in said Commonwealth: + +G. Weinberg + +being found duly qualified in that behalf, and having taken and subscribed the oaths required by law, was admitted to practice as an Attorney, and, by virtue thereof, as a Counsellor at Law, in any of the Courts of the said Commonwealth: that said Attorney is at present a member of the Bar, and is in good standing according to the records of this Court\*. + +In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said Court, this second day of June in the year of our Lord two thousand and nine. + +![](_page_6_Picture_7.jpeg) + +MAUR '1 S. 1/ + +• Rccorda cfpnvge disapbncofiny. Inch irs a pnatc !wound imposed by the Band of Bar ()semen or by any cost. an not coserrel by dm cablicancel \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744602/EFTA02744602.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744602/EFTA02744602.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fe8998b0adb87c0e22b7cb09eb658f01a55e76d3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744602/EFTA02744602.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,362 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744602.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 4594, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.89, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_6_Picture_7.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "MOTION FOR LIMITED APPEARANCE BY TELEPHONE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 151.29, + 629.3700000000001 + ], + [ + 477.07012939453125, + 629.3700000000001 + ], + [ + 477.07012939453125, + 644.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 151.29, + 644.9830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATION OFD G. WEINBERG", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 179.57999999999998, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 442.96759033203125, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 442.96759033203125, + 92.34 + ], + [ + 179.57999999999998, + 92.34 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 158.67000000000002, + 93.96000000000001 + ], + [ + 476.07867431640625, + 93.96000000000001 + ], + [ + 476.07867431640625, + 112.25091552734375 + ], + [ + 158.67000000000002, + 112.25091552734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744602" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744602/_page_6_Picture_7.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744602/_page_6_Picture_7.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0ee8a6eafb7d8fb7b87fb8b9886cee6fdc40dd23 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744602/_page_6_Picture_7.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0cb9fe7c334f4023c1638d23b69ea763bc1fedf5d8430c211071d60c1c01ed70 +size 24805 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744609/EFTA02744609.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744609/EFTA02744609.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..71abaf9891100492af9985d8a8f1858e438d58a5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744609/EFTA02744609.md @@ -0,0 +1,161 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY IN CONNECTION WITH DEFENDANT'S VARIOUS MOTIONS TO COMPEL AND REPLIES THERETO + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby gives notice of his intent to rely on the following case as supplemental authority in connection with the above referenced Motions to Compel and Replies thereto: + +I. Doe v. 202 F.R.D. 173, 176 (E.D. P.A. 2001) (denying protective order where alleged sexual assault victim did not demonstrate a serious specific injury and allowing Defendants to identify Plaintiff in discovery because holding otherwise would "chill defendants ability to conduct discovery"). + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing w4s electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this C day of , 2009 + +Respectfully s + +By: RO RT D. CRITT 1 N, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224 .2 rcrit@bc1claw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 isx@searcylaw.com iph@searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Brad Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberz@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf @brucereinhartlaw com Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Ricci-Leopold, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 skuvin@riccilaw.com tleopold@riccilaw.com + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744609/EFTA02744609.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744609/EFTA02744609.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..52a9741acf3b41b1982a397928a5c2a160e2f796 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744609/EFTA02744609.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,337 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744609.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 4763, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.57, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.85565185546875, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.85565185546875, + 103.10302734375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 103.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY IN CONNECTION \nWITH DEFENDANT'S VARIOUS MOTIONS TO COMPEL \nAND REPLIES THERETO", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.744, + 626.94 + ], + [ + 484.48638916015625, + 626.94 + ], + [ + 484.48638916015625, + 671.233024597168 + ], + [ + 129.744, + 671.233024597168 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.308, + 309.42 + ], + [ + 364.2369689941406, + 309.42 + ], + [ + 364.2369689941406, + 324.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 250.308, + 324.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.108, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 118.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 189.108, + 118.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 157 + ], + [ + "Line", + 78 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744609" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744615/EFTA02744615.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744615/EFTA02744615.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..61220c0f1924e7aa61352a4c68ef49ad5e695926 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744615/EFTA02744615.md @@ -0,0 +1,281 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEI'EREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRAI + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE H, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +NOTICE TO STRIKE + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Notice to Strike: + +1. Strike DE 141. Incorrectly filed. + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the forego' ectronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 5 day of June, 2009 + +Respectfully itted, + +By: ROBER ITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTT1ER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomey.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com Counsel for Plaintiffs + +Brad M, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P.M, Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcylaw.com + +iph@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf@brucereinhartlaw com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datum Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidroaarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +lama @bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +tleopold@riccilaw.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744615/EFTA02744615.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744615/EFTA02744615.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8ba59571e6d6c798d0250e286c587406b7b87558 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744615/EFTA02744615.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,306 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744615.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 4322, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.24, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.886474609375, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.886474609375, + 101.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 101.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 115.01999999999998 + ], + [ + 364.9869689941406, + 115.01999999999998 + ], + [ + 364.9869689941406, + 129.363037109375 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 129.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 487.62 + ], + [ + 365.33050537109375, + 487.62 + ], + [ + 365.33050537109375, + 502.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 502.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 96 + ], + [ + "Line", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 159 + ], + [ + "Line", + 79 + ], + [ + "Text", + 72 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744615" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744621/EFTA02744621.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744621/EFTA02744621.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3783e84fe8ab3eedbf184f6d443514cb9fee82da --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744621/EFTA02744621.md @@ -0,0 +1,165 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY IN CONNECTION WITH DEFENDANT'S VARIOUS MOTIONS TO COMPEL AND REPLIES THERETO + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby gives notice of his intent to rely on the following case as supplemental authority in connection with the above referenced Motions to Compel and Replies thereto: + +1. Doe v. 202 F.R.D. 173, 176 (E.D. P.A. 2001) (denying protective order where alleged sexual assault victim did not demonstrate a serious specific injury and allowing Defendants to identify Plaintiff in discovery because holding otherwise would "chill defendants ability to conduct discovery"). + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing w4s electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this C day of , 2009 + +Respectfully s + +By: RO RT D. CRITT I N, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224 .2 rcrit@bc1claw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTEER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 isx@searcvlaw.com 1ph@searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Brad Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberz@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf @brucereinhartlaw com Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Ricci-Leopold, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 skuvin@riccilaw.com tleopold@riccilaw.com + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744621/EFTA02744621.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744621/EFTA02744621.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5f6efccf1418abc8e69a5305f3ef931d2310e115 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744621/EFTA02744621.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,337 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744621.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 4765, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.53, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 412.85565185546875, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 412.85565185546875, + 103.10302734375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 103.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY IN CONNECTION \nWITH DEFENDANT'S VARIOUS MOTIONS TO COMPEL \nAND REPLIES THERETO", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.744, + 626.94 + ], + [ + 484.87445068359375, + 626.94 + ], + [ + 484.87445068359375, + 671.233024597168 + ], + [ + 129.744, + 671.233024597168 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 309.42 + ], + [ + 364.5818176269531, + 309.42 + ], + [ + 364.5818176269531, + 324.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 324.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.108, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 118.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 189.108, + 118.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 157 + ], + [ + "Line", + 78 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744621" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744627/EFTA02744627.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744627/EFTA02744627.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ca83df08a01e38b65b7fd958b426227c1a304ce6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744627/EFTA02744627.md @@ -0,0 +1,82 @@ +## The Psychological Trauma Center a division of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc. + +Medical Director: Gilbert W. Kliman. M. D. + +2105 Divisadcm St . San Francisco. CA 94115 Mow (415)292.7119 Fax (4151749-2802 )1,0vr expertchildonrinatry cum + +Forensic Child Psychiatric Evaluations. Life Care Plans R Testimony + +## DECLARATION OF GILBERT KLIMAN, M. D. + +June 4, 2009 + +## RE: EXPECTATION OF HARM FROM DISCLOSING THE PLAINTIFFS' IDENTITIES IN DOES V JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +- 1. I, Gilbert W. Kliman, M.D., of 2105 Divisadero Street, San Francisco, California, CA. Physicians License G55912, declare the following under penalty of perjury: 2.1 have been retained by plaintiffs' law firm, Mermelstein & Horowitz, to give expert testimony. If called as a witness, I would testify truthfully and competently concerning my psychiatric findings about each of the plaintiffs' alleged experiences of sexual abuse, and the enduring effects that I find each of the young women have suffered as a direct result of the sexual acts perpetrated by the defendant. +- 3. I have been asked to respond to the Defense motion, which requests that some of the plaintiffs, who are now adults, should be publicly named. It is my opinion that involuntary public disclosure will result in the plaintiffs experiencing revictimization, albeit by a justice system that is designed to protect them. If their identities are released, the victims will be at-risk of having their personal lives scrutinized by friends, extended family, spouses, children, fellow students, employers and fellow employees, the media and general public. This type of exposure humiliates many victims and represents another betrayal of trust. Public exposure places the plaintiffs at further risk of stigmatization, shame and retraumatization. +- 4. Due to traumatization the plaintiffs are arrested in their development, and even those who are now legally adults are arrested in part to adolescent aspects of psychology. +- 5. The plaintiffs do not hold their heads high with pride for having been sexually controlled by Mr. Epstein. They hold their heads low with shame. The internal life of a typical adolescent, into late adolescence and early adult years in the best of circumstances, usually involves generous proportions of self-consciousness, shame, selfabsorption and self-doubt and self-blame about sexual acts. + +6. Clinically harmful levels of shame, self-consciousness, self-doubt and self-blame are even more prominent among victims of molestations than among the general population. + +7. Molested teenagers are particularly vulnerable to wrongful manipulations and special clinical harms from the experiences of shame and humiliation. In fact, shame and efforts to cope with it played an underlying role in the harm to each plaintiff. Each was lured into Mr. Epstein's sexual lair with the promise of overcoming bodily and sexual shame by earning money and bettering their lot in life. The defendant capitalized on their sexual naiveté, insecurities and effort to better themselves, and he worked hard to overcome their shame at his enlistment of them in his selfish gratifications. + +8. The defendant who wishes to make their identities public is one whom the criminal justice system has already determined is a person who has already committed a crime of child molestation. That surely means he has already exploited and manipulated the girls' state of adolescent sexuality, including their embarrassment, awkwardness and bodily self-consciousness. He perverted their nascent and developing moral structures by posing as a generous, avuncular mentor who could coach them about their bodies, sex and love. + +The exploitation of adolescent bodies, sex and love is – from a psychoanalytic point of view – an influence on the developing moral conscience of the children, as well as on their sexual urges. Now the ravaging of their internal and private moral conscience is intended by the perpetrator to be made a public ravaging. + +9. Among sexual trauma victims, the insidious and destructive persistence of shame, humiliation and associated self-blame is well-documented (Finkelhor and [REDACTED], 1985). Stigmatization, as experienced by a sexual trauma victim, has especially painful and pathologic consequences. Shame lingers and becomes integrated within the adolescent victim's malleable emerging identity, character structure and self image. Moral clarity is distorted. Perceptions of self-blame and guilt are magnified. The impact of shame lends to cultivating a self image of being "spoiled goods." + +10. Stigmatization following sexual trauma results in long-term risks that can negatively shape multiple facets of adult development: sexual, emotional, interpersonal and vocational. Stigmatization, which is generally to be avoided among psychiatric patients, increases risks among those – as in our plaintiffs as a group – who experience clinical depression and self-destructive behaviors: drug use, criminal activity, even prostitution. + +Stigmatization following abuse is associated with delinquency due to increased anger and affiliation with deviant peers (Feiring et al., 2007). + +11. Shame and guilt are important dimensions of both complex and single event, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Symptoms of shame are associated with feelings of helplessness and powerlessness, which each of the plaintiffs endorsed experiencing in relation to Mr. Epstein. + +12. The DSM-IV-TR recognizes both powerlessness and helplessness as requisite parts of the traumatic experience in Criterion A for the diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder trauma (██████████ Seligman, recent Past President of the American Psychological Association, coined relevant terms of “learned helplessness and “Loss of Personal Locus of Control.” See Seligman, M.P. 1975: Helplessness, Depression, Development and Death. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco). The teenaged girls suffered the loss of personal locus of control to a much more experienced, sexually aggressive, powerful and dominant, manipulative perpetrator. + +13. Releasing names of the plaintiffs to the public will reenact experiences of powerlessness and helplessness in the face of a boundary violation. Repetition and reenactment represent central features of Criterion B in the DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder trauma. In effect, release of their identity and public intrusion into their personal life represents a reenactment of the shame of sexual traumatization. Repetition and reenactment are central pathologies that afflict sexual trauma survivors. + +14. Victims of sexual abuse often rely upon some form of dissociation, splitting or denial, as a defensive means to manage overwhelming affects associated with the sexual trauma. Each of the plaintiff girls has employed some variation of this defense, both during the massages and then subsequently following disclosure of the abuse. Primitive, maladaptive responses of this nature will become additionally reinforced as a result of public disclosure. + +15. Another aspect of the plaintiffs’ experience, which is recognized by DSM-IV-TR, is that the trauma was associated with human design factors (such as cruel intention to do harm, rape, torture). Trauma of this origin has a tendency to produce more “severe or long lasting” posttraumatic stress disorder than natural events (DSM IV TR p. 464). A policy of deliberate revelation of the names of the victims would reinforce the sense of design, pattern and policy of human intentions. + +16. Negative expectations about significant activities are noted in DSM-IV-TR, as part of Criterion C. Symptoms of foreshortened future are characteristic of a traumatized individual’s clinical course (C4). They expect revictimization. They expect bad outcomes (C7) in their social, educational, vocational, relational plans. They are hypervigilant (Criterion D4) for further trauma, and this affects lifestyle choices and future planning. Hypervigilance is part of the arousal set of criteria. Public disclosure of the victims’ identity will aggravate existing symptoms of hypervigilance. + +17. The DSM-IV-TR diagnostic category of “chronic” is justified for each of the plaintiffs. Scientific literature shows that the prognostic consequences of PTSD and residual effects may last for decades (U.S. Dept. of Health, 2005; *Issues in Child Abuse Prevention Number 9 Autumn 1998*: Long-term Effects of Child Sexual Abuse, Paul E Mullen and Jillian Fleming). The lasting impact upon character, identity and moral development will probably affect long-term influences upon adult development. It is more probable than not that stigmatization associated with public disclosure of the + +plaintiffs' identities will intensify the scope, nature and severity of the chronic symptom course. + +18. In addition to PTSD, shame and humiliation themselves have also been associated with causing clinical depression. Coexisting PTSD and clinical depression places the plaintiff's at increased risk for re-victimization and high risk sexual behaviors (e.g., sexually transmitted disease, premature pregnancy, rape) (Nelson, 2002), and at greater risk to victimize others (Filipas and Ullman, 2006; Desai, Centers for Disease Control, 2002) who are in their control. Studies have also shown that chronic symptoms of PTSD, in association with a single episode of Major Depressive Disorder, can produce lifetime adjustment difficulties, which include suicidality (Oquendo et al, 2005; Dube et al, CDC, 2001; Rohde, J. Am. Acad. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 2005). The plaintiffs will be additionally vulnerable to these clinical outcomes, if they suffer the stigmatization and humiliation associated with public disclosure of their identities. + +19. Alternative hypothesis: I have applied the evidence shown from examination and testing of the plaintiffs and relevant observations and information from other professionals while testing an alternative hypothesis: that no harm would result from public disclosure of the plaintiffs' identities. During the evaluations with the six plaintiffs, I used generally acceptable criteria for establishing whether a DSM-IV-TR disorder occurred. I established that there were provable and diagnosable injuries, primarily posttraumatic stress disorder and comorbid depression. Based upon these diagnostic signs, it is more probable than not, that exposing the plaintiff's identity to the public is not a trivial concern or one without substantial clinical repercussions. I believe that most child, adolescent and adult psychiatrists would share the opinion that additional psychiatric injury will result from such exposure. + +20. However, consider for the sake of argument, that my diagnostic conclusions are incorrect, notwithstanding having fulfilled standard psychiatric evaluation procedures of taking a history from multiple sources, videotaping and transcribing my initial interview, and reviewing available medical and legal documents. Even if this was the case, and my diagnostic conclusions were faulty, I believe that multiple experts, even those who may now propose publication of the victims' names, would still come to a conclusion that the plaintiff's suffered sexual abuse, and in some cases, multiple acts of ongoing abuse, at the hands of Jeffery Epstein. Even without developing a subsequent disorder, there is much clinical evidence and scientific literature showing likelihood of substantial psychiatric harm to these sexually abused plaintiffs. + +21. To form these conclusions, I have used my extensive experience in forming these opinions. That experience is both as a treating child psychiatrist and separately as a forensic psychiatrist. I have treated hundreds of minor patients, as well as additionally evaluated hundreds of children and adolescents who have suffered sexual abuse. I have made long term followups of many of the children and have treated many adults who have been molested as adolescents. It is my opinion, with a reasonably high degree of medical certainty that the defense motion to allow public disclosure of the plaintiffs' identities is clinically and ethically a wrongful plan. The act of revealing their identities against their wishes places the plaintiffs at risk, in the best of circumstances, of suffering + +an aggravation of existing diagnostic concerns. It is more probable than not that releasing personal identities will [REDACTED] an exacerbation and magnification of symptoms lending to increased risk of revictimization and retraumatization. + +I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing statements are true and correct, and that this declaration was executed at San Francisco, California on June 4, 2009. + +Sincerely, + +![]()Gilbert Kliman, M.D. + +Distinguished Life Fellow, American Psychiatric Association + +Senior Fellow, American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry + +[REDACTED] Brockman Award Holder, for Distinguished Lifetime Contributions to + +Psychoanalysis and Psychiatry, bestowed by the American College of Psychoanalysis and Psychiatry + +![](_page_4_Picture_108.jpeg) + +State of California, City & County of San Francisco +Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this +24 day of June 2009, by Gilbert Kliman +proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence +to be the person(s) who appeared before me. +*Leonid Nakhodkin* +Leonid Nakhodkin \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744627/EFTA02744627.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744627/EFTA02744627.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f8ce434d22ddc61d2f046c219799facd65039444 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744627/EFTA02744627.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,258 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744627.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 13422, + "elapsed_seconds": 13.05, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_4_Picture_108.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "The Psychological Trauma Center \na division of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 165.24, + 64.80000000000001 + ], + [ + 443.5374755859375, + 64.80000000000001 + ], + [ + 443.5374755859375, + 91.09259033203125 + ], + [ + 165.24, + 91.09259033203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DECLARATION OF GILBERT KLIMAN, M. D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 172.58399999999997, + 209.79000000000002 + ], + [ + 437.39581298828125, + 209.79000000000002 + ], + [ + 437.39581298828125, + 224.988037109375 + ], + [ + 172.58399999999997, + 224.988037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "RE: EXPECTATION OF HARM FROM DISCLOSING THE PLAINTIFFS' IDENTITIES \nIN DOES V JEFFREY EPSTEIN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.456, + 278.64 + ], + [ + 464.30224609375, + 278.64 + ], + [ + 464.30224609375, + 307.8580322265625 + ], + [ + 84.456, + 307.8580322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744627" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744627/_page_4_Picture_108.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744627/_page_4_Picture_108.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9e364562d060d41c0b6e2b562bc63026899add06 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744627/_page_4_Picture_108.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6b31c3aeb38e5e63f0e866efd398be27355d61245c33b1c7b6ee8becfaa6b0bd +size 9948 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744632/EFTA02744632.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744632/EFTA02744632.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..62926ec6ef92f7173b37f70e9eb563e5da989d23 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744632/EFTA02744632.md @@ -0,0 +1,471 @@ +professional publications include books and peer-reviewed medical journal articles on mass disasters, most recently concerning the Attack on America. + +He was extensively interviewed in 1997 by CBS Dallas TV regarding psychiatric testimony concerning eleven altar boys, testimony which had resulted in a record-making jury verdict against the Archdiocese of Dallas. In April, 1998, Dr. Kliman was interviewed by Channel Four anchorwoman, Linda concerning his Salvation Army project providing the Cornerstone form of psychoanalytic psychotherapy for homeless preschoolers and toddlers,. The Cornerstone project itself was viewed on the Channel II Five O'Clock News. KGO TV interviewed Dr. Kliman concerning a forensic testimony, with a focus on a Stanford football player who had allegedly become a child molester. During the Lewinsky-Clinton matter, Kliman was interviewed by Channel 12/20 concerning psychoanalytic views of leaders having exceptional sexual access to partners and the risk of a position of power overcoming the judgments of such leaders. During 2001 following the World Trade Building terrorism, Dr. Kliman was interviewed by Channel II News and appeared on five occasions thereafter through 2003 concerning the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. In May 2003, he was discussant with U.N. Secretary General Olaru Otonu, featured on Dhubai Business TV concerning the plight of children in war. + +In 2004, together with the International Psychoanalytic Association, Dr. Kliman helped organize, establish and supervise a therapeutic preschool project in Buenos Aires. "Cornerstone Argentina" is now in its second year of treating severely disturbed and impoverished preschoolers, with his continuing collaboration. + +Following the hurricane disasters of 2005 he collaborated with Mercy Corps and the Children's Psychological Health Center to produce a mental health resource. The result, "My Katrina and Rita Story", a guided activity resource of families who had to deal with the hurricanes. Mercy Corps is distributing copies to 20,000 families. + +In 2005, RE DISTURBED PRESCHOOLERS Dr. Kliman helped organs,. establish and supervise a therapeutic project in Piedmont California, at the nonprofit Ann Center. + +In 2007, RE HOMELESS CHILDREN: Dr. Kliman helped establish a Reflective Network Therapy service for homeless preschoolers in S ttle. He provided four days of training in that method for the Family Service Center of MI County (located in Seattle), and created an organizational link between The Family Services Center and The Children's Psychological Health Center, Inc. of San Francisco in order to continue serving homeless children in Seattle. + +In 2008, Dr. Kliman activated the Reflective Network Therapy services for preschoolers in Seattle. He supervises there in person and by phone and video. + +In 2008, RE DISASTER SERVICES: Following the Sichuan Earthquake Disaster of May 12, 2008, Dr. Kliman established a link between Children's Psychological Health Center, Inc., Mercy Corps, and The China America Psychoanalytic Alliance. He created mental health resources (see Publications) which were licensed for mass distribution in China by Mercy Corps. + +In 2008, Dr. Kliman helped found a new non-profit organization called Teach with Africa and is a member of its Board of Directors. + +**PROFESSIONAL POSITIONS:** + +**Medical Director:** The Children's Psychological Health Center, Inc. (a non-profit agency), San Francisco, 1993- Responsible for standards of research. clinical treatment, clinical supervision, staff training and forensic evaluations - reporting directly to the Board of Directors. **Psychiatric Consultant:** Ann [REDACTED] Center, Piedmont, CA. **Psychiatric Consultant:** [REDACTED] County Family Services, Seattle, WA. **Private Practice: Medical Director**, The Psychological Trauma Center, (a division of Preventive Psychiatry Associates, Medical Group, Inc.), San Francisco, 1989-. **Chief Psychiatric Consultant**, Children's Garden, San Rafael, CA, 1990-1991. (Children's Garden is a residential [REDACTED] care facility, consisting of group care cottages and a school.) **Director**, Preventive Psychiatry Services and Unit for Study of Mass Violence and Genocide, St. Mary's Hospital, San Francisco, CA 1987-1989. Private practice of Psychiatry and Psychoanalysis (Adult, Child, and Adolescent), San Francisco, CA, 1985-. **Director** and **Principal Investigator**, [REDACTED] Care Study Unit, Columbia University, College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, N.Y., 1984-87. **Associate Clinical Professor**, Columbia University, Department of Child Psychiatry, New York, N.Y., 1985-87. **Founder**, **Editor-in-Chief**, the Journal of Preventive Psychiatry, New York, N.Y., 1980-. **Principal Investigator**, NIMH project ("Preventive Mental Health Services for Children Entering [REDACTED] Care"), The Center for Preventive Psychiatry, [REDACTED] Plains, N.Y., 1979-1985. **Consultant**, Children's Television Workshop, New York 1976. **Assistant Clinical Professor**, Mount Sinai Medical School, Department of Psychiatry, New York, N.Y., 1969-70. **Director**, Preventive Psychiatry Service, Elmhurst General Hospital, Queens, N.Y., 1969-70 + +**GRANTS AWARDED:** + +Grants have been received as Principal Investigator for research and service in preventive psychiatry from: The Aaron Norman Foundation, American Chai Trust, [REDACTED] Barrie Foundation, Bydale Foundation, Cheesborough Pond's Inc., Ciba-Giegy Corporation, Julius H. & Bessie R. Cohn Foundation, David and Ruth Kosh Foundation, James [REDACTED] Foundation, Estate of Florence Mascias, Birny Mason Foundation, The Charles and Emma Goldmann Foundation, The Haas Foundation, The Savin Corporation, The Harris Foundation, The Abelard Foundation, AMF Corporation, CNA Financial Corporation, D. & R. Gottesman Foundation, Stella & Charles Guttman Foundation, Longhill Charities, Virginia & Leonard Marx Foundation, The Klingenstein Foundation, The Lavanburg-Corner House Foundation, Herman Muehlstein Foundation, Nestle Corporation, Louise Ottinger Charitable Trust, Pettus Crowe Foundation, Edward & Ellen Roche Relief Foundation, Samuel Rubin Foundation, Savin Business Machines Corp., S. & H. Scheuer Foundation, [REDACTED] Tannenbaum Foundation. + +Grants have been received as Principal Investigator for a project to develop nonmedical training in Early Childhood Psychotherapy from: The Cleveland Foundation, The Van Ameringen Foundation. A grant was received for equipment for preschool therapeutic services, from: The Hecksher Foundation. Grants have been received as Principal Investigator for Research in the Etiology of Early Childhood Psychosis from: The Boehm Foundation. Grants have been received as Principal Investigator for Research in Assessment of Preventive Clinical Interventions with Children Entering [REDACTED] Family Care, from: The National Institute of Mental Health (Grant # RO1 MH 27944), and The Harris Foundation. Grants received as Principal Investigator, The Columbia University [REDACTED] Care Study Unit, for development of preventive interventions with [REDACTED] children, from the following foundations: The Daniel and Florence Guggenheim + +Foundation, The Dreyfus Foundation, The Seth Sprague Foundation, The Gralnick Foundation, The Harris Foundation, U.S. Trust, and The Scheuer Family Foundation. + +Most recent grants: + +1996-2002: Support from The Office of Education, Division of Special Education, San Mateo County, California. + +1996 The Windholz Foundation, San Francisco, for video documentation of an experimental project concerning treatment of disturbed and traumatized preschool patients in a public education special education division. + +1999 Morris Stulsaft Foundation for video-recording facility to document treatment in The Cornerstone Therapeutic School. + +1999-2001 The Cadence Corporation - for early childhood treatment services + +2000-2001 The Harris Foundation for Cornerstone Therapeutic School. + +2000 Funding and Recognition by the State of California: In 2001, The Department of Education, Division of Special Education, certified the Cornerstone Therapeutic School as a nonpublic special education school, allowing public entities to fund the school by contracts with Unified School Districts. + +2001 The San Francisco Day Care Corporation — for Cornerstone Therapeutic School. + +2001 The Sophie Murvis Foundation for Training of Teachers and Therapists in the Cornerstone Method. + +2002, 2003. The Five Foundation for development of The Cornerstone Therapeutic Preschool 2003. + +2005 The Sophie Murvis Foundation grant for Training of Teachers and Therapists in the Cornerstone Method. + +2005 Mercy Corps for creation of "My Personal Story about Hurricanes Katrina and Rita" + +2008 Mercy Corps for creation of "My Sichuan Earthquake Story" + +#### JANUSZ KORCZAK INTERNATIONAL LITERARY PRIZE: + +First place, International Literary Prize including an award of one thousand dollars, for "World's Best Book Concerning the Well-Being of Children"—Awarded to Gilbert Kliman, M.D. and Albert Rosenfeld, co-authors of Responsible Parenthood published by Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1980 + +#### PUBLISHED PAPERS AND BOOKS: + +1. 01. "Adrenal Medullary Function," in G. [REDACTED] *Yearbook of Endocrinology*, Yearbook Publishers, 1955. +2. 02. Improved Visual Recognition in Hypnotic Versus Control State," *Archives of General Psychiatry*, Vol. 7:155-162, October 1962. +3. 03. *Children and the Death of a President*, Editor and Contributor (with Martha Wolfenstein, Ph.D.), Doubleday & Company, New York, 1965. +4. 04. Oedipal Themes in Children's Reactions to the Assassination of President Kennedy," in Wolfenstein and Kliman, *Children and the Death of a President*, Doubleday, New York, 1965. +5. 05. "The Role of Stimulus Ambiguity in Hypnotic Recognition," (with Eugene Goldberg, M.D.), *Arch. Gen. Psychiat.* 14: 100, Jan. 1966. +6. 06. "Sharing Truths for Mental Health," in *Mental Health in Our Daily Life*. Mental Health Association, [REDACTED] Plains, New York, 1966. +7. 07. "A Psychoanalyst Looks at [REDACTED] Violence as a Factor in Black Violence," The Center for Preventive Psychiatry, 1968. +8. 08. Teacher Recognition of Psychiatric Needs Among Preschoolers," The Center for Preventive Psychiatry, 1968. +9. 09. *Psychological Emergencies of Childhood*. Grune and [REDACTED], New York, 1968. +10. 10. "A Psychiatrist Speaks Out: 3,000 Blighted Children of Westchester," The Center for Preventive Psychiatry, 1969. +11. 11. "On a Vacuum in Mental Health Practices," The Center for Preventive Psychiatry, 1969. +12. 12. "Psychological Management of the Dying Child," in W. Kutscher (Ed.) *Death and Bereavement*, Charles C. [REDACTED] Company, Springfield, Ill. 1969. +13. 13. "The Unique Function of the Teacher in an Experimental Therapeutic Nursery School" (with Doris Ronald), The Center for Preventive Psychiatry, [REDACTED] Plains, New York, 1970. +14. 14. The Open Family Series (Consultant Editor, with Sarah Bonnett [REDACTED], author). A series of five books entitled *About Dying, Making Babies, That New Baby, A Hospital Story*, and *About Handicaps*, [REDACTED] Publishing Co., New York, 1974. +15. 15. "Death in the Family—Its Impact on Children," Terry [REDACTED] Klein Memorial Lecture. *Behavioral Sciences Tape Library*, Leonia, New Jersey, 1974. +16. 16. "Death of a Parent Occurring During a Child's Analysis," in *Trauma: Monograph V of the Monograph Series of the Ernst Kris Study Group*, New York, 1974. +17. 17. "A Case of a Dying Child," in *Trauma: Monograph V of the Monograph Series of the Ernst Kris Study Group*, New York Psychoanalytic Institute, International Universities Press, New York, 1974. +18. 18. "Analyst in the Nursery: Application of Child Analytic Techniques in a Therapeutic Nursery," *The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child*, Volume 30, New York Times Publishing Company, 1975. +19. 19. "A Study of Maternal Depression in the First Two Years of Life: A Possible Contributing Factor in the Etiology of Infantile Psychosis and Neurosis" (with Judyth Katz), The Center for Preventive Psychiatry, [REDACTED] Plains, New York, 1975. +20. 20. Introduction to *Love and Mankind's Future*, by Alexander Arzoumanian, Persepolis Press, New York, 1976. +21. 21. "Preventive Measures in Childhood Bereavement," in Linzer, N. *Understanding Bereavement and Grief*, Yeshiva University Press, New York, 1977. +22. 22. "Childhood Mourning: A Taboo Within a Taboo," in Gerber, I., Wiener, A., Kutscher, A., et al., *Perspectives on Bereavement*, MSS Information Corporation, New York, 1979. + +1. 23. "Mourning, Memory, and Reconstruction: The Analysis of a Four-Year-Old Maternally Bereaved Girl at Age Sixteen Months" (With [REDACTED], Ph.D.), in *The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child*, Volume 34, The New York Times Press, New York, 1979. +2. 24. "Facilitation of Mourning During Childhood," in Gerber, I., Wiener, A., Kutscher, A., et al., *Perspectives on Bereavement*, MSS Information Corporation, New York, 1979. +3. 25. "The Cornerstone Treatment of a Preschool Boy from an Extremely Impoverished Environment" (with [REDACTED], Ph.D.), *The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child*, Vol. 35, The New York Times Press, New York, 1980. +4. 26. *Responsible Parenthood: The Child's Psyche Through the Six-Year Pregnancy*, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York, 1980. +5. 27. "Death: Some Implications in Child Development and Child Analysis," in *Advances in Thanatology*, Vol. 4, No. 2, Arno Press, New York, 1980. +6. 28. "Children in [REDACTED] Care: A Preventive Service and Research Program for a High Risk Population" (with M. Harris Schaeffer, [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED], and Bernard G. Pasquariella). *The Journal of Preventive Psychiatry*, Volume I: 1, 1981. +7. 29. Editorial(s). *The Journal of Preventive Psychiatry*. Volume I, 1981-1982, Volume II, 1983-4, Volume III, 1985-7, Volume IV, in press. +8. 30. *Preventive Mental Health Services for Children Entering [REDACTED] Family Care: An Assessment* (with M. Harris Schaeffer, and M. [REDACTED]). The Center for Preventive Psychiatry, [REDACTED] Plains, New York, 1982. +9. 31. "Summary of Two Psychoanalytically Based Service and Research Projects: Preventive Treatments for [REDACTED] Children" with M. Harris Schaeffer, Ph.D. *J. of Preventive Psychiatry*, Vol. II, No. 1, 1983. +10. 32. "Three New Areas in Litigation on behalf of Children," in *Child Psychiatry and the Law*, Diane Schekty, Editor, Volume 2, Bruner/Mazel, New York, 1985. +11. 33. *Preventive Psychiatry: Early Intervention and Situational Crisis Management*, co-editor, with S.C. Klagsbrun, M.D., E.J. Clark, Ph.D., others. The Charles Press, Philadelphia, 1989. +12. 34. *My Earthquake Story: A Guided Workbook for Children, Parents and Teachers*, with Harriet Wolfe, M.D. and Edward Oklan, M.D. Psychological Trauma Center Press, Kentfield, CA. October, 1989. +13. 35. "Facilitation of Mourning During Childhood," chapter in *Preventive Psychiatry: Early Intervention and Situational Crisis Management*. (Eds) S. Klagsbrun, G. Kliman, E. Clark, A. Kutscher, R. DeBellis, C. Lambert. The Charles Press, Philadelphia, 1989. +14. 36. "Toward Preventive Intervention in Early Childhood Object Loss," chapter in Noshpitz, H. and Coddington, D. (Eds) *Stressors and Clinical Techniques in Child Psychiatry*. Charles [REDACTED], NY, 1990. +15. 37. "Brief Report: Loss of Parental Services—A Guide to Categorization." *J. Preventive Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines* 4:1, 1990. Human Sciences Press, NYC. +16. 38. "A Methodologic Breakthrough: The Saga of Delivering Effective Primary Preventive Psychotherapy to Groups of [REDACTED] Children." *J. Preventive Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines* 4:1, 1990. Human Sciences Press, NYC. +17. 39. "The Rise of Adolf Hitler and Other Genocidal Leaders—Psychoanalytic and Historical Symposium (Summary)," *J. Preventive Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines* 4:1, 1990. Human Sciences Press, NYC. + +1. 40. Kliman, G. et al (2007). *"Facilitating Effective Coping in Children Following Disasters: A Psychoanalytic Informed Guided Narrative Intervention."* J. Am Psan. Assoc. In Press +2. 41. Kliman, G. and M.H. Schaeffer, Ph.D. "A Breakthrough in Prediction and Prevention: Diagnoses as Social Predictors for [REDACTED] Children." *J. Preventive Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines* 4:1, 1990 Human Sciences Press, NYC. +3. 42. "My Flood Story—a Guided Activity Workbook for Children, Families and Teachers," co-authored with Edward Oklan, M.D., Family Development Press, 1010 Sir Francis Drake Blvd, Kentfield, CA 94960. +4. 43. "My Earthquake Story, A Guided Activity Workbook for Children, Families and Teachers," co-authored with Harriet Wolfe, M.D., Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., 2105 Divisadero Street, San Francisco, CA 94115 and Edward Oklan, M.D., Family Development Press, 1010 Sir Francis Drake Blvd, Kentfield, CA 94960. +5. 44. "Field Notes: [REDACTED] Care: The Personal Life History Book: A Psychoanalytically Based Intervention for [REDACTED] Children," *Journal for the Psychoanalysis of Culture & Society*, Fall 1996 1:2. 159-162. +6. 45. Kliman G and Zelman A. (1996). "Use of a Personal Life History Book in the Treatment of [REDACTED] Children--An Attempt to Enhance Stability of [REDACTED] Care Placements." Chapter in Zelman A (ed). *Early Intervention with High-Risk Children: Freeing Prisoners of Circumstance*. Jason Aronson, Northvale, NJ. 105-124. +7. 46. "Cornerstone Project: Analysis in Special Ed Classes," *The American Psychoanalyst*, 1997. 31:2. 27-28 +8. 47. "My Book about Kosovo - a Guided Activity Workbook for Kosovo Children, Families, and their Teachers." English and Albanian Editions, CPHC, 1999, San Francisco. +9. 48. "My Book about the Attack on America", A Guided Activity Workbook for Children, Families and Teachers, coauthored with Ed Oklan, M.D. and Ann Oklan, M.D. 2001, CPHC, San Francisco. +10. 49. "Helping Patients and their Families Cope in a National Disaster", The S.F. Medical Society, January 2002. Reprinted in J. L.A. Medical Society, March 2002. +11. 50. Discussion of Reactive Attachment Disorder. Developmental Pediatrics. 2003. +12. 51. "My Personal Story About Hurricanes Katrina and Rita – a guided activity workbook to help coping, learning and Healthy expression." The Children's Psychological Health Center, Sept. 24, 2005 San Francisco. Derivative editions by Mercy Corps, Portland, OR. +13. 52. "My Personal Story About Tropical Storm Stan" English Ed. Feb. 24, 2006, The Children's Psychological Health Center. *Spanish Translation " Mi Historia De La Tormenta Stan" Feb. 2006* +14. 53. Israeli Terror Book +15. 54. "Methods for Maximizing the Good Effects of [REDACTED] Care: Evidence Based Strategies to Prevent Discontinuities of [REDACTED] Care and Raise I.Q." International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies, April, 2006 +16. 55. "My Personal Story about being Homeless" A Guided Activity Workbook to help Children Cope. The Children's Psychological Health Center Jan 15, 2008 +17. 56. "My Sichuan Earthquake Story – A Guided Activity Workbook to help Children Cope" 85 pages. First English Edition May 22, 2008 available for download online at [www.childrenspsychological.org](http://www.childrenspsychological.org). Mandarin edition by CPHC and China America Analytic Association, in press with Mercy Corps June 2, 2008. + +--- + +- 57. "My Hurricane Story" A Guided Activity Workbook to help Children Cope. The Children's Psychological Health Center. Sept 21, 2008 + +--- + +**WORKS IN PROGRESS:** available in Draft: + +IQ Rise among Preschoolers with Pervasive Developmental Disorders. + +Child Psychoanalytic Contributions to Civil Justice System, submitted by invitation, to Psychoanalytic Inquiry + +Books in Draft: + +- 1. Reflective Network Therapy: Early Childhood Psychotherapy in the Classroom +- 2. A Unifying New Theory of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder + +**PRESENTATIONS:** + +- 01. "Specific Traumas: Selective Review of Literature," presented at the Ernst Kris Study Group, New York Psychoanalytic Institute, New York, 1965. +- 02. "Psychoanalysis of a Four-Year-Old in a Preschool Group," presented at the American Psychoanalytic Association, Atlantic City, New Jersey, May, 1966 +- 03. "Covert Suicidal Impulses in Maternally Deprived Children" (with Harriet Lubin, M.S.W.), presented at the American Association of Psychiatric Services for Children, Boston, Massachusetts, November, 1969. +- 04. Children's Reactions to National Events: The 1968 Federal Elections," presented at the American Orthopsychiatric Association, Washington, D.C., 1969. +- 05. "Facilitation of Mourning During Childhood," presented at the Chicago Psychoanalytic Institute, May 1973. +- 06. "Preventive Approaches to Preschool Psychiatric Disorders: Some Assessments," presented at the Academy of Child Psychiatry, Washington, D.C., October, 1973. +- 07. "Biological Drive Derivative Cycles in Preschool Patients," presented at the New York Psychoanalytic Institute Research Seminar, 1974. +- 08. "Children in National Disasters," presented at the International Association for Child Psychiatry, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1974. +- 09. "Childhood Mourning: Some Social Aspects," presented at Yeshiva University, New York, October, 1974. +- 10. "The Center for Preventive Psychiatry's Interventions with Bereaved Children," presented at the second annual conference on "The Impact of Bereavement and Grief on the Family," Yeshiva University, October 15, 1975. +- 11. "Death: Implication for Psychoanalytic Theory and Practice," presented at The Association for Psychoanalytic Medicine, New York, 1977. +- 12. "A Psychoanalytic View of an Ancient Mass Disaster: The Mayan Exodus," The Center for Preventive Psychiatry, 1977. + +1. 13. "A Psychoanalytic View of Preventive Psychiatry," presented at Stockbridge, Mass., December, 1977. +2. 14. "The Self-Concept and Healthy Narcissism: Relevance to Preventive Psychiatry," presented at the Westchester Psychoanalytic Society, [REDACTED] Plains, New York, 1978. +3. 15. "Special Problems of the Single Parent Child," presented at Department of Child Psychiatry, Rutgers Medical School and published by Jason Aronson Psychotherapy Tape Library, New York, 1978. +4. 16. "The Self-Concept: Its Significance in Prevention of Mental Illness," presented at The Alumni Association of the Chicago Psychoanalytic Institute, Child Psychotherapy Program, Chicago, 1978. +5. 17. "Treatment of an Impoverished Intellectually Retarded Ghetto Child by the Cornerstone Method" (with [REDACTED] Ph.D.), presented at the American Psychoanalytic Association, New York, 1979. +6. 18. "Preventive Approaches Among [REDACTED] Children Using Modern Theory of Narcissism," presented at The Department of Psychiatry, Mountainside Hospital, Symposium on Primary Prevention of the Mental and Behavioral Disorders, Mountainside, NJ, 1979. +7. 19. "The Center for Preventive Psychiatry: Its Relationship to Infant Psychiatry," at the Symposium on Infant Psychiatry, The Center for Preventive Psychiatry, [REDACTED] Plains, New York, 1979. +8. 20. "Mourning, Memory and Reconstruction," presented at The Westchester Psychoanalytic Association, [REDACTED] Plains, New York, 1980. +9. 21. "Preliminary Report on Preventive Psychiatric Services for [REDACTED] Children," presented at American Association of Psychiatric Services for Children, 1980. +10. 22. "Assessment of Primary Preventive Services: Children Entering [REDACTED] Family Care," presented at American Orthopsychiatric Association, May, 1981. +11. 23. "Psychoanalytically-Based Approaches to the Problems of [REDACTED] Care: A Pilot Project," presented at the American Psychoanalytic Association Interdisciplinary Seminar on Psychoanalytic Observations of [REDACTED] Care, New York, December, 1978. See also report of this Seminar by [REDACTED], T.: "Psychoanalytic Observations of [REDACTED] Care (An Interdisciplinary Seminar of the American Psychoanalytic Association)." *The Journal of Preventive Psychiatry*, Volume I:1, 1981. +12. 24. "A Project to Deliver and Evaluate Preventive Psychiatric Services," Columbia College of Physicians & Surgeons, Division of Child Psychiatry Grand Rounds, May, 1982. +13. 25. "New Concepts in Litigation on Behalf of Children," presented at New York Medical College, October, 1982. +14. 26. "Cruel Experiments of Nature: General Remarks on Childhood Bereavement and Developmental Pathology." Vulnerable Child Workshop, American Psychoanalytic Association, April, 1983. +15. 27. Facilitation of Mourning During Childhood: Role of The Clinician," presented at New York Hospital, Westchester Division, October, 1983. +16. 28. "A Questionnaire for Surveying the Practice of Preventive Psychiatry," presented at the American Academy of Child Psychiatry, Prevention Committee, October, 1983. +17. 29. "Experiences and Problems in Research Concerning Childhood Bereavement," presented at Department of Psychiatry, University of Ottawa, November, 1983. +18. 30. "Prediction and Prevention with [REDACTED] Children" (co-authored with M. Harris Schaeffer, Ph.D.), presented at American Psychiatric Association, May, 1984. +19. 31. "Preventive Psychiatry as Applied to [REDACTED] Children," Grand Rounds, [REDACTED] Porter Psychiatric Institute, 1985. +20. 32. "The Childhood of Adolf Hitler," with Robert Pois, Ph.D., The American Psychoanalytic Association, Denver, May 1985. + +1. 33. Seminar on "New Areas in Forensic Psychiatry," at the Robert [REDACTED] law firm, San Francisco, 1986. VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE +2. 34. "Children's Reactions to the Challenger Shuttle Disaster," on 20/20 (Television Broadcast), 1986. VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE +3. 35. The Fathering of Adolf Hitler," Grand Rounds, McAuley Neuropsychiatric Institute, St. Mary's Hospital, San Francisco, 1986. +4. 36. "Child Sexual Abuse: Psychoanalytic and Forensic Approaches," Children's Hospital, San Francisco, 1986. VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE +5. 37. "Preventive Psychiatry for Children," Training Seminar at McAuley Neuropsychiatric Institute, St. Mary's Hospital, San Francisco, 1987. VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE +6. 38. "Multi-Victim Child Sexual Abuse," San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute Extension Division, October 1987. VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE +7. 39. "Children in [REDACTED] Families: Advances in Preventive Psychiatry," Continuing Education Program for Psychiatrists, U.C. [REDACTED], 1988. +8. 40. "The Mothering of Adolf Hitler," Grand Rounds. McAuley Neuropsychiatric Institute, St. Mary's Hospital, San Francisco, Dec. 1988. +9. 41. "Adolf Hitler's Mothering: A Child Psychoanalytic View," Westchester Psychoanalytic Society, New York Hospital, January, 1989. +10. 42. "The Personal Life History Book: Preventive Psychotherapy for Children in Chaos." Department of Child Psychiatry, Harlem Hospital, New York, NY, January, 1989. +11. 43. Chairman: Symposium April 20-21, 1989. The Rise of Adolf Hitler and Other Genocidal Leaders. Interdisciplinary Unit for Study of Mass Violence and Genocide. St. Mary's Hospital Department of Psychiatry, San Francisco. +12. 44. "The Mothering of Adolf Hitler," Symposium above. VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE +13. 45. "The Fathering of Adolf Hitler," Symposium above. VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE +14. 46. Public Media: Following the October 17th earthquake, Dr. Kliman and his Psychological Trauma Center associates appeared on KRON-TV, KFAS, KQED and public service radio network to offer advice and respond to call-in questions regarding earthquake stress and trauma. His *Earthquake Story* guided workbook (see above) was distributed as a public service by San Francisco Community Mental Health Services and the Oakland Bureau of Education to 11,000 teachers in Oakland and San Francisco. +15. 47. [REDACTED] Psychoanalytic Society: (April 1990) "Simultaneous child and couple therapy: emergence and interpretation of congruent unconscious themes." +16. 48. University of California College of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, Irvine. (June 1990) "Prevention of Psychopathology among Children: Systematic Projects with [REDACTED] Children." +17. 49. Preventive Interventions with Traumatized Children," Grand Rounds California Pacific Hospital Department of Psychiatry, October 20, 1992. VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE. +18. 50. Altered Interpersonal Schemas After Life Threatening Childhood Trauma," Center for Study of Consciousness, UCSF, October 1992. +19. 51. Alterations of Pre-Traumatic Memory and Post Traumatic Schemas," Child Analysis Colloquium, San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute, November 1992. +20. 52. Toward A New Theory of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder," Control Mastery Group, San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute, December 1992. +21. 53. Severe Psychological Trauma in Very Young Children," Grand Rounds at the Menninger-San Mateo County Hospital Psychiatric Residency Program, March 23, 1993. +22. 54. Psychological Crises Among Preschoolers," Department of Health, City of San Francisco, April 1993. +23. 55. Child Analysis Colloquium," San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute, May 1993. + +1. 56. "Loss of Parental Services—a Guide for Clinicians and Attorneys," Children's Psychological Trauma Center, September 16, 1993. (120 min. VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE.) +2. 57. Catastrophic Levels of Psychological Trauma—a Guide for Clinicians and Attorneys," Children's Psychological Trauma Center, September 27, 1993 (120 min. VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE.) +3. 58. Systematic Preventive Interventions with ██████ Children," Keynote Address, Western Pennsylvania Psychiatric Institute Conference on Adoption and ██████ Care, Sept. 22, 1993. +4. 59. Cost Benefits of Preventive Interventions with ██████ Children," American Behavioral Health Institute, San Francisco, Sept. 28, 1993. (60 min. VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE.) +5. 60. True and False Allegations of Child Molestation," Children's Psychological Trauma Center, October 1, 1993. (120 min. VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE). +6. 61. Severe Psychological Trauma in Childhood—Some New Observations," Grand Rounds, Dept. of Child Psychiatry, Oakland Children's Hospital, Oct. 7, 1993. (60 min. VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE.) +7. 62. Preventive Approaches in Severe Psychological Trauma," Bar Association of San Francisco, October 28, 1993. (90 min. VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE.) +8. 63. New Theory of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder," Pediatric Grand Rounds California Pacific Hospital, Nov. 5, 1993. +9. 64. Preventing Depression in Yourself, Your Clients and Your Co-Workers," San Francisco Bar Association, San Francisco, CA, December 2, 1993. +10. 65. A New Theory of Post Traumatic Disorders," Center for Preventive Psychiatry, ██████ Plains, NY, January 11, 1994. +11. 66. KRON-TV, "Helping Children Deal with Earthquake Stress," San Francisco, CA, January 20, 1994. +12. 67. Samuel Kahn Memorial Lecture, The Center for Preventive Psychiatry, ██████ Plains, N.Y. Topic, "Catastrophic Traumas of Childhood—New Findings, New Theory, New Therapeutic Tasks," February 28, 1994. +13. 68. "Preventing Job Stress: The Disease of the 20th Century," San Francisco Bar Association, San Francisco, CA, March 25, 1994. +14. 69. "Controlled Assessment of Psychoanalytically Derived Psychotherapy with ██████ Children," American Psychoanalytic Association, Philadelphia, PA, May 1994. +15. 70. "A senior researcher's subjective experience of a new hypothesis," California School of Professional Social Work Studies. Commencement Address, May 1994. +16. 71. "Oppositionalism Among Traumatized Children," International Association Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, San Francisco, CA, July 23, 1994. +17. 72. "New Theory of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder," International Association Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, San Francisco, CA, July 25, 1994. +18. 73. "Violence Against Young Children—Children in War," Co-sponsored by San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute, San Francisco, CA, July 26, 1994. +19. 74. "Method for Treatment of Preschool Psychiatric Patients in Groups," American Psychoanalytic Association, Philadelphia, PA, December 15, 1994. +20. 75. "A New Theory of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder," Control-Mastery Research Group, San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute, March 31, 1995. +21. 76. "New Theory of Child Abuse Effects," T.A.S.K., Monterey, CA, April 1, 1995. +22. 77. "Psychological Trauma, Day Care and Mental Health," San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute Extension Division. April 26, 1995. +23. 78. "Special Problems of Medical Ethics in Psychiatric Treatment: Child Abuse Concerns," San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute Research Group, June 30, 1995. + +- 79. "Operational Confirmation of aPsychoanalytic Hypothesis: Detecting and Interfering with The Repetition Compulsion," Cleveland Psychoanalytic Institute and Anni Katan Center for Child Development, October 28, 1995. +- 80. The Personal Life History Book Method: Reducing Transfers Among la Family Homes," The Center for Preventive Psychiatry, =Plains, NY, October 30 43. +- 81. "A New Theory of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder," Grand Rounds, Baylor University School of Medicine, Houston, November 8, 1995. +- 82. "Raising IQ's in aTherapeutic Nursery: The Cornerstone Method. How it works as illustrated by video clips of the therapist and patients in the classroom," The Houston Psychoanalytic Institute and Stedman West Child Development Center, Houston, TX, November 8, 1995. +- 83. "The Difficult Client: Accredited Continuing Legal Education seminar for California Attorneys." The Psychological Trauma Center, The Psychological Trauma Center, 1996. +- 84. "Catastrophic injuries and psychological trauma: Accredited Continuing Legal Education seminar for California Attorneys." The Psychological Trauma Center, 1996. +- 85. "Why Small Clients Get Large Awards: Proving and Disproving Psychological Injuries in Childhood. Accredited Continuing Legal Education seminar for California Attorneys." 1996 +- 86. "A New Public Health Approach in Public Special Education: Presentation to The San Mateo Board of Education," San Mateo, CA. April 17, 1996. +- 87. A new model for special education of preschoolers: The Cornerstone Method -- for synergy between early childhood education and psychotherapy. California State Dept. Education, Division of Special Education September 1996, Red Lion Hotel, Orange County Airport, CA. +- 88. "Synergy Between Special Education and Psychotherapy in the Classroom: Special Education Learning Program Administrators," San Mateo, CA. October 10, 1996. +- 89. "The Role of Psychoanalyst as Forensic Expert in Catastrophic Psychological Trauma Cases." American Psychoanalytic Association, Winter Meeting, Waldorf Astoria, NY. December 1996 +- 90. "Controlled Assessment of aPsychoanalytically Derived Psychotherapy." American Psychoanalytic Association, Winter Meeting, Waldorf Astoria, NY December 1996. +- 91. "Child Psychotherapy Course: Several preschool patients with different diagnosis, treated in apreschool therapeutic nursery, showing response to interpretations, with discussions of the role of teacher, parents and medications." San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute, March 4, 11, 18, 1997 +- 92. "Synergy between Psychotherapy and early childhood special education" SELPA Administrators, April 17, 1997 +- 93. "Analyst in the Nursery: The Cornerstone Method," San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute, May 21, 1997 +- 94. "Psychological Trauma Among Preschoolers," San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute, May 15, 1997 +- 95. ACT for Mental Health, April 17, 1997 +- 96. "New Theory of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder," Fifth European Conference on Traumatic Stress, European Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, July 1, 1997. +- 97. The Cornerstone Method: Intensive Preschool Psychotherapy in Public School Special Education Classes. California State Federation/Council for Exceptional Children 48th Annual Conference & Special Education Fall Conference, San Francisco, CA, October 21- 24, 1998. +- 98. Research and treatment with highly traumatized preschoolers. Institute, Berkeley, Feb. 4, 2002. + +1. 99. Five year and thirty-three year follow ups of early childhood psychotherapy: Some startling findings among children treated by The Cornerstone Method. Grand Rounds, Dept. of Psychiatry, California Pacific Medical Center, San Francisco, February 1, 2000. (VIDEOTAPE AVAILABLE). +2. 100. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and new methods of treatment. Department of Mental Health, State of Oklahoma, and Dept. of Psychiatry, Oklahoma State College of Medicine. Two Days of Workshops and Seminars to fellows, residents in psychiatry and child psychiatry, medical students, and mental health clinicians. October 22, 23 2000. +3. 101. A Psychoanalytic Treatment of Young Children: Surprisingly Measurable Positive Outcomes”, San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute - Extension Division Discussion for Clinicians, 03.05.2001 +4. 102. Regarding the 9/11/2002 Attack on America. + +2001-2002 Attack on America Events: 2001-2002 Public Health/ Public Education Activities: + +Seminar for Parents on Crisis Management following 9/11: Convent of Sacred Heart Elementary School Seminar for Teachers on Crisis Management following 9/11: Stuart █ and Convent of Sacred Heart Elementary Schools Federal Emergency Management Agency: Web-Site Linkage for CPHC's advice to parents and teachers American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry: Web-Site Linkage for free copies of guided activity workbook for children, parents and teachers. + +American Psychoanalytic Association: Web-site linkage for free copies of guided activity workbook for children, parents and teachers. + +Channel II: Three interviews on primary prevention of the effects of psychological trauma and terror + +Channel II: Three interviews on secondary prevention via early life psychiatric treatment of children + +1. 103. Day Long Workshop on The Cornerstone Method. The Children's Psychological Health Center, Feb. 4, 2001, San Francisco. +2. 104. Child psychoanalysis. San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute. Six seminars to child analysts and advanced students, using illustrations from parent-permitted videos of the author's recent treatment work with young children. +3. 105. Theory and Intervention regarding Early Childhood Trauma: Extension Division, San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute. +4. 106. Educating and treating disturbed young children: Office of Education, County of San Mateo, ten conferences a year. (1995- 2002) +5. 107. The Cornerstone Method of educating and treating disturbed young children: 45 conferences a year, Children's Psychological Health Center, San Francisco. (1999- continuing) +6. 108. New methods for treatment of traumatized and/or developmentally disordered young children. Northern California Mental Health Association, February 9, 2002. A day long workshop. Eureka, Ca. +7. 109. Research and treatment with disturbed and traumatized young children. █ Institute, Berkeley, Feb 4, 2002. + +- 110. Presentations of video-taped child treatment sessions: The Child Analysis Study Group of the San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute, six occasions 2001-2002. +- 111. New Theory and New Treatments of Children. Northern California Society of Mental Health Professionals. Feb 8, 2002. +- 112. Treatment of Children in their Real Life Spaces. Ann Center, Berkeley, CA February 2, 2002. +- 113. Treatment of children in community school settings. Workshop on Community Child Psychiatry. American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. October 2002. +- 114. Treatment of preschoolers in real life space The Cornerstone Method. A two day training workshop for the L.A. County Dept. of Mental Health. October 2002. +- 115. The Cornerstone Method. The American Psychoanalytic Association, Workshop on Early Childhood. January 2003, New York. +- 116. Treatment of Three Autistic Preschoolers: The American Psychoanalytic Association. June, 2003. Boston. +- 117. The Personal Life History Book: A Preventive Therapy for Children. A day-long workshop at Counseling4Kids, Los Angeles, September 2003. +- 118. A new method of treatment of autistic preschoolers. The Chinatown Child Development Center, San Francisco, December 4, 2003. +- 119. Results of the Cornerstone Method: Pervasive Developmental Disorder with eight month to 37year followup. The M.I.N.D. Institute, U.C. lug December 19, 2003. +- 120. Procedures for preventing and reducing psychopathology among children. Joint Committee of AACAP and Child Welfare League, November 2003, with Marilyn Benoit, M.D. +- 121. The Role of Child Psychiatrists in Prevention of Child Abuse: Forensic Child Psychiatry as aSocietal Influence. Mensa Society, January 2004. +- 122. Psychoanalysis Confronts Autism. The L.A. and SoCal Psychoanalytic Institutes, February 22, 2004. +- 123. Child Psychiatric Testimony and the Leading Edge of Social Change. American College of Forensic Psychiatry, March 28, 2004 +- 124. The Cornerstone Method of Treating Autism. American Psychoanalytic Association, Boston, Mass., January 2005. +- 125. An evidence based method for in-classroom treatment of disturbed preschoolers. Child Welfare League of America. New Orleans, Ma 2005. +- 126. Two evidence-based methods for treating children. International Psychoanalytic Association, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, July 2005. +- 127. A novel evidence-based method for treatment of Asperger's Disorder. Lorman Educational Seminars, Redding, CA. November 18, 2005 +- 128. "Applications of The Cornerstone Method to Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders" American Psychoanalytic Association, New York, New York. January 18, 2006 +- 129. "Applying The Cornerstone Method in Public Schools" Philadelphia Board of Education April 28,06 DVD FORMAT AVAILABLE +- 130. "Crises Intervention Techniques Within Schools: What you Need to Know When Large or Small Scale Disasters Strike" Lorman Educational Seminar, Sacramento, CA Oct. 6, 2006 +- 131. "Saying Goodbye: Termination in Psychotherapy" 53"I Annual Meeting of The American e•in Acr of Child and Adolescent Piir, San Diego, Ca October 28, 2006 +- 132. LE, Viron M, JE, A, Samples G, Kliman G: A school-based mental health recovery effort. Poster session presentation at the 58th Institute on Psychiatric Services Annual Meeting, New York, NY, October 5-8, 2006. + +- 133. a L, Viron M,MIt JEn; A, Samples G, Kliman G, O'Neill P. A School-based Mental Health Recovery Effort. Postcr session presentation at ADMSEP Annual meeting. Park City, Utah, June, 2007. +- 134. Mishkin, AD, Viron M, LE, JE, Samples G, Kliman G. Reducing Post-Traumatic Stress after Hurricane Katrina: A School-Based Intervention. Poster presented at the 59th Institute on Psychiatric Services Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA, October 11-14, 2007. +- 135. Videotape evidence for a new theory of PTSD etiology and treatment. Combined meeting of American Academy of Psychoanalysts with Academy of Psychoanalysis and Psychodynamic Psychiatry, The Marriot, Washington, D.C. May 3, 2008 + +#### CURRENT TEACHING: + +Faculty Member: S.F. Psychoanalytic Institute. Eight 90 minute seminars on Pathogenesis in Early Childhood, with Focus on Psychological Trauma (a course for Candidates in the Child Analysis Program). See also Grand Rounds presentations below. + +#### THESIS CHAIR ACTIVITIES: + +Chairperson, Thesis Committee, California School of Professional Psychology, for Thesis of E. Wayrynen, M.A. concerning "Oppositional Behavior Following Childhood Sexual Abuse." 1998 + +Chairperson, Thesis Committee, Institute, for Thesis of Miquelon Hope, Ph.D. on IQ and CGAS changes following in-classroom psychotherapy and control group. 1999. + +Chairperson, Thesis Committee, Pacific Graduate School of Psychology, for Tina Scovis-Weston, Ph.D., on Early Memory Changes among Twelve Boys Raped by Men. 2001. + +#### RECENT AND CURRENT PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE WORK: + +Chairperson, Forensic Subcommittee of S.F. Psychoanalytic Institute, 1993-1996. Established liaison with San Francisco Bar Association for a series of Continuing Legal Education Credit seminars presented by a panel of psychoanalysts. Topics presented by G. Kliman, 1993-1994: "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder," "Prevention of Stress in the Workplace," and "Prevention of Depressive Reactions during Legal Practice." Place: S.F. Bar Association. + +## CURRENT: + +Member, Child Development Program Committee, San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute. + +Member, Child Analysis Study Group, San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute. + +Member, Committee on Psychoanalysis and the Community, American Psychoanalytic Institute. + +Member, Joint Committee on Care: Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and the Child Welfare Association. + +#### PROFESSIONAL COMMENDATIONS: + +Aletter of commendation regarding clinical work in the classroom within apublic school system: + +December 3, 2001 + +To Whom It May Concern: + +This is to report that the San Mateo County Office of Education, Special Education programs, has benefited from the services of The Children's Psychological Health Center, specifically its Cornerstone Therapeutic School Project. + +We have worked together for the past six years. Under the leadership of Gilbert Kliman, M.D., the Center has trained members of our teaching and school psychology staff to carry out a mental health service on our premises. We now have acollaborative project in its sixth year for our special education preschool children with Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDD) and for those with Serious Emotional Disorders (SED) which interfere with their education. As an alternative to sending children to aprivate nonpublic special education school for extremely intensive mental health services at significant cost, this project has created and provides just such intensive service within apublic preschool special class program at 65 Tower Road, San Mateo. + +To my knowledge, among the 30 children served so far under the collaborative project, we are seeing cognitive, social and human gains which have decreased the gap between these children and their typically developing peers. Several families and children are thriving with less intensive special education service or returned to regular education class. Not only has the family and child suffering been reduced, the burden to taxpayers is also reduced. The children have been able to remain in the community, and some who were functioning as severely autistic and retarded now appear to be developing within asomewhat normal range. We are pleased with the quality of special education services our County provides for preschoolers with PDD or SED. We are also gratified with the research results provided by The Children's Psychological Health Center. + +We recommend the Cornerstone project to other school systems, so that they consider it an important opportunity should they be able to collaborate similarly with The Children's Psychological Health Center. At Califirnia's common cost of \$15,000 to \$40,000 or more a year, for a special education child who needs fell time special education services and auxiliary intensive help, the savings for even one child's 12-year career of intensive services in special education can be substantial. The savings from one of the successes we have seen may equal the costs of the entire Cornerstone project with the 30 children helped so far. + +We have not yet seen any failures. The agency is showing measurable cognitive gains for our collaborative work which, according to their research, averages 20 to 28 points in independent WPPSI testing of the children in the Cornerstone program. The techniques are far more economical to use than we have found with the Lovaas method, which we also implement for some students. We have also seen the techniques transmitted to special education teachers as well as inexperienced therapists. + +Iinvite you to visit our project in action. + +Sincerely, + +JAYS. FARMS, Ed.D. Senior Administrator Special Education + +#### MAJOR FEDERAL COURT FORENSIC ACTIVITIES: + +#### EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS HEARD IN FEDERAL COURT, HANNIBAL MISSOURI, November 15, 2001 + +Under Dr. Kliman's leadership, a Children's Psychological Health Center team of five clinicians and two administrative staff has been at work since May 2, 2001 conducting a behavioral audit regarding the psychiatric conditions and the residential treatment of over 100 children (mostly ages 13 to 17) at Heartland Christian Academy, as requested by the Academy's general counsel. + +2001: Doe vs. Three Springs Treatment Center, Nashville, TN. + +2004: Does vs. L.K. Baliredy et al (An international child trafficking matter). Five days of deposition. + +2004Doe vs. State of New Mexico and Arthur Brokup. + +#### MAJOR STATE COURT CASES: + +#### Some cases of public health significance. concerning allegedly traumatized minors in care of governmental or institutional agencies: + +Does vs. OK Boys Ranch and State of Washington: 44 children in care at a state-licensed rehabilitation and care-related center were allegedly allowed to abuse each other while staff and therapists did not report harmful activities of which they knew, Dr. Kliman opined. The plaintiff children have to date all received settlements in four phases of this litigation over anine year period, with Dr. Kliman as the principal expert. + +York vs. Chaparral/Victor Treatment Facility. Orange County Superior Court. An eleven year old child severely and chronically molested by a residential treatment staff member was evaluated and an opinion given by Dr. Kliman concerning harm and how to rehabilitate the child as much as possible. Implications for standards of residential care are contained within the case. + +Carlson vs. Ray-Lam Home. Orange County Superior Court. Dr. Kliman evaluated and testified concerning a twelve year old boy who was allegedly molested by a father and had + +to rescue himself. The father's partner was negligent, Dr. Kliman opined. The judge agreed and awarded the child compensation for psychological damages. + +Does vs. Archdiocese of Los Angeles. Dr. Kliman was the lead psychiatric witness. The case settled after six days of his deposition testimony. + +Does vs. Salesian Order Western Region. Dr. Kliman was the lead psychiatric witness. The case settled after nine days of his deposition testimony and two days of trial. + +Does v South Dakota School for the Deaf. Multiple boys were molested by an older student. The state school administration was allegedly negligent and major psychological damages were claimed. Dr. Kliman served as the principal plaintiffs' expert on administrative liability issues and psychological damages. The case settled with major compensation for the plaintiffs during the time of jury deliberations. + +#### CHILD PSYCHIATRIC EXPERT TESTIMONY: + +Dr. Kliman helped set legal precedents for the inclusion of psychiatric testimony in matters concerning wrongful death of a parent and loss of parental services, in both New York State and California. He has testified in over 275 cases including over 100 trials. A Federal Rule 26 list is available on request and on www.expertchildpsychiatry.com. His courtroom and deposition testimony experience includes cases of institutional negligence of children leading to psychological trauma, negligent care, loss of parental services due to wrongful deaths, psychological trauma as part of personal injury of adults and children, childhood molestation, sexual harassment, termination of parental rights, and disputed custody. Since 2000 about 30% of his forensic work has been requested by defense, about 70% by plaintiffs, with the defense tasks increasing markedly in recent years. + +Dr. Kliman's evaluations and testimony regarding 16 children negligently cared for and abused at The Kiwanis' OK Boys' Ranch, Olympia, WA, helped lead to settlements and awards, totalling \$25,000,000. Responding to disclosures in that case, many improvements have occurred in the publicly funded and licensed institutional care of children throughout the State of Washington, according to newspaper accounts. + +Dr. Kliman's evaluations and opinions, together with that of The Children's Psychological Trauma Center team led by Robert Wynne MFCC, led to record-making \$8,000,000 loss of parental and other services compensation for 17 bereaved subsistence-economy Alaskan Inupiat Native Americans AM vs. Ryan Airlines, Anchorage, 1997). + +Principal expert regarding institutional negligence and psychological damages in Does vs. Rudolph Kos and the Diocese of Dallas, Dallas 1997. The Catholic Church of Dallas was held liable for institutional negligence, testimony concerning the need for major psychiatric treatment planning was accepted by the jury, and \$119,000,000—including punitive damages against the Church--was awarded to the 11 plaintiffs, by unanimous decision. + +## OTHER PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIVITIES AND RECOGNITION: + +Way In response to the mental health needs of families following recent massive firestorms, United printed and distributed 10,000 copies of "My Fire Story -- aGuided Activity Workbook for Children, Families and Teachers," co-authored with Edward Oklan, M.D. Copies can be obtained from Family Development Press, 1010 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard, Kentfield, CA 94960. The State America of Iowa purchased rights to reproduce 10,000 copies of "My Book about The Attack on - aGuided Activity Workbook for Children, Families and Teachers", published in 2001. + +During 1996 - 2002 Sophie Murvis Foundation, The Windholz Foundation, The Atkinson, Cadence Corporation, Irving Harris Foundation and The Stullsaft Foundations have recently awarded grants to Dr. Kliman as principal investigator for his Cornerstone Therapeutic Nursery project, serving seriously disturbed preschoolers in the San Mateo Office of Education. + +Presentations on The Cornerstone Therapeutic Nursery Project have been made by Dr. Klitnan during 1997 through 2002 at the San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute and the Seattle Institute for Psychoanalysis. + +Three documentary videotapes concerning Dr. Kliman's psychotherapies of disturbed children treated by him using this method in atherapeutic special education class are now available for scientific and educational purposes, parental permission having been gained. Such use requires aconfidentiality agreement. + +Tape I: The Cornerstone Method. + +Tape IL Treatment of an Autistic Boy + +Tape III: Unique Features of The Cornerstone Method + +As apilot application of his techniques for preschoolers, Dr. Kliman opened a Cornerstone Therapeutic Nursery at the Salvation Army Shelter for homeless families in January 1998, Medical serving seven homeless families with preschool children. He is supervising the project weekly as Director of The Children's Psychological Trauma Center. Unedited videotapes of that project are available to scientists and educators with aconfidentiality agreement. The MI Institute has provided a psychology intern to conduct the treatment under Dr. Kliman's training and supervision. The California School of Professional Psychology has assigned a doctoral thesis candidate to Dr. Kliman's supervision to study the I.Q. rise phenomenon previously documented in Cornerstone therapies. + +Peer-reviewed publications of Dr. Kliman's work with children appear in Zelman, A: Interventions with High Risk Children, Jason Aronsonlitter by Kliman on Controlled Assessment of The Personal Life History Book Method for Children). Results of Dr. Kliman's Cornerstone Method are also reported extensively in that book, focusing on the I.Q. rise phenomenon. + +# Archive of Videotaped Seminars and Events: + +— Gilbert Kliman, M.D., Medical Director + +THE CHILDREN'S PSYCHOLOGICAL TRAUMA CENTER + +(A division of the Children's Psychological Health Center, Inc. ) + +Archive of Videotaped Seminars and Events: + +### CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION TAPES: + +California MCLE credit is available to attorneys for study of these tapes. Unless otherwise indicated, Gilbert Kliman, M.D. was the sole or principal speaker. Contact Edith Lee at 415 474 0955 for MCLE credit fulfillment associated with study of these tapes. + +- 01. True and False Allegations of Sexual Molestations 1987. 1.5 hrs. +- 02. Loss of Parental Services May 6th 1992Elina Wayrynen and Gilbert Kliman, M.D. 2.0 hrs. +- 03. Abuse in Institutions August In 1995, 2.0 hrs. +- 04. Catastrophic Accidents with Lifetime Psychological Damage, December 5th 19952.5 hrs. +- 05. Evaluating Psychological Trauma in Catastrophic Accidents (Grosvenor Hotel. San Francisco) 1996, 2.5 hrs. +- 06. Loss of Parental Services (Holiday Inn),January 9th 1996, 2.5 hrs. +- 07. Loss of Parental Services,.May 12th 19931.5 brs. +- 08. True and False Allegations of Sexual Abuse June 7'h 1993, 1.5 hrs. +- 09. Catastrophic Psychological Traumas in Childhood, February 1994, 2.5 hrs. +- 10. The Difficult Client February 27'h 1996, 2.5 hrs. +- 11. The Difficult Client (at Wells Fargo). February 6'h 1996, 2.5 hrs. +- 12. Evaluating the Validity of Recovered Memories: Perspective of aForensic Expert February 29th 1996, 1.0 hr. +- 13. How Small Clients Get Large Awards, Psychological Trauma in early childhood produces life time consequences in some cases. Defense and plaintiff considerations. 2.5 hrs. +- 14. Giving Powerful Voices to Children in Court: I, March 20th 1998. Windle Turley, Esq. With Gilbert Kliman, M.D., 2.5 hrs. +- 15. Giving Powerful Voices to Children in Court IL May 8th 1998, John Connelly, Jr. with Gilbert Kliman, M.D., 2.5 hrs. + +- 16. Giving Powerful Voices to Children in Court III,June 12th 1998, Marc June, Esq. With Gilbert Kliman, M.D., 2.5 hrs. +- 17. Psychoanalysis and the Law: How Child Psychoanalysis Contributes to Justice for Children. Conference at the San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute, March lu 1999, Introduction by Maureen Katz, M.D., Discussion by Katherine MacVicar, M.D., Gilbert Kliman, M.D., presenter. San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute Extension Division. 1.5 hrs. + +# The Children's Psychological Health Center + +# Archive of Videotaped Seminars and Events: + +— Gilbert Kliman, M.D., Medical Director + +### CLINICAL AND SCIENTIFIC TAPES: + +STARRED (\*) TAPES BELOW ARE A PRECIOUS ARCHIVE OF INFORMATION ABOUT PROBLEMS AND TREATMENT OF SEVERELY STRESSED CHILDREN. THEY ARE NOT FOR SALE OR COMMERCIAL DISTRIBUTION. THEY MAY BE STUDIED AT CPHC ON-SITE WITH ASSISTANCE OF OUR STAFF BY QUALIFIED RESEARCHERS, CLINICIANS, SPECIAL EDUCATION TEACHERS, ADMINISTRATORS OF NONPROFIT CLINICAL ORGANIZATIONS AND SCHOOLS FOR CHILDREN, SCIENTISTS AND STUDENTS OF RELEVANT DISCIPLINES BY APPOINTMENT AT CPTC HEADQUARTERS. CREDENTIALS, REFERENCES AND CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT ARE REQUIRED COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH ARRANGEMENTS CAN BE CONTRACTED FOR WITH CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS AND LONG TERM USE OF THE TAPES. + +- Childhood Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (California Pacific Hospital Grand Rounds), 1992 New Theory of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder,Gilbert Kliman, M.D. December 4'h 1992, International Association of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, Fairmont Hotel, San Francisco. •3. Severe Psychological Trauma in very Young Children, March 23d 1993 \*4. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder: Child & Adult, September 27th 1993 +- 5. Cost Effectiveness: Mental Health Services for Children, September 28th 1993 +- 6. Preventive Child P ychiatry , Mc Aulev St Mary's October 16'h 1993, •7. New Theory of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, for Int. Association of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry July 25th 1994 \*8. Cornerstone Method Conference. Wells Fargo. January 30th 1996 \*9. Cornerstone Conference: Control - Mastery Group, San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute. February 96 1996 + +- 10. Conference on Childhood of Adolf Hitler. Control-MasteryGroup, San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute, May 17 1996 +- 11. Orientation to the Personal Life History Book Method. CPTC & ACT For Mental Health April 4th 1997(two tapes) \*12. The Cornerstone Method: A Public Health Approach. National Association for Social Work and Psychoanalysis,Seattle. September 26 1997 •13. New Theory of Psychological Trauma: Colloquium. San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute,October le 1996 \*14. Treatment of Severely Disturbed Preschoolers in their Public School Special Education Classrooms: A New Application of Intensive Psychotherapy. American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. \*15. Treatment of an Autistic Boy. the Cornerstone Method \*16. The Cornerstone Therapeutic Nursery Method \*17. The Cornerstone Method: Unique Features +- 18. Investing in our Futures: Rotary Club: About the Cornerstone Method, December 9th 1997Robert Denebeim, Esq. With Gilbert Kliman, M.D. +- 19. Salivation Army Cornerstone Program: Channel 4 News. Linda fl Reporter. +- 20. Gilbert Kliman M.D. on Channel 4 News, April 22d 1998. LindaIt Reporter. +- 21. Orientation to The Personal Lje History Book October 136 1998(three tapes) '22. The Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy of aFour Year Old Boy, 1999. An ongoing archive made with generous permission of the child's family, now totaling over 25 hours. This child has had severe stressors in his life, and suffers behavioral and overanxious symptoms. He has impulse dyscontrol, attentional deficits, and expressive language difficulties from which he can be seen to be recovering. Two excerpted tapes have been created to illustrate features of the child's pathology, and of the response to interpretive aspects of treatment. Gilbert Kliman, M.D. is the psychoanalyst, and the treatment is conducted three times aweek, with parent guidance every two weeks. The videographer is in the room. This may be the only existing video archive of achild analysis conducted by a certified child psychoanalyst. 4123. Cornerstone Treatment Archives: 1995-2008. Ongoing archive of intensive in-classroom treatment of seriously disturbed preschoolers, within their public special education classrooms in San Francisco and San Mateo, Shelters for homeless families in San + +Francisco and Seattle, private therapeutic preschool in San Francisco, and Cornerstone Argentina + +- 24. Thirty four year follow-up of aCornerstone Treated autistic child, now recovered. Presented at The San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute, Child Analysis Study Group, 2001. Permission for public viewing granted by the patient. Excerpts may be viewed on wv.w.childrenspsycholoeical.org or the entire video obtained from gilbertkliman2008@gmail.com + +\*25 Orientation of the Family Services Center of County. Four days in December, 2007, in Seattle. Six DVD's. + +## Scientific and Educational Video Archives under Dr. Kliman's supervision: + +With parental permission, The Children's Psychological Health Center, under Dr. Kliman's leadership, is collecting unedited treatment documents of aspecial method of treatment in areal life space, called "The Cornerstone therapeutic preschool method." Now totaling over 200 video archive hours, eight different California therapists working with various educator teams have recorded their Cornerstone therapeutic preschool method work. Beginning in 1995, this archive started with Gilbert Kliman, M.D. working for ayear as daily in-classroom therapist in apublic special education school. He was assisted by Leanne Runyan and Gail as the teachers at the San Mateo Early Childhood Education Center, a preschool special education facility of The County of San Mateo. A second team under his supervision included work at The San Francisco Unified School District (Vanessa Vigilante and Esther Kronenberg). Third and fourth teams were at The Salvation Army Gateway Shelter (Vanessa Vigilante as therapist and Lynda Byrd as teacher, Deanna Reardon as therapist and Lynda Byrd as teacher). A fourth was at The Cadence Cornerstone Site at Mt. Pleasant School, San Jose (Karita Hummer, therapist and Kathy Krall, teacher). Fifth team therapy was provided by Jane Christmas. The sixth team therapists was Dr. Miquela Hope, the seventh Molly Franklin, MFT. All have been extensively videotaped carrying out the method. An eighth team was assembled in late 2002, when Linda Hirshfeld Ph.D. joined as Fellow in Cornerstone Therapy. In 2001 Mike McDonald, Ed.D. became Special Education Director of Cornerstone School. All the treatments are have been under principal supervision of Dr. Kliman with additional supervision by Mali M.D., Myrna Frankel, Ed.D., and Jan Baeuerlen, M.D. Linda Hirshfeld, Ph.D. of the Ann Center is conducting the archival work for her Cornerstone Services. + +Aprofessional researcher/ training confidentiality agreement is required to study this archive. + +SAOK Private Forensic 7-13.04\CVWPPA CVs \ Gilbert Kliman CV ppa 06 02 08.doc \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744632/EFTA02744632.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744632/EFTA02744632.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a44c23f84055dc2c303f5442a9683f74a01f8997 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744632/EFTA02744632.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1391 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744632.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 23, + "chars": 64861, + "elapsed_seconds": 18.62, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "PROFESSIONAL POSITIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.755, + 83.53299999999999 + ], + [ + 245.2, + 83.53299999999999 + ], + [ + 245.2, + 95.698 + ], + [ + 82.755, + 95.698 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "GRANTS AWARDED:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.529, + 388.469 + ], + [ + 200.451, + 388.469 + ], + [ + 200.451, + 400.634 + ], + [ + 81.529, + 400.634 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JANUSZ KORCZAK INTERNATIONAL LITERARY PRIZE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.142, + 574.9989999999999 + ], + [ + 402.38824462890625, + 574.9989999999999 + ], + [ + 402.38824462890625, + 590.8170471191406 + ], + [ + 82.142, + 590.8170471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PUBLISHED PAPERS AND BOOKS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.916, + 696.6489999999999 + ], + [ + 276.58990478515625, + 696.6489999999999 + ], + [ + 276.58990478515625, + 712.3170394897461 + ], + [ + 80.916, + 712.3170394897461 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "WORKS IN PROGRESS: available in Draft:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.529, + 150.846 + ], + [ + 304.66099999999994, + 150.846 + ], + [ + 304.66099999999994, + 163.822 + ], + [ + 81.529, + 163.822 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRESENTATIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.529, + 323.589 + ], + [ + 185.12599999999998, + 323.589 + ], + [ + 185.12599999999998, + 336.56499999999994 + ], + [ + 81.529, + 336.56499999999994 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "2001-2002 Attack on America Events: 2001-2002 Public Health/ Public Education Activities:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 106.66199999999998, + 223.83600000000004 + ], + [ + 494.69100000000003, + 223.83600000000004 + ], + [ + 494.69100000000003, + 251.41 + ], + [ + 106.66199999999998, + 251.41 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CURRENT TEACHING:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.0999984741211, + 175.176 + ], + [ + 212.71099999999996, + 175.176 + ], + [ + 212.71099999999996, + 190.343017578125 + ], + [ + 82.0999984741211, + 190.343017578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "THESIS CHAIR ACTIVITIES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.91000366210938, + 283.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 243.4242401123047, + 283.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 243.4242401123047, + 299.0930480957031 + ], + [ + 81.91000366210938, + 299.0930480957031 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "RECENT AND CURRENT PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE WORK:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.303, + 485.789 + ], + [ + 519.211, + 485.789 + ], + [ + 519.211, + 501.593017578125 + ], + [ + 80.303, + 501.593017578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CURRENT:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.303, + 591.2189999999999 + ], + [ + 141.21327209472656, + 591.2189999999999 + ], + [ + 141.21327209472656, + 607.7230224609375 + ], + [ + 80.303, + 607.7230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROFESSIONAL COMMENDATIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.59400000000001, + 145.16899999999998 + ], + [ + 296.1822509765625, + 145.16899999999998 + ], + [ + 296.1822509765625, + 159.61126708984375 + ], + [ + 84.59400000000001, + 159.61126708984375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MAJOR FEDERAL COURT FORENSIC ACTIVITIES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.59400000000001, + 251.41 + ], + [ + 373.23150634765625, + 251.41 + ], + [ + 373.23150634765625, + 266.890380859375 + ], + [ + 84.59400000000001, + 266.890380859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS HEARD IN FEDERAL COURT, HANNIBAL \nMISSOURI, November 15, 2001", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.59400000000001, + 278.173 + ], + [ + 540.66845703125, + 278.173 + ], + [ + 540.66845703125, + 307.0113525390625 + ], + [ + 84.59400000000001, + 307.0113525390625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MAJOR STATE COURT CASES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.142, + 478.48999999999995 + ], + [ + 259.4683837890625, + 478.48999999999995 + ], + [ + 259.4683837890625, + 492.6575622558594 + ], + [ + 82.142, + 492.6575622558594 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Some cases of public health significance. concerning allegedly traumatized minors in care of \ngovernmental or institutional agencies:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.142, + 504.44199999999995 + ], + [ + 517.1824340820312, + 504.44199999999995 + ], + [ + 517.1824340820312, + 535.0115966796875 + ], + [ + 82.142, + 535.0115966796875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CHILD PSYCHIATRIC EXPERT TESTIMONY:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.59400000000001, + 278.984 + ], + [ + 336.84735107421875, + 278.984 + ], + [ + 336.84735107421875, + 294.271728515625 + ], + [ + 84.59400000000001, + 294.271728515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OTHER PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIVITIES AND RECOGNITION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 86.43299999999999, + 121.65 + ], + [ + 425.71441650390625, + 121.65 + ], + [ + 425.71441650390625, + 141.681396484375 + ], + [ + 86.43299999999999, + 141.681396484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Archive of Videotaped \nSeminars and Events:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.51600000000002, + 123.27199999999998 + ], + [ + 425.4072265625, + 123.27199999999998 + ], + [ + 425.4072265625, + 173.65447998046875 + ], + [ + 203.51600000000002, + 173.65447998046875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION TAPES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.142, + 312.235 + ], + [ + 324.5430603027344, + 312.235 + ], + [ + 324.5430603027344, + 328.2783508300781 + ], + [ + 82.142, + 328.2783508300781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Children's Psychological Health Center", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 118.309, + 96.50899999999999 + ], + [ + 534.536, + 96.50899999999999 + ], + [ + 534.536, + 126.51599999999999 + ], + [ + 118.309, + 126.51599999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Archive of Videotaped Seminars and Events:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 143.44199999999998, + 136.248 + ], + [ + 482.1563415527344, + 136.248 + ], + [ + 482.1563415527344, + 158.956 + ], + [ + 143.44199999999998, + 158.956 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CLINICAL AND SCIENTIFIC TAPES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 83.36800000000001, + 226.26900000000003 + ], + [ + 286.88399999999996, + 226.26900000000003 + ], + [ + 286.88399999999996, + 242.48899999999998 + ], + [ + 83.36800000000001, + 242.48899999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Scientific and Educational Video Archives under Dr. Kliman's supervision:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 22, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.529, + 251.41 + ], + [ + 460.9468994140625, + 251.41 + ], + [ + 460.9468994140625, + 270.92041015625 + ], + [ + 81.529, + 270.92041015625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 87 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 526 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 540 + ], + [ + "Line", + 51 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 68 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 487 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 448 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 515 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 429 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 376 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 303 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 385 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 449 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744632" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744655/EFTA02744655.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744655/EFTA02744655.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2e8513f0778a84cf53134a5e7043d6de55e037bd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744655/EFTA02744655.md @@ -0,0 +1,229 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381- + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08- CV-80811 -MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80893-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 08-CV- 80469-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al., + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80591-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES 2-7'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL AND/OR IDENTIFY PLAINTIFFS IN THE STYLE OF THIS CASE AND MOTION TO IDENTIFY JANE DOE IN THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY, OR ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO DISMISS "SUA SPONTE", WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiffs, JANE DOES 2-7, hereby serve their Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel and/or Identify Plaintiffs in the Style of this Case and Motion to Identify Jane Doe in Third-Party Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss "Sua Sponte", With Incorporated Memorandum of Law, and state as follows: + +- 1. The lawsuits filed by JANE DOES 2-7 involve private, intimate facts pertaining to their own childhood sexual abuse and exploitation by Defendant Jeffrey Epstein. + +2. Jane Does 2-7 filed their suits under a pseudonym' to prevent public disclosure of the private, highly sensitive and intimate facts pertaining to their sexual assaults, and the public association of their identities with Defendant Epstein and these assaults. + +3. Dr. Gilbert Kliman,' a well-known forensic psychiatrist with an expertise in the field of child trauma, has met with and evaluated each of Jane Does 2-7 and opined that public disclosure of their real names would create a substantial risk to them of further psychological harm. See Exhibit "A", Declaration of Gilbert Kliman. M.D. + +4. Dr. Kliman opines as follows: + +Releasing names of the plaintiffs to the public will reenact experiences of powerlessness and helplessness in the face of a boundary violation. Repetition and reenactment represent central features of Criterion B in the DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder trauma. In effect, release of their identity and public intrusion into their personal life represents a reenactment of the shame of sexual traumatization. Repetition and reenactment are central pathologies that afflict sexual trauma survivors. + +Victims of sexual abuse often rely upon some form of dissociation, splitting or denial, as a defensive means to manage overwhelming affects associated with the sexual trauma. Each of the plaintiff girls has employed some variation of this defense, both during the massages and then subsequently following disclosure of the abuse. Primitive, maladaptive responses of this nature will become additionally reinforced as a result of public disclosure. + +Another aspect of the plaintiffs' experience, which is recognized by DSM-IV-TR, is that the trauma was associated with human design factors (such as cruel intention to do harm, rape, torture). Trauma of this origin has a tendency to produce more "severe or long lasting" posttraumatic stress disorder than natural events (DSM IV TR p. 464). A policy of deliberate revelation of the names of the victims would reinforce the sense of design, pattern and policy of human intentions. + +It is my opinion, with a reasonably high degree of medical certainty that the defense motion to allow public disclosure of the plaintiffs' identity is clinically + +1 Defendant and his counsel are aware of the real names of Jane Does 2-7. + +2 A copy of the curriculum vitae of Dr. Gilbert Kliman is attached hereto as Exhibit "B". + +and ethically a wrongful plan. The act of revealing their identity against their wishes places the plaintiffs at risk, in the best of circumstances, of suffering an aggravation of existing diagnostic concerns. It is more probable than not that releasing personal identities will an exacerbation and magnification of symptoms lending to increased risk of revictimization and retraumatization. + +Exhibit "A", II 13-15, 21 + +5. Given the private nature of the allegations in this lawsuit and the serious risk of harm to the mental health of Jane Does 2-7 if a public disclosure of their identities were required. Jane Does 2-7 should be permitted to continue using a pseudonym in this lawsuit. + +6. Notably, in one of the cases consolidated for purposes of discovery, Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 08-80893, this Court recognized the harm likely to result from public disclosure of the victims' identities in these cases, and allowed the Plaintiff in that case to "proceed in this action under the pseudonym 'Jane Doe' ", by Order dated October 6, 2008. + +7. Jeffrey Epstein sets forth no facts to support his bare contention that Jane Does 2- 7 use of a pseudonym in these proceedings interferes with his "constitutional due process right." Sste Motion to Compel, p. 3. Defendant and his counsel know the identities of these Plaintiffs. + +8. Defendant also requests the Court's permission to use the real names of Jane Does 2-7 in various third-party subpoenas for discovery purposes. Defendant does not identify any of the entities or persons to whom he intends to send subpoenas. An order granting the relief requested without limitations would essentially nullify Jane Does 2-7's right to proceed anonymously. Jane Does 2-7 therefore object to the issuance of third-party subpoenas, and submit that Defendant can obtain the discovery he seeks by alternative means that will preserve the confidentiality of the Jane Does 2-7's identities. + +9. If this Court were to permit third party subpoenas or records custodian depositions using the existing captions and identifying Jane Does 2-7 in the body of the subpoena by their names, due to publicity surrounding the Defendant's crimes, then Jane Does 2- 7 would effectively be revealed as abuse victims in these cases against Defendant Epstein. Any subpoenas or notices to third parties therefore should not disclose the type of action or the Defendant's identity. There are alternatives which would preserve Jane Does 2-7's anonymity and be more efficient and cost-effective at the same time. For instance, Defendant can obtain records from various non-party sources through Plaintiffs' counsel, who can certify that they have obtained the records through authorizations signed by Jane Does 2-7. Another means to obtain non-party records concerning Plaintiffs is the appointment of a special who would verify authenticity and completeness of the records. + +10. Finally, Jeffrey Epstein's request that this Court order a "sua sponte" dismissal is illogical. Sua sponte means "[w]ithout prompting or suggestion; on its own motion." Black's Law Dictionary 1437 (7th ed.1999). Thus, the definition of sua sponte does not fit these circumstances, because the Court is being prompted by Epstein's Motion. Velchez v. Carnival Corp" 331 F.3d 1207 (11th Cir. 2003). In any event, there is no basis or authority to support a dismissal of these cases. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 respectfully request that (i) this Court deny Defendant's Motion to Compel and/or Identify Plaintiffs in the Style of this Case and Motion to Identify Jane Doe in Third-Party Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss "Sua Sponte", in its entirety; (ii) Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 be permitted to continue using their pseudonyms in this litigation; (iii) this Court order that records from non-parties relating to Jane Does 2-7, including medical and employment records, only be obtained through Plaintiffs' counsel by means of signed authorizations that do not include the caption or identify Epstein as the party seeking records, or alternatively, appoint a special to obtain the records, who would verify authenticity and completeness of the records; and (iv) all other relief this Court deems just and appropriate. + +## MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +#### I. PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES 2-7 SHOULD BE PERMITTED TO PROCEED ANONYMOUSLY IN THIS CASE DUE TO THE SENSITIVE, PRIVATE NATURE OF THE UNDERLYING FACTS AND THE RISK OF PSYCHOLOGICAL HARM TO THE PLAINTIFFS + +Federal courts permit a party to proceed under a pseudonym when special circumstances warrant anonymity. See, e.g., Roe v. Aware Woman Ctr. for Choice, Inc., 253 F.3d 678, 685-87 (11th Cir.2001); Does I thru XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp., 214 F.3d 1058, 1068-69 (9th Cir.2000); James v. Jacobson, 6 F.3d 233, 238-39 (4th Cir.1993); EW v. New York Blood Center, 213 F.R.D. 108, 110-12 (E.D.N.Y.2003); Javier v. =-Botello, 211 F.R.D. 194, 196 (W.D.N.Y.2002); Doe v. 105 F.Supp.2d 40, 43.44 (E.D.N.Y.1999); Doe v. United Servs. Life Ins. Co., 123 F.R.D. 437, 439 (S.D.N.Y.1988). Sexual assault victims are a paradigmatic example of those entitled to a grant of anonymity. See Doe No. 2 v. Kolko, 242 F.R.D. 193 (E.D. N.Y. 2006); Doe v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield United of Wisc., 112 F.3d 869, 872 (7th Cir.1997) ("fictitious names are allowed when necessary to protect the privacy of ... rape victims, and other particularly vulnerable parties or witnesses"); see also Doe v. City of Chicago, 360 F.3d 667, 669 (7th Cir. 2004). + +The decision whether to allow a plaintiff to proceed anonymously is within the court's discretion. See Aware Woman Ctr., 253 F.3d at 684; Javier, 211 F.R.D. at 195; EW, 213 F.R.D. at 110. As set forth above, this Court exercised its direction in one of the consolidated cases, Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 08-80893, to allow a plaintiff to proceed under the pseudonym "Jane Doe" in an Order dated October 6, 2008. + +Courts will permit a party to proceed under a pseudonym where "the party's need for anonymity outweighs prejudice to the opposing party and the public's interest in knowing the party's identity." Does I Thru XXIII, 214 F.3d at 1068; see Javier, 211 F.R.D. at 195; EW, 213 F.R.D. at 111; As set forth herein, the balancing test in this case weighs in favor of permitted plaintiff to continue to proceed anonymously: + +> In undertaking this balance, courts have considered such facts as (1) whether the plaintiff is suing the government or a private person; (2) whether the plaintiff would be compelled to disclose intimate information; (3) whether plaintiff would be compelled to his or her intention in engage in illegal conduct, thereby risking criminal prosecution; (4) whether the plaintiff would risk injury if identified; (5) whether the party defending against a suit brought under a pseudonym would thereby be prejudiced; (6) the ages of the parties whose identity is to be suppressed; (7) the extent to which the identity of the litigant has been kept confidential; (8) whether, because of the purely legal nature of the issues presented or otherwise, there is an atypically weak public interest in knowing the litigants' identities; and (9) the public interest in guaranteeing open access to proceedings without denying litigants access to the justice system. + +Doe v. Del Rio 241 F.R.D. 154, 157 (S.D. N.Y. 2006) + +The public has a strong interest in protecting the identities of sexual assault victims so that other victims will not be deterred from reporting such crimes. See Doe v. , 202 F.R.D. 173, 176 (E.D.Pa.2001) (granting anonymity to sexual assault victim); Doe No. 2 v. Kolko, 242 F.R.D. 193 (E.D. N.Y. 2006). That is particularly true in these consolidated cases where there are numerous victims with similar claims. Although these cases have gained considerable media attention, there appears to be little public interest in knowing the specific identity of each of the victims. + +With regard to the second factor, courts have granted anonymity to protect against disclosure of a wide range of issues involving matters of the utmost intimacy, including sexual assault. See, e.g., Aware Woman Ctr., 253 F.3d at 685 (abortion); EW, 213 F.R.D. at II I (infection with hepatitis B); Doe v. 202 F.R.D. 173, 176 (E.D.Pa.2001) (sexual assault victim); IM, 105 F.Supp.2d at 42 (sexual assault victim); WGA v. Priority Pharmacy, Inc., 184 F.R.D. 616, 617 (E.D.Mo.1999) (status as AIDS patient); Doe v. United Servs. Life Ins. Co., 123 F.R.D. 437, 439 (S.D.N.Y.1988) (sexual orientation); see also Blue Cross, 112 F.3d at 872 (recognizing rape victims as entitled to anonymity). It cannot be reasonably denied that a person's sexual history — especially during their childhood — is an intimate fact. When the childhood sexual history includes criminal sexual contact by an adult, the facts are even more intimate and personal. In the electronic age in which we live, these concerns are heightened. As federal courts have recognized in this context, it is now possible to "determine whether a given individual is a party to a lawsuit in federal court anywhere in the country by the simplest of computer searches, to access the docket sheet of any such case electronically, and ... that entire case files will be accessible over the Internet." Doe v. City of New York, 201 F.R.D. 100, 102 (S.D.N.Y.2001) (denying anonymity where any injury was purely reputational and case did not involve private or intimate matter); see EW, 213 F.R.D. at 112-13. + +As Dr. Kliman explains in his Declaration, disclosure of Jane Does 2-7's identities will place these Plaintiffs "at-risk of having their personal lives scrutinized by friends, extended family, spouses, children, fellow students, employers and fellow employees, the media and general public. This type of exposure humiliates many victims and represents another betrayal of trust. Public exposure places the plaintiff's at further risk of stigmatization, shame and retraumatization." See Exhibit "A" atl 3. Dr. Kliman also finds it of no consequence that some of the plaintiffs are now legally adults in that "[d]tie to traumatization the plaintiffs are arrested in their development, and even those who are now legally adult are arrested in part to adolescent + +aspects of psychology." Id. at 1 4 + +The policy of protecting victims of sexual misconduct from undue embarrassment and disclosure of their private affairs is firmly established in Fed.R.Evid. 412. The protections of Rule 412 are designed to "encourage victims of sexual misconduct to institute and participate in legal proceedings against alleged offenders." (Committee Notes to 1994 Amendment). Likewise, many states in this country, including Florida and New York, have similarly enacted laws to protect the anonymity of sexual assault victims. See Fla. Stat. §§794.024, 794.026 (2008); N.Y. Civil Rights Law § 50-b (McKinney 2009). In 1994, the Florida Legislature passed The Crime Victims Protections Act. The legislative stated purpose for the Act was "to protect the identity of victims of sexual crimes." Fla. AGO, 2003-56, 2003 WL 22971082 (Dec. 15, 2003). Under §794.024, Florida Statutes, court records that identify the name and/or address of a victim of a sexual crime are presumed to be confidential and exempt from public access. Id. Similarly, upon approving New York's rape shield law, then Governor Mario stated, "sexual assault victims have unfortunately had to endure a terrible invasion of their physical privacy. They have a right to expect that this violation will not be compounded by a further invasion of their privacy." 1991 McKinney's Sessions Laws of N.Y., at 2211-2212 (quoted in Deborah S. v. Diorio, 153 Misc.2d 708, 583 N.Y.S.2d 872 (N.Y.Ciry Civ.Ct.1992)); see also Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584, 597, 97 S.Ct. 2861, 53 L.Ed.2d 982 (1977) ("Short of homicide, [rape] is the ultimate violation of self'). + +As to the fourth factor of risk injury, Dr. Kliman has evaluated Jane Does 2-7, and has concluded that the childhood sexual abuse at issue has caused features of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), including shame, guilt, helplessness, and powerlessness. See Exhibit "A" at II 4-7. Dr. Kliman further states, "it is more probable than not that releasing personal identities + +will an exacerbation and magnification of symptoms lending to increased risk of revictimization and retraumatization." Id. at 1 21. Thus, this is not a case analogous to those cited by defendant in which the plaintiffs were merely at risk of "personal embarrassment." Instead, there is a genuine and immediate risk of psychological harm. + +None of the cases cited by Defendant where courts denied a plaintiff's request for anonymity involved victims of childhood sexual assault or evidence of emotional or psychological harm that would result from disclosure of the plaintiff's identity. See Doe v. Hartz, 52 F.Supp.2d 1027 (N.D.Iowa 1999); Doe v. Shakur, 164 F.R.D. 359 (E.D.N.Y.1996); Doe v. Bell Atlantic Bus. Sys. Servs., 162 F.R.D. 418 (D.Mass.1995); Doe v. Univ. of Rhode Island, 28 Fed.R.Serv.3d 366, 1993 WL 667341 (D.R.I. Dec. 28, 1993). + +As to the factor of prejudice, the Defendant does not identify how his ability to conduct discovery or impeach Jane Does 2-7's credibility has been or will be impaired if these Plaintiffs are permitted to proceed under a pseudonym. See EW, 213 F.R.D. at 112, 105 F.Supp.2d at 44-45. Other than the need to make redactions and take measures not to disclose these Plaintiffs' identities, Defendant will not be hampered or inconvenienced merely by Plaintiffs' anonymity in court papers. As set forth above, Defendant already knows their true identities. See Aware Woman Center, 253 F.3d at 687 (no prejudice where plaintiff offered to disclose her name to defendant); EW, 213 F.R.D. at 112; , 105 F.Supp.2d at 44-45. + +#### II. DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT BE PERMITTED TO USE THE REAL NAMES OF JANE DOES 2-7 IN THIRD-PARTY SUBPEONAS EXCEPT FOR THOSE ISSUED TO PERSONS WHOM PLAINTIFFS HAVE ALREADY DISCLOSED THEIR SEXUAL ABUSE + +As for the use of Jane Does 2-7's real names in subpoenas issued to non-parties, a party may obtain discovery of any non-privileged matter that is relevant to a claim or defense of any party. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(6)(1). However, a district court may limit discovery "for good cause shown" by making "any order which justice requires to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense," including that the discovery not be had or that it be had only by a method other than that selected by the party seeking discovery. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c). Jane Does 2-7 have articulated a specific and substantial harm from disclosure of their identities. + +If this Court were to permit Defendant to issue third-party subpoenas containing Jane Doe 2-7's real names, the identity of the Defendant, and/or facts pertaining to the nature of the case to whomever Defendant wants, it would be akin to requiring these Plaintiffs to use their real name in the pleadings. Instead, Jane Does 2-7 propose to voluntarily execute authorizations (which would not contain the case names or the identity of the Defendant) to allow Defendant to obtain education, employment, and medical records to be used for purposes of this litigation only.3Alternatively, Defendant can obtain the records through a special who would verify authenticity and completeness of the records. Either of these approaches would not only place Jane Does 2-7 at less risk of psychological harm, but would also be more cost-effective and efficient. + +# CONCLUSION + +Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 respectfully request that Defendant's Motion to Compel and/or Identify Plaintiffs in the Style of this Case and Motion to Identify Jane Doe in Third-Party Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss "Sua Sponte" be denied in its entirety, and that Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 be permitted to continue using their pseudonyms in this litigation. Additionally, to avoid public disclosure of the Plaintiffs identities in non-party records discovery, Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 request that such + +3 Defendant and Plaintiff have previously agreed that education records can be obtained in this + +discovery be obtained either through Plaintiffs' counsel by means of written authorizations, or by the appointment of a special + +Dated: June 8, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattomey.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-7 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on June 8, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +#### SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. + +rcritton@bc1claw.com + +James + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack U + +jph@searcylaw.com + +Katherine Warthen Ezell + +KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike + +MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits + +lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg + +rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744655/EFTA02744655.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744655/EFTA02744655.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e909441aac94a9bc98d6986ccbe2048147859a7d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744655/EFTA02744655.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,763 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744655.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 15, + "chars": 22134, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.34, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES 2-7'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO \nCOMPEL AND/OR IDENTIFY PLAINTIFFS IN THE STYLE OF THIS CASE AND \nMOTION TO IDENTIFY JANE DOE IN THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS FOR \nPURPOSES OF DISCOVERY, OR ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO DISMISS \n\"SUA SPONTE\", WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 83.23200000000001, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 530.7274169921875, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 530.7274169921875, + 499.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 83.23200000000001, + 499.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 239.29200000000003, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 391.0112609863281, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 391.0112609863281, + 141.363037109375 + ], + [ + 239.29200000000003, + 141.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES 2-7 SHOULD BE PERMITTED \nTO PROCEED ANONYMOUSLY IN THIS CASE DUE TO THE \nSENSITIVE, PRIVATE NATURE OF THE UNDERLYING FACTS \nAND THE RISK OF PSYCHOLOGICAL HARM TO THE PLAINTIFFS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 130.356, + 167.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 517.8489990234375, + 167.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 517.8489990234375, + 224.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 130.356, + 224.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT BE PERMITTED TO USE \nTHE REAL NAMES OF JANE DOES 2-7 IN THIRD-PARTY \nSUBPEONAS EXCEPT FOR THOSE ISSUED TO PERSONS WHOM \nPLAINTIFFS HAVE ALREADY DISCLOSED THEIR SEXUAL ABUSE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 133.72999572753906, + 567.81 + ], + [ + 516.9857177734375, + 567.81 + ], + [ + 516.9857177734375, + 624.3630218505859 + ], + [ + 133.72999572753906, + 624.3630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 484.37999999999994 + ], + [ + 349.43621826171875, + 484.37999999999994 + ], + [ + 349.43621826171875, + 500.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 500.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.5423889160156, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.5423889160156, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 455.1346740722656, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 455.1346740722656, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 76 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 80 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744655" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744670/EFTA02744670.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744670/EFTA02744670.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c27bda5f97486491bac4f06bf95f1f0155176dc0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744670/EFTA02744670.md @@ -0,0 +1,148 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARR + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08- CV-80811 -MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08- CV-80993-MARRA + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 08-CV- 80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al., + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80591-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80656-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES' 2- 7 NOTICE OF JOINDER IN PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOES 101 AND 102'S MOTION FOR NO-CONTACT ORDER + +Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 join in Plaintiffs Jane Does 101 and 102's Motion for No-Contact Order, filed May 22, 2009, and state as follows: + +- I. Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 incorporate and adopt the facts set forth in the pending Motion for No-Contact Order. Additionally, Plaintiffs offer additional facts in support of the Motion for a No-Contact Order, as set forth below. +- 2. Upon information and belief, Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 were all identified on the victims list provided to Defendant Epstein's counsel in connection with the Non-prosecution Agreement, and each has been identified as victims to Defendant Epstein in their pending + +actions. In June 2008, Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Pucillo ordered Defendant Epstein "not to have any contact, direct or indirect," with any of his victims. Judge Pucillo clarified that forbidden "indirect" contact included, but was not limited to, text messages, emails, telephone calls, or messages through third parties. As detailed herein, Jane Does 4 and 7 have been contacted on multiple occasions by at least one person representing that she is cooperating with and communicating on behalf of Defendant Epstein. In these contacts, the Plaintiffs/victims were threatened and harassed. + +3. As with other Plaintiffs, Jane Does 4 and 7 were first introduced to Defendant Epstein by Hayley , who was a high school friend.' + +4. had had contact with these Plaintiffs on several occasions in which she represented to Plaintiffs Jane Doe 4 and 7 that she is cooperating with Defendant Epstein's attorneys and that she is being financially supported by Defendant Epstein. Moreover, has told these Plaintiffs specifically that she is communicating on behalf of Defendant Epstein. + +5. During these contacts, made disparaging comments to the Plaintiffs and also sent disturbing text messages to Jane Doe No. 4. In one text, specifically stated, "I just met with my lawyer today and I'm finally done with the Epstein case. LOL. I knew you were suing Jeffrey all along and I've learned so much about you in the meantime. LOL." Jane Doe 4 understood this to mean that had exchanged private information about Jane Doe 4 with Defendant Epstein and his attorneys. Since February, 2009, Jane Doe 4 has continued to receive text messages from that are sometimes harassing and other times seek information about Jane Doe 4's private life, her lawsuit against Defendant Epstein, and/or her lawyer's strategy. + +was named in at least one civil case against Mr. Epstein as a co-defendant. See Jane Doe v. Epstein, case no. 50-2008-CA-0065996, Palm Beach County Circuit Court. ■ brought multiple underage girls to Epstein in addition to Jane Does 4 and 7. + +6. On one occasion, approached Jane Doe 7 and disclosed that she was cooperating with Defendant Epstein's defense, and that she (M) agreed that she would testify against Jane Doe 7 and the other plaintiffs to make sure that none of the Plaintiffs ever received any money from Defendant Epstein, making clear that her testimony would not be truthful to achieve this end. She also made disparaging comments to Jane Doe 7, accusing her of ruining Defendant Epstein's reputation. + +7. The very possibility of any contact with Epstein or his agents, including M, causes anxiety and distress particularly to Jane Doe 4 and 7, as well as the other Plaintiffs. A nocontact order should prevent further harassment of the Plaintiffs by Epstein and his agents, including, but not limited to, Hayley + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7, respectfully join Plaintiffs Jane Does 101 and 102 in moving this Court to enter an order granting Plaintiffs' Motion for a No Contact Order prohibiting the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, from any contact or communication with Plaintiffs, either directly or indirectly, except through Plaintiffs' attorneys of record for the duration of the Order. + +Dated: June 8, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 8, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. izoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bc1claw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iah@searcvlaw.com Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com U + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744670/EFTA02744670.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744670/EFTA02744670.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ef123dade8d951ae074c51b4f442c797304129f4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744670/EFTA02744670.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,383 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744670.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 6441, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.77, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 406.3418273925781, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 406.3418273925781, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES' 2- 7 NOTICE OF JOINDER IN PLAINTIFFS' \nJANE DOES 101 AND 102'S MOTION FOR NO-CONTACT ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 107.71199999999999, + 456.8399999999999 + ], + [ + 505.2855224609375, + 456.8399999999999 + ], + [ + 505.2855224609375, + 486.363037109375 + ], + [ + 107.71199999999999, + 486.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 85.863037109375 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 454.7248229980469, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 454.7248229980469, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744670" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744677/EFTA02744677.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744677/EFTA02744677.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b45f2c53ccad7ffab1494218a2cfd4d91d0298c4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744677/EFTA02744677.md @@ -0,0 +1,249 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRAMMI + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRAMMI + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/Mill + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 6. + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/RIM + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRAMM + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/ + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/MMI + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRAMIM + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO: 09-CV-80469-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendants. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/MMI + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO: 09-CV-80656-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +### RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO STRIKE CASE FROM CURRENT TRIAL DOCKET + +COMES NOW plaintiff Jane Doe, by and through her undersigned counsel, to file this response in opposition to defendant Jeffrey Epstein's motion to strike her trial date from the current trial docket. Epstein argues that a few discovery disputes require striking the trial date. But these disputes can be resolved before the discovery deadline expires — particularly given that there are nearly four months remaining until the discovery cutoff. Moreover, Jane Doe will be gravely harmed by any delay in this matter because it will give Epstein the opportunity to finish hiding his assets. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/MITI + +# Background + +Defendant Epstein has filed aboilerplate motion to strike Jane Doe's trial date and numerous other consolidated cases involving similar allegations of his sexual abuse of minors — for an unspecified period of time, delaying what is currently set as a February 22, 2010, trial date until some later and unspecified date. On May 28, 2009, the court granted the motion to strike the trial date as to plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 — who had agreed to the delay for their own reasons. The court set a new trial date of June 1, 2010, for these cases. The court, however, reserved ruling on the motion to continue Jane Doe's case (and one other plaintiff, C.M.A.). + +In recounting the procedural history of this case, Epstein does not disclose that in this particular case, he has been the one responsible for numerous delays. Indeed, a quick review of the docket sheet shows the following requests for extensions by defendant Epstein: + +DE 10 (defendant's motion for extension of time to respond to complaint) (10/1/08) + +DE21 (defendant's motion for extension of time to file motions to compel) (3/4/09) + +DE39 (defendant's motion extension of time to file reply as to response to opposition to motion to stay) (4/22/09) + +DE41 (defendant's motion for extension of time to file reply as to response in opposition to motion to compel tax records) (4/27/09) + +DE42 (defendant's motion for extension of time to file reply as to response in opposition to motion to compel on first interrogatories) (4/27/09) + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA.M + +DE44 (defendants motion for extension of time to file response as to motion to strike reference to non-prosecution agreement) (4/29/09) + +DE52 (defendant's motion for extension to time to file response as to amended complaint) (5/05/09) + +DE60 (motion for extension of time to file response to plaintiffs first amended complaint) (5/18/09) + +It should be noted that Jane Doe, as a matter of civility, has not objected to a single one of these requests for an extension from defendant Epstein. In none of these conferences regarding these requests for extension did defense counsel indicate that he was concerned that the trial date might need to be continued because of any delay in this case. + +Jane Doe has yet to request a single extension of time for any reason. + +It may also be relevant to note that Epstein has "taken the Fifth" with regard to essentially all discovery that Jane Doe has propounded to him in this case. + +#### Epstein Has Failed to Provide any "Exceptional Circumstances" to Continue the Trial Date + +This court, of course, has discretion to continue the trial date. The rules of this court, however, make clear that "[a] continue of any trial . . . will be granted only on exceptional circumstances." Local Rule 7.6 (emphasis added). All defendant Epstein has shown is a few, run of the mill, discovery disputes — that have arisen months in advance of the discovery deadline. (The deadline in this case is October 1, 2009 roughly four months away.) At the very least, any motion to continue is premature. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARR,A + +Defendant Epstein has failed to provide any good reason for delaying trial in Jane Doe's case. Most of his pleading focuses on discovery disputes that have arisen with regard to Jane Does 2-7 or C.M.A. These disputes have absolutely no bearing on whether Jane Doe's case can be ready for trial by February 22, 2010. + +In an effort to provide some sort of "good cause" for rescheduling the trial date, Epstein's defense counsel has provided an affidavit asserting generally that it will not be possible to complete discovery in a timely fashion in this case. That same affidavit, however, acknowledges that some of the discovery disputes that have arisen in other cases have not arisen in this case. In particular, the affidavit spends a great deal of time explaining how an objection to disclosing the true names of the plaintiffs in other cases has (allegedly) made it impossible for Epstein to serve subpoenas and thus obtain meaningful discovery about other plaintiffs. See Affidavit of Michael J. Pike at 4- 5, Exhibit 1 to Epstein's Motion to Strike Cases from Current Trial Docket. The affidavit concedes, however, that this objection does not apply to Jane Doe's case. See id. at 5 ("As stated in the motion to strike, Brad ME [counsel for Jane Doe] has agreed to such a procedure relative to third party subpoenas."). + +In addition, Jane Doe will be gravely prejudiced if a delay of any sort is sanctioned in this case. As the court is well aware, this case involves serious allegations of sexual abuse of minor. Each passing day with the matter unresolved adds to the psychological stress that Jane Doe must bear. This is not the kind of case that where additional time should be allowed to pass. In general, "The compensation and remedy due a civil plaintiff should not be delayed." v. FDIC, 427 F.2d 578, + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAt.M. + +580 (D.C. Cir. 1970). Given the sexual abuse allegations at stake here, that general admonition applies with even greater force. + +Moreover, Jane Doe will be gravely prejudiced if Epstein is allowed to postpone trial in this matter. As explained at greater length in Jane Doe's soon to be filed Memorandum in Support of Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets, good cause exists for believing defendant Epstein is currently moving his assets overseas in an attempt to defeat the satisfaction of any judgment that Jane Doe might obtain in this case. In addition, it is possible that by delaying the trial until June 2010, Epstein might be able to escape the supervision of the Florida courts entirely. Epstein is currently in jail and will serve a one-year term of community control (house arrest) following his release. Conveniently enough for Epstein, it appears that this term of community control will expire at around the time of his proposed new trial date. + +For all these reasons, the Court should deny the motion to strike Jane Doe's currently-established trial date. + +Dated: June 8, 2009. + +Respectfully Submitted, + +s/ J. TE NFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRS + +E-mail: bedwardsarra-law.com and + +Paul G. Cassell + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 S. 1400 E. + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +Telephone: 801-585-5202 + +Facsimile: 801-585-6833 + +E-Mail: cassellp(@law.utah.edu + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRALMEM + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 8, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties wo hare not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +s/ J. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRal + +#### SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jqoldberaer(Waqwfla.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton(&bcIclaw.com + +Isidro Manual= isidrociarciaRbellsouth.net + +Jack= iph searcvlaw.com + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bcIclaw.c,om + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp bciclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg riosefsber podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz(sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssmsexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wbergerRrra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744677/EFTA02744677.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744677/EFTA02744677.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..073101c5533692dbcb4581eb8b656cc33689b551 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744677/EFTA02744677.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,561 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744677.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 9584, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.94, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 202.67999267578125, + 64.80000000000001 + ], + [ + 410.82, + 64.80000000000001 + ], + [ + 410.82, + 93.78851318359375 + ], + [ + 202.67999267578125, + 93.78851318359375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO STRIKE CASE \nFROM CURRENT TRIAL DOCKET", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 98.39999999999999, + 477.9 + ], + [ + 507.335205078125, + 477.9 + ], + [ + 507.335205078125, + 508.3526611328125 + ], + [ + 98.39999999999999, + 508.3526611328125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 271.83, + 93.96000000000001 + ], + [ + 349.6106262207031, + 93.96000000000001 + ], + [ + 349.6106262207031, + 110.67205810546875 + ], + [ + 271.83, + 110.67205810546875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Epstein Has Failed to Provide any \"Exceptional Circumstances\" \nto Continue the Trial Date", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 117.465, + 506.25 + ], + [ + 487.3669128417969, + 506.25 + ], + [ + 487.3669128417969, + 535.5485229492188 + ], + [ + 117.465, + 535.5485229492188 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.9199981689453, + 135.27 + ], + [ + 386.835, + 135.27 + ], + [ + 386.835, + 150.66 + ], + [ + 225.9199981689453, + 150.66 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.5400085449219, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 351.16499999999996, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 351.16499999999996, + 121.55853271484375 + ], + [ + 264.5400085449219, + 121.55853271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 170 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 293 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744677" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744688/EFTA02744688.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744688/EFTA02744688.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b89923203a1d909285ef40d2de40a0bb73f94631 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744688/EFTA02744688.md @@ -0,0 +1,512 @@ +#281849/clw + +UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-CIV- +MARRA/[REDACTED] + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff(s), + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and [REDACTED], + +Defendant(s). + +NOTICE OF SERVING +ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES + +COMES NOW the Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through undersigned counsel, and hereby files this Notice with the Court that Answers to Interrogatories propounded by the Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, on January 16, 2009, have been furnished to the attorney for the Defendant. + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been furnished by mail this 18th day of February, 2009, to: See attached list of counsel. + +![]()\_\_\_\_\_ +JACK SCAROLA +Florida Bar No.: 169440 +JACK P. [REDACTED] +Florida Bar No.: 0547808 +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 +Phone: (561) 686-6300 +Fax: (561) 383-9410 +Attorney for Plaintiff(s) + +![](_page_0_Picture_122.jpeg) + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, ct al. Case No.: 08-CV-8081I-C1V-MARRAMOHNSON Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +#### ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES + +- 1. What is the name and address of all persons answering or assisting in answering these interrogatories, and, if applicable, the person's official position or relationship with the party to whom the interrogatories are directed? + +#### ANSWER + +C.M.A. c/o her attorneys: Jack Scarola, Esq. and Jack P. Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +With the assistance of her counsel, Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. and Richard Willits, P.A. + +- 2. List the names, business addresses, telephone and cell phone numbers, dates of employment, immediate supervisor (name and address) and rates of pay regarding all employers, including self-employment, for whom you have worked in the past 10 years; this includes listing all sources of income you have received. Answer this question by year, i.e. 1998-2009. + +#### ANSWER + +Objection. Irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence. + +- 3. List all former names and when you were known by those names. State all addresses where you have lived for the past 10 years, the dates you lived at each address, your Social Security number, your date of birth, and, if you are or have ever been married, the name of your spouse or spouses. List any children by name, date of birth and the father's name and address. List the names and address of your parents and any brother or sister. + +#### ANSWER + +Nickname- Brooke + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-8081 I-CIV-MARRa Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +> 2210 48 Terrace North Dates: July, 2007-Present West Palm Beach, FL. 33417 + +5168 Pat Place Dates: February, 2004- July, 2007 West Palm Beach, FL. + +Rome, Georgia Dates: August, 2003-February, 2004 + +1403 Suwanee Drive Dates: About 2 % years ago West Palm Beach, FL. 33409 + +Tallahassee Drive Dates: Approximately 1 year West Palm Beach, FL. 33409 + +SSN- 052-72-3510 DOB- 1/2/87 + +I have never been married. + +Children: DOB: 3112/04 + +Father: Address: 1603 Plantation Lane West Palm Beach, FL. 33407 + +Brayden Gilchrest DOB: 3/25/08 + +Father: Donald Gilchrest Address: West Palm Beach, FL. + +Parents: (Father) Address Unknown + +> Dorothy (Mother) 2210 48 Terrace North West Palm Beach, FL. 33417 + +Siblings: (Brother) Pasqualino (Brother) 2210 48 Terrace North West Palm Beach, FL. 33417 C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CTV-MARla Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +- 4. Have you ever been convicted of a crime, other than any juvenile adjudication, which under the law under which you were convicted was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of 1 year, or that involved dishonesty or a false statement regardless of the punishment? If so, state as to each conviction the specific crime and the date and place of conviction. + +# ANSWER + +No + +- 5. Please provide the name, address, telephone number, place of employment and job title of any person who has, claims to have or whom you believe may have knowledge or information pertaining to any fact alleged in the pleadings (as defined in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(a) filed in this action, or any fact underlying the subject matter of this action). + +# ANSWER + +- 1. C.M.A. do her attorneys: + +Jack Scarola, Esq. and Jack P. fl Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Tel: (561) 686-6300 + +Richard Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 Tel: (561) 582-7600 + +Subject matter: Plaintiff. + +- 2. Jeffrey Epstein do his attorneys: + +Robert Critton, Esquire Burman Critton Luther & Coleman LLP C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-80/311-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +> 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33414 Tel: (561) 842-2820 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Tel: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Tel: (561) 202-6360 + +Subject matter: Defendant + +- 3. C.M.A.'s mother, Dorothy, and her brother, c/o C.M.A.'s attorneys: + +Jack Scarola, Esq. and Jack P. Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnha Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Tel: (561) 686-6300 + +Richard Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 Tel: (561) 582-7600 + +Subject matter: C.M.A.'s involvement with Epstein. + +- 4. (Address unknown) + +Subject matter: Defendant. + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRADOHNSON Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +- 5. Jane Doe (Case No.: 1:93-cv-01109-KAM) c/o her attorney: + +Theodore Leopold, Esquire Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. 2925 P.G.A. Boulevard, Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Tel: (561) 515-1400 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +- 6. Jane Doe (Case No.: 502008CA020614) c/o her attorney: + +Isidro M. Esquire The Law Office of Brad & Associates, LLC 2028 Street, Suite 202 Hollywood, FL 33020 Tel: (954) 414-8033 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +- 7. Jane Doe #2 (Case No.: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) c/o her attorney: + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esquire Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +- 8. Jane Doe #3 (Case No.: 9:08-cv-80232-KAM) c/o her attorney: + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esquire Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. + +Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiffs Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +- 9. Jane Doe #5 (Case No.: 9:08-cv-80381-KAM) c/o her attorney: + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esquire Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +- 10. Jane Doe #4 (Case No.: 9:08-cv-80380-KAM) c/o her attorney: + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esquire Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +- 11. Jane Doe (Case No.: 9:08-cv-80804-KAM) do her attorney: + +Theodore Leopold, Esquire Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. 2925 P.G.A. Boulevard, Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Tel: (561) 515-1400 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +- 12. Jane Doe #7 (Case No.: 9:08-cv-80993-KAM) do her attorney: + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esquire Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRY Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First l.Hgatories nter + +> 18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +- 13. A.C. (Case No.: 502008CA025129XXXXMB Al c/o her attorneys: + +Jack Scarola, Esquire Jack P. Esquire Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Tel: (561) 686-6300 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +- 14. Jose Alessi (Address unknown at this time) + +Subject matter: Jeffrey Epstein's + +- 15. Janusa Banasiack Palm Beach Police Department 345 South County Road Palm Beach, FL 33480 Tel: (561) 838-5480 + +Subject matter: Investigator. + +- 16. Lanaa Bolohavek Palm Beach County Prosecutors Office 401 North Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Tel: (561) 355-7100 + +Subjoct matter: Prosecutor. + +- 17. Detective Dawson, lead investigator + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRABOIINSON Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +> Palm Beach Police Department 345 South County Road Palm Beach, FL 33480 Tel: (561) 838-5480 + +Subject matter: Investigator. + +- 18. Anti Street Palm Beach, FL 33411-1228 + +Subject matter: Former boyfriend of a victim of Epstein. + +- 19. Sgt. Frich Palm Beach Police Department 345 South County Road Palm Beach, FL 33480 Tel: (561) 838-5480 + +Subject matter: Investigator. + +- 20. Shawn W. Haught 1603 Plantation Lane West Palm Beach, FL 33417 + +Subject matter: Plaintiffs former boyfriend. + +- 21. Tony Higgins, supervisor Sanitation Bureau of the Town of Palm Beach 3101 N.W. 161h Terrace Pompano Beach, FL 33064 Tel: (877) 46-WASTE + +Subject matter: The incident which is the subject matter of this lawsuit. Discovery is ongoing. + +- 22. Major Kniesley Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office 3228 Gun Club Road West Palm Beach, FL 33406 + - (561) 666-3000 + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein. et al. Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRALIOFINSON Plaintiffs Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +Subject matter: Investigator. + +- 23. Amanda, friend of C.M.A (Address will be provided upon receipt) + +Subject matter: Victim and friend of C.M.A. + +- 24. Ghislane Maxwell c/o Ghislane Corp. 3580 Brillo Way Palm Beach, FL 33480 + +Subject matter: Associate of Epstein. + +- 25. Susan Pope Parent Child Center West Palm Beach, FL + +Subject matter: Counselor at Parent Child Center. + +- 26. Detective Recarcy Palm Beach Police Department 345 South County Road Palm Beach, FL 33480 Tel: (561) 838-5480 + +Subject matter: Investigator. + +- 27. Chief Michael Reiter Palm Beach Police Department 345 South County Road Palm Beach, FL 33480 Tel: (561) 838-5480 + +Subject matter: Investigator. + +- 28. (Address unknown at this time) + +Subject matter: Associate of Epstein who facilitated introductions with various victims. + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-80S1 I -CIV Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +- 29. Alfredo Rodriguez (Address unknown at this time) + +Subject matter: Employee of Epstein. + +- 30. Detective Palm Beach Police Department 345 South County Road Palm Beach, FL 33480 Tel: (561) 838-5480 + +Subject matter: Investigator + +- 31. Jeffrey Slomon, Esquire First Assistant U.S. Attorney U.S. Dept. of Justice 500 South Australian Avenue Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Tel: (561) 820-8711 + +Subject matter: Federal prosecutor. + +- 32. Twila , M.S.W. Federal Bureau of Investigation 505 South Flagler Drive, Suite 500 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Subject matter: Investigator. + +- 33. Dr. Thys Address will be provided upon receipt West Palm Beach + +Subject matter: C.M.A.'s physician. + +- 34. A. Villafana Assistant U.S. Attorney U.S. Dept. of Justice 500 South Australian Avenue + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MA,RRADOHNSON Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +> Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Tel: (561) 820-8711 + +Subject matter: Federal prosecutor. + +- 36. Kelly, friend of C.M.A's mother (Address will be provided upon receipt) + +Subject matter: Friend of C.M.A's mother. + +- 36. Dominique, friend of C.M.A.'s mother (Address will be provided upon receipt) + +Subject matter: Friend of C.M.A.'s mother + +- 37. Virginia, friend of C.M.A (Address will be provided upon receipt) + +Subject matter: Potential victim and friend of C.M.A. + +- 38. (Address unknown at this time) + +Subject matter: Associate of Epstein who may have been involved in encounters between Epstein and C.M.A. + +- 6. Please state the specific nature and substance of the knowledge that you believe the person(s) identified in your response to interrogatory no. 5 may have. + +ANSWER + +Please see answer to Interrogatory #5 + +- 7. Were you suffering from physical infirmity, disability, disease, sickness, or psychiatric/psychological condition at the time of the incidents) described in the complaint? If so, what was the nature of the infirmity, disability, or sickness? + +ANSWER + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MA Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant'sRFir rroga ories + +### School behavioral problems, received counseling prior to the incident + +- 8. Did you consume any alcoholic beverages or take any drugs or medications within 12 hours before the time of each incident(s) described in the complaint? If so, state the type and amount of alcoholic beverages, drugs, or medication which were consumed, and when (dates) and where you consumed them. + +#### ANSWER + +- 1. On one occasion I had taken "Morning Glory" and "Angel Trumpets". I do not recall the date. +- 2. On another occasion I used cocaine powder. I do not recall the date. +- 9. Describe each injury (physical, emotional, mental) for which you are claiming damages in this case, specifying the part of your body that was injured, the nature of the injury and as to any injuries you contend are permanent, the effects on you that you claim are permanent. + +# ANSWER + +I have bipolar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent injuries are psychological. + +- 10. Please state each item of damage that you claim, and include in your answer: the count to which the item of damages relates; the factual basis for each item of damages; and an explanation of how you computed each item of damages, including any mathematical formula used. + +## ANSWER + +I am claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a jury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. § 2255. + +Discovery is ongoing. + +- 11. List the names and business addresses of each physician (including psychiatrist, psychologist, chiropractor or medical provider) who has treated or examined you, + +C.MA. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiffs Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +> and each medical facility where you have received any treatment or examination for the injuries for which you seek damages in this case; and state as to each the date of treatment or examination and the injury or condition for which you were examined or treated. + +#### ANSWER + +Dr. Serge Thys (Psychiatrist) Date: I do not recall the date. I would defer 2151 45th Street to the Doctors records. West Palm Beach, FL. 33407 + +Susan Pope (Counselor/Therapist) Date: Since high school. Ongoing. Parent Child Center 2001 W. Blue Heron Boulevard + +- 12. List the names and business addresses of all other physicians, medical facilities, rehab facilities (drug, alcohol or psychiatric) or other health care providers including psychiatrist, psychologist, mental health counselor and chiropractors by whom or at which you have been examined or treated in the past 10 years; and state as to each the dates of examination or treatment and the condition or injury for which you were examined or treated. + +# ANSWER + +Good Samaritan Hospital (3/12/04, 3/25108) Child Birth 1309 N Flagler Dr West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +St. Mary's Hospital (4/07) DNC 901 46th Street West Palm Beach, FL 33407 + +Gloria C. Hakkarainen, MD Ob/Gyn 292510th Avenue North, Suite 305 Palm Springs, FL. 33461 + +Theodore Ritota, DDS Dentist + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-808 I 1-CI V-Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First + +> 3401 South Federal Highway Delray Beach, FL. 33483 + +Palm Beach County Healthcare Department Flu Shots 45'h Street West Palm Beach, FL. 33407 + +FAU Wellness Center 1650 Osceola Drive West Gate, FL. 33407 + +- 13. State the name and address of every person known to you, your agents, or your attorneys, who has knowledge about, or possession, custody, or control of, any model, plat, map, drawing, motion picture, video tape, or photograph pertaining to any fact or issue involved in this controversy; and describe as to each, what item such person has, the name and address of the person who took or prepared it, and the date it was taken or prepared. + +### ANSWER + +The FBI has photos taken of me at Jeffrey Epstein's home b Jeffrey Epstein had a photo taken of me at his home by + +- 14. Please state if you (or parents or guardian on your behalf) have ever been a party, either plaintiff or defendant, in a lawsuit other than the present matter, and, if so, state whether you were plaintiff or defendant, the nature of the action, and the date and court in which such suit was filed. + +# ANSWER + +No + +- 15. List all dates you allege you were at Mr. Epstein's home in Florida, include date, time arrived and left, the name(s) of anyone who went with you to the home when you were there, the time spent with Mr. Epstein and the name(s) and address of any individuals who were present in the home with Mr. Epstein and you. + +# ANSWER + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-80811-C1V-MARRA/ Plaintifrs Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +> From May or June of 2002 to August of 2003 I went to Mr. Epstein's home on average 2 times a week. There were weeks when I would go 4 times a week. All my visit dates were maintained by Jeffrey Epstein and his staff in a phone message book kept on a table by the phone in the kitchen. + +Discovery is ongoing. + +- 16. State in detail how you came to be at Mr. Epstein's home on each occasion, i.e. did someone bring you or ask you if you would or wanted to go; if so, state the name and address of that individual and what he/she told you and the purpose of your visit. + +#### ANSWER + +I was introduced to Jeffrey Epstein by my friend Virginia in 2002. I was to give Jeffrey Epstein a massage. I continued to provide massages up until August of 2003. I was transported to Jeffrey Epstein's house by Yellow Cab, provided by Jeffrey Epstein, Virginia, mSoyfriend Shawn Naught, my mother Dorothy Groenert and my brother + +Virginia (Address will be provided upon receipt) + +- 17. State the amount of monies (or anything else of value, including gifts) you claim were given or paid to you by Mr. Epstein (or someone paid/gave you on his behalf and that person's name, address and phone number) by year from 2000- 2006. + +#### ANSWER + +\$200-\$300 for a massage session at an average of 2 sessions a week from May or June of 2002 to Au + +\$500 for a photo taken by at Jeffrey Epstein's house + +Paid for taxi cabs + +Concert tickets-Incubus, delivered by two girls at the concert + +Clothes and lingerie sent by FedEx + +Book-Massage for Dummies + +CD + +Flowers + +Express gift card + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et aL + +Case No.: 08-CV-8081 I-CIV-ItilARRa Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +- 18. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding Mr. Epstein, with whom you have had sexual activity since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual activity, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. + +## ANSWER + +## Objection. Relevance and overbroad. + +- 19. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding your claims against Mr. Epstein, whom you have claimed (formally or informally) committed sexual assault or battery on you since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual assault or battery, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. + +# ANSWER + +None. + +- 20. State the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding your claims against Mr. Epstein, whom you have claimed (formally or informally) committed lewd or lascivious conduct to you since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the lewd or lascivious conduct, the date and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. + +# ANSWER + +None + +- 21. State the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding your claims against Mr. Epstein, whom you have claimed (formally or informally) committed lewd or lascivious exhibition to you since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the lewd or lascivious exhibition, the date and whether you received money or other consideration from the person + +## ANSWER + +None + +- 22. List in detail all discussionsfinterviews which you had with any representative + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et n.l. Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +> from FBI, U.S. Attorneys' Office, State Attorneys' Office (Palm Beach County), Palm Beach Sheriffs Office and Palm Beach Police Department regarding your meetings with Mr. Epstein. Include dates, who was present, the details of what was discussed, whether a court reporter was present and whether a taped statement was taken or whether you provided a written statement. + +#### ANSWER + +I was interviewed by the FBI and a State Attorney, they have my statement. + +- 23. State the names, addresses, ages, phone numbers and dates of all females whom you claim were brought by you to Mr. Epstein's home to give him a massage or for any other reason. As to each female, state the amount of money you claim you were paid to bring each female. + +# ANSWER + +A.L. Age: 22 West Palm Beach, FL. I was paid \$100.00 + +- 24. Please list each time you were interviewed by any state or federal law enforcement agent or prosecutor, who was present, whether notes were taken, and what you recall saying to them. + +## ANSWER + +I do not recall who interviewed me. This information would be available in the FBI and Prosecutors office. They took notes and I was not provided with a copy of those notes. + +- 25. Please describe any statements made to you by any federal or state law enforcement agent or prosecutor regarding the availability of civil remedies against Mr. Epstein and regarding whether there would be any benefit from your voluntary cooperation with law enforcement. + +#### ANSWER + +None + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. +Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON +Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +![]()STATE OF Florida ) + +COUNTY OF Palm Beach ) + +The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 17 day of February, 2009 +by [REDACTED] who is personally known to me or who has produced +\_\_\_\_\_ (type of identification) as identification and who did/did +not take an oath. + +![]()![](_page_18_Picture_71.jpeg) + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-808 I 1.-CIV-MARla Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +#### COUNSEL LIST + +Jack A. Goldberger Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue S. West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 863-9100 Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561)-202-6360 Fax: (561)-828-0983 Attorneys for + +Robert Critton Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33414 Phone: (561)-842-2820 Fax: (561)-844-6929 Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire lawyerwillits®aol.com Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 Phone: (561)-582-7600 Fax: (561)-588-8819 Attorneys for Party \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744688/EFTA02744688.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744688/EFTA02744688.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e46af052a974ad403b924b848e059fabaaf46572 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744688/EFTA02744688.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1528 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744688.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 20, + "chars": 23916, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.21, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_122.jpeg", + "_page_18_Picture_71.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "NOTICE OF SERVING ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.676, + 286.74 + ], + [ + 393.51599999999996, + 286.74 + ], + [ + 393.51599999999996, + 313.47 + ], + [ + 197.676, + 313.47 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 149.290283203125 + ], + [ + 395.7160339355469, + 149.290283203125 + ], + [ + 395.7160339355469, + 163.0670166015625 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 163.0670166015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 106.48799999999999, + 241.1702880859375 + ], + [ + 163.13558959960938, + 241.1702880859375 + ], + [ + 163.13558959960938, + 254.5670166015625 + ], + [ + 106.48799999999999, + 254.5670166015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 106.48799999999999, + 476.28 + ], + [ + 163.47911071777344, + 476.28 + ], + [ + 163.47911071777344, + 489.6870422363281 + ], + [ + 106.48799999999999, + 489.6870422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 106.48799999999999, + 631.8 + ], + [ + 164.2655792236328, + 631.8 + ], + [ + 164.2655792236328, + 646.0670471191406 + ], + [ + 106.48799999999999, + 646.0670471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 225.18 + ], + [ + 163.58782958984375, + 225.18 + ], + [ + 163.58782958984375, + 240.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 240.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 355.59000000000003 + ], + [ + 163.58924865722656, + 355.59000000000003 + ], + [ + 163.58924865722656, + 371.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 371.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "School behavioral problems, received counseling prior to the incident", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 136.89000000000001 + ], + [ + 492.75018310546875, + 136.89000000000001 + ], + [ + 492.75018310546875, + 151.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 151.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 229.23 + ], + [ + 162.45782470703125, + 229.23 + ], + [ + 162.45782470703125, + 243.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 243.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 371.79 + ], + [ + 162.83924865722656, + 371.79 + ], + [ + 162.83924865722656, + 387.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 387.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 515.16 + ], + [ + 163.20782470703125, + 515.16 + ], + [ + 163.20782470703125, + 530.3035278320312 + ], + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 530.3035278320312 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 202.5 + ], + [ + 162.08924865722656, + 202.5 + ], + [ + 162.08924865722656, + 217.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 217.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 423.63 + ], + [ + 162.83782958984375, + 423.63 + ], + [ + 162.83782958984375, + 439.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 439.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.652, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 163.58924865722656, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 163.58924865722656, + 399.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 104.652, + 399.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.652, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 163.95925903320312, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 163.95925903320312, + 529.9235229492188 + ], + [ + 104.652, + 529.9235229492188 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.652, + 644.76 + ], + [ + 164.33924865722656, + 644.76 + ], + [ + 164.33924865722656, + 660.0535125732422 + ], + [ + 104.652, + 660.0535125732422 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.652, + 291.6 + ], + [ + 161.97911071777344, + 291.6 + ], + [ + 161.97911071777344, + 306.3170471191406 + ], + [ + 104.652, + 306.3170471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.652, + 500.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 162.70263671875, + 500.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 162.70263671875, + 515.1870422363281 + ], + [ + 104.652, + 515.1870422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 200.07 + ], + [ + 162.45782470703125, + 200.07 + ], + [ + 162.45782470703125, + 215.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 215.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Objection. Relevance and overbroad.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 225.99000000000004 + ], + [ + 312.4017028808594, + 225.99000000000004 + ], + [ + 312.4017028808594, + 241.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 241.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 330.48 + ], + [ + 162.83782958984375, + 330.48 + ], + [ + 162.83782958984375, + 345.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 345.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 460.89 + ], + [ + 163.20782470703125, + 460.89 + ], + [ + 163.20782470703125, + 476.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 476.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 591.3 + ], + [ + 163.20925903320312, + 591.3 + ], + [ + 163.20925903320312, + 606.4335174560547 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 606.4335174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 213.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 162.45925903320312, + 213.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 162.45925903320312, + 227.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 227.68353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 329.66999999999996 + ], + [ + 162.83782958984375, + 329.66999999999996 + ], + [ + 162.83782958984375, + 345.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 345.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 460.0799999999999 + ], + [ + 162.83782958984375, + 460.0799999999999 + ], + [ + 162.83782958984375, + 475.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 475.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 604.26 + ], + [ + 162.45925903320312, + 604.26 + ], + [ + 162.45925903320312, + 618.8035125732422 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 618.8035125732422 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 276.624, + 149.04 + ], + [ + 367.91571044921875, + 149.04 + ], + [ + 367.91571044921875, + 162.9735107421875 + ], + [ + 276.624, + 162.9735107421875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 74 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744688" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744688/_page_0_Picture_122.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744688/_page_0_Picture_122.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f7f3ceac6de6b02cdd8c7554276ca8dd0064a034 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744688/_page_0_Picture_122.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:72c383c5962ce1ce973ceac72f186444ed710f661c5df63aed18867f1c5c54ab +size 8165 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744688/_page_18_Picture_71.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744688/_page_18_Picture_71.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..78909ee77ebd4d59ac4c7689ade91e9886015869 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744688/_page_18_Picture_71.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:97937791363130750f005689a3592f0de6ae9a5cb0edd247540bd5b248f863e0 +size 19704 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744708/EFTA02744708.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744708/EFTA02744708.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b496522614ff6f33aee0e50a4bcc77f589cc12a1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744708/EFTA02744708.md @@ -0,0 +1,390 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARFa + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff(s), + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and + +Defendant(s). + +## PLAINTIFF'S INITIAL DISCLOSURE + +COMES NOW the Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through her undersigned attorneys, and hereby files her initial Disclosure in compliance with the Joint Discovery Plan/Scheduling Report dated August 18, 2008, as follows: + +(A) Name and, if known, the address and telephone number of each individual likely to have discoverable Information that the disclosing party may use to support its claim or defenses, unless solely for impeachment, identifying the subjects of the information: + +- 1. C.M.A. c/o her attorneys: + +Jack Scarola, Esq. and Jack P. , Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Tel: (561) 686-6300 + +Richard Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, PA 2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 Tel: (561) 582-7600 + +![](_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg) + +Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRal + +Plaintiffs Initial Disclosure + +Page 2 of 12 + +Subject matter: Plaintiff. + +- 2. Jeffrey Epstein do his attorneys: + +Robert Critton, Esquire Burman Critton Luther & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33414 Tel: (561) 842-2820 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Tel: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Tel: (581) 202-6360 + +Subject matter: Defendant + +- 3. C.M.A.'s mother, Dorothy, and her brother, c/o C.M.A.'s attorneys: + +Jack Scarola, Esq. and Jack P. M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Tel: (561) 686-6300 + +Richard Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 Tel: (561) 582-7600 + +Subject matter: C.M.A.'s involvement with Epstein. + +Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARLa + +Plaintiffs Initial Disclosure + +Page 3 of 12 + +4. (Address unknown) + +Subject matter. Defendant + +5. Jane Doe (Case No.: 1:93-cv-01109-KAM) do her attorney: + +> Theodore Leopold, Esquire Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. 2925 P.G.A. Boulevard, Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Tel: (561) 515-1400 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +6. Jane Doe (Case No.: 502008CA020614) do her attorney: + +> Isidro M. , Esquir The of Brad FEM & Associates, LLC 2028 Street, Suite 202 Hollywood, FL 33020 Tel: (954) 414-8033 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +7. Jane Doe #2 (Case No.: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) do her attorney: + +> Jeffrey M. Herman, Esquire Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiffs Initial Disclosure + +Page 4 of 12 + +- 8. Jane Doe #3 (Case No.: 9:08-cv-80232-KAM) do her attorney: + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esquire Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +- 9. Jane Doe #5 (Case No.: 9:08-cv-80381-KAM) do her attorney: + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esquire Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +- 10. Jane Doe #4 (Case No.: 9:08-cv-80380-KAM) do her attorney: + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esquire Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +- 11. Jane Doe (Case No.: 9:08-cv-80804-KAM) do her attorney: + +Theodore Leopold, Esquire Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. 2925 P.G.A. Boulevard, Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Tel: (561) 515-1400 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 06-CV-60811-CIV-MARRALIOHNSON Plaintiffs Initial Disclosure Page 5 of 12 + +- 12. Jane Doe #7 (Case No.: 9:08-cv-80993-KAM) do her attorney: + +Jeffrey M. Herman, Esquire Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +- 13. A.C. (Case No.: 502008CA025129)00(XMB Al do her attorneys: + +Jack Sc la, Esquire Jack P. E, Esquire Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Tel: (561) 686-6300 + +Subject matter: Victim of Epstein. + +- 14. Jose Alessi (Address unknown at this time) + +Subject matter: Jeffrey Epstein's M. + +- 15. Janusa Banasiack Palm Beach Police Department 345 South County Road Palm Beach, FL 33480 Tel: (561) 838-5480 + +Subject matter. Investigator. + +- 16. Lanaa Belohavek Palm Beach County Prosecutors Office 401 North Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Tel: (561) 355-7100 + +Subject matter: Prosecutor. + +Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiffs Initial Disclosure + +Page 8 of 12 + +- 17. Detective Dawson, lead investigator Palm Beach Police Department 345 South County Road Palm Beach, FL 33480 Tel: (561) 838-5480 + +Subject matter: Investigator. + +- 18. Ant treat Palm Beach, FL 33411-1228 + +Subject matter: Former boyfriend of a victim of Epstein. + +- 19. Sgt. Filch Palm Beach Police Department 345 South County Road Palm Beach, FL 33480 Tel: (561) 838-5480 + +Subject matter. Investigator. + +- 20. 1603 Plantation Lane West Palm Beach, FL 33417 + +Subject matter: Plaintiffs former boyfriend. + +- 21. Tony Higgins, supervisor Sanitation Bureau of the Town of Palm Beach 3101 N.W. 16th Terrace Pompano Beach, FL 33064 Tel: (877) 46-WASTE + +Subject matter: The incident which is the subject matter of this lawsuit. Discovery is ongoing. + +- 22. Major Kniesley Palm Beach County Sheriffs Office 3228 Gun Club Road West Palm Beach, FL 33406 + - (561) 666-3000 + +Subject matter: Investigator. + +Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARa + +Plaintiffs Initial Disclosure + +Page 7 of 12 + +- 23. Amanda, friend of C.M.A (Address will be provided upon receipt) + +Subject matter: Victim and friend of C.M.A. + +- 24. Ghislane Maxwell c/a Ghislane Corp. 3580 Brillo Way Palm Beach, FL 33480 + +Subject matter: Associate of Epstein. + +- 25. Susan Pope Parent Child Center West Palm Beach, FL + +Subject matter: Counselor at Parent Child Center. + +- 26. Detective Recarcy Palm Beac Police Department 345 South County Road Palm Beach, FL 33480 Tel: (561) 838-5480 + +Subject matter: Investigator. + +- 27. Chief Michael Reiter Palm Beach Police Department 345 South County Road Palm Beach, FL 33480 Tel: (561) 838-5480 + +Subject matter: Investigator. + +- 28. (Address unknown at this time) + +Subject matter various victims. Associate of Epstein who facilitated introductions with + +- 29. Alfredo Rodriguez (Address unknown at this time) + +Subject matter: Employee of Epstein. + +Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiffs Initial Disclosure + +Page 8 of 12 + +- 30. Detective Palm Beach Police Department 345 South County Road Palm Beach, FL 33480 Tel: (561) 838-5480 + +Subject matter. Investigator + +- 31. Jeffrey Slomon, Esquire First Assistant U.S. Attorney U.S. Dept. of Justice 500 South Australian Avenue Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Tel: (561) 820-8711 + +Subject matter: Federal prosecutor. + +- 32. Twila , M.S.W. Federal Bureau of Investigation 505 South Flagler Drive, Suite 500 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Subject matter: Investigator. + +- 33. Dr. Thys Address will be provided upon receipt West Palm Beach + +Subject matter C.M.A.'s physician. + +- 34. A. Villafana Assistant U.S. Attorney U.S. Dept. of Justice 500 South Australian Avenue Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Tel: (561) 820-8711 + +Subject matter. Federal prosecutor. + +- 35. Kelly, friend of C.M.A's mother (Address will be provided upon receipt) + +Subject matter: Friend of C.M.A's mother. + +Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRAL [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff's Initial Disclosure + +Page 9 of 12 + +36. Dominique, friend of C.M.A.'s mother +(Address will be provided upon receipt) + +Subject matter: Friend of C.M.A.'s mother + +37. Virginia, friend of C.M.A. +(Address will be provided upon receipt) + +Subject matter: Potential victim and friend of C.M.A. + +38. [REDACTED] +(Address unknown at this time) + +Subject matter: Associate of Epstein who may have been involved in encounters between Epstein and C.M.A. + +**(B) A copy of, or description by category and location of, all documents, data compilations, and tangible things that are in the possession, custody or control of the party and that the disclosing party may use to support its claim or defenses, unless solely for impeachment:** + +| Plt. No. | Def. No. | Description of Exhibit | Counsel | Objection | Marked In Evid. | Marked for Ident. | +|----------|----------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------|-----------|-----------------|-------------------| +| | 1 | Visitation Log | | | | | +| | 2 | Any deposition in any other case involving molestation allegations against Jeffrey Epstein | | | | | +| | 3 | U.S. Department of Justice's complete file, records and evidence | | | | | +| | 4 | Federal Bureau of Investigation's complete file, records and evidence | | | | | +| | 5 | Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office's complete file, records and evidence | | | | | +| | 6 | Palm Beach County Prosecutor's complete file, records and evidence | | | | | +| | 7 | Palm Beach Police Department's complete file, records and evidence | | | | | +| | 8 | Palm Beach Police Department Probable Cause Affidavits | | | | | + +Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARI2a + +Plaintiff's Initial Disclosure + +Page 10 of 12 + +(C) A computation of any category of damages claimed by the disclosing party, making available for inspection and copying as under Rule 34 the documents or other evidentiary material, not privileged or protected from disclosure, on which such computation is based, including materials bearing on the nature and extent of injuries suffered: + +All damages recoverable for personal injury under Florida law including the following: + +suffered bodily injury; + +pain and suffering; + +disability; + +disfigurement; + +mental anguish; + +loss of the capacity for the enjoyment of life; and + +Medical and nursing care and treatment. + +The economic damages have not yet been calculated. The noneconomic damages are for the jury's determination. + +Statutory damages pursuant to 18 USCA §2255. + +Punitive damages. + +(D) for inspection and copying as under Rule 34 any insurance agreement under which any person carrying on an insurance business may be liable to satisfy part or all of a judgment which may be entered in the action or to indemnify or reimburse for payment made to satisfy the judgment." Fed.R.Civ.P.26(a): + +Plaintiff is unaware of any applicable insurance policies. Discovery is ongoing. + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. +Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON +Plaintiff's Initial Disclosure +Page 11 of 12 + +**CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by +U.S. Mail to all counsel on the attached list, this 2nd day of February, 2009. + +![]()Jack Scarola + +Florida Bar No.: 169440 + +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) + +Jack P. [REDACTED] + +Florida Bar No.: 0547808 + +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +Phone: (561) 686-6300 + +Fax: (561) 383-9424 + +Attorneys for Plaintiff + +Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRAM + +Plaintiff's Initial Disclosure + +Page 12 of 12 + +**SERVICE LIST** + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Phone: (561) 582-7600 + +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Robert Critton, Esquire + +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP + +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 + +Phone: (561) 842-2820 + +Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire + +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 South Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 202-6360 + +Fax: (561) 828-0983 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744708/EFTA02744708.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744708/EFTA02744708.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1b95b29e5879bf1d57ea282b7bcd9a89e589e5e8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744708/EFTA02744708.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,583 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744708.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 12, + "chars": 12938, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.78, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.78000000000003, + 93.29888916015625 + ], + [ + 389.3645324707031, + 93.29888916015625 + ], + [ + 389.3645324707031, + 120.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 192.78000000000003, + 120.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S INITIAL DISCLOSURE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 194.00400000000002, + 341.01 + ], + [ + 390.20654296875, + 341.01 + ], + [ + 390.20654296875, + 355.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 194.00400000000002, + 355.56353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 215.42399999999998, + 111.78000000000002 + ], + [ + 365.976, + 111.78000000000002 + ], + [ + 365.976, + 125.55000000000001 + ], + [ + 215.42399999999998, + 125.55000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 113.4 + ], + [ + 330.48, + 113.4 + ], + [ + 330.48, + 127.98000000000002 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 127.98000000000002 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 68 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 56 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744708" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744708/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744708/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..00d9a76359afff0c7c35b08c0b296cfab6a4a34b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744708/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c9e296989bd8fa633834a19517099400b326221cd5a5e4d81fc98941b8991012 +size 9532 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744720/EFTA02744720.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744720/EFTA02744720.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a8dd8e5ee31235e9a1a287855a3738e7d24f3921 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744720/EFTA02744720.md @@ -0,0 +1,246 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MAR + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA + +## PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO STRIKE CASES FROM CURRENT TRIAL DOCKET AND MOTION TO CONTINUE CASE AND/OR ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO MODIFY TRIAL AND SCHEDULING ORDER DEADLINES + +The Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through undersigned counsel, files this Response to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Strike Cases From Current Trial Docket And Motion to Continue Case And/Or Alternative Motion to Modify Trial and Scheduling Order (D.E. 104), and further states as follows: + +1. Defendant EPSTEIN seeks to have this case (and others that are presently pending) stricken from the trial docket, or continued for at least an additional three months or have the existing pretrial deadlines extended. In light of Plaintiffs filing of her Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. 52255 (D.E. 113) on June 5, 2009, Plaintiff agrees to a modification of the pretrial schedule as outlined in Defendant EPSTEIN's Motion to Strike (D.E. 104); to wit, extending discovery for an additional three months from the currently set deadline of August 28, 2009, extending the current deadline of October 15, 2009 by two months to file substantive pretrial motions, extending the current deadline of December 21, 2009 by one month to mediate this matter, and extending the deadline of June 29, 2009 by one month to exchange expert witness reports.' + +2. EPSTEIN's requests to have this case stricken from the trial docket, or in the alternative, continued for three months, however, are not warranted under the circumstances and would unreasonably and unnecessarily delay the resolution of this case. The filing of the instant motion marks the third different way EPSTEIN has sought to delay the trial on this matter. First, it was Defendant's Motion for Stay (D.E. 33), which was denied by the Court on December 17, 2008. Next, it was Defendant's second Motion for Stay (D.E. 51), which is presently pending before the Court. Third, and unfortunately, probably not the last, is Defendant's latest attempt to delay the trial of this case. + +With regards to the last requested modification of the pretrial order, EPSTEIN requests "an additional month to complete the remaining deadlines under each of the Court's Trial Orders." Given that each of the other deadlines not specifically listed above are to take place 15 days or less from the calendar call date of February 19, 2010 (which is 3 days from the trial date of February 22, 2010), the only logical deadline EPSTEIN could be referring to is the expert witness report exchange. + +3. In order to justify his latest attempt to delay the trial of this case, EPSTEIN argues that Plaintiffs conduct has prevented him from "conducting any meaningful discovery, including the taking of C.M.A.'s supervisors, co-workers, acquaintances, friends, and other third parties."(D.E. 104, pg. 7). The sworn affidavit by counsel for Defendant, Michael Pike, Esq. repeats the same allegation ("As a result, the undersigned has not had an opportunity to depose any individuals that may have information about the allegations made by Plaintiffs."(D.E. 042-2, paragraph 4). + +4, Defendant's Motion and affidavit are simply not supported by the history of this case. First, this case was filed in state court on February 21, 2008. Defendant EPSTEIN was served with a summons and complaint on July 2, 2008. For reasons that are known only to himself and his counsel in this case, EPSTEIN waited a full six months before propounding any discovery of any kind upon Plaintiff. EPSTEIN filed his first set of interrogatories on January 16, 2009, and his first set of requests to produce on January 16, 2009. EPSTEIN's choice to wait a half a year before engaging in formal discovery is not the Plaintiffs fault, nor can he now be allowed to argue that the current trial setting is unworkable because of his failures. + +5. Second, Plaintiff provided answers to Defendant's first set of interrogatories on February 18, 2009 (Attached as Exhibit "1"). Plaintiffs answers to interrogatories identifies thirty six (36) people, other than herself and EPSTEIN, who have or may have knowledge regarding the subject matter of the instant law suit. This list of individuals includes Plaintiffs relatives, mental health providers, a former boyfriend, her friends, other victims of EPSTEIN, members of law enforcement who investigated EPSTEIN, and former employees and/or associates of EPSTEIN. Armed + +with the identities of these crucial fact witnesses for almost the last four (4) months, EPSTEIN had not set a single one of them for deposition as of the time he filed the instant motion. Defendant's claims that he has been absolutely prevented from engaging in any discovery as a result of Plaintiffs "delay tactics" are absolutely belied by the fact that he actually has much of the information he complains Plaintiff is concealing from him, but has chosen to do nothing with it over the last four months. + +6. Plaintiff also filed on February 2, 2009 her Initial Disclosure which likewise identified multiple individuals who had or may have knowledge regarding the subject matter of the instant suit (Attached as Exhibit "2"). Defendant failed to set any of those indentified individuals for deposition either. + +7. Once again, Defendant cannot bury his head in the sand by failing to take available discovery and then turn around and complain that he cannot get ready for trial scheduled in February of 2010. + +8. Third, EPSTEIN inappropriately characterizes Plaintiffs assertions of the protections afforded to her under the applicable rules of procedure and case law with respect to unreasonably invasive and irrelevant discovery propounded by EPSTEIN as an attempt to conceal evidence from EPSTEIN and delay the discovery of same. Defendant's allegations in this regard are flat out wrong. Plaintiff, just like EPSTEIN, has certain rights and privileges with respect to the scope of permissible discovery. Plaintiff has every right to avail herself of the protections available to her under the rules of discovery without fear of claims from EPSTEIN that she is concealing or delaying anything. Indeed, it is ironic that EPSTEIN takes issue with a litigant invoking the protections available to her with regards to inappropriate and unreasonable discovery + +when he himself has failed to respond to any discovery propounded to him by Plaintiff, but instead has invoked his 5th Amendment privilege. + +9. Fourth, in the event that the Court rules that Plaintiff can recover the statutory damage floor established in 18 U.S.C. §2255 for each proven incident of abuse committed by EPSTEIN upon her, the discovery which EPSTEIN presently seeks will not be relevant or material in any way given Plaintiffs Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255. + +10. Defendant asserts as justification for continuing this case what can fairly be characterized as routine and ordinary discovery disputes. Nothing contained in either his motion or supporting affidavit rises to the level of "exceptional circumstances" required by Local Rule 7.6 to continue a trial setting. Any issues related to discovery can certainly be cured by extending the trial deadlines as proposed by EPSTEIN. Delaying the trial of this case is simply not necessary nor justified. + +WHEREFORE, in light of the foregoing, the Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court enter an order denying Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Strike Cases From Current Trial Docket And Motion to Continue Case And/Or Alternative Motion to Modify Trial and Scheduling Order. + +Respectfully submitted, + +*/s/Jack P.* [REDACTED] + +JACK SCAROLA + +Florida Bar No. 169440 + +JACK P. [REDACTED] + +Florida Bar No.: 0547808 + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +Phone: (561) 686-6300 + +Fax: (561) 383-9456 + +Attorneys for Plaintiff + +**CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 8th, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified above via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. + +*/s/Jack P.* [REDACTED] + +JACK SCAROLA + +Florida Bar No. 169440 + +JACK P. [REDACTED] + +Florida Bar No.: 0547808 + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +Phone: (561) 686-6300 + +Fax: (561) 383-9456 + +Attorneys for Plaintiff + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Robert Critton, Esquire +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 +Phone: (561) 842-2820 +Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue S. +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +Phone: (561) 582-7600 +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 South Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561)-202-6360 +Fax: (561)-828-0983 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744720/EFTA02744720.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744720/EFTA02744720.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cc73416212bd12837fd0da3471bacef8414246af --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744720/EFTA02744720.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,427 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744720.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 10324, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.28, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 193.392, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 401.1368103027344, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 401.1368103027344, + 101.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 193.392, + 101.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO \nSTRIKE CASES FROM CURRENT TRIAL DOCKET AND MOTION TO CONTINUE \nCASE AND/OR ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO MODIFY TRIAL AND SCHEDULING \nORDER DEADLINES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.768, + 540.27 + ], + [ + 524.9976806640625, + 540.27 + ], + [ + 524.9976806640625, + 596.8000030517578 + ], + [ + 69.768, + 596.8000030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 233.784, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 393.51599999999996, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 393.51599999999996, + 413.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 233.784, + 413.90999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 82.62 + ], + [ + 342.72, + 82.62 + ], + [ + 342.72, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 97.19999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 32 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744720" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744729/EFTA02744729.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744729/EFTA02744729.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..02c13c7e6da4eb8b3fc216b04e3a817712cf025e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744729/EFTA02744729.md @@ -0,0 +1,142 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S FIRST AMENDED ANSWER & AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, files his First Amended Answer to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint [DE 56] and states: + +- 1. Without knowledge and deny. +- 2. As to the allegations in paragraphs 2, Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[lit would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. - + +EXHIBIT r + +.. a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against self-incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief" which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +3. As to the allegations in paragraph 3, deny. + +4. As to the allegations in paragraph 4, deny. + +5. As to the allegations in paragraph 5, without knowledge and deny. + +6. As to the allegations in paragraphs 6, Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. - "... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against self-incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief' which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +7. As to the allegations in paragraphs 7 through 14 of Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint, Defendant exercises his Fifth Amendment Privilege against selfincrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. — "... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against self-incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief" which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +8. In response to the allegations of paragraph 15, Defendant realleges and adopts his responses to paragraphs 1 through 14 of the Second Amended Complaint set forth in paragraphs 1 through 6 above herein. + +9. Defendant asserts the Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-incrimination to the allegations set forth in paragraphs 16 through 21 of the Second Amended Complaint. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination + +Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. — "... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against selfincrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief" which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +10. In response to the allegations of paragraph 22, Defendant realleges and adopts his responses to paragraphs 1 through 14 of the Second Amended Complaint set forth in paragraphs 1 through 6 above herein. + +11. Defendant asserts the Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-incrimination to the allegations set forth in paragraphs 23 through 27 of the Second Amended Complaint. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d + +§1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. —"... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against selfincrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief' which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +12. In response to the allegations of paragraph 28, Defendant realleges and adopts his responses to paragraphs 1 through 14 of the Second Amended Complaint set forth in paragraphs 1 through 6 above herein. + +13. Defendant asserts the Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-incrimination to the allegations set forth in paragraphs 29 through 34 of the Second Amended Complaint. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[l]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. —"... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against self- + +incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief" which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court deny the relief sought by Plaintiff. + +## Affirmative Defenses + +1. As to all counts, Plaintiff actually consented to and was a willing participant in the acts alleged, and therefore, her claims are barred, or her damages are required to be reduced accordingly. + +2. As to all counts alleged, Plaintiff actually consented to and participated in conduct similar and/or identical to the acts alleged with other persons which were the sole or contributing cause of Plaintiff's alleged damages. + +3. As to all counts, Plaintiff impliedly consented to the acts alleged by not objecting, and therefore, her claims are barred, or her damages are required to be reduced accordingly. + +4. As to all counts, Defendant reasonably believed or was told that the Plaintiff had attained the age of 18 years old at the time of the alleged acts. + +5. As to all counts, Plaintiffs claims are barred as she said she was 18 years or older at the time. + +6. As to all counts, Plaintiffs alleged damages were caused in whole or part by events and/or circumstances completely unrelated to the incident(s) alleged in the complaint. + +7. Plaintiffs claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. + +8. As to Plaintiff's claims for punitive damages in Count I — "Sexual Assault & Battery," and Count II — "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress," such claims are subject to the limitations as set forth in §768.72, et seq., Florida Statutes. + +9. As to Plaintiffs claims for punitive damages in Count I — "Sexual Assault & Battery," and Count II — "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress," such claims are subject to the constitutional limitations and guideposts as set forth in BMW of North America v. Gore 116 S.Ct 1589 (1996)• Philip Morris USA v. 127 S.Ct. 1057 (2007); State Farm v. 123 S.Ct 1513 (2003) v. Liqqet Group, Inc., 945 So.2d 1246 (Fla. 2006). The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Florida's Constitution, Art. I, §§2 and 9, prohibit the imposition of grossly excessive or arbitrary punishments + +10.As to Plaintiffs claims for punitive damages in Count I — "Sexual Assault & Battery," and Count II — "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress," the determination of whether or not Defendant is liable for punitive damages is required to be bifurcated from a determination of the amount to be imposed. + +11. Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action for sexual assault and/or battery under Count I. + +12.As to Count III, Plaintiff has failed to plead a cause of action as she does not and can not show a violation of a predicate act under 18 U.S.C. §2255 (2005). + +13.As to Count III, the version of 18 U.S.C. §2255 in effect at the time of the alleged conduct applies, and, thus, the presumptive minimum damages amount should Plaintiff prove the elements of such claim is \$50,000, and not subject to any multiplier. + +14.As to Count III, application of the amended version of 18 U.S.C. §2255, effective July 27, 2006, would be in violation of the legal axiom against retroactive application of an amended statute, and also in violation of such constitutional principles, including but not limited to, the "Ex Post Facto" Clause, U.S. Const. Article I, §9, cl. 3, §10, cl. 1, and procedural and substantive due process, U.S. Const. 14th Amend., 5m Amend. The statute in effect during the time of the alleged conduct applies. + +15.As to Count Ill, application of the amended version of 18 U.S.C. §2255, effective July 27, 2006, is prohibited pursuant to the vagueness doctrine and the Rule of Lenity. A criminal statute is required to give " 'fair warning ... in language that the common world will understand, of what the law intends to do if a certain line is passed. To make the warning fair, so far as possible the line should be clear.' " United States v. Lanier, 520 U.S. 259, 265, 117 S.Ct. 1219, 137 L.Ed.2d 432 (1997) (quoting McBovle v. United States 283 U.S. 25, 27, 51 S.Ct. 340, 75 L.Ed. 816 (1931)) (omission in original). The "three related manifestations of the fair warning requirement" are: (1) the vagueness doctrine bars enforcement of a statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application; (2) the canon of strict construction of criminal statutes, or rule of lenity, ensures fair warning by so resolving ambiguity in a criminal statute as to apply it only to conduct clearly covered; (3) due process bars courts from applying a novel construction of a criminal statute to conduct that neither the statute nor any prior judicial decision has fairly disclosed to be within its scope. + +16. The applicable version of 18 U.S.C. §2255 creates a cause of action on behalf of a "minor." Plaintiff had attained the age of majority at the time of filing this action, and accordingly, her cause of action is barred. + +17. Because Plaintiff has no claim under 18 U.S.C. §2255, this Court is without subject matter jurisdiction as to all claims asserted. + +18.Application of the 18 U.S.C. §2255, as amended, effective July 27, 2006, is in violation of the constitutional principles of due process, the "Ex Post Facto" clause, and the Rule of Lenity, in that in amending the term "minor" to "person" as to those who may bring a cause of action impermissibly and unconstitutionally broadened the scope of persons able to bring a §2255 claim. + +19. 18 U.S.C. §2255 violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment under the U.S. Constitution, and thus Plaintiff's claim thereunder is barred. + +20. 18 U.S.C. §2255 violates the constitutional guarantees of procedural and substantive due process. Procedural due process guarantees that a person will not be deprived of life, liberty or property without notice and opportunity to be heard. Substantive due process protects fundamental rights. Accordingly, Plaintiffs cause of action thereunder is barred. + +WHEREFORE Defendant requests that this Court deny the relief sought by Plaintiff. + +Robert D. Critton, Jr. Attorney for Defendant Epstein + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this \_\_\_ day of \_\_\_\_\_, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: \_\_\_\_\_ +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. +Florida Bar No. 224162 +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +*(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744729/EFTA02744729.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744729/EFTA02744729.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..006a715420032a4a3a726c37c1ef7d732a941184 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744729/EFTA02744729.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,469 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744729.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 16142, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.45, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 86.8074951171875 + ], + [ + 412.3953552246094, + 86.8074951171875 + ], + [ + 412.3953552246094, + 115.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 115.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S FIRST AMENDED ANSWER & AFFIRMATIVE \nDEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 108.32399999999998, + 284.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 508.8858337402344, + 284.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 508.8858337402344, + 312.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 108.32399999999998, + 312.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Affirmative Defenses", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.74, + 218.70000000000002 + ], + [ + 367.8368835449219, + 218.70000000000002 + ], + [ + 367.8368835449219, + 233.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 241.74, + 233.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 364.75199999999995, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 364.75199999999995, + 123.12 + ], + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 123.12 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744729" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744739/EFTA02744739.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744739/EFTA02744739.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fad1f8d9306c0e1535c05dab0d8baec1598b7f64 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744739/EFTA02744739.md @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ +May 29, 2009 Page 2 + +## Written Consent to Amendment + +Ihereby consent to Defendant EPSTEIN's request to amend his affirmative defenses as set forth in his proposed Defendant EPSTEIN's First Amended Answer & Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint in each of Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No.2, Jane Doe No.3, Jane Doe No.4, and Jane Doe No.5; and as set forth in Defendant EPSTEIN's First Amended Answer & Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff's (First) Amended Compaint in Jane Doe No.6, and Jane Doe No.7. + +> C nsel for each of the Plaintiffs Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd. Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 + +Jane Doe No. Jane Doe No. Jane Doe No. Jane Doe No. Jane Doe No. Jane Doe No. 2v. Epstein, Case No. 08-80119 3 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-80232 4v. Epstein, Case No. 08-80380 5v. Epstein, Case No. 08-80381 6 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-80994 7v. Epstein, Case No. 08.80993 + +Dated: r" -t tee> 7 + +EXHIBIT 13 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744739/EFTA02744739.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744739/EFTA02744739.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ea4326c625033bba2a7092a0d2022f6bda26b3d6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744739/EFTA02744739.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,86 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744739.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1046, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.48, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Written Consent to Amendment", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 148.23 + ], + [ + 389.9338073730469, + 148.23 + ], + [ + 389.9338073730469, + 161.19 + ], + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 161.19 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 219 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744739" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744740/EFTA02744740.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744740/EFTA02744740.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a143c76813857031ddca541fd7b288c758efb701 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744740/EFTA02744740.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED FIRST MOTION TO AMEND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Unopposed First Motion to Amend Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiffs counsel being in agreement with the requested amendment, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion to amend is hereby GRANTED, Defendant shall file the Amended Answer within five (5) days. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: + +Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744740/EFTA02744740.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744740/EFTA02744740.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7ea624f6efcbe71230358ef51dd189fbe4860165 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744740/EFTA02744740.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744740.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 818, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.76, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 72.1875 + ], + [ + 410.1499938964844, + 72.1875 + ], + [ + 410.1499938964844, + 100.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 100.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED FIRST MOTION TO AMEND \nAFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 305.37 + ], + [ + 532.5286865234375, + 305.37 + ], + [ + 532.5286865234375, + 334.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 334.29998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744740" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744741/EFTA02744741.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744741/EFTA02744741.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f3974d3b9117c8632ee55da8feeb78bca05a163e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744741/EFTA02744741.md @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED FIRST MOTION TO AMEND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, moves to amend his affirmative defenses as set forth in the attached Defendant EPSTEIN's First Amended Answer & Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint, attached hereto as Exhibit A. Rule 15(a), Fed.R.Civ.P. (2009); Loc. Gen. Rules 7.1, 15.1 (S.D. Fla. 2009): + +1. Pursuant to Rule 15(a)(2), Fed.R.Civ.P., a party may amend his pleading "only with the opposing party's written consent or the courts leave. The court should freely give leave when justice so requires." Plaintiffs counsel has consented in writing to Defendant's proposed amendments set forth in Exhibit A hereto. Plaintiffs written consent to the amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit B. + +2. It is well settled that leave to amend is liberally granted where, as here, there is no resulting prejudice. The liberal allowance of pleading amendments is a "recognition that controversies should be decided on the merits whenever practicable." See generally, 27A Fed.Proc., Lawyers Ed. §62.273. Generally; freely allowed (2008). "In + +the absence of any apparent or declared reason--such as undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party by virtue of allowance of the amendment, futility of amendment, etc.—the leave sought should, as the rules require, be 'freely given.' " Foman v. 371 U.S. 178, 182, 83 S.Ct. 227, 9 L.Ed.2d 222 (1962). + +3. In the instant case, Defendant only amended his affirmative defenses. This is the first amendment sought by Defendant. Defendant's original Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint was recently filed with this Court on April 2, 2009. Recently certain constitutional issues have come to the forefront in other litigation filed against EPSTEIN based on similar allegations regarding the 18 U.S.C. §2255 claim and the punitive damages claim. Accordingly, Defendant seeks to add affirmative defenses directed to those claims. See affirmative defenses in Exhibit A hereto. + +4. There will be no resulting prejudice to Plaintiff should leave to amend be granted. Defendant has not unduly delayed this matter in seeking the amendments. Defendant by written correspondence sought Plaintiff's permission to amend. As noted, Plaintiff agreed in writing to the amendments. See Exhibit B hereto. + +5. Accordingly, Defendant is entitled to the amendments sought. Upon this Court entering the order granting Defendant's motion to amend, he will file and serve the Amended Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint. Loc. General Rule 15.1 (S.D. Fla. 2009). + +WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court enter an order granting Defendant's motion to amend. + +## Rule 7.1 Certification + +I hereby certify that Defendant's counsel communicated in writing with Plaintiff's counsel regarding this motion to amend. Plaintiffs counsel agreed in writing to the proposed attached amendment (See Exhibit A and B). + +Robert D. ritton, Jr. Attorney r Defendant Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of recor identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this` y of June , 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssmesexabuseattornev.com ahorowitzOsexabuseattomev.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jacescabellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully sapmitted, + +By: ROBERT CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bard No. 224162 rcritebcicaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744741/EFTA02744741.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744741/EFTA02744741.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4d9e75f8ad81f4b8ace21e4ddb45436971509ec1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744741/EFTA02744741.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,253 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744741.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4607, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.76, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 410.8953552246094, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 410.8953552246094, + 115.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 115.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED FIRST MOTION TO AMEND \nAFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.456, + 283.5 + ], + [ + 529.8202514648438, + 283.5 + ], + [ + 529.8202514648438, + 313.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 84.456, + 313.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 127.98000000000002 + ], + [ + 378.1133728027344, + 127.98000000000002 + ], + [ + 378.1133728027344, + 143.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 143.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.324, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 387.74005126953125, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 387.74005126953125, + 336.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 261.324, + 336.17999267578125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744741" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744745/EFTA02744745.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744745/EFTA02744745.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..89d517b7778ee90139a338b1f64aa8ae15ec1696 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744745/EFTA02744745.md @@ -0,0 +1,165 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA, + +6-11 Olf A 1' + +JANE DOE NO. 6 CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRAMES + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7 CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRAMM + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRAMM + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRAMM + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +DOE II + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRAIME + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRAMMI + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRAMM + +PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF FILING WITHDRAWAL OF PREVIOUSLY RAISED OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, MOTION TO COMPEL AND/OR IDENTIFY C.M.A. IN THE STYLE OF THIS CASE AND MOTION TO IDENTIFY C.M.A. IN THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY. OR, ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO DISMISS SUA SPONTE, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through her undersigned attorneys, hereby files notice of withdrawal of previously raised objections to Defendant, JEFRREY EPSTEIN'S, Motion + +to Compel and/or Identify C.M.A. in the Style of This Case and Motion to Identify C.M.A. In Third-Party Subpoenas For Purposes of Discovery, or, Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law, and further states as follows: + +1. Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, filed a Motion to Compel and/or Identify C.M.A. in the Style of This Case and Motion to Identify C.M.A. in Third-Party Subpoenas For Purposes of Discovery, or, Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, 146th Incorporated Memorandum of Law (D.E. 67) on April 29, 2009. + +2. EPSTEIN's Motion seeks the following relief (taken verbatim from the conclusion of his Motion): + +- a) "That C.M.A. be identified by her legal name in the style of this case; +- b) That Epstein be granted leave to identify C.M.A. by her legal name in Third-Party Subpoenas (but not file them in Court, or, if required, in a redacted form); and +- c) That on an alternative basis, this court dismiss this action Sua Sponte until such time as C.M.A. Identifies herself in the style of this matter. + +Doe v. Rostker, 89 F.R.D at 163? + +3. Plaintiff withdraws her objection to a) and b) requested above. The request to have C.M.A.'s case dismissed is rendered moot given C.M.A.'s acquiescence to a) and b). To the extent that it is not, however, C.M.A. continues to object to c) above. + +4. Counsel for EPSTEIN is free to prepare a proposed agreed order reflecting the above for the Court's consideration following the undersigned's review of same. + +## CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1 + +Counsel for the movant conferred via telephone with counsel for the Defendant regarding the tiling of the instance Notice and he has no objection to Plaintiff filing same. + +s/ Jack P. + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 20th day of May, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of electronic filing to all counsel of record on the attached service list. + +> /c/Jack P ■ Jack Scarola Florida No.: 169440 Jack P. Florida Bar No.: 0547808 Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9424 Attorneys for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +Phone: (561) 582-7600 +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Robert Critton, Esquire +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 +Phone: (561) 842-2820 +Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 South Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 202-6360 +Fax: (561) 828-0983 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744745/EFTA02744745.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744745/EFTA02744745.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..437502150ffa2e3b217e60cebcba84f5955f5feb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744745/EFTA02744745.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,333 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744745.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 4521, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.55, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 402.6335754394531, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 402.6335754394531, + 128.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 128.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 165.24, + 181.44 + ], + [ + 477.11468505859375, + 181.44 + ], + [ + 477.11468505859375, + 196.447021484375 + ], + [ + 165.24, + 196.447021484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 340.2 + ], + [ + 381.4877014160156, + 340.2 + ], + [ + 381.4877014160156, + 355.8170471191406 + ], + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 355.8170471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.204, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 345.16799999999995, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 345.16799999999995, + 117.44999999999999 + ], + [ + 255.204, + 117.44999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 163 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744745" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744751/EFTA02744751.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744751/EFTA02744751.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..529a2c6988c382eddceaf1692d801443ef21eb6c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744751/EFTA02744751.md @@ -0,0 +1,297 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff; + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff; + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +1 + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-. + +CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA-. + +CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S REPLY TO JANE DOE NO. 101 AND JANE DOE NO. 102'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO COMPEL AND IDENTIFY JANE DOE NUMBERS 101 AND 102 IN THIRD PARTY SUBPOENAS FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, ("Mr. Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Reply To Jane Doe No. 101 And Jane Doe No. 102's Response In Opposition To Motion To Compel and Identify Jane Doe Numbers 101 and 102 in Third Party Subpoenas For Purposes of Discovery: + +I. Plaintiffs' Response in Opposition is set forth in DE 124. Plaintiffs' response is drafted in acalculated effort to continue to argue issues relating to 18 U.S.C. 2255 rather than deal solely with the issue of identification of the Plaintiffs. Obviously, Plaintiffs' identification takes asecond seat to Plaintiffs' attempt to continue to argue issues that are or may be set forth in their opposition to Epstein's motion to dismiss, which largely deals with issues surrounding 18 U.S.C. 2255. See Defendant's Motion to Identify Jane Doe 101 [DE 16]. + +2. In their response, Plaintiffs seem to forget that they brought this lawsuit against Epstein. Plaintiffs claim they will suffer physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological and psychiatric trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, confusion, embarrassment, loss of educational opportunities, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, separation from her family, medical and psychological expenses, loss on income, loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and loss of the capacity to enjoy life. See e.g., ¶1J28, Comp., DE 1; see also ¶¶36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 61, 65, and 69, Comp., DE 1. Jane Doe 101 and 102came to Defendant's home on anumber of occasions. Jane Doe 101 brought her friend, (referenced by name in anumber of actions) to experience this same "trauma" — it does not make sense. Jane Doe 101 had issues associated with law enforcement involving drugs, battery, fleeing police; Jane Doe 102 claims to have been raped by two (2) individuals in 1998; pre any involvement with Epstein. This type of information is relevant, and Defendant is entitled + +to fully explore it. As such, Plaintiffs' have placed their past and medical history as well as education, social, work, interpersonal, recreational legal, criminal and other aspects of their past and current lives at issue in light of the allegations they allege in their respective complaints. Despite Plaintiffs contention and effort to mislead this court, Epstein does not wish to publicize Plaintiffs' names in an effort to embarrass them. On the contrary, Epstein wishes to defend the claims made against him and dispute the damages Plaintiffs' claim by conducting discovery. Again, Plaintiffs allege substantial economic and non-economic personal injury damages. If this Court prevents Epstein from serving Third-Party Subpoenas identifying Plaintiffs, Epstein will be denied his due process rights by Plaintiffs in that he will be prevented from conducting broad, open and liberal discovery. The undersigned must serve subpoenas on medical doctors to obtain medical information related to Plaintiffs' alleged psychological and physical damages and or other third parties such as employees for other damages as same goes to the heart of Epstein's defenses and Plaintiffs' damages. Plaintiffs' intent is to have Epstein try this case without having obtained relevant and meaningful discovery. Plaintiff's proposal will chill Defendant's ability to fully and fairly access and obtain discovery. See infra. + +3. Plaintiffs' counsel are competent trial attorneys well versed in many areas of the law, including that of personal injury. Despite the foregoing, Plaintiffs counsel, in some highlighted effort to resolve the discovery issues Plaintiffs have intentionally created in an effort to chill discovery, offers to provide only the documents that Plaintiffs' counsel obtains from third parties through its own selective procedures, and only after Plaintiffs' counsel has been able to cull through same. + +4. It is hard to believe that any competent law firm responsible to his/her client would ever allow an opposing party to request records and provide those records to the requesting firm only after the opposing firm had an opportunity to review and filter through same. Plaintiffs, in this case, seek thousands if not millions in damages, including physical and emotional/mental and personal injury type, and Epstein must and is entitled to conduct his own discovery thereon. No valid discovery objections or exemptions exist preventing necessary and reasonable discovery. To hold otherwise prevents Mr. Epstein from preparing and defending this matter and denies to him his right to fully and fairly defend these cases. + +5. Plaintiffs cite ahost of cases for the proposition that anonymity should be granted when, for instance, afear of retaliation or ostracism exists. Inconsistent with the cases Plaintiffs cite, not once do they state that Plaintiffs will be embarrassed, ostracized, or psychologically and emotionally unable to proceed with the action. Even so, embarrassment alone is not enough. See Response to Motion to Proceed Anonymously. In determining whether to allow a party to proceed with litigation anonymously, acourt must consider whether the identification poses a risk of retaliatory physical or mental harm to the requesting party or even more critically, to innocent non-parties. Doe. No. 2 v. Kolko, 242F.R.D. 193, 195-98 (E.D.N.Y. 2006), gag: , Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 10(a). 28 U.S.C.A. Further, Plaintiffs cite cases wherein a psychologist opined that plaintiff suffered or will suffer sever emotional distress. Id. Here, no such affidavit has been provided and/or submitted to this court to justify Plaintiff's requests to proceed anonymously. Good cause must also be shown in order to proceed anonymously. Good cause for a protective order, which Plaintiffs have not filed here, is established upon ashowing that disclosure will work a clearly defined and serious injury to the party seeking closure; the injury + +must be shown with specificity. See Doe v...., 202 F.R.D. 173, 176 (E.D. P.A. 2001). Thus, Plaintiffs have not met their burden of persuasion. Id. Plaintiffs fail to show good cause in that they have not clearly defined what injury they will sustain if not permitted to proceed anonymously; they have only offered speculation. Such a failure is fatal to their request to proceed anonymously. See infra. + +6. In Kolko, a case cited by the Defendants, the court specifically found that proceeding anonymously (i.e., in the style of the case only) would not inhibit discovery. Here, preventing Epstein from identifying Plaintiffs' in subpoenas and other type discovery overwhelmingly inhibits discovery. See Doe v. 202 F.R.D. at 176 (E.D. P.A. 2001) (denying protective order where alleged sexual assault victim did not demonstrate a serious specific injury and allowing Defendants to identify Plaintiff in discovery because holding otherwise would "chill defendants ability to conduct discovery"). Plaintiffs obviously cannot cite one case preventing open and broad discovery or preventing the identification of Plaintiffs in third-party subpoenas or in other discovery. While Plaintiffs cite to each of above cases, it is misleading for Plaintiffs to suggest the case did not allow for the service of third party subpoenas with the correct names. + +7. Next, Plaintiffs' cite a host of criminal cases and statutes which this court has an obligation to distinguish when attempting to in artfully apply same in the civil context. For instance, while Fla. Stat. §794.024 and §794.026 appear to prevent the disclosure of the identity of a sexual assault victim, Fla. Stat. §794.024 only applies to public employees (and to investigations and state prosecutions related to claims of rape) and §794.026 only applies if disclosure is being done "with a reckless disregard for the highly offensive nature of the + +publication." Rather, disclosure is being requested in order to properly litigate and defend this matter. Further, §794.026 does not (emphasis added) prevent the disclosure of the name of a sexual assault victim - it only allows for civil remedy as aresult thereof assuming one meets the criteria to recover (i.e., disclosure with areckless disregard for the highly offensive nature of the publication). Again, Epstein agreed to enter into a confidentiality agreement and, if required by this court, to redact full names from any document filed with the Court. + +8. Next, the language of Fla. Stat. §92.56 makes it clear that the statute only applies criminal proceedings brought by the State of Florida, not civil proceedings. As set forth by the Office of Attorney General, Fla. Stat. §92.56 and Fla. Stat. §794.024 "were created by the Crime Victims Protection Act" ate 2003 WL 22971082 (Fla. A.G.). Even though Fla. Stat. §92.56 only applies to criminal proceedings, subsection (2) thereof allows for the accused to apply for an order of disclosure to prepare adefense in acriminal proceeding. + +9. In addition, Plaintiffs cite to Fed.R.Evid. 412. The Advisory Committee Notes to Rule 412, Fed.R.Evid, makes clear that the procedures to determine admissibility of an alleged victim's/plaintiff's sexual conduct or activity in civil cases does not apply to discovery of such information. Rather, discoverability of such information is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery is broad. Rule 412, entitled "Sex Offense Cases; Relevance of Alleged Victim's Past Sexual Behavior or Alleged Sexual Predisposition," provides in relevant part - + +(a) Evidence generally inadmissible.--The following evidence is not admissible in any civil ... proceeding involving alleged sexual misconduct except as provided in subdivisions (b) and (c): + +(1) Evidence offered to prove that any alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior. + +(2) Evidence offered to prove any alleged victim's sexual predisposition. + +(b) Exceptions.- + +(2) In acivil case, evidence offered to prove the sexual behavior or sexual predisposition of any alleged victim is admissible if it is otherwise admissible under these rules and its probative value substantially outweighs the danger of harm to any victim and of unfair prejudice to any party. Evidence of an alleged victim's reputation is admissible only if it has been placed in controversy by the alleged victim. + +(c) Procedure to determine admissibility.-- + +(1) A party intending to offer evidence under subdivision (b) must— + +(A) file awritten motion at least 14 days before trial specifically describing the evidence and stating the purpose for which it is offered unless the court, for good cause requires adifferent time for filing or permits filing during trial; and + +(B) serve the motion on all parties and notify the alleged victim or, when appropriate, the alleged victim's guardian or representative. + +(2) Before admitting evidence under this rule the court must conduct a hearing in camera and afford the victim and parties a right to attend and be heard. The motion, related papers, and the record of the hearing must be sealed and remain under seal unless the court orders otherwise. + +In confirming that Rule 412 does not control the discoverability of such information, the + +Advisory Committee Notes (1994 Amendments) state - + +The procedures set forth in subdivision (c) do not apply to discovery of avictim's past sexual conduct or predisposition in civil cases, which will be continued to be governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26. In order not to undermine the rationale of Rule 412, however, courts should enter appropriate orders pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 (c) to protect the victim against unwarranted inquiries and to ensure confidentiality. Courts should presumptively issue protective orders barring discovery unless the party seeking discovery makes a showing that the evidence sought to be discovered would be relevant under the facts and theories of the particular case, and cannot be obtained exceptthrough discovery. In an action for sexual harassment, for instance, while some evidence of the alleged victim's sexual behavior and/or predisposition in the workplace may perhaps be relevant, non-work place conduct will + +> usually be irrelevant. CAM v. McGregor Electronic Industries, Inc., 989 F.2d 959, 962-63 (8th Cir. 1993) (posing for a nude magazine outside work hours is irrelevant to issue of unwelcomeness of sexual advances at work). Confidentiality orders should be presumptively granted as well. + +(Emphasis added). + +In accordance with Rule 412 and Rule 26, Epstein seeks discovery of Plaintiffs' physical, emotional and psychological history. We are not at the admissibility phase, which Rule 412 addresses. We are at the discovery phase, and identification of the Plaintiffs is required in order to properly litigate and defend the claims against Epstein. Defendant has no other means of obtaining any information about the Plaintiffs' without being permitted to identify Plaintiffs in third party subpoenas and in discovery. Counsel for C.M.A. recognized this conundrum and agreed to identifying C.M.A. and other attorneys in the state court cases and in one of the federal matters have agreed to serve subpoenas with full indentifying information as long as the documents do not disclose the name in the court file. See Exhibit "A". + +WHEREFORE, Defendant, Mr. Epstein, requests this court allow it to identify Plaintiffs in the style of this case and that Defendant be permitted to identify Plaintiffs in discovery an for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was el ronica y filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document i being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of June , 2009. + +Respectfully + +By: ROBER s 0. C TTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rent • bcIclaw. om + +MICHAEL J. , ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mvike@bc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED] Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf brucereinhartlaw.c m Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Ricci-Leopold, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 skuvinOxiccilaw.com tleopoldOxiccilaw.com + +riosefsbereapodhurst.com kezellanodhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 ia.gesa@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744751/EFTA02744751.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744751/EFTA02744751.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..94c71a8afacc7ecda946b95e3bc96906c343e9cc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744751/EFTA02744751.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,540 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744751.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 13, + "chars": 18387, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.46, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 414.3641052246094, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 414.3641052246094, + 103.353515625 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 103.353515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 269.892, + 541.08 + ], + [ + 385.21051025390625, + 541.08 + ], + [ + 385.21051025390625, + 557.6030120849609 + ], + [ + 269.892, + 557.6030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.72, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 168.48 + ], + [ + 189.72, + 168.48 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 383 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 332 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 406 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 378 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 466 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744751" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744764/EFTA02744764.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744764/EFTA02744764.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1edfe0584e48b52edf2ed66db35e35cafa4c88f5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744764/EFTA02744764.md @@ -0,0 +1,111 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA- + +JANE DOE NO. 2 + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S FIRST AMENDED ANSWER & AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, files his First Amended Answer to Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint [DE 56] and states: + +- 1. Without knowledge and deny. + +2. As to the allegations in paragraphs 2, Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny - Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 FIa.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. — + +"... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against self-incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief" which would prevent a plaintiff bringing aclaim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +3. As to the allegations in paragraph 3, deny. + +4. As to the allegations in paragraph 4, deny. + +5. As to the allegations in paragraph 5, without knowledge and deny. + +6. As to the allegations in paragraphs 6, Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436So.2d 1099(Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[at would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. acivil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against self-incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief which would prevent a plaintiff bringing aclaim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +7. As to the allegations in paragraphs 7 through 14 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Defendant exercises his Fifth Amendment Privilege against selfincrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - 'lilt would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. -"... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against self-incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief" which would prevent a plaintiff bringing aclaim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +8. In response to the allegations of paragraph 15, Defendant realleges and adopts his responses to paragraphs 1 through 14 of the Second Amended Complaint set forth in paragraphs 1 through 6 above herein. + +9. Defendant asserts the Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-incrimination to the allegations set forth in paragraphs 16 through 21 of the Second Amended Complaint. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination + +Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[lit would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. — "... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against selfincrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief' which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +10. In response to the allegations of paragraph 22, Defendant realleges and adopts his responses to paragraphs 1 through 14 of the Second Amended Complaint set forth in paragraphs 1 through 6 above herein. + +11. Defendant asserts the Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-incrimination to the allegations set forth in paragraphs 23 through 27 of the Second Amended Complaint. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4"' DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court.")\* 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d + +§1280 Effect of Failure to Deny - Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. —"... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against selfincrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief which would prevent a plaintiff bringing aclaim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +12. In response to the allegations of paragraph 28, Defendant realleges and adopts his responses to paragraphs 1 through 14 of the Second Amended Complaint set forth in paragraphs 1 through 6 above herein. + +13. Defendant asserts the Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-incrimination to the allegations set forth in paragraphs 29 through 34 of the Second Amended Complaint. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4t DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[lit would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. —"... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against self- + +incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief' which would prevent a plaintiff bringing aclaim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court deny the relief sought by Plaintiff. + +## Affirmative Defenses + +1. As to all counts, Plaintiff actually consented to and was awilling participant in the acts alleged, and therefore, her claims are barred, or her damages are required to be reduced accordingly. + +2. As to all counts alleged, Plaintiff actually consented to and participated in conduct similar and/or identical to the acts alleged with other persons which were the sole or contributing cause of Plaintiff's alleged damages. + +3. As to all counts, Plaintiff impliedly consented to the acts alleged by not objecting, and therefore, her claims are barred, or her damages are required to be reduced accordingly. + +4. As to all counts, Defendant reasonably believed or was told that the Plaintiff had attained the age of 18 years old at the time of the alleged acts. + +5. As to all counts, Plaintiffs claims are barred as she said she was 18 years or older at the time. + +6. As to all counts, Plaintiffs alleged damages were caused in whole or part by events and/or circumstances completely unrelated to the incident(s) alleged in the complaint. + +7. Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. + +8. As to Plaintiffs claims for punitive damages in Count I — "Sexual Assault & Battery," and Count II — "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress," such claims are subject to the limitations as set forth in §768.72, et seq., Florida Statutes. + +9. As to Plaintiffs claims for punitive damages in Count I — "Sexual Assault & Battery," and Count II — "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress," such claims are subject to the constitutional limitations and guideposts as set forth in BMW of North America v. Gore, 116 S.Ct 1589 (1996); Philip Morris USA v. 127 S.Ct. 1057 (2007); State Farm v. la 123 S.Ct 1513 (2003); Env. Liociet Group, Inc., 945 So.2d 1246 (Fla. 2006). The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Florida's Constitution, Art. I, §§2 and 9, prohibit the imposition of grossly excessive or arbitrary punishments + +10.As to Plaintiffs claims for punitive damages in Count I — "Sexual Assault & Battery," and Count II —"Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress," the determination of whether or not Defendant is liable for punitive damages is required to be bifurcated from a determination of the amount to be imposed. + +11.Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action for sexual assault and/or battery under Count I. + +12.As to Count III, Plaintiff has failed to plead a cause of action as she does not and can not show a violation of a predicate act under 18 U.S.C. §2255 (2005). + +13.As to Count III, the version of 18 U.S.C. §2255 in effect at the time of the alleged conduct applies, and, thus, the presumptive minimum damages amount should Plaintiff prove the elements of such claim is \$50,000, and not subject to any multiplier. + +14. As to Count III, application of the amended version of 18 U.S.C. §2255, effective July 27, 2006, would be in violation of the legal axiom against retroactive application of an amended statute, and also in violation of such constitutional principles, including but not limited to, the "Ex Post Facto" Clause, U.S. Const. Article I, §9, cl. 3, §10, cl. 1, and procedural and substantive due process, U.S. Const. 14th Amend., 5th Amend. The statute in effect during the time of the alleged conduct applies. + +15.As to Count Ill, application of the amended version of 18 U.S.C. §2255, effective July 27, 2006, is prohibited pursuant to the vagueness doctrine and the Rule of Lenity. Acriminal statute is required to give 'fair warning ... in language that the common world will understand, of what the law intends to do if a certain line is passed. To make the warning fair, so far as possible the line should be clear.' " United States v. Lanier, 520U.S. 259, 265, 117 S.Ct. 1219, 137 L.Ed.2d 432 (1997) (quoting McBovle v. United States 283 U.S. 25, 27, 51 S.Ct. 340, 75 L.Ed. 816 (1931)) (omission in original). The "three related manifestations of the fair warning requirement" are: (1) the vagueness doctrine bars enforcement of a statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application; (2) the canon of strict construction of criminal statutes, or rule of lenity, ensures fair warning by so resolving ambiguity in a criminal statute as to apply it only to conduct clearly covered; (3) due process bars courts from applying anovel construction of a criminal statute to conduct that neither the statute nor any prior judicial decision has fairly disclosed to be within its scope. + +16.The applicable version of 18 U.S.C. §2255 creates a cause of action on behalf of a"minor." Plaintiff had attained the age of majority at the time of filing this action, and accordingly, her cause of action is barred. + +17. Because Plaintiff has no claim under 18 U.S.C. §2255, this Court is without subject matter jurisdiction as to all claims asserted. + +18.Application of the 18 U.S.C. §2255, as amended, effective July 27, 2006, is in violation of the constitutional principles of due process, the "Ex Post Facto" clause, and the Rule of Lenity, in that in amending the term "minor" to "person" as to those who may bring acause of action impermissibly and unconstitutionally broadened the scope of persons able to bring a §2255 claim. + +19. 18 U.S.C. §2255 violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment under the U.S. Constitution, and thus Plaintiffs claim thereunder is barred. + +20. 18 U.S.C. §2255 violates the constitutional guarantees of procedural and substantive due process. Procedural due process guarantees that a person will not be deprived of life, liberty or property without notice and opportunity to be heard. Substantive due process protects fundamental rights. Accordingly, Plaintiffs cause of action thereunder is barred. + +WHEREFORE Defendant requests that this Court deny the relief ught by Plaintiff. + +Robert D. Crit .n, Jr. Attorney for Defendant Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of rec identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 'day o, 2009: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssmasexabuseattornev.com ahorowitz sexabuseattornev.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jaqescabellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully sub ted, + +By: ROBERT D CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar o. 224162 rcritabcIclaw.corn MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744764/EFTA02744764.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744764/EFTA02744764.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3a9f18a0b93555ef25ec9cc7a7536ac78f57a420 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744764/EFTA02744764.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,477 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744764.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 16082, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.4, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 202.572, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 413.8999938964844, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 413.8999938964844, + 120.53997802734375 + ], + [ + 202.572, + 120.53997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S FIRST AMENDED ANSWER & AFFIRMATIVE \nDEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 107.71199999999999, + 287.54999999999995 + ], + [ + 511.5079345703125, + 287.54999999999995 + ], + [ + 511.5079345703125, + 317.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 107.71199999999999, + 317.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Affirmative Defenses", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 242.964, + 220.32000000000005 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 220.32000000000005 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 234.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 242.964, + 234.89999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.74, + 110.97 + ], + [ + 365.364, + 110.97 + ], + [ + 365.364, + 123.93 + ], + [ + 241.74, + 123.93 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 311 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 333 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 333 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 277 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 361 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 269 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 236 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744764" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744774/EFTA02744774.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744774/EFTA02744774.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..35f41da292f667aa660c47e11d4185942e25140d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744774/EFTA02744774.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +NO. 08-80804-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE, a/k/a JANE DOE #1, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFF + +, and + +Defendants. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Preserve Evidence (DE 12), filed August 21, 2008. Plaintiff represented in her motion that Defendant opposed the requested relief. However, Defendant subsequently filed aResponse (DE 14) in which he informs the Court that he does not, in fact, oppose the requested relief.' Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Motion (DE 12) is GRANTED. Defendant is directed to preserve all evidence listed in Exhibit # 1 to Plaintiff's Motion and provide duplicates + +EXHIBIT A + +&#x27;Plaintiff's counsel is reminded of his duty to "make reasonable effort to confer (orally or motion." in writing), S.D. with Fla. all L.R. parties 7.1(A)(3). or non-parties A who may be affected by the relief sought in the reasonable effort includes giving Defendant's counsel adequate time to consider Plaintiff's request and respond. + +to Plaintiff should said evidence be returned to Defendant by the State of Florida. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, + +Florida, this 4th day of September, 2008. + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies to: all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744774/EFTA02744774.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744774/EFTA02744774.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..346fea5100aa5248a5b70492185aaec36b94a338 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744774/EFTA02744774.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,151 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744774.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1339, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.85, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 216.64799999999997, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 405.8389892578125, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 405.8389892578125, + 121.5 + ], + [ + 216.64799999999997, + 121.5 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 275.4, + 396.90000000000003 + ], + [ + 322.36749267578125, + 396.90000000000003 + ], + [ + 322.36749267578125, + 411.48 + ], + [ + 275.4, + 411.48 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 219 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744774" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744776/EFTA02744776.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744776/EFTA02744776.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d0007121f40bcef807b8a3ef33045d2ec73187c5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744776/EFTA02744776.md @@ -0,0 +1,270 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRAJ, + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRAJ. + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +## DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 101 and 102's MOTION FOR AN ORDER FOR TILE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE & INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW (dated 5/26/09, DE 114) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, ("EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys responds to the Plaintiffs' Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 ("Plaintiffs") Motion For And Order For The Preservation Of Evidence And Incorporated Memorandum Of Law, [DE 114], and states: + +1. Plaintiffs once again mislead and mischaracterize the criminal counts to which EPSTEIN pled guilty. Contrary to Plaintiffs' representations in 11 of their motion and in their memorandum of law, EPSTEIN pled guilty to one count of felony solicitation (which was not related to a minor), under §796.07(2)(f), Fla.Stat., and one count of procuring a minor for prostitution under §796.03, Fla. Stat. Plaintiffs' reference to the "pleas of 'guilty' ... to various Florida state crimes involving the solicitation of minors for the prostitution and procurement of + +minors for the purposes of prostitution" mischaracterizes the specific counts to which EPSTEIN pled guilty. + +2. As to Plaintiffs' allegations in tit 2 and 3, many of the Plaintiffs' allegations are without any factual basis and know such assertions to be false and untrue. + +3. Defendant agrees with Plaintiff's assertion that the Palm Beach Police Department (PBPD) executed a search warrant at EPSTEIN's Palm Beach mansion on October 25, 2005. See ¶4 Plaintiffs' motion. + +4. Defendant's attorneys have no objection to an order to preserve evidence similar to the one entered in the case of Doe v. Epstein, et al Case No. 08-80804-CIV-MARla, [DE 20], and attached hereto as Exhibit A. EPSTEIN's attorneys are unaware of any items referenced in Plaintiffs' motion, ¶5-6, having been returned to EPSTEIN or his attorneys, but will agree to a preservation of such items to the extent such items exist. + +5. As tor of Plaintiffs' motion, EPSTEIN and his attorneys have no objection to the referenced authorities, (PBPD, FBI, USAO, and PBSAO), preserving items to the extent such items even exist, in a manner that said authorities deem appropriate. + +6. As to 118, 9, and 10 of Plaintiffs' motion re: documents, Defendant has asserted in other matters and asserts here, specific legal objections as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges, as follows: My attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would + +unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further Defendants objects as the request to preserve evidence is overly broad and includes information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +7. Responding to the grossly overly broad list and categories of documents and items alleged in Plaintiff's motion (1918-10) involves a testimonial component. The Fifth Amendment Privilege extends to the act of production where, as here, it involves a self-incriminating testimonial communication or "a compelled testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 120 S.Ct. 2037 (2000); Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence, Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §I38 (6th Ed.). See also Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.0. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[lit would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court"); Hoffman v. U.S. 71 S.0.814, 818 (1951), and progeny). + +The Fifth Amendment Privilege may be invoked in a civil action where a litigant or witness is being asked to provide information or respond to a question that may incriminate him in a crime. See generally, DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4'h DCA 1983). The privilege against self-incrimination may be asserted during discovery when a litigant + +has "reasonable grounds to believe that the response would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against a litigant." A witness, including a civil defendant, is entitled to invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege whenever there is a realistic possibility that the answer to a question could be used in anyway to convict the witness of a crime or could aid in the development of other incriminating evidence that can be used at trial. Id; Pillsbury Company v. Conboy, 495 U.S. 248, 103 S.Ct. 608 (1983). + +The United States Supreme Court has made clear that the scope of the Fifth Amendment Privilege includes the circumstances as here "the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena (or production request) has a compelled testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000). In explaining the application of the privilege, the Supreme Court stated: + +We have held that "the act of production" itself may implicitly communicate "statements of fact." By "producing documents in compliance with a subpoena, the witness would admit that the papers existed, were in his possession or control, and were authentic." Moreover, as was true in this case, when the custodian of documents responds to a subpoena, he may be compelled to take the witness stand and answer questions designed to determine whether he has produced everything demanded by the subpoena. X120 The answers to those questions, as well as the act of production itself, may certainly communicate information about the existence, custody, and authenticity of the documents. Whether the constitutional privilege protects the answers to such questions, or protects the act of production itself, is a question that is distinct from the question whether the unprotected contents of the documents themselves are incriminating. + +FN19. "The issue presented in those cases was whether the act of producing subpoenaed documents, not itself the making of a statement, might nonetheless have some protected testimonial aspects. The Court concluded that the act of production could constitute protected testimonial communication because it might entail implicit statements of fact: by producing documents in compliance with a subpoena, the witness would admit that the papers existed, were in his possession or control, and were authentic. United States v. Doe. 465 U.S., at 613, and n. 11, 104 S.Ct. 1237; Fisher, 425 U.S., at 409-410, 96 S.Ct. 1569; id, at 428, 432, 96 S.Ct. 1569 (concurring opinions). See Braswell v. United States. 1487 U.S.,1 at + +104, 108 S.Ct. 2284; [ *id.* ] at 122, 108 S.Ct. 2284 (dissenting opinion). Thus, the Court made clear that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination applies to acts that imply assertions of fact. "... An examination of the Court's application of these principles in other cases indicates the Court's recognition that, in order to be testimonial, an accused's communication must itself, explicitly or implicitly, relate a factual assertion or disclose information. Only then is a person compelled to be a 'witness' against himself." *Doe v. United States*, 487 U.S., at 209-210, 108 S.Ct. 2341 (footnote omitted). + +FN20. See App. 62-70. Thus, for example, after respondent had been duly sworn by the grand jury [ ], the prosecutor called his attention to paragraph A of the Subpoena Rider (reproduced in the Appendix, *infra*, at 2048-2049) and asked whether he had produced "all those documents." App. 65. + +Finally, the phrase "in any criminal case" in the text of the Fifth Amendment might have been read to limit its coverage to compelled testimony that is used against the defendant in the trial itself. It has, however, long been settled that its protection encompasses compelled statements that lead to the discovery of incriminating evidence even though the statements themselves are not incriminating and are not introduced into evidence. Thus, a half century ago we held that a trial judge had erroneously rejected a defendant's claim of privilege on the ground that his answer to the pending question would not itself constitute evidence of the charged offense. As we explained: + +"The privilege afforded not only extends to answers that would in themselves support a conviction under a federal criminal statute but likewise embraces those which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a federal crime." *Hoffman v. United States*, 341 U.S. 479, 486, 71 S.Ct. 814, 95 L.Ed. 1118 (1951). + +Compelled testimony that communicates information that may "lead to incriminating evidence" is privileged even if the information itself is not inculpatory. *Doe v. United States*, 487 U.S. 201, 208, n. 6, 108 S.Ct. 2341, 101 L.Ed.2d 184 (1988). It's the Fifth Amendment's protection against the prosecutor's use of incriminating information derived directly or indirectly from the compelled testimony of the respondent that is of primary relevance in this case. + +In summarizing its holding regarding the application of the Fifth Amendment Privilege to a production request, the Hubbell Court left "no doubt that the constitutional privilege against self incrimination protects" not only "the target of a grand jury investigation from being compelled to answer questions designed to elicit information about the existence of sources of + +potentially incriminating evidence," but the privilege also "has the same application to the testimonial aspect of a response to a subpoena seeking discovery of those sources." At 43, and 2047. Here, Plaintiffs' motion to preserve evidence by listing a large inventory of items is in reality no different that propounding a discovery request upon Defendant, and thus, Defendant is afforded the protection of the Constitutional privileges asserted herein. + +8. As stated above, Defendant and Defendant's attorneys have no objection to the entry of an order similar to Exhibit A hereto. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that the Court enter an order similar to that as entered in Exhibit A hereto. + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this tday of June , 2009 + +Respectfully sub ted, + +By: ROBERT D. V RM'ON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar 224162 + +mrit@tciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mnike@bc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos.* +*08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-* +*80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-* +*80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-* +*80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-* +*80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf @brucereinhartlaw corn Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Ricci-Leopold, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 skuvin@riccilaw.com tleopold@riccilaw.com + +rjosefsberg@podhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744776/EFTA02744776.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744776/EFTA02744776.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..48002f3cd04c99a35b0d9d2e7ea48777291b0188 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744776/EFTA02744776.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,491 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744776.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 15500, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.12, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 409.85565185546875, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 409.85565185546875, + 103.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 103.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. \n101 and 102's MOTION FOR AN ORDER FOR TILE PRESERVATION OF \nEVIDENCE & INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW (dated 5/26/09, DE 114)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.5, + 370.98 + ], + [ + 537.6253662109375, + 370.98 + ], + [ + 537.6253662109375, + 415.85302734375 + ], + [ + 76.5, + 415.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 268.668, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 382.6169738769531, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 382.6169738769531, + 374.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 268.668, + 374.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 123.12 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 123.12 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 164.43 + ], + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 164.43 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 36 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744776" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744787/EFTA02744787.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744787/EFTA02744787.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f3632af542c3c9bc07838f7f12f614d1e05b4610 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744787/EFTA02744787.md @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRAMM + +IN RE: JANE DOES 1 AND 2, + +Petitioners. + +## ORDER TO COMPEL PRODUCTION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on the Petitioners' ore tenus motion seeking the production of the Non-Prosecution Agreement between the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("USAO") and Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"). After consideration of the Motion, the arguments of the parties, and the record, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Petitioners' Motion is GRANTED. The USAO shall produce the Non-Prosecution Agreement, including any modifications and addenda thereto, in accordance with the following procedures: + +- (a) The USAO shall produce a copy of the Non-Prosecution Agreement, including any modifications and addenda thereto (collectively referred to as the "Agreement"), to the attorneys for Petitioners. +- (b) Petitioners and their attorneys shall not disclose the Agreement or its terms to any third party absent further court order, following notice to and an opportunity for Epstein's counsel to be heard. +- (c) Before counsel for petitioners show the Agreement to their clients or discuss the specific terms with them, they must provide a copy of this Order to petitioners, who must review and acknowledge their receipt of, and agreement to abide by, the terms of the Order. Counsel for petitioners must promptly provide a copy of that acknowledgment to the USAO. + - (d) If any individuals who have been identified by the USAO as victims of + +EX. BIT A- + +Epstein and/or any attomey(s) for those individuals request the opportunity to review the Agreement, then the USAO shall produce the Agreement to those individuals, so long as those individuals also agree that they shall not disclose the Agreement or its terms to any third party absent further court order, following notice to and an opportunity for Epstein's counsel to be heard + +(e) Prior to producing the documents to any other individuals who have been identified by the USAO as victims of Epstein and/or any attomey(s) for those individuals, a copy of this Order must be provided to said individuals, who must review and acknowledge their receipt of, and agreement to abide by, the terms of this Order. Counsel for petitioners must promptly provide a copy of that acknowledgment to the USAO. + +DONE and ORDERED in, in West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 21" day of August, 2008. + +> KENNETH A. MARRA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record + +By signing below, I certify that I have reviewed and agree to be bound by the terms of this Order. + +Dated: Signed by: + +Printed Name: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744787/EFTA02744787.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744787/EFTA02744787.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9556ca54215715dc9a5cd527e52470a08f31ca52 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744787/EFTA02744787.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,151 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744787.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2707, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.67, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 92.34 + ], + [ + 400.248, + 92.34 + ], + [ + 400.248, + 118.25999999999999 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 118.25999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER TO COMPEL PRODUCTION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 234.09 + ], + [ + 483.48, + 234.09 + ], + [ + 483.48, + 249.48 + ], + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 249.48 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 315 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744787" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744789/EFTA02744789.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744789/EFTA02744789.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..af60c91ff5814534cce8da38c2ef00f4921897db --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744789/EFTA02744789.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRa + +JANE DOES #1 AND #2, + +Petitioners, + +v. + +UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, + +Respondent. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on the Petitioners' Motion to Unseal Non-Prosecution Agreement (DE 28), filed September 25, 2008. Respondent filed its response (DE 29), on October 8, 2008, and Petitioners filed their reply (DE 30) on October 16, 2008. The Court has carefully considered the motion and the record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +Petitioners motion seeks the Court to enter an order unsealing the Non-prosecution Agreement, including any modifications and addenda thereto (collectively referred to as the "Agreement"), between the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("USAO") and Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"). At a hearing held on August 14, 2008, the Court ordered the USAO to produce the Agreement to counsel for the Petitioners and to any other victims identified by the USAO and their counsel, pursuant to the terms of the Court's Order. (See DE 26, August 21, 2008). Petitioners argue that the Agreement "should now be unsealed." + +First, as Respondent points out, the Agreement was not filed in this case, under seal or otherwise. Petitioners also assert that the Agreement should be "unsealed" because the victims + +EXHIBIT b + +and/or their attorneys believe the Government has mischaracterized some of its provisions. If and when such alleged mischaracterizations become relevant to an issue to be decided by the Court, the parties will be given the opportunity to advance their positions and the Court will resolve the issue. If disclosure of the Agreement will be required for the Court to resolve the issue, appropriate disclosure will be ordered. + +Furthermore, to the extent Petitioners are seeking modification of the restrictions placed upon their use of the Agreement by the Court's August 21, 2008 order, Petitioners have not met their burden to justify a modification. Petitioners' mere desire to discuss the Agreement with third parties is insufficient, in and of itself, to warrant the granting of such relief. If and when Petitioners have a specific tangible need to be relieved of the restrictions, they should file an appropriate motion. If a specific tangible need arises in a civil case Petitioners or other alleged victims are pursuing against Epstein, relief should be sought in that case, with notice to the United States, the other party to the Agreement. Accordingly, it is + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Petitioners' Motion to Unseal Non-Prosecution Agreement (DE 28) is DENIED. + +DONE and ORDERED in in West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 12\* day of February, 2008. + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record KENNETH A. MARRA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744789/EFTA02744789.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744789/EFTA02744789.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7fa56ebdc60560f70820098e308fc98b89ae463e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744789/EFTA02744789.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744789.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2835, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.8, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 396.73419189453125, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 396.73419189453125, + 124.0570068359375 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 124.0570068359375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 279.684, + 328.86 + ], + [ + 327.578369140625, + 328.86 + ], + [ + 327.578369140625, + 344.8435363769531 + ], + [ + 279.684, + 344.8435363769531 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744789" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744791/EFTA02744791.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744791/EFTA02744791.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..84bf2970fc61402bb9f336c8d3aa96ebbadd2c75 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744791/EFTA02744791.md @@ -0,0 +1,79 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +Case No. 08-80736-Civ-MarraMg + +JANE DOES #1 and #2 + +Petitioners, + +v. + +UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, + +Respondent. + +### RESPONDENT'S OPPOSITION TO VICTIMS' MOTION TO UNSEAL NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT + +Respondent, by and through its undersigned counsel, files its Opposition to Victims' Motion to Unseal Non-Prosecution Agreement, and states: + +#### I. THE MOTION TO UNSEAL SHOULD BE DENIED BECAUSE THE NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT HAS NEVER BEEN FILED UNDER SEAL IN THIS COURT. + +Petitioners have filed their motion to unseal the non-prosecution agreement, claiming that no good cause exists for sealing it. As an initial matter, the motion should be denied because the non-prosecution agreement entered into between the United States Attorney's Office and Jeffrey Epstein was never filed in the instant case by the United States, either under seal or otherwise. On August 14, 2008, this Court held a telephonic hearing to discuss petitioners' request for a copy of the non-prosecution agreement. The United States advised the Court that the Agreement had a confidentiality provision, + +EXHT1T + +which the United States was obligated to honor. The United States requested that, if the Agreement was to be produced to petitioners, it should be done pursuant to a protective order, to ensure that further dissemination of the Agreement would not occur. At that time, petitioners had no objection to such a procedure. + +On August 21, 2008, this Court entered its Order to Compel Production and Protective Order (DE 26). Subpart (b) of the Order provides that, "Petitioners and their attorneys shall not disclose the Agreement or its terms to any third party absent further court order, following notice to and an opportunity for Epstein's counsel to be heard." (DE 26 at I.) Presumably, petitioners' motion to unseal is an effort to modify the terms of the Protective Order, to enable them to disclose the Agreement to third parties. + +Since the Agreement has not been filed under seal with this Court, the legal authority cited by petitioners regarding sealing of documents, United States v. Ochoa-Vasque, 428 F.3d 1015 (11'' Cir. 2005), is inapposite. The parties who negotiated the Agreement, the United States Attorney's Office and Jeffrey Epstein, determined that the Agreement should remain confidential. They were free to do so, and violated no law in making such an agreement. Since the Agreement has become relevant to the instant lawsuit, petitioners have been given access to it, upon the condition that it not be disclosed further.' Petitioners have no legal right to disclose the Agreement to third parties, or standing to challenge the confidentiality provision. + +&#x27;It is unclear whether the Petitioners themselves (as opposed to their attorneys) have actually reviewed the Non-Prosecution Agreement. The Court's Order to Compel Production required petitioners' counsel to review and agree to the Protective Order and to do the same with + +In order to have standing, petitioners must show: (I) an injury in fact, meaning an injury that is concrete and particularized, and actual or imminent; (2) a causal connection between the injury and the causal conduct; and (3) a likelihood that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision. Granite State Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. City of Clearwater, Ha. 351 F.3d 1112, 1116 (11th Cir. 2003). Petitioners already have obtained access to the agreement, so they cannot claim a denial of access as an injury in fact. Their motion to unseal refers to their stated desire to confer with other victims of Epstein and their attorneys "to determine whether they were likewise provided with inaccurate information about the nature of the plea agreement." (DE 28 at 5.) + +This asserted reason for needing to unseal the Agreement is baseless given that the Protective Order, at the Court's direction, specifically provides for a very simple procedure to allow other victims and their lawyers to see the Agreement. (See DE 26 at 1-2, subpart (d).) All that is required is for any victims and/or their attorneys to review and agree to the terms of the Protective Order, and to provide the signed acknowledgment of that agreement to the United States. + +Petitioners' claim that they wish to discuss with others the "possible legal responses" to the Government, including the National Alliance of Victims' Rights Attorneys, also provides no basis for vacatur of the Protective Order. Petitioners contend that the "sealing order would apparently block these forms of consultation . . ." (DE 28 at + +their clients. Copies of those signed acknowledgements to abide by the Protective Order were then to be provided "promptly" to the United States. To date, only Attorney Brad has provided a signed acknowledgement. + +5.) First, there is no sealing order. Second, the Protective Order does not prevent petitioners from consulting with anyone; it only prevents them from disclosing the Agreement. Petitioners fail to mention why it is necessary for the National Alliance of Victims' Rights Attorneys to have the Agreement in hand, in order to meaningfully consult with them. + +Petitioners also assert that they would like to be able to reference the Agreement "in a parallel civil suit that is pending before this Court." (DE 28 at 5.) Given that the suit names Jeffrey Epstein as a defendant and is pending before the same district judge, it seems that litigation regarding the production and use of the Agreement should occur in that case, where the true party in interest, Jeffrey Epstein, is present and represented by counsel, rather than in a suit that was originally filed in July as an "Emergency Petition" under the various victims' rights laws. + +## H. THE GOVERNMENT ACCURATELY DESCRIBED THE PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT, AT THE TIME THE RESPONSES WERE FILED WITH THE COURT. + +Petitioners castigate the Government for inaccurately describing the nonprosecution agreement. (DE 28 at 2-5.) They contend a particular provision cited by the Government does not appear in the copy of the Agreement produced to them. + +During the telephonic hearing on August 14, 2008, Government counsel advised the Court and petitioners' counsel that there was an ongoing dispute between the Government and Epstein's attorneys over what constituted the Agreement. Government counsel advised that, in its opinion, the Agreement had three parts. The first part was + +executed in September 2007, the second part, an addendum, was executed in October 2007, and the third part was a December 2007 letter from the United States Attorney to Epstein's attorneys, suggesting a further modification of the Agreement. The Government advised the Court that it believed that all three parts comprised the Agreement, while it appeared that Epstein's attorneys were contending the Agreement was comprised only of parts one and two. + +At the commencement of the instant litigation, in July 2008, the Government believed the Agreement was comprised of all three parts mentioned above. This belief was expressed in victim notification letters, including one sent to Jane Doe #1,2 the Government's July 9, 2008 response to the Emergency Petition for Enforcement of Victims Rights Act, as well as the Declaration of A. Villafafia, Assistant U.S. Attorney, which accompanied the Government's response. This belief continued until August 2008, when the Government advised Epstein's attorneys that the victims had + +2The victim notification letter was provided to Epstein's attorneys prior to being sent, who approved the language of which the petitioners now complain. Thus, petitioners' repeated assertions that the Government made these errors intentionally and/or negligently are meritless. (See. e.g., DE 28 at 4-5 ("The Government apparently feels free to disclose to the victims one provision in the non-prosecution agreement that it believes it is to its advantage to disclose, but not others. The Government should not be permitted to pick and choose, particularly where it has inaccurately described the provision that it has chosen to disclose.") The Government seeks no "advantage" in this suit brought by the two victims. Furthermore, the petitioners' original emergency petition focused on their concern about the amount of jail time that Epstein would serve. The provision that they complain of now has no relation to jail time. Furthermore, petitioners aver that the October 2007 disclosure to Jane Doe #1 contained inaccurate information, but that disclosure was made before the December 2007 letter and, therefore, did not include anything related to the U.S. Attorney's now-defunct proposed amendment to the Agreement. + +demanded disclosure of the Agreement to them, and discussions ensued about what constituted the Agreement. Epstein's attorneys then told the Government that Epstein believed the Agreement consisted only of the first and second parts. These were the parts disclosed to petitioners pursuant to the Protective Order in compliance with the Court's order to compel production. The fact that an erroneous disclosure was inadvertently made to one petitioner after Epstein had already entered his guilty plea, was sentenced, and surrendered to begin serving his sentence does not create an injury where one did not exist before. + +## CONCLUSION + +For the foregoing reasons, the United States respectfully requests that the Court deny Petitioners' Motion to Unseal the Non-Prosecution Agreement. + +Respectfully submitted, + +R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY + +By: s/ Dexter A. Lee DEXTER A. LEE Assistant U.S. Attorney Fla. Bar No. 0936693 99 N.E. 4th Street Miami, Florida 33132 (305) 961-9320 Fax: (305) 530-7139 E-mail: dexter.lee@usdoj.gov Attorney for Respondent + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 8, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. + +> s/ Dexter A. Lee DEXTER A. LEE Assistant U.S. Attorney + +# SERVICE LIST + +Jane Does 1 and 2 v. United States Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA. United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Brad Esq., The Law Offices of Brad 2028 Street, Suite 202 Hollywood, Florida 33020 (954) 414-8033 Fax: (954) 924-1530 & Associates, LLC \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744791/EFTA02744791.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744791/EFTA02744791.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..496d560f4f2899011a15ecdfa1a3eb3f9336c63f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744791/EFTA02744791.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,448 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744791.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 10263, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.13, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 196.452, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 412.6041564941406, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 412.6041564941406, + 144.35302734375 + ], + [ + 196.452, + 144.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "RESPONDENT'S OPPOSITION TO VICTIMS' MOTION \nTO UNSEAL NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 145.656, + 353.96999999999997 + ], + [ + 463.9825744628906, + 353.96999999999997 + ], + [ + 463.9825744628906, + 383.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 145.656, + 383.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. THE MOTION TO UNSEAL SHOULD BE DENIED \nBECAUSE THE NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT HAS \nNEVER BEEN FILED UNDER SEAL IN THIS COURT.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 148.10399999999998, + 453.6 + ], + [ + 513.0111083984375, + 453.6 + ], + [ + 513.0111083984375, + 496.10302734375 + ], + [ + 148.10399999999998, + 496.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "H. THE GOVERNMENT ACCURATELY DESCRIBED THE \nPROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT, AT THE TIME THE \nRESPONSES WERE FILED WITH THE COURT.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 154.224, + 428.49 + ], + [ + 522.4710693359375, + 428.49 + ], + [ + 522.4710693359375, + 473.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 154.224, + 473.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 315.9 + ], + [ + 356.6639404296875, + 315.9 + ], + [ + 356.6639404296875, + 330.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 330.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 231.33599999999998, + 91.53 + ], + [ + 389.14947509765625, + 91.53 + ], + [ + 389.14947509765625, + 106.863037109375 + ], + [ + 231.33599999999998, + 106.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 246.24 + ], + [ + 353.942626953125, + 246.24 + ], + [ + 353.942626953125, + 261.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 261.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 68 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744791" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744798/EFTA02744798.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744798/EFTA02744798.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b08a0d8b79bb6598bdb25a3150840c76540dbd1f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744798/EFTA02744798.md @@ -0,0 +1,161 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff; + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRAMMI + +CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRAME + +DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS 101 AND 102'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO UNSEAL THE NONPROSECUTION AGREEMENT (dated 5/29/09. IDE 1281 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, ("EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys responds to the Plaintiffs' Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 ("Plaintiffs") Motion For Leave To File Under Seal Response In Opposition To Defendant's Motion To Stay Or, In The Alternative, To Unseal The Nonprosecution Agreement, and states: + +1. This Court has already entered orders preserving the confidentiality of the Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") and denying prior attempts to have the document unsealed. See Court's Orders, attached hereto as Exhibit A and Exhibit B, respectively, entered in In Re: Jane Does 1 and 2. Petitioners Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRAIMM, A. Order To Compel Production And Protective Order, [DE 26], dated August 21, 2008, and B. Order [DE 36], dated February 12, 2009, on Petitioners' Motion To Unseal Non-Prosecution Agreement [DE 28]. Both of these Orders are clear that the terms of the NPA are to remain confidential and remain + +protected from being disclosed to third parties. The NPA is an agreement between the United States Attorney's Office and EPSTEIN. Plaintiffs' motion presents nothing in support of this Court modifying its prior orders. + +2. Significantly, even the United States Attorney's Office (USAO), along with Defendant, has strongly opposed making the NPA public. Attached as Exhibit C hereto is Respondent United States of America's Opposition To Victims' Motion To Unseal Non-Prosecution Agreement, dated October 8, 2008, [DE 29], also filed in In Re: Jane Does 1 and 2, Petitioners, Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRAta In opposing the petitioners' attempts to make public the terms of the NPA, the United States in the Response, Exhibit C, stated: + +Since the Agreement (NPA) has not been filed under seal with this Court, the legal authority cited by petitoners regarding sealing of documents, United States v. Ochoa-Vasque 428 F.3d 1015 (11`" Cir. 2005), is inapposite. The parties who negotiated the Agreement, the United States Attorney's Office and Jeffrey Epstein, determined the Agreement should remain confidential. They were free to do so, and violated no law in making such an agreement. Since the Agreement has become relevant to the instant lawsuit, petitioners have been given access to it, upon the condition that it not be disclosed further. Petitioners have no legal right to disclose the Agreement to third parties, or standing to challenge the confidentiality provision. + +After the United States' response, Exhibit C, this Court entered its Order, Exhibit B, agreeing with the United States' position and maintaining the confidentiality of the NPA in accordance with its prior Order, Exhibit A. The "victims" who were provided a copy of the NPA were and are required to maintain the NPA's confidentiality and not disclose the terms to third parties. + +3. Other parties in the consolidated cases have been able to file their responses without a similar request being made. Defendant believes that these Plaintiffs can fully respond without the need to file under seal; and reference provisions generally. However if the Court is + +inclined to grant this Order, then in order to continue to protect the confidentiality of the NPA and to comply with the Court's prior Orders, Exhibit A and Exhibit B, Defendant would agree to allow Plaintiff to file under seal her response and reference only those portions (identified herein) of the NPA which are potentially relevant to the issues arising under claims brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 and thus, that may have impact on Defendant's motion for stay and Plaintiff's response thereto. Specifically, the only portions relevant for this Court to make a decision on Defendant's motion and Plaintiffs' response are paragraphs 7, 8, 9, and10 of the NPA, and paragraphs 7A, 7B, and 7C of the Addendum To The NPA. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an Order denying any attempts by Plaintiffs to unseal or make public or to disclose to third parties the terms of the NPA, and to deny Plaintiffs move to file their response under seal; or if the Court is inclined to grant the motion, to allow Plaintiff to file her response to the motion to stay and only the specified portions of the NPA and Addendum thereto under seal. + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 10th day of June , 2009 + +Respectfully sub tted, + +By: ROBERT D. RITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar o. 224162 rcritQbelclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpikeabc1claw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAMOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com ahorowitz®sexabuseattomev.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232. 08-80380, 08- 80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80811 reelthw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsx@searcylaw.com iph®searcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Brad Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwardserra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp(alaw.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. ER Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecfrabrucereinhartlaw Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Ricci-Leopold, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 skuvin@riccilaw.com tleopoldOsiccilaw.com + +riosefsbergftodhurst.com kezellanodhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jaaesq(abellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744798/EFTA02744798.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744798/EFTA02744798.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f68ee4576baa22c416587c42b7ca756f4ada6f94 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744798/EFTA02744798.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,378 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744798.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 8608, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.19, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 413.23565673828125, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 413.23565673828125, + 101.60302734375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 101.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 269.28000000000003, + 471.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 385.21051025390625, + 471.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 385.21051025390625, + 487.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 269.28000000000003, + 487.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAMOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.108, + 125.55000000000001 + ], + [ + 423.2166748046875, + 125.55000000000001 + ], + [ + 423.2166748046875, + 169.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 189.108, + 169.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 265 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 13 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 151 + ], + [ + "Line", + 75 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744798" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744806/EFTA02744806.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744806/EFTA02744806.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..917bfbd9de849e9721cef6c34955ea4fad809b6d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744806/EFTA02744806.md @@ -0,0 +1,263 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038 1 -MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6. CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7. CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 1-MARRAj + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff. + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA,M. + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_J + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102. CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA + +Plaintiff. + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### JOINT SCHEDULING AND DISCOVERY REPORT REGARDING JANE DOE 101 V. EPSTEIN CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe 101, and Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, conferred by telephone via their respective counsel on May 29, 2009, and submit this Joint Scheduling and Discovery Report in accordance with this Court's Order Requiring Counsel to Confer, File Joint Scheduling Report and File Joint Discovery Report and pursuant to Local Rule 16.1(BX2) of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. and Rule 26 (f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and state as follows: + +# I. JOINT DISCOVERY REPORT RE: JANE DOE 101 + +# A. Disclosures Under Rule 26(a) + +The parties propose to exchange initial disclosures under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a) on or before June 22, 2008. + +# B. Conduct of Discovery + +# 1. Discovery and Pretrial Deadlines + +The parties propose the following discovery and pre-trial deadlines. The Plaintiffs are set forth in the left hand column and the Defendants in the right hand column. Where there has been an agreement, the parties have identified the same date. + +| Plaintiff's Proposed | Defendant's Proposed | +|-------------------------------------|----------------------| +| Dates | Dates | +| Amendment of pleadings July 1, 2009 | September I, 2009 | +| August 1, 2009 | January 12, 2010 | +| Sept. 1, 2009 | February 8, 2010 | +| Dec. 1, 2009 | March 8, 2010 | + +Dispositive motions to be filed January 15, 2010 March 22, 2010 + +Joint Pretrial Statement to be + +filed pursuant to S.D.Fla.L.R. 16.1E February 15, 2010 April 26.2010 + +Proposed pre-trial conference March 15, 2010 May 25, 2010 + +Proposed trial April 15, 2010 June 25, 2010 + +Number of days estimated for jury trial 5 5-6 + +## 2. Subjects of Discovery and Whether Discovery Should be Phased or Limited to Particular Issues + +Plaintiff's Position: At least one unusual issue at this time may require consideration of bifurcation or special restrictions on the scope of discovery or the subjects of discovery: the Plaintiff victim's ability to maintain her anonymity. Another issue that inevitably becomes important in each case as soon as discovery is underway is the matter of limits on discovery of past sexual history of the victims, all of whom were minors at the time Defendant sexually exploited them. These issues are being briefed, and their resolution will establish clearly understood and more workable parameters for the conduct of discovery. The Court's recent order imposing the onedeposition limit per party presents a scheduling challenge but should streamline discovery. + +Defendant's Position: This Plaintiff as do other Plaintiffs, wish to restrict the scope of discovery and to control the scope and flow of the discovery separate and apart from what would be typical in a personal injury claim, which in essence this case is. There are pending motions in the various cases dealing with the anonymity issue, service of third party subpoenas, past sexual history and basic information needed to defend a personal injury suit. In the vast majority of the pending cases, the individuals who claim humiliation, embarrassment and severe emotional distress to name a few of the damages, went voluntarily to the Defendant's home on multiple occasions and took + +either a friend and in some instances their best friend. As has been briefed in other cases, the Defendant believes that the individuals' sexual history, past and current, is relevant for the reasons set forth in those motions. + +The Court's recent order imposing a one deposition limit for each Plaintiff and a single deposition for the Defendant will present some significant scheduling challenges with the number of attorneys involved. Attempts have been made on at least one occasion to schedule a deposition and getting all of the attorneys to respond, with any meaningful time frame, indicates that it could take weeks if not months to complete some of the depositions because of the lawyers' schedules. + +# C. Issues About Disclosure of Electronically-Stored Information + +Plaintiff's Position: The parties do not know whether issues will arise concerning discovery of electronically-stored information, but it seems likely. Both parties have issued preservation letters to their opponents. Plaintiff has filed a motion aimed at preserving evidence and setting parameters for potential discovery disputes. At this time, such discovery may be produced in paper or electronic form, subject to further order of the Court as may be necessary as discovery proceeds, subject to any objections. The format in which e-files should be required to be provided may need to be established by Court order. This could be critical when it comes to issues regarding the various Plaintiff-victims' pornography claims. + +Defendant's Position: Defendant will in all likelihood raise in this case Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment issues and privileges. + +# D. Issues About Claims of Privilege or ConfidentilIMS + +Plaintiff's Position: Plaintiff requests that her identity remain anonymous in this proceeding because she was a victim of Defendant's sexual misconduct while she was still a minor and is now a mere young adult. Making this information public would cruelly subject her to further trauma, humiliation, embarrassment, stress, and loss of self-esteem. At a minimum, the Plaintiff's name should be redacted from papers and exhibits filed with the Court or, otherwise, be filed under seal. On the other hand, with regard to third party discovery, it would be most effective for it to be issued with Defendant's name redacted. Obviously, the plaintiffs identity is necessary in third party requests in order for the recipient of the notice or subpoena to know to whom the documents that are being requested relate and how to select them. + +The issue of anonymity is being fully briefed by the parties, and in her motion papers, Plaintiff has offered several suggestions, including those briefly mentioned above, as to how reasonable access to records may be provided to Defendant while simultaneously safeguarding Plaintiff's privacy. Perhaps the appointment of a special might be most effective. to ensure full and fair discovery + +Defendant's Position: Defendant has chosen to oppose anonymity in that the Defendant believes he is being prejudiced in attempting to defend himself and in conducting even basic discovery. The Plaintiffs' attorneys wish to filter the information through them and to limit the scope not only of discovery but ultimately that which will be admissible to attempt to portray Plaintiffs, including Jane Doe 101 in the most favorable light. Jane Doe 101 came to the home on at least one occasion, if not more than one occasion. It is also the undersigned's belief that she brought at least one, if not more girls to experience same "severe emotional damages, humiliation and embarrassment" that she claims. It simply does not make sense. At some point, them will be third-party depositions that will take place and are the Plaintiff and her lawyer realistically stating or suggesting that neither the Plaintiffs name nor the Defendant's name can be used, and that this case is going to be treated in some vacuum? The Defendant has due process rights, and their suggestion about confidentiality with regard to discovery, is for the sole purpose of attempting to present the Plaintiff in the most favorable light and to steer clear of arrest records, criminal records, health records, witness' information, etc. which maybe relevant, material and certainly lead to the discovery of admissible evidence re: many issues including damages and proximate causation. + +The Defendant will be asserting his Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment privileges in this matter as to discovery issues. + +# E. Limitations Imposed by the Discovery Rules + +Plaintiff's Position: Plaintiff requests that the limitation of 10 depositions for each party under Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(a)(2) be removed. Plaintiff intends to participate in some of the depositions of and by other victims. There is no need at this time to alter other limitations imposed by the discovery rules, except for the hourly limit, which the Court has addressed in its Order of May 28, 2009, consolidating cases for discovery and procedural matters. + +Defendant's Position: Defendant would request that the 10 deposition limit be imposed, pending a motion by either side setting forth justification for additional depositions, or by agreement of counsel + +# F. Other Orders that the Court Should Issue Under Rule 26(c) or Rule 16(b) and (c) + +Plaintiffs Position: Several motions are being briefed at this time, including, but not limited to. Plaintiffs' Motion for Preservation of Evidence; Plaintiffs' Motion for No-Contact Order; Plaintiffs' Motion to Proceed Anonymously; Defendant's Motion to Compel and/or Identify Jane + +Does for Third-Party Subpoenas; and Defendant's Motion to Stay. Plaintiffs believe that a status conference involving all of those cases that have been consolidated for the purposes of discovery and procedural matters might assist the parties and the Court in clarifying and resolving pending issues. + +With respect and knowledge that the Court has just ruled, Plaintiff's counsel must reiterate our strong belief that a determination of certain threshold legal issues would assist in making settlement negotiations that currently are unworkable, more meaningful. These issues are: 1) retroactivity, i.e., whether the statutory minimum is \$50,000 or \$150,000; and 2) whether that applicable amount is the minimum to be awarded per incident, per cause of action or per victim. + +Defendant's Position: The Defendant is aware of the Court's recent ruling commenting on the issue of retroactivity, i.e. applying the 2006 Amendment to 18 U.S.C. §2255 which was not in existence at the time of the alleged incident; and, the issue as to whether or not a minimum amount, if applicable, is to be based on a single cause of action or on a per incident basis under §2255. These are issues that in part have been raised in the Defendant's motion to dismiss. Defendant has no objection to the Court dealing with those issues at this time. + +# II. CONFERENCE REPORT + +## A. Likelihood of Settlement + +Plaintiff's Position: The Plaintiff has attempted meaningful settlement discussions. Plaintiff is willing to continue to explore the prospects for settlement through mediation or otherwise as the case proceeds forward. + +Defendant's Position: The Defendant has engaged through his attorneys a meaningful settlement discussion. The Defendant, as well, will continue to explore the possibility of settlement through mediation or otherwise. + +## B. Likelihood of Appearance of Additional Parties + +It does not seem likely that additional parties will appear in this case. However, the parties reserve the right to join additional parties within the deadline set forth in Section I (B) above, if appropriate. + +# C. Proposed Time Limits + +Proposed time limits are set forth in the Discovery Plan, Section 1(B) above. + +# D. Proposals for the Formulation and Simplification of Issues + +Plaintiff's Position: Plaintiff believes that a status conference allowing argument on certain pending motions and clarification of issues related to consolidation and damages would be of great benefit in regard to the formulation and simplification of issues at this time. + +Defendant's Position: As the Court is aware, there are a number of cases which are currently being handled by this Court arising out of similar allegations. Many of the issues raised in the case sub judice have been raised in other cases. A status conference will serve no purpose. The parties, through their attorneys, are very capable in submitting the appropriate papers to fully argue and explore the issues which have been raised. Having 5 or 6 different sets of the Plaintiff's lawyers (all of which will come in multiples) arguing with the Defendant's attorney, i.e. the undersigned, will only create a circus like atmosphere. + +# E. Necessity or Desirability of Amendments to the Pleadings + +Plaintiff filed her Amended Complaint on April 17, 2009. Plaintiff does not believe at this time that further amendment will be necessary. The parties however reserve the right to amend pleadings within the deadline set forth in Section 1(B) above. + +#### F. Possibility of Obtaining Admissions of Fact and of Documents; Stipulations; Need for Advance Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence + +Plaintiffs' Position: Plaintiff believes that Defendant's Non-Prosecution Agreement with the United States Attorney's Office constitutes an agreement to waive the right to contest liability as to all Counts of the Amended Complaint. Plaintiff requests an early ruling by the Court on the effect of the agreement which has been filed by Plaintiff under seal according to this Court's order, which will simplify the issues. Additionally, Plaintiffs believe that it is appropriate to have an advance evidentiary ruling on similar fact evidence. If the parties know early in the case how similar fact evidence will be treated at trial, discovery can be more focused and efficient. + +Defendant's Position: Defendant expects that the parties will work together to arrive at admissions as the matter progresses. Defendant disagrees that Defendant's plea agreement is an admission as described by Plaintiff. Defendant does agree that having an advance ruling on similar fact evidence may be desirable, after motion and ability to brief and respond. + +### G. Suggestions for the Avoidance of Unnecessary Proof and of Cumulative Evidence + +There are no suggestions at this time for the avoidance of unnecessary proof or of cumulative evidence. + +#### H. Suggestion on the Advisability of Referring Matters to a Magistrate Judge or + +The parties suggest that discovery matters be referred to a Magistrate Judge. + +Plaintiffs Position: In addition, the motion papers pertaining to the anonymity issue include a proposal for the appointment of a special to act as a neutral decision-maker with regard to the issuance of third-party requests and the gathering of records in a way that would protect the victims' interest in anonymity while ensuring Defendant full and fair access to records---a novel idea that may be worthy of consideration. + +Defendant's Position: The Defendant opposes using any special or any other "special system" different from that which is set forth in the Rules of Civil Procedure. Should the court decide that the Plaintiff is entitled to anonymity for some additional period of time, then the Defendant should be allowed to do full discovery such as serving third party subpoenas for records and to depose third parties. Under the circumstance, the Defendant offered to not file any records in the court file containing Jane Doe 101's name at this time and to merely use the names, date of birth, and the last four digits of the social security numbers of the Plaintiffs for purposes of identification in serving subpoena. The absurdity of the Plaintiffs' position is that when depositions of witnesses, physicians and other third parties take place, the witness is going to know the name of the Plaintiff, the name of the Defendant, and the circumstances surrounding the case. What the Plaintiff wants to do is to preserve anonymity so that she and her lawyers can control as best as possible, any negative information which would affect her damages. Setting aside the Plaintiff's allegations, the Defendant, just as is any Defendant, is entitled to full and fair discovery and a fair hearing/trial. The Plaintiff and her attorneys believe that because of the allegations (not proven) that she is entitled to some special care or treatment which would preclude any adverse or mitigating information to causation or damages. Every plaintiff would like this same cocoon built around their case, i.e. put in the favorable evidence, information, prevent the Defendant from providing any negative or mitigation evidence and ask the fact finder for a ton of money. Fortunately, that is not the way the Rules of Civil Procedure operate. + +## I. Preliminary Estimate of the Time Required for Trial + +The parties estimate that the trial will require five to six (5-6) days. + +#### J. Requested Date or Dates for Pre-Trial Conference and Trial + +Dates are set forth in the proposed discovery plan, Section I (B) above. + +## K. Other Information + +The parties know of no other information that might be helpful to the Court at this early date regarding setting the case for status conference or pre-trial conference. + +Dated: June 12, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN, LLP Attorneys for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +By: s/Robert Critton Robert Critton Fla. Bar. No. 224162 rcrit@bcIclaw.com Michael J. Pike Fla. Bar No. 617296 mpike@bciclaw.com 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Telephone: (561) 842-2820 Facsimile: (561) 515-3148 + +> ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: s/Katherine W. Ezell Robert C. Josefsberg Ha. Bar No. 040856 riosefsberg@podhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell@podhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +By: s/Jack Goldberger Jack Goldberger, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 262013 jagesq@bellsouth.net 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Telephone: (561) 659\_8300 Facsimile: (561) 835\_8691 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744806/EFTA02744806.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744806/EFTA02744806.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0b7bea43efa4879a1274c8e2538a6dfe8f51430c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744806/EFTA02744806.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1074 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744806.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 18820, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.06, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.856, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 419.2564392089844, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 419.2564392089844, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 206.856, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JOINT SCHEDULING AND DISCOVERY REPORT \nREGARDING JANE DOE 101 V. EPSTEIN\nCASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 171.36, + 663.39 + ], + [ + 454.9479064941406, + 663.39 + ], + [ + 454.9479064941406, + 707.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 171.36, + 707.2330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. JOINT DISCOVERY REPORT RE: JANE DOE 101", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 162.792, + 263.25 + ], + [ + 464.2243957519531, + 263.25 + ], + [ + 464.2243957519531, + 279.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 162.792, + 279.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. Disclosures Under Rule 26(a)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 221.54399999999998, + 290.78999999999996 + ], + [ + 404.6327209472656, + 290.78999999999996 + ], + [ + 404.6327209472656, + 307.10302734375 + ], + [ + 221.54399999999998, + 307.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Conduct of Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.74, + 374.22 + ], + [ + 384.3390197753906, + 374.22 + ], + [ + 384.3390197753906, + 389.60302734375 + ], + [ + 241.74, + 389.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "1. Discovery and Pretrial Deadlines", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 214.2, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 413.1625671386719, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 413.1625671386719, + 417.363037109375 + ], + [ + 214.2, + 417.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "2. Subjects of Discovery and Whether Discovery \nShould be Phased or Limited to Particular Issues", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 181.152, + 263.25 + ], + [ + 451.0378112792969, + 263.25 + ], + [ + 451.0378112792969, + 293.2330627441406 + ], + [ + 181.152, + 293.2330627441406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "C. Issues About Disclosure of Electronically-Stored Information", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 140.76, + 319.14000000000004 + ], + [ + 486.0190124511719, + 319.14000000000004 + ], + [ + 486.0190124511719, + 334.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 140.76, + 334.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "D. Issues About Claims of Privilege or ConfidentilIMS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 185.43599999999998, + 677.9699999999999 + ], + [ + 476.2728576660156, + 677.9699999999999 + ], + [ + 476.2728576660156, + 693.3630142211914 + ], + [ + 185.43599999999998, + 693.3630142211914 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "E. Limitations Imposed by the Discovery Rules", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 166.46400000000003, + 319.14000000000004 + ], + [ + 425.231201171875, + 319.14000000000004 + ], + [ + 425.231201171875, + 334.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 166.46400000000003, + 334.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "F. Other Orders that the Court Should Issue \nUnder Rule 26(c) or Rule 16(b) and (c)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.72, + 594.54 + ], + [ + 436.5851135253906, + 594.54 + ], + [ + 436.5851135253906, + 625.1030120849609 + ], + [ + 189.72, + 625.1030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. CONFERENCE REPORT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 212.97599999999997, + 512.73 + ], + [ + 383.75518798828125, + 512.73 + ], + [ + 383.75518798828125, + 527.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 212.97599999999997, + 527.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. Likelihood of Settlement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 234.39600000000002, + 540.27 + ], + [ + 392.4531555175781, + 540.27 + ], + [ + 392.4531555175781, + 555.3630218505859 + ], + [ + 234.39600000000002, + 555.3630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Likelihood of Appearance of Additional Parties", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 175.64399999999998, + 181.44 + ], + [ + 451.25640869140625, + 181.44 + ], + [ + 451.25640869140625, + 196.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 175.64399999999998, + 196.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "C. Proposed Time Limits", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 240.516, + 290.78999999999996 + ], + [ + 387.00970458984375, + 290.78999999999996 + ], + [ + 387.00970458984375, + 307.1030578613281 + ], + [ + 240.516, + 307.1030578613281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "D. Proposals for the Formulation and Simplification of Issues", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 147.49200000000002, + 346.68 + ], + [ + 479.1578063964844, + 346.68 + ], + [ + 479.1578063964844, + 362.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 147.49200000000002, + 362.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "E. Necessity or Desirability of Amendments to the Pleadings", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 150.552, + 649.6200000000001 + ], + [ + 476.2000732421875, + 649.6200000000001 + ], + [ + 476.2000732421875, + 665.6030120849609 + ], + [ + 150.552, + 665.6030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "F. Possibility of Obtaining Admissions of Fact and of Documents; \nStipulations; Need for Advance Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 137.7, + 153.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 499.164306640625, + 153.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 499.164306640625, + 182.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 137.7, + 182.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "G. Suggestions for the Avoidance of \nUnnecessary Proof and of Cumulative Evidence", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 196.452, + 498.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 447.414306640625, + 498.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 447.414306640625, + 527.60302734375 + ], + [ + 196.452, + 527.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "H. Suggestion on the Advisability of Referring \nMatters to a Magistrate Judge or", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.048, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 440.9033508300781, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 440.9033508300781, + 624.3630218505859 + ], + [ + 186.048, + 624.3630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Preliminary Estimate of the Time Required for Trial", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 163.404, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 462.5983581542969, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 462.5983581542969, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 163.404, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "J. Requested Date or Dates for Pre-Trial Conference and Trial", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 143.82, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 482.46832275390625, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 482.46832275390625, + 196.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 143.82, + 196.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "K. Other Information", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.86, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 377.1966247558594, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 377.1966247558594, + 278.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 247.86, + 278.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 88 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744806" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744820/EFTA02744820.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744820/EFTA02744820.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..224210b85437de64975e70a3b2820bf99be895be --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744820/EFTA02744820.md @@ -0,0 +1,119 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MA RRA/, 1 + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-a + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRAJ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S Unopposed Motion For Extension of Time in Which to File a Response to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs Jane Does 101 & 102 Motion for No Contact. Having considered Defendant's Unopposed Motion and Plaintiffs counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall file Response to Plaintiffs Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs Jane Does 101 & 102 Motion for No Contact on or before July 14, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of June, 2009 + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies all counsel \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744820/EFTA02744820.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744820/EFTA02744820.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..882bb227e68c413ee765dd6ecc5755669a91e97b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744820/EFTA02744820.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744820.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1801, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.31, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 413.23565673828125, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 413.23565673828125, + 107.2230224609375 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 107.2230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 283.968, + 627.75 + ], + [ + 333.7080993652344, + 627.75 + ], + [ + 333.7080993652344, + 643.1030120849609 + ], + [ + 283.968, + 643.1030120849609 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744820" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744824/EFTA02744824.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744824/EFTA02744824.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7a6e07e13f6029dfb433347a9569468c348258cc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744824/EFTA02744824.md @@ -0,0 +1,355 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/RM + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JMM + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JMN + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08.80994-CIV-MARRAJJOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: OS-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/J + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/JEM + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-J + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA-J + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/J + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES 2-7 NOTICE OF JOINDER IN PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES 101 & 102 MOTION FOR NO CONTACT (DE 116) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves this Court for an extension of time until July 14, 2009, to file a Response to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs Jane Does 101 & 102 Motion for No Contact, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 A.1(j) (S.D. Fla. 2008). As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +1. Counsel for Defendant communicated with Counsel for the Plaintiff, and Plaintiff's Counsel agrees to the requested extension of July 14, 2009, to file a Response to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs Jane Does 101 & 102 Motion for No Contact. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Coun el for Plaintiff's counsel, by telephone, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement t jhe requested extension. + +> Ro ton, sq. Attorney for Defendant + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of reco d identifie on t e following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of , 2009 + +> Respec 'fled, + +By: ROBER N, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Ep + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/J + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Brad MI, Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@na-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +SW. ... Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. III Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isx@searcvlaw.com + +iph@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +tleovold@riccilaw.com + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +gosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@oodhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iageso@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744824/EFTA02744824.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744824/EFTA02744824.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d8425629292c6fd443ca1f3bbb17d27c8053cbfe --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744824/EFTA02744824.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,333 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744824.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 5272, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.0, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 413.646484375, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 413.646484375, + 107.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 107.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 171.972, + 323.19 + ], + [ + 444.48529052734375, + 323.19 + ], + [ + 444.48529052734375, + 338.60302734375 + ], + [ + 171.972, + 338.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 530.55 + ], + [ + 365.7369689941406, + 530.55 + ], + [ + 365.7369689941406, + 545.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 545.2330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 267.3 + ], + [ + 364.20050048828125, + 267.3 + ], + [ + 364.20050048828125, + 283.1030578613281 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 283.1030578613281 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 133 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 61 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 111 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 53 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744824" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744830/EFTA02744830.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744830/EFTA02744830.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b29d50e7078470bdbe713e8c05e6d8efbffbd5e7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744830/EFTA02744830.md @@ -0,0 +1,119 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S Unopposed Motion For Extension of Time in Which to File a Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and in Third Party Subpoenas, having considered Defendant's Unopposed Motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall file a Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and in Third Party Subpoenas on or before June 29, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of June, 2009 + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies all counsel \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744830/EFTA02744830.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744830/EFTA02744830.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..23474c95135229d940ec3f6cda170ea7fd1d88f3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744830/EFTA02744830.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,188 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744830.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1820, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.45, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.48565673828125, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.48565673828125, + 103.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 103.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744830" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744834/EFTA02744834.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744834/EFTA02744834.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bb34d04b1620fe5db907816b9053ff2d7baded99 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744834/EFTA02744834.md @@ -0,0 +1,263 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +/ + +CASE NO.: 08-ev-80119-MARRA/JAM + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/J + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRAJJ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARIRAJJ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/J + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/JMME + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-J.M + +Plaintiff, + +JEPPREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA-JEM + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/JIMM + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES 2-7 RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL IDENTITY IN THE STYLE OF THE CASE AND IN THRID PARTY SUBPOENAS (DE 144) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves this Court for an extension of time until June 29, 2009, to file a Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and in Third Party Subpoenas, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 A.1(j) (S.D. Fla. 2008). As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +1. Counsel for Defendant communicated with Counsel for the Plaintiff, and Plaintiff's Counsel agrees to the requested extension of June 29, 2009, to file a Reply to Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and Third Party Subpoenas. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of P Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred t C.un.el for Plaintiff's counsel, by telephone, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agr e requested extension. + +Ro D. Cntt , Esq. Attorney for Defe dant + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also ify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identi on t e following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this it day of 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: + +RO , JR., ESQ. + +Flo 162 + +rent claw.com + +MICHAEL J. PUCE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Ep + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAM + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Brad M, Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +casselln@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +11M. Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Jack Scialp, Esq. Jack P.M. Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsx@searcylaw.com jph@searcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Defendant + +561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. Shipley, 08-80469 + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Ricci-Leopold, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL. 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 skuvin@riccilaw.com tleopold@riccilaw.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberg@tx:dhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iagesq@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744834/EFTA02744834.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744834/EFTA02744834.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..91cf096ecc48f709fe80e8ee9c59f5a1ab2f605f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744834/EFTA02744834.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,333 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744834.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 5288, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.88, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 412.0903625488281, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 412.0903625488281, + 104.60302734375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 104.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of P Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 170.74800000000002, + 321.57000000000005 + ], + [ + 444.07940673828125, + 321.57000000000005 + ], + [ + 444.07940673828125, + 337.1835632324219 + ], + [ + 170.74800000000002, + 337.1835632324219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.308, + 557.28 + ], + [ + 364.6169738769531, + 557.28 + ], + [ + 364.6169738769531, + 572.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 250.308, + 572.2330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 294.03 + ], + [ + 364.95050048828125, + 294.03 + ], + [ + 364.95050048828125, + 309.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 309.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 137 + ], + [ + "Line", + 69 + ], + [ + "Text", + 59 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 116 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744834" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744840/EFTA02744840.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744840/EFTA02744840.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9c449233216688383f4fc97b4ec0d24ae2558ccb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744840/EFTA02744840.md @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEI-FREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRAJ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRiV + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRAJ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-MM + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to file a Reply to Plaintiff, C.M.A.'s, Response + +in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Strike Cases from Current Trial Docket. Having considered Defendant's Unopposed Motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall file a Reply to Plaintiff, C.M.A.'s, Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Strike Cases from Current Trial Docket on or before June 26, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of June 2009 + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies all counsel \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744840/EFTA02744840.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744840/EFTA02744840.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..15d718f00c0b2a185c586948e85594b7d71eb306 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744840/EFTA02744840.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744840.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1781, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.43, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 414.35565185546875, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 414.35565185546875, + 104.60302734375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 104.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 284.58, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 334.8678894042969, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 334.8678894042969, + 641.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 284.58, + 641.2330169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744840" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744844/EFTA02744844.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744844/EFTA02744844.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d5a7cee80f9c1e3dca6637c41848e01258d0a36a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744844/EFTA02744844.md @@ -0,0 +1,135 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFF C.M.A'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE CASES FROM CURRENT TRIAL DOCKET(DE 147) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves this Court for an extension of time until June 26, 2009, to file a Reply to Plaintiff, C.M.A.'s, Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Strike Cases from the Current Trial Docket. As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +1. Counsel for Defendant communicated with Counsel for the Plaintiff, and Plaintiff's Counsel agrees to the requested extension of June 26, 2009, to file a Response to Plaintiff, C.M.A.'s, Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Strike Cases from the Current Trial Docket. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff's counsel, by telephone, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested c}cjension. + +Robert . Cntton, Esq. Attorney for Defendant + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this re day of June. 2009. + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. E, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 isx@searcvlaw.com iah@searcvlaw.com Co-Counsel for Plaintiff + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 iagese@bellsouth.net + +Counsel or Defendants Jeffrey Epstein and + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. & Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Defendant \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744844/EFTA02744844.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744844/EFTA02744844.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..97480fe80593df25322be3a76d23f9c90ab7adfc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744844/EFTA02744844.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,276 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744844.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 3294, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.36, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 412.1572570800781, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 412.1572570800781, + 103.863037109375 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 103.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 172.58399999999997, + 297.27 + ], + [ + 445.98529052734375, + 297.27 + ], + [ + 445.98529052734375, + 312.3630676269531 + ], + [ + 172.58399999999997, + 312.3630676269531 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 268.05600000000004, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 383.3669738769531, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 383.3669738769531, + 91.863037109375 + ], + [ + 268.05600000000004, + 91.863037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 93 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744844" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744849/EFTA02744849.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744849/EFTA02744849.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..80f1dbf8345c93f9099610e330fc6df721e7f012 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744849/EFTA02744849.md @@ -0,0 +1,119 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRAJ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRAJ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-=. + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to file a Reply to Plaintiff, Jane Doe's, Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Strike Cases from Current Trial Docket. Having considered Defendant's Unopposed Motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall file a Reply to Plaintiff, Jane Doe's, Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Strike Cases from Current Trial Docket on or before June 26, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of June, 2009 + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies all counsel \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744849/EFTA02744849.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744849/EFTA02744849.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..89c9517d1121a7db6fb242fc03b5f6433f425c30 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744849/EFTA02744849.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744849.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1782, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.46, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 413.98565673828125, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 413.98565673828125, + 103.863037109375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 103.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 285.192, + 627.75 + ], + [ + 334.4879150390625, + 627.75 + ], + [ + 334.4879150390625, + 642.7330169677734 + ], + [ + 285.192, + 642.7330169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744849" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744853/EFTA02744853.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744853/EFTA02744853.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6042b22ba20228df49d05f437078b3abd935118b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744853/EFTA02744853.md @@ -0,0 +1,144 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/=. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/MMI + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/MM + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/MM + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV.MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEITREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE CASES FROM CURRENT TRIAL DOCKET(DE 146) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves this Court for an extension of time until June 26, 2009, to file a Reply to Plaintiff, Jane Doe's, Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Strike Cases from the Current Trial Docket. As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +1. Counsel for Defendant communicated with Counsel for the Plaintiff, and Plaintiff's Counsel agrees to the requested extension of June 26, 2009, to file a Response to Plaintiff, Jane Doe's, Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Strike Cases from the Current Trial Docket. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filin Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with C. nse for Plaintiffs counsel, by telephone, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement th t requested extension. + +Ro Att li, y for Defendant + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following service list in the manner specified via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF on this 10 day of June, 2009: + +![]()Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +561-835-8691 Fax +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff* + +![]()*(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744853/EFTA02744853.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744853/EFTA02744853.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..453f76129084dc135e42f066d9c5b4decf8ec8d1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744853/EFTA02744853.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,276 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744853.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 3055, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.91, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 411.0064392089844, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 411.0064392089844, + 103.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 103.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filin Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 170.13600000000002, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 442.98529052734375, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 442.98529052734375, + 311.60302734375 + ], + [ + 170.13600000000002, + 311.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.1, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 384.336, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 384.336, + 91.53 + ], + [ + 260.1, + 91.53 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 42 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 95 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744853" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744858/EFTA02744858.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744858/EFTA02744858.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d3d790f78dcff129f86b6e43b2b868acb5e4b9b2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744858/EFTA02744858.md @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO: 08-CV-80119- MARRA/ + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/IME + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 6. CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 8-CV-80893-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO: 09-CV-80469-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO: 09-CV-80656-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +## ORDER APPOINTING RECEIVER AND DIRECTING RECEIVER TO SECURE ASSETS FOR POSTING OF A BOND + +For the reasons provided in Jane Doe's Memorandum in Support of Motion for Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge Property of Epstein, and for Posting of a \$15 Million Bond to Secure Potential Judgment, it is adjudged: + +1. The defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, is hereby ordered not to make any further transfers of assets that are fraudulent, as defined in the Florida Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, Fla. Stat. Ann. § 726.101 et seq. Epstein also shall not transfer any of his assets outside the fifty states of the United States or the District of Columbia without first seeking leave of court, after providing notice and an opportunity to be heard bytplaintiff Jane Doe. + +2. is appointed as receiver of all the real property, good, chattels, moneys, financial instruments, stocks, or other assets of any type of defendant Jeffrey Epstein, and all the rents, income, interest, and profits from them, all called the "property" in this order, and the receiver is directed to immediately enter upon, receive and take complete possession of all of the property and the rents, income and profits. + +3. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, and his servants, agents and employees are ordered to deliver immediately to the receiver all of the property and they, and each of them, are enjoined from interfering in any way with the receiver or with any of the property until the further order of this court. + +4. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein and his servants, agents and employees are further ordered to deliver to the receiver or his representative, all keys or combinations to locks required to open or gain access to any of the property and all money deposited in any bank to the credit of the defendant, and any other money, financial instruments, or things of value of the defendant wherever they may be. + +5. The receiver is granted all the usual, necessary and incidental powers for the purpose of managing and maintain the property, including the power to appoint such agents as the receiver considers necessary to enable the receive to perform the receiver's duties. + +6. The receiver shall, within 60 days of this order, if sufficient assets are available, post a \$15 million bond on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein with the Clerk of the Court to secure any potential judgment the plaintiff might obtain. The + +receiver shall also by that time file an accounting of all significant assets of Jeffrey Epstein with the Court. The receiver shall be entitled to reasonable compensation and coverage of expenses, as approved by the Court. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this day of , 2009. + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: All counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744858/EFTA02744858.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744858/EFTA02744858.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..766a9aa21c5dccec4fc6eb109a15d48e69fe005f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744858/EFTA02744858.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,283 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744858.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 3842, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.29, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.95999999999998, + 68.85000000000001 + ], + [ + 411.2796936035156, + 68.85000000000001 + ], + [ + 411.2796936035156, + 96.81353759765625 + ], + [ + 201.95999999999998, + 96.81353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER APPOINTING RECEIVER AND DIRECTING RECEIVER TO SECURE \nASSETS FOR POSTING OF A BOND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 412.29 + ], + [ + 520.4976806640625, + 412.29 + ], + [ + 520.4976806640625, + 440.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 440.79998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744858" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/EFTA02744864.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/EFTA02744864.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7ab6b239e071cd73a8089cbf9c067d9d735e88fc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/EFTA02744864.md @@ -0,0 +1,607 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED] + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6: + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/ [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/ [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendants. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRZE7 + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO: 09-CV-80591-MARR + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO: 09-CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +### PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR INJUNCTION RESTRAINING FRAUDULENT TRANSFER OF ASSETS, APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN, AND TO POST A \$15 MILLION BOND, TO SECURE POTENTIAL JUDGMENT + +COMES NOW Plaintiff Jane Doe, by and through undersigned counsel, and hereby files this Motion for Injunction, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 64, for appointment of a receiver to take charge of Epstein's property, and to post a \$15 million bond to secure any potential judgment in this case, for the reasons explained in the accompanying supporting memorandum. + +Plaintiff Jane Doe, by and through her undersigned counsel, files this memorandum in support of her motion for appointment of a receiver to take charge of + +## CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +Epstein's property and to post a \$15 million bond to secure any potential judgment in this case. + +Epstein is a billionaire who recently has been fraudulently transferring his assets overseas and elsewhere with the intent to prevent Jane Doe (and possibly numerous other victims of his sexual abuse) from satisfying any judgment they might obtain against him. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 64 guarantees Jane Doe all available state law pre-judgment remedies to respond to these fraudulent transfers. Florida has adopted the Florida Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (FUFTA), Fla. Stat. Ann. § 726.101 et seq., which gives the Court power to appoint a receiver to take charge of assets that are being fraudulently transferred. Given the serious allegations of sexual abuse against Jane Doe when she was a minor, this Court should appoint a receiver to control and account for Epstein's assets and direct the receiver to post a \$15 million bond with this Court on behalf of Epstein to satisfy any judgment that Jane Doe might obtain. + +# STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS + +1. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein is the defendant in this action, which involves claims by Jane Doe that Epstein repeatedly sexually abused her when she was a minor. Because of the egregious and repeated acts of sexual abuse committed by Epstein, her complaint seeks damages in excess of \$50 million, including punitive damages. See Amended Complaint, ¶ 2. + +2. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein is extremely wealthy. According to reputable press reports in the New York Times and elsewhere, he is a billionaire. He is also the owner CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +of a Caribbean island in the Virgin Islands (Little St. James Island), where he serves as a financial advisor to other billionaires. He was previously a financial trader at Bear Steams. It is therefore reasonable to infer that he has a great deal of financial sophistication. See Affidavit of Paul Cassell at ¶ 2 Attachment A to this Pleading. + +3. According to reputable press reports, before his recent incarceration (discussed below), he frequently traveled around the globe in the company of such famous persons as President Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, and Donald Trump. It is therefore reasonable to infer that he has international contacts, including international financial contacts. See Affidavit of Paul Cassell at ¶ 3. + +4. Over the past year, approximately 25 civil suits have been filed in Florida state courts and Florida federal courts raising similar allegations of sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein against minor girls. These complaints seek damages comparable to those sought by Jane Doe in this case. See Affidavit of Paul Cassell at ¶ 4. Accordingly, Epstein has currently pending against him lawsuits seeking more than \$1 billion in damages. He thus faces financial win. Id. + +5. On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein pled guilty to one count of procuring a person under 18 for prostitution and one count of felony solicitation to prostitution before the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida. He was sentenced to 18 months in jail. + +6. Since those guilty pleas, he has been incarcerated in the Palm Beach County Detention facility. However, he has also been allowed out on a "work release" program, where he works at managing his financial interests. Affidavit of Paul Cassell at ¶ 5. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +7. Given the substantial claims against him, his international connections, and other information, Jane Doe's counsel has been gravely concerned that Epstein will fraudulently transfer all of his assets to overseas locations to defeat collection of any judgment that she might obtain against him. Accordingly, as part of discovery in this case, Jane Doe propounded requests for admissions by Epstein regarding whether he was fraudulently transferring assets. Rather than answering these requests for admission about on-going fraudulent transfers of his property, Jeffrey Epstein asserted his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Affidavit of Paul Cassell at ¶ 6. + +8. Jeffrey Epstein's net worth is greater than \$1 billion. Jane Doe's First Request for Admissions (RFA's) #5, Attachment B to this Pleading; Epstein's Resp. to RFA's #5, Attachment C to this Pleading. + +9. Since he was incarcerated, Jeffrey Epstein has, directly or indirectly (through the services or assistance of other persons) conveyed money and assets in an attempt to insulate and protect his money and assets from being captures in civil lawsuits filed against him. Epstein's Resp. to RFAs #6. + +10. Epstein owns and controls real estate property in foreign countries, including the Caribbean. Epstein's Resp. to RFAs #7 and #8. + +11. Epstein is currently moving significant financial assets overseas, outside of the direct territorial reach of federal and Florida courts. Epstein's Resp. to RFA #21. + +12. Epstein is transferring these assets with the intent to defeat any judgment that might be entered against him in this and other similar cases. Epstein's Resp. to RFA #22. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +13. Epstein could currently post a \$15 million bond to satisfy a judgment in this case without financial or other difficulty. Epstein's Resp. to RFA #23. + +14. Epstein has blocked all discovery, in this and other related cases, regarding his assets. Affidavit of Paul Cassell at ¶¶ 7, 8. + +# ARGUMENT + +# I. EPSTEIN IS FRAUDULENTLY TRANSFERRING HIS ASSETS. + +As noted in the material facts above, defendant Epstein is currently making fraudulent transfers of his assets. In particular, he is currently moving significant financial assets overseas, outside of the direct territorial reach of Federal and Florida courts, and is doing so with the specific intent to defeat any judgment that might be entered against him in this and other similar cases. Statement of Material Facts #11 and #12. + +Because these material facts rest, in part, on Epstein's invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, it is pertinent to note that Jane Doe is entitled to an adverse inference from his invocation of his Fifth Amendment rights when asked whether he was fraudulently transferring his assets overseas. Jane Doe propounded requests for admission to Epstein that asked specifically about on-going fraudulent transfers of assets. In response, Epstein asserted his Fifth Amendment right to refuse to answer incriminating questions. Of course, Epstein's "invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege, like the assertion of any privilege, stands in stark opposition to the otherwise liberal discovery rules, and 'undermine[s] to some degree the trial system's capacity to ascertain the truth." United States ex reL DRC, Inc. v. Custer Baffles, LLC, 415 F.Supp.2d 628, 632 (E.D. Va. 2006) (quoting Robert Fleidt, The + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +Conjurer's Circle — The Fifth Amendment Privilege in Civil Cases, 91 YALE L.J. 1062, 1082 (1982)). As a result, where a witness refuses to testify in a civil case on Fifth Amendment grounds, the permissible inference is that the witness's testimony, had it been given, "would not have been favorable to the claim." United States v. A Single Family Residence, 803 F.2d 625, 629 n.4 (11th Cir. 1986). Of course, the Fifth Amendment is not violated by such an inference. The concerns animating the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination are not in play "Din a civil suit involving only private parties" because "no party brings to the battle the awesome powers of the government, and therefore to permit an adverse inference to be drawn from exercise of the privilege does not implicate the policy considerations underlying the privilege." Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S.308, 335 (1976). + +An adverse inference is entirely justified in this case. Epstein has remained silent when asked such straightforward requests for admissions: + +- Since being incarcerated you have, directly or indirectly (through the services or assistance of other persons), conveyed money or assets in an attempt to insulate or protect your money or assets from being captured in any civil lawsuits filed against you. RFA's #6. +- You are moving significant financial assets overseas, outside of the direct territorial reach of the U.S. and Florida Courts. RFA's #21. +- You are making asset transfers with the intent to defeat any judgment that might be entered against you in this or similar cases. RFA's #22. + +## CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +The silence in the face of these questions speaks far louder than words. As Justice Brandeis recognized long ago, "[s]ilence is often evidence of the most persuasive character.'" Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308, 319 (1976) (quoting U.S. ex rel. Bilokumsky v. Tod, 263 U.S. 149, 153-54 (1923)). This is plainly one of those situations. + +In a civil case, drawing an adverse inference is the proper action for a court to take when a litigant blocks legitimate discovery through exercise of a Fifth Amendment invocation. "[W]hile there is no doubt that a witness is entitled to assert the privilege in a civil case, it is also clear that an adverse inference based on a refusal to answer in a civil case is an appropriate remedy, as it provides some relief for the civil litigant whose case is unfairly prejudiced by a witness' assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege without placing the witness in the 'cruel trilemma' of choosing among incrimination, perjury, or contempt." United States ex rel. DRC, Inc. v. Custer Battles, LLC, 415 F.Supp.2d 628, 633 (E.D. Va. 2006). The Eleventh Circuit has not hesitated to support district courts that draw an adverse inference from silence. For example, in United States v. Two Parcels of Real Property, 92 F.3d 1123, 1129 (11th Cir. 1996), the district court drew an adverse inference when claimants to real property refused to answer questions regarding the property. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed that decision, explaining that "[t]his Court has held . . . that the trier of fact may take an adverse inference against parties to a civil action refusing to testify on Fifth Amendment grounds. Id. at 1129 (citing United States v. A Single Family Residence, 803 F.2d 625, 629 n.4 (11th Cir. 1986)). Similarly, in Arango v. U.S. Dept of the Treasury, 115 F.3d 922, 926 (11th Cir. 1997), the Eleventh Circuit explained that "the First Amendment + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +does not forbid adverse inferences against civil litigants . . . who assert the privilege against self-incrimination." + +Here an adverse inference is entirely appropriate. In addition to Epstein's refusal to answer questions, there are strong circumstantial reasons for believing he is hiding his assets. As explained above, see Statement of Material Facts #1 through #3, Epstein clearly has the means to hide his assets — he is a sophisticated financial advisor. And given that the sexual abuse lawsuits brought against Epstein threaten him with financial ruin — he has a clear motive for hiding his substantial assets. Finally, Epstein is currently on work release, running his financial affairs from his office — giving him the clear opportunity to make the necessary arrangements to move his assets to overseas or other unreachable locations. Thus, there is a "perfect circumstantial evidence case that [Epstein] ha[s] means, motive, and opportunity" to fraudulently transfer assets. See United States v. Sparks, 265 F.3d 825, 830 (9th Cir. 2001) (finding probable cause for an arrest based solely on a showing of means, motive, and opportunity). The fact that this evidence is circumstantial rather than direct proof of the transfers is irrelevant, because "'circumstantial evidence is not less probative than direct evidence, and, in some cases is even more reliable.'" United States v. Ranum, 96 F.3d 1020, 1026 (7th Cir. 1996) (quoting United States v. Hatchett, 31 F.3d 1411, 1421 (7th Cir. 1994)). + +For all these reasons, the Court should conclude that Epstein is fraudulently transferring assets. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAJ II. JANE DOE IS ENTITELD TO THE PROTECTIONS OF THE UNIFORM FRAUDULENT TRANSFER ACT AS ADOPTED BY FLORIDA + +In light of Epstein's fraudulent asset transfers, Jane Doe is entitled to prejudgment remedies to protect her against Epstein's efforts to block her from satisfying the judgment she is likely to ultimately obtain in this case. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 64 guarantees Jane Doe during the course of this suit "all remedies providing for seizure of person or property for the purpose of securing satisfaction of the judgment ultimately to be entered in the action" that are "available under the circumstances and in the manner provided by the law of the state in which the court is held." The Rule goes on to provide that "[t]he remedies thus available include arrest, attachment, garnishment, replevin, sequestration, and other corresponding or equivalent remedies, however designated and regardless of whether by state procedure the remedy is ancillary to an action or must be obtained by an independent action." This "long-settled federal law provid[es] that in all cases in federal court , . . state law is incorporated to determine the availability of prejudgment remedies for the seizure of person or property to secure satisfaction of the judgment ultimately entered." v. Cascade Intern., Inc., 21 F.3d 1520, 1531 (11th Cir. 1994). Accordingly, under this Rule, this Court looks to Florida law to determine Jane Doe's rights to pre-judgment relief. + +To prevent fraudulent transfers of assets before judgment, Florida has adopted the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act. Fla. Stat. Ann. § 726.101 et seq. Under the Florida's Uniform Transfer Act (FUFTA), courts are broadly empowered to take action to block certain "fraudulent transfers" of assets. Jane Doe is accordingly entitled to invoke the remedies under this Act if Epstein is making "fraudulent transfers" of his assets. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +The Act defines a "fraudulent" transfer of assets as one made "[w]ith actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any creditor of the debtor." Fla. Stat. Ann. § 726.105(1)(a). The FUFTA also contains a "quite broad" definition of "transfer." Nationsbank, N.A. v. Coastal Utilities, Inc., 814 So.2d 1227, 1230 (Fla. Ct. Apps. 2002). It extends to "every mode, direct or indict, absolute or conditional, voluntary or involuntary, of disposing of or parting with an asset or an interest in an asset, and includes payment of money, release, lease, and creation of a lien or other encumbrance." Fla. Stat. Ann. § 726.102(12). This "broad definition includes 'every' mode of disposing of an asset and does not limit the statute to direct transactions made by the debtor him/herself." Nationsbank, N.A. v. Coastal Utilities, Inc., 814 So.2d 1230. As noted above, Epstein is transferring his assets with the intent to defeat any judgment that might be entered against him in this and other similar cases, see Statement of Material Facts #12, and therefore is plainly covered by the Act. + +The FUFTA extends is protections to "creditors" - such as Jane Doe, who is a "creditor" of Epstein's within the meaning of the Act. The FUFTA extends its protections not merely to judgment creditors, but more widely to future creditors who have a "claim," including a "claim" that has not yet been reduced to judgment. See Fla. Stat. Ann. § 726.102(2) (defining a claim as a "right to payment, whether or not the right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured."); Fla. Stat. Ann. § (defining creditor protected by the act as "a person who has a claim"). See generally Freeman v. First Union Nat. Bank, 865 So.2d 1272, 1277 (Fla. 2004) (noting that the definition of CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +claim is "broadly constructed" under the FUFTA). This means that "as is universally accepted, as well as settled in Florida, a 'claim' under the Act may be maintained even though contingent and not yet reduced to judgment." Freeman, 865 at 1277 (internal quotations omitted). In Florida, then, "'tort claimants are as fully protected against fraudulent transfers as holders of absolute claims."' Id. at 1277 (quoting Money v. Powell, 139 So.2d 702, 703 (Fla. Ct. Apps. 1962). Jane Doe is, of course, a tort claimant against Epstein. + +For all these reasons, Jane is entitled to the full protections of the Florida Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act. + +### III. UNDER THE UNIFORM FRAUDULENT TRANSFER ACT, JANE DOE IS ENTITLED TO THE REMEDIES OF APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF EPSTEIN'S ASSETS, FILE AN ACCOUNTING OF THOSE ASSETS WITH THE COURT, AND TO POST A \$15 MILLION BOND + +Under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, this Court is given broad powers to prevent fraudulent transfers of assets. The remedies provided by the Act specifically include: + +- 1. An injunction against further disposition by the debtor . . . of the asset transferred ....; +- 2. Appointment of a receiver to take charge of the asset transferred or of other property of the transferee; or +- 3. Any other relief the circumstances may require. Fla. Stat. Ann. § 726.108(c). + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Jane Doe seeks one of these specifically provided remedies — namely, appointment of a receiver to take charge of Epstein's assets. Appointment of a receiver will serve three important goals: first, if a receiver has control of Epstein's assets, Epstein's ability to further transfer those assets will be blocked; second, the receiver can provide an accounting of Epstein's assets, allowing Jane Doe (and the Court) to take whatever other action may be appropriate; and, third, the receiver can post a bond of \$15 million with the Court so that Jane Doe will have funds to satisfy any judgment that she might obtain. + +The Court should appoint a receiver to account for Epstein's assets. The appointment of a receiver is directly authorized by the FUFTA. Fla. Stat. Ann. § 726.108(c); see Freeman v. First Union Nat. Bank, 865 So.2d 1272, 1277 (Fla. 2004) (noting that appointment of a receiver is remedy provided by the FUFTA). A receiver is the only way to start to block further dissipation of assets — by, first, gaining control over Epstein's assets and then, second, making an accounting of what assets of Epstein's remain in this country or are otherwise subject to control by this Court. Given Epstein's Fifth Amendment invocations and other obstructions regarding any discovery concerning his assets, see Statement of Material Facts #14, it is currently impossible for Jane Doe to protect her interests in blocking Epstein's fraudulent transfers. Indeed, one of the other remedies specifically specified in the Act — "[ajn injunction against further disposition by the debtor . . . of the asset transferred" — is presumably unworkable given that there is no way to know what assets Epstein possesses, much less where he is transferring them to. Cf. Special Purpose Accounts Receivable Co-op Corp. v. Prime One Capital Co., L.L.C., 2007 WL 4482611 (S.D. Fla. 2007) (Marra, J.) (refusing to + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +apply any heightened pleading requirements to UFTA claims "[Oven this lack of access to information on the part of a plaintiff in a fraudulent transfer case"). Jane Doe therefore needs a receiver to account for Epstein's assets to the Court. + +The receiver should make a report to the Court regarding Epstein's assets so that Jane Doe can determine what additional further action is required. For example, Jane Doe might need to take action to set aside various transfers. But even now, it is clear that the receiver should take one additional step: Once a receiver is appointed and accounts for Epstein's assets, the receiver should post a \$15 million bond on behalf of Epstein with the Clerk of the Court in order to satisfy any judgment that Jane Doe might obtain in this case. + +A \$15 million bond is reasonable. First, given Epstein's tremendous net worth, he can post a \$15 million bond without any financial or other difficulty. See Statement of Material Facts #13. Second, given the egregious acts of sexual abuse Epstein committed against Jane Doe (who was a minor at the time) — and the punitive damages claim present in this case — \$15 million is a reasonable bond amount given the nature of the judgment that Jane Doe is likely to obtain at trial. Jane Doe seeks more than \$50 million damages. See First Amended Complaint, ¶ 1. Her complaint alleges that Jeffrey Epstein had a sexual obsession for minor girls. Id. at ¶ 10. To satisfy that obsession, Epstein engaged in an elaborate scheme whereby his assistants recruited minor girls for the purpose of engaging in prostitution. Id. at ¶ 11. Her complaint explains that: + +Beginning in approximately February 2003 and continuing until approximately June 2005, the defendant coerced and enticed the impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor [Jane CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Doe] in order to commit various acts of sexual misconduct against her. These acts included, but were not limited to, fondling and inappropriate and illegal sexual touching of the then minor [Jane Doe], sexual misconduct and masturbation of Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, in the presence of the then minor Plaintiff, and encouraging and coercing the then minor Plaintiff to become involved in prostitution. + +Id. at 1118. Jane Doe finally notes that in June 2009, Epstein entered pleas of "guilty" to various Florida state crimes involving the solicitation of minors for prostitution and the procurement of minors for the purposes of prostitution, for which Defendant Epstein was sentenced to 18 months incarceration in Palm Beach County jail to be followed by 12 months community control (house arrest). Id. at ¶ 22. + +Jane Doe has propounded various discovery requests regarding these allegations to Jeffrey Epstein. It is noteworthy that Epstein has asserted a Fifth Amendment self-incrimination privilege to these requests, rather than provide answers. For example, Jane Doe has asked Epstein to admit that he committed sexual assault against Jane Doe when she was minor. Plaintiffs First Request for Admissions to Defendant Epstein 11. In response, Epstein asserted his Fifth Amendment privilege not to incriminate himself. + +For all these reasons, directing the receiver to post a \$15 million bond on behalf of Epstein is reasonable under the circumstances. + +The UFTA "also grants the court equity powers to remedy . . . fraud." Invo Florida, Inc. v. Somerset Venturer, Inc., 751 So.2d 1263, 1267 (Fla. Ct. Apps. 2000). The FUFTA's provisions are "supplement(ed]" by "the principles of law and equity." Fla. Stat. Ann. § 726.111. It is well-settled that "[a]n equitable action requires equitable relief." Prince v. Tyler, 890 So.2d 246, 251 (Fla. 2004), and "equity will do what ought to + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +be done." Sterling v. Brevard County, 776 So.2d 281, 284 (Fla. Ct. Apps. 2000). The Court should therefore also exercise its equitable powers to impose the same remedies that Jane Doe requests. + +Of course, in equity, the Court considers the relative positions of the two claimants. Here, Jane Doe has presented substantial claims of sexual abuse against her while a minor, while Epstein (who pled guilty to felony charges involving such conduct) has taken the Fifth Amendment rather than answer questions about his sexual abuse of Jane Doe. If Jane Doe does not obtain the remedy that she is requesting, then Epstein may well be able to move all of his assets to unreachable locations, leaving her with a substantial tort claim and no possible way to satisfy it. On the other hand, appointing a receiver will not interfere with any legitimate interest of Epstein, particularly given his phenomenal wealth. + +When this Court proceeds in equity, it "will not suffer a wrong to be without a remedy." Connell v. Mittendorf, 147 So.2d 169, 172 (Fla. Ct. Apps. 1962). This case cries out for the Court to intercede and take action to avoid allowing a confessed and wealthy sex offender from concealing his assets and depriving his victims — including Jane Doe — from satisfying any judgment that they may well obtain against him. A receiver with control over Epstein's assets is a modest and entirely appropriate step to take given Epstein's actions. + +For the consideration of the Court, a proposed order adopting these remedies is attached to this pleading. + +### CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa CONCLUSION + +WHEREFORE, in view of the fraudulent transfers being made by Jeffrey Epstein to prevent Jane Doe from satisfying any judgment she might obtain in this case, the Court should appoint a receiver to take charge of Epstein's property and direct the receiver to provide the Court with an accounting of Epstein's assets and post a \$15 million bond to secure any potential judgment that Jane Doe might obtain in this case. + +DATED this 19th day of June, 2009. + +Respectfully Submitted, + +s/ J. J. + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards rra-law.com + +And + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellpelaw.utah.edu + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 19, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> s/ J. J. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jo°Idberger aewpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton(a.bcIclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrooarcia bellsouth.net + +Jack inhesearcvlaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzeMpodhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPikeebelclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell casselloabciclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg riosefsberg@podhurst.com + +# SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz sexabuseattomev.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssmsexabuseattornev.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com + +## AFFIDAVIT OF PAUL G. CASSELL, ESQUIRE + +1. I, Paul Cassell, have person knowledge of the matters set forth herein. I am an attorney licensed to practice in the State of Utah since 1992. My office is located at the University of Utah College of Law, where I am a law professor. Along with other attorneys, I represent plaintiff Jane Doe in this matter. + +2. It appears that defendant Jeffrey Epstein is an extremely wealthy individual. According to reputable press reports, his net worth is in the hundreds of millions of dollars - if not, indeed, a billion dollars. See, e.g., New York Time, July 1, 2008, at A2 ("Over the weekend Jeffrey E. Epstein, who after years of advising billionaires became a billionaire himself, left his estate on Little St. James Island, with its staff of 70 and its flamingo-stocked lagoon, boarded a private helicopter and flew to Florida. There, he turned himself in at the Palm Beach County jail and began serving 18 months for soliciting prostitution."). According to the Wikipedia entry about Jeffrey Epstein, he is a billionaire and owner of a private island in the Virgin Island (Little St. James Island), and was a financial trader at Bear Steams. He then founded his own financial management firm, J. + +![](_page_21_Picture_4.jpeg) + +Epstein and Col, later called Financial Trust Co., located on his private island in the U.S. Virgin Island. He reportedly only took billionaire clients. + +3. Other attorneys and I have made repeated efforts to find published information about defendant Jeffrey Epstein in general and his financial dealings in particular. The most detailed published source of information about defendant Jeffrey Epstein that I have been able to locate is an article that was published in Vanity Fair by Vicky Vicky is a contributing editor to Vanity Fair, a contributor to CNBC, and a weekly columnist for the London Evening Standard. The article can be found in the internet at http://vicicyward.com/wordpress/archives/30.1 + +4. According to the Vanity Fair article, defendant Jeffrey Epstein became wealthy by managing the financial assets of other billionaires. He reportedly limited his clients to those whose net worth was more than \$1 billion. Unlike other fund managers, however, Epstein kept all his deals and clients secret (with one exception — billionaire Leslie Wexner — who Epstein claims was his mentor). He has great skills in trading in international currency markets, which helped him make money for himself and his clients. As a result, it is reasonable to infer that he has significant fmancial sophistication, including sophistication about the international transfer of financial instruments and other assets. + +5. According to the Vanity Fair article, defendant Jeffrey Epstein's real mentor was not Leslie Wexner, but Steven Jude Hoffenberg, who was sent to federal prison for twenty years for bilking investors out of more than \$450 million in one of the largest Ponzi schemes in American history. Epstein assisted Hoffenberg with (failed) takeover bids of Pan American World Airways and Emery Air Freight. + +6. According to the Vanity Fair article, before working with Wexner and Hoffenberg, defendant Jeffrey Epstein worked with Beam Stearns. He left the firm very suddenly in 1981 after being questioned by S.E.C. investigators in an insider trading scandal involving several Italian and Swiss investors. + +7. According to the Vanity Fair article, Epstein recently owned (and thus may still own) a Boeing 727 with a trading room. + +8. Vicky published a follow-up note to her earlier article in May 2008. It can be found at http://www.vanitvfair.com/online/dailv/2008/05/vicky- + +you.html. According to this note, rumors were circulating (to celebrities such as Dustin Hoffman, Alec Baldwin, and filmmaker Michael Mailer) that Epstein was moving all of his considerable assets to Israel. The note also indicated that, having written the earlier detailed article about Epstein, was now frequently viewed as an "expert" on Epstein. + +9. According to reputable press reports, Jeffrey Epstein has travelled internationally with Donald Trump, former President Bill Clinton, and Prince Andrew. See, e.g., The Daily Mail, Prince Andrew's Billionaire Friend is Accused of Preying on Girl of 14, Apr. 29, 2007, http://www.dailyznail.co.uldnews/article-451372/Prince-Andrews-billionaire-friend-accused-nreving-gir1-14.html ("One of Prince Andrew's closest friends [Jeffrey Epstein] is being investigated by the FBI for allegedly paying under-age girls for tawdry sexual encounters."). It is therefore reasonable to infer that he has international contacts, including international financial contacts. + +10. Approximately 25 civil suits have been filed in Florida state courts and Florida federal courts raising similar allegations against Jeffrey Epstein. These complaints seek damages comparable to those sought by Jane Doe in this case. Accordingly, Epstein has currently pending against him lawsuits seeking more than \$1 billion in damages. Even given his great wealth, it appears that the lawsuits against him could well lead to his financial ruin, unless he is able to conceal his assets so that the plaintiffs in these cases are unable to reach them. + +11. Since his guilty plea in state court, he has been incarcerated in the Palm Beach County Detention facility. I have been advised, however, that he has currently been allowed out on a "work release" program, where he works at managing his financial interests. + +12. Because of his overseas contacts, other plaintiff attorneys and I have been greatly concerned that Epstein might attempt to transfer many of his assets overseas with the intent to defeat any judgment that might be entered against him. I have also received reports, that I am attempting to substantiate, that Epstein is transferring his assets out of the country at this time with the intent to make it impossible for Jane Doe and other plaintiffs to satisfy any significant judgment that they might obtain against him. In light of these reports, other attorneys and I have propounded the requests for admission regarding fraudulent asset transfers discussed in the pending motion. + +13. In this case, Epstein has blocked all discovery regarding the current location of his assets and recent fraudulent transfers of his assets, by asserting a Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. With other attorneys working on this case (and related cases), I have wanted to obtain direct, first hand information regarding Epstein's financial dealings, but have been blocked for doing so by Epstein. Therefore, I have been forced to rely on reputable press reports for information about these dealings. + +14. In the similar sexual abuse lawsuits filed against Epstein, other plaintiffs attorneys have advised that Epstein has likewise blocked all discovery regarding his finances with Fifth Amendment invocations or other interposed obstructions. + +I swear the foregoing to be truthful under the penalty of perjury. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +![]()Paul G. Cassell + +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80/393-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +# PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO DEFENDANT + +COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Jane Doe, by and through her undersigned counsel, and files this her First Request for Admissions to the Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, and requests said Defendant admit or deny the following facts, in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: + +### DEFINITIONS + +The term "you" means and refers to the Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +# ADMISSIONS + +- I. Your net worth is greater than \$10 million. +- 2. Your net worth is greater than \$50 million. +- 3. Your net worth is greater than \$100 million. +- 4. Your net worth is greater than \$500 million. + +![](_page_28_Picture_14.jpeg) + +- 5. Your net worth is greater than \$1 billion. +- 6. Since being incarcerated you have, directly or indirectly (through the services or assistance of other persons), conveyed money or assets in an attempt to insulate or protect your money or assets from being captured in any civil lawsuits filed against you. + - 7. You own or control, directly or indirectly, real estate property in the Caribbean. +- 8. You own or control, directly or indirectly, real estate property in foreign countries. +- 9. In the last 2 years you have transferred assets and/or money and/or financial instruments to countries outside the United States. + - 10. You have provided financial support to the modeling agency MC2. + - 11. You committed sexual assault against Plaintiff, a minor. + - 12. You committed battery against Plaintiff. + - 13. You digitally penetrated Plaintiff when she was a minor. +- 14. You offered Plaintiff more money contingent upon her having sex with you or giving you oral sex. + - 15. You intended to harm Plaintiff when you committed these sexual acts against her. +- 16. You knew Plaintiff was under the age of 16 when you sexually touched and fondled her. +- 17. You intend to hire investigators to intimidate and harass Plaintiff during this litigation. +- 18. You were engaged in the act of trafficking minors across state or country borders for the purposes of sex or prostitution between 2000 and the present. + - 19. You coerced Plaintiff into being a prostitute and remaining in prostitution. + +- A. Procuring a minor for the purpose of prostitution as defined in F.S. 796.03 +- B. Battery as defined by Florida Statutes +- C. Sexual Battery + +21. You are moving significant financial assets overseas, outside of the direct territorial reach of the U.S. and Florida Courts. + +22. You are making asset transfers with the intent to defeat any judgment that might be entered against you in this or similar cases. + +23. You currently have the ability to post a bond of \$15 million to satisfy a judgment in this case without financial or other difficulty. + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing has been provided via United States mail to the following addressees, this "2 day of March, 2009. + +Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esquire Michael J. Pike, Esquire Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman, LLP 515 North Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 rcrit@bciclaw.com mpike@bciclaw.com + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esquire Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 jagesq@bellsouth.net + +Michael R. Tein, Esquire +██████████ Tein, P.L. +3059 Grand Avenue +Suite 340 +Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 +[tein@lewistein.com](mailto:tein@lewistein.com) + +Respectfully Submitted, + +THE LAW OFFICE OF BRAD ██████████ & +ASSOCIATES, LLC + +By: + +![]()Brad ██████████, Esquire +Attorney for Plaintiff +Florida Bar No. 542075 +2028 ██████████ Street +Suite 202 +Hollywood, Florida 33020 +Telephone: 954-414-8033 +Facsimile: 954-924-1530 +E-Mail: [be@bradedwardslaw.com](mailto:be@bradedwardslaw.com) + +Paul G. Cassell +Attorney for Plaintiff +Pro Hac Vice +332 S. 1400 E. +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +Telephone: 801-585-5202 +Facsimile: 801-585-6833 +E-Mail: [cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV- 80893 — MARRA/ + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +• + +# DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS (dated 03123/09) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, ('EPSTEIN'), by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his response to Plaintiff's First Request for Admission, dated March 23, 2009. + +1. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +2. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my + +![](_page_32_Picture_12.jpeg) + +Jane Doe v. Epstein, et al. Page 2 + +attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +3. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +4. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these Circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +5. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to Jane Doe v. Epstein, et ei. + +Page 3 + +effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +6. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +7. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +8. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I Intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Jane Doe v. Epstein, et al. + +Page 4 + +Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +9. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +10. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I Intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +11. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would + +Jane Doe v. Epstein, et al. Page 5 + +unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +12. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +13. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +14. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Jane Doe v. Epstein, et at. + +Page 6 + +15. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +16. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +17. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +18. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my Jane Doe v. Epstein, et al. + +Page 7 + +attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +19. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +20. In response to 20 A, B, and C, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +21. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to + +Jane Doe v. Epstein, et al. Page 8 + +effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +22. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +23. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein, I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +# Certificate of Service + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of thei9regoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this \_nay of Mav 2009. + +Jane Doe v. Epstein, et al. +Page 9 + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +561-835-8691 Fax +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/EFTA02744864.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/EFTA02744864.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8117e422b1f4f716e3b394e902e15fb5ea0c8d44 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/EFTA02744864.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1956 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 41, + "chars": 58134, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.02, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_21_Picture_4.jpeg", + "_page_28_Picture_14.jpeg", + "_page_32_Picture_12.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.736, + 67.23 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 67.23 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 96.81353759765625 + ], + [ + 200.736, + 96.81353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR INJUNCTION RESTRAINING \nFRAUDULENT TRANSFER OF ASSETS, APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO \nTAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN, AND TO POST A $15 MILLION BOND, \nTO SECURE POTENTIAL JUDGMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 71.95500000000001, + 438.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 546.7294921875, + 438.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 546.7294921875, + 495.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 71.95500000000001, + 495.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 283.968, + 67.6875 + ], + [ + 540.2775268554688, + 67.6875 + ], + [ + 540.2775268554688, + 82.6700439453125 + ], + [ + 283.968, + 82.6700439453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 466.55999999999995 + ], + [ + 408.68115234375, + 466.55999999999995 + ], + [ + 408.68115234375, + 482.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 482.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ARGUMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 268.05600000000004, + 190.35 + ], + [ + 342.6871643066406, + 190.35 + ], + [ + 342.6871643066406, + 206.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 268.05600000000004, + 206.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. EPSTEIN IS FRAUDULENTLY TRANSFERRING HIS ASSETS.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.04, + 217.89000000000004 + ], + [ + 470.6675720214844, + 217.89000000000004 + ], + [ + 470.6675720214844, + 233.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 104.04, + 233.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 286.416, + 68.4375 + ], + [ + 540.396, + 68.4375 + ], + [ + 540.396, + 83.42999267578125 + ], + [ + 286.416, + 83.42999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. UNDER THE UNIFORM FRAUDULENT TRANSFER ACT, JANE DOE IS \nENTITLED TO THE REMEDIES OF APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER \nTO TAKE CHARGE OF EPSTEIN'S ASSETS, FILE AN ACCOUNTING \nOF THOSE ASSETS WITH THE COURT, AND TO POST A $15 \nMILLION BOND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 103.42800000000001, + 328.86 + ], + [ + 541.746337890625, + 328.86 + ], + [ + 541.746337890625, + 400.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 103.42800000000001, + 400.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa \nCONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 67.6875 + ], + [ + 541.47314453125, + 67.6875 + ], + [ + 541.47314453125, + 96.1700439453125 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 96.1700439453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 93.96000000000001 + ], + [ + 349.81756591796875, + 93.96000000000001 + ], + [ + 349.81756591796875, + 109.55352783203125 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 109.55352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF PAUL G. CASSELL, ESQUIRE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 173.808, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 435.4051513671875, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 435.4051513671875, + 112.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 173.808, + 112.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 28, + "polygon": [ + [ + 181.152, + 42.12 + ], + [ + 401.770263671875, + 42.12 + ], + [ + 401.770263671875, + 70.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 181.152, + 70.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO DEFENDANT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 28, + "polygon": [ + [ + 90.576, + 273.78000000000003 + ], + [ + 490.22113037109375, + 273.78000000000003 + ], + [ + 490.22113037109375, + 289.4830627441406 + ], + [ + 90.576, + 289.4830627441406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFINITIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 28, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.8, + 453.6 + ], + [ + 333.44287109375, + 453.6 + ], + [ + 333.44287109375, + 467.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 244.8, + 467.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ADMISSIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 28, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.8, + 534.6 + ], + [ + 331.4769592285156, + 534.6 + ], + [ + 331.4769592285156, + 550.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 244.8, + 550.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 342.63 + ], + [ + 375.49420166015625, + 342.63 + ], + [ + 375.49420166015625, + 358.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 358.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 32, + "polygon": [ + [ + 214.2, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 427.92852783203125, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 427.92852783203125, + 131.156494140625 + ], + [ + 214.2, + 131.156494140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S \nFIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS (dated 03123/09)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 32, + "polygon": [ + [ + 143.208, + 370.17 + ], + [ + 498.41436767578125, + 370.17 + ], + [ + 498.41436767578125, + 401.5364685058594 + ], + [ + 143.208, + 401.5364685058594 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 39, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.1, + 660.96 + ], + [ + 386.44378662109375, + 660.96 + ], + [ + 386.44378662109375, + 679.152961730957 + ], + [ + 260.1, + 679.152961730957 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 44 + ], + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 36 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 34 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 42 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "Line", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 72 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 393 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 38, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 39, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 76 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 40, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744864" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/_page_21_Picture_4.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/_page_21_Picture_4.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b1a824558bd1e00596d2429db1759e213b7bf36a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/_page_21_Picture_4.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:17f09377f827701db58df6a5ec39f05b8763b4440821e29f442c369ce2e2aabc +size 6684 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/_page_28_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/_page_28_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7eccced5f51adda7e97c72a94e5cd08d0b6bd44d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/_page_28_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6b22581bd23b92cbf7f6bb2eb77f196c9ab443e4569a65a74308e08bc731e17a +size 6511 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/_page_32_Picture_12.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/_page_32_Picture_12.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9f74b5ea92974cad3e708791f1a910c1340012c3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744864/_page_32_Picture_12.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6a65c2c31c1dfa6ced6a62614569d9f525d65d57e7470665e4041380d3896444 +size 5780 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744905/EFTA02744905.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744905/EFTA02744905.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6cf264ea2a66dd878dc26da48465a950b2ac25bd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744905/EFTA02744905.md @@ -0,0 +1,115 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MAIMAMMI + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MAR + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. Ii, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Their Reply to Plaintiff? Motion for Leave to File Under Seal Responsc in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay or, in the Alternative, to Unseal the Non-Prosecution Agreement. Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Their Reply to Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Under Seal Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay or, in the Alternative, to Unseal the Non-Prosecution Agreement is hereby GRANTED, making their reply due June 30, 2009. + +DONE AND ORDERED in this day of June, 2009. + +UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE + +Copies furnished: All counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744905/EFTA02744905.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744905/EFTA02744905.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..70f1117aca48f440862b6a7b09add7c9f78abdfe --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744905/EFTA02744905.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744905.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1890, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.2, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.91799999999998, + 74.14501953125 + ], + [ + 406.44390869140625, + 74.14501953125 + ], + [ + 406.44390869140625, + 102.86248779296875 + ], + [ + 206.91799999999998, + 102.86248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 283.668, + 542.7 + ], + [ + 332.6430969238281, + 542.7 + ], + [ + 332.6430969238281, + 558.1125030517578 + ], + [ + 283.668, + 558.1125030517578 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744905" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744909/EFTA02744909.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744909/EFTA02744909.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9c3369d8890c6d9093ea43783a3f9ddcb6c994e9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744909/EFTA02744909.md @@ -0,0 +1,230 @@ +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119- + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff; vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380- + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff; vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993- + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-8081l-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff; vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA + +Plaintiff, VS.. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO.101 AND JANE DOE 102'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE THEIR REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY OR. IN THE ALTERNATIVE. TO UNSEAL THE NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 ("Plaintiffs"), move this Court for an order enlarging the time in which they must reply to Plaintiffs' Motion For Leave to File Under Seal Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay or, in the Alternative, to Unseal the Non-Prosecution Agreement. The grounds for this motion are as follows: + +- 1. The issue may be made moot at a June 25, 2009, hearing before Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Colbath. +- 2. This motion is not made for the purpose of delay and should be grantcd in the interest of equity and faimess. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs , Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe 102, request an enlargement of time up to and including June 30, 2009, to file their reply to the Plaintiffs' Motion For Leave to File Under Seal Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay or, in the Alternative, to Unseal the Non-Prosccution Agreement. + +## CERTIF1CATE OF HAVING CONFERRED WITTI OPPOSING COUNSEL PURSUANT TO S.D.L.R. 7.1.A.3 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, one of the undersigned counsel for the Plaintiff hereby certifies that he has confcrred with one of the attomeys for the Defendant, Robert Critton, Esq., about the matters raised in this Motion. Mr. Critton advised that the Defendant does not oppose the Motion or the relief sought herein. + +DATED this 19°' day of June, 2009. + +Respectfully subtnitted, + +By: Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856 Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771 Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, Florida 33130 (305) 358-2800 (305) 358-2382 (fax) rjosefsberg®podhurst.com kezell@uodhurst.com Artorneys for Plaintiff + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 19th day of June, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff + +By: s/Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Br No. 040856 riosefsberganodhurstcom Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 k e7.0 I (40 d h1.11.51. CO In City National Bank Building 25 W. Hagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +# SERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Case No. 08-CV-80119- United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820 Fax: (561) 515-3148 reritrakciclaw.com mpike®bciclaw.com Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300 Fax: (561) 835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360 Fax: (561) 828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9456 isilasearevlaw.com joh@searcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Adam Horowitz, Esq. + +Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +Phone: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com + +smermelstein@sexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,0840232, 0840380, 08-80381, 0840993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. + +Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. + +Leopold Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +Phone: (561) 515-1400 + +Fax: (561) 515-1401 + +skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com + +tleopold@leopoldkuvin.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Phone: (561) 582-7600 + +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +jawverwillits@aol.com + +reelrhw@hottnail.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +Brad Ma Esq. + +Law Office of Brad & Associates, LLC + +2028 Street, Suite 202 + +Hollywood, FL 33020 + +Phone: (954) 414-8033 + +Fax: (954) 924-1530 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +be@bradedwardslaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Isidro Manuel MI, Esq. + +Elkins & Bochringer + +224 Datura Avenue, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 832-8033 + +Fax: (561) 832-7137 + +isidroaarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744909/EFTA02744909.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744909/EFTA02744909.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8a286901fae26c452f926062792bbfb0e2cbc1ad --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744909/EFTA02744909.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,440 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744909.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 6268, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.2, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 208.14600000000002, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 406.8168029785156, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 406.8168029785156, + 103.99249267578125 + ], + [ + 208.14600000000002, + 103.99249267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO.101 AND JANE DOE 102'S MOTION FOR \nENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE THEIR REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR \nLEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO \nDEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY OR. IN THE ALTERNATIVE. TO \nUNSEAL THE NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.38199999999999, + 503.82 + ], + [ + 541.548, + 503.82 + ], + [ + 541.548, + 576.7330169677734 + ], + [ + 69.38199999999999, + 576.7330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIF1CATE OF HAVING CONFERRED WITTI OPPOSING \nCOUNSEL PURSUANT TO S.D.L.R. 7.1.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 135.08, + 305.37 + ], + [ + 475.88983154296875, + 305.37 + ], + [ + 475.88983154296875, + 334.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 135.08, + 334.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 224.10999999999999, + 79.38 + ], + [ + 388.8902587890625, + 79.38 + ], + [ + 388.8902587890625, + 92.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 224.10999999999999, + 92.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.02, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 353.7062683105469, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 353.7062683105469, + 93.11248779296875 + ], + [ + 264.02, + 93.11248779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 87 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 38 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744909" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744917/EFTA02744917.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744917/EFTA02744917.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3694001b902ad97f357e7a15dd2355890f2c9843 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744917/EFTA02744917.md @@ -0,0 +1,189 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994- + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA + +I + +### PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO.101 AND JANE DOE 102'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE THEIR REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR AN ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE (D.E. 114) + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 ("Plaintiff% move this Court for an order enlarging the time in which they must reply to Plaintiffs' Motion For an Order For The Preservation of Evidence (D.E. 114). The grounds for this motion are as follows: + +- 1. Due to travel and court commitments, undersigned counsel needs an additional seven +- (7) days to reply. +- 2. This motion is not made for the purpose of delay and should be granted in the interest of equity and fairness. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs , Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe 102, request an enlargement of time up to and including June 26, 2009, to file their reply to the Plaintiffs' Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence (D.E. 114). + +#### CERTIFICATE OF HAVING CONFERRED WITH OPPOSING COUNSEL PURSUANT TO S.D.L.R. 7.1.A.3 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, one of the undersigned counsel for the Plaintiff hereby certifies that he has conferred with one of the attorneys for the Defendant, Robert Critton, Esq., about the matters raised in this Motion. Mr. Critton advised that the Defendant does not oppose the Motion or the relief sought herein. + +DATED this 19th day of June, 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856 Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771 Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, Florida 33130 (305) 358-2800 (305) 358-2382 (fax) rjosefsberg©podhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Attorneys for Plaintiff + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 19th day of June, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff + +By: s/Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg Ha. Br No. 040856 rjosefsbereodhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell@podhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +# SERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRa United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820 Fax: (561) 515-3148 rcrit®bciclaw.com mpike@bciclaw.com Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300 Fax: (561) 835-8691 ineso@bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Bnice E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360 Fax: (561) 828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9456 jsx@searcvlaw.com jph@searcvlaw.corn, + +Counsel for PlainhffC.MA. + +Adam Horowitz, Esq. Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. Mennelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Phone: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 shorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com + +smermelstein@sexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. Leopold Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Phone: (561) 515-1400 Fax: (561) 515-1401 pkuvineleopoldkuvin.com tkowld@leovoldlcuvin.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 Phone: (561) 582-7600 Fax: (561) 588-8819 lawyerwillitsi@aol.corn reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 0840811 + +Brad Esq. Law Office of Brad & Associates, LLC 2028 Street, Suite 202 Hollywood, FL 33020 Phone: (954) 414-8033 Fax: (954) 924-1530 bedwards@rra-law.com be@bradedwardslaw.corn + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Isidro Manuel =, Esq. + +Elkins & Boehringer + +224 Datura Avenue, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 832-8033 + +Fax: (561) 832-7137 + +isidmgarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744917/EFTA02744917.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744917/EFTA02744917.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c8b26b18bad65d0df111ff9ea53bde5b4c6c522c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744917/EFTA02744917.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,440 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744917.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 5976, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.83, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.532, + 76.7750244140625 + ], + [ + 406.8176574707031, + 76.7750244140625 + ], + [ + 406.8176574707031, + 105.11248779296875 + ], + [ + 207.532, + 105.11248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO.101 AND JANE DOE 102'S MOTION FOR \nENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE THEIR REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR \nAN ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE (D.E. 114)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.452, + 545.13 + ], + [ + 544.0859375, + 545.13 + ], + [ + 544.0859375, + 590.6030120849609 + ], + [ + 72.452, + 590.6030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF HAVING CONFERRED WITH OPPOSING \nCOUNSEL PURSUANT TO S.D.L.R. 7.1.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 138.15, + 277.7750244140625 + ], + [ + 478.306, + 277.7750244140625 + ], + [ + 478.306, + 306.11248779296875 + ], + [ + 138.15, + 306.11248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 224.10999999999999, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 389.270263671875, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 389.270263671875, + 92.60302734375 + ], + [ + 224.10999999999999, + 92.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.792, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 354.5112609863281, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 354.5112609863281, + 94.23248291015625 + ], + [ + 262.792, + 94.23248291015625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744917" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744925/EFTA02744925.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744925/EFTA02744925.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..eb88d93b85dc102ed28d664cff13f0685b41e144 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744925/EFTA02744925.md @@ -0,0 +1,175 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MABRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380- + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381- + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994- + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993- + +Plaintiff; vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 11, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MAltRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO.101 AND JANE DOE 102'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE THEIR REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR AN ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE (D.E. 1141 + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 ("Plaintiff"), move this Court for an order enlarging the time in which they must reply to Plaintiffs' Motion For an Order For The Preservation of Evidence (D.E. 114). The grounds for this motion are as follows: + +- 1. Due to travel and court commitments, undersigned counsel needs an additional seven +- (7) days to reply. +- 2. This motion is not made for the purpose of delay and should be granted in the interest of equity and fairness. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs , Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe 102, request an enlargement of time up to and including June 26, 2009, to file their reply to the Plaintiffs' Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence (D.E. 114). + +### CERTIFICATE OF HAVING CONFERRED WITH OPPOSING COUNSEL PURSUANT TO S.D.L.R. 7.1.A.3 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, one of the undersigned counsel for the Plaintiff hereby certifies that he has conferred with one of the attorneys for the Defendant Robert Critton, Esq., about the matters raised in this Motion. Mr. Critton advised that the Defendant does not oppose the Motion or the relief sought herein. + +DATED this 19' day of June, 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856 Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771 Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, Florida 33130 (305) 358-2800 (305) 358-2382 (fax) rjosefsberg©podhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Attorneys for Plaintiff + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 19th day of June, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff + +By: 5/Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Br No. 040856 rjosefsbenz@podhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell@podhurst.corn City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +# SERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRa United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820 Fax: (561) 515-3148 scrit@bcIclaw.com mpike@bc1claw.com Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300 Fax: (561) 835-8691 ineso@bellsoutknet Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360 Fax: (561) 828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9456 jsx@searcvlaw.com iph@searcvlaw.com, + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.MA. + +Adam Horowitz, Esq. Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Phone: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com + +smermelstein@sexabuseattomey.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 0840119,08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. Leopold Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Phone: (561) 515-1400 Fax: (561) 515-1401 pkuvin@Jeopoldkuvin.com tkowld@leovoldlcuvin.com + +Counsel for Plainti fir in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 Phone: (561) 582-7600 Fax: (561) 588-8819 lawyerwillits®aol.com reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 0840811 + +Brad Esq. Law Office of Brad & Associates, LLC 2028 Street, Suite 202 Hollywood, FL 33020 Phone: (954) 414-8033 Fax: (954) 924-1530 bedwards@rra-law.com be@bradedwardslaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Isidro Manuel =, Esq. + +Elkins & Boehringer + +224 Datura Avenue, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 832-8033 + +Fax: (561) 832-7137 + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744925/EFTA02744925.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744925/EFTA02744925.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c5a13a716d3b19e49adf0231a21a63024783beae --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744925/EFTA02744925.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,440 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744925.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 5956, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.88, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.532, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 406.8176574707031, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 406.8176574707031, + 105.11248779296875 + ], + [ + 207.532, + 105.11248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO.101 AND JANE DOE 102'S MOTION FOR \nENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE THEIR REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR \nAN ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE (D.E. 1141", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.06599999999999, + 545.94 + ], + [ + 544.1445922851562, + 545.94 + ], + [ + 544.1445922851562, + 590.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 73.06599999999999, + 590.9830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF HAVING CONFERRED WITH OPPOSING \nCOUNSEL PURSUANT TO S.D.L.R. 7.1.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 138.15, + 277.02 + ], + [ + 478.306, + 277.02 + ], + [ + 478.306, + 306.11248779296875 + ], + [ + 138.15, + 306.11248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 224.72399999999996, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 389.6711730957031, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 389.6711730957031, + 92.73248291015625 + ], + [ + 224.72399999999996, + 92.73248291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.792, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 354.5112609863281, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 354.5112609863281, + 94.23248291015625 + ], + [ + 262.792, + 94.23248291015625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 87 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744925" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744933/EFTA02744933.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744933/EFTA02744933.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..73722285e176443764d48a51314461234e10529b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744933/EFTA02744933.md @@ -0,0 +1,119 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAMM + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASENO.: 08-CV-80232- + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA I + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MAR + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993- + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARla + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Unopposed Amended Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Their Reply to Defendant's Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence (D.E. 114). Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Unopposed Amended Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Their Reply to Plaintiffs' Motion for and Order for the Preservation of Evidence (D.E. 114) is hereby GRANTED, making their reply due June 26, 2009. + +DONE AND ORDERED in this day of June, 2009. + +UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE + +Copies furnished: All counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744933/EFTA02744933.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744933/EFTA02744933.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8916ece550bf3ebed6943084a23ded1482c6870b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744933/EFTA02744933.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744933.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1776, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.22, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 208.14600000000002, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 406.434814453125, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 406.434814453125, + 105.11248779296875 + ], + [ + 208.14600000000002, + 105.11248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 283.668, + 545.13 + ], + [ + 331.4879150390625, + 545.13 + ], + [ + 331.4879150390625, + 560.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 283.668, + 560.2330169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744933" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744937/EFTA02744937.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744937/EFTA02744937.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f0a5d6c5f677995f26c0aafd0bc73a47a5e35474 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744937/EFTA02744937.md @@ -0,0 +1,161 @@ +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/=. + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff; vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRAJ + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARIta + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA1 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-804459-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRAi + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO.101 AND JANE DOE 102'S UNOPPOSED AMENDED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE THEIR REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR AN ORDER FOR TILE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE (D.E. 114) + +Plaintiffs, Jane DoeNo. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 ("Plaintiff'), move this Court for an order enlarging the time in which to reply to Defendant's response to Plaintiffs' Motion For an Order For The Preservation of Evidence (D.E. 114). The grounds for this motion are as follows: + +- 1. Due to travel and court commitments, undersigned counsel needs an additional seven +- (7) days to reply. +- 2. This motion is not made for the purpose of delay and should be granted in the interest of equity and fairness. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs , Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe 102, request an enlargement of time up to and including June 26, 2009, to file their reply to Defendant's response to the Plaintiff? Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence (D.E. 114). + +# CERTIFICATE OF HAVING CONFERRED WITH OPPOSING COUNSEL PURSUANT TO S.D.L.R. 7.1.A.3 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, one of the undersigned counsel for the Plaintiff hereby certifies that he has conferred with one of the attorneys for the Defendant, Robert Critton, Esq., about the matters raised in this Motion. Mr. Critton advised that the Defendant does not oppose the Motion or the relief sought herein. + +DATED this 22nd day of June, 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856 Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771 Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, Florida 33130 (305) 358-2800 (305) 358-2382 (fax) rjosefsbergOoodhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Attorneys for Plaintiff + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 22"" day of June, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff + +By: s/Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Br No. 040856 rjosefsberg@podhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezellftiodhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +#### SERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAi United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820 Fax: (561) 515-3148 rcrit@bciclaw.com mnikekbeiclaw.com Counsel for Defendant. Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300 Fax: (561) 835-8691 jagesqabellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant. Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360 Fax: (561) 828-0983 ccf@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9456 jsx@searcylaw.com jph®searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Adam Horowitz, Esq. Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Phone: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com + +smennelstein@sexabuseattomey.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,0840232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. Leopold Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Phone: (561) 515-1400 Fax: (561) 515-1401 skuvin@leonoldkuvin.com + +tleopoldaleopoldkuvin.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 Phone: (561) 582-7600 Fax: (561) 588-8819 lawyenvillitsaaol.com + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +Brad =I, Esq. Law Office of Brad 84 Associates, LIE 2028 Street, Suite 202 Hollywood, FL 33020 Phone: (954) 414-8033 Fax: (954) 924-1530 bedwards@sra-law.com be@bradedwardslaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Isidro Manuel =, Esq. Elkins & Boehringer 224 Datum Avenue, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 832-8033 Fax: (561) 832-7137 isidrogarcialabellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744937/EFTA02744937.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744937/EFTA02744937.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bcd039c0ef46e31091d94d6a2e307d4afb76a833 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744937/EFTA02744937.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,440 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744937.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 6065, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.64, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.532, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 405.684814453125, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 405.684814453125, + 104.36248779296875 + ], + [ + 207.532, + 104.36248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO.101 AND JANE DOE 102'S UNOPPOSED \nAMENDED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE THEIR REPLY TO \nDEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR AN ORDER FOR TILE \nPRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE (D.E. 114)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.75, + 542.7 + ], + [ + 537.25, + 542.7 + ], + [ + 537.25, + 601.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 76.75, + 601.4830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF HAVING CONFERRED WITH OPPOSING \nCOUNSEL PURSUANT TO S.D.L.R. 7.1.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 135.694, + 273.78000000000003 + ], + [ + 476.464, + 273.78000000000003 + ], + [ + 476.464, + 303.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 135.694, + 303.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.338, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 389.24810791015625, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 389.24810791015625, + 90.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 225.338, + 90.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.178, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 351.7940368652344, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 351.7940368652344, + 89.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 262.178, + 89.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 87 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744937" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744945/EFTA02744945.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744945/EFTA02744945.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..929e638f186c12cdfb05a636a8cb57e4a4d628e2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744945/EFTA02744945.md @@ -0,0 +1,125 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAME + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232- + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA' + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381- + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/ + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Unopposed Amended Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Their Reply to Defendant's Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Under Seal Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay or, in the Alternative, to Unseal the Non-Prosecution Agreement. Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Plaintiffs Jane Doc No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Amended Unopposed Motion for Enlargement ofTimc to File Their Reply to Defendant's Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Under Seal Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay or, in the Alternative, to Unseal the Non-Prosecution Agreement is hereby GRANTED, making their reply due June 30, 2009. + +DONE AND ORDERED in this day of June, 2009. + +UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE + +Copies furnished: All counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744945/EFTA02744945.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744945/EFTA02744945.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..298ae345efcb6fd7df9d062e8c1e32b78dceca4d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744945/EFTA02744945.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744945.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1994, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.35, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.532, + 76.0250244140625 + ], + [ + 406.44390869140625, + 76.0250244140625 + ], + [ + 406.44390869140625, + 104.36248779296875 + ], + [ + 207.532, + 104.36248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.44, + 542.7 + ], + [ + 331.86370849609375, + 542.7 + ], + [ + 331.86370849609375, + 556.9925079345703 + ], + [ + 282.44, + 556.9925079345703 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744945" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744949/EFTA02744949.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744949/EFTA02744949.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..15862641a6cbf48cecdf1e182880fd48b221198b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744949/EFTA02744949.md @@ -0,0 +1,202 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAI + +Plaintiff, VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA=M + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-8081 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA1 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591- + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA' + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO.101 AND JANE DOE 102'S UNOPPOSED AMENDED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE THEIR REPLY TO DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO UNSEAL THE NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 ("Plaintiffs"), move this Court for an order enlarging the time in which to reply to Defendant's response to Plaintiffs' Motion For Leave to File Under Seal Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay or, in the Alternative, to Unseal the Non-Prosecution Agreement. The grounds for this motion are as follows: + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 22' day of June, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff + +By: s/Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Br No. 040856 riosefsberg(podhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell@podhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +- 1. The issue may be made moot at a June 25, 2009, hearing before Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Colbath. +- 2. This motion is not made for the purpose of delay and should be granted in the interest of equity and fairness. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe 102, request an enlargement of time up to and including June 30, 2009, to file a reply to Defendant's response to the Plaintiffs' Motion For Leave to File Under Seal Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay or, in the Alternative, to Unseal the Non-Prosecution Agreement. + +# CERTIFICATE OF HAVING CONFERRED WITH OPPOSING COUNSEL PURSUANT TO S.D.L.R. 7.1.A.3 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, one of the undersigned counsel for the Plaintiff hereby certifies that he has conferred with one of the attorneys for the Defendant, Robert Critton, Esq., about the matters raised in this Motion. Mr. Critton advised that the Defendant does not oppose the Motion or the relief sought herein. + +DATED this 22' day of June, 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856 Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771 Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, Florida 33130 (305) 358-2800 (305) 358-2382 (fax) riosefsberit(thmodhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Attorneys for Plaintiff + +## \$ERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRa United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Duman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820 Fax: (561) 515-3148 rcritlabc1claw.com tn,pike@bc1claw.com Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300 Fax: (561) 835-8691 jageso@bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360 Fax: (561) 828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.oant Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. ■, **Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9456 isx@,searcvlaw.com joh searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff** + +Adam Horowitz, Esq. + +Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. + +Merrnelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +Phone: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +ahorowitz@isexabuseattornev.com + +stnermelstein@sexabuseattomey.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. + +Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. + +Leopold Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +Phone: (561) 515-1400 + +Fax: (561) 515-1401 + +skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com + +tleopold@leopoldkuvin.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Phone: (561) 582-7600 + +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +lavryerwillits@aol.com + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +Brad Esq. + +Law Office of Brad & Associates, LLC + +2028 Street, Suite 202 + +Hollywood, FL 33020 + +Phone: (954) 414-8033 + +Fax: (954) 924-1530 + +bedwards@ra-law.com + +be@bradedwardslawcom + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Isidro Manuel Esq. Elkins & Boehringer 224 Datura Avenue, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 832-8033 Fax: (561) 832-7137 isidrogarcia(abellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 0840469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744949/EFTA02744949.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744949/EFTA02744949.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2cd922562ea449e518ad570de6ab124adb51ee82 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744949/EFTA02744949.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,440 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744949.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 6332, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.17, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.532, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 405.31396484375, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 405.31396484375, + 104.36248779296875 + ], + [ + 207.532, + 104.36248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO.101 AND JANE DOE 102'S UNOPPOSED AMENDED \nMOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE THEIR REPLY TO \nDEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE \nUNDER SEAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY \nOR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO UNSEAL THE NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 71.838, + 501.39 + ], + [ + 541.06787109375, + 501.39 + ], + [ + 541.06787109375, + 574.3000183105469 + ], + [ + 71.838, + 574.3000183105469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.338, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 389.270263671875, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 389.270263671875, + 91.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 225.338, + 91.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF HAVING CONFERRED WITH OPPOSING \nCOUNSEL PURSUANT TO S.D.L.R. 7.1.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 135.08, + 302.94 + ], + [ + 476.464, + 302.94 + ], + [ + 476.464, + 333.49249267578125 + ], + [ + 135.08, + 333.49249267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "$ERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.792, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 351.7940368652344, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 351.7940368652344, + 89.60302734375 + ], + [ + 262.792, + 89.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 88 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 38 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744949" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744957/EFTA02744957.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744957/EFTA02744957.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2a319dff5bc1844a65e93e92028111f77c575969 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744957/EFTA02744957.md @@ -0,0 +1,159 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA=.1 + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRAI + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA1 + +Plaintiff vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA' + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-8081 I -MARItia + +Plaintiff vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893- + +Plaintiff" vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. IL CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF STRIKING DOCKET ENTRY + +Plaintiffs JANE DOE NO. 101 and JANE DOE 102 give notice of striking Docket Entry 167, their Motion for Enlargement of Time To File Their Reply To Plaintiffs' Motion For An Order For The Preservation of Evidence (D.E. 114) on the following grounds: + +- 1. The proposed Order was inadvertently omitted, and + +2. Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102 have filed an Unopposed Amended Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Their Reply to Defendant's Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence (D.E. 114), which was filed as Docket Entry 168 and renders Docket Entry 167 moot. The corrected document has been re-filed with the Court. + +DATED this 22nd day of June, 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856 Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771 Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, Florida 33130 (305) 358-2800 (305) 358-2382 (fax) riosefsbergailodhutst.com kezell@podhurst.com Attorneys for Plaintiff + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 22' day of June, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who arc not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff + +By: s/Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg Ha. Br No. 040856 riosefsbergQoodhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezellOpodhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## SERVICE I.IST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA I United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820 Fax: (561) 515-3148 rcrit@bciclaw.com mpike@belclaw.com Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300 Fax: (561) 835-8691 jagesq®bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360 Fax: (561) 828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. ■, **Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9456 ju@searcylaw.com jph@scarcvlaw.corn** + +Counsel for + +Adam Horowitz, Esq. Stuart Mennelstein, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Phone: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 ahorowitz©sexabuseattomev.com + +smermelsteinOsexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,08-80232, 0840380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. Leopold Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Phone: (561) 515-1400 Fax: (561) 515-1401 skuvin©leopoldkuvin.com + +tleopold©leopoldkuvin.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 229010'" Ave North, Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 Phone: (561) 582-7600 Fax: (561) 588-8819 lawyerwiltits@aolcom melrhw@hotmail.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 0840811 + +Brad M, Esq. Law Office of Brad & Associates, LIE 2028 Street, Suite 202 Hollywood, FL 33020 Phone: (954) 4148033 Fax: (954) 924-1530 bedwards(iArra-law.com be@bradedwardslaw.corn + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Isidro Manuel Esq. + +Elkins & Boehringer + +224 Datura Avenue, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 832-8033 + +Fax: (561) 832-7137 + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744957/EFTA02744957.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744957/EFTA02744957.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9dd97d923ed4fabb9fc91b6e1913d1197d18e730 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744957/EFTA02744957.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,413 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744957.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 5363, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.87, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.532, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 405.3305969238281, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 405.3305969238281, + 103.61248779296875 + ], + [ + 207.532, + 103.61248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF STRIKING DOCKET ENTRY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 151.044, + 541.8900000000001 + ], + [ + 462.74151611328125, + 541.8900000000001 + ], + [ + 462.74151611328125, + 557.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 151.044, + 557.2330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.338, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 389.6711730957031, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 389.6711730957031, + 103.23248291015625 + ], + [ + 225.338, + 103.23248291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE I.IST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.178, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 352.26824951171875, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 352.26824951171875, + 89.60302734375 + ], + [ + 262.178, + 89.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 87 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744957" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/EFTA02744965.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/EFTA02744965.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ec11d70223b5bfd627d439da34cd07d1e8b3f56b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/EFTA02744965.md @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ +![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg) + +## BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN LLP + +1. MICHAEL BURMAN, PA, GREGORY W. COLEMAN, PA. ROBERT D. CRITTONdR., PA! BERNARD LEBEDEKER MARK T. LU1TIER, PA. RCFPREY C. PEPIN MICHAEL I. MKS HEATHER MCNAMARA RUDA + +I MAEDA sonstuCERMTSD CIVIL MEAL LAWYER + +A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP + +## Sent by E-Mall and U.S. Mall + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 + +Re: + +![](_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg) + +Dear Bob: + +May 12, 2009 + +ADELQUI J. BENAVENTE MASI RIVESTKIATOR + +BARBARA M. MOCENNA ASHUR STOKEIN•BARING BE STOKES MAALEOALS + +RITA IL BUDNYK OP COUNSEL + +By this letter, you and your clients are hereby given notice not to destroy, conceal or alter any paper or electronic files and other data generated by and/or stored on your clients' computer and storage media (e.g., hard disks, backup tapes), or any other electronic data, such as voice mail. This Includes Facebook, MySpace and any other social networking services. As you know, your clients' failure to comply with this notice can result in severe sanctions being imposed by the Court and liability in tort for spoliation of evidence or the adverse inference being imposed. + +In order to avoid spoliation, you must be prepared to provide the data requested on the original media. They must not reuse any media on which potentially relevant data is presently stored. + +Although we may bring a motion for an order preserving documents and things from destruction or alternation, your clients' obligation to preserve documents and things for discovery in this case arises in law and equity independently from any order on such motion. + +515 N. FLAMER DRIVE / SUITE 400 / WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33401 TELEPHONE (561) 842-28D3 FAX (561) 844-6929 mallabclelaw.corn + +![](_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg) + +May11, 2009 + +Page 2 + +Electronic documents and the storage media on which they reside contain relevant, discoverable information beyond that which may be found In printed documents. Therefore, even where a paper copy exists, we may seek all documents in their electronic form along with information about those documents contained on the media. We also may seek paper printouts of only those documents that contain unique information after they were printed out (such as paper documents containing handwriting, signatures, drawings, annotations, highlighting and redactions) along with any paper documents for which no corresponding electronic files exist. + +Our discovery requests may ask for certain data on hard disks, floppy disks and backup media used in your clients' computers, some of which data are not readily available to an ordinary computer user, such as "deleted" files and "file fragments." As ybu may know, although a user may "erase" or °delete" a file, all that is really erased is a reference to that file in a table on the hard disk' unless overwritten with new data, a "deleted" file can be intact on the disk as any "active" file you would see in a directory listing. + +With regard to electronic data created subsequent to the date of delivery of this letter, relevant evidence is not to be destroyed, and your clients are to take whatever steps are appropriate to avoid destruction of evidence. + +In order to assure that you and your clients' obligation to preserve documents and things will be met, please forward a copy of this letter to all persons with custodial responsibility for the items referred to in this lett + +Cordially + +Rob- D. Critton, Jr. + +RDC/clz + +cc: Jack Goldberger, Esq. J. Michael Burman, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. • \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/EFTA02744965.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/EFTA02744965.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f1cdbdc03905492cf41a0e14f5f48d6dd280efcd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/EFTA02744965.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,151 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 3582, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.32, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER \n& COLEMAN LLP", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.46800000000002, + 109.1268310546875 + ], + [ + 422.6610107421875, + 109.1268310546875 + ], + [ + 422.6610107421875, + 145.48406982421875 + ], + [ + 207.46800000000002, + 145.48406982421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Sent by E-Mall and U.S. Mall", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 91.18799999999999, + 244.61999999999998 + ], + [ + 247.32968139648438, + 244.61999999999998 + ], + [ + 247.32968139648438, + 260.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 91.18799999999999, + 260.41998291015625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 107 + ], + [ + "Line", + 51 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744965" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2e3bc7f13528e39ecf5a98e498a4894e423c4888 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:187d1539d92ea8d8a6632361c95c177c88de8a8a14f6def9d3e4922b26543034 +size 7227 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7ed67cbc6fc6b9540695c21e78e1608211480e7b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7711a0be43bede6aaf3e698fecf3c669097f0794a9816edbe81ee47795c11dfd +size 10164 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a489b69019f249975e6ac0c778654a7912e2f275 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744965/_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d09c170dd870a4244a9289fbd9a0158e5081445e1b19b9a12fe800e62d1ae630 +size 13375 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744967/EFTA02744967.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744967/EFTA02744967.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8f4234610922739e2e2580acce15284e36791dc0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744967/EFTA02744967.md @@ -0,0 +1,183 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +Plaintiff. + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. ll, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRAI + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO. 101 AND JANE DOE NO. 102'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' FOR AN ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE + +Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 (collectively, "Plaintiffs") reply to Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence ("Response") and state as follows: + +I. Defendant complains that Plaintiffs "once again mislead and mischaracterize the criminal counts to which Epstein pled guilty" (Resp. 1 1) and that Plaintiffs' allegations in paragraphs 2 and 3 of Plaintiffs' Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence ("Motion") are without factual basis (id. 1 2). While Plaintiffs strenuously disagree with Defendant's statements, these allegations and denials are irrelevant to this Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence. + +2. Defendant asserts that he previously agreed to preserve all necessary evidence by way of an Order, attached to his Response as Exhibit "A," which Order was entered in another counsel's earlier-filed case, Jane Doe a/k/a Jane Doe No. I v. Epstein et at, Case No. 08-80804- C1V-MARRal [D.E. 20]. Defendant's attorneys state that they have no objections to a similar order being issued in the present case (see Resp. 1 4); however, defense counsel fail to mention in their Response that the Order in Jane Doe No. I does not provide for the preservation of evidence that Plaintiffs are requesting in the present case. The discovery request in Jane Doe No. I pertains merely to items listed in a property receipt for evidence confiscated by the Palm Beach Police Department. Here, Plaintiffs, through their Motion, request the preservation of relevant and discoverable evidence beyond those confiscated items. Defendant asserts no specific objections to any of the items listed in paragraphs 8 through 10 of Plaintiffs' Motion, but, instead, asks the Court to enter an order similar to the Order in Jane Doe No. 1, which would be tantamount to denying most of Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's preservation request. + +3. Defendant objects to Plaintiffs' request for preservation as being "grossly overly broad" (Resp.1 7), but fails to demonstrate any basis for this objection. Furthermore, this contention is hypocritical, considering that Defendant issued an equally, if not more, expansive request in his May 12, 2009 letter to Plaintiffs' counsel. See Ex. "A," attached hereto. Plaintiffs specify in paragraphs 8 through 10 of their Motion that the list of items to be preserved consists of relevant + +evidence.' In contrast, Defendant's letter requests the preservation of all computer files and electronic data, without any specification limiting his request to potentially relevant documents. + +4. Defendant complains that Plaintiffs' request to preserve evidence includes information that is not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, potential admissibility is not relevant to a preservation order, as the court recognized in Capricorn Power Co. v. Siemens Westinghouse Power Corp., 220 F.R.D. 429, 434 (W.D. Pa. 2004): "[A] motion for a preservation order can be granted with regard to all items of evidence which are discoverable in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1), without the necessity of establishing that the evidence will necessarily be relevant and admissible at trial." + +5. Defendant's Fifth Amendment concerns are premature, as Plaintiffs are not asking Defendant to produce evidence. Defendant admits in his Response that "[t]he Fifth Amendment Privilege extends to the act of production . . . ." (Resp. 1 7). Indeed, Defendant's entire Fifth Amendment privilege argument throughout his Response rests solely on case law dealing with the production of evidence. Defendant does not cite to any authority for his assertion that the privilege against self-incrimination applies to preserving, as opposed to producing, evidence. Unsurprisingly, Defendant merely posits, with no legal basis, that "Plaintiffs' motion to preserve evidence ... is in reality no different that [sic] propounding a discovery request upon Defendant, ...." (id.) Such an assertion is senseless. If and when a notice to produce is served, the Court will determine the + +One example of a relevant request by Plaintiffs in their Motion is for "records of domestic and international travel, including travel in Defendant's private airplanes• " Motion 18. Considering Count Two of Jane Doe No. 101's Amended Complaint, which is entitled "Travel with Intent to Engage in Illicit Sexual Conduct pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255 in Violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b)," (Amended Complaint 11 29-32), records of Defendant's travel are relevant and important documents that must be preserved. + +validity of any claims of Fifth Amendment privilege. Until then, briefing Fifth Amendment privilege issues is a waste of the Court's and counsel's time. + +6. Finally, whether the Non-Prosecution Agreement is, as Defendant coins it, a "deferred prosecution agreement" (see Resp. 76), is irrelevant to Plaintiffs' Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that the Court enter the order that Plaintiffs submitted with their Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence. + +DATED this 22nd day of June, 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856 Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771 Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, Florida 33130 (305) 358-2800 (305) 358-2382 (fax) rjosefsberg@podhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Attorneys for Plaintiff + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 22s day of June, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff + +By: s/Robert C. Josefsberg Robert C. Josefsberg Ha. Br No. 040856 rjosefsberg@podhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell@podhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## SERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRa United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820 Fax: (561) 515-3148 rcrit@bcIclaw.com mpike@bciclaw.com Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300 Fax: (561) 835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360 Fax: (561) 828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.corn Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9456 jsx@searcylaw.com jph@searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Adam Horowitz, Esq. Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Phone: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com smermelstein@sexabuseattornev.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. Leopold Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Phone: (561) 515-1400 Fax: (561) 515-1401 skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com tleopold@leopoldkuvin.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 Phone: (561) 582-7600 Fax: (561) 588-8819 Jawverwillits@aol,corn reelrhw@hotmail.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +Brad , Esq. Law Office of Brad & Associates, LLC 2028 Street, Suite 202 Hollywood, FL 33020 Phone: (954) 414-8033 Fax: (954) 924-1530 bedwards@rra-law.com be@bradedwartislaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Isidro Manuel Esq. Elkins & Boehringer 224 Datum Avenue, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 832-8033 + +Fax: (561) 832-7137 + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744967/EFTA02744967.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744967/EFTA02744967.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a3466149356aa2ee34a99ce899bb5c9c1f91ccd5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744967/EFTA02744967.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,477 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744967.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 9982, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.73, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO. 101 AND JANE DOE NO. 102'S REPLY \nIN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' FOR AN ORDER FOR THE \nPRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 115.05599999999998, + 490.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 497.8329772949219, + 490.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 497.8329772949219, + 533.6835327148438 + ], + [ + 115.05599999999998, + 533.6835327148438 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.9223937988281, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.9223937988281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 351.1353759765625, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 351.1353759765625, + 86.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 86.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 13 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744967" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744977/EFTA02744977.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744977/EFTA02744977.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7bf3e800f8c56c247467fd02edf321f8f4434dfc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744977/EFTA02744977.md @@ -0,0 +1,773 @@ +## DISTRICT 08-80119-CIV-MARRA UNITED STATES SOUTHERN WEST PALM CASE NO. DISTRICT COURT OF FLORIDA BEACH DIVISION + +4 WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, et al., + +Plaintiffs, + +vs. + +JUNE 12, 2009 + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE + +## APPEARANCES: + +FOR THE PLAINTIFFS: ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQ. Mermelstein & Horowitz 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Miami, FL 33160 305.931.2200 For Jane Doe + +> J. , ESQ. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Jane Doe 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 954.522.3456 + +20 ISIDRO M. , ESQ. Elkins Boehringer 224 Datura Avenue West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Jane DOE II 561.832.8033 23 RICHARD H. WILLITS, ESQ. 2290 10th Avenue North Lake Worth, FL 33461 For C.M.A. 561.582.7600 + +ROBERT C. JOSEFSBERG, ESQ. 2 Podhurst Orseck Josefsberg 25 West Flagler Street 3 Miami, FL 33130 For Jane Doe 101 305.358.2800 4 (Via telephone) 5 KATHERINE W. EZELL, ESQ. Podhurst Orseck Josefsberg 6 25 West Flagler Street Miami, FL 33130 7 For Jane Doe 101 305.358.2800 8 FOR THE DEFENDANT: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. MICHAEL BURMAN, ESQ. 9 Burman Critton, etc. 515 North Flagler Street 10 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561.842.2820 + +11 + +JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQ. 12 Atterbury Goldberger Weiss 250 Australian Avenue South 13 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561.659.8300 + +14 + +ANN VILLAFANA, ESQ. 15 Assistant U.S. Attorney 500 East Broward Boulevard 16 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33394 For U.S.A. 954.356 7255 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +REPORTED BY: + +G. WEINBERG, ESQ. 20 Park Plaza Boston II 02116 (Via telephone) 617.227.3700 JAY LEFKOWITZ, ESQ. (Via telephone) + +LARRY HERR, RPR-RMR-FCRR-AE Official United States Court Reporter Federally Certified Realtime Reporter 400 North Miami Avenue, Room 8N09 Miami, FL 33128 305.523.5290 1 2 THE COURT: We are here in the various Doe vs. Epstein cases. + +3 May I have counsel state their appearances? + +4 5 MR. HOROWITZ: Adam Horowitz, counsel for plaintiffs Jane 2 through Jane Doe 7. + +6 THE COURT: Good morning. + +7 8 MR. Doe. Brad , counsel for plaintiff Jane + +9 THE COURT: Good morning. + +10 11 MR. : Good morning, Your Honor. Sid for Jane Doe II. + +12 THE COURT: Good morning. + +13 14 MR. WILLITS: Good morning, Your Honor. Richard Willits, here on behalf of the plaintiff C.M.A.. + +15 THE COURT: Good morning. + +16 17 18 19 MS. EZELL: Good morning, Your Honor. I'm Katherine Ezell from Podhurst Orseck, here with Amy Adderly and Susan Bennett, and I believe my partner, Bob Josefsberg, is going to appear by telephone. + +20 THE COURT: Mr. Josefsberg, are you there? + +21 MR. JOSEFSBERG: I am, Your Honor. + +22 THE COURT: Good morning. + +23 MR. JOSEFSBERG: Good morning. + +24 25 THE COURT: All right. Do we have all the plaintiffs stated their appearances? Okay. + +2 3 MR. CRITTON: Your Honor, Robert Critton on behalf of Mr. Epstein, and my partner, Michael Burman. + +4 THE COURT: Good morning. + +5 6 MR. GOLDBERGER: Good morning, Your Honor. Jack Goldberger on behalf of Mr. Epstein. + +7 8 THE COURT: I see we have some representatives from the United States Attorney's Office here. + +9 10 MS. VILLAFANA: Good morning, Your Honor. Ann Villafana for the U.S. Attorney's office. + +11 THE COURT: Good morning. + +12 Who else do we have on the phone? + +13 14 MR. CRITTON: Your Honor, we have two members of the defense team are on the phone, also. + +15 THE COURT: Who do we have on the phone? + +16 17 MR. WEINBERG: Weinberg. Good morning, Your Honor. + +18 19 MR. LEFKOWITZ: Jay Lefkowitz. Good morning, Your Honor. + +20 THE COURT: Good morning. + +21 22 23 24 25 I scheduled this hearing for very limited issues which, as you all know, there's been a motion by Mr. Epstein to stay the civil proceedings against him. The one issue I have concern about is Mr. Epstein's contention or assertion that by defending against the allegations in the civil proceedings, he + +1 2 3 may expose himself to an allegation by the United States in the non-prosecution agreement that he's violated that agreement and therefore would subject himself to potential federal charges. + +4 5 6 7 8 I had asked for some briefing on this. I asked the United States to present its position to me. And I received the Government's written response, which I frankly didn't find very helpful. And I still am not sure I understand what the Government's position is on it. + +9 10 11 12 So first let me hear from Mr. Epstein's attorneys as to what do you believe the concern is. I don't believe the non-prosecution agreement has ever been filed in this Court; am I correct? + +13 MR. CRITTON: To my knowledge, Your Honor, it has not. + +14 15 THE COURT: So I don't believe I've ever seen the entire agreement. I've seen portions of it. + +16 17 18 MR. : Your Honor, I believe that it was filed under Jane Doe 1 and 2 vs. United States of America, case under seal in your court. + +19 THE COURT: Okay. + +20 MR. : In a separate case. + +21 22 THE COURT: In that case, okay. Was it actually filed in that case? + +23 MR. : I filed it under seal. + +24 25 THE COURT: In any event, what's Mr. Epstein's concern about if you defend the civil actions, you're going to expose + +1 2 yourself to a claim for a breach by the United States of the non-prosecution agreement? + +3 MR. CRITTON: Robert Critton. + +4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Your Honor, our position on this case is, I'd say is somewhat different. When this issue originally came before the Court, as you are aware prior to my firm's involvement in the case, there was a motion filed on behalf of Mr. Epstein seeking a stay. And I think it was in Jane Doe 102 and then subsequently Jane Doe 2 through 5 because all of those cases were filed on or about the same time. + +11 12 13 14 15 And at that time the Court looked at the issue and it was based upon a statutory provision at that time. And the Court said I don't find that it's applicable, or for whatever reason I think the Court said I don't consider that to be a pending proceeding or a proceeding at that particular time. + +16 17 18 19 In that same order, which was in Jane Doe 2, I believe it's -- not I believe, I know it's docket entry 33, the Court also went on to talk about at that particular point in time dealt with the issue of the discretionary stay. + +20 21 22 23 24 25 And the Court said at that time, I'm paraphrasing, but the Court also does not believe a discretionary stay is warranted. And what the Court went on to say is that if defendant does not breach the agreement, then he should have no concerns regarding his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. + +1 2 3 4 5 The fact that the U.S. Attorney or other law enforcement officials may object to some discovery in these civil cases is not in and of itself a reason to stay the civil litigation, so that any such issue shall be resolved as they arise in the course of the litigation. + +6 7 8 9 10 11 And I would respectfully submit to the Court that the position that the Government has taken in its most recent filings changes the playing field dramatically. Because what the Government in essence has said as distinct from the U.S. saying is, well, we object to some discovery, or we may object to some discovery in the civil cases. + +12 13 14 15 16 17 What they have, in essence, said is if you take some action, Mr. Epstein, that we believe unilaterally, and this is on pages 13 and 14 of their pleading or of their response memo to the Court's inquiry, they say if Mr. Epstein breaches the agreement. They said it's basically like a contract, and if one side breaches, the other side can sue. + +18 19 20 21 22 23 In this instance what the Government will do is if we believe that Mr. Epstein has breached the agreement, we'll indict him. We will indict him. And his remedy under that circumstance, which is an incredible and catastrophic catch 22 is, we'll indict him and then he can move to dismiss. That's a great option. + +24 25 In this particular instance my mandate in defending - and that's a dramatic change in the Government's position, + +1 2 3 4 5 6 because the Government is not saying, and the Court was pretty specific in what you asked the Government for in its response is, in essence, and it's the same question in a more limited fashion you're posing today is whether Mr. Epstein's defense of the civil action violates the NPA agreement, the non-prosecution agreement, between the U.S. and Mr. Epstein. + +7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 And the Government refuses to answer that question. They won't come out and say, yes, it will, or no, it won't. What they're doing is they want to sit on the sideline, and as their papers suggest is, they want us to lay in wait and that if, in fact, they believe he violates a provision of the NPA as it relates to the defense of this case or these multitude of cases, then they can come in and indict him -- no notice, no opportunity to cure. + +15 16 17 18 19 We don't think that's what the NPA says, but that's certainly what their papers say. We'll indict him, no notice, no opportunity to cure. We will indict him, and his remedy under that circumstance is that he can move to dismiss the indictment. + +20 21 22 23 24 Well, that's great except Mr. Epstein, his mandate to me and I know his mandate to his criminal lawyers, is: Make certain I don't do anything, in particular in these civil cases that would in any way suggest that I am in willful violation of the NPA. + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 33, certainly some aspects of the NPA are within Mr. Epstein's control. There's no question about that. But aspects that relate to the defense of these cases, either in terms of the civil lawyers who are defending these, I think there's 12 or 13 pending cases in front of you, there's another four cases in the state court, is the risk is substantial, it's real, and it presents a chilling effect for the civil lawyers in moving forward to determine whether or not we're taking some action that in some way may be a violation of the NPA. + +10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 And the Government's, again, refusal or non-position with regard to past acts that have been taken in the civil case with regard to the defense or future acts that we may take with regard to these contested litigation casts an extraordinary cloud of doubt and uncertainty and fear that the defense of these cases could jeopardize Mr. Epstein and put him in the irreparable position of violating the NPA and then subsequently being indicted. + +18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 In this particular instance, again, Mr. Epstein has no intention of willfully violating the NPA, but it's of great concern to him. And I'd say with the position that the Government has taken, no notice, no cure period, no opportunity to discuss. Again, we think that's not what the NPA provides, it's not what the deal was between the two contracting parties, the United States and Mr. Epstein. But that's clearly what their papers say under the circumstances, and it would create + +2 3 4 5 6 In essence, we're left with a catch 22 in defending the civil cases. We have a mandate to take no action, to take any action which may be deemed to be a violation of the NPA, either in the past or in the future, which would in any way risk Mr. Epstein being indicted by the United States. + +7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 He has the clear risk of an indictment based upon the papers that the Government filed. It's real, it's not remote, and it's not speculative. It chills the action of the defense in this instance of both Mr. Epstein and his attorneys in trying to defend these cases and decide under the circumstances can we do this, can we take this position with regard to depositions, can we take this legal position with regard to motions to dismiss, with regard to responses, with regard to replies? + +16 17 18 19 And we send out paper discovery. Is this in some way if we contact someone who may be an associate of these individuals as part of our investigation, is that potentially in any way a violation of the NPA? Again, we don't think so. + +20 21 22 23 24 25 And, obviously, again, my direction has been from my client: Don't take any action that would result in me being indicted under the NPA. Well, that's great. But, generally, civil lawyers or civil lawyers in defending a personal injury case or a tort case, which is exactly what these are, and from a practical standpoint, we use various tools to do discovery. + +2 Very typical. + +3 4 But in this instance, as the Court knows, things are not typical with regard to this case in any way, shape or form. + +5 We can't even serve subpoenaes, there's objections and there's + +6 -- we can't even serve objections to third parties so we can + +7 obtain documents unless we have to filter it through the + +8 plaintiffs' attorneys. They won't allow us to use their + +9 10 clients' names, even in a subpoena that would never be filed in the court. + +11 How do we do a deposition of a third party? We wanted + +12 to take the deposition of Jane Doe 4. Well, who is she? Well, + +13 we can't tell you that. Well, who's the defendant? Well, we + +14 can't tell you that because nobody wants anybody to know + +15 anything about the case. They want to present it strictly + +16 through -colored glasses. + +17 And in this particular instance, we simply can't + +18 defend this case or take certain action with the spector + +19 hanging over us that, in fact, the Government may deem it to be + +20 a violation of the NPA, because very clearly in their response + +21 papers, they don't say. They say we don't take the position, + +22 and then they take a substantial position is we think there's + +23 not all that substantial factors that would entitle him to a + +24 stay. + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 in the question is, is can he defend these cases? That's what I really want to know. Can he defend these cases and, in essence, what he has done in the past or what his defense team has done in the past and what they're going to do in the future, can you give him, Epstein, assurances that the Government under this situation, whatever he does, based on advice of counsel, that that cannot be a willful violation of the NPA, which they can -- they, the U.S. -- can then turn around and say that's a violation of the agreement and, therefore, we're going to go proceed to indict you under the circumstances. + +12 13 14 15 16 Our position is, Your Honor, is that the U.S. has now cavalierly suggested that, as they did in picking up on the court's docket entry or prior order, is, look, compliance with the NPA is solely up to Mr. Epstein. In this type of balance of equities, it doesn't speak in favor of a stay. + +17 18 19 Well, that's great. And maybe that was the position back in '08, on August 5th of '08, when the issue came up in front of the Court with regard to the initial stay. + +20 21 22 23 24 But the Government's papers under these circumstances suggested a very different set of circumstances. Their own unilateral, which is the issue that we argued in the motion for stay, is that the Government's position is that we can unilaterally indict this man if we think he's breached the NPA. + +1 2 3 4 between us and the Government. They'll say, and as the Court knows, the Government has substantial power. The Government does what it wants. Most of the time hopefully they're right. Sometimes they make mistakes. + +5 6 7 8 But in this particular instance, my client has rights. We think that there's notice provisions, we think there's cure provisions under the NPA. That's not what their paper says under the circumstances. + +9 10 11 12 13 14 15 And what we'd like to know from the Government, and maybe the answer is basically what the Court asks is, let the Government come forward today and say, based on the knowledge that we have, or as of today's date, June 12th, 2009, we, the Government, agree that there is no set of circumstances, not that we're not aware of, but as of today's date, there is nothing that exists that would be a violation of the NPA. + +16 17 18 19 20 21 THE COURT: Well, that's way beyond what I'm interested in. I don't know what Mr. Epstein may have done outside the context of defending this case that may constitute a violation. And if he has done something outside the context of defending this case that's a violation, I don't care. That's between the United States and Mr. Epstein. + +22 23 24 25 I'm only concerned about whether anything he does in defending these civil actions is going to be a violation of the non-prosecution agreement. If he has done something else, it's none of my business, and I don't care, and I'm not going to + +1 2 3 even ask the Government to give you an assurance that he hasn't done anything that might have violated the agreement up till today. I'm only interested in defending these civil actions. + +4 5 6 7 8 9 10 MR. CRITTON: Then I would respectfully submit to the Court that the Government be asked in that limited context, are they as of today, whether there were or not, but as of today is there anything that has been done or will you take the position, the United States, that any position that Mr. Epstein has taken with regard to defending these civil cases is in any way a violation of the NPA? + +11 12 13 14 THE COURT: Well, I'm not sure what they're going to say, but that might -- that cures the problem up to this point. But then we have to deal with what's going to happen from here on in. And that's another issue that we have to deal with. + +15 So I understand your position. + +16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 But has anyone suggested to you on behalf of the United States that there is something that you've done in defending this case that they believe may or could be construed as a violation of the non-prosecution agreement? Has anyone pointed to anything that you've done? For example, the fact that you've wanted to take their -- I don't know if you've noticed depositions or not in this case, but if you've sent notice of taking deposition, if you sent requests for production of documents, if you sent interrogatories, if you issued third party subpoenas? Is anything you've done thus far 1 2 in the context of this case been brought to your attention as a potential violation? + +3 4 5 6 7 8 MR. CRITTON: I have received no notification nor am I aware that we've received any notification of any action that we have taken today. As I suggested to the Court, I don't know when they've done or not. And in their papers they suggested, well, we don't know everything that's gone on in the civil litigation. + +9 10 11 But from a practical standpoint, it was a number of comments that were made in their papers is, we can indict, we can see if there's a breach. + +12 Judge, I may have some -- + +13 THE COURT: Before you go on. + +14 MR. CRITTON: I'm sorry. + +15 16 17 18 19 20 THE COURT: You've focused a great deal on the Government's response to my inquiry as supporting your position that you're in jeopardy. But you've made the suggestion, even before this brief was filed, that defending the case was going to potentially result in an assertion or allegation that you breached the non-prosecution agreement. + +21 22 23 24 25 So what was it that caused you to make that initial assertion? Because that's what caught my attention, was not - this brief that the Government has filed was in response to something that you filed initially in your most recent motion for a stay which raised the issue. + +1 2 3 So what was it that gave you some concern to even raise the issue that defending this case is going to constitute a breach? + +4 5 6 7 8 9 MR. CRITTON: Because there are other instances where counsel other than myself, not in the civil aspects, where allegations have been made and letters have been sent by the United States suggesting that there's been a violation of the NPA. And under those circumstances, some notification was provided. + +10 11 THE COURT: Did it have anything to do with defending the civil actions? + +12 MR. CRITTON: It did not. + +13 14 THE COURT: So then why was that issue raised by you in the first instance? + +15 16 17 18 19 20 MR. CRITTON: Because of the prospect that the defendant could take, that the U.S. would take the position under the circumstances that a position that we took with regard to the contested litigation may well impact, that the Government may have a very different view of what the interpretation of the agreement is. + +21 22 23 24 25 And as an example is a number of the parties, and I know the Court doesn't want to get into a discussion, the issue is, is under 2255 is that from the defendant's perspective the deal that was cut on that, it was a very specific deal. It dealt with both consensual and contested litigation. It dealt + +1 2 3 4 5 6 with a secret list of individuals who we had no idea who was on the list, and a commitment that he would under certain circumstances be required to pay a minimum amount of damages, which our position is under 2255 based upon the statute that was in effect at the time, a \$50,000 as to anyone who wanted - who came forward who was on the list and met certain criteria. + +7 8 9 10 11 12 13 The position that now has been asserted by a number of the plaintiffs under the circumstances, and it's been pled, and actually a number of the complainants is, is Epstein agreed, and they cite to a letter that was sent by Ms. Villafana from the Government, that says he has to plead guilty or he can't contest liability. That may be true under very, very limited or specific circumstances. + +14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 But what the plaintiffs have done in a number of the cases, and these are pending motions, is they've said is, well, we think C.M.A. cases is a good example, they've pled 30 separate counts of 2255 alleged violations. And they're saying under the circumstances is, therefore, we have 2255 violations, there's 30 of them, so 30 times 150, or should be, or whether it's 150, that's the amount of money that we want, so maybe \$15 million, or whatever the number is. + +22 23 24 25 Some of the other plaintiffs' lawyers have been even more creative. They've said is, well, we'll agree that it's only one cause of action but that each number of violations; that is, if 20 alleged incidents occurred, that we would + +1 2 3 consider to be, or that we will argue are violations, then we can take 20 times the 50, or the 150, depending on which statute is applicable. + +4 5 6 7 8 So the Government under that set of circumstance could say, and, again, this is one of the reasons that we raised it, they could say, look, our deal with you was that you couldn't contest liability, that you were waiving liability, or your ability to contest an enumerated offense under 2255. + +9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Again, part of the deal was as to an enumerated offense. Okay. Well, what's that mean? What did he plead to? Well, he really didn't plead to anything, which is another issue associated with the 2255. But if the Government comes in and says, no, wait a minute, our position was, is that you're stuck with 2255 and the language within the NPA. And, therefore, whether it's an offense or whether it's multiple offenses or violations or each one represents an individual cause of action, if the Government takes the position that's adverse to what we think the clear reading of the agreement was under those circumstances, they could claim a violation. + +20 21 22 23 24 And as a result -- and that's one of the reasons we put -- that was the most glaring one to us, so we raised that issue. And then when the Government's response came with regard to, is we can just proceed to indict if we think that there's been a breach of the agreement. + +2 3 THE COURT: Thank you. Who wants to be heard from the plaintiffs first? + +4 5 6 Is there any plaintiff's attorney who is contending that the defense of these civil actions by Mr. Epstein is going to constitute a breach of the non-prosecution agreement? + +7 MR. JOSEFSBERG: Your Honor, this is Bob Josefsberg. + +8 May I speak? + +9 THE COURT: Yes, sir. + +10 11 12 13 14 MR. JOSEFSBERG: We're not quite confident that any breaches of any agreement, which were third-party beneficiaries, should be resolved by you. We're not saying it shouldn't. But we have not raised any breach of agreement. We think that is between the United States and Mr. Epstein. + +15 16 17 18 What I find incredulous and disingenuous is that Mr. Epstein is saying that he wants a stay because he may be forced into taking actions in the defense of this case that would violate the agreement. + +19 20 21 22 23 24 And let me make our position clear on that. If he wants to move to take depositions, interrogatories, production, and they are according to your rulings appropriate, not invasive of the privacy of someone, and they are relevant, then I don't know how those could in any way be violations of the agreement. + +1 2 3 to the agreement that I am a beneficiary of. One of them is that he has agreed that on any action brought in the 2255, he will admit to liability. + +4 5 6 7 8 9 And I received on May 26 a motion to dismiss, which we're prepared to respond to and disagree with, but totally contesting liability, saying that the statute doesn't apply because the girls are no longer minors and saying, and this is the great one, saying that the predicate of the conviction under 2255 has not been satisfied. + +10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Now, the understanding that I have is the agreement between the Government and Mr. Epstein was that the Government desired to see these victims made whole, and wanted them to be in the same position as if Mr. Epstein had been prosecuted and pled or convicted. And they would be able to have the predicate of that criminal conviction, which just as a matter of liability would just be introduced as proof that he's done this. + +18 19 20 21 22 They, under the agreement, are supposed to admit to liability on limited something that's under 2255. He has filed, but since there is no conviction, there can be no civil suit under 2255, with which we disagree. But it is totally in opposite of the NPA. + +23 24 25 The second part is there are many young ladies, and this perhaps he can use this to his great advantage, who are humiliated about this entire situation. Some of them won't + +2 We were appointed by Judge as a Special + +3 to represent these young ladies. And some of them don't even + +4 want to file suit. They don't even want to be known as Jane + +5 Doe 103. They don't want any of the risks for these motions + +6 that are pending. + +7 And part of the agreement was that if we represented + +8 them and they settle, Mr. Epstein would pay our fees. And he + +9 has written us as of yesterday that he is under no obligation + +10 to pay our fees on settling cases. + +11 Now, those two matters, I believe, may be breaches. + +12 But I am not asking this Court at this time to do anything + +13 about them. Nor am I telling the Government, I'm not running + +14 to the Government and saying indict him because I want you to + +15 pressure him to do what he agreed to. + +16 I'm a third-party beneficiary for that agreement, and + +17 I may move to enforce certain parts of it. But as far as the + +18 issue of staying the litigation, that is the exact opposite of + +19 the intent and the letter of the NPA. The purpose of the NPA + +20 was so that these 34 young ladies, these victims who have been + +21 severely traumatized, may move on with their lives. + +22 And to stay this action would be the exact opposite of + +23 the purpose of that agreement and would be horrible + +24 psychologically for all of my clients. + +1 2 position. And I don't want to argue the merits of whether a stay should or should not be granted. + +3 4 5 6 7 8 I'm just trying to understand what the ground rules are going to be if I grant a stay or if I deny a stay. And I've already denied a stay once. I have to decide this current motion, and I just want to know what is going to happen if I deny the stay in terms of Mr. Epstein's exposure under the non-prosecution agreement. That's my concern. + +9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 So if you're telling me that you're not going to urge the United States, on behalf of any of your clients, to take the position that he's breached the agreement because he's taking depositions, because he's pursuing discovery, because he's conducting investigations that anyone in any other type of civil litigation might conduct with respect to plaintiffs that are pursuing claims against a defendant, that those typical types of actions, in your judgment, are not breaches of the agreement and that he can go forward and defend the case as any other defendant could defend, and you're not going to run to the United States and say, hey, he's breaching the agreement by taking depositions and he's breaching the agreement by issuing subpoenas to third parties in order to gather information necessary to defend, then I don't have a problem. But if he's going to be accused of breaching the agreement because he sends out a notice of deposition of one of your clients, how is he supposed to defend the case? + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 MR. JOSEFSBERG: Your Honor, you're totally correct. He can depose my client. That's not a problem. But the problem is that these are not typical clients and this is not a typical case. He has written in his pleadings that he wants to publish the names of these girls in the newspapers so that other people may come forward to discuss their sexual activities with these different plaintiffs. That's not your typical case. But are rulings that you'll make in this case, and they're not part of the NPA. + +10 11 12 13 14 As far as my going to the Government is concerned, I find it very uncomfortable for me to use the Government to try to pursue my financial interest in litigation. And I know that Mr. Epstein and his counsel will make much ado about it. So I am not going to be running there. + +15 16 17 However, if they start taking depositions regarding liability, I will consider that to be a breach because they're supposed to have admitted liability. + +18 19 20 21 22 THE COURT: But, again, I don't have the agreement and I don't remember reading the agreement. But what I'm being told is the part of the agreement that admits liability is only as to a 2255 claim, and there are numerous other personal injury tort claims other than 2255 claims. + +23 24 25 And there's a limit of damages on the 2255 claim, as I understand it, but I presume that all the plaintiffs are going to seek more than the limited or capped amount of damages in + +2 3 4 And so why aren't they entitled to defend and limit the amount of damages that your client is seeking on the non-2255 tort claims? + +5 6 7 MR. JOSEFSBERG: Your Honor, you are correct. On non-2255 tort claims, they are permitted to do the defense, whatever is appropriate. + +8 9 10 11 12 My cases are pure 2255 on which liability under the agreement is supposed to be admitted. Now, as to the amount of damages, there are legal issues that will be before you and under the C.M.A. cases that are getting before you, as to whether it is 50 or 150. That has nothing to do with the NPA. + +13 14 15 16 There are legal issues that are before you as to whether it is per statute, per count or per incident or per plaintiff. Those have nothing to do with the NPA. There is no amount in NPA. Those will be resolved. + +17 18 19 Anyone who has brought a case that is outside of 2255, the defense is permitted to contest liability under the NPA. That's no violation. + +20 21 22 23 24 25 Under the NPA if someone brought a case under just 2255, Mr. Epstein, if he is to keep his word, cannot contest liability. And there would no need to stay this. Because it is a self-fulfilling agreement. He can contest liability. And as far as the amount of damages, anyone that wants to go over the statutory minimums, of course, he can contest that in any + +1 2 3 way that is proper under the Rules of Evidence and your rulings. The NPA has no limitation on his contesting damages above the minimum statutory amount. + +4 5 6 7 The only thing that he has done is in his actions of refusing to pay for settling defendants, and in his saying that he has no liability under 2255, those appear to be contrary to what's in the NPA. + +8 9 10 11 12 13 But I'm not in any position right now to claim a breach, and I don't know whether I'd be claiming a breach or enforcing it in front of you, suing him for fees, asking you to have him admit liability, or complaining to the Government. And that's why I'm not that helpful in this situation because I think it's the Government's role. + +14 15 16 17 But I do not waive the right to be a third-party beneficiary because pursuant to my appointment, which was agreed to by Mr. Epstein, I and my clients have certain rights, and we want to enforce them. + +18 19 20 21 22 But his defending this lawsuit will not in any way be a violation. His getting this lawsuit stayed would be a violation of the spirit of taking care of these girls, and there would be other issues. Like if there is a stay, Your Honor, would he be posting a bond? + +23 24 THE COURT: We don't need to talk about those issues. That's not my concern. + +1 2 3 4 5 6 THE COURT: That's not my concern. So, again, I just want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend a case that's being prosecuted against him or her, that that in and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to criminal prosecution. + +7 MR. JOSEFSBERG: I agree, Your Honor. + +8 9 THE COURT: Any other plaintiff's counsel want to chime in? + +10 11 MR. WILLITS: Richard Willits on behalf of C.M.A.. I would join, to weigh in on what Mr. Josefsberg said. + +12 MR. JOSEFSBERG: Your Honor, I could not hear. + +13 14 THE COURT: We'll get him to a microphone. Mr. Willits is speaking. + +15 16 17 MR. WILLITS: On behalf of my client, C.M.A., we join in what Mr. Josefsberg said, and we also want to point out something to the Court. + +18 19 20 21 22 First, we want to make a representation to the Court, we have no intention of complaining to the U.S. Attorney's Office, never had that intention, don't have that intention in the future, but, of course, subject to what occurs in the future. + +23 24 25 I want to point out to the Court that Mr. Epstein went into this situation with his eyes wide open, represented by counsel, knowing that civil suits had to be coming. If he + +2 3 4 5 6 7 He appears to be having second thoughts now about he could have negotiated this way or he could have negotiated that way with the U.S. Attorney's Office. And they want to impose their second thoughts on the innocent plaintiffs. We don't think that's fair. We think it's in the nature of invited error, if there was any error whatsoever. + +8 Thank you. + +9 10 11 THE COURT: You agree he should be able to take the ordinary steps that a defendant in a civil action can take and not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? + +12 13 14 15 16 17 MR. WILLITS: Of course. And we say the same thing Mr. Josefsberg said. It's all subject to your rulings and the direction of this Court as to what is proper and what is not proper. And we're prepared to abide by the rulings of this Court, and we have no intention of running to the State's Attorney. + +18 THE COURT: The U.S. Attorney? + +19 MR. WILLITS: I'm sorry. The U.S. Attorney. + +20 THE COURT: Mr. + +21 MR. : Thank you, Your Honor. + +22 23 24 25 If I may briefly, I think perhaps defense counsel forgot about this, but on pages 17 and 19 of my memorandum of law in opposition to the motion to dismiss, I did make reference to the non-prosecution agreement, and I did say that 1 2 the contesting of the jurisdiction of this Court was a potential breach of the non-prosecution agreement. + +3 4 5 6 7 So my client happens to have, and they have filed with the Court a copy of her state court complaint, given the fact that the non-prosecution agreement limits the non-contesting of jurisdiction to claims exclusively brought under the federal statute. + +8 9 10 11 12 I'm going to go ahead and withdraw those contentions on pages 17 and 19 of my memo of law because it doesn't apply to my case. So to the extent that I raised this issue with defense counsel and the Court, I'm going to withdraw that aspect of it. + +13 14 THE COURT: Can you file something in writing on that point with the Court? + +15 MR. : Yes. + +16 17 THE COURT: What do you say about this issue that we're here on today? + +18 19 20 21 22 23 24 MR. : I think that the problem that I have with it is that this non-prosecution agreement is being used by defense counsel for the exact opposite purpose that it was intended. My perception of this thing, and I wasn't around, is that Mr. Epstein essentially bought his way out of a criminal prosecution, which is wonderful for the victims in a way, and wonderful for him, too. + +1 2 as a shield against the plaintiffs that he was supposed to make restitution for. + +3 4 5 6 7 And, certainly, he can take my client's depo. He's done extensive discovery in the state court case -- very intrusive, I might add. And we don't care, because we can win this case with the prosecution agreement or without the prosecution agreement. We are ready to go forward. + +8 9 10 THE COURT: You're not going to assert to the United States Government that what he's doing in defending the case is a violation for which he should be further prosecuted? + +11 MR. : Absolutely not. + +12 THE COURT: Anyone else for the plaintiffs? + +13 14 MR. HOROWITZ: Judge, Adam Horowitz, counsel for plaintiffs Jane Doe 2 through 7. + +15 16 17 18 I just wanted to address a point that I think you've articulated it. I just want to make sure it's crystal clear, which is that we can't paint a broad brush for all of the cases. + +19 20 21 22 23 24 25 The provision relating to Mr. Epstein being unable to contest liability pertains only to those plaintiffs who have chosen as their sole remedy the federal statute. My clients, Jane Doe 2 through 7, have elected to bring additional causes of action, and it's for that reason we were silent when you said does anyone here find Mr. Epstein to be in breach of the non-prosecution agreement. That provision, as we understand + +2 3 4 5 THE COURT: Okay. But, again, you're in agreement with everyone else so far that's spoken on behalf of a plaintiff that defending the case in the normal course of conducting discovery and filing motions would not be a breach? + +6 7 MR. HOROWITZ: Subject to your rulings, of course, yes. + +8 THE COURT: Thank you. + +9 Anyone else have anything to say from the plaintiffs? + +10 11 12 13 14 Ms. Villafana, if you would be so kind as to maybe help us out. I appreciate the fact that you're here, and I know you're not a party to these cases and under no obligation to respond to my inquiries. But as I indicated, it would be helpful for me to understand the Government's position. + +15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 MS. VILLAFANA: Thank you, Your Honor. And we, of course, are always happy to try to help the Court as much as possible. But we are not a party to any of these lawsuits, and in some ways we are at a disadvantage because we don't have access. My access is limited to what's on Pacer. So I don't really know what positions Mr. Epstein may have taken either in correspondence or in discovery responses that aren't filed in the case file. + +23 24 25 But your first order was really just what do you think about a stay, and then the second order related to this hearing and asked a much more specific question, which is whether we + +1 2 believe that Mr. Epstein's defense was a breach of the agreement. + +3 4 5 6 7 8 9 And I've tried to review as many of the pleadings as possible. As you know, they're extremely voluminous. And I haven't been through all of them. But we do believe that there has been a breach in the filing that Mr. Josefsberg referred to, and contrary to Mr. Critton, we do understand that we have an obligation to provide notice, and we are providing notice to Mr. Epstein today. + +10 11 12 13 14 The pleading that we found to be in breach -- the non-prosecution agreement, sought to do one thing, which was to place the victims in the same position they would have been if Mr. Epstein had been convicted of the federal offenses for which he was investigated. + +15 16 17 18 19 And that if he had been federally prosecuted and convicted, the victims would have been entitled to restitution, regardless of how long ago the crimes were committed, regardless of how old they were at the time, and how old they are today, or at the time of the conviction. + +20 21 And it also would have made them eligible for damages under 2255. + +22 23 24 25 And so our idea was, our hope was that we could set up a system that would allow these victims to get that restitution without having to go through what civil litigation will expose them to. + +1 2 3 4 5 You have a number of girls who were very hesitant about even speaking to authorities about this because of the trauma that they have suffered and about the embarrassment that they were afraid would be brought upon themselves and upon their families. + +6 7 8 9 10 So we did through the non-prosecution agreement tried to protect their rights while also protecting their privacy. So, pursuant to the non-prosecution agreement -- on the other hand, we weren't trying to hand them a jackpot or a key to a bank. It was solely to sort of put them in that same position. + +11 12 13 14 15 So we developed this language that said if -- that provided for an attorney to represent them. Most of the victims, as you know from the pleadings, come from not wealthy circumstances, may not have known any attorneys who would be in a position to help them. + +16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 So we went through the Special procedure that resulted in the appointment of Mr. Josefsberg, and the goal was that they would be able to try to negotiate with Mr. Epstein for a fair amount of restitution/damages. And if Mr. Epstein took the position, which apparently he has, which is that the \$50,000 or \$150,000 floor under 2255 also would be a cap. That if they were to proceed to file suit in Federal Court to get fair damages under 2255, Mr. Epstein would admit liability, but he, of course, could fight the damages portion, which means that, of course, he would be entitled to depositions; of + +1 2 3 course, he would be entitled to take discovery, and we don't believe that any of that violates the non-prosecution agreement. + +4 5 6 7 8 9 10 The issue with the pleading that he filed, the motion to dismiss the case, I believe it's Jane Doe 101, represented by Mr. Josefsberg, is that that is a case that was filed exclusively under 18 U.S.C., Section 2255. She met that requirement. Mr. Epstein is moving to dismiss it, not on the basis of damages, he is saying that he cannot be held liable under 2255 because he was not convicted of an offense. + +11 12 13 The reason why he was not convicted of an offense is because he entered into the non-prosecution agreement. So that we do believe is a breach. + +14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 The issue really that was raised in the motion to stay and that I addressed in our response to the motion to stay is that Mr. Epstein's -- Mr. Epstein wants to stay the litigation in order to leave, in order to sort of attack the cases of the victims whether they are fully within the non-prosecution or not, non-prosecution agreement or not, and leave the Government without a remedy if he does, in fact, breach those terms. And that is why we opposed the stay. + +22 23 THE COURT: I'm not sure what you mean by that last statement. + +24 25 MS. VILLAFANA: Well, because this issue related to the motion to dismiss on Mr. Josefsberg's client came up after 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 we had filed that response. And what we said in the response to the motion to stay is that the reason why he wants to stay the litigation is so that the non-prosecution agreement terminates based on a period of time, as he puts it. And then afterwards he would be able to come in here and make all of these arguments that clearly violate the non-prosecution agreement but we would be without remedy. + +8 9 10 11 12 13 THE COURT: But you're not taking the position that other than possibly doing something in litigation which is a violation of an express provision of the non-prosecution agreement, any other discovery, motion practice, investigations that someone would ordinarily do in the course of defending a civil case would constitute a violation of the agreement? + +14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 MS. VILLAFANA: No, Your Honor. I mean, civil litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take discovery is part of what civil litigation is about. And while there may be, for example, if someone were to try to subpoena the Government, we would obviously resist under statutory reasons, all that sort of stuff. But, no, Mr. Epstein is entitled to take the deposition of a plaintiff and to subpoena records, etc. + +22 23 24 25 THE COURT: And even if he seeks discovery from a Government agency, you have the right to resist it under the rules of procedure but that would not constitute a violation, again unless there's a provision in the prosecution agreement + +2 MS. VILLAFANA: Correct. + +3 THE COURT: That's your position? + +4 MS. VILLAFANA: Yes. + +5 THE COURT: Thank you. + +6 MS. VILLAFANA: Thank you, Your Honor. + +7 THE COURT: Mr. Critton, did you want to add anything? + +8 9 MR. CRITTON: Yes, sir. Just a few responses to some of the issues that have been raised. + +10 11 12 13 The most glaring, at least from our perspective, is both Mr. Josefsberg's comments that he believes that there's a violation of the NPA as well as Ms. Villafana with regard to Jane Doe 101. + +14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Mr. Josefsberg, while he was the attorney rep who was selected by Judge to represent a number of individuals, alleged victims that may have been on the list, he represents many of them. And the type of response that was filed in 101 would probably be very similar to what we will file if he files -- and he filed 102 as well. But if he files 103, 104 and 105, or whatever number he files, we may well take that same legal position in our motions and in our response or in reply. + +23 24 25 And what we've been, in essence, told today is we consider that to be a violation of the NPA under the circumstances. + +1 2 3 4 102 is a perfect example that he filed is, we have e-mails going back and forth between the Government and my clients' attorneys at the time that suggested that 102 probably doesn't even fit within the statute of limitations. + +5 6 7 8 9 10 11 So under Mr. Josefsberg's argument is as well, we've only brought a 2255 claim. We don't care whether she's within or is outside the statute of limitations. Because she was on the list and under the circumstances, he has to admit liability, which we contest is under that set of circumstances you're stuck with it. You can fight damages if you can, but she's a real person and you can't raise statute of limitations. + +12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 The other point that kind of strikes out is there's probably a difference. And I'm happy to provide a copy of the NPA or a redacted portion of the NPA which deals with the civil issues, which are paragraphs 7, 8, 9 and 10, and the entire addenda in camera for the Court to look at, if plaintiff's counsel and the Government, I guess, really, because they're not a party, is if they have no objection because they all have access based on a prior court order to the non-prosecution agreement. + +21 22 So I'm happy to provide that to the Court today and show it to counsel so that the Court can review that. + +23 24 25 But our position with regard to the 2255 claims is that -- there were two types of claims that could be filed, one was consensual litigation, the second was contested litigation. 1 2 3 And under the consensual, in essence, which Mr. Epstein did, is he's offered \$50,000 of the statutory minimum for that time period to all of those individuals. + +4 THE COURT: Can I interrupt you a second? + +5 MR. CRITTON: Yes, sir. + +6 7 8 9 THE COURT: I'm not here, and I don't believe it's my role to decide whether or not there is or is not a breach of the agreement. I'm just trying to understand what the Government's position is regarding your defending these cases. + +10 11 12 13 14 Now, I'm just saying this as an example. If, for example, in the non-prosecution agreement there was a provision that said explicitly: Jeffrey Epstein shall not move to dismiss any claim brought under 2255 by any victim no matter how long ago the allegations or the acts took place, period. + +15 16 17 If that was in the agreement and you filed a motion to dismiss by someone who brought a claim, it might sound like it might be a violation. + +18 MR. CRITTON: I agree. + +19 20 THE COURT: So you would know that when you filed your motion because it was right there for you to read. + +21 22 23 24 25 And so to stay the case because I want to do something that the contract expressly prohibits me from doing, so stay the case until the agreement expires so then I can do something that the agreement said I couldn't do so you won't be in fear of prosecuting, I'm not sure that that is what I'm concerned + +2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I'm concerned about discovery, investigation, motion practice, that's not prohibited by a provision of the agreement. If there's something that's prohibited by the agreement that you, knowing what the agreement says, go ahead and do, anyway, I guess that's a risk you're going to have to take. If there's a legitimate dispute about it, I guess some arbiter is going to decide whether it's a breach or not. + +9 10 11 12 13 14 But, again, that's something you and Mr. Burman, Mr. Goldberger, and you are all very good lawyers, and he's got a whole list of lawyers representing him, and you've got the agreement and you're going to make legal decisions on how to proceed, and you're going to have to go and make your own decisions. + +15 16 17 18 19 I'm concerned about things that aren't in the agreement, that aren't covered, that you're going to be accused of violating because, again, you take depositions, you send out subpoenas, you file motions that are not prohibited by the agreement. And that's what I'm concerned about. + +20 MR. CRITTON: And I understand that, Your Honor. + +21 22 23 24 25 But at the same time, it's as if the lawyers and the clients, based upon our interpretation of the agreement, and, believe me, we would not have filed 101, the motion to dismiss, but for believing that there was a good faith basis to do that under the circumstances. + +1 2 3 4 And now, in essence, we're being accused not only by -- not accused, but it's been suggested that there's a breach of the NPA, not only by Mr. Josefsberg on behalf of 101, but as well Ms. Villafana on behalf of the United States. + +5 6 7 8 9 That's the perfect example. They're basically saying we think you violated. We may send you notice under the circumstances. So does that mean that on 101 we have to back off of it because we think in good faith that it's a motion and is that something that this Court ultimately will rule? + +10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 THE COURT: I don't know that I'm the one who is going to make that decision. Again, that's not the kind of thing that I was concerned about. I was more concerned about the normal, ordinary course of conducting and defending a case that would not otherwise expressly be covered under the agreement, that you're going to then have someone say, ah, he's sent a notice of deposition, he's harassing the plaintiffs. I don't know if there's a no contact provision in the agreement or no harassment type of provision in the agreement. Ah, this is a breach because you sent discovery, or he's issuing subpoenas to third parties trying to find out about these victims' backgrounds, he's breaching the agreement. + +22 Those are the kind of things that I was worried about. + +23 24 25 MR. CRITTON: The concern that we have is as part of doing this general civil litigation, it's not just the discovery process. And I understand the issues that the Court + +2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 But part of it is that often cases are disposed of either on a summary basis or certainly legal issues that come before the Court during the course of the case, just like in a criminal case. That's clearly part of the, I'd say the defense of the case under the circumstances; and if, in fact, an individual can't legally bring a cause of action for certain reasons, such as has been suggested in 101, and may be suggested in 102 when that pleading is filed, that certainly is a position that puts my client at risk. + +11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 As another example that I use with C.M.A., that they filed this 30-count complaint. Now, they have the state court claims as well. But they, in essence, have said they filed another pleading with the Court that says depending on what the Court rules, in essence, on whether we can file multiple claims or one cause of action with multiple violations, we may dump the state court claims and, therefore, we'll just ride along on that. That's a very different -- + +19 20 21 22 23 24 Mr. Epstein would never have entered into, nor would his attorneys have allowed him to enter into that agreement under those circumstances where he had this unlimited liability. That clearly was never envisioned by any of the defendants -- by the defendant or any of his lawyers under the circumstances. + +1 2 attorneys; i.e., he's not recapitulating on liability under the 2255, and that's all we have now. That's our exclusive remedy. + +3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 And the Government says, yeah, that's right, that's a violation of the NPA. It again chills us from moving forward, filing the necessary motion papers and taking legal positions that may put my client at risk for violating the NPA and then creating the irreparable harm of, after having been in jail, after having pled guilty to the state court counts, after registering on release as a sex offender, he's complied and done everything, taken extraordinary efforts to comply with the NPA, puts him at substantial risk. And that's what our worry is moving forward. + +13 14 MR. JOSEFSBERG: Your Honor, may I be heard. May I make three comments? It will take less than a minute. + +15 THE COURT: Yes, sir. + +16 17 18 19 MR. JOSEFSBERG: Mr. Critton refers to the alleged victims. I want you to know that our position is that pursuant to the NPA they're not alleged victims. They are actual, real victims, admitted victims. + +20 21 22 23 Secondly, he argues about the statute of limitations on 102. I know that you don't want to hear about that, and I'm not going to comment about it. But please don't take our lack of argument about this as being we agree with anything. + +24 25 Last and most important, we totally agree with Mr. Critton in his suggestion that he hand you a copy of the 1 2 3 4 5 NPA. I think that many of the questions you asked will be answered when you read the NPA, and I think it's very unfair of everyone who is sitting in front of you who have the NPA to be discussing with you whether it's being breached, whether there should be a stay when you're not that familiar with it. + +6 7 If we would give you a copy of it, I think it would be much more helpful in making your ruling. + +8 9 THE COURT: Maybe Judge Colvat will resolve this issue for me. + +10 11 MR. JOSEFSBERG: Even if he doesn't, Your Honor, I believe we are allowed to show it to you. + +12 13 14 15 THE COURT: I'll tell you what: I'll wait for Judge Colvat to rule, and then if he rules that it should remain sealed, then I'll consider whether or not I want to have it submitted to me in camera. + +16 Anything else, Mr. Josefsberg? + +17 18 19 MR. JOSEFSBERG: No. I thank you on behalf of myself and the other counsel on the phone for permitting us to appear by phone. + +20 21 THE COURT: All right. Anyone else have anything they want to add? + +22 MR. : Brad on behalf of Jane Doe. + +23 24 25 I only had one issue here, and when I read your motion that you wanted to hear on the narrow issue of just defense in the civil actions filed against him violates the + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 non-prosecution agreement, I was expecting that we were going to hear something from the Government similar to the affidavit that was filed by Mr. Epstein's attorneys wherein he indicates as of the day of this affidavit attached to the motion to stay, the U.S. Attorney's Office has taken the position that Epstein has breached the non-prosecution agreement and it names specifically investigation by Epstein of this plaintiff and other plaintiffs, Epstein's contesting damages in this action. Epstein, or his legal representatives, making statements to the press. And we didn't hear any of those things. + +11 12 13 So that's what I was expecting that the U.S. Attorney's Office was going to expound on and say, yes, we've made some communications to Epstein. He's violating. + +14 15 16 17 What we're hearing right now, today, just so that I'm clear, and I think the Court is clear now, is that the non-prosecution agreement is what it is. There have been no violations, but for maybe what Mr. Josefsberg brought up. + +18 19 20 21 But there are very few restrictions on Mr. Epstein. He went into this eyes wide open. And whether or not I agree with the agreement, how it came to be in the first place, is neither here nor there. + +22 23 24 25 But there have been no violations or breaches up to this point. And his affidavit that was filed, I'm just troubled by where it even came from. I mean, it's making specific allegations that the U.S. Attorney's Office is + +1 2 threatening a breach, and this is part of the motion to stay, which we're all battling here. + +3 4 5 6 So I just wanted to indicate to the Court or remind the Court that there have been specific allegations made, the United States Attorney's Office is making these allegations of breach, which we haven't heard any of the evidence of. + +7 Thank you. + +8 THE COURT: All right. + +9 10 11 Ms. Villafana, did you want to respond to that suggestion that there were other allegations of breach besides the one that you've just mentioned today? + +12 MS. VILLAFANA: No, Your Honor. + +13 14 15 THE COURT: Thank you. I appreciate your giving me the information, which I think has been very helpful today, and I'll try and get an order out as soon as possible. + +16 [Court adjourned at 11:10 a.m.]. + +17 CERTIFICATE + +18 19 I hereby certify that the foregoing is an accurate transcription of proceedings in the above-entitled matter. + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +s/Larry Herr + +DATE LARRY HERR, RPR-CM-RMR-FCRSC + +Official United States Court Reporter + +400 N. Miami Avenue + +Miami, FL 33128 - 305/523-5290 + +(Fax) 305/523-5639 + +email: Lindsay165@aol.com + +|

A

abide 27:15
ability 18:8 19:1
able 20:14 27:9
32:18 34:5,15
about 4:24 5:25 6:10
6:18 9:2 11:15
13:22 20:25 21:13
23:13 25:23 27:2
27:11,23 28:16
30:24 32:2,2,3
34:16 38:1,2,7,15
38:19 39:12,12,20
39:22 41:20,21,22
41:23
above 25:3
above-entitled 44:19
Absolutely 29:11
access 30:19,19
36:19
according 19:21
accurate 44:18
accused 22:23 38:16
39:1,2
action 7:13 8:5 9:8
10:3,4,9,21 11:18
15:4 17:24 18:17
20:2 21:22 27:10
29:23 40:7,16 43:8
actions 5:25 13:23
14:3 16:11 19:5,17
22:16 25:4 42:25
activities 23:7
acts 9:11,12 37:14
actual 41:18
actually 5:21 17:9
Adam 1:13 3:4
29:13
add 29:5 35:7 42:21
addenda 36:16
Adderly 3:17
additional 29:22
address 29:15
addressed 33:15
adjourned 44:16
Adler 1:17
admit 20:3,18 25:11
32:23 36:8
admits 23:20
admitted 23:17 24:9
41:19
ado 23:13
advantage 20:24
adverse 18:18
advice 12:7
affidavit 43:2,4,23
afraid 32:4
after 33:25 41:7,8,8
afterwards 34:5
again 9:10,18,22
10:19,20 18:5,9
23:18 26:1 30:2
34:25 38:9,17
39:11 41:4

|

against 4:23,25 6:24
22:15 26:4 29:1
42:25
agency 34:23
ago 31:17 37:14
agree 13:13 17:23
25:25 26:7 27:9
37:18 41:23,24
43:19
agreed 17:9 20:2
21:15 25:16
agreement 5:2,2,11
5:15 6:2,23 7:16
7:19 8:5,6 12:9
13:24 14:2,19
15:20 16:20 18:18
18:24 19:6,11,13
19:18,24 20:1,10
20:18 21:7,16,23
22:8,11,17,19,20
22:23 23:18,19,20
24:1,9,23 27:25
28:2,5,19,25 29:6
29:7,25 30:2 31:2
31:11 32:6,8 33:3
33:12,19 34:3,7,11
34:13,25 36:20
37:8,11,15,23,24
38:4,5,5,12,16,19
38:22 39:14,17,18
39:21 40:20 43:1,6
43:16,20
ah 39:15,18
ahead 28:8 38:5
al 1:4
allegation 5:1 15:19
allegations 4:25 16:6
37:14 43:25 44:4,5
44:10
alleged 17:17,25
35:16 41:16,18
allow 11:8 31:23
allowed 40:20 42:11
along 40:17
already 22:5
always 30:16
Amendment 6:24
America 5:17
amount 17:3,20
23:25 24:3,9,16,24
25:3 32:19
Amy 3:17
Ann 2:14 4:9
another 9:5 14:14
18:11 40:11,14
answer 8:7 13:10
answered 42:2
anybody 11:14
anyone 14:16,19
17:5 22:13 24:17
24:24 29:12,24
30:9 42:20
anything 8:22 11:15
13:22 14:2,7,20,25

|

16:10 18:11 21:12
30:9 35:7 41:23
42:16,20
anyway 38:6
apparently 32:20
appear 3:19 25:6
42:18
appearances 1:12
3:3,25
appears 27:2
applicable 6:13 18:3
apply 20:6 28:9
appointed 21:2
appointment 25:15
32:17
appreciate 30:11
44:13
appropriate 19:21
24:7
arbiter 38:8
argue 18:1 22:1
argued 12:22
argues 41:20
argument 36:5
41:23
arguments 34:6
arise 7:5
around 12:9 28:21
articulated 29:16
asked 5:4,4 8:2 14:5
30:25 42:1
asking 21:12 25:10
asks 13:10
aspect 28:12
aspects 9:1,2 16:5
assert 29:8
asserted 17:7
assertion 4:24 15:19
15:22
Assistant 2:15
associate 10:17
associated 18:12
assurance 14:1
assurances 12:5
attached 43:4
attack 33:17
attention 15:1,22
Atterbury 2:12
attorney 2:15 7:1
19:4 27:17,18,19
32:12 35:14
attorneys 5:9 10:10
11:8 32:14 36:3
40:20 41:1 43:3
Attorney's 4:8,10
26:19 27:4 43:5,12
43:25 44:5
August 12:18
Australian 2:12
authorities 32:2
Avenue 1:21,23 2:12
2:23 44:22
aware 6:6 13:14 15:4
a.m 44:16

|

B

back 12:18 36:2 39:7
backgrounds 39:21
balance 12:15
bank 32:10
based 6:12 10:7 12:6
13:11 17:4 34:4
36:19 38:22
basically 7:16 13:10
39:5
basis 33:9 38:24
40:3
battling 44:2
Beach 1:2,4,21 2:10
2:13
before 1:11 6:5
15:13,18 24:10,11
24:13 40:4
behalf 3:14 4:2,6 6:7
14:16 22:10 26:10
26:15 30:3 39:3,4
42:17,22
being 9:17 10:6,21
23:19 26:4 28:19
29:19 34:15 39:1
41:23 42:4
believe 3:18 5:10,10
5:14,16 6:17,17,21
7:13,19 8:11 14:18
21:11 31:1,5 33:2
33:5,13 37:6 38:23
42:11
believes 35:11
believing 38:24
beneficiaries 19:12
beneficiary 20:1
21:16 25:15
Bennett 3:18
besides 44:10
between 8:6 9:23
13:1,21 19:14
20:11 36:2
beyond 13:16
Biscayne 1:14
Bob 3:18 19:7
Boehringer 1:20
bond 25:22
Boston 2:18
both 10:10 16:25
35:11
bought 28:22
Boulevard 1:14,17
2:15
Brad 3:7 42:22
1:16
breach 6:1,23 15:11
16:3 18:24 19:6,13
23:16 25:9,9 28:2
29:24 30:5 31:1,6
31:10 33:13,20
37:7 38:8 39:2,19
44:1,6,10
breached 7:19 12:24
15:20 22:11 42:4

|

43:6
breaches 7:15,17
19:11 21:11 22:16
43:22
breaching 22:19,20
22:23 39:21
brief 15:18,23
briefing 5:4
briefly 27:22
bring 29:22 40:7
broad 29:17
brought 15:1 20:2
24:17,20 28:6 32:4
36:6 37:13,16
43:17
Broward 2:15
brush 29:17
buffer 12:25
Burman 2:8,9 4:3
38:9
business 13:25

| +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| C | | | | | +|

C 2:1 44:17,17
came 6:5 12:18 17:6
18:22 33:25 43:20
43:24
camera 36:16 42:15
cap 32:21
capped 23:25
care 13:20,25 25:20
29:5 36:6
case 1:3 5:17,20,21
5:22 6:4,7 8:12
9:11 10:24,24 11:4
11:15,18 13:18,20
14:18,22 15:1,18
16:2 19:17 22:17
22:25 23:4,8,8
24:17,20 26:3,4
28:10 29:4,6,9
30:4,22 33:5,6
34:13 37:21,23
39:13 40:4,5,6
cases 3:2 6:9 7:3,11
8:13,22 9:3,5,5,15
10:3,11 12:1,2
14:9 17:15,16
21:10 24:8,11 26:2
29:18 30:12 33:17
37:9 40:2
casts 9:13
catastrophic 7:21
catch 7:21 10:2
caught 15:22
cause 17:24 18:17
26:5 40:7,16
caused 15:21
causes 29:22
cavalierly 12:13
certain 8:22 11:18
17:2,6 21:17 25:16
40:7
certainly 8:16 9:1

| | | | | + +|

29:3 40:3,9
Certified 2:22
certify 44:18
change 7:25
changes 7:8
charges 5:3
chilling 9:7
chills 10:9 18:25
41:4
chime 26:9
chosen 29:21
circumstance 7:21
8:18 18:4
circumstances 9:25
10:1,11 12:11,20
12:21 13:8,13 16:8
16:17 17:3,8,13,18
18:19 32:14 35:25
36:8,9 38:25 39:7
40:6,21,24
cite 17:10
civil 4:23,25 5:25 7:3
7:3,11 8:5,22 9:4,7
9:11 10:3,23,23
13:23 14:3,9 15:7
16:5,11 19:5 20:20
22:14 26:25 27:10
31:24 34:13,14,15
34:16 36:14 39:24
42:25
claim 6:1 18:19
23:21,23 25:8 36:6
37:13,16
claimed 40:25
claiming 25:9
claims 22:15 23:22
23:22 24:1,4,6
28:6 36:23,24
40:13,15,17
clear 10:7 18:18
19:19 29:16 43:15
43:15
clearly 9:24 11:20
34:6 40:5,22
client 10:21 13:5
23:2 24:3 26:15
28:3 33:25 40:10
41:6
clients 11:9 21:24
22:10,24 23:3
25:16 29:21 30:1
36:3 38:22
client's 29:3
cloud 9:14
Colvat 42:8,13
come 8:8,13 13:11
21:1 23:6 32:13
34:5 40:3
comes 18:12
coming 26:25
comment 41:22
comments 15:10
35:11 41:14
commitment 17:2

|

committed 31:17
communications
43:13
complainants 17:9
complaining 25:11
26:19
complaint 28:4
40:12
compliance 12:14
complied 41:9
comply 41:10
concern 4:24 5:10,24
9:20 16:1 22:8
25:24 26:1 39:23
concerned 13:22
23:10 27:11 37:25
38:2,15,19 39:12
39:12
concerns 6:24
conduct 22:14
conducting 22:13
30:5 39:13
confident 19:10
consensual 16:25
36:25 37:1
consider 6:14 18:1
23:16 35:24 42:14
constitute 13:18
16:2 19:6 34:13,24
construed 14:18
contact 10:17 39:17
contending 19:4
contention 4:24
contentions 28:8
contest 17:12 18:7,8
24:18,21,23,25
29:20 36:9
contested 9:13 16:18
16:25 36:25
contesting 20:6 25:2
28:1 43:8
context 13:18,19
14:5 15:1
contract 7:16 37:22
contracting 9:23
contrary 25:6 31:7
control 9:2
convicted 20:14
31:13,16 33:10,11
conviction 20:8,15
20:20 31:19
copy 28:4 36:13
41:25 42:6
correct 5:12 23:1
24:5 35:2
correspondence
30:21
counsel 3:3,4,7 12:7
16:5 23:13 26:8,25
27:22 28:11,20
29:13 36:17,22
42:18
count 24:14
counts 17:17 41:8

|

course 7:5 24:25
26:21 27:12 30:4,6
30:16 32:24,25
33:1 34:12 39:13
40:4
court 1:1 2:22 3:1,6
3:9,12,15,20,22,24
4:4,7,11,15,20
5:11,14,18,19,21
5:24 6:6,11,13,14
6:18,20,21,22 7:6
8:1 9:6 11:3,10,25
12:19 13:1,10,16
14:5,11 15:5,13,15
16:10,13,22 19:2,9
21:12,25 23:18
25:23 26:1,8,13,17
26:18,23 27:9,14
27:16,18,20 28:1,4
28:4,11,13,14,16
29:4,8,12 30:2,8
30:16 32:22 33:22
34:8,22 35:3,5,7
36:16,19,21,22
37:4,6,19 39:9,10
39:25 40:4,12,14
40:15,17 41:8,15
42:8,12,20 43:15
44:3,4,8,13,16,22
court's 7:15 8:25
12:14
covered 38:16 39:14
create 9:25
creating 41:7
creative 17:23
crimes 31:17
criminal 8:21 20:15
26:6 28:22 40:5
criteria 17:6
Critton 2:8,9 4:2,2
4:13 5:13 6:3,3
14:4 15:3,14 16:4
16:12,15 31:7 35:7
35:8 37:5,18 38:20
39:23 41:16,25
crystal 29:16
cure 8:14,17 9:21
13:6
cures 14:12
current 22:5
cut 16:24
C.M.A 1:24 3:14
17:16 24:11 26:10
26:15 40:11


D
D 1:13 2:8
damages 17:3 23:23
23:25 24:3,10,24
25:2 31:20 32:23
32:24 33:9 36:10
43:8
date 13:12,14 44:21
Datura 1:21

|

21:2 35:15
day 43:4
deal 9:23 14:13,14
15:15 16:24,24
18:6,9
deals 36:14
dealt 6:19 16:25,25
decide 10:11 22:5
37:7 38:8
decision 39:11
decisions 38:12,14
deem 11:19
deemed 10:4
defend 5:25 10:11
11:18 12:1,2 22:17
22:18,22,25 24:2
26:3
defendant 1:8 2:8
6:23 11:13 16:16
22:15,18 27:10
40:23
defendants 25:5
40:23
defendant's 16:23
defending 4:25 7:24
9:4 10:2,23 13:18
13:20,23 14:3,9,18
15:18 16:2,10
25:18 29:9 30:4
34:12 37:9 39:13
defends 26:3
defense 4:1,14 8:4,12
9:3,12,14 10:9
12:3 19:5,17 24:6
24:18 27:22 28:11
28:20 31:1 40:5
42:24
denied 22:5
deny 22:4,7
depending 18:2
40:14
depo 29:3
depose 23:2
deposition 11:11,12
14:23 22:24 34:20
39:16
depositions 10:13
14:22 19:20 22:12
22:20 23:15 32:25
38:17
desired 20:12
determine 9:8
developed 32:11
difference 36:13
different 6:5 12:21
16:19 23:7 40:18
direction 10:20
27:14
disadvantage 30:18
disagree 20:5,21
discovery 7:2,10,11
10:16,25 22:12
29:4 30:5,21 33:1
34:11,16,22 38:2

|

39:19,25
discretionary 6:19
6:21
discuss 9:22 23:6
discussing 42:4
discussion 16:22
disingenuous 19:15
dismiss 7:22 8:18
10:14 20:4 27:24
33:5,8,25 37:13,16
38:23
disposed 40:2
dispute 38:7
distinct 7:9
DISTRICT 1:1,11,11
DIVISION 1:2
docket 6:17 8:25
12:14
documents 11:7
14:24
Doe 1:4,15,18,22 2:3
2:7 3:1,5,8,11 5:17
6:8,9,16 11:12
21:5 29:14,22 33:5
35:13 42:22
doing 8:9 29:9 34:9
37:22 39:24
done 12:3,4 13:17,19
13:24 14:2,7,17,20
14:25 15:6 17:14
20:16 25:4 29:4
41:10
doubt 9:14
dramatic 7:25
dramatically 7:8
dump 40:16
during 40:4


E
E 44:17,17
each 17:24 18:16
East 1:17 2:15
1:16 3:7,7
5:16,20,23 42:22
42:22
effect 9:7 17:5
efforts 41:10
either 9:3 10:5 30:20
40:3,25
elected 29:22
eligible 31:20
Elkins 1:20
email 44:24
embarrassment 32:3
enforce 21:17 25:17
enforcement 7:2
enforcing 25:10
enter 40:20
entered 33:12 40:19
entire 5:15 20:25
36:15
entitle 11:23
entitled 24:2 31:16
32:25 33:1 34:20

| +|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +|

entry 6:17 8:25
12:14
enumerated 18:8,9
envisioned 40:22
Epstein 1:7 3:1 4:3,6
4:22 6:7 7:13,15
7:19 8:6,20 9:15
9:18,24 10:1,6,10
12:5,15 13:17,21
14:8 17:9 19:5,14
19:16 20:11,13
21:8 23:13 24:21
25:16 26:3,23
28:22 29:19,24
30:20 31:9,13
32:18,19,23 33:8
33:16 34:19 37:1
37:12 40:19 43:5,7
43:9,13,18
Epstein's 4:24 5:9,24
8:4 9:1 22:7 31:1
33:16 43:3,8
equities 12:16
error 27:7,7
ESQ 1:13,16,20,23
2:1,5,8,8,11,14,17
2:20
essence 7:9,12 8:3
10:2 12:3 35:23
37:1 39:1 40:13,15
essentially 28:22
et 1:4
etc 2:9 34:21
even 11:5,6,9 14:1
15:17 16:1 17:22
21:3,4 32:2 34:22
36:4 42:10 43:24
event 5:24
ever 5:11,14
everyone 30:3 42:3
everything 15:7
41:10
evidence 25:1 44:6
exact 21:18,22 28:20
exactly 10:24
example 14:20 16:21
17:16 34:17 36:1
37:10,11 39:5
40:11
except 8:20 11:25
exclusive 41:2
exclusively 28:6 33:7
exists 13:15
expecting 43:1,11
expires 37:23
explicitly 37:12
expose 5:1,25 31:24
exposure 22:7
expound 43:12
express 34:10
expressly 37:22
39:14
extensive 29:4
extent 28:10

|

extraordinary 9:13
41:10
extremely 31:4
eyes 26:24 43:19
Ezell 2:5 3:16,17
e-mails 36:2


F

F 44:17
fact 7:1 8:11 11:19
14:20 28:4 30:11
33:20 40:6
factors 11:23
fair 27:6 32:19,23
faith 38:24 39:8
familiar 42:5
families 32:5
far 14:25 21:17
23:10 24:24 30:3
fashion 8:4
favor 12:16
Fax 44:23
fear 9:14 37:24
federal 5:3 28:6
29:21 31:13 32:22
federally 2:22 31:15
fees 21:8,10 25:10
few 35:8 43:18
field 7:8
Fifth 6:24
fight 32:24 36:10
file 21:4 28:13 30:22
32:22 35:18 38:18
40:15
filed 5:11,16,21,23
6:7,10 10:8 11:9
15:18,23,24 20:20
28:3 30:21 33:4,6
34:1 35:17,19 36:1
36:24 37:15,19
38:23 40:9,12,13
42:25 43:3,23
files 35:19,19,20
filing 30:5 31:6 41:5
filings 7:8
filter 11:7
financial 23:12
find 5:6 6:13 19:15
19:25 23:11 29:24
39:20
firm's 6:6
first 5:9 16:14 19:3
26:18 30:23 43:20
fit 36:4
FL 1:15,18,21,24 2:3
2:6,10,13,16,23
44:23
Flagler 2:2,6,9
floor 32:21
FLORIDA 1:1,4
focused 15:15
forced 19:17
foregoing 44:18
forgot 27:23

|

form 11:4
Fort 1:18 2:16
forth 36:2
forward 9:8 13:11
17:6 19:1 21:1
22:17 23:6 26:2
29:7 41:4,12
found 31:10
four 9:5
frankly 5:6
from 3:17 4:7 5:9 7:9
10:20,24 13:9
14:13 15:9 16:23
17:10 19:2 30:9
32:13,13 34:22
35:10 37:22 41:4
43:2,24
front 9:5 12:19
25:10 42:3
fully 33:18
further 29:10
future 9:12 10:5
12:5 26:21,22


G

G 2:17
██████ 1:20,20 3:10
3:10 27:20,21
28:15,18 29:11
gather 22:21
gave 16:1
general 39:24
generally 10:22
getting 24:11 25:19
girls 20:7 23:5 25:20
32:1
give 12:5 14:1 42:6
given 28:4
giving 44:13
glaring 18:21 35:10
glasses 11:16
go 12:10 15:13 22:17
24:24 26:2 28:8
29:7 31:24 38:5,13
goal 32:17
going 3:18 5:25 12:4
12:10 13:23,25
14:11,13 15:18
16:2 19:5 22:4,6,9
22:18,23 23:10,14
23:24 26:5 28:8,11
29:8 36:2 38:6,8
38:12,13,16 39:10
39:15 41:22 43:1
43:12
Goldberger 2:11,12
4:5,6 38:10
gone 15:7
good 3:6,9,10,12,13
3:15,16,22,23 4:4
4:5,9,11,16,18,20
17:16 38:10,24
39:8
Government 7:7,9

|

7:18 8:1,2,7 9:21
10:8 11:19 12:6
13:1,2,2,9,11,13
14:1,5 15:23 16:19
17:11 18:4,12,17
20:11,11 21:13,14
23:10,11 25:11
29:9 33:19 34:18
34:23 36:2,17 41:3
43:2

Government's 5:6,8
7:25 9:10 12:20,23
15:16 18:22 25:13
30:14 37:9
grant 22:4
granted 22:2
great 7:23 8:20 9:19
10:22 12:17 15:15
20:8,24
ground 22:3
guess 36:17 38:6,7
guilty 17:11 41:8


H

H 1:23
hand 32:9,9 41:25
hanging 11:19
happen 14:13 22:6
happens 28:3
happy 30:16 36:13
36:21
harassing 39:16
harassment 39:18
harm 10:1 41:7
having 27:2,11
31:24 41:7,8
hear 5:9 26:12 41:21
42:24 43:2,10
heard 19:2 41:13
44:6
hearing 1:10 4:21
30:24 43:14
held 33:9
help 30:11,16 32:15
helpful 5:7 25:12
30:14 42:7 44:14
her 26:4 28:4
Herr 2:21 44:20,21
hesitant 32:1
hey 22:19
him 4:23 7:20,20,22
8:13,16,17 9:15,20
11:23 12:5 21:14
21:15 25:10,11
26:4,5,13 28:24
38:11 40:20 41:11
42:25
himself 5:1,3
Honor 3:10,13,16,21
4:2,5,9,13,17,19
5:13,16 6:4 12:12
19:1,7 23:1 24:5
25:22,25 26:7,12
27:21 30:15 34:14

|

35:6 38:20 41:13
42:10 44:12
HONORABLE 1:11
hope 31:22
hopefully 13:3
Horowitz 1:13,14
3:4,4 29:13,13
30:6
horrible 21:23
humiliated 20:25
hypocritical 19:25


I

idea 17:1 31:22
II 1:22 3:11
impact 16:18
important 41:24
impose 27:4
incident 24:14
incidents 17:25
incredible 7:21
incredulous 19:15
indicate 44:3
indicated 30:13
indicates 43:3
indict 7:20,20,22
8:13,16,17 12:10
12:24 15:10 18:23
21:14
indicted 9:17 10:6
10:22
indictment 8:19 10:7
individual 18:16
40:7
individuals 10:18
17:1 35:15 37:3
information 22:21
44:14
initial 12:19 15:21
initially 15:24
injury 10:23 23:22
innocent 27:5
inquiries 30:13
inquiry 7:15 15:16
instance 7:18,24
9:18 10:10 11:3,17
13:5 16:14
instances 16:4
intended 28:21
intent 21:19
intention 9:19 26:19
26:20,20 27:16
interest 23:12
interested 13:17
14:3
interpretation 16:20
38:22
interrogatories
14:24 19:20
interrupt 37:4
introduced 20:16
intrusive 29:5
invasive 19:22
investigated 31:14

| +|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +|

investigation 10:18
38:2 43:7
investigations 22:13
34:11
invited 27:6
involvement 6:6
irreparable 9:16
10:1 41:7
ISIDRO 1:20
issue 4:23 6:5,11,19
7:4 11:25 12:18,22
14:14 15:25 16:2
16:13,22 18:12,22
21:18 28:10,16
33:4,14,24 42:8,23
42:24
issued 14:25
issues 4:21 24:10,13
25:21,23 35:9
36:15 39:25 40:3
issuing 22:20 39:19
i.e 41:1

|

K

Katherine 2:5 3:16
keep 24:21
KENNETH 1:11
key 32:9
kind 30:10 36:12
39:11,22
knew 27:1
know 4:22 6:17 8:21
11:14 12:2 13:9,17
14:21 15:5,7 16:22
19:23 22:6 23:12
25:9 27:1 30:12,20
31:4 32:13 37:19
39:10,17 41:17,21
knowing 26:25 38:5
knowledge 5:13
13:11
known 21:4 32:14
knows 11:3 13:2

|

limitation 25:2
limitations 36:4,7,11
41:20
limited 4:21 8:3 14:5
17:12 20:19 23:25
30:19
limits 28:5
Lindsay165@aol.c...
44:24
list 17:1,2,6 35:16
36:8 38:11
litigation 7:4,5 9:13
15:8 16:18,25
21:18 22:14 23:12
31:24 33:16 34:3,9
34:15,15,16 36:25
36:25 39:24
lives 21:21
long 31:17 37:14
longer 20:7
look 12:14 18:6
36:16
looked 6:11

|

43:17
mean 18:10 33:22
34:14 39:7 43:24
means 32:24
members 4:13
memo 7:14 28:9
memorandum 27:23
mentioned 44:11
merits 22:1
Mermelstein 1:14
met 17:6 33:7
Miami 1:15 2:3,6,23
2:23 44:22,23
Michael 2:8 4:3
microphone 26:13
might 14:2,12 22:14
29:5 37:16,17
million 17:21
minimum 17:3 25:3
37:2
minimums 24:25
minors 20:7
minute 18:13 41:14
mistakes 13:4
money 17:20
more 8:3 17:23
23:25 30:25 39:12
42:7
morning 3:6,9,10,12
3:13,15,16,22,23
4:4,5,9,11,16,18
4:20
most 7:7 13:3 15:24
18:21 32:12 35:10
41:24
motion 1:10 4:22 6:7
12:22 15:24 20:4
22:6 27:24 33:4,14
33:15,25 34:2,11
37:15,20 38:2,23
39:8 41:5 42:23
43:4 44:1
motions 10:14 17:15
21:5 30:5 35:21
38:18
move 7:22 8:18 19:1
19:20 21:17,21
37:12
moving 9:7 33:8
41:4,12
much 23:13 30:16
30:25 42:7
multiple 18:15 40:15
40:16
multitude 8:12
myself 16:5 42:17

|

need 24:22 25:23
negotiate 32:18
negotiated 27:3,3
neither 43:21
never 11:9 26:20
40:19,22
newspapers 23:5
nobody 11:14
none 13:25
non-contesting 28:5
non-position 9:10
non-prosecution 5:2
5:11 6:2 8:6 13:24
14:19 15:20 19:6
22:8 24:1 27:25
28:2,5,19,25 29:25
31:11 32:6,8 33:2
33:12,18,19 34:3,6
34:10 36:19 37:11
43:1,6,16
non-2255 24:4,6
normal 30:4 39:13
North 1:23 2:9,23
nothing 13:15 24:12
24:15
notice 8:13,16 9:21
13:6 14:23 22:24
31:8,8 39:6,16
noticed 14:22
notification 15:3,4
16:8
NPA 8:5,11,15,24
9:1,9,16,19,22
10:4,19,22 11:20
12:8,15,24 13:7,15
14:10 16:8 18:14
20:22 21:19,19
23:9 24:12,15,16
24:18,20 25:2,7
35:12,24 36:14,14
39:3 41:4,6,11,18
42:1,2,3
number 15:9 16:21
17:7,9,14,21,24
32:1 35:15,20
numerous 23:21

| +|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|

O

| | | | | +|

J 1:16
Jack 2:11 4:5
jackpot 32:9
jail 41:7
Jane 1:4,15,18,22
2:3,7 3:5,5,7,11
5:17 6:8,9,16
11:12 21:4 29:14
29:22 33:5 35:13
42:22
Jay 2:20 4:18
Jeffrey 1:7 37:12
jeopardize 9:15
jeopardy 15:17
join 26:11,15
Josefsberg 2:1,2,5
3:18,20,21,23 19:7
19:7,10 21:25 23:1
24:5 25:25 26:7,11
26:12,16 27:13
31:6 32:17 33:6
35:14 39:3 41:13
41:16 42:10,16,17
43:17
Josefsberg's 33:25
35:11 36:5
JR 2:8
Judge 1:11 15:12
21:2 29:13 35:15
42:8,12
judgment 22:16
June 1:5 13:12
jurisdiction 28:1,6
just 18:23 20:15,16
22:3,6 24:20 26:1
29:15,16 30:23
35:8 37:8,10 39:24
40:4,17 42:24
43:14,23 44:3,11

|

L

lack 41:22
ladies 20:23 21:3,20
Lake 1:24
language 18:14
32:11
LARRY 2:21 44:21
Las 1:17
last 33:22 41:24
Lauderdale 1:18
2:16
law 7:1 27:24 28:9
lawsuit 25:18,19
lawsuits 30:17
lawyers 8:21 9:4,7
10:23,23 17:22
27:1 38:10,11,21
40:23
lay 8:10
least 35:10
leave 33:17,19
Lefkowitz 2:20 4:18
4:18
left 10:2
legal 10:13 24:10,13
35:21 38:12 40:3
41:5 43:9
legally 40:7
legitimate 38:7
less 41:14
let 5:9 13:10 19:19
letter 17:10 21:19
letters 16:6
liability 17:12 18:7,7
20:3,6,16,19 23:16
23:17,20 24:8,18
24:22,23 25:6,11
29:20 32:23 36:9
40:22 41:1
liable 33:9
like 7:16 13:9 25:21
37:16 40:4
limit 23:23 24:2

|

M

M 1:20
2:18
made 15:10,17 16:6
20:12 31:20 43:13
44:4
major 11:25
make 8:21 13:4
15:21 19:19 23:8
23:13 26:2,18
27:24 29:1,16 34:5
38:12,13 39:11
41:14
making 42:7 43:9,24
44:5
man 12:24
mandate 7:24 8:20
8:21 10:3
many 20:23 31:3
35:17 42:1
2:14 4:9
MARRA 1:11
2:17 4:16
21:2 32:16
matter 20:15 37:13
44:19
matters 21:11
may 3:3 5:1 7:2,10
9:9,12 10:4,17
11:19 13:17,18
14:18 15:12 16:18
16:19 17:12 19:8
19:16 20:4 21:11
21:17,21 23:6
27:22 30:20 32:14
34:17 35:16,20
39:6 40:8,16 41:6
41:13,13
maybe 12:17 13:10
17:20 30:10 42:8

|

N

N 44:22
names 11:9 23:5
43:6
narrow 42:24
nature 27:6
necessary 22:22 41:5

|

O

object 7:2,10,10
objection 36:18
objections 11:5,6
obligation 21:9
30:12 31:8
obtain 11:7
obviously 10:20
34:18
occurred 17:25
occurs 26:21
off 39:8
offender 41:9
offense 18:8,10,15
33:10,11
offenses 18:16 31:13
offered 37:2

| + +|

office 4:8,10 26:20
27:4 43:5,12,25
44:5

Official 2:22 44:22

officials 7:2

often 40:2

okay 3:25 5:19,21
18:10 30:2

Olas 1:17

old 31:18,18

once 22:5

one 4:23 7:17 11:25
17:24 18:5,16,20
18:21 20:1,8 22:24
31:11 36:24 39:10
40:16 42:23 44:11

only 13:22 14:3
17:24 23:20 25:4
29:20 36:6 39:1,3
42:23

open 26:24 43:19

opportunity 8:14,17
9:21

opposed 33:21

opposite 20:22 21:18
21:22 28:20

opposition 27:24

option 7:23

order 6:16 12:14
22:21 30:23,24
33:17,17 36:19
44:15

ordinarily 26:3
34:12

ordinary 27:10
39:13

originally 6:5

Orseck 2:2,5 3:17

other 7:1,17 16:4,5
17:22 22:13,18
23:6,21,22 24:1
25:21 26:8 32:8
34:9,11 36:12
42:18 43:8 44:10

otherwise 39:14

out 8:8 10:16 22:24
26:16,23 28:22
30:11 36:12 38:17
39:20 44:15

outside 13:18,19
24:17 36:7

over 11:19 24:24

own 12:21 38:13


P

Pacer 30:19

pages 7:14 27:23
28:9

paint 29:17

Palm 1:2,4,21 2:10
2:13

paper 10:16 13:7

papers 8:10,16 9:25
10:8 11:21 12:20

|

15:6,10 41:5

paragraphs 36:15

paraphrasing 6:20

Park 2:18

part 10:18 18:9
20:23 21:7 23:9,20
34:16 39:23 40:2,5
44:1

particular 6:15,18
7:24 8:22 9:18
11:17 13:5

parties 9:23 11:6
16:21 22:21 39:20

partner 3:18 4:3

parts 19:25 21:17

party 11:11 14:25
30:12,17 36:18

past 9:11 10:5 12:3,4

pay 17:3 21:8,10
25:5

pending 6:15 9:5
17:15 21:6

people 23:6

per 24:14,14,14,14

perception 28:21

perfect 36:1 39:5

perhaps 20:24 27:22

period 9:21 34:4
37:3,14

permitted 24:6,18

permitting 42:18

person 36:11

personal 10:23
23:21

perspective 16:23
35:10

pertains 29:20

phone 4:12,14,15
42:18,19

picking 12:13

place 31:12 37:14
43:20

plaintiff 3:7,14
24:15 30:4 34:20
43:7

plaintiffs 1:5,13 3:4
3:24 11:8 17:8,14
17:22 19:3 22:14
23:7,24 27:5 29:1
29:12,14,20 30:9
39:16 43:8

plaintiff's 19:4 26:8
36:16

playing 7:8

Plaza 2:18

plead 17:11 18:10,11

pleading 7:14 31:10
33:4 40:9,14

pleadings 23:4 31:3
32:13

please 41:22

pled 17:8,16 20:14
41:8

Podhurst 2:2,5 3:17

|

point 6:18 14:12
26:16,23 28:14
29:15 36:12 43:23

pointed 14:20

portion 32:24 36:14

portions 5:15

posed 11:25

posing 8:4

position 5:5,8 6:4 7:7
7:25 9:16,20 10:12
10:13 11:21,22
12:12,17,23 14:8,8
14:15 15:16 16:16
16:17 17:4,7 18:13
18:17 19:19 20:13
22:1,11 25:8 30:14
31:12 32:10,15,20
34:8 35:3,21 36:23
37:9 40:10 41:17
43:5

positions 30:20 41:5

possible 30:17 31:4
44:15

possibly 34:9

posting 25:22

potential 5:3 15:2
28:2

potentially 10:18
15:19

power 13:2

practical 10:25 15:9

practice 34:11 38:3

predicate 20:8,15

prepared 20:5 27:15

present 5:5 11:15

presents 9:7

press 43:10

pressure 21:15

presume 23:24

pretty 8:1

prior 6:6 8:25 12:14
36:19

privacy 19:22 32:7

probably 35:18 36:3
36:13

problem 14:12 22:22
23:2,3 28:18

procedure 32:16
34:24

proceed 12:10 18:23
32:22 38:13

proceeding 6:15,15

proceedings 4:23,25
44:19

process 39:25

production 14:24
19:20

prohibited 38:3,4,18

prohibits 37:22

proof 20:16

proper 25:1 27:14
27:15

prosecuted 20:13
26:4 27:11 29:10

|

31:15

prosecuting 37:25

prosecution 26:6
28:23 29:6,7 34:25

prospect 16:15

protect 32:7

protecting 32:7

provide 31:8 36:13
36:21

provided 16:9 32:12

provides 9:22

providing 31:8

provision 6:12 8:11
29:19,25 34:10,25
37:11 38:3 39:17
39:18

provisions 13:6,7

psychologically
21:24

publish 23:5

pure 24:8

purpose 21:19,23
28:20

pursuant 25:15 32:8
41:17

pursue 23:12

pursuing 22:12,15

put 9:15 18:21 32:10
41:6

puts 18:25 34:4
40:10 41:11


Q

question 8:3,7 9:2
12:1 30:25

questions 42:1

quite 19:10


R

R 44:17

raise 16:2 36:11

raised 15:25 16:13
18:5,21 19:13
28:10 33:14 35:9
40:1

read 37:20 42:2,23

reading 18:18 23:19

ready 29:7

real 9:6 10:8 36:11
41:18

really 12:2 18:11
30:20,23 33:14
36:17

Realtime 2:22

reason 6:14 7:3
29:23 33:11 34:2

reasons 18:5,20
34:19 40:8

recapitulating 41:1

received 5:5 15:3,4
20:4

recent 7:7 15:24

records 34:21

redacted 36:14

|

reference 27:25

referred 31:6

refers 41:16

refusal 9:10

refuses 8:7

refusing 25:5

regard 9:11,12,13
10:12,13,14,14
11:4 12:19 14:9
16:18 18:23 35:12
36:23

regarding 6:24
23:15 37:9

regardless 31:17,18

registering 41:9

relate 9:3 30:1

related 30:24 33:24

relates 8:12

relating 29:19

release 41:9

relevant 19:22

remain 42:13

remedy 7:20 8:17
29:21 33:20 34:7
41:2

remember 23:19

remind 44:3

remote 10:8

rep 35:14

replies 10:15

reply 35:22

REPORTED 2:21

Reporter 2:22,22
44:22

represent 21:3 32:12
35:15

representation
26:18

representatives 4:7
43:9

represented 21:7
26:24 33:5

representing 38:11

represents 18:16
35:16

requests 14:23

required 17:3

requirement 33:8

resist 34:18,23

resolve 42:8

resolved 7:4 19:12
24:16

respect 22:14

respectfully 7:6 14:4

respond 20:5 30:13
44:9

response 5:6 7:14
8:2 11:20 15:16,23
18:22 33:15 34:1,1
35:17,21

responses 10:14
30:21 35:8

restitution 29:2
31:16,23

| +|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +|

restitution/damages
32:19
restrictions 43:18
result 10:21 15:19
18:20
resulted 32:17
review 31:3 36:22
Richard 1:23 3:13
26:10
ride 40:17
right 3:24 6:24
12:25 13:3 25:8,14
34:23 37:20 41:3
42:20 43:14 44:8
rights 13:5 25:16
32:7
risk 9:6 10:6,7 18:25
38:6 40:10 41:6,11
risks 21:5
Robert 2:1,8 4:2 6:3
role 25:13 37:7
Room 2:23
Rosenfeldt 1:17
■■■-colored 11:16
Rothstein 1:17
RPR-CM-RMR-F...
44:21
RPR-RMR-FCRR...
2:21
rule 39:9 42:13
rules 22:3 25:1 34:24
40:15 42:13
ruling 8:25 42:7
rulings 19:21 23:8
25:2 27:13,15 30:6
run 22:18
running 21:13 23:14
27:16


S

|

seen 5:14,15
selected 35:15
self-fulfilling 24:23
self-incrimination
6:25
send 10:16 38:17
39:6
sends 22:23
sent 14:22,23,24
16:6 17:10 39:15
39:19
separate 5:20 17:17
serve 11:5,6
set 12:21 13:13 18:4
31:22 36:9
settle 21:8
settling 21:10 25:5
severely 21:21
sex 41:9
sexual 23:6
shape 11:4
shield 29:1
show 36:22 42:11
Sid 3:10
side 7:17,17
sideline 8:9
silent 29:23
similar 35:18 43:2
simply 11:17
since 20:20
sir 19:9 35:8 37:5
41:15
sit 8:9
sitting 42:3
situation 12:6 20:25
25:12 26:24
sole 29:21
solely 12:15 32:10
some 4:7 5:4 7:2,10
7:11,12 9:1,8,9
10:16 15:12 16:1,8
17:22 20:25 21:3
30:18 35:8 38:7
43:13
someone 10:17 19:22
24:20 26:3 34:12
34:17 37:16 39:15
something 13:19,24
14:17 15:24 20:19
26:17 28:13 34:9
37:21,23 38:4,9
39:9 43:2
Sometimes 13:4
somewhat 6:5
soon 44:15
sorry 15:14 27:19
sort 32:10 33:17
34:19
sought 31:11
sound 37:16
South 2:12
SOUTHERN 1:1
speak 12:16 19:8
speaking 26:14 32:2

|

Special 21:2 32:16
specific 8:2 11:1
16:24 17:13 30:25
43:25 44:4
specifically 43:7
spector 11:18
speculative 10:9
spirit 25:20
spoken 30:3
standard 11:1
standpoint 10:25
15:9
start 23:15
state 3:3 9:6 28:4
29:4 40:12,17 41:8
stated 3:25
statement 33:23
statements 43:9
States 1:1,11 2:22
4:8 5:1,5,17 6:1
9:24 10:6 13:21
14:8,17 16:7 19:14
22:10,19 29:9 39:4
44:5,22
State's 27:16
statute 17:4 18:3
20:6 24:14 28:7
29:21 36:4,7,11
41:20
statutory 6:12 24:25
25:3 34:18 37:2
stay 4:23 6:8,19,21
7:3 11:24 12:16,19
12:23 15:25 19:16
21:22 22:2,4,4,5,7
24:22 25:21 30:24
33:14,15,16,21
34:2,2 37:21,22
42:5 43:4 44:1
stayed 25:19
staying 21:18
steps 27:10
still 5:7
Street 2:2,6,9
strictly 11:15
strikes 36:12
stuck 18:14 36:10
stuff 34:19
subject 5:3 26:5,21
27:13 30:6
submit 7:6 14:4
submitted 42:15
subpoena 11:9 34:17
34:20
subpoenaes 11:5
subpoenas 14:25
22:21 38:18 39:19
subsequently 6:9
9:16
substantial 9:6
11:22,23 13:2
18:25 41:11
sue 7:17
suffered 32:3

|

suggest 8:10,23
suggested 12:13,21
14:16 15:5,6 36:3
39:2 40:8,9
suggesting 16:7
suggestion 15:17
41:25 44:10
suing 25:10
suit 20:21 21:4 32:22
suits 26:25
summary 40:3
supporting 15:16
supposed 20:18
22:25 23:17 24:9
29:1
sure 5:7 14:11 26:2
29:16 33:22 37:25
Susan 3:17
system 31:23
s/Larry 44:20


T

|

12:24,25 13:6,6
17:16 18:18,23
19:14 25:13 27:6,6
27:22 28:18 29:15
30:23 39:6,8 42:1
42:2,6 43:15 44:14
third 11:6,11 14:25
22:21 39:20
third-party 19:11
21:16 25:14
thoughts 27:2,5
threatening 44:1
three 41:14
through 3:5 6:9 11:7
11:16 29:14,22
31:5,24 32:6,16
till 14:2
time 6:10,11,12,15
6:19,20 13:3 17:5
21:12 31:18,19
34:4 36:3 37:2
38:21
times 17:19 18:2
today 8:4 13:11 14:3
14:6,6 15:5 28:17
31:9,19 35:23
36:21 43:14 44:11
44:14
today's 13:12,14
told 23:20 35:23
tools 10:25
tort 10:24 23:22
24:4,6
totally 20:5,21 23:1
41:24
TRANSCRIPT 1:10
transcription 44:19
trauma 32:3
traumatized 21:21
tried 31:3 32:6
troubled 43:24
true 17:12
try 23:11 30:16
32:18 34:17 44:15
trying 10:11 22:3
28:25 32:9 37:8
39:20
turn 12:8
two 4:13 9:23 19:25
21:11 36:24
type 12:15 22:13
35:17 39:18
types 22:16 36:24
typical 11:2,4 22:15
23:3,4,8


U

| +|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +| 10:1,11,22 12:6,10 | 44:9,12 | went 6:18,22 26:23 | 40:8 | 50 18:2 24:12 | +|-----------------------------|----------------------|-----------------------|----------------------|---------------------| +| 12:20 13:7,8 16:8 | violate 19:18 34:6 | 32:16 43:19 | 102 6:8 35:19 36:1,3 | 500 2:15 | +| 16:17,23 17:2,4,8 | violated 5:2 14:2 | were 6:10 14:6 15:10 | 40:9 41:21 | 515 2:9 | +| 17:12,18 18:4,8,19 | 39:6 | 18:7 19:11 21:2 | 103 21:5 35:19 | 561.582.7600 1:24 | +| 20:9,18,19,21 21:9 | violates 8:5,11 33:2 | 29:23 31:17,18 | 104 35:19 | 561.659.8300 2:13 | +| 22:7 24:8,11,18,20 | 42:25 | 32:1,4,22 34:17 | 105 35:20 | 561.832.8033 1:22 | +| 24:20 25:1,6 28:6 | violating 9:16,19 | 36:24 43:1 44:10 | 11:10 44:16 | 561.842.2820 2:10 | +| 30:12 31:21 32:21 | 38:17 41:6 43:13 | weren't 32:9 | 12 1:5 9:4 | | +| 32:23 33:7,10 | violation 8:23 9:9 | West 1:2,4,21 2:2,6 | 12th 13:12 | | +| 34:18,23 35:24 | 10:4,19 11:20 12:7 | 2:10,13 | 13 7:14 9:4 | 6 1:18 | +| 36:5,8,9 37:1,13 | 12:9 13:15,19,20 | we'll 7:19,22 8:16 | 14 7:14 | 617.227.3700 2:19 | +| 38:25 39:6,14 40:6 | 13:23 14:10,19 | 17:23 26:13 40:17 | 150 17:19,20 18:2 | | +| 40:21,23 41:1 | 15:2 16:7 18:19 | we're 9:8 10:2 12:10 | 24:12 | | +| understand 5:7 | 24:19 25:19,20 | 13:14 19:10,12 | 17 27:23 28:9 | 7 1:18 3:5 29:14,22 | +| 14:15 21:25 22:3 | 29:10 34:10,13,24 | 20:5 27:15 28:17 | 18 33:7 | 36:15 | +| 23:24 29:25 30:14 | 35:12,24 37:17 | 39:1 43:14 44:2 | 18205 1:14 | | +| 31:7 37:8 38:20 | 40:25 41:4 | we've 15:4 35:23 | 19 27:23 28:9 | | +| 39:25 | violations 17:17,18 | 36:5 43:12 | | 8 36:15 | +| understanding | 17:24 18:1,16 | whatsoever 27:7 | | 8N09 2:23 | +| 20:10 | 19:23 40:16 43:17 | while 32:7 34:16 | 2 3:5 5:17 6:9,16 | | +| unfair 42:2 | 43:22 | 35:14 | 29:14,22 | | +| unilateral 12:22 | voluminous 31:4 | whole 20:12 38:11 | 20 2:18 17:25 18:2 | 9 36:15 | +| unilaterally 7:13 | vs 1:6 3:1 5:17 | wide 26:24 43:19 | 2009 1:5 13:12 | 954.356.7255 2:16 | +| 12:24 | | willful 8:23 12:7 | 22 7:21 10:2 | 954.522.3456 1:19 | +| United 1:1,11 2:22 | | willfully 9:19 | 224 1:21 | | +| 4:8 5:1,5,17 6:1 | W 2:5 | Willits 1:23 3:13,14 | 2255 16:23 17:4,17 | | +| 9:24 10:6 13:21 | wait 8:10 18:13 | 26:10,10,14,15 | 17:18 18:8,12,14 | | +| 14:8,17 16:7 19:14 | 42:12 | 27:12,19 | 20:2,9,19,21 23:21 | | +| 22:10,19 29:8 39:4 | waive 25:14 | win 29:5 | 23:22,23 24:8,17 | | +| 44:5,22 | waiving 18:7 | withdraw 28:8,11 | 24:21 25:6 31:21 | | +| unless 11:7 34:25 | want 8:9,10 11:15 | wonderful 28:23,24 | 32:21,23 33:7,10 | | +| unlimited 40:21 | 12:2 16:22 17:20 | word 24:21 | 36:6,23 37:13 41:2 | | +| until 37:23 | 21:4,4,5,14 22:1,6 | worried 39:22 | 2290 1:23 | | +| urge 22:9 | 25:17 26:2,8,16,18 | worry 41:11 | 25 2:2,6 | | +| use 10:25 11:8 20:24 | 26:23 27:4 29:16 | Worth 1:24 | 250 2:12 | | +| 23:11 28:25 40:11 | 35:7 37:21 41:17 | writing 28:13 | 26 20:4 | | +| used 28:19 | 41:21 42:14,21 | written 5:6 21:9 23:4 | | | +| U.S 2:15 4:10 7:1,9 | 44:9 | | | | +| 8:6 12:8,12 16:16 | wanted 11:11 14:21 | | | | +| 26:19 27:4,18,19 | 17:5 20:12 29:15 | x 1:9 | 3 1:18 | | +| 43:5,11,25 | 42:24 44:3 | | 30 17:16,19,19 | | +| U.S.A 2:16 | wants 11:14 13:3 | | 30-count 40:12 | | +| U.S.C 33:7 | 19:2,16,20 23:4 | | 305.358.2800 2:3,7 | | +| | 24:24 33:16 34:2 | yeah 41:3 | 305.523.5290 2:23 | | +| | warranted 6:22 | yesterday 21:9 | 305.931.2200 1:15 | | +| | wasn't 28:21 | young 20:23 21:3,20 | 305/523-5290 44:23 | | +| various 3:1 10:25 | | | 305/523-5639 44:23 | | +| very 4:21 5:7 11:1,2 | way 8:23 9:9 10:5,16 | | 33 6:17 9:1 | | +| 11:20 12:21 16:19 | 10:19 11:4 13:16 | \$15 17:20 | 33128 2:23 44:23 | | +| 16:24 17:12,12 | 14:10 19:23 25:1 | \$150,000 32:21 | 33130 2:3,6 | | +| 23:11 29:4 32:1 | 25:18 27:3,4 28:22 | \$50,000 17:5 32:21 | 33160 1:15 | | +| 35:18 38:10 40:18 | 28:23 | 37:2 | 33301 1:18 | | +| 42:2 43:18 44:14 | ways 30:18 | | 33394 2:16 | | +| Via 2:4,19,20 | wealthy 32:13 | | 33401 1:21 2:10,13 | | +| victim 37:13 | weigh 26:11 | 0 | 33461 1:24 | | +| victims 20:12 21:20 | Weinberg 2:17 4:16 | 02116 2:18 | 34 21:20 | | +| 28:23 31:12,16,23 | 4:16 | 08 12:18,18 | | | +| 32:13 33:18 35:16 | Weiss 2:12 | 08-80119-CIV-M... | | | +| 39:20 41:17,18,19 | well 7:10 8:20 10:22 | 1:3 | | | +| 41:19 | 11:12,12,13,13 | | | | +| view 16:19 | 12:17 13:16 14:11 | | | | +| Villafana 2:14 4:9 | 15:7 16:18 17:15 | 1 5:17 | | | +| 4:10 17:10 30:10 | 17:23 18:10,11 | 10 36:15 | | | +| 30:15 33:24 34:14 | 33:24 35:12,19,20 | 10th 1:23 | | | +| 35:2,4,6,12 39:4 | 36:5 39:4 40:13 | 101 2:3,7 33:5 35:13 | 5 1:18 6:9 | | +| | | 35:17 38:23 39:3,7 | 5th 12:18 | | \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744977/EFTA02744977.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744977/EFTA02744977.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..35d5f87bde388bb35d527b006e6b7f6a08b7ab22 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744977/EFTA02744977.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1776 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02744977.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 51, + "chars": 214771, + "elapsed_seconds": 39.05, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "DISTRICT \n08-80119-CIV-MARRA \nUNITED STATES \nSOUTHERN \nWEST PALM \nCASE NO. \nDISTRICT COURT \nOF FLORIDA \nBEACH DIVISION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.8, + 44.55 + ], + [ + 463.24346923828125, + 44.55 + ], + [ + 463.24346923828125, + 105.30000000000001 + ], + [ + 244.8, + 105.30000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING \nBEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, \nUNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 307.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 515.35595703125, + 307.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 515.35595703125, + 353.58416748046875 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 353.58416748046875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "APPEARANCES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 119.34, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 218.04966735839844, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 218.04966735839844, + 385.08416748046875 + ], + [ + 119.34, + 385.08416748046875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 131 + ], + [ + "Line", + 66 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 107 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 108 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 106 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 106 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 106 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 106 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 106 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 104 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 38, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 39, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 40, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 41, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 42, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 106 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 43, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 107 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 44, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 45, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 46, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 47, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 48, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 49, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 50, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02744977" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745028/EFTA02745028.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745028/EFTA02745028.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..512d26d7bba4b09557f83e36a11130e3a357dd6c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745028/EFTA02745028.md @@ -0,0 +1,228 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO.2, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO.3, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO.4, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Plaintiff, + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80994-MARRA/ + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80993-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.; 08-CV-80811-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80893-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendants. + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80469-MARRA/JOHNSON + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80591-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80656-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's. Reply to Plaintiff. Opposition to Epstein's Motion To Strike Cases rom urrent r a oc ce nd Motion to Continue Case And/Or Alternative Motion to Modify Trial and Schedulinc Order Deadlines + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN (hereinafter "EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Reply to Plaintiff, (hereinafter "CMA"), Opposition to Motion To Strike Cases From Current Trial Docket + +And Motion to Continue Case And/Or Alternative Motion to Modify Trial and Scheduling Order Deadlines. In support, EPSTEIN states: + +## Background + +1. C.M.A. was filed on February 23, 2008. The case was removed to federal court on July 21, 2008. A Motion for Stay was filed on July 25, 2008 (DE 33), which this Court subsequently denied on December 12, 2008 (DE 28). The case was transferred from Judge Zloch to this division on September 3, 2008 (DE 21). C.M.A. filed her First Amended Complaint on February 10, 2009. (C.M.A. DE 39-40). Epstein's Motion to Dismiss same was filed on March 12, 2009. (C.M.A. DE 47). The Motion to Dismiss remains outstanding. + +2. Pursuant to the court's Order Setting Trial And Discovery Deadlines, Referring Case To Mediator And Referring Discovery Motions To U.S. Magistrate Judge (the "Trial Orders"), this matter is currently set on this court's Trial Docket commencing February 22, 2010. However, the schedules and the trial date must be set back for the reasons set forth in the Motion to Strike and herein. + +## Argument and Memorandum of Law + +3. Defendant never sat on his hands for six months as C.M.A. suggests. During that time period, numerous other cases have been filed against Epstein, all of which required extensive attorney time to address the numerous motions and discovery to and from various plaintiffs. + +4. In addition, up until May 20, 2009, Plaintiff refused to allow Defendant to identify her by name in various third-party subpoenas directed to Plaintiff's health care + +providers, past and current; basic personal injury discovery. If defendant could not use CMA's name, how could the provider have provided records from a "CMA" designation? In fact, as set forth in Defendant's April 29, 2009 Motion to Identify (DE 67), Plaintiff offered to allow Defendant access to her medical history only after her attorneys were able to obtain and filter through same. Only then would Plaintiff turnover the "filtered" relevant information. Obviously, such an offer is unrealistic and does not comport with the basic discovery rules or afford Epstein his constitutional due process rights to defend himself. As set forth herein, it is evident that discovery has been unreasonably delayed and now prevented by C.M.A. who seeks over a million dollars in damages. + +5. On May 20, 2009, C.M.A. capitulated and filed her Notice of Withdrawal of Previously Raised Objections to Epstein's Motion to Compel and/or Identify C.M.A. in the Style of this Case and Motion to Identify C.M.A. in Third-Party Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sue Sponte (DE 23)(the "Notice of Withdrawal"). Defendant's Motion to Identify can be found at docket entry #67 in the individual C.M.A. matter. Obviously, by filing the Notice of Withdrawal, Plaintiff recognized that her attempts to prevent meaningful discovery was delaying this matter and would ultimately delay her trial. + +6. Now, after filing the Notice of Withdrawal, C.M.A. states, at paragraph 5 in her Opposition Motion to Defendant's Motion to Strike, that she identified in her responses to interrogatories thirty-six (36) people, other than herself and Epstein, who may have knowledge regarding the subject matter of this lawsuit, including mental health providers, relatives, friends, etc.... C.M.A. cleverly forgets that up until May 20, 2009, + +C.M.A. objected to Defendant obtaining any of her medical information, despite the fact that her medical history and psychological condition are key elements of her damage claims in this matter. Moreover, C.M.A. continues to object to providing information concerning her alleged ability to work or not to work (despite her claim of loss of earnings in the past and capacity in the future), which is currently the subject of a motion to compel. Clearly, Defendant would waste considerable attorney time taking depositions until such time as the appropriate information is produced by Plaintiff, including her tax returns so that her supervisors, friends and colleagues may be identified and deposed. Simply put, substantial and key discovery remains outstanding. Defendant should not be forced to take depositions without the ability to have records and information in hand. + +7. C.M.A. failed to disclose that on June 5, 2009 she filed a Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc. and Dr. Serge Thys (DE 114), and of even date she filed her Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on the Statutory Damages provided by 18 U.S.C. 2255. (DE 113). On June 17, 2009, Plaintiff filed a subsequent Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Palm Beach County School District, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital Dr. Gloria C. Hakkarinen, and Florida Atlantic University (DE 121). While Plaintiff agreed to allow Defendant to identify her in various third-party subpoenas directed to her physicians, she now utilizes another delay tactic to prevent discovery of her past medical and psychological history from being discovered by and through the Conditional Notice and the Motions for Protective Order. What is Plaintiff trying to hide? + +8. After Plaintiff allowed Defendant to use her name in third party subpoenas, Defendant served subpoenas on: + +- a. Palm Beach County School District +- b. Dr. Serge Thys +- c. Parent/Child Center +- d. Good Samaritan Hospital +- e. St. Mary's Hospital +- f. Dr. Gloria C. Hakkarinen +- g. Florida Atlantic University + +CMA then filed two (2) protective orders, and all records that were obtained (or were to be obtained) went sent to her attorney, i.e. discovery was halted by CMA not the Defendant. + +9. Without the health care provider information, including psychological psychiatric records, it will be impossible to have a meaningful compulsory psychological examination by a defense expert. + +10. Comically, Plaintiff claims in the Conditional Notice and in the Motion for Protective Order that if she is successful at Motion to Dismiss, she intends to rely exclusively on the statutory damages provided under 18 U.S.C. 2255 rather than those damages provided for under common law. On the flipside, Plaintiff then claims that ". . .should the court rule. . .that the statutory damage floor can only be applied once, Plaintiff will be pursuing any and all damages available to her, whether they be pursuant to statute or by common law." (DE 113 at ¶5-6 and DE 114 at ¶4-7). The undersigned + +assumes this is part of the "conditional" aspect of the notice. Based upon the court's ruling referenced below, such a position is not warranted at Motion to Dismiss stage. What if this motion is not ruled upon until after the discovery cutoff or two weeks before the trial? The Defendant will have been prevented from obtaining critical discovery. + +11. Thus, it appears C.M.A. intends to further stall discovery pending the outcome of the Motion to Dismiss and any future Motion for Summary Judgment. See infra. That is, C.M.A. wishes to rely on the statutory damage floor if she is successful at motion to dismiss, and claims her medical history will not be at issue and thus no evidence regarding her physical, emotional and pecuniary injuries will be presented at trial. First, that is not what is currently alleged in the 89-page Amended Complaint. Second, paragraph 6 of Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order (DE 114) is cleverly worded in that it states "[p]laintiff will not be presenting any evidence of the extent of her physical, emotional or pecuniary injuries, beyond evidence that she was a victim of sexual contact to which she was legally incapable of consenting by virtue of her age (including, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, and loss of the capacity to enjoy life)." This court must ask what Plaintiff intends to use "beyond" evidence of the extent of her physical, emotional or pecuniary injuries. Does "beyond" mean Plaintiff still intends to produce evidence of her pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma etc... even if she is successful at Motion to Dismiss? + +12. Next, and equally significant, this court ruled in its May 28, 2009 Order that "[i]ssues regarding the minimum amount of damages available to Plaintiff under 18 U.S.C. 2255 do not affect whether plaintiff has stated a claim and are not appropriate for Motion to dismiss. These damages issues will be resolved at summary judgment or trial." See Order (DE 101). Hence, if this Court accepts Plaintiff's position and her bogus Notice of Conditional Reliance, Defendant may not be permitted discovery as to C.M.A.'s damages alleged in the Amended Complaint until a Motion for Summary Judgment is ruled upon, which could be right before and/or at trial. Certainly, such a result would be inherently unfair, but exactly what Plaintiff is strategizing to accomplish. Should this court entertain Plaintiffs position, maybe it should also entertain a conditional stay of this matter until such time as Plaintiff firmly decides what route she will traverse to recover damages. + +13. Additionally, it is unreasonable for this court to accept Plaintiff's position set forth in the Conditional Reliance and in the Motion for Protective Order because this court has already ruled that Plaintiff can only be deposed once. As such, Plaintiff cannot force the taking of her deposition while key discovery remains unavailable due to the Plaintiff's Motions for Protective Order. Moreover, if Defendant prematurely takes Plaintiff's deposition based on one (1) theory of recovery (which is exactly what Plaintiff is attempting to accomplish), then under this Court's prior ruling, an additional deposition of Plaintiff may not be allowed despite Plaintiff's success at Motion to Dismiss or Motion for Summary Judgment in connection with her 18 U.S.C. 2255 claims and/or conditional reliance. + +14. Nonetheless, despite Plaintiff's success at Motion to Dismiss or Motion for Summary Judgment, Defendant has a constitutional due process right to discover and assert defenses to C.M.A.'s claims. However, C.M.A. and her attorneys wish to direct this court, control how discovery will take place and who will be deposed, control what questions will be asked and to whom, and Plaintiff wishes to decide what damages she may seek pending the outcome of a substantive motion despite what her Amended Complaint already alleges. Accordingly, Epstein's due process rights in connection with the defense of this matter are being violated. + +15. In sum, the above reflects C.M.A.'s tactics to delay and prevent meaningful discovery in hopes that C.M.A. will be able to prevent Epstein from putting on any evidence in defense of his case. Epstein cannot defend this matter when the element of unfair and prejudicial "surprise" is ever so present. Schearbrook Land and Livestock Company v. U.S. et. al, 124 F.R.D. 221 (M.D. Fla. 1988). Plaintiff's trial by ambush tactics should not be tolerated. + +16. Accordingly, this court should exercise its discretion and modify the trial order and the deadlines/schedules thereunder as requested in Defendant's initial Motion to Strike and Continue Case. Under the circumstances outlined above, failure to strike this case from the current docket, continue the trial, and/or to modify the court's scheduling order will prejudice Epstein. Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 16(b)(4); Altadis USA, Inc. v. NPR, Inc. 2004 WL 444533 (M.D. Fla.)(granting motion to extend discovery and continue trial). + +17. Counsel for Jane Doe 2-7 has already agreed to a similar modification of the schedules under the Trial Order. + +WHEREFORE, Epstein, through his counsel, requests that this court enter an Order: + +- a. striking this case from the current trial docket; +- b. continuing the trial of this matter and setting same on a new trial docket at least three months (depending on when the Defendant can obtain his discovery, after this Court rules on the protective orders) after the current trial date; or, alternatively, +- c. modifying the current trial schedule to allow for at least an additional 3 months as to all deadlines, including the trial date; and +- d. for such other and further relief as this cou eems just and proper. + +By: ROBERT D CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar o. 224162 MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this erday of June , 2009 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A.* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. █, Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Co-Counsel for Plaintiff* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant* █ + +![]()![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745028/EFTA02745028.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745028/EFTA02745028.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..26c9691fbad96101a7a0e41b144f163df9918634 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745028/EFTA02745028.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,545 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745028.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 12, + "chars": 15377, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.15, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 411.620849609375, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 411.620849609375, + 103.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 103.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 270.504, + 167.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 348.33990478515625, + 167.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 348.33990478515625, + 185.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 270.504, + 185.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Argument and Memorandum of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 526.5 + ], + [ + 416.2881774902344, + 526.5 + ], + [ + 416.2881774902344, + 544.2900085449219 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 544.2900085449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.8, + 444.69000000000005 + ], + [ + 372.4054260253906, + 444.69000000000005 + ], + [ + 372.4054260253906, + 460.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 244.8, + 460.29998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745028" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745040/EFTA02745040.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745040/EFTA02745040.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bc493bd0dba24297da7609b96d80b690dcb6a7c4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745040/EFTA02745040.md @@ -0,0 +1,137 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +/ + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +/ + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +1 + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-C1V-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE CASES FROM CURRENT TRIAL DOCKET + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves this Court for an extension of time until July 6, 2009, to file a Reply to Plaintiff, Jane Doe's, Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Strike Cases from the Current Trial Docket. As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +1. Counsel for Defendant communicated with Counsel for the Plaintiff, and Plaintiff's Counsel agrees to the requested extension of July 6, 2009, to file a Response to Plaintiff, Jane Doe's, Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Strike Cases from the Current Trial Docket. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff's counsel, by telephone, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested extension. + +> Robert D. Cri on, Esq. Attorney for 0 efendant + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following service list in the manner specified via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF on this 22 day of June, 2009: + +Brad Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellu@law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff + +> By: ROBERT D. FRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar o. 224162 rcrit@bcIclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike 0 bciclaw.com BURMAN, CR1TTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 561-835-8691 Fax iagesa@bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745040/EFTA02745040.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745040/EFTA02745040.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..851d707fc94ab0a86482ab53d20ad6902b282f53 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745040/EFTA02745040.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,276 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745040.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 3425, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.41, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 414.0064392089844, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 414.0064392089844, + 109.10302734375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 109.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 170.13600000000002, + 297.27 + ], + [ + 444.4494323730469, + 297.27 + ], + [ + 444.4494323730469, + 311.85 + ], + [ + 170.13600000000002, + 311.85 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 76.05889892578125 + ], + [ + 387.7810974121094, + 76.05889892578125 + ], + [ + 387.7810974121094, + 90.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 90.06353759765625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 42 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 98 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745040" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745045/EFTA02745045.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745045/EFTA02745045.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..81a74f03454e5559d2c022b45395b689b5ffb5a7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745045/EFTA02745045.md @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/IMI + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-a + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRAa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to file a Reply to Plaintiff, Jane Doe's, + +Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Strike Cases from Current Trial Docket. Having considered Defendant's Unopposed Motion and Plaintiffs counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall file a Reply to Plaintiff, Jane Doe's, Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Strike Cases from Current Trial Docket on or before July 6, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of June 2009 + +Kenneth A. Matra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies all counsel \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745045/EFTA02745045.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745045/EFTA02745045.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f14ef45e33a564848588093373c086ea01cbf121 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745045/EFTA02745045.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745045.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1796, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.34, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 413.60565185546875, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 413.60565185546875, + 105.7230224609375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 105.7230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 283.356, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 332.6178894042969, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 332.6178894042969, + 641.6030120849609 + ], + [ + 283.356, + 641.6030120849609 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745045" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745049/EFTA02745049.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745049/EFTA02745049.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a27377d5e0796dbcf8615360d716b1e75cadb433 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745049/EFTA02745049.md @@ -0,0 +1,171 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO. 101 AND JANE DOE NO. 102'5 REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY OR,IN THE ALTERNATIVE. TO UNSEAL THE NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT + +Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 (together, "Plaintiffs"), by and through their undersigned attorneys, reply to Defendant's Response [D.E. 152] to Plaintiffs' Motion for + +Leave to File Under Seal Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay or, in the Alternative, to Unseal the Non-Prosecution Agreement (the "NPA") and state as follows: + +Based on the Court's comments and counsel's arguments during the June 12, 2009 hearing on Defendant's Motion to Stay and/or Continue Action For Time Certain Based on Parallel Civil and Criminal Proceedings with Incorporated Memorandum of Law [D.E. 65], and the recent ruling from Judge Colbath in the related state court cases, Plaintiffs believe that the issues raised in Defendant's Motion to Stay are moot. + +Dated: June 29, 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: s/Katherine W. Ezell Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Bar No. 040856 rjosefsberu&odhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell®oodhurst,com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 29th day of June, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECIC, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: s/Katherine W. Ezell Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Bar No. 040856 riosefsbergapodhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Ha. Bar No. 114771 kezell©podhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## SERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAi United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820/Fax: (561) 515-3148 reritPt,bc1claw.com mpike@bc1claw.com Counsellor Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300/Fax: (561) 835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360/Fax: (561) 828-0983 ecfabrucereinhartlaw.conit Counsellor Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300/Fax: (561) 383-9456 jsxO-searcylaw.com joh©searcvlaw.com Counsellor Plaintiff in related Case No. 08-80811 + +Adam Horowitz, Esq. Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. Mennelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Phone: (305) 931-2200/Fax: (305) 931-0877 ahorowitz(asexabuseattomey.com smennelstein@sexabuseattomev.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. Leopold Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Phone: (561) 515-1400/Fax: (561) 515-1401 skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com ticopoldatIleopoldkuvin.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 Phone: (561) 582-7600/Fax: (561) 588-8819 lawverwillitsatol.com reelrhw@hotinail.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +Brad Esq. • Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-4252 Phone: (954) 522-3456/Fax: (954) 527-8663 bedwards@rnt-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 Isidro Manuel MI, Esq. + +Elkins & Boehringer + +224 Datum Avenue, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 832-8033/Fax: (561) 832-7137 + +isidrogarcia bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745049/EFTA02745049.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745049/EFTA02745049.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..969cf25afc499aa848d3e91c36adfa318cd04634 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745049/EFTA02745049.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,405 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745049.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 5826, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.94, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 208.14600000000002, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 405.9381103515625, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 405.9381103515625, + 104.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 208.14600000000002, + 104.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO. 101 AND JANE DOE NO. 102'5 REPLY TO \nDEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE \nUNDER SEAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY \nOR,IN THE ALTERNATIVE. TO UNSEAL THE NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.38199999999999, + 571.8599999999999 + ], + [ + 538.1627807617188, + 571.8599999999999 + ], + [ + 538.1627807617188, + 629.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 69.38199999999999, + 629.9830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.338, + 77.14501953125 + ], + [ + 389.6150817871094, + 77.14501953125 + ], + [ + 389.6150817871094, + 91.61248779296875 + ], + [ + 225.338, + 91.61248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.792, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 352.6312561035156, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 352.6312561035156, + 90.86248779296875 + ], + [ + 262.792, + 90.86248779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745049" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745057/EFTA02745057.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745057/EFTA02745057.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e27f4bdd29f4f60785bb6ba01ce0df611f275e24 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745057/EFTA02745057.md @@ -0,0 +1,142 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08- CV-80811 -MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08- CV-80993-MARRA, + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 08-CV- 80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +CASE NO.: 08- CV-80893-MARRA, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al., + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80591-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80656-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +## STIPULATED HIPAA QUALIFIED PROTECTIVE ORDER + +THIS CAUSE having come before the Court on Joint Motion of the parties, Jane Doe No. 2, Jane Doe No. 3, Jane Doe No. 4, Jane Doe No. 5, Jane Doe No. 6, Jane Doe No. 7 and Jane Doe No. 8 (collectively, "Plaintiffs"), and Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, for a HIPAA Qualified Protective Order, and the Court having being duly advised in the premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: + +I. General. In accordance with the requirements of the regulations promulgated under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), specifically 45 C.F.R. §164.512 (e) (1) (ii) (B) & (v), the Court issues a HIPAA Qualified Protective Order, as the term is defined in the foregoing regulations, and for health information of the Plaintiffs obtained in discovery requires that all parties be: + +- a. prohibited from using or disclosing protected health information (“PHI”) for any purpose other than the litigation of the following cases: Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein, case no. 08-CV-80119, Jane Doe No. 3 v. Jeffrey Epstein, case no. 08-CV-80232, Jane Doe No. 4 v. Jeffrey Epstein, case no. 08-CV-80380, Jane Doe No. 5 v. Jeffrey Epstein, case no. 08-CV-80381, Jane Doe No. 6 v. Jeffrey Epstein, case no. 08-CV-80994, Jane Doe No. 7 v. Jeffrey Epstein, case no. 08- CV-80993, and Jane Doe No. 8 v. Jeffrey Epstein, case no. 09-CV-80802, and any other state or federal lawsuits against Jeffrey Epstein alleging similar sexual misconduct (hereafter, the “Lawsuits”); and +- b. required to return to the disclosing entity or destroy the PHI (including all copies made), at the conclusion of the litigation of the Lawsuits. + +Based upon this HIPAA Qualified Protective Order all persons, including but not limited to physicians and other medical providers, shall comply with, and are hereby authorized to use or disclose PHI in response to, any and all subpoenas for records. This HIPAA Qualified Protective Order applies to PHI received pursuant to subpoena or discovery in the Lawsuits. It further applies to all notes, opinions and other documents of psychological experts retained by any of the parties for purposes of the Lawsuits. + +2. *Depositions.* In addition to the foregoing, pursuant to 45 C.F.R. §164.512 (e) (1) (I) and for purposes of compliance with HIPAA, without waiver of any right to prepayment of costs, fees and expenses associated with copying costs, or any other appropriate objection or privilege that may be timely asserted, each deponent duly noticed for deposition in the above-style litigation, including but not limited to a party, a fact witness, a records custodian, an expert, a treater, or a health care provider of any type, is expressly and specially authorized to use or to disclose to the attorneys, employees, agents, and designees of each party or each party’s legal counsel in this case the protected health information of a party that is responsive to deposition questions or a valid duces tecum at such duly noticed deposition with both HIPAA regulations and any applicable state law not pre-empted by HIPAA, the authorization and order set forth in this paragraph expressly includes protected health information concerning psychological and mental records. + +3. *Experts, Litigation Consultants, and Attorneys.* This Protective Order does not prevent disclosure of PHI to the parties’ litigation experts, Plaintiffs’ and Defendant’s lawyers, and consultants hired for purposes of the Lawsuits, subject to the prohibitions and requirements of paragraph 1 above. + +4. *Judicial Proceedings.* In addition to the foregoing, pursuant to 45 C.F.R. §164.512 (e) (1) (i) and for purposes of compliance with HIPAA, without waiver of any right to prepayment of costs, fees, and expenses associated with copying costs, or any other appropriate objection or privilege that may be timely asserted, all witnesses duly appearing at, or subpoenaed for, any judicial proceeding related to this litigation, including but not limited to trial, are specifically and expressly authorized to use and disclose the PHI of a party at such judicial proceeding. In compliance with both HIPAA regulations and any applicable state law not pre- + +empted by HIPAA, the authorization set forth in this paragraph expressly includes protected health information concerning psychological and mental health records. + +5. Court Reporter, Photocopying & Other Service Providers. In addition to the foregoing, pursuant to 45 C.F.R. §164.512 (e) (1) (I) and for purposes of compliance with HIPAA, without waiver of any right to prepayment of costs, fees and expenses associated with copying costs, or other appropriate objection or privilege that may be timely asserted, any person or entity authorized or ordered above to use or disclose PHI is expressly and specifically authorized to do so with, to, or before any court reporter service, videography service, translation service, photocopy service, document management service, records management service, graphics service or other such litigation service, designated by a party or a party's legal counsel in this case. The protections and requirements of paragraph No. 1 above specifically apply to any such service so designated. Each party or the party's legal counsel is charged with giving notice of the obligations imposed by this Order to any such service the party or counsel so designates, and is further charged with obtaining advance consent of such service to comply fully with this paragraph. Upon such consent, the service will be deemed to have voluntarily submitted to the Court's jurisdiction during the pendency of this litigation for purposes of enforcement of this paragraph, including but not limited to the imposition of such sanctions, monetary or otherwise, as may be appropriate for any non-compliance. + +6. Expiration. Unless a motion for enforcement of this Order has been filed in this case and remains pending at the time, this Order shall expire upon the conclusion of the Lawsuits by any final resolution including dismissal or by final judgment, through and including all appellate proceedings, unless the time for commencing such proceedings has expired without an appeal. + +This Order is effective nunc pro rum as of the date of commencement of each of the Lawsuits. It is self-executing without need of further order of the Court. A copy of this Order shall be valid as an original. + +DONE AND ORDERED this day of July, 2009. + +DISTRICT COURT JUDGE + +Copies furnished to: All counsel of record. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745057/EFTA02745057.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745057/EFTA02745057.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1ab9657a1104fc9343caf47f80cc79df1c6c8925 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745057/EFTA02745057.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,245 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745057.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 7632, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.9, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 113.60302734375 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 113.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "STIPULATED HIPAA QUALIFIED PROTECTIVE ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 143.20800000000003, + 443.88 + ], + [ + 468.42315673828125, + 443.88 + ], + [ + 468.42315673828125, + 458.60302734375 + ], + [ + 143.20800000000003, + 458.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745057" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745062/EFTA02745062.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745062/EFTA02745062.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bca562d8175b4b5658cc230e4b709a8fbc56e429 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745062/EFTA02745062.md @@ -0,0 +1,187 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80993- + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08- CV-8081I -MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 08-CV- 80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al., + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80591-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## JOINT MOTION FOR STIPULATED HIPAA PROTECTIVE ORDER + +Plaintiffs, JANE DOES 2-7, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby file this Unopposed Motion for Stipulated HIPAA Protective Order, and state as follows: + +- I. In the course of discovery in this case, the parties will be exchanging discovery concerning the Plaintiffs which is protected by Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"). + - 2. These records include sensitive and confidential medical and therapy records. +- 3. Accordingly, the parties request the entry of the attached Stipulated HIPAA Protective Order to protect Plaintiffs' rights under HIPAA and allow Defendant to receive discovery of protected healthcare information under HIPAA. + +4. A proposed Agreed Order is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7, respectfully request that this Court enter the Stipulated HIPAA Protective Order attached as Exhibit "A". + +Dated: July I, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-8 + +By: s/ Robert D. Critton + +Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esq. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +Michael J. Pike, Esq. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & + +COLEMAN, + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on July 2, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawverwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745062/EFTA02745062.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745062/EFTA02745062.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5636e47821447a505477cff7429efa62d89b4fbf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745062/EFTA02745062.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,345 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745062.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 3710, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.7, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 99.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 99.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JOINT MOTION FOR STIPULATED HIPAA PROTECTIVE ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 118.72800000000001, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 493.8933410644531, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 493.8933410644531, + 445.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 118.72800000000001, + 445.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.9223937988281, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.9223937988281, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745062" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745068/EFTA02745068.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745068/EFTA02745068.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..06ac0d899addb8af7a15e366683a1d17611b9bd8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745068/EFTA02745068.md @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defel'idant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-C1V-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/1 + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-C1V-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRAI + +## ORDER + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S Unopposed Motion For Extension of Time in Which to File a Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and in Third Party Subpoenas, having considered Defendant's Unopposed Motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall file a Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and in Third Party Subpoenas on or before July 14, 2009. + +DONE aiid'ORDEREDIffifir day of June, 2009 + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies all counsel \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745068/EFTA02745068.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745068/EFTA02745068.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b28f6d0ce24a9c02162b84ebd87b0202f36ffb48 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745068/EFTA02745068.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745068.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1830, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.39, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 412.48565673828125, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 412.48565673828125, + 105.363037109375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 105.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 280.908, + 614.79 + ], + [ + 330.0133361816406, + 614.79 + ], + [ + 330.0133361816406, + 629.6030120849609 + ], + [ + 280.908, + 629.6030120849609 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745068" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745072/EFTA02745072.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745072/EFTA02745072.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..510d7da588f0e68b3c3266d97f12382bbe631de0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745072/EFTA02745072.md @@ -0,0 +1,145 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRAIMMI + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRAIMIN + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/MM + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/.== + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRAM= + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/MMI + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-M= + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA-M= + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRAM= + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES 2-7 RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL IDENTITY IN THE STYLE OF THE CASE AND IN TIIRID PARTY SUBPOENAS (DE 144) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves this Court for an extension of time until July 14, 2009, to file a Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and in Third Party Subpoenas, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 A.1(j) (S.D. Ha. 2008). As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +1. Counsel for Defendant communicated with Counsel for the Plaintiff, and Plaintiff's Counsel agrees to the requested extension of July 14, 2009, to file a Reply to Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and Third Party Subpoenas. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff's counsel, by telephone, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the quest;. extension. + +**Certificate of Service** + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 29th day of June, 2009. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) +[lrivera@hermanlaw.com](mailto:lrivera@hermanlaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +![]()![]()*(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745072/EFTA02745072.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745072/EFTA02745072.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a950001afef909c69e5c89bdfd0f538ed223d061 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745072/EFTA02745072.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,268 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745072.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 3019, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.5, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 80.19 + ], + [ + 414.74566650390625, + 80.19 + ], + [ + 414.74566650390625, + 111.35302734375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 111.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 171.36, + 331.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 444.89111328125, + 331.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 444.89111328125, + 347.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 171.36, + 347.9730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 242.35200000000003, + 82.62 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 82.62 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 96.38999999999999 + ], + [ + 242.35200000000003, + 96.38999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 28 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745072" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745077/EFTA02745077.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745077/EFTA02745077.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b6a1c2209441ca445ff05b381fc2556fee1be279 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745077/EFTA02745077.md @@ -0,0 +1,135 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 013-CV-80232-MARRA + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/M. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-8081 I-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRA1 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RESET TRIAL DATES AND PRETRIAL DEADLINES FOR CASES 08-80811 AND 08-80893 + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant Epstein's Motion to Strike Cases from Current Trial Docket and Motion to Continue Case and/or Alternative Motion to Modify + +Trial and Scheduling Order Deadlines for C.M.A, Jane Doe (80893), and Jane Does 2-7, filed May 19, 2009. (DE 104). The Court has reviewed the motion, responses, and replies, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. It is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Epstein's Motion to Continue (DE 104) is DENIED as to Plaintiffs C.M.A and Jane Doe (80893). After reviewing the parties' submissions and the record, the Court finds that Defendant's motion to continue is premature. These cases were filed nearly a year ago and there are still several months before the respective December 2009 and February 2010 trial dates. If discovery disputes have precluded the ability of counsel to prepare for trial, the Court will consider a short extension to the discovery deadlines, but under the present circumstances, the trial dates will not be delayed. Counsel should conduct themselves accordingly. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 51° day of July, 2009. + +KENNETH A. MARRA Copies furnished to: United States District Judge + +all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745077/EFTA02745077.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745077/EFTA02745077.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..25f73457f0c572f8f0c3d40d1e181b56c2d94847 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745077/EFTA02745077.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745077.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 2449, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.42, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RESET TRIAL DATES AND PRETRIAL \nDEADLINES FOR CASES 08-80811 AND 08-80893", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.03999999999999, + 594.54 + ], + [ + 508.1307067871094, + 594.54 + ], + [ + 508.1307067871094, + 624.7330169677734 + ], + [ + 104.03999999999999, + 624.7330169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745077" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745081/EFTA02745081.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745081/EFTA02745081.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..84ca092ab1c3d0dc7e344da0d97acc760516a1e3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745081/EFTA02745081.md @@ -0,0 +1,167 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-ev-80119-MARRA/J + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/,=M + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/=M + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-al + +CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA-a + +CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRAI + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion For Extension of Time in which to Respond to Plaintiff, Jane Does's Motion for + +Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfers of Assets, Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein and to Post a \$15 Million Bond to Secure Potential Judgment (DE 165). Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall Respond to Plaintiff's Motion- for Injunction -Restraining Fraudulent--Transfers -of-AssetsrAppointment-of - a-Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein and to Post a \$15 Million Bond to Secure Potential Judgment (DE 165) on or before July 16, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Matra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745081/EFTA02745081.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745081/EFTA02745081.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2e8cc96d899f63db7f512d167f4a11bad4a6c964 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745081/EFTA02745081.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,276 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745081.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 2345, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.52, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 414.3964538574219, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 414.3964538574219, + 108.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 108.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 283.968, + 627.75 + ], + [ + 333.7379150390625, + 627.75 + ], + [ + 333.7379150390625, + 643.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 283.968, + 643.4830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.48800000000006, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.48800000000006, + 101.60302734375 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 101.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 32 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745081" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745086/EFTA02745086.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745086/EFTA02745086.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1e1a2eada69d643cd46e9e6c61d6a2f8f3bafe3f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745086/EFTA02745086.md @@ -0,0 +1,361 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +/ + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR INJUNCTION RESTRAINING FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS OF ASSESTS. APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN AND TO POST A \$15 MILLION BOND TO SECURE POTENTIAL JUDGEMENT (DE 165) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves this Court for an extension of time until July 16, 2009, to file a Response to Plaintiffs Jane Doe's Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfers of Assets, Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein and to Post a \$15 Million Bond to Secure Potential Judgment (DE 165), pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 A.1(j) (S.D. Ha. 2008). As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +1. Counsel for Defendant communicated with Counsel for the Plaintiff, and Plaintiff's Counsel agrees to the requested extension of July 16, 2009, to file a Response to Plaintiffs Jane Doe's Response to Plaintiffs Jane Doe's Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfers of Assets, Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein and to Post a \$15 Million Bond to Secure Potential Judgment (DE 165). + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Coun el for Plaintiff's counsel, by telephone, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreeme the requested extension. + +> ton, Esq. efendant + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the f with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also ce being served this day on all counsel of record identi the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 6th day of regoing was electronically filed y that the foregoing document is on the following Service List in + +By: + +ROB T D. ON, JR., ESQ. + +Flori Bar No '2\$162 + +rcrit Iclaw.com + +MIC L J. PIICE ESQ. + +Flori Bar #617290 + +maike@bcIclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomev.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P.•, Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcylaw.com + +iph@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. MI, Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +Shipley, 561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL. 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +tleopold@riccilaw.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iageso@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745086/EFTA02745086.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745086/EFTA02745086.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3c25b928bc7453355ae74249641e87cf4175c32a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745086/EFTA02745086.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,333 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745086.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 5608, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.63, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 411.73565673828125, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 411.73565673828125, + 106.863037109375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 106.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 171.972, + 422.01000000000005 + ], + [ + 445.99530029296875, + 422.01000000000005 + ], + [ + 445.99530029296875, + 440.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 171.972, + 440.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 364.2369689941406, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 364.2369689941406, + 92.60302734375 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 92.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 436.59000000000003 + ], + [ + 365.70050048828125, + 436.59000000000003 + ], + [ + 365.70050048828125, + 451.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 451.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 103 + ], + [ + "Line", + 51 + ], + [ + "Text", + 41 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 163 + ], + [ + "Line", + 80 + ], + [ + "Text", + 77 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745086" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745092/EFTA02745092.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745092/EFTA02745092.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..744ffc156a3e4fc1c31b477dae9a7a63d1eb045b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745092/EFTA02745092.md @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 013-CV-80232-MARRA + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-8081 I -CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +/ + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +## ORDER TO FILE NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT UNDER SEAL FOR IN CAMERA REVIEW + +In view of the potential delay of the unsealing of the Non-Prosecution Agreement in the + +State court proceeding, and in order to avoid undue delay in deciding the motions to stay pending in this Court, the Court hereby requests that Plaintiffs file a copy of the Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") under seal for in camera review. A single copy of the NPA will be sufficient. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach. Palm Beach County, Florida. this 6th day of July, 2009 + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745092/EFTA02745092.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745092/EFTA02745092.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..09a4677b5bacc149e1883a74185939b699229598 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745092/EFTA02745092.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745092.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1747, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.38, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER TO FILE NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT UNDER SEAL FOR IN \nCAMERA REVIEW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 91.8, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 524.0021362304688, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 524.0021362304688, + 638.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 91.8, + 638.9830169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 30 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745092" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745096/EFTA02745096.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745096/EFTA02745096.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..deeab32861a50f6eaff61955167020ec19f27fb1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745096/EFTA02745096.md @@ -0,0 +1,135 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 013-CV-80232-MARRA + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/M. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-8081 1 -CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 101 AND 102'S MOTION FOR AN ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence (DE 114), filed May 26, 2009. The motion is fully briefed and ripe for review. See DE's 151, 168. The Court has carefully considered the motion, response, and reply, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +The Court intends to GRANT Plaintiffs' motion for an order for the preservation of evidence. However, Plaintiffs' proposed order is overly broad. Accordingly, the Court directs the parties to attempt to agree upon language for an order directing Defendant to preserve evidence and submit an agreed order to the Court no later than July 20, 2009. If the parties cannot agree, then each party shall submit a proposed order by the foregoing date. + +In the interim and until further order of the Court, Defendant shall not destroy any evidence in his possession, custody, or control that is relevant to these cases or that may lead to the discovery of evidence relevant to these cases. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 6th day of July, 2009 + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745096/EFTA02745096.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745096/EFTA02745096.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0ee4c14f8dbfa4e31084eed184809ec8beccae3e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745096/EFTA02745096.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745096.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 2427, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.4, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 101 AND 102'S MOTION FOR AN ORDER \nFOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 71.60400000000001, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 540.3933715820312, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 540.3933715820312, + 624.7330169677734 + ], + [ + 71.60400000000001, + 624.7330169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745096" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745100/EFTA02745100.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745100/EFTA02745100.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ab7c7ef86d3233112f645e2f49d5834600f7011e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745100/EFTA02745100.md @@ -0,0 +1,287 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAME + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994- + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, + +Plaintif& + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRAI + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## NOTICE OF FILING NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT UNDER SEAL FOR IN CAMERA REVIEW + +Plaintiffs, JANE DOE NO. 101 and JANE DOE NO. 102, hereby give notice of Sling Non-Prosecution Agreement, including the Addendum thereto pursuant to the Court's Order to File NonProsecution Agreement Under Seal for In Camera Review dated July 6, 2009. + +Dated: July 10, 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: iirtetta C. + +Robert C. Jose + +Fla. Bar No. 040856 + +riosefsbera@oodhurst.com + +Katherine W. Ezell + +Fla. Bar No. 114771 + +kezell@nodfmrst.com + +City National Bank Building + +25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +Telephone: (305) 358-2800 + +Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 101° day of July, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: RAuat Caltv..4..JA&6\_16b ,(44 + +Robert C. Josefs g + +Fla. Bar No. 040856 + +dose fsberg dipodhurst.com + +Katherine W. Ezell + +Fla. Bar No. 114771 + +ketelbdoodhurst.corn + +City National Bank Building + +25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +Telephone: (305) 358-2800 + +Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## SERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAi United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820/Fax: (561) 515-3148 rcrit@bc1claw.com intike@bc1claw.com Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300/Fax: (56I) 835-8691 jausaabellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360/Fax: (561) 828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300/Fax: (561) 383-9456 isx@searcvlaw.com iDhasearcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff in related Case No. 08-80811 Adam Horowitz, Esq. + +Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +Phone: (305) 931-2200/Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com + +smermelstein@sexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,08-80232, 0840380, 08- 80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. + +Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. + +Leopold Kuvin, PA. + +2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +Phone: (561) 515-1400/Fax: (561) 515-1401 + +skuvin@leopoldkuvin.corrt + +tleocioldale000ldkuvin.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, PA. + +2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Phone: (561) 582-7600/Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +lawverwillits@aol.com + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauddrdale, FL 33301-4252 + +Phone: (954) 522-3456/Fax: (954) 527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-Iaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Isidro Manuel Esq. + +Elkins & Bochringer + +224 Datura Avenue, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 832-8033/Fax: (561) 832-7137 + +isidrogarciaithbellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745100/EFTA02745100.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745100/EFTA02745100.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6b95b28a24ca68b65af60f75c47179ff9da8baf2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745100/EFTA02745100.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,405 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745100.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 5195, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.04, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.69, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 405.3176574707031, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 405.3176574707031, + 102.86248779296875 + ], + [ + 205.69, + 102.86248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF FILING NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT \nUNDER SEAL FOR IN CAMERA REVIEW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 144.904, + 596.97 + ], + [ + 466.50946044921875, + 596.97 + ], + [ + 466.50946044921875, + 627.8625030517578 + ], + [ + 144.904, + 627.8625030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.496, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 388.1402587890625, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 388.1402587890625, + 89.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 223.496, + 89.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.95, + 76.7750244140625 + ], + [ + 350.66131591796875, + 76.7750244140625 + ], + [ + 350.66131591796875, + 90.86248779296875 + ], + [ + 260.95, + 90.86248779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745100" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745108/EFTA02745108.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745108/EFTA02745108.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9dc0bc475efbc64be4a294473b72c0c08afcf887 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745108/EFTA02745108.md @@ -0,0 +1,326 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAi + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 6. + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAi + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendants. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAMM + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO: 09-CV-80591-MARRa + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO: 09-CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION + +Plaintiff Jane Doe, hereby moves this Court for an order compelling defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, to answer her first request for production or, in the alternative, to prove that his invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege is proper. Jane Doe also requests production of a privilege log. + +Jane Doe has propounded 16 requests for production, including such straightforward requests as requests for production of: + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +Request No. 1: Copies of all telephone records; + +Request No. 2: Photos of the inside of your home located at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, Florida, that depict the room(s) where massages took place (including massage table). + +Request No. 10: Correspondence between Epstein and federal prosecutors; + +Request No. 12: Personal tax returns; + +Request No. 13: Photocopies of Epstein's passport; + +Request No. 14: A statement of net worth; and + +Request No. 16: Medical records. + +In response to each and every one of these requests, Epstein has given the following response (with only minor variations here and there): + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +This Court should order Epstein to provide all of the requested information or, in the alternative, prove that his Fifth Amendment invocations are valid. It is for the court, not the claimant, to determine whether the hazard of incrimination is justified. United States v. Argomaniz, 925 F.2d 1349, 1355 (11th Cir. 1991). "A court must make a particularized inquiry, deciding, in connection with each specific area that the + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAi + +questioning party wishes to explore, whether or not the privilege is well-founded." Id. Typically this is done in an in camera proceeding wherein the person asserting the privilege is given the opportunity "to substantiate his claims of the privilege and the district court is able to consider the questions asked and the documents requested by the summons." Id. + +Here Epstein has made boilerplate invocation of the Fifth Amendment to each and every request propounded by Jane Doe, including for example the request for correspondence with federal prosecutors and for production of federal tax returns. This obviously is not a request with Fifth Amendment implications, as the information has already been fully disclosed to the Government. + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to answer the requests or provide a particularized justification for his Fifth Amendment invocation with regard to each request. + +Epstein's "cut and paste" response to the request for production also blatantly disregards the requirements for invoking privilege under the Court's local rules. Local rule 26.1.G very specifically requires the preparation of a privilege log with respect to all documents and oral communications (among other things) that are withheld on the basis of privilege. Epstein has failed to prepare such a log, making it impossible for Jane Doe to effectively challenge his generic assertions. Indeed, with respect to a few requests, Epstein has stated: "Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege." Of course, the whole purpose of forcing a defendant to prepare a privilege log is to force the defendant to decide whether or not + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +information is privileged. An assertion that something "may" be privileged is obviously woefully deficient. The Local Rules do not permit this tactic, and Epstein should be (at a minimum) promptly required to produce a privilege log. + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to provide a privilege log and to answer the interrogatories or provide a particularized justification for his Fifth Amendment invocation with regard to each request. + +It should be noted that (with minor exceptions) the only grounds on which Epstein can refuse to answer the request for production is proof of a valid Fifth Amendment privilege. This the only objection Epstein has asserted (with minor exceptions). As a result, any other objections to production are deemed waived. See Local Rule 26.1G.3.(a) ("Any ground [for an objection] not stated in an objection within the time provided by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or any extensions thereof, shall be waived."). + +# SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION + +For the convenience of the court — and in compliance with Local Rule 26.1 H (party filing motion to compel shall list specific requests in succession) — Jane Doe's requests for production and Epstein's objections are as follows: + +Request No. 1: Copies of all telephone records in your or your attorney's possession from 2002 through 2005 that in any way relate to you (including all phone lines owned by you or that were used to contact girls for the purposes of scheduling massages for you.) + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective + +representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 2: All massage appointment books, diaries, computer calendars or scheduling entities, scheduling books or any other writing or correspondence that contains the names of any of the girls that were called, contacted, scheduled or who otherwise went to your home located at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, Florida, for the purpose of giving you a massage. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 3: Any and all documentation in your possession that contains Plaintiff's name or that refers to Plaintiff, directly or indirectly, (includes e-mails, letters, message pads, diaries, appointment books, computer print outs). + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 4: Any and all photos, videos, downloaded digital prints or any other visual depiction of Plaintiff, or of any other known or suspected minor females introduced to you, directly or indirectly, by Plaintiff. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 5: Photos of the inside or your home located at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, Florida, that depict the room(s) where the massages too place (including massage table). + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 6: Any and all documentation of cancelled checks or evidence of payment to Plaintiff of any kind and for any reason whatsoever. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 7: All discovery information obtained by you or your attorneys as a result of the exchange of discovery in the State criminal case against you or the Federal investigation against you. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Federal Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and § 90.410, Fla. Stat.1 Further, the request may including information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege. + +Request No. 8: All financial documents evidencing asset transfers from 2005 to present for you personally or any company or corporation owned by you. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +--- + +1 Jane Doe does not intend to use these materials to draw a forbidden inference of guilt from the mere fact that information was provided to law enforcement officials as part of plea discussions, but rather for other purposes. These materials are also quite clearly likely to lead to the discovery of other admissible evidence, as they relate to the same subject matter as this lawsuit. To the extent that Epstein relies on the non-prosecution agreement, nothing in that agreement bars *discovery* of information relevant to this lawsuit. + +Request No. 9: Any documents or other evidentiary materials provided to local, state, or federal law enforcement investigators or local, state or federal prosecutors investigating your sexual activities with minors. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and § 90.410, Fla. Stat.2 Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege. + +Request No. 10: All correspondence between you and your attorneys and state or federal law enforcement or prosecutors (includes, but not limited to, letters to and from the States Attorney's office or any agents thereof). + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, + +--- + +2 Jane Doe does not intend to use these materials to draw a forbidden inference of guilt from the mere fact of plea discussions, but rather for other purposes. These materials are also likely to lead to the discovery of other admissible evidence. To the extent that Epstein relies on the non-prosecution agreement, nothing in that agreement bars discovery of information relevant to this lawsuit. + +Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and § 90.410, Fla. Stat. 3 Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege. + +Request No. 11: Any and all documents reflecting your current net worth. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 12: Personal tax returns for all years from 2002 through the present. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution; overly broad. + +Request No. 13: A photocopy of your passport, including any supplemental pages reflecting travel to locations outside the 50 United States between 2002 and 2008, including any documents or records regarding plane tickets, hotel receipts, or transportation arrangements. + +--- + +3 Jane Doe does not intend to use these materials to draw a forbidden inference of guilt from the mere fact of correspondence in connection with plea discussions, but rather for other purposes. These materials are also likely to lead to the discovery of other admissible evidence. To the extent that Epstein relies on the non-prosecution agreement, nothing in that agreement bars *discovery* of information relevant to this lawsuit. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional protections and privileges, the scope of information is so overbroad that it seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence; compiling such information over a six year period would be unduly burdensome and time consuming.4 + +Request No. 14: A sworn statement of your net worth (including a detailed financial statement depicting all current assets and liabilities). + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 15: All financial statements or affidavits produced by you for any reason, to any person, company, entity or corporation since 2005. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United + +--- + +4 Jane Doe believes that Epstein used overseas travel as a means of obtaining underage girls for sexual purposes and for avoiding criminal prosecution for such activities. Also, providing a copy of a passport is hardly "burdensome." Also, given the fact that Epstein is likely to have used the services of a travel agent or another intermediary, it should not be difficult for him to provide evidence of his overseas travels from such intermediaries. + +States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution; overly broad. + +Request No. 16: All medical records of Defendant Epstein from Dr. Stephan Alexander. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +### CONCLUSION + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to answer the request for production, or provide a particularized justification for his Fifth Amendment invocation with regard to each request. Epstein should also be required to provide a privilege log. Counsel for Jane Doe have conferred with opposing counsel on the issues raised in this motion, and no resolution was possible. + +DATED July 10, 2009 + +Respectfully Submitted, + +s/ [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] +[REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER +Las Olas City Centre +401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 +Telephone (954) 522-3456 +Facsimile (954) 527-8663 +Florida Bar No.: 542075 +E-mail: [bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 10, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> s/ J. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +## SERVICE LIST Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bcIclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrooarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@oodhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bciclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745108/EFTA02745108.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745108/EFTA02745108.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..44e6c97b59e1714b461d7b483e0267c118463912 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745108/EFTA02745108.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,691 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745108.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 16, + "chars": 26496, + "elapsed_seconds": 13.48, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 135.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 135.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S FIRST \nREQUEST FOR PRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.05199999999999, + 520.83 + ], + [ + 538.7138671875, + 520.83 + ], + [ + 538.7138671875, + 549.4335174560547 + ], + [ + 74.05199999999999, + 549.4335174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 464.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 428.1395568847656, + 464.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 428.1395568847656, + 480.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 480.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 369.36 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 369.36 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 382.32 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 382.32 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 314.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 314.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 329.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 329.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nJane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 143.82, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 468.96051025390625, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 468.96051025390625, + 163.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 143.82, + 163.67999267578125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745108" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745124/EFTA02745124.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745124/EFTA02745124.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a95e195b04cfd386e8a349a32e7b29b8f08dc215 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745124/EFTA02745124.md @@ -0,0 +1,260 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAiM. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 6. + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendants. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO: 09-CV-80591-MARRa + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO: 09-CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +#### PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO DEFENDANT + +Plaintiff Jane Doe, hereby moves this Court for an order compelling defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, to answer her first requests for admissions or, in the alternative, to prove that his invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege is proper. + +Jane Doe has propounded 23 requests for admission to Epstein, including such straightforward requests as: + +- Your net worth is greater than \$1 billion. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +- You own or control, directly or indirectly, real estate property in foreign countries. +- You are moving significant financial assets overseas, outside of the direct territorial reach of the U.S. and Florida Courts. +- You currently have the ability to post a bond of \$15 million to satisfy a judgment in this case without financial or other difficulty. + +In response to each and every one of these questions, Epstein has given the following response: + +In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +This Court should order Epstein to answer all of the requests for admission or, in the alternative, prove that his Fifth Amendment invocations are valid. It is for the court, not the claimant, to determine whether the hazard of incrimination is justified. United States v. Argomaniz, 925 F.2d 1349, 1355 (11th Cir. 1991). "A court must make a particularized inquiry, deciding, in connection with each specific area that the questioning party wishes to explore, whether or not the privilege is well-founded." Id. Typically this is done in an in camera proceeding wherein the person asserting the privilege is given the opportunity "to substantiate his claims of the privilege and the + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +district court is able to consider the questions asked and the documents requested by the summons." Id. + +Here Epstein has made boilerplate invocation of the Fifth Amendment to each and every question propounded by Jane Doe, including for example a request that he admit that his net worth is more than \$500 million. It is not apparent how admitting his net worth is incriminating in the circumstances of this case. In any event, the Fifth Amendment does not operate in this fashion. It is Epstein's obligation to explain his claims on a "question-by-question basis." Id. + +The only issue before the Court is Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege. Epstein has only asserted a Fifth Amendment objection to production. As a result, any other objections to production are deemed waived. See Local Rule 26.1G.3.(a) ("Any ground [for an objection] not stated in an objection within the time provided by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or any extensions thereof, shall be waived."). + +## SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION + +For the convenience of the court — and in compliance with Local Rule 26.1 H (party filing motion to compel shall list specific requests in succession) — Jane Doe's requests for admission are as follows: + +- 1. Your net worth is greater than \$10 million. +- 2. Your net worth is greater than \$50 million. +- 3. Your net worth is greater than \$100 million. +- 4. Your net worth is greater than \$500 million. +- 5. Your net worth is greater than \$1 billion. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +6. Since being incarcerated you have, directly or indirectly (through the services or assistance of other persons), conveyed money or assets in an attempt to insulate or protect your money or assets from being captured in any civil lawsuits filed against you. + +7. You own or control, directly or indirectly, real estate property in the Caribbean. + +8. You own or control, directly or indirectly, real estate property in foreign countries. + +9. In the last 2 years you have transferred assets and/or money and/or financial instruments to countries outside the United States. + +10. You have provided financial support to the modeling agency MC2. + +11. You have committed sexual assault against Plaintiff, a minor. + +12. You committed battery against Plaintiff. + +13. You digitally penetrated Plaintiff when she was a minor. + +14. You offered Plaintiff more money contingent upon her having sex with your or giving you oral sex. + +15. You intended to harm Plaintiff when you committed these sexual acts against her. + +16. You knew Plaintiff was under the age of 16 when you sexually touched and fondled her. + +17. You intend to hire investigators to intimidate and harass Plaintiff during this litigation. + +18. You were engaged in the act of trafficking minors across state or country borders for the purposes of sex or prostitution between 2000 and the present. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +- 19. You coerced Plaintiff into being a prostitute and remaining in prostitution. +- 20. You are guilty of the following offenses against Jane Doe: +- A. Procuring a minor for the purpose of prostitution as defined in F.S. 796.03; +- B. Battery as defined by Florida Statutes. +- C. Sexual Battery. +- 21. You are moving significant financial assets overseas, outside of the direct territorial reach of the U.S. and Florida Courts. +- 22. You are making asset transfers with the intent to defeat any judgment that might be entered against you in this or similar cases. +- 23. You currently have the ability to post a bond of \$15 million to satisfy a judgment in this case without financial or other difficulty. + +## CONCLUSION + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to answer the requests for admission or provide a particularized justification for his Fifth Amendment invocation with regard to each request. Counsel for Jane Doe have conferred with opposing counsel on the issues raised in this motion, and no resolution was possible. + +DATED July 10, 2009 Respectfully Submitted, + +s/ J. + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRia + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 10, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> s/ J. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA~ + +### SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberaer@aawpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745124/EFTA02745124.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745124/EFTA02745124.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..be010a75994eda9453d9c39154adb51ba915b308 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745124/EFTA02745124.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,559 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745124.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 9099, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.67, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 135.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 135.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S \nFIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO DEFENDANT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.384, + 506.25 + ], + [ + 538.064697265625, + 506.25 + ], + [ + 538.064697265625, + 535.5635375976562 + ], + [ + 111.384, + 535.5635375976562 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 464.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 421.76513671875, + 464.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 421.76513671875, + 480.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 480.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.772, + 409.86 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 409.86 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 425.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 263.772, + 425.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.44, + 286.6875 + ], + [ + 387.3754577636719, + 286.6875 + ], + [ + 387.3754577636719, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 226.44, + 303.75 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.384, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 350.1988220214844, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 350.1988220214844, + 122.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 264.384, + 122.04998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745124" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745134/EFTA02745134.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745134/EFTA02745134.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5e258aa29a186e255dead6c1e1f7ebc02e044901 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745134/EFTA02745134.md @@ -0,0 +1,322 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 6. + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO: 09-CV-80591-MARRa + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO: 09-CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +### PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES + +Plaintiff Jane Doe, hereby moves this Court for an order compelling defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, to answer her first set of interrogatories or, in the alternative, to prove that his invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege is proper. + +Jane Doe has propounded 23 interrogatories, including such straightforward requests as: + +Interrogatory No. 2: Describe financial assets that are under your control, directly or indirectly, including interests in corporations or other business entities. + +Interrogatory No. 3: Describe which financial assets listed in your answer to interrogatory #2 are located outside the 50 states of the United States and where they are located. + +Interrogatory No. 4: Describe your net worth, including income and expenses for 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. + +Interrogatory No. 5: Describe any real property in which you have a total or partial interest, either directly or indirectly. + +Interrogatory No. 7: Describe any transfer of assets under your control, either directly or indirectly, to locations outside the 50 United States in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. + +Interrogatory No. 8: Describe, with specificity, your travel to locations outside the 50 states of the United states in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008, including your dates of travel, location to which you traveled and persons that accompanied you in each such travel. + +Interrogatory No. 11: Have you heard or do you know about any statement or remark (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of any party to this lawsuit, other than yourself, concerning any issue in this lawsuit? If so, state the name and address of each person who heard or read it, and the date, time, place and substance of each statement or remark. + +Interrogatory No. 12: Do you intend to elicit testimony of witnesses other than Plaintiff regarding any statements she has ever made? If so, what statements do you + +intend to produce through testimony? Through which witness do you intend to elicit such statement? And for what purpose do you intend to admit such statement? + +Interrogatory No. 23: State the facts upon which you rely for each affirmative defense in your answer. + +In response to these interrogatories, Epstein has given the following response (with only slight variations on the overbreadth objection): + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +This Court should order Epstein to answer all of these interrogatories or, in the alternative, prove that his Fifth Amendment invocations are valid. It is for the court, not the claimant, to determine whether the hazard of incrimination is justified. United States v. Argomaniz, 925 F.2d 1349, 1355 (11th Cir. 1991). "A court must make a particularized inquiry, deciding, in connection with each specific area that the questioning party wishes to explore, whether or not the privilege is well-founded." Id. Typically this is done in an in camera proceeding wherein the person asserting the privilege is given the opportunity "to substantiate his claims of the privilege and the + +district court is able to consider the questions asked and the documents requested by the summons." Id. + +Here Epstein has made boilerplate invocation of the Fifth Amendment to each and every question propounded by Jane Doe, including for example the question: Do you intend to elicit testimony of witnesses other than Plaintiff regarding any statements she has ever made? This obviously is not an interrogatory with Fifth Amendment implications. Nor is Epstein's claim that this interrogatory is somehow "overbroad" or "not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence" even facially plausible. + +Epstein's "cut and paste" response to the interrogatories also blatantly disregards the requirements for invoking privilege under the Court's local rules. Local rule 26.1.G very specifically requires the preparation of a privilege log with respect to all documents and oral communications (among other things) that are withheld on the basis of privilege. Epstein has failed to prepare such a log, making it impossible for Jane Doe to effectively challenge his generic assertions. The Local Rules do not permit this tactic, and Epstein should be (at a minimum) promptly required to produce a privilege log. + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to answer the interrogatories or provide a particularized justification for his Fifth Amendment invocation with regard to each request. + +It should be noted that the only two grounds on which Epstein can refuse to answer the interrogatories are either proof of a valid Fifth Amendment privilege or proof + +of a valid overbreadth objection. These are the only two objections Epstein has asserted. As a result, any other objections to production are deemed waived. See Local Rule 26.1G.3.(a) ("Any ground [for an objection] not stated in an objection within the time provided by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or any extensions thereof, shall be waived."). + +# SPECIFIC INTERROGATORIES + +For the convenience of the court — and in compliance with Local Rule 26.1 H (party filing motion to compel shall list specific requests in succession) — Jane Doe's interrogatories are as follows: + +- 1. What is the full name and Florida address of the person answering these interrogatories, and, if applicable, the person's official position or relationship with the party to whom the interrogatories are directed? + +[Note: This is the only interrogatory Epstein answered in any way.] + +- 2. Describe financial assets that are under your control, directly or indirectly, including interests in corporations or other business entities. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 3. Describe which financial assets listed in your answer to interrogatory #2 that are located outside the 50 states of the United States and where they are located. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 4. Describe your net worth, including income and expenses for 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 5. Describe any real property in which you have a total or partial ownership interest, either directly or indirectly. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled + +me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +6. Describe which real properties listed in your answer to interrogatory #5 are located outside the 50 United States and where the properties are located. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +7. Describe any transfer of assets under [y]our control, either directly or indirectly, to locations outside the 50 United States in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my + +constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 8. Describe, with specificity, your travel to locations outside the 50 states of the United States in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008, including your dates of travel, location to which you traveled and persons that accompanied you in each such travel. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 9. List each telephone number used by you or your assistants to call minor females directly, or indirectly, for the purpose of scheduling a massage to take place at your house located at 358 El Brillo Way, West Palm Beach (includes landlines, cell phones, and private jet or airplane lines). For each cell phone, list the provider. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my + +constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +1. 10. List the last known name, address and telephone numbers of all persons that may have any knowledge about any of the allegations in the Complaint, including, but not limited to, friends, acquaintances, employees, or others to whom you have spoken about the subject matter which forms the basis of this Complaint or who have observed such activity. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The scope of the information is so overbroad that it also includes information that is attorney-client and work-product privileged. + +1. 11. Have you heard or do you know about any statement or remark (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of any party to this lawsuit, other than yourself, concerning any issue in this lawsuit? If so, state the name and address of each person who made the statement or remark, the name and address of each person who heard or read it, and the date, time, place and substance of each statement or remark. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit,, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate + +the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The scope of the information is so overbroad that it also includes information that is attorney-client and work-product privileged. + +1. 12. Do you intend to elicit testimony of witnesses other than Plaintiff regarding any statements she has ever made? If so, what statements do you intend to produce through testimony? Through which witness do you intend to elicit such statement? And for what purpose do you intend to admit such statement? Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Additionally, work-product and attorney-client. +2. 13. Are you transferring, or do you plan to, or might you transfer money or assets out of the country during the course of this litigation? + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, + +thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 14. Describe each property owned by you, including location, approximate value, and whether there is a mortgage on the property and the amount of any such mortgage. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 15. Describe with specificity the amount of money available to you in cash or that can be readily liquidated as such. Include the bank financial institution, holding company, or other location of this money and the name of the account. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +16. State with as much specificity as possible when you met the Plaintiff, and including in your answer the following: (a) the circumstances and location of how and where you met (b) describe the nature of your relationship, (c) describe how many occasions she was with you at your residence located at 358 El Brillo Way in Palm Beach, Florida. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +17. Provide the names, addresses, and phone numbers of all your current accountants, financial planners or money managers handling, or assisting in the handling, of your money or assets. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +18. Did you ever ask the Plaintiff to introduce you to minor females and/or to bring minor females to your house in Palm Beach, Florida and if so, when did this occur, and what was she asked by you to do, and what did you tell her about the reason for her to bring these other minor girls? + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +1. 19. Did you ever engage in sexual activity of any kind whatsoever with the Plaintiff, and including in your answer what type of sexual activity took place, where it took place, and the dates or general timeframe when this activity occurred. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +1. 20. Were there parameters or instructions by you to the Plaintiff as to the types of girls to bring to your Palm Beach, Florida house, including age, range, what they would be asked to do, body type or socio-economic background? + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +21. Describe any words or actions that you made to assure the Plaintiff that sexual activity with you was proper[] or appropriate? + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +22. Describe what age you thought the Plaintiff was when you first had sexual activity with her, including your reasons for that belief. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +23. State the facts upon which you rely for each affirmative defense in your answer. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, + +thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. No answer has yet been filed, so not applicable. + +# CONCLUSION + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to answer the interrogatories or provide a particularized justification for his Fifth Amendment invocation with regard to each request. Epstein should also be required to produce a privilege log. Counsel for Jane Doe have conferred with opposing counsel on the issues raised in this motion, and no resolution was possible. + +DATED July 10, 2009 + +Respectfully Submitted, + +J. + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassello@law.utah.edu + +### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 10, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> s/ J. J. + +### SERVICE LIST Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberaer@aqwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bcIclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrooarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bciclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745134/EFTA02745134.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745134/EFTA02745134.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d9f2916fef1cc36cfb84b8ceedb06355d39f1040 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745134/EFTA02745134.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,839 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745134.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 20, + "chars": 35734, + "elapsed_seconds": 15.18, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 135.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 135.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S FIRST \nSET OF INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.44, + 451.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 538.81298828125, + 451.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 538.81298828125, + 480.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 73.44, + 480.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SPECIFIC INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 216.036, + 244.61999999999998 + ], + [ + 397.0257568359375, + 244.61999999999998 + ], + [ + 397.0257568359375, + 260.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 216.036, + 260.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 175.76999999999998 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 175.76999999999998 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 191.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 191.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 120.69 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 120.69 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 135.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 135.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nJane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 143.82, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 468.96051025390625, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 468.96051025390625, + 163.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 143.82, + 163.67999267578125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745134" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745154/EFTA02745154.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745154/EFTA02745154.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fb0b0a3b958d8e341702cb23c73484bb0e843526 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745154/EFTA02745154.md @@ -0,0 +1,627 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +I + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-Marraf. + +Epstein's Memorandum of Law In pposition to lane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 2 of 24 + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/a + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEPPREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/Ja + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/a + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/a + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-Manalli. + +Epstein's Memorandum of law in Opposition to lane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 3 of 24 + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-IIMMI + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### EPSTEIN'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR INJUNCTION RESTRAINING FRAUDULENT TRANSFER OF ASSETS, APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN, AND TO POST A \$15 MILLION BOND TO SECURE POTENTIAL JUDGMENT + +Defendant, JEFFERY EPSTEIN ("Epstein"), by and through his undersigned counsel, submits this Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiffs, JANE DOE ("Jane Doe"), Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets, Appointment of a Receive to Take Charge of Property of Epstein, and to Post a \$15 Million Bond to Secure Potential Judgment (DE #165) ("Injunction Motion"), and states: + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-Mara + +Epstein's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Jane Doe's injunction Motion + +Page 4 of 24 + +### I. INTRODUCTION + +Jane Doe filed her Injunction Motion (DE #165) on June 19, 2009 seeking an injunction to restrain any transfer of assets by Epstein, appointment of a receiver to take charge of Epstein's property and a \$15,000,000 bond to secure her potential judgment in this action. The Injunction Motion is essentially a veiled and improper attempt to circumvent the statutory requirements for pre-judgment attachment set forth in Fla. Stat. §76.01 et seg. Nowhere in her 18-page motion does Jane Doe cite any authority supporting the relief she requests — not for an injunction, not for appointment of a receiver and not for the posting of a \$15,000,000 bond. + +The Injunction Motion is premised on the wholly unsupported contention that Epstein is fraudulently transferring his assets. Jane Doe cites to purported facts such as Epstein being a billionaire, having financial sophistication and international contacts, as well as invocation of his constitutional rights under the Fifth Amendment in response to discovery requests, to support her fraudulent transfer claim. Jane Doe has not identified one asset transferred by Epstein nor pointed to one scintilla of evidence to suggest Epstein is fraudulently transferring his assets. Rather, she asks the Court to presume Epstein is fraudulently transferring his assets because he asserted his Fifth Amendment privilege is response to Jane Doe's Request for Admissions 6, 21 and 22. See Epstein's Response to Jane Doe's Request for Admissions attached as Exhibit C to Injunction Motion (DE #165). Based on this unsupported presumption of fraudulent transfer, Jane Doe asks the Court to impose significant and unjustified restraints on Epstein's assets. Simply put, Jane Doe is improperly seeking assurance she will be able to collect a potential judgment. Most importantly, there is no legal authority supporting any of the + +Case No. 08-CV.80893-ManaiM + +Epstein's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 5 of 24 + +relief requested by Jane Doe. For the following reasons, the Court must deny Jane Doe's Injunction Motion. + +#### II. JANE DOE'S STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS IS BASED ON SPECULATION AND HEARSAY AND CONTAINS NO MATERIAL "FACTS" + +Jane Doe's "Statement of Material Facts" relies heavily on the affidavit Jane Doe's own counsel. 5fis Affidavit of Paul Cassell, Esq., attached as Exhibit A to the Injunction Motion (DE #165). Mr. Cassell's affidavit is riddled with hearsay, speculation, conjecture and unsupported assumptions and does not contain one material "fact" based on his personal knowledge. The majority of Mr. Cassell's assertions in his affidavit are based on a 2005 Vanity Fair article (the "2005 Vanity Fair Article"). See Vicky "The Talented Mr. Epstein," Vanity Fair , (January 24, 2005; accessed June 24, 2009). Mr. Cassell's affidavit is essentially a recitation of irrelevant, speculative and hearsay statements contained in an article published over four years ago. The Court should disregard Mr. Cassell's affidavit in determining the Injunction Motion. See t.L. U.S. v. Baker, 432 F.3d 1189, 1211-12 (11th Cir. 2005) (holding that newspapers articles were inadmissible double hearsay when offered to prove the truth of their contents — the identity of the gunman); Dollar v. State, 685 So. 2d 901, 903 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (holding that a newspaper article, introduced to prove the truth of out of court statements contained therein, constitutes inadmissible hearsay); Frasher v. Fox Distributing of S.W. Fla.. Inc., 813 So. 2d 1017, 1020 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (holding that an affidavit supporting a prejudgment writ of attachment "must not be based on hearsay or the plaintiffs subjective beliefs but rather on the plaintiff's personal knowledge of the + +Case No. 08-CV -80893-Marr + +Epstein's Memorandum of LaAI Mpposition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 6 of 24 + +defendant's actions," citing Unique Caterers, Inc. v. Rudy's Farm Co., 338 So. 2d 1067, 1071 (Fla. 1976)) + +In his affidavit, Mr. Cassell states that "[i]t appears that defendant Jeffery Epstein is an extremely wealthy individual." See Affidavit of Paul Cassell 12. Mr. Cassell's affidavit goes on to state that Epstein "has great skills in trading in international currency markets" and therefore "it is reasonable to infer that he has significant financial sophistication." Id. 14. This appearance of extreme wealth and sophistication in international financial matters is based on inadmissible hearsay newspaper reports, Wikipedia, and the 2005 Vanity Fair Article. + +Mr. Cassell asserts that Epstein's "real mentor [Steven Hoffenberg] was sent to federal prison for twenty years for bilking investors out of more than \$450 million on one of the largest Ponzi schemes in American history." Id. 15. First, the foregoing statement has absolutely no relevance to the instant case, except to attempt to link Epstein to an individual convicted of operating a Ponzi scheme. The 2005 Vanity Fair Article reports on Epstein's business dealings with Steven Hoffenberg during the 1980's and merely notes that Hoffenberg is "currently ... serving a 20-year sentence" for operating a Ponzi scheme. Importantly, despite all the questionable and speculative suggestions and inferences in the 2005 Vanity Fair Article, it does not in any way link Epstein to the Ponzi scheme. Yet, Mr. Cassell tries to forge a link between Epstein and Hoffenberg's Ponzi scheme, ultimately to cast Epstein in a negative light and suggest he, like Mr. Hoffenberg, is committing financial crimes. Even Vanity Fair did not attempt to make this untenable connection. Similarly, Mr. Cassell states that Epstein was questioned by the SEC in 1981 regarding an insider trading investigation at Bear Stearns involving + +Case No. OS-CV-808934%4ms/ + +Epstein's Memorandum of law in to lane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 7 of 24 + +Italian and Swiss investors. Id. 16. This statement is obviously intended to associate Epstein with Bear Stems, a tarnished financial institution apparently involved in questionable international transactions in the 1980's, to somehow suggest Epstein is fraudulently transferring his assets overseas. It is worth noting that the questioning occurred approximately twenty-eight years ago, in 1981, and that Epstein was merely questioned because the SEC believed "Epstein had information on insider trading at Bear Stems." The foregoing assertions in Mr. Cassell's affidavit have absolutely no bearing on Jane Doe's Injunction Motion. + +Then, Mr. Cassell goes beyond the pale and resorts to celebrity gossip to suggest Epstein may be transferring his assets to Israel. Specifically, in paragraph 8 of his affidavit, Mr. Cassell cites a May 2008 Vanity Fair article and states "rumors were circulating (to celebrities such as Dustin Hoffman, Alec Baldwin and filmmaker Michael Mailer) that Epstein was moving all of his considerable assets to Israel." Id. 18 (emphasis added). The article actually stated "[t]alk that Epstein had moved himself and his assets to Israel reached the ears of such luminaries as Harvey Weinstein...." See Vicky S "You Will Have Jeffrey Epstein to Kick Around!" Vanity Fair >, (May 7, 2008; accessed June 24, 2009) (emphasis added). Not only does Mr. Cassell rely on utterly unreliable celebrity "rumors," he cites it out of context to suggest that Epstein is fraudulently transferring assets to Israel. + +Some other irrelevant, speculative and/or hearsay statements in Mr. Cassell's affidavit include: (1) Epstein may own a Boeing 727 with a trading room (5O Affidavit of Paul Cassell 17); (2) Epstein has travelled internationally with Donald Trump and is + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-Mare + +Epstein's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 8 of 24 + +close friends with Prince Andrew and therefore it is reasonable to infer Epstein has international financial contacts (14,19); (3) Epstein reportedly limited his clients to those with a net worth over \$1 billion and kept all his deals and clients secret (a. 14); (4) the current lawsuits could cause Epstein to financial ruin (Id.lio); and (5) Mr. Cassell attests he was "advised" that Epstein works at managing his financial interests while on a "work release" program (Id. 111). Mr. Cassell also admittedly relies on unsubstantiated reports that Epstein is transferring assets out of the country with the intent to make it impossible for Jane Doe and other plaintiffs to satisfy a potential judgment. Id. 112. + +Based on the foregoing irrelevant, speculative and unreliable hearsay information primarily gleaned and taken out of context from a four-year-old Vanity Fair article as well as unsubstantiated reports from unnamed individual(s), Mr. Cassell concludes that Epstein "might" be transferring his assets overseas with the intent to defeat any judgment that might be entered against him. Id. 112. Mr. Cassell does not attest to one material fact of which he has personal knowledge that would have any bearing on Jane Doe's Injunction Motion. For all of the foregoing reasons, the Court should disregard Mr. Cassell's affidavit. + +# III. JANE DOE IS NOT ENTITLED TO INJUNCTIVE RELIEF + +### A. Jane Doe Is Not Entitled To an Adverse Inference Based on Epstein's Invocation of His Fifth Amendment Privilege + +Jane Doe is not entitled to an adverse inference based on Epstein's invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to Jane Doe's Request for Admissions 6, 21 and 22. A two-step inquiry must be undertaken to determine whether such an inference is appropriate. See U.S. v. Custer Battles, LW 415 F.Supp.2d 628, 633 (ED. Va. 2006). + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-Marta\_ + +Epstein's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 9 of 24 + +First, the court must determine whether there was a valid basis for invocation of the privilege, which requires only "the existence of a plausible possibility that the person might be prosecuted in this country." Id. Jane Doe would be hard pressed to contend that Epstein's invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege is invalid. However, in an abundance of caution, Epstein incorporates by reference the argument and authority set forth in his section "III" of his Motion to Stay And Or Continue Action for Time Certain Based on Parallel Civil and Criminal Proceedings with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE # 24). + +The second step requires an assessment of whether the requested inferences, which are a form of evidence, comply with the Federal Rules of Evidence. See Custer Battles, LW, 415 F.Supp.2d at 634. That is, they must be relevant, reliable and not unfairly prejudicial, confusing or cumulative. Id. An "adverse inference can only be drawn when independent evidence exists of the fact to which the party refuses to answer." Id. at 635 (emphasis added) (citations omitted). In Custer Battles, LLC, unlike the instant case, the court found the record contained "ample evidence of Morris' involvement in the [fraudulent] billing ... which in turn ensures that the proposed adverse inferences, should the jury choose to draw them, are not unreliable." Id. See also Avirgan v. Hull, 932 F.2d 1572, 1580 (11th Cir. 1991) (holding that "the negative inference to be drawn from the assertion of the fifth amendment does not substitute for evidence needed to meet the burden of production")' Eagle Hospital Physicians, LW v. SRO Consulting, Inc., 561 F.3d 1298, 1304 (11th Cir. 2009) (recognizing that "dismissal following the assertion of the Fifth Amendment violates the Constitution where the + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-Marra/Johnson + +Epstein's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 10 of 24 + +inferences drawn from Fifth-Amendment-protected silence are treated as a substitute for the need for evidence on an ultimate issue of fact," citing Avirgan,supra). + +As belabored throughout this memorandum, Jane Doe cites no independent evidence that Epstein is fraudulently transferring assets. Accordingly, an adverse inference would be wholly unreliable and is clearly impermissible under the instant circumstances. + +Additionally, granting the relief sought by Jane Doe based solely on an adverse inference would violate Epstein's Fifth Amendment rights. See LaSalle Bank Lake View v. Seguban, 54 F.3d 387, 389 (7th Cir. 1995) (noting that "the Supreme Court has prohibited practices that are coercive in that they make the exercise of the privilege 'costly,' citing Spevack v. Klein, 385 U.S. 511, 515 (1967)). As the LaSalle court explained, "deeming an allegation of a complaint [or Jane Doe's allegation that Epstein is fraudulent transferring assets] to be admitted based on the invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege without requiring the complainant to produce evidence in support of its allegations would impose too great a cost and exceed the authorization of Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308 (1976)]." See LaSalle Bank Lake View, 54 F.3d at 391; see also National Acceptance v. Bathalter, 705 F.2d 924, 931-32 (7th Cir. 1983) (holding that judgment imposing liability cannot rest solely upon a privileged refusal to admit or deny at the pleading stage. The cost to a defendant of treating his claim of privilege as an admission would be to excuse a plaintiff of presenting proof of his claim; "[w]e think Baxter indicates that this is too great a cost"). As Jane Doe fails to present any independent evidence of fraudulent transfer, the Court must deny her request for an adverse inference and ultimately deny her Injunction Motion. + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-Mara Johnson + +Epstein's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 11 of 24 + +#### B. Jane Doe Has Not Properly Pled a Claim for Nor Requested Injunctive Relief + +Jane Doe does not properly plead a claim for an injunction. While the title of Jane Doe's motion appears to request injunctive relief, nowhere in the motion does Jane Doe set forth the elements of an injunction. Moreover, the ad damn= clause of the motion does not request injunctive relief. It is well settled that the party seeking an injunction must establish: (1) substantial likelihood of success on the merits; (2) irreparable injury unless an injunction issues; (3) the threatened injury outweighs the harm to the defendant if the injunction issues; and (4) that the injunction will not disserve the public interest. See N. Am. Med. Corp. v. Axiom Worldwide, Inc., 522 F.3d 1211, 1217 (11th Cir. 2008). An injunction is a drastic and extraordinary remedy which should be granted sparingly and only after the moving party has alleged and proven facts entitling it to relief. See Shands at Lake Shore, Inc. v. Ferrero, 898 So. 2d 1037, 1038 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Wade v. , 928 So. 2d 1260, 1262 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). + +As a threshold matter, the Court should disregard Jane Doe's motion for injunctive relief as she has not properly pled the claim. She does not even attempt to allege any of the elements set forth in Axiom Worldwide. Inc. supra, and does not request injunctive relief in her motion. Moreover, in her First Amended Complaint (DE #38), Jane Doe does not seek an injunction nor does she assert a claim under Fla. Stat. §726.101 et seq. See Lawhon v. Mason, 611 So. 2d 1367, 1368 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) (holding that a party must `file suit under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act" to enjoin fraudulent transfer of assets) (emphasis added). + +Case No, 08-CV-80893-Mama/ + +Epstein's Memorandum of Lawn losition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 12 of 24 + +As Jane Doe has not properly pled a claim for injunctive relief, the Court should deny Jane Doe's motion, if in fact she intended to make one, for an injunction. + +#### C. Injunctive Relief is Unavailable as Jane Doe Seeks Only Money Damages + +Even assuming arguendo Jane Doe properly pled the elements of an injunction, cases in which the plaintiff seeks only to recover money damages do not fall within the jurisdiction of equity and injunctive relief is therefore unavailable. See =s\_cLis iile Int'l Inc., 21 F.3d 1520, 1529-30 (11th Cir. 1994) (holding that the district court lacked the general equitable authority to issue an injunction where the plaintiff sought only the award of monetary damages). Jane Doe's First Amended Complaint (DE #38) does not seek equitable relief. Rather, Jane Doe demands judgment against Epstein for compensatory damages (Counts I, II, III and V), punitive damages (Counts I - III), attorney's fees (Counts II, IV and V), minimum damages authorized by law and all actual damages sustained (to be trebled as authorized by law) (Count IV) and such other relief as the Court deems just and proper (Counts I - V).1 See ad damnum clauses of Counts I — V, Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (DE #38). The Court should deny Jane Doe's Injunction Motion as her pleadings do not invoke the Court's equity jurisdiction. + +#### D. The Court is Without Authority to Issue an Injunction Restraining Epstein's Use of His Assets + +Jane Doe is not entitled to the injunctive relief requested. Preliminary injunctive relief freezing a defendant's assets to establish a fund with which to satisfy a potential judgment for money damages is not an appropriate exercise of a federal district court's + +&#x27; The Eleventh Circuit in -rejected appellees' suggestion that they successfully invoked the district court's equitable jurisdiction ough their requests for any additional relief as may appear 'just and proper' at the conclusion of each complaint. The mere incantation of such boilerplate language does not convert a legal cause of action into a legitimate request for equitable relief." 21 F.3d at 1526. + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-MarraM + +Epstein's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page I3 of 24 + +authority. See , 21 F.3d at 1530. It is well settled by a long and unbroken line of Florida cases that in an action at law for money damages there is no judicial authority for an order requiring the deposit of the amount in controversy into the registry of the court, or indeed for any restraint upon the use of a defendant's assets prior to the entry of judgment. Id. at 1531 (citations omitted); see also Proctor v. Eason, 651 So. 2d 1301, 1301-02 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). In , plaintiffs brought a securities fraud action to recover money damages. See 21 F.3d at 1522. To ensure they could collect their potential judgment, plaintiffs moved for, and the court granted, preliminary injunctive relief freezing the defendant's assets. Id. at 1525. The Eleventh Circuit vacated the injunction and held the district court did not have the authority to issue an injunction simply to tie up the defendant's assets during the pendency of the litigation. The court noted, "[t]he general federal rule of equity is that a court may not reach a defendant's assets unrelated to the underlying litigation and freeze them so that they may be preserved to satisfy a potential judgment." Id. at 1527. The court went on to cite an oftquoted passage from the United States Supreme Court in De Beers Consol. Mines, Ltd. v. United States, 325 U.S. 212, 221 (1945): + +> To sustain the challenged order would create a precedent of sweeping effect. This suit, as we have said, is not to be distinguished from any other suit in equity. What applies to it applies to all such. Every suitor who resorts to chancery for any sort of relief by injunction may, on a mere statement of belief that the defendant can easily make away with or transport his money or goods, impose an injunction on him, indefinite in duration, disabling him to use so much of his funds or property as the court deems necessary for security or compliance with its possible decree. And, if so, it is difficult to see why a plaintiff in any action for a personal judgment in tort or contract may not, also, apply to the chancellor for a so-called injunction sequestrating + +Case No. OS-CV-80893- + +Epstein's Memorandum oli llil apposition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 14 of 24 + +his opponent's assets pending recovery and satisfaction of a judgment in such a law action. No relief of this character has been thought justified in the long history of equity jurisprudence. + +(Emphasis added). + +Accordingly, the court held that preliminary injunctive relief freezing a defendant's assets to establish a fund with which to satisfy a potential money judgment is not an appropriate exercise of a district court's authority. See a 21 F.3d at 1530. + +The court also noted the injunctive remedy sought was equivalent to a writ of attachment. Id. at 1530. "Rule 64 [governing seizure of persons or property], and not Rule 65 (which governs injunctions generally), provides the standard for evaluating a request for preliminary injunctive relief that is, in reality, no more than a request for prejudgment attachment." Id. (Citations omitted). In actions at law, plaintiffs "possess an adequate, exclusive prejudgment remedy for the sequestration of assets under [Fla. Stat. §76.01 a seq.] provided that they can satisfy the enumerated statutory grounds for relief. Accordingly, the use of injunctive relief as a substitute for the remedy of prejudgment attachment, with its attendant safeguards, is improper." Id. at 1531 (emphasis added) (citations omitted). See also SME Racks, Inc. v. Sistemas Mecanicos Para. Electroncia, S.A., 243 Fed. Appx. 502, 504 (11th Cir. 2007) (affirming district court's refusal to grant a preliminary injunction freezing defendant's assets). + +Similarly, in Lawhon v. Mason, 611 So. 2d 1367, 1368 (Ha. 2d DCA 1993), plaintiffs filed a "motion to prohibit defendant from transferring assets." The motion cited plaintiffs' extensive injuries, defendant's perceived lack of insurance coverage, a belief that defendant had "substantial assets," and that defendant "had hired personal + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-Marra/ Epstein's Memorandum of Lawftlosition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion Page I5 of 24 + +counsel skilled in the area of execution of judgment." Id. The trial court granted plaintiffs' motion, which the Second District Court of Appeals characterized as "a series of temporary injunctions without the necessary showing of entitlement to injunctive relief." Id. The Second District quashed the order granting the injunction and held that "[a]n injunction cannot be used to enforce money damages or prevent a party of disposing of assets prior to the conclusion of an action at law." Id. See also Briceno v. Bryden Investment, Ltd., 973 So. 2d 614, 616 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (noting that in Florida, an injunction cannot be entered to prevent a party of disposing of assets prior to judgment, even where the party seeking the injunction alleges the defendant may be dissipating assets; a judgment for money damages is adequate and injunctive relief is improper) (citations omitted). The Lawhon court also noted that the order was similar to a pre-judgment writ of attachment. 611 So. 2d at 1368. "A writ of attachment cannot issue unless there is a debt due or an existing debt not yet due" and plaintiff must file a "verified complaint or sworn allegation that the defendant is removing or disposing of property. Hearsay or `subjective belief will not suffice." Id. (Emphasis added). See also Frasher, 813 So. 2d at 1020 (holding that an affidavit supporting a prejudgment writ of attachment "must not be based on hearsay or the plaintiff's subjective beliefs but rather on the plaintiff's personal knowledge of the defendant's actions, citing Unique Caterers, 338 So. 2d at 1071). + +In the instant case, Jane Doe seeks the same relief the courts in and Lawhon prohibited — an injunction freezing Epstein's assets during the pendency of the litigation so Jane Doe will have a fund with which to satisfy her potential judgment. If the court granted the relief sought by Jane Doe based on a "mere statement of belief that Jane Doe v. Eosteig + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-Maa + +Epstein's Memorandwn of law in Opposition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 16 of 24 + +[Epstein] can easily make away with or transport his money or goods ... it is difficult to see why a plaintiff in any action for a personal judgment in tort or contract may not, also, apply to the chancellor for a so-called injunction sequestrating his opponent's assets pending recovery and satisfaction of a judgment in such a law action." See DeBeers, 325 U.S. at 221. Since Jane Doe is not seeking prejudgment attachment under Fla. Stat. §76.01 et seq.. there is no authority to enjoin Epstein's use of his assets. The Court must therefore deny Jane Doe's Injunction Motion. + +### IV. JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER AND FOR A \$15,000,000 BOND IS NOT SUPPORTED BY LAW + +Jane Doe moves the Court, pursuant to Fla. Stat. §726.108(1)(c), to appoint a receiver to take charge of and account for Epstein's assets. However, Jane Doe's reliance on the foregoing statute is misplaced in that §726.108(1)(c) does not provide for the appointment of a receiver to take charge of the debtor's assets. To the contrary, the statute permits "[a]ppointment of a receiver to take charge of the asset transferred or of other property of the transferee." See Fla. Stat. §726.108(1)(c) (emphasis added). Epstein is clearly not a "transferee" and the court should deny Jane Doe's motion to appoint a receiver to take control of Epstein's assets. + +Jane Doe also improperly attempts to obtain an accounting of Epstein's assets through the receiver. She states, "[a] receiver is the only way to start to block further dissipation of assets — by, first, gaining control over Epstein's assets and then, second, making an accounting of what assets of Epstein's remain in this country or are otherwise subject to control by this Court." See Injunction Motion (DE #165) at 15. However, Jane Doe does not properly plead a claim for an accounting or set forth any facts which + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-Marrar + +Epstein's Memorandum of Law in to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 17 of 24 + +would entitle her to an accounting; she just asks for one. See Florida Software Systems, Inc. v. Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corp., 46 F.Supp.2d 1276, 1285 (M.D. Fla. 1999) (holding that a party seeking an equitable accounting must show the existence of a fiduciary relationship or a complex transaction and must demonstrate that the remedy at law is inadequate); Nautica Int'l Inc. v. Intermarine USA, L.P., 5 F.Supp.2d 1333, 1343 (S.D. Fla. 1998) (holding that plaintiff failed to state a claim for equitable accounting as plaintiff failed to allege the remedy at law was inadequate). The Court should deny Jane Doe's motion to the extent it requests an accounting as she has not properly pled a claim for an accounting. + +In addition, not unlike her motion for an injunction and to appoint a receiver to take control of Epstein's assets, there is no authority for Jane Doe's motion to require Epstein post a \$15,000,000 bond to secure a potential judgment. Jane Doe does not cite one case or statute that addresses posting a bond to secure a potential judgment. Instead, Jane Doe references cases generally addressing the court's power to grant equitable relief.2 The request for a bond is akin to Jane Doe's motion for an injunction in that it seeks to "establish a fund with which to satisfy a potential judgment for money damages," which the court in held was beyond the authority of the district court. See S 21 F.3d at 1530. "There is simply no judicial authority for an order requiring the deposit of the amount in controversy into the registry of the court, or indeed for any restraint upon the use of a defendant's assets prior to the entry of judgment." Id. at 1531 (citations omitted). Accordingly, the Court should deny Jane Doe's motion to require Epstein to post a \$15,000,000 bond. + +2 See also section III.B, supra, discussing the impropriety of granting equitable relief where there are no equitable claims pending before the court. + +Jane Doe v Easteig + +Case No 08-CV•80893-Nlarra/ + +Epstein's Memorandum of Lawl.tosition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 18 of 24 + +### V. RELIEF UNDER THE UFTA IS INAPPROPRIATE AS THERE IS NO EVIDENCE EPSTEIN IS FRAUDULENTLY TRANSFERRING ASSETS + +The crux of Jane Doe's Injunction Motion is premised on the unsupported assumption that Epstein is fraudulently transferring his assets. Jane Doe asks the Court to infer, based on Epstein's invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to Jane Doe's Request for Admissions 6, 21 and 22, and the irrelevant, hearsay and speculative assertions in Paul Cassell's affidavit, that Epstein is fraudulently transferring assets. Jane Doe has not, and cannot, point to any evidence which would suggest Epstein fraudulently transferred anything. For the reasons set forth below, Jane Doe is not entitled to any relief under Fla. Stat. §726.101 et seq. — the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act ("UFTA"). + +# A. Jane Doe's Burden of Proof Under the UFTA + +## 1. The "Badges of Fraud" and Proof of Fraudulent Intent + +To prove a fraudulent transfer, Jane Doe must demonstrate: (1) a transfer of property has in fact occurred; (2) the property transferred belonged to the debtors; (3) the transfer occurred within certain statutory time periods; and (4) the debtor made the transfer with the intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors. See In re Leneve, 341 B.R. 53, 56 (S.D. Fla. 2006). Courts typically resort to the "badges of fraud," to determine fraudulent intent. Id. at 61. The Eleventh Circuit has adopted the badges of fraud contained in Fla. Stat. §726.105(2) in determining a debtor's actual intent with regarding a transfer. See In re Ramsurat, 361 B.R. 246, 254 (M.D. Fla. 2006) (citations omitted). The badges of fraud are whether: (a) the transfer or obligation was to an insider; (b) the debtor retained possession or control of the property transferred after the transfer; (c) the transfer or obligation was disclosed or concealed; (d) before the transfer was made or Jane Doc v. ENteitl + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-Marc + +Epstein's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 19 of 24 + +obligation was incurred, the debtor had been sued or threatened with suit; (e) the transfer was of substantially all of the debtor's assets; (f) the debtor absconded; (g) the debtor removed or concealed assets; (h) the value of the consideration received by the debtor was reasonably equivalent to the value of the asset transferred or the amount of the obligation incurred; (i) the debtor was insolvent or became insolvent after the transfer was made or obligation incurred; and (j) the transfer occurred shortly before or shortly after a substantial debt was incurred. See In re Ramsurat, 361 B.R. at 254; In re Dealers Agency Services. Inc., 380 B.R. 608, 613 (M.D. Fla. 2007) (recognizing that the Eleventh Circuit adopted the "badges of fraud" to determine fraudulent intent); Fla. Stat. §726.105(2). + +Moreover, Fla. Stat. §726.106, which applies to creditors whose claims arose before the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred, provides that a transfer is fraudulent "if the debtor made the transfer or incurred the obligation without receiving a reasonably equivalent value ... and the debtor was insolvent at that time or the debtor became insolvent as a result of the transfer or obligation." See Fla. Stat. §726.106(1). Subsection (2) provides that the transfer is fraudulent "if the transfer was made to an insider for an antecedent debt, the debtor was insolvent at that time, and the insider had reasonable cause to believe that the debtor was insolvent." See Fla. Stat. §726.106(2). + +### 2. Jane Doe's "Means, Motive and Opportunity" Test is Unfounded + +Despite the well-settled statutory framework to determine fraudulent transfer, Jane Doe appears to have conveniently made up her own test, likely because Jane Doe cannot point to a single badge of fraud contained in Fla. Stat. §726.105(2) that would + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-Mara + +Epstein's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 20 of 24 + +apply to Epstein. Indeed, Jane Doe cannot identify a single transfer made by Epstein. Yet Jane Doe urges the Court to conclude Epstein is fraudulently transferring assets because he purportedly has the means, the motive and the opportunity to do so, citing United States v. Sparks, 265 F.3d 825, 830 (9th Cir. 2001). See Injunction Motion (DE #165) at 11. Sparks is completely inapposite as it concerned whether probable cause for an arrest can be based on a showing of means, motive and opportunity. No court has recognized the "means, motive and opportunity test" to determine fraudulent transfer. + +### B. Jane Doe Cannot Make The Requisite Showing for Relief Under the UFTA; There Is No Evidence of Fraudulent Transfer + +As set forth above, there are various ways, set forth in the UFTA and applicable case law, in which a creditor could prove a debtor is fraudulently transferring assets. Jane Doe fails to point to one iota of evidence that Epstein is fraudulently transferring assets. In In re Stewart 280 B.R. 268 (M.D. Fla. 2001), proceedings were brought to set aside certain transfers of the debtor as fraudulent to creditors. The bankruptcy trustee claimed, among other things, that the debtor made a series of transfers to his wife totaling \$392,691. Id. at 273. There were deposits into the wife's securities accounts in the sum of \$392,691 which were not explained by the entries on the account statements. Id. at 274. The trustee concluded the funds must have originated from the debtor and pointed to the debtor's income to show that he had the financial means and the financial wherewithal to supply the funds. Id. No other evidence was presented to establish the debtor transferred \$392,691 to his wife. Under these circumstances, the court held that the trustee had "not established the existence of any transfer of the Debtor's interest in property as required by ... §726.105 of the Florida Statutes." Id. See also In re Energy Jane Doe + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-Marra + +Epstein's Memorandum of Law m'—dWosition to lane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 21 of 24 + +Smart. Inc., 381 B.R. 359, 382 (M.D. Fla. 2007) (holding that bankruptcy trustee failed to establish a fraudulent transfer claim as the trustee failed to establish that the debtor made any transfers).; + +Moreover, the court refused to enter a final default judgment against the debtor because the complaint contained "virtually no allegations of fact." See In re Stewart, 280 B.R. at 285. The court noted that "[n]owhere in the Complaint does Barbara Stewart allege that an identifiable asset was transferred on a specific date pursuant to a specific transfer. Further, nowhere in the Complaint does Barbara Stewart allege any specific facts which, even if admitted, would support a finding that a transfer was made with the actual intent to defraud a creditor." Id. at 285-86. + +As in In re Stewart Jane Doe does not allege "an identifiable asset was transferred on a specific date pursuant to a specific transfer" or allege any facts which "would support a finding that a transfer was made with the actual intent to defraud a creditor." See In re Stewart 280 B.R. at 285-86. Moreover, the only "evidence" Jane Doe presents to prove fraudulent transfer is her assertion that Epstein "has the financial means and the financial wherewithal" to fraudulently transfer his assets. As the court in In re Stewart rejected such an argument and found that the trustee did not establish the existence of a transfer of property as required by Fla. Stat. §726.105, so should the Court here. + +3In so holding, the court cited 1.1 U.S.C. §548. 50 in re Energy Smart. Inc., 381 B.R. 359 at 382. Section 548 of the Bankruptcy Code and §726.105, Florida Statutes, "are substantially the same, with the result that 'the analysis of what must be show to prove actual fraud under both the bankruptcy and state law fraudulent transfer provisions is the same."' ags In re Dealer's Agency Services, Inc. 380 B.R. at 612 (citations omitted). + +Case No. OECV-80893•Marra/ + +Epstein's Memorandum of Law,Mosition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 22 of 24 + +### V. CONCLUSION + +For the foregoing reasons, Epstein respectfully requests the Court deny Jane Doe's Injunction Motion. + +By: + +ROBERT D. CRFI TO,fQ, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +DAVID A. YAREMA, ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 12492 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CWECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this • ti day th of July 2009 + +Respect ted, + +By: + +ROBE T D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +DAVID A. YAREMA, ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 12492 + +dyarema@belclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. S Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & P.A. Shipley, 08-80469 + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcvlaw.com + +jph@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Jane Doc v. Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-Marran. + +Epstein's Memorandum of taw mOpposition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 23 of 24 + +### Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Brad cl• + +Rothstein osenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hat Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. I. Esq. + +Law irm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +josefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Case No. 08-CV-80893-MarrafJohnson + +Epstein's Memorandum of taw in Opposition to Jane Doe's Injunction Motion + +Page 24 of 24 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf @brucereinhartlaw com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +tleovold@riccilaw.com + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesq@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745154/EFTA02745154.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745154/EFTA02745154.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dfb2c0589502359850bc1acf0a289ff1a409b96a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745154/EFTA02745154.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1319 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745154.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 24, + "chars": 41932, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.46, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 411.73565673828125, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 411.73565673828125, + 103.10302734375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 103.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EPSTEIN'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO \nJANE DOE'S MOTION FOR INJUNCTION RESTRAINING \nFRAUDULENT TRANSFER OF ASSETS, APPOINTMENT OF A \nRECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN, AND TO \nPOST A $15 MILLION BOND TO SECURE POTENTIAL JUDGMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 108.93599999999999, + 462.51 + ], + [ + 505.94781494140625, + 462.51 + ], + [ + 505.94781494140625, + 533.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 108.93599999999999, + 533.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. INTRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 87.51599999999999, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 224.96493530273438, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 224.96493530273438, + 106.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 87.51599999999999, + 106.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. JANE DOE'S STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS IS BASED ON \nSPECULATION AND HEARSAY AND CONTAINS NO MATERIAL \n\"FACTS\"", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 86.29199999999999, + 147.42000000000002 + ], + [ + 523.4651489257812, + 147.42000000000002 + ], + [ + 523.4651489257812, + 190.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 86.29199999999999, + 190.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. JANE DOE IS NOT ENTITLED TO INJUNCTIVE RELIEF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.74, + 531.36 + ], + [ + 446.73992919921875, + 531.36 + ], + [ + 446.73992919921875, + 550.1030120849609 + ], + [ + 88.74, + 550.1030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. Jane Doe Is Not Entitled To an Adverse Inference Based on Epstein's \nInvocation of His Fifth Amendment Privilege", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 125.46000000000001, + 558.0899999999999 + ], + [ + 528.5169677734375, + 558.0899999999999 + ], + [ + 528.5169677734375, + 591.3530120849609 + ], + [ + 125.46000000000001, + 591.3530120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Jane Doe Has Not Properly Pled a Claim for Nor Requested \nInjunctive Relief", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.62400000000002, + 105.30000000000001 + ], + [ + 524.1329956054688, + 105.30000000000001 + ], + [ + 524.1329956054688, + 133.863037109375 + ], + [ + 123.62400000000002, + 133.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "C. Injunctive Relief is Unavailable as Jane Doe Seeks Only Money \nDamages", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.62400000000002, + 145.8 + ], + [ + 524.97998046875, + 145.8 + ], + [ + 524.97998046875, + 175.85302734375 + ], + [ + 123.62400000000002, + 175.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "D. The Court is Without Authority to Issue an Injunction Restraining \nEpstein's Use of His Assets", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 126.072, + 546.75 + ], + [ + 528.2591552734375, + 546.75 + ], + [ + 528.2591552734375, + 576.3530120849609 + ], + [ + 126.072, + 576.3530120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IV. JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER AND \nFOR A $15,000,000 BOND IS NOT SUPPORTED BY LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 286.74 + ], + [ + 527.66845703125, + 286.74 + ], + [ + 527.66845703125, + 319.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 319.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "V. RELIEF UNDER THE UFTA IS INAPPROPRIATE AS THERE IS NO \nEVIDENCE EPSTEIN IS FRAUDULENTLY TRANSFERRING ASSETS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 86.904, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 525.512939453125, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 525.512939453125, + 126.35302734375 + ], + [ + 86.904, + 126.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. Jane Doe's Burden of Proof Under the UFTA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 124.848, + 357.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 398.9212951660156, + 357.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 398.9212951660156, + 375.35302734375 + ], + [ + 124.848, + 375.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "1. The \"Badges of Fraud\" and Proof of Fraudulent Intent", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 161.568, + 385.55999999999995 + ], + [ + 485.1956481933594, + 385.55999999999995 + ], + [ + 485.1956481933594, + 402.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 161.568, + 402.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "2. Jane Doe's \"Means, Motive and Opportunity\" Test is \nUnfounded", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 162.18, + 590.49 + ], + [ + 528.9966430664062, + 590.49 + ], + [ + 528.9966430664062, + 623.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 162.18, + 623.2330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Jane Doe Cannot Make The Requisite Showing for Relief Under the \nUFTA; There Is No Evidence of Fraudulent Transfer", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.62400000000002, + 285.92999999999995 + ], + [ + 527.1378784179688, + 285.92999999999995 + ], + [ + 527.1378784179688, + 318.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 123.62400000000002, + 318.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "V. CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 86.904, + 96.38999999999999 + ], + [ + 212.8706512451172, + 96.38999999999999 + ], + [ + 212.8706512451172, + 112.17352294921875 + ], + [ + 86.904, + 112.17352294921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 343.43999999999994 + ], + [ + 366.08837890625, + 343.43999999999994 + ], + [ + 366.08837890625, + 360.4335632324219 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 360.4335632324219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 22, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 364.6269836425781, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 364.6269836425781, + 125.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 125.9730224609375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 72 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 74 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 72 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 76 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 165 + ], + [ + "Line", + 82 + ], + [ + "Text", + 75 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745154" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745178/EFTA02745178.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745178/EFTA02745178.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7ded1a17169cc7b0b5ee6174fa225f363b8a57f4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745178/EFTA02745178.md @@ -0,0 +1,142 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAIMI + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRAMME + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRARM + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +![](_page_0_Picture_27.jpeg) + +CASE NO.: 08-C V-8038 I -MARRAIIIIIM + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRAMM. + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08- CV-8081 I -MARRA... + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80893-MARRAIIIIII + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 08-CV- 80469-MARRA/ORM + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al., + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 08- CV-8059I-MARRAa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80656-MARRA' + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## SHIPAA QUALIFIED PROTECTIVE ORDER + +THIS CAUSE having come before the Court on Joint Motion of the parties, Jane Doe No. 2, Jane Doe No. 3, Jane Doe No. 4, Jane Doe No. 5, Jane Doe No. 6, Jane Doe No. 7 and Jane Doe No. 8 (collectively, "Plaintiffs"), and Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, for a HIPAA Qualified Protective Order, and the Court having being duly advised in the premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: + +1. General. In accordance with the requirements of the regulations promulgated under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), specifically 45C.F.R. §164.512 (e) (1) (ii) (B) & (v), the Court issues a IIIPAA Qualified Protective Order, as the term is defined in the foregoing regulations, and for health information of the Plaintiffs obtained in discovery requires that all parties be: + +- a. prohibited from using or disclosing protected health information ("PHI") for any purpose other than the litigation of the following cases: Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein, case no. 08-CV-80119, Jane Doe No. 3 v. Jeffrey Epstein, case no. 08-CV-80232, Jane Doe No. 4 v. Jeffrey Epstein, case no. 08-CV-80380, Jane Doe No. 5 v. Jeffrey Epstein, case no. 08-CV-80381, Jane Doe No. 6 v. Jeffrey Epstein, case no. 08-CV-80994, Jane Doe No. 7 v. Jeffrey Epstein, case no. 08- CV-80993, and Jane Doe No. 8 v. Jeffrey Epstein, case no. 09-CV-80802, and any other state or federal lawsuits against Jeffrey Epstein alleging similar sexual misconduct (hereafter, the "Lawsuits"); and +- b. required to return to the disclosing entity or destroy the PHI (including all copies made), at the conclusion of the litigation of the Lawsuits. + +Based upon this HIPAA Qualified Protective Order all persons, including but not limited to physicians and other medical providers, shall comply with, and are hereby authorized to use or disclose PHI in response to, any and all subpoenas for records. This HIPAA Qualified Protective Order applies to PHI received pursuant to subpoena or discovery in the Lawsuits. It further applies to all notes, opinions and other documents of psychological experts retained by any of the parties for purposes of the Lawsuits. + +2. *Depositions.* In addition to the foregoing, pursuant to 45 C.F.R. §164.512 (e) (1) (I) and for purposes of compliance with HIPAA, without waiver of any right to prepayment of costs, fees and expenses associated with copying costs, or any other appropriate objection or privilege that may be timely asserted, each deponent duly noticed for deposition in the above-style litigation, including but not limited to a party, a fact witness, a records custodian, an expert, a treater, or a health care provider of any type, is expressly and specially authorized to use or to disclose to the attorneys, employees, agents, and designees of each party or each party's legal counsel in this case the protected health information of a party that is responsive to deposition questions or a valid duces tecum at such duly noticed deposition with both HIPAA regulations and any applicable state law not pre-empted by HIPAA, the authorization and order set forth in this paragraph expressly includes protected health information concerning psychological and mental records. + +3. *Experts, Litigation Consultants, and Attorneys.* This Protective Order does not prevent disclosure of PHI to the parties' litigation experts, Plaintiffs' and Defendant's lawyers, and consultants hired for purposes of the Lawsuits, subject to the prohibitions and requirements of paragraph 1 above. + +4. *Judicial Proceedings.* In addition to the foregoing, pursuant to 45 C.F.R. §164.512 (e) (1) (i) and for purposes of compliance with HIPAA, without waiver of any right to prepayment of costs, fees, and expenses associated with copying costs, or any other appropriate objection or privilege that may be timely asserted, all witnesses duly appearing at, or subpoenaed for, any judicial proceeding related to this litigation, including but not limited to trial, are specifically and expressly authorized to use and disclose the PHI of a party at such judicial proceeding. In compliance with both HIPAA regulations and any applicable state law not pre- + +empted by HIPAA, the authorization set forth in this paragraph expressly includes protected health information concerning psychological and mental health records. + +5. Court Reporter, Photocopying & Other Service Providers. In addition to the foregoing, pursuant to 45 C.F.R. §164.512 (e) (I) (I) and for purposes of compliance with IIIPAA, without waiver of any right to prepayment of costs, fees and expenses associated with copying costs, or other appropriate objection or privilege that may be timely asserted, any person or entity authorized or ordered above to use or disclose Pill is expressly and specifically authorized to do so with, to, or before any court reporter service, videography service, translation service, photocopy service, document management service, records management service, graphics service or other such litigation service, designated by a party or aparty's legal counsel in this case. The protections and requirements of paragraph No. I above specifically apply to any such service so designated. Each party or the party's legal counsel is charged with giving notice of the obligations imposed by this Order to any such service the party or counsel so designates, and is further charged with obtaining advance consent of such service to comply fully with this paragraph. Upon such consent, the service will be deemed to have voluntarily submitted to the Court's jurisdiction during the pendency of this litigation for purposes of enforcement of this paragraph, including but not limited to the imposition of such sanctions, monetary or otherwise, as may be appropriate for any non-compliance. + +6. Expiration. Unless a motion for enforcement of this Order has been filed in this case and remains pending at the time, this Order shall expire upon the conclusion of the Lawsuits by any final resolution including dismissal or by final judgment, through and including all appellate proceedings, unless the time for commencing such proceedings has expired without an appeal. + +This Order is effective nunc pro tune as of the date of commencement of each of the Lawsuits. It is self-executing without need of further order of the Court. A copy of this Order shall be valid as an original. + +DONE AND ORDERED this /5 day of July, 2009. + +Copies furnished to: All counsel of record. Ann + +-s 7)1A-0,6v41 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745178/EFTA02745178.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745178/EFTA02745178.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4dbf4a7f29f774a37f6bb16f58be0d8ff9ddf12d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745178/EFTA02745178.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,251 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745178.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 7698, + "elapsed_seconds": 12.32, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_27.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.18, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 394.62054443359375, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 394.62054443359375, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 204.18, + 128.79 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SHIPAA QUALIFIED PROTECTIVE ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 150.6695098876953, + 437.40000000000003 + ], + [ + 458.17499999999995, + 437.40000000000003 + ], + [ + 458.17499999999995, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 150.6695098876953, + 457.65 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 111 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 113 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 230 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "ListGroup", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 443 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745178" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745178/_page_0_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745178/_page_0_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..34057b4072707b289ba897fb5a8e0133d589481b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745178/_page_0_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8b496eeaeaaec1bc646357c768bf8dc98e789c27656c808fa0e0d23400c6bb1d +size 10626 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745183/EFTA02745183.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745183/EFTA02745183.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1cd9cf9df4ae8ea9a24c6ac1524bbe945ae550af --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745183/EFTA02745183.md @@ -0,0 +1,119 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRAJ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-11f1ARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/1 + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S Unopposed Motion For Extension of Time in Which to File a Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and in Third Party Subpoenas, having considered Defendant's Unopposed Motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall file a Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and in Third Party Subpoenas on or before July 31, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this 13th day of July, 2009 + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies all counsel \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745183/EFTA02745183.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745183/EFTA02745183.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3402c587694f730478d32e9621df75b92c75b84f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745183/EFTA02745183.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745183.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1835, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.36, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 412.8403625488281, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 412.8403625488281, + 105.35302734375 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 105.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.744, + 613.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 333.0133361816406, + 613.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 333.0133361816406, + 628.1030120849609 + ], + [ + 282.744, + 628.1030120849609 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745183" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745187/EFTA02745187.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745187/EFTA02745187.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d75e7ea0739096648e6babd6bcdaa824831653dc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745187/EFTA02745187.md @@ -0,0 +1,133 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES 2-7 RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL IDENTITY IN THE STYLE OF THE CASE AND IN THRID PARTY SUBPOENAS (DE 144) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves this Court for an extension of time until July 31, 2009, to file a Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and in Third Party Subpoenas, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 A.1(j) (S.D. Fla. 2008). As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +1. Counsel for Defendant communicated with Counsel for the Plaintiff, and Plaintiff's Counsel agrees to the requested extension of July 31, 2009, to file a Reply to Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and Third Party Subpoenas. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff's counsel, by telephone, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with t uested extension. + +> By: ROBE ON, JR., ESQ. + +## Certificate of Service + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 13th day of Js , 2009. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com vera@hermanlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectf ly ub ted, + +By: ROBERT aT RI ESQ. Florida B No. 22 rcrit€bc claw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 moike@bcIclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-842-2820 Fax: 561-515-3148 + +(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745187/EFTA02745187.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745187/EFTA02745187.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..25c8a709f94f8d78ee1c14d0a58641eae64dc181 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745187/EFTA02745187.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,276 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745187.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 3115, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.44, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 412.85565185546875, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 412.85565185546875, + 105.35302734375 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 105.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 170.74800000000002, + 322.38 + ], + [ + 444.48529052734375, + 322.38 + ], + [ + 444.48529052734375, + 340.10302734375 + ], + [ + 170.74800000000002, + 340.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.188, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 370.9111328125, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 370.9111328125, + 88.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 244.188, + 88.18353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 84 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745187" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745192/EFTA02745192.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745192/EFTA02745192.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5209902380ca130653e6f58dfed568ec32eb51c9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745192/EFTA02745192.md @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S Unopposed Motion For Extension of Time in Which to File a Response to Plaintiffs Jane + +Does 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs Jane Does 101 & 102 Motion for No Contact. Having considered Defendant's Unopposed Motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall file Response to Plaintiffs Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs Jane Does 101 & 102 Motion for No Contact on or before July 31, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this IP day of July, 2009 + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies all counsel \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745192/EFTA02745192.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745192/EFTA02745192.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2105f2749fb4bd41c7180ca29ac86d7d99b77d95 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745192/EFTA02745192.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745192.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1791, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.38, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 412.8403625488281, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 412.8403625488281, + 104.60302734375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 104.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.744, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 331.8678894042969, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 331.8678894042969, + 641.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 282.744, + 641.2330169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745192" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745196/EFTA02745196.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745196/EFTA02745196.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ee871aa4a8dffc6b5b2840530bd5c9070ec5e3fe --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745196/EFTA02745196.md @@ -0,0 +1,390 @@ +**UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA** + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/J [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/J [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/J [REDACTED] + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/J [REDACTED] + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/J [REDACTED] + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/J [REDACTED] + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +C.M.A., + +CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/J [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +JANE DOE, + +CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/J [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +DOE II, + +CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-J [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA-J [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/J [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +**DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION +OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES 2-7 +NOTICE OF JOINDER IN PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES 101 & 102 +MOTION FOR NO CONTACT (DE 116)** + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves this Court for an extension of time until July 31, 2009, to file a Response to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs Jane Does 101 & 102 Motion for No Contact, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 A.1(j) (S.D. Fla. 2008). As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +1. Counsel for Defendant communicated with Counsel for the Plaintiff, and Plaintiff's Counsel agrees to the requested extension of July 31, 2009, to file a Response to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs Jane Does 101 & 102 Motion for No Contact. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff's counsel, by telephone, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested extension. + +Ro6ifrt D. Cri ton, Esq. Attorney for Defendant + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this ILI' day of Lily, 2009 + +> Respectfully submi ted, By. RO R . C ON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** + +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** + +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/J [REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) + +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* + +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* + +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80811* + +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +*Pro Hac Vice* + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. + +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +Jack Scalp, Esq. + +Jack P. M, Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcylaw.com + +iph@searcylaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf@brucereinhartlaw. .om + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +tleopold@riccilaw.com + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jageso@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745196/EFTA02745196.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745196/EFTA02745196.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7e0318bd8a30e32be8130354f08b744bbb5b4b07 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745196/EFTA02745196.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,277 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745196.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 5889, + "elapsed_seconds": 12.33, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 196.452, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 406.98, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 406.98, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 196.452, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 167.07600000000002, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 440.73529052734375, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 440.73529052734375, + 337.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 167.07600000000002, + 337.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 528.9300000000001 + ], + [ + 361.20050048828125, + 528.9300000000001 + ], + [ + 361.20050048828125, + 545.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 545.2330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 266.49 + ], + [ + 358.632, + 266.49 + ], + [ + 358.632, + 280.26 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 280.26 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 38 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 48 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 46 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 122 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 117 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 53 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745196" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745202/EFTA02745202.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745202/EFTA02745202.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..be72fb6fcbb683438b6fab78f89a2d28e0390c26 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745202/EFTA02745202.md @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +![](_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg) + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/... + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRAMIII + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRAMM + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRAJMMI + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-C1V-MARRA/MIM + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/.... + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRAMMI + +Plaintiff, + +JEPPREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRall + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09.80591-CIV-MARRA-MMI + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRAI + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S Unopposed Motion For Extension of Time in Which to File a Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case (9 al49°) + +and in Third Party Subpoena/Staving considered Defendant's Unopposed Motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall file a Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and in Third Party Subpoenas on or before July 31, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this ay of July 2009 + +Courtesy Copies all counsel + +o te-vsn5 16-1" ,a 4 United States Lisifiet Judge P9A06 W rit l ektim-/ \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745202/EFTA02745202.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745202/EFTA02745202.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c50f6a4d37cd6fc7f62081187c3bc0adbbab37f1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745202/EFTA02745202.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,221 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745202.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1914, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.58, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.105, + 89.91 + ], + [ + 401.1058349609375, + 89.91 + ], + [ + 401.1058349609375, + 118.25999999999999 + ], + [ + 201.105, + 118.25999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 284.745, + 601.8299999999999 + ], + [ + 332.2607116699219, + 601.8299999999999 + ], + [ + 332.2607116699219, + 615.5999999999999 + ], + [ + 284.745, + 615.5999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 92 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 97 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 133 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745202" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745202/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745202/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c6154b314b040b13278426878170a203bd257a14 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745202/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d722b9815728675de1a7fc6d814605f5425f2c2b1e16a50293145e79aa51d74f +size 10796 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745206/EFTA02745206.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745206/EFTA02745206.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d2fa25cce6c543b7c6b4de60eb14f07ad03cbacf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745206/EFTA02745206.md @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@ +![](_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg) + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRAMMIS + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-1VIARRAAIIM + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/M. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381.MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRAJ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRAJ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08401193-CIV-MARRall + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469.CIVIIRRAMMII + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRAS + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIWMAlta + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +## ORM + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S Unopposed Motion For Extension of Time in Which to File a Response to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs Jane Does 101 & 102 Motion for No Contact.(D, -.aro + +Having considered Defendant's Unopposed Motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall file Response to Plaintiffs Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs Jane Does 101 & 102 Motion for No Contact on or before July 31, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this. day of jay, 2009 + +Courtesy Copies all counsel + +horn Ain-eiri Offided United States udge insaw76-- \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745206/EFTA02745206.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745206/EFTA02745206.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e2841f47abf3ca8058d5ed03e57794d458442afe --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745206/EFTA02745206.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,221 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745206.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1833, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.68, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.72000000000003, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 400.365, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 400.365, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 201.72000000000003, + 119.07 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORM", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.67, + 613.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 332.7349853515625, + 613.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 332.7349853515625, + 632.6324005126953 + ], + [ + 281.67, + 632.6324005126953 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 97 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 34 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745206" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745206/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745206/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4e333953c8a2c056c7f8f6fbe603c6b1068e3486 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745206/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:5b228ece4f54644a978eaa417805e84062d0e2db0ba090f201283d1e711e9706 +size 10004 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745210/EFTA02745210.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745210/EFTA02745210.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ad95527c327e7a3174f5695efd6b45e44978b17c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745210/EFTA02745210.md @@ -0,0 +1,133 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 013-CV-80232-MARRA + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/M. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-8081 1 -CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRAal. + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARRA/a + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Defendant" or "Epstein")'s renewed Motion to Stay (DE 65 in 08-80119). The Court held a hearing on the Motion on June 12, 2009. The Court has reviewed the motion, responses, and replies where filed, and is otherwise fully advised in the premesis. + +The Court previously entered an Order denying Defendant's motion to stay, and the Court incorporates by reference its previous Order. See DE 33 in 08-80119, entered August 5, 2008. Defendant's renewed motion alleges that the civil actions filed against Defendant should be stayed because Epstein's defense of the civil actions violates the Non-Prosecution Agreement between Epstein and the United States (the "NPA"). The Court has reviewed the NM in camera. The Court has also considered argument from counsel and representations from the United States on the matter. Based upon the representations of the United States, Epstein's proceeding in the normal course of defending the civil actions will not constitute a breach of the NPA. To the extent that the NPA limits the actions Epstein may take in defending these cases, he is aware of those limitations and can conduct himself accordingly. Thus, the Court sees no reason to modify its earlier ruling. Accordingly, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion to Stay (DE 65 in 08-80119) is DENIED. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this le day of July, 2009 + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745210/EFTA02745210.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745210/EFTA02745210.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8bc395cc8682f9af1078fbca9e392fc8677a0014 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745210/EFTA02745210.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745210.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 2674, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.39, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 330.7379150390625, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 330.7379150390625, + 610.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 610.4830169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745210" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745214/EFTA02745214.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745214/EFTA02745214.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..da856c6fa6ad7157fd8018a847289fd6eef89658 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745214/EFTA02745214.md @@ -0,0 +1,285 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRa + +C.M. A., + +Plaintiff, v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and + +Defendants, + +#### DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION, AND MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT; MOTION TO STRIKE, AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, ("EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned counsel, moves to dismiss Count I through XXXI of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint for failure to state a cause of action, and for more definite statement, or to strike, as specified herein. Rule 12(b)(6), (e) and (f), Fed.R.Civ.P. (2008); Local Gen. Rule 7.1 (S.D. Fla. 2008). In support of dismissal, Defendant states: + +The First Amended Complaint attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through XXX are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 — Civil Remedies for Personal Injuries; Count XXXI is entitled "Sexual Battery," and Count XXXII is entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortious Assault only against Defendant, " Under the heading "Factual Allegations" of the First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff also references numerous federal and state criminal statutes, but fails to allege whether or not she is attempting to assert claims based on these statutes. (¶15, 1st Am. Comp.). + +![](_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg) + +Dismissal is required on the following grounds: (1) A review of the complaint + +allegations establishes that Plaintiff has failed to state the 30 causes of action under 18 U.S.C.A. 2255. As discussed more fully below herein, this statute does not allow for the Plaintiff to allege 30 separate causes of action; rather, the statute allows for the Plaintiff to attempt to assert one claim. In addition, Plaintiff has failed to allege a violation of the requisite predicate act as identified in 18 U.S.C. §2255 in order to state a cause of action. Thus, Counts I through XXX against EPSTEIN are required to be dismissed. Rule 12(b)(6), Fla.R.Civ.P. + +(2) Count XXXI — Sexual Battery is also required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action as Plaintiff has failed to allege the requisite elements of such claim. The count fails to sufficiently allege whether it is being brought pursuant to common or statutory law. Further, in Count XXXI, Plaintiff reincorporates in their entirety Counts I through XXX; such pleading is improper and requires dismissal under the applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +#### Supporting Memorandum of Law I. Motion To Dismiss Standard + +As established by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. V. Twombly, 127 S.Ct. 1955 (2007), a motion to dismiss should be granted if the plaintiff does not plead "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Id, at 1974. Although the complaint need not provide detailed factual allegations, the basis for relief in the complaint must state "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id, at 1965. Further, Ifjactual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level ... on the + +assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact)." Id. + +On a motion to dismiss, the well pleaded allegations of plaintiffs complaint are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. M.T.V. v. DeKalb County Sch. Dist., 446 F.3d 1153, 1156 (11th Cir.2006). + +Significantly, the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. V. Twombly abrogated the often cited observation that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief." Id, (abrogating and quoting Conley 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 102, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957)). The Supreme Court rejected the notion that "a wholly conclusory statement of claim [can] survive a motion to dismiss whenever the pleadings le[avel open the possibility that a plaintiff might later establish some 'set of [undisclosed] facts' to support recovery." Id. As explained by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp., supra at 1664-65: + +While a complaint attacked by a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations ibid.; Sanivan v. American Bd. of Psychiatry and Neurology, Inc., 40 F.3d 247, 251 (C.A.7 1994) a plaintiff's obligation to provide the "grounds" of his "entitle[ment] to relief" requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do, see Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265, 286, 106 S.Ct. 2932, 92 L.Ed.2d 209 (1986) (on a motion to dismiss, courts "are not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation"). Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level, see 5 C. R& A. MI Federal Practice and Procedure 1216, pp. 235-236 (3d e 4) (hereinafter ("[T]he pleading must contain something more ... than ... a statement "It that merely creates a suspicion [of] a legally cognizable right of action"), on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact), see, e.g., Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A. 534 U.S. 506, 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002). Neitzke v. 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (" u e )(6) does not countenance ... dismissals based on a judge's disbelief of a complaint's + +> factual allegations") Scheuer v. 416 U.S. 232, 236, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (19741 (a well-Mcomplaint may proceed even if it appears "that a recovery is very remote and unlikely"). + +In discussing Twomblv, the Eleventh Circuit in v. Fla. International Univ., 495 F.3d 1289, 1295 (11°' Cir. 2007), noted - "The Supreme Court's most recent formulation of the pleading specificity standard is that 'stating such a claim requires a complaint with enough factual matter (taken as true) to suggest' the required element." In order to sufficiently allege the claim, the complaint is required to identify "facts that are suggestive enough to render [the element] plausible." a 495 F.3d at 1296 (quoting Twombly, 127 S.Ct. at 1965). + +# II. Standard for More Definite Statement Pleading, & Motion to Strike + +Pursuant to Rule 12(e), a party may move for more definite statement of a pleading to which a responsive pleading is allowed where the pleading "is so vague or ambiguous that the party cannot reasonably frame a response." The motion is required to point out the defects and the desired details. Id. As to the general rules and form of pleading, Rules 8 and 10, a claim for relief must contain "a short plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief;" Rule 8(a)(3); and may contain alternative claims within a count or as many separate claims. Rule 10(d)(2) and (3). Pursuant to Rule 12(f) - Motion to Strike, "the court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter." + +# III. Counts I through XXX, 18 U.S.C. 4,2255, are required to be dismissed. + +A. 18 U.S.C. 42255 creates a single civil remedy or cause of action on behalf of a minor plaintiff against a defendant. The civil remedy afforded is not on a "per violation" basis. + +Contrary to Plaintiff's attempted assertion of 30 separate counts pursuant to 18 + +U.S.C.A. §2255 - CAM Remedy tor Personal 'manes, this statute creates a single tederai cause of action or "civil remedy" for a minor victim of sexual, abuse, molestation and exploitation. Under the plain meaning of the statutory text, §2255 does not create separate causes of action on behalf of a minor against a defendant on a "per violation" basis. No where in the statutory text is there any reference to the civil remedy afforded by this statute as being on a "per violation" basis. 18 U.S.C. 2255(a) creates a civil remedy for "a minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation ... ." Seems, 428 F.Supp.2d 432 (E.D. Va. 2006); v. Husband, 376 F.Supp.2d 603 (E.D. Va. 2006); Doe v. Liberatore 478 F.Supp.2d 742, 754 (M.D. Pa. 2007); and the recent cases in front of this court on Defendant's Motions to Dismiss and For More Definite Statement — Doe No. 2 v. Epstein, 2009 WL 383332 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009)• Doe No. 3 v. Epstein, 2009 WL 383330 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009); Doe No. 4 v. Epstein 2009 WL 383286 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009); and Doe No. 5 v. Epstein, 2009 WL 383383 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009). + +There is no reported case supporting Plaintiffs tortured and nonsensical interpretation of §2255. In all of these cases (cited above), each of the Plaintiffs brought a single count or cause of action attempting to allege numerous violations of the "predicate acts" specifically identified in §2255. "18 U.S.C. §2255 gives victims of sexual conduct who are minors a private right of action." aa, 492 + +F.Supp.2d 1186, 1188 (N.D. Cal. 2007), (emphasis added). 18 U.S.C.A. §2255 "merely provides a cause of action tor aamages in any appropriate United States District Court.'" Id, at 1189. See also Tilton v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc. 554 F.3d 1371 (11th Cir. Jan. 15, 2009)(District Court granted plaintiff "the minimum 'actual damages' prescribed by §2255(a)," wherein plaintiff alleged that defendants had violated three of the statutory predicate acts). + +In improperly attempting to bring 30 separate counts pursuant to §2255, Plaintiffs complaint alleges in part that "beginning in approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003, the Defendant coerced and enticed the impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct. These acts occurred, on average, one to three times per week from late may or early June of 2002 until August 2003. At a bare minimum these acts occurred twice a month from June 2002 until August of 2003." Am. Complaint, ¶13. Plaintiff then claims the identical damages in each of the 30 §2255 counts. See ¶¶25, 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193, and 199. As well, in Count XXXI, entitled "Sexual Battery," Plaintiff claims the identical "actual damages" in that she realleges and incorporates each and every of the 199 allegations in the 30 prior counts. + +It is well settled that in interpreting a statute, the court's inquiry begins with the plain and unambiguous language of the statutory text. CBS, Inc. v. Prime Time 24 Venture, 245 F.3d 1217 (11th Cir. 2001); U.S. v. Castroneves, 2009 WL 528251, \*3 (S.D. Fla. 2009), citing Reeves v. Astrue, 526 F.3d 732, 734 (11th Cir. 2008); and + +Page 7 + +v. Husband, 376 F.Supp.2d at 610 ("When interpreting a statute, [a court's] inquiry begins with the text."). "The Court must first look to the plain meaning of the words, and scrutinize the statute's 'language, structure, and purpose." Id. In addition, in construing a statute, a court is to presume that the legislature said what it means and means what it said, and not add language or give some absurd or strained interpretation. As stated in CBS. Inc., supra at 1228 - "Those who ask courts to give effect to perceived legislative intent by interpreting statutory language contrary to its plain and unambiguous meaning are in effect asking courts to alter that language, and Ic]ourts have no authority to alter statutory language.... We cannot add to the terms of [the] provision what Congress left out.' Merritt, 120 F.3d at 1187." See also Dodd v. U.S., 125 S.Ct. 2478 (2005); 73 Am.Jur.2d Statutes §124. + +Title 18 of the U.S.C. is entitled "Crimes and Criminal Procedure." §2255 is contained in "Part I. Crimes, Chap. 110. Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children." 18 U.S.C. §2255 (2003), is entitled Civil remedy for personal injuries, and provides: + +- (a) Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than \$50,000 in value. +- (b) Any action commenced under this section shall be barred unless the complaint is filed within six years after the right of action first accrues or in the case of a person under a legal disability, not later than three years after the disability. + +Reading the entire statute in context, no where is there any language indicating that a minor plaintiff has a private right of action against a defendant "per violation." + +Under the statutory rules of construction, had the legislature intended to give a plaintiff multiple causes of action against a defendant on a per violation basis, the statute would have included such language. Had Congress wanted to create such a remedy as Plaintiff attempts to bring, it could have easily included language of "per violation" after the presumptive damages amount in subsection (a). By its own terms, the statute provides for the recovery of "actual damages the minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including attorney's fees." There is absolutely no language that allows for a plaintiff to multiply the specified or presumptive damages recoverable on a "per violation" basis. The Plaintiffs position on §2255 puts a strained interpretation with an absurd result. The absurdity of Plaintiff's position is further evidenced by Count XXXI — "Sexual Battery" where Plaintiff reincorporates each of the 30 counts and seeks the identical "actual damages." + +In supra, the defendants sought to dismiss plaintiffs' 18 U.S.C. §2255 action based on forum non conveniens. The Northern District of California Court, relying on the rules of statutory construction, rejected plaintiffs' argument that Congress had intended to abrogate the forum non conveniens doctrine in a §2255 action; the District Court noted that the statute does not contain a mandatory venue provision. Had Congress wanted to get rid of the forum non-conveniens doctrine, it would have said so in the statute. Also, in v. Husband, 428 F.Supp. 432; and 376 F.Supp.2d 603, the plaintiff invoked "the accompanying civil remedy for these criminal violations, stating that she has sustained and continues to sustain physical and mental damages, humiliation, and embarrassment as a result of Defendant's criminal acts." In other words, she + +brought a single cause of action, based on allegations of multiple violations of the §2255 predicate acts. Furthermore, the court refused to add a venue interpretation that simply was not written into the statutory text. See other §2255 cases cited herein. + +For an example of a statute wherein the legislature included the language "for each violation" in assessing a "civil penalty," see 18 U.S.C. §216, entitled "Penalties and injunctions," of Chapter 11 — "Bribery, Graft, and Conflict of Interests," also contained in Title 18 — "Crimes and Criminal Procedure." Subsection (b) of §216 gives the United States Attorney General the power to bring a "civil action ... against any person who engages in conduct constituting an offense under" specified sections of the bribery, graft, and conflicts of interest statutes. The statute further provides in relevant part that "upon proof of such conduct by a preponderance of the evidence, such person shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than \$50,000 for each violation or the amount of compensation which the person received or offered for the prohibited conduct, which ever amount is greater." As noted, 18 U.S.C. §2255 does not include such language. + +Accordingly, Plaintiffs multiple counts brought pursuant to §2255 are required to be dismissed for failure to state multiple causes of action. + +#### B. Also requiring dismissal Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege the requisite 42255 predicate acts. + +Also requiring dismissal of Plaintiffs purported §2255 claim(s) is Plaintiffs failure to sufficiently allege any violation of a requisite predicate act as specifically identified in subsection (a) of the statute quoted above. Relevant to Plaintiff's complaint, 18 U.S.C. 2255(a) creates a civil remedy for "a minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title + +and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation ... ." See cases cited above + +herein. Plaintiff has failed to plead any factual allegations whatsoever pertaining to violations of the specified "predicate acts." In paragraph 15, Plaintiff makes reference by citation only to the following federal statutes - "18 U.S.C. §§2241, 2242, 2243, 2421, and 2423." See endnote following the Certificate of Service herein for the complete statutory text.' + +First, Plaintiffs reliance on 18 U.S.C. §2241 in its entirety as a predicate act is improper; it is a violation of subsection §2241(c) that is a designated predicate act. A reading of the text of the other referenced federal statutes shows that no where in Plaintiffs Amended Complaint are there any allegations setting forth the requisite elements of the cited predicate act. Further, any attempted reliance by Plaintiff on other federal or state statutes not specifically identified in 18 U.S.C. §2255 is improper and fails to state a cause of action. See ¶15 of Am. Complaint wherein Plaintiff references by citation additional Florida State statutes and thereafter incorporates such reference into her §2255 claim(s). See v. Husband 376 F.Supp.2d, and 428 Supp.2d, supra, requiring allegations/evidence to establish predicate act under 18 U.S.C. §2255 in order to be afforded civil remedy. + +Plaintiff appears to be relying solely on an "agreement with the Federal Government" as a basis for imposing liability under 18 U.S.C. §2255. See ¶¶17, 18, and 19 of 1sI Am. Complaint. There is nothing in Plaintiffs allegations that would allow for a §2255 claim to go forward without specifying the statutory predicate act and factual allegations pertaining to a violation of the requisite predicate act(s). Accordingly, under + +the standard of pleading as established in Twombly supra, Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege the requisite elements of a §2255 claim, thus requinng dismissal; tor failure to state a cause of action. + +C. 18 U.S.C. §2255 does not allow for the recovery of punitive damages. Thus, Plaintiff's request for punitive damages under §2255 is required to be dismissed or stricken. + +In each of the improperly asserted Counts I through XXX, Plaintiff also seeks punitive damages. A plain reading of 18 U.S.C. §2255, quoted above herein, establishes that the statute does not allow for the recovery of punitive damages. Had Congress wanted to allow for such a recovery, it could have easily written such language into the damages provision of the statute. The legislative body chose not to write a punitive damages component into §2255 as it has done in other statutes affording civil remedies. In relevant part, §2255 reads - Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section ... of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than \$50,000 in value." See discussion of rules of statutory construction in part III.A. herein. See subsection (0(2) of 18 U.S.C. §2252A, entitled Certain activities relating to material constituting or containing child pornography, also contained in Chapter 110, Part I, Crimes, within which specific reference is made to "compensatory and punitive damages" in setting forth the relief which may be afforded to a plaintiff in bringing a civil action under §2252A(f). + +Accordingly, Plaintiff's claims for punitive damages are required to be dismissed with prejudice or stricken. + +D. In the alternative, pursuant to constitutional law principles of statutory interpretation, 18 U.S.C. 82255 is required to be interpreted as creating a single "civil remedy" or cause of action on behalf of a minor plaintiff against a defendant. The "civil remedy" afforded is not on a "per violation" basis. + +As set forth above, it is Defendant's position that the text of 18 U.S.C. §2255 does not allow a Plaintiff, such as C.M.A., to pursue the civil remedy and the damages afforded under the statute on a "per violation" basis. See part III.A. above. In the alternative, simply for the sake of argument, if one were to assume that the language of §2255 were vague or ambiguous, under the constitutional based protections of due process, judicial restraint, and the rule of lenity applied in construing a statute, Defendant's position as to the meaning of the statute would prevail over Plaintiffs view. See United States v. 128 S.Ct. 2020, 2025 (2008). As summarized by the United States Supreme Court in supra, at 2025: + +... The rule of lenity requires ambiguous criminal laws to be interpreted in favor of the defendants subjected to them. See United States v. Gradwell, 243 U.S. 476, 485, 37 S.Ct. 407, 61 L.Ed. 857 (1917); McBoyle v. United States, 283 U.S. 25, 27, 51 S.Ct. 340, 75 L.Ed. 816 (1931); United States v. Bass, 404 U.S. 336, 347-349, 92 S.Ct. 515, 30 L.Ed.2d 488 (1971). This venerable rule not only vindicates the fundamental principle that no citizen should be held accountable for a violation of a statute whose commands are uncertain, or subjected to punishment that is not clearly prescribed. It also places the weight of inertia upon the party that can best induce Congress to speak more clearly and keeps courts from making criminal law in Congress's stead. ... + +In the Court was faced with the interpretation of the term "proceeds" in the federal money laundering statute, 18 U.S.C. §1956. "The federal money-laundering + +statute prohibits a number of activities involving criminal 'proceeds." Id, at 2023. Noting + +that the term "proceeds" was not defined in the statute, the Supreme Court stated the well settled principle that "when a term is undefined, we give it its ordinary meaning." Id, at 2024. Under the ordinary meaning principle, the government's position was that proceeds meant "receipts," while the defendant's position was that proceeds meant "profits." The Supreme Court recognized that under either of the proffered "ordinary meanings," the provisions of the federal money-laundering statute were still coherent, not redundant, and the statute was not rendered "utterly absurd." Under such a situation, citing to a long line of cases and the established rule of lenity, "the tie must go to the defendant." Id, at 2025. See portion of Court's opinion quoted above. "Because the 'profits' definition of 'proceeds' is always more defendant friendly that the 'receipts' definition, the rule of lenity dictates that it should be adopted." Id. + +Plaintiffs position would subject Defendant EPSTEIN to a punishment that is not clearly prescribed — an unwritten multiplier of the "actual damages" or the presumptive damages. The rule of lenity requires that Defendant's interpretation of the remedy afforded under §2255 be adopted. + +In addition, under the Due Process Clause's basic principle of fair warning - + +... a criminal statute must give fair warning of the conduct that it makes a crime ... . As was said in United States v. Harriss, 347 U.S. 612, 617, 74 S.Ct. 808, 812, 98 L.Ed. 989, + +'The constitutional requirement of definiteness is violated by a criminal statute that fails to give a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that his contemplated conduct is forbidden by the statute. The underlying principle is that no man shall be held criminally responsible for conduct which he could not reasonably understand to be proscribed.' + +> Thus we have struck down a [state] criminal statute under the Due Process Clause where it was not 'sufficiently explicit to inform those who are subject o Ir wnar conaucr on part Connally v. General Const. Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391, 46 S.Ct. 126, 127, 70 L.Ed. 322. We have recognized in such cases that 'a statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application violates the first essential of due process of law,' ibid., and that 'No one may be required at peril of life, liberty or property to speculate as to the meaning of penal statutes. All are entitled to be informed as to what the State commands or forbids.' Lanzetta v. New Jersey, 306 U.S. 451, 453, 59 S.Ct. 618, 619, 83 L.Ed. 888. + +Thus, applying these well-entrenched constitutional principles of statutory interpretation and application, Plaintiffs 30 separate counts brought under 18 U.S.C. §2255 are required to be dismissed. + +IV. Count XXXI — "Sexual Batten," is required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. In the alternative, Plaintiff should be required to more definitely state whether she is attempting to allege a claim under Florida common or statutory law, or some federal law, and further allege the required elements and factual allegations. + +In Count XXXI, although entitled "Sexual Battery," Plaintiff improperly realleges and incorporates each and every allegation and each and every count (30) which she previously attempted to allege, resulting in a count that is 204 paragraphs long and includes reference to Federal and Florida statutory law, while also including language sounding in common law. The count is such a hodgepodge of legal allegations that Plaintiff fails to state a legally recognizable or viable cause of action. + +In ¶15, Plaintiff alleges that "the acts referenced in paragraphs 9 through 14, committed by Defendant against the then minor Plaintiff, C.M.A., were committed in violation of numerous criminal State and Federal statutes ... , including but not limited to, those crimes designated in 18 U.S.C. §§2241, 2242, 2243, 2421, and 2423, criminal + +offenses outlined in Chapter 800 of the Federal Codes, as well as those designated in Plaintiff also alleges that Defendant's "tortious commission of sexual battery upon C.M.A. were (sic) done willfully and maliciously." + +Supporting Defendant's position that Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action in Count XXXI, 18 U.S.C. §§2241(c), not §2241 in its entirety, as discussed above, is one of the predicate acts, along with 2242, 2243, 2421, and 2423, designated in the federal civil remedy statute — 18 U.S.C. §2255. Plaintiff attempted and failed to allege such a claim in the previous counts. Defendant can find no criminal offenses in any "Chapter 800 of the Federal Codes" which give rise to a civil cause of action. + +The same is true for Plaintiffs reference to the Florida Statutes. Not one of the statutes referenced creates a private cause of action or affords a civil remedy on behalf of the alleged victim of the criminal offense.' (Except for Florida Statute §39.01, all of the statutes referenced by Plaintiff are contained Title XLVI. Crimes of the Florida Statutes). The referenced criminal statutes set forth acts subject to criminal prosecution and the criminal penalties therefor, if proven. See generally, Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Plaza Materials Corp., 908 So.2d 360, 374 (Fla. 2005)("not every statutory violation carries a civil remedy")• Miami Herald Pub. Co. v. Ferre, 636 F.Supp. 970 (S.D. Fla. 1985)(violation of Florida's criminal extortion statute does not give rise to civil cause of + +&#x27; Florida Statutes §§796.03 — Procuring person under age 18 for prostitution; 796.04 — Forcing, compelling, or coercing another to become a prostitute; 796.045 (which did not become effective until Oct. 1, 2004) - Sex trafficking; penalties; 796.07 — Prohibiting prostitution, etc.; evidence; penalties; definitions; and §39.01, entitled "Definitions," is contained in Title V — Judicial Branch, Chapter 39 - "Proceedings relating to Children." + +action for damages); Mantooth v. Richards, 557 So.2d 646 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), per cunam, (Dismissal of plaintiffs civil complaint affirmed where parental kidnapping statutes concerned only criminal violations and did not create a civil remedy). + +As well, the Count XXXI allegations make absolutely no reference to any viable common law cause of action; Defendant should not be required to guess or speculate as to the nature of Plaintiffs cause of action. Even if Defendant were to speculate as to the supposed cause of action, these causes of action (common law or otherwise) have not been sufficiently alleged. On its face, in accordance with the pleading requirements annunciated in Twomblv, supra, Count XXXI is completely lacking as to any common law elements or the underlying factual allegations to support each element, and thus, Count XXXI is required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. + +In the alternative, Plaintiff should be required to more definitely state whether her claim is being brought pursuant to federal or Florida statutory law, specifically identify the statute it is being brought under, or whether her claim is being asserted under common law. Once Plaintiff identifies the nature of her claim, she is required to sufficiently allege in accordance with Twomblv the requisite elements of the identified claim, along with sufficient factual allegations supporting the elements. + +# Conclusion + +Pursuant to applicable law, Counts I through XXXI of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint are required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. 18 U.S.C. does not allow for the Plaintiff C.M.A. to allege separate causes of action against + +Defendant EPSTEIN, but rather allows Plaintiff to attempt to assert a single civil remedy + +--- + +if she can prove a violation of any of the statutory enumerated predicate acts. Further, Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege a requisite predicate act under §2255. In addition, §2255 does not allow for recovery of punitive damages. Count XXXI is also subject to dismissal with prejudice for failure to state a cause of action, as Plaintiff has failed to allege a legally viable or recognizable cause of action. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court grant his motion to dismiss Counts I through XXXI, or alternative motion for more definite statement, and motion to strike. + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 12th day of March, 2009: + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A.* +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +jagesq@bellsouth.net +*Counsel for Defendants Jeffrey Epstein* +and [REDACTED] + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +jsxesearcylaw.com + +jphesearcvlaw.com Counsel for Defendant" + +Co-Counsel for Plaintiff + +## ENDNOTE: + +ecfebrucereinharllaw. + +Respectfully su yj tted, + +By: ROBERT D CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar o. 224162 rcrit@bcicl-w.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpikeebciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +U.S.C.A. - Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure, Chapter 109A. Sexual Abuse + +## §2241. Aggravated Sexual Abuse. + +(c) With children.--Whoever crosses a State line with intent to engage in a sexual act with a person who has not attained the age of 12 years, or in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly engages in a sexual act with another person who has not attained the age of 12 years, or knowingly engages in a sexual act under the circumstances described in subsections (a) and (b) with another person who has attained the age of 12 years but has not + +attained the age of 16 years (and is at least 4 years younger than the person so engaging), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for not less than 30 years or for life. If the defendant has previously been convicted of another Federal offense under this subsection, or of a State offense that would have been an offense under either such provision had the offense occurred in a Federal prison, unless the death penalty is imposed, the defendant shall be sentenced to life in prison. + +## § 2242. Sexual abuse + +Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly-- + +(1) causes another person to engage in a sexual act by threatening or placing that other person in fear (other than by threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person will be subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping); or + +(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is— + +(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or + +(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act; + +or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life. + +# § 2243. Sexual abuse of a minor or + +(a) Of a minor.—Whoever, in the speilinaritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly engages in a sexual act with another person who— + +(1) has attained the age of 12 years but has not attained the age of 16 years; and + +(2) is at least four years younger than the person so engaging; + +or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both. + +(b) Of a —W hoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly engages in a sexual act with another person who is-- + +### (1) in official detention; and + +#### (2) under the custodial, supervisory, or disciplinary autnomy of me person so engaging; + +or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both. + +(c) Defenses.—(1) In a prosecution under subsection (a) of this section, it is a defense, which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant reasonably believed that the other person had attained the age of 16 years. + +(2) In a prosecution under this section, it is a defense, which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence, that the persons engaging in the sexual act were at that time married to each other. + +(d) State of mind proof requirement--In a prosecution under subsection (a) of this section, the Government need not prove that the defendant knew-- + +- (1) the age of the other person engaging in the sexual act; or +- (2) that the requisite age difference existed between the persons so engaging. + +# Chapter 117 Transportation for Illegal Sexual Activity and Related Crimes + +# § 2421. Transportation generally + +Whoever knowingly transports any individual in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, with intent that such individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. + +## § 2423. Transportation of minors + +(a) Transportation with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity.--A person who knowingly transports an individual who has not attained the age of 18 years in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any commonwealth, territory or possession of the United States, with intent that the individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 10 years or for life. + +(b) Travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct —A person who travels in interstate commerce or travels into the United States, or a United States citizen or an alien admitted for permanent residence in the United States who travels in foreign commerce, for the purpose of engaging in any illicit sexual conduct with another person shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. + +(c) Engaging in illicit sexual conduct in foreign places.--Any United States citizen or alien admitted tor permanent residence who travels in toreign commerce, and engages in any illicit sexual conduct with another person shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. + +(d) Ancillary offenses.--Whoever, for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain, arranges, induces, procures, or facilitates the travel of a person knowing that such a person is traveling in interstate commerce or foreign commerce for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual conduct shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. + +(e) Attempt and conspiracy.--Whoever attempts or conspires to violate subsection (a), (b), (c), or (d) shall be punishable in the same manner as a completed violation of that subsection. + +(f) Definition.--As used in this section, the term "illicit sexual conduct" means (1) a sexual act (as defined in section 2246) with a person under 18 years of age that would be in violation of chapter 109A if the sexual act occurred in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States; or (2) any commercial sex act (as defined in section 1591) with a person under 18 years of age. + +(g) Defense.—In a prosecution under this section based on illicit sexual conduct as defined in subsection (f)(2), it is a defense, which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant reasonably believed that the person with whom the defendant engaged in the commercial sex act had attained the age of 18 years. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745214/EFTA02745214.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745214/EFTA02745214.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e1a77360220590cca43911db977813ca57780593 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745214/EFTA02745214.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1184 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745214.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 21, + "chars": 39912, + "elapsed_seconds": 10.26, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 195.84, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 393.8671875, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 393.8671875, + 123.05352783203125 + ], + [ + 195.84, + 123.05352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST \nAMENDED COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION, \nAND MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT; MOTION TO STRIKE, \nAND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 98.53200000000001, + 317.52 + ], + [ + 494.8418273925781, + 317.52 + ], + [ + 494.8418273925781, + 371.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 98.53200000000001, + 371.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Supporting Memorandum of Law \nI. Motion To Dismiss Standard", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 213.588, + 494.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 381.8646240234375, + 494.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 381.8646240234375, + 520.9335327148438 + ], + [ + 213.588, + 520.9335327148438 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Standard for More Definite Statement Pleading, & Motion to Strike", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.01200000000001, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 473.1916809082031, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 473.1916809082031, + 381.3170471191406 + ], + [ + 123.01200000000001, + 381.3170471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. Counts I through XXX, 18 U.S.C. 4,2255, are required to be dismissed.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 118.116, + 623.7 + ], + [ + 482.6859130859375, + 623.7 + ], + [ + 482.6859130859375, + 640.4370422363281 + ], + [ + 118.116, + 640.4370422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Also requiring dismissal Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege \nthe requisite 42255 predicate acts.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.90799999999999, + 545.13 + ], + [ + 468.4447326660156, + 545.13 + ], + [ + 468.4447326660156, + 572.3035125732422 + ], + [ + 127.90799999999999, + 572.3035125732422 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.772, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 332.11895751953125, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 332.11895751953125, + 613.1835174560547 + ], + [ + 263.772, + 613.1835174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 369.036, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 369.036, + 376.65000000000003 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 376.65000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ENDNOTE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.5, + 507.87 + ], + [ + 143.5740966796875, + 507.87 + ], + [ + 143.5740966796875, + 522.4335327148438 + ], + [ + 76.5, + 522.4335327148438 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a72241. Aggravated Sexual Abuse.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.44, + 573.48 + ], + [ + 261.33636474609375, + 573.48 + ], + [ + 261.33636474609375, + 588.4335174560547 + ], + [ + 73.44, + 588.4335174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a7 2242. Sexual abuse", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.992, + 233.27999999999997 + ], + [ + 191.4748077392578, + 233.27999999999997 + ], + [ + 191.4748077392578, + 247.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 70.992, + 247.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a7 2243. Sexual abuse of a minor or", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.992, + 453.6 + ], + [ + 287.64, + 453.6 + ], + [ + 287.64, + 468.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 70.992, + 468.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(1) in official detention; and", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.396, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 223.03578186035156, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 223.03578186035156, + 156.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 81.396, + 156.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) under the custodial, supervisory, or disciplinary autnomy of me person so \nengaging;", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.992, + 154.42889404296875 + ], + [ + 470.3470153808594, + 154.42889404296875 + ], + [ + 470.3470153808594, + 181.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 70.992, + 181.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Chapter 117 Transportation for Illegal Sexual Activity and Related Crimes", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.992, + 413.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 473.0129089355469, + 413.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 473.0129089355469, + 428.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 70.992, + 428.68353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a7 2421. Transportation generally", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.992, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 252.6538543701172, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 252.6538543701172, + 441.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 70.992, + 441.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a7 2423. Transportation of minors", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.992, + 516.78 + ], + [ + 255.68307495117188, + 516.78 + ], + [ + 255.68307495117188, + 531.8035278320312 + ], + [ + 70.992, + 531.8035278320312 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 94 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 39 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 84 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745214" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745214/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745214/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a7abd98e4e0e50cde6c5990453052ba6a122f258 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745214/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:9584e0a35d40af5c446e83866c3c2541bdd5ca86cf5755f2624cd6e8febe124e +size 12093 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745235/EFTA02745235.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745235/EFTA02745235.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..95f990eab2ced24d876e99d3800d420a5675508c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745235/EFTA02745235.md @@ -0,0 +1,117 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +GASP NO • 08-CV-80811-Civ-mawrmitinHNAnN + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, + +vs, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and a + +Defendants. + +## PLAINTIFF. C.M.A.'S. CONDITIONAL NOTICE OF INTENT TO EXCLUSIVELY RELY ON STATUTORY DAMAGES PROVIDED BY 18 U.S.C. 82255 + +'Plaintiff, C.MA., by and through her undersigned counsel, hereby files her Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255, and in support thereof states as follows: + +1. This is an action to recover money damages against Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, for acts of sexual abuse and prostitution committed upon the thenminor, C.M.A. + +2. Plaintiff has plead thirty separate counts against EPSTEIN for separate incidences of abuse committed by EPSTEIN against Plaintiff pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255. 18 U.S.C. §2255, entitled "Civil remedy for personal injuries", creates a private right of action for minor children who were the victim of certain enumerated sex offenses. 18 U.S.C. §2255 also creates a statutory floor for the amount of damages a + +![](_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg) + +victim can recover for a violation of same. Plaintiff has also alleged a single count of Sexual Battery against EPSTEIN as well. + +3. There presently exists between the Plaintiff and EPSTEIN a disagreement as to whether the statutory damage floor established in 18 U.S.C. §2255 is recoverable for each commission of an enumerated sex offense listed in 18 U.S.C. §2255, or whether the statutory damage floor can only be enforced once, regardless of how many times a defendant perpetrates an enumerated sex offense against a minor victim. + +4. This disagreement between the parties is properly the subject of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint For Failure to State a Cause of Action, and Motion For More Definite Statement; Motion to Strike, and Supporting Memorandum of Law (D.E. 47) which is currently pending before this Court. + +5. In the event that the Court rules that the Plaintiff is entitled to recover the statutory damages created by 18 U.S.C. §2255 for each violation', Plaintiff will be pursuing only those statutory damages, and will not pursue damages available at common law. + +6. Should the Court rule however, that the statutory damage floor can only be applied once, Plaintiff will be pursuing any and all damages available to her, whether they be pursuant to statute or by common law. + +1The parties also disagree about the amount the statutory damage floor should be for this case. 18 U.S.C. §2255 was amended in 2005 to increase the floor from \$50,000 to \$150,000. The parties essentially disagree about which version of 18 U.S.C. §2255 should apply in this case. + +Respectfully submitted, + +*/s/Jack P.* [REDACTED] + +JACK SCAROLA + +Florida Bar No. 169440 + +JACK P. [REDACTED] + +Florida Bar No.: 0547808 + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +Phone: (561) 686-6300 + +Fax: (561) 383-9456 + +Attorneys for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +**CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 5th, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached counsel list via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. + +*/s/Jack P.* [REDACTED] + +JACK SCAROLA + +Florida Bar No. 169440 + +JACK P. [REDACTED] + +Florida Bar No.: 0547808 + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +Phone: (561) 686-6300 + +Fax: (561) 383-9456 + +Attorneys for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue S. +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 South Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561)-202-6360 +Fax: (561)-828-0983 + +Robert Critton, Esquire +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 +Phone: (561)-842-2820 +Fax: (561)-844-6929 + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +Phone: (561)-582-7600 +Fax: (561)-588-8819 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745235/EFTA02745235.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745235/EFTA02745235.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..af7f1a5f707689ac0ee5fe74a4272664e200c4d8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745235/EFTA02745235.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,259 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745235.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4372, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.12, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 111.78000000000002 + ], + [ + 392.2320861816406, + 111.78000000000002 + ], + [ + 392.2320861816406, + 139.05706787109375 + ], + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 139.05706787109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF. C.M.A.'S. CONDITIONAL NOTICE OF INTENT TO EXCLUSIVELY RELY \nON STATUTORY DAMAGES PROVIDED BY 18 U.S.C. 82255", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 512.1419067382812, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 512.1419067382812, + 397.8170471191406 + ], + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 397.8170471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 239.904, + 292.40999999999997 + ], + [ + 383.724, + 292.40999999999997 + ], + [ + 383.724, + 306.18 + ], + [ + 239.904, + 306.18 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 337.21200000000005, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 337.21200000000005, + 122.30999999999999 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 122.30999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 48 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745235" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745235/_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745235/_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3d5a7fd8423e608466b9dcc6a689485a0d7209ff --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745235/_page_0_Picture_13.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:20303744baa4af93aa653d3d431fb7bd6226d1ceb07f54e6babc6de16a7af07a +size 12266 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745239/EFTA02745239.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745239/EFTA02745239.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e070139c96d469e538ff3d5460d10f8d43d1cc66 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745239/EFTA02745239.md @@ -0,0 +1,1222 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SMITHFRN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80811-MARRA/Ila + +C.M. A., + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +Y EPSTEIN and + +Defendants, + +DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF C.M.A. TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE AND ANSWER DEFENDANT'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, AND TO OVERRULE OBJECTIONS, AND FOR AN AWARD OF DEFENDANT'S REASONABLE EXPENSES + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, moves this Court for an order compelling Plaintiff, C.M.A. to respond to Defendant's First Request To Produce and to answer Defendant's First Set of Interrogatodes, and to overrule her objections asserted in Plaintiffs Response To Defendant's First Request To Produce, dated February 13, 2009, and in Plaintiffs Notice of Serving Answers To Interrogatories, dated February 18, 2009. Defendant further seeks an award of his • reasonable expenses, including expenses, associated with the making of this motion. Rule 37, Fed.R.Civ.P. (2008); Local Gen. Rules 7.1 and 26.1 H (S.D. Fla. 2008). In support of his motion, Defendant states: + +Prior to the filing of this motion, on April 1, 2009, Defendant's counsel communicated by telephone with Plaintiffs counsel In agood faith effort to resolve the discovery Issues herein. This motion addresses those discovery Items which remain at + +![](_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg) + +issue. Also, rather than file 2 separate motions to compel, Defendant filed one addressing the production requests and interrogatories because the discovery Issues overlap. + +## Motion To Compel Responses to Production Requests Nos. 1, 2, 4.5. and 19, and Answers to Interrogatories Nos. 2, 18. and 23. + +## Production Request No. + +1. Individual and/or joint income tax returns and supporting documentation including W-2 and 1099 forms for 2002-2007 and, as well as all records or documentation relative to the Plaintiffs earnings for the current year. + +# Response: + +Objection. Irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible information. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Plaintiffs tax retums and supporting documentation are relevant to Plaintiffs damages claims and, thus, discoverable. Plaintiffs complaint alleges in part that "beginning in approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003, the Defendant coerced and enticed the impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct." 1st Am. Complaint, ¶13. (Plaintiff also refused to answer Interrogatory no. 2 which sought her employment history for the past ten years asserting the same general objection). + +Such Information Is both relevant and reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. It is well settled that relevant Information is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P.; + +Donahav v. Palm Beach Tours & trans.. Inc. 242F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). + +Discoverability of such information Is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery is broad. ponahav, supra, at 686, and cases cited therein. "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claims or defense of any party involved in the pending action." Id. + +Plaintiffs tax returns, along with the requested supporting documentation, for the six year period, and documents relevant to her current earnings, are relevant to Plaintiffs damages claims detailed below herein. Such information would show Plaintiffs employment and earning history, as well as provide evidence as to how Plaintiff has been able to function in her daily life before, during and after the alleged incidents. Was she self-sufficient? Was she able to get out of bed each morning and support herself? What type of job did she hold? One's ability to earn aliving and be self-supporting has not only afinancial component, but also an emotional/psychological/mental component. + +C.M.A.'s First Amended Complaint attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through XXX are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 — Civil Remedies for Personal injuries; Count XXXI is entitled "Sexual Battery," and Count XXXII is entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortious Assault only against Defendant, + +in her answers to Interrogatory nos. 9 and 10, which seek Information about C.M.A.'s damages claims, Plaintiff answered that: + +&#x27; Defendant's Motion To Dismiss directed to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint is pending. + +C.M.A. v. Epstein, et al. Page 4 + +> Ihave bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developer, drug problems. Permanent injuries are psychological. (Interrog. No. 9). + +> Iam claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a jury who will provide their own methods of computation In an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. §2255. (Interrog. No. 10). + +In her 1st Amended Complaint, relevant to her damages claims, Plaintiff alleges: + +C.M.A., has in the past suffered, and will in the future suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy and other damages ... . The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses ... and will in the future suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. The Plaintiff C.M.A. has suffered loss of income, a loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of capacity to enjoy life. These Injuries are permanent in nature and the Plaintiff, C.M.A., will continue to suffer these losses in the future. + +(15t Am. Complaint, Counts I - XXX (18 U.S.C. §2255), 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193; Count XXXI (Sexual Battery), ¶199.) + +in each of her "Wherefore" clauses, Plaintiff seeks "compensatory damages of at least the minimum provided by law." 18 U.S.C. §2255, pursuant to which Plaintiff attempts to bring certain of her claims, allows for recovery of \*\*actual damages." See fn. 2herein for applicable statutory text.2 + +As discussed above, the tax returns, and supporting documentation, will provide direct evidence as to Plaintiffs claimed damages. Such information does not only go to + +(a) 2 Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal Injury as a result of such violation may sue In any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including areasonable attorney's fee. My minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than \$50,000 in value. [Emphasis added.] + +compensatory or actual damages or loss of income/loss of capacity to earn Income type damages, but also her emotional/psychological/mental health type damages. In the telephone communication between counsel for the respective parties, Plaintiffs counsel indicated that Plaintiff was not seeking loss of income/earning capacity type damages; (Defendant is not aware that there has been any formal withdrawal of such damages claimed); notwithstanding, the Information sought Is still relevant and discoverable based on the additional damages claimed by Plaintiff. The time period will allow Defendant to compare how Plaintiff was doing In her life prior to, during, and after the alleged incident. Again, the type of jobs Plaintiff has been able to hold and her earnings and ability to support herself clearly have not only afinancial component, but an emotional/psychological/mental health component as well. Accordingly, Plaintiffs objection is required to be overruled, and Defendant is entitled to the documents requested. + +# Production Request No. 2 + +2. All bills/expenses from any medical doctor, chiropractor, psychologists, psychi mental health counselors (Including any members of the healing arts and relatedlik, i.e. drugs, prescriptions, etc.) you claim you incurred as a result of the injuries which are or may be the subject matter of this lawsuit + +# Response: + +None In our possession. These will be provided upon receipt. Discovery is ongoing. + +# 1..egal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Plaintiff makes no objection to the documents requested, but has failed to produce any documents responsive to this request Clearly, the documents are relevant and discoverable as they go to proof of Plaintiffs claimed injuries. In the April 1, 2009, + +telephone communication Plaintiffs counsel Indicated that Plaintiff was still not in possession of such documents. The First Request for Production was served on Plaintiff on January 16, 2009. In her answer to Interrogatory no. 11, (Notice of Serving Answers, dated February 18, 2009, identifies a psychiatrist and a counselor/therapist from whom she claims she is receiving "treatment or examination for the Injuries for which [she] seeks damages." See Exhibit A hereto for copy C.M.A.'s ;answer to Interrogatory no. 11. Regarding the date of treatment from the psychiatrist — she asserts "I would defer to the Doctors records." She claims the treatment from the counselor/therapist has been "since high school" and "ongoing." Defendant is entitled to the documents sought and Plaintiff is in control of and has the ability to obtain the requested medical bills and expenses she claims were incurred as result of her Injuries claimed in this action. Plaintiff should be required to immediately produce the requested documents to Defendant. + +## Production Request No. 4 + +4. All reports, evaluations, recommendations and/or analysis submitted by any expert which relate to or cover the Incident which Is the subject matter of this lawsuit and/or any injuries, damages or losses you allege were caused by the incident. + +# Response: + +Any reports generated by any retained experts not yet disclosed are protected by the work product privilege. Notwithstanding same, none. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Plaintiff, through counsel, in the April 1, 2009, telephone communication, indicated that she does not have any responsive documents and stands by her objection. Rule 26 provides In relevant part — + +## 2) Disclosure of Expert Testimony. + +(A) In General. In addition to the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1), a party must disclose to the other parties the Identity of any witness It may use at trial to present evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, 703, or 705. + +(B) Written Report. Unless otherwise stipulated or ordered by the court, this disclosure must be accompanied by awritten report--prepared and signed by the witness—if the witness is one retained or specially employed to provide expert testimony in the case or one whose duties as the party's employee regularly involve giving expert tostimony. The report must contain: + +(i) a complete statement of all opinions the witness will express and the basis and reasons for them; + +(II) the data or other information considered by the witness in forming them; + +(iii) any exhibits that will be used to summarize or support them; + +(iv) the witness's qualifications, Including alist of all publications authored in the previous 10 years; + +(v) alist of all other cases in which, during the previous four years, the witness testified as an expert at trial or by deposition; and + +(vi) astatement of the compensation to be paid for the study and testimony in the case. + +(C) Time to Disclose Expert Testimony. A party must make these disclosures at the times and in the sequence that the court orders. Absent a stipulation or a court order, the disclosures must be made: + +(i) at least 90 days before the date set for trial or for the case to be ready for trial; or + +(Ii) if the evidence is intended solely to contradict or rebut evidence on the same subject matter identified by another party under Rule 26(a)(2)(B), within 30 days after the other party's disclosure. + +# (e) Supplementing Disclosures and Responses. + +(1) In General. A party who has made a disclosure under Rule 26(a)--or who has responded to an interrogatory, request for production, or request for admission--must supplement or correct its disclosure or response: + +(A) in atimely manner If the party learns that in some material respect the disclosure or response is incomplete or incorrect, and if the additional or corrective + +> Information has not otherwise been made known to the other parties during the tllbuuve,y out.ebb + +(B) as ordered by the court. + +(2) Expert Witness. For an expert whose report must be disclosed under Rule 26(a)(2)(B), the party's duty to supplement extends both to information included In the report and to Information given during the expert's deposition. Any additions or changes to this information must be disclosed by the time the party's pretrial disclosures under Rule 26(a)(3) are due. + +Accordingly, Defendant requests that should Plaintiff be in possession of any such reports, evaluations, recommendations and/or analysis prepared by an expert expected to testify at trial or deposition, or to be used by an expert expected to testify at trial or deposition, that such documents be produced as required by Rule 26, Fed.R.C1v.P. quoted above. + +## Production Request No. 5 + +5. All medical reports and/or records from doctors, physicians, (including psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors), hospitals, drug or alcohol facilities or any other person or entity who has rendered treatment to or examined you for any reason after the incident(s) which is the subject matter of this lawsuit. + +# Response: + +None in our possession. Discovery is ongoing. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Once again, Plaintiff should be required to immediately produce the requested documents. In support of ordering immediate production, Defendant reaileges and incorporates his "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement To Discovery" to request no. 5 above herein. + +## Interrogatory No. Z + +2. List the names, business addresses, telephone and cell phone numbers, dates of employment, immediate supervisor (name and address) and rates of pay regarding all employers, including self-employment, for whom you have worked in the past 10 years; this Includes listing all sources of income you have received. Answer this question by year, i.e. 1998 - 2009. + +## Answer: + +Objection. Irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Such information is clearly relevant to the damages and injuries claimed by Plaintiff in this action. Plaintiffs complaint alleges in part that "beginning in approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003, the Defendant coerced and enticed the impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct." 1s' Am. Complaint, ¶13. (See discussion of Production Request no. 1 above herein). + +Such information is both relevant and reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. It is well settled that relevant information is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P.; Donahav v. Palm Beach Tours & trans.. Inc., 242F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). Discoverability of such Information is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery is broad. Donahav, supra, at 686, and cases cited therein. "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claims or defense of any party involved in the pending action." id. + +Plaintiffs employment and earnings history prior to and after the alleged + +Incidents are relevant to her claimed damages and injuries. Such information would not only evidence Plaintiffs employment and earning history, but also provide evidence as to how Plaintiff has been able to function in her daily life before, during and after the alleged incidents. Was she self-sufficient? Was she able to get out of bed each moming and support herself? What type of job did she hold? One's ability to earn a living and be self-supporting has not only afinancial component, but also an emotIonaVpsychological/mental component. + +C.M.A.'s First Amended Complaint attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through XXX are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 — Civil Remedies for Personal Injuries; Count XXXI is entitled "Sexual Battery," and Count XXXff is entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortious Assault only against Defendant, + +In her answers to interrogatory nos. 9 and 10, which seek information about C.M.A.'s damages claims, Plaintiff answered that + +Ihave bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent injuries are psychological. (Interrog. No. 9). + +Iam claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a jury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. §2255. (Interrog. No. 10). + +In her 1st Amended Complaint, relevant to her damages claims, Plaintiff alleges: + +C.M.A., has in the past suffered, and will In the future suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, Invasion of her privacy and other damages ... . The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses ... and will in the future suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. The Plaintiff C.M.A. has suffered loss of income, a + +> loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of capacity to enjoy life. These Injuries are permanent in nature ana the Plaintiff, G.M.A., will continue to suffer these losses in the future. + +> (1st Am. Complaint, Counts I — XXX (18 U.S.C. §2255), ¶¶25, 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193; Count XXXI (Sexual Battery), ¶199.) + +In each of her 'Wherefore" clauses, Plaintiff seeks "compensatory damages of at least the minimum provided by law." 18 U.S.C. §2255, pursuant to which Plaintiff attempts to bring certain of her claims, allows for recovery of "actual damages." See fn. 2 herein for applicable statutory text. + +As discussed above, C.M.A.'s employment and earnings history will provide direct evidence as to Plaintiffs claimed damages. Such Information does not only go to compensatory or actual damages or loss of income/loss of capacity to earn income type damages, but also her emotionapsychologIcal/mental health type damages. In the telephone communication between counsel for the respective parties, Plaintiffs counsel indicated that Plaintiff was not seeking loss of Income/earning capacity type damages; (Defendant Is not aware that there has been any formal withdrawal of such damages claimed); notwithstanding, the information sought Is still relevant and discoverable based on the additional damages claimed by Plaintiff. The time period will allow Defendant to compare how Plaintiff was doing in her life prior to, during, and after the alleged Incident. Again, the type of jobs Plaintiff has been able to hold and her earnings and ability to support herself dearly have not only afinancial component, but an emotional/psychological/mental health component as well. Accordingly, Plaintiffs + +objection is required to be overruled, and Defendant is entitled to the information sought in the interrogatory. + +# Interrogatory No.18 + +18. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding Mr. Epstein, with whom you have had sexual activity since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual activity, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. + +Answer: + +Objection. Relevance and overbroad. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Plaintiffs only objection is relevancy and overbroad, without any facttlal support or showing as required by Rule 26(c) and Local Gen. Rule 26.1 H (S.D. Fla. 2008). Nowhere does C.M.A. explain how such interrogatory is overbroad. + +It is well settled that relevant Information is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(bX1), Fed.R.Civ.P.; Donahav v. Patm Beath Tours & trans., Inc., 242F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). Discoverability of an alleged victim's/plaintiff's sexual conduct or activity in civil cases is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery is broad. Donahav, supra, at 686, and cases cited therein. "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claims or defense of any party involved in the pending action." id. + +In accordance with Rule 26, the discovery sought regarding Plaintiff's sexual activity with males and the nature thereof, including whether she received any C.M.A. v. Epstein, et at. + +Page 13 + +compensation or consideration therefore, in Interrogatory no. 18, are all relevant to + +Plaintiffs damages claims and the type of injury she claims she has, suffered. Defendant has no other means of obtaining such information and obtaining such information through Plaintiff will better protect the confidentiality until the Court can make a determination in accordance with the procedures under Rule 412(c) whether such information will be admissible at trial. See Rule 412(c), Fed.R.Civ.P. Defendant will agree to an order keeping the confidentiality of the information obtained through discovery. + +The evidence sought is relevant based on the facts and theories of this action. C.M.A.'s First Amended Complaint attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through XXX are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 — Civil Remedies for Personal Injuries;- Count XXXI is -entitled "Sexual Battery,"\_\_and\_ Count\_ XXXII is entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortlous Assault only against Defendant, + +In her answers to interrogatory nos. 9 and 10, which seek information about C.M.A.'s damages claims, Plaintiff answered that: + +Ihave bl-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent Injuries are psychological. (Interrog. No. 9). + +Iam claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a jury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. §2255. (Interrog. No. 10). + +In her l et Amended Complaint, relevant to her damages claims, Plaintiff alleges: + +C.MA., has in the past suffered, and will in the future suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her + +> privacy and other damages ... . The then minor Plaintiff Incurred medical and psychological expenses ... arid will in llue futunt, suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. The Plaintiff C.M.A. has suffered loss of Income, a loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of capacity to enjoy life. These Injuries are permanent in nature and the Plaintiff, C.M.A., will continue to suffer these losses in the future. + +> (tat Am. Complaint, Counts I — XXX (18 U.S.C. §2255), ¶125, 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193; Count XXXI (Sexual Battery), ¶199.) + +In each of her 'Wherefore" clauses, Plaintiff seeks "compensatory damages of at least the minimum provided by law." 18 U.S.C. §2255, pursuant to which Plaintiff attempts to bring certain of her claims, allows for recovery of °actual damages." See fn. 2 herein for applicable statutory text. + +C.M.A. also alleges that Defendant's conduct was "sexual assault and child abuse of a then minor." ¶2. She alleges that °beginning in approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003, the .Defendant coerced and enticed the impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct.°113. + +... These acts included, but were not limited to, fondling and Inappropriate and illegal sexual touching of the then minor Plaintiff, sexual misconduct and masturbation of the Defendant in the presence of the then minor Plaintiff, soliciting and enticing the then minor Plaintiff to engage In sexual acts with another female in EPSTEIN's presence, and encouraging the then minor Plaintiff to become involved in prostitution; Defendant committed numerous criminal sexual offenses against the then minor Plaintiff including, but not limited to, sexual battery, solicitation or prostitution, procurement of a minor for the purpose of prostitution, and lewd and lascivious assaults upon the person of the then minor plaintiff. (1st Am. Complaint¶13). + +The information sought Is clearly relevant to the injuries and damages claimed by Plaintiff. The nature of her claimed Injuries and damages are such that Defendant is + +entitled to evidence which would show the nature of her relationship with males, whether she has suffered or engaged in other acts of sexual misconduct or activity as alleged in her complaint, and whether she suffered injury and damages as a result of the other claimed sexual misconduct or activity. See United States v, Bear Stops, 997 F.2d 451 (8th Cir. 1993)(Defendant charged with sexual abuse of six year old boy was entitled to admission of evidence relating to victim's sexual assault by 3 older boys to establish alternative explanation for why victim exhibited behavioral manIfestatbns of sexually abused child.). + +In further support of Defendant's motion, a copy of Balas v, Ruzzo, 703So.2d 1076(Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1998), is attached hereto as Exhibit B as it is on point to the discovery issues in this action, and the relevancy and discoverability of Plaintiffs history of sexual activity and any payment, therefore. See interrogatories 8, 22 and 30 propounded in the Balas case and footnote 1 herein. 3 Additionally and significantly, in other pending state court civil actions against. Defendant EPSTEIN attempting to assert similar claims and damages, the Circuit Court Judges have already ruled that such information is discoverable as it is relevant to the damages claims of Plaintiff. See Composite Exhibits C and D hereto. Composite Exhibit C are the Orders, dated February 23, 2009, entered in the case of A.C. v. Epstein, and aCase No. 502008CA025129 MB Al, 15th Judicial Circuit, In and For Palm Beach County, State of Florida, which granted Defendants motion to compel therein directed + +3 In Dalas v. Ruzzo, supra, the Plaintiffs alleged amulticount complaint Including claims for "coercion of prostitution' pursuant to §796.09, Ha. Stat.; for battery for the unwanted and offensive touching of petitioners' bodies; false imprisonment for physically confining the petitioners against their will; invasion of privacy; and Intentional infliction of emotional distress. + +Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 54 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/02/2009 Page 16 of 18 + +C.M.A. v. Epstein, et al. Page 16 + +to discovery identical to interrogatory no. 18 above. (In the A.C. case, the Plaintiff + +answered without objection interrogatories identical to not 19, 20, and 21 herein.) + +Composite Exhibit D is a portion the transcript from a March 3, 2009 hearing on Defendant's motion to compel discovery in the case of Jane Doe II v. Epstein, and + +aCase No. 502008CA020614 MB AF, 15°' Judicial Circuit Court, In and For Palm Beach County, State of Florida. Again, the Circuit Court Judge determined that the Information sought is relevant to the issue of damages and, thus, discoverable. + +Accordingly, Plaintiffs objections are required to be overruled and Defendant is entitled to the discovery sought. + +# Inter ociatory No. 23 + +23. State the names, addresses, ages, phone numbers and dates of all females whom you claim were brought by you to Mr. Epstein's home to give him a massage or for any other reason. As to each female, state the amount of money you claim you were paid to bring each female. + +Answer: + +A.L. Age: 22 West Palm Beach, FL I was paid \$100.00 + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Counsel for the respective parties also discussed this interrogatory In an effort to come to a resolution. Plaintiff does not object to the discovery requested. Plaintiff's counsel indicated that he had a "problem" disclosing the identity of A.L. to the extent she was a minor at the time. Defendant would agree to an order protecting public disclosure of the true Identity of A.L. if she were indeed a minor at the time; however, as part of the order, Plaintiff should also be required to provide Defendant with the full + +name of A.L. so that Defendant may conduct meaningful discovery. It is Plaintiff who claims she brought A.L. to Epstein's home as part of the alleged "scheme." In addition, Plaintiff failed to provide any date or dates as to when she brought A.L. to Epstein's home. Plaintiff's counsel indicated they would attempt to provide this information. + +Accordingly, in granting Defendants motion to compel discovery, with respect t this Interrogatory, Plaintiff should be required to provide the full name of A.L. (which Defendant agrees to keep confidential at this time), the date or dates which she brought A.L. or any female to Epstein's home, and how much she was allegedly paid each time. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court grant Defendants motion to compel and award Defendants reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, associated with this motion. + +## Rule 7.1 Certification + +Ihereby certify that counsel for the respective parties communicated by telephone in agood faith effort to resolve the discovery issues prior to the filing of this motion to compel. Some of the issues were resolved or in the process of being resolved. + +> Robert D. Cri Attorney for , Jr. efendant Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of r entified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on thi ay of April 2009 + +Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 54 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/02/2009 Page 18 of 18 + +C.M.A. v. Epstein, et al. Page 18 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. vviiiits, 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. reelrhwehotmail.com + +Jack Sole, Esq. Jack P. Esq. Searcy enney Scarola Bamhart Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsxesearcvlaw.com lohfasearcvlaw.com Co-Counsel for Plaintiff + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Attuitaby Guldbervor & W0193, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 Jaaescabellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. & Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ectabrucereinhartlaw. Counsel for Defendantcis. + +Respectfully subm + +By: ROBERT D. ITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar IV . 224162 rcritebdcla4v.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 molkeeboldaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: OS-CV-80811-CW-Plaintiff's Answers to Defenda ries + +# School behavioral problems, received counseling prior to the ii rt.ideiit. + +- 8. Did you consume any alcoholic beverages or take any drugs or medications within 12 hours before the time of each Incident(s) described In the complaint? If so, state the type and amount of alcoholic beverages, drugs, or medication which were consumed, and when (dates) and where you consumed them. + +## ANSWER + +- 1. On one occasion I had taken "Morning Glory" and "Angel Trumpets". I do not recall the date. +- 2. On another occasion I used cocaine powder. I do not recall the date. + +- 9. Describe each injury (physical, emotional, mental) for which you are claimind damages In this case, specifying the part of your body that was injured, the nature of the injury and as to any injuries you contend are permanent, the effects on you that you claim are permanent. + +## ANSWER + +Ihave bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent Injuries are psychological. + +- 10. Please state each item of damage that you claim, and Include in your answer. the count to which the item of damages relates; the factual basis for each item of damages; and an explanation of how you computed each item of damages, including any mathematical formula used. + +## ANSWER + +Iam claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by ajury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. § 2255. + +Discovery is ongoing. + +- 11. List the names and business addresses of each physician (including psychiatrist, psychologist, chiropractor or medical provider) who has treated or examined you, + +13" EXHIBIT :A + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et at CaseNo.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRAIM Plaintiffs Answers to Defendant's First taro ties + +> and each medical tacility where you have received any tlaahnestrt o' e:wtni"atio" for the injuries for which you seek damages in this case; and state as to each the date of treatment or examination and the Injury or condition for which you were examined or treated. + +## ANSWER + +Dr. Serge Thys (Psychiatrist) 2151 45th Street West Palm Beach, FL 33407 Date: I do not recall the date. I would defer to the Doctors records. + +Susan Pope (Counselor/Therapist) Date: Since high school. Ongoing. Parent Child Center 2001 W. Blue Heron Boulevard + +- 12. List the names and business addresses of all other physicians, medical facilities, rehab facilities (drug, alcohol or psychiatric) or other health care' providers including psychiatrist, psychologist, mental health counselor and chiropractors by whom or at which you have been examined or treated In the past 10 years; and state as to each the dates of examination or treatment and the condition or injury for which you were examined or treated. + +## ANSWER + +Good Samaritan Hospital (3/12/04, 3/25/08) Child Birth 1309 N Flagler Dr West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +St. Mary's Hospital (4/07) DNC 90145th Street West Palm Beach, FL 33407 + +Gloria C. Hakkaralnen, MD Ob/Gyn 2926 10th Avenue North, Suite 305 Palm Springs, FL. 33461 + +Theodore Ritota, DDS Dentist + +VVe'stla w. + +703 So.2d 1076 703So.2d 1076.22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Pia. L Weekly DI69 (Cite am 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 1 + +District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District. Kimberly BALAS and Teresa Shumate, Petitioners, v. Marjorie A. RUZZO, and Exec., Inc., etc., Respondents. No. 97-82. + +307Ak31 k Relevancy and Materiality. Most Cited Cases Party may be permitted to discover. evidence that would be inadmissible at trial, if it would load to discovery of relevant evidence. West's F.S.A. RCP Rule 1.280(b)(1). + +# (3) Pretrial Procedure 307A 4;:=36.1 + +Oct. 10, 1997. + +As Modified on Grant of Clarification Jan. 2, 1998. ,,,,.., nrev - der,; ea rl t'1 v..--2-ck 216 ka• 307AII Depositions and Discovery , Plaintiffs brought action against alleged house of \ (ken ) . 307A11(A) Discovery In General prostitution for, inter ails, coercion titudon. 307A166 Particular Subjects of Diselos- tire The Circuit Court, Brevard County, Pound, 307Ak36.1 k In General. Most Cited J., granted in part defendants' motion to compel dis- Cases covery. Plaintiffs filed petition for writ of certior- Evidence of plaintiffs' past prostitution and their art. Tho District Court of Appeal, W. Sharp, J., held revenues relating to such activities, including activthat evidence of plaintiffs' past prostitution and ides with alleged house of prostitution against their revenues relating to such activities was dis- which they had filed suit, was discoverable, where covetable. plaintiffs brought action not only for coercion of + +## 307A Pretrial Procedure + +prostitution, but also for battery, false imprison-Petition denied. meet, invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, violation of their civil rights, Millis, J., concurred specially end filed opinion. and racketeering. Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, § 40302, '42 U.S.C.A. § West Headnotes 13981; West's P.S.A. §§ 772.014, 796.09; West's F.S.A. RCP Rule 1). + +# DI Pretrial Procedure 307A (C=r31 \*1076 RI chard E. nd Heather Fisher Lind- + +say, of Spriggs & , Tallahassee. for Peti- + +tioners. + +Mark S. Peters of Anul, Theriac & Eismunenger, P.A., Cocoa, for Respondents. + +### 307A Pretrial Procedure + +307A.11 Depositions and Discovery 307AII(A) Discovery in General 307Ak31 k. Relevancy and Materiality. + +Most Cited Cases Discovery In civil cases must be relevant to subject matter of case and must be admissible or reason- W. SHARP, Judge. ably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. + +West's F.S.A. RCP Rule 1.280(b)(1). Bolas and Shumate petition this court for awrit of certiorari to review certain portions of the lower (21 Pretrial Procedure 307A rE=31 court's order which granted, in part, amotion to compel discovery filed by respondents Ruzzo and 307A Pretrial Procedure Exec., Inc. Petitioners argue that these portions de-307.411 Depositions and Discovery part from the essential requirements of law and will 307A11(A) Discovery in General cause them irreparable harm because they will be + +EXHIBIT + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 2 + +compelled to disclose intimate details of their sexual history. We decline to issue the writ of certiorari. + +Balas and Shumate filed suit against Ruzzo and Exec, Inc., doing business as "The Boardroom." According to Balas and Shumate, The Boardroom operates ostensibly as \*1077 a leisure spa but actually is a house of prostitution. Balas worked at The Boardroom from December 1993 until February 1996; Shumate worked there from October 1992 until March 1996. Ruzzo, the sole officer and shareholder of Exec, Inc., collected about fifty to sixty percent of each employees' earnings from performing sexual acts. + +According to Balas and Shumate, Ruzzo exerted mental and emotional control over her employees and thus she was able to exploit them as prostitutes. Ruzzo required her employees to pay her substantial sums of money to attend "metaphysical workshops" conducted by Ruzzo or persons associated with her. At the work place, the employees were required to participate in religious and quasi-religious "circles," rituals and incantations. These practices were allegedly designed to break down the personalities of the women who worked for Ruzzo and to dependency and loyalty to herself. At one time when the earnings of a new employee were missing and believed to be stolen, Ruzzo required that the petitioners be strip searched and body cavity searched. Ruzzo caused the petitioners to believe their continued employment was dependent on their submission to these searches and that they might be arrested on felony charges if they refused to submit to the searches. + +Balas and Shumate's second amended complaint against Ruzzo contains seven counts. Count I is an action for coercion of prostitution pursuant to section 796.09, Florida Statutes. Petitioners allege the requirement that they perform sexual acts to retain their employment constitutes inducement and coercion to engage in prostitution. Count II is a claim for battery for the unwanted and offensive touching of the petitioners' bodies. Count III is a claim for false imprisonment for physically confining the pe- + +titioners against their will. Count IV alleges that respondents' actions constituted an invasion of petitioners' privacy. Count V is a claim for the intentional infliction of emotional distress. Count VI alleges a civil rights action that respondents have violated petitioners' right to be free from crimes of violence motivated by gender within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. section 13981. Finally, count VII seeks civil remedies for criminal practices or racketeering pursuant to section 772.104, Florida Statutes. The petitioners claim that they suffered emotional pain, anguish, humiliation, insult, indignity, loss of self-esteem, inconvenience, hurt and emotional distress. They seek an award of general and punitive damages, among other relief. + +The discovery to which the petitioners are being required to respond is as follows: + +I. + +**Interrogatory 8:** Please advise how long have you been engaged in prostitution.... + +II. + +**Interrogatory 22:** State with specificity the manner in which the acts as described in your Complaint have materially affected how you interact with your husband, boyfriend, fiancée' [sic] or any other individual of the opposite sex. + +III. + +**Request for Production 30:** A copy of any photographs, movies or videotapes in which you performed sexual acts and/or simulated sexual acts in exchange for money or other consideration. + +IV. + +**Interrogatory 16:** Please list the names, addresses, telephone numbers and rates of pay for all employers for which you worked, including the + +nature of the work, during the five years human-J..k. of amploreet th Boardroom and from the date of your termination with the Boardroom to the present, providing the names of your immediate supervisors at each place of employment and the reason for your leaving each place of employment. + +V. + +Interrogatory 26: Please state your total income while employed at the Boardroom, and state the source of that income including any income from other employment or \*1078 income earned from prostitution other than at the Boardroom. + +VI. + +Request for Production 34: Business records from any selfemployrnent or owned business ventures in the last 5 years, including any records or list of customers, "special customer lists" or "sugar daddy's list." + +(1)12) Discovery in civil cases must be relevant to the subject matter of the case and must be admissible or reasonably calculated to lead to admissible a t evidence. See Allstate Insurance Co. v. non, 655 So.2d 91 (Pla.1995). Amente v. 653 So.2d 1030 (Fla.1995); IRv. Stardust rulsers, Inc., 690 Sold 743 a. th DCA 1997). The concept of relevancy is broader in the discovery context than in the trial context and a party may be permitted to discover evidence that would be inadmissible at trial, if it would lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Allstate; Amente. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(1) delineates the proper scope of discovery: + +In General. Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the subject matter of the pending action, whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or the claim or defense of any other party, including the existence, description, Page 3 + +nature custody, condition, and location of any documents, or other tangible things and ei entity and location of persons:havinglcnowledge of any discoverable matter. It. is not ground for objection that the information sought will be inadmissible at the trial if the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +Nonetheless, the discovery of certain kinds of information may cause material injury:of an irreparable nature. This Includes the "cat-out-of-the-bag" material that could be used to injure another person or party outside the context of the litigation, material protected by privilege, trade secrets or work product Discovery was never intended to be used as atactical tool to harass, embarrass or annoy ones adversary. Rather, pretrial discovery was implemented to simplify the issues in a case, to eliminate the elements of surprise, to encourage the settlement of cases, to avoid the cost of litigation, and to achieve abalanced search for the tin h to ensure afair trial. filkint v. Syken, 672 So.2d 517 (Pla.1996). + +• Here the petitioners argue that the information sought to be discovered regarding prostitution and their sexual activities was propounded solely to embarrass them and to invade their right to privacy. The petitioners also claim that this information is privileged under section 796.09 and is not calculated to lead to evidence which would be admissible at trial. + +Section 796.09 provides a person with acivil cause of action for compensatory and punitive damages against anyone who coerces that person into prostitution, who coerces that person to remain in prostitution, or who uses coercion to collect or receive any part of that person's earnings derived from prostitution. In the course of litigation under this section, any transaction about which a plaintiff testifies or produces evidence does not subject the plaintiff to criminal prosecution or to any penalty or forfeiture. In addition, any testimony or evidence or any information produced by the plaintiff or wit- + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 4 + +ness for the plaintiffs cannot be used against the plaintiffs or witness in any other investigation or proceeding, except one for perjury. + +Section 796.09(5) specifically provides that it is *not* a defense that the plaintiff was paid or otherwise compensated for prostitution, that the plaintiff had engaged in prostitution prior to any involvement with the defendant or that the plaintiff made no attempt to escape from the defendant. Section 796.09(6) provides that convictions for prostitution or prostitution-related offenses are *inadmissible* for the purpose of attacking the plaintiffs' credibility. + +This legislation was the result of the Florida Supreme Court Gender Bias Study Commission, which conducted an extensive investigation of prostitution in this state. The Commission's activities included interviews with law enforcement and corrections personnel, \*1079 judges, public defenders, prosecutors, drug rehabilitation counselors, social workers, medical personnel, prostitutes, clients and pimps. The Commission found prostitution to be prevalent and uniform throughout the state and law enforcement largely unable to deter it under prevailing social attitudes and judicial practices. The Commission further found that prostitutes are often victims of economic, physical, and psychological coercion, that most persons do not choose to become prostitutes, but do so to survive, and that ninety percent of street prostitutes, both adult and children, are controlled by pimps who use a variety of coercive methods to maintain this control. The Commission determined that clients and pimps are rarely prosecuted and, when prosecuted, receive light sentences; whereas prostitutes, who are mainly females, are frequently prosecuted and receive harsher treatment in the courts. The Commission recommended changes in the methods of intervention in prostitution from punitive to therapeutic, changes in the law to require more equal treatment by the courts of the prostitute in relation to the client and the pimp and to lessen the incentive to traffic in human flesh by giving the prostitute access to the judicial system without first having to be + +arrested. + +Under section 796.09, the petitioners' prior involvement in prostitution and their earnings from prostitution would be irrelevant. Hence discovery should not be permitted because such information would not be admissible at trial nor would it be reasonably calculated to lead to evidence ultimately admissible at trial. Even though the scope of discovery is generally quite broad, section 796.09 is designed to encourage prostitutes to sue their pimps. Thus the usually broad scope of discovery may be constricted so that prostitutes will not be embarrassed, harassed or hindered in their actions. + +[3] Had the petitioners brought their lawsuit against Ruzzo and The Boardroom *only* under section 796.09, evidence of petitioners' past prostitution, including with the Boardroom, and their earnings relating to such activities, may not have been discoverable. However, the petitioners filed a multi-count complaint for compensatory and punitive damages, alleging numerous causes of action against the respondents. These other causes carry no such protection from discovery. Since the information sought by discovery may be relevant or may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in one or more of these *other* causes of action or to determination of damages, we cannot conclude that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law in granting this discovery. *See* [REDACTED] v. *TIB Bank of the Keys*, 687 So.2d 895 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (by alleging fraud as well as breach of contract, purchaser placed at issue her reliance on venders' assertions, the veracity of financial documents she submitted to the vender, and the state of her mental health, including memory problems she was experiencing at the time of the alleged tortious conduct, thus deposition questions concerning her state of mind were relevant). + +Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. + +THOMPSON, J., concurs. +HARRIS, J., concurs specially with opinion.HARRIS, Judge, concurring specially: + +© 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. + +703 So.2d 1076 + +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 + +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 5 + +There is a temptation in cases such as this to inquire which, the pot or the kettle, is imbued with the darker hue. Indeed that may ultimately be the question uppermost in the jurors' minds. But the issue presently before us is simply whether the pot, in order to establish the parties' comparative complexion, may discover the historical condition and the inherent characteristics of the kettle. + +any part of that person's earnings derived from prostitution. + +The employees resist discovery of their past prostitution or their past or present earning experience on the basis of subparagraph 5 of section 796.09: + +(5) It does not constitute a defense to a complaint under this section that: + +- a) The plaintiff was paid or otherwise compensated for acts of prostitution; +- b) The plaintiff engaged in acts of prostitution prior to any involvement with the defendant ... + +We are here involved with parties that the limited record before us indicates were co-conspirators in a joint effort to violate Florida's laws against prostitution. The defendants are the owner/operators of a "social club" whose primary service is prostitution; the plaintiffs are employees of the club who provide such services. The employees are suing the owner/operators for, among other counts, taking advantage of their vulnerabilities ("coercing" them to be prostitutes) through manipulation and exploitation. In order to prepare a defense to the action, defendants have filed certain interrogatories for the employees to answer. These interrogatories\*1080 request such information as how long the employees have been engaged in prostitution; how the employees have been affected by the defendants' conduct; copies of photographs, movies, and videotapes in which the employees have performed sexual acts or simulated sexual acts; the names of previous employers and previous rates of pay; and a statement of income received from defendants. These interrogatories survived the employees' objections. I agree certiorari should be denied. + +The employees' primary cause of action is based on section 796.09(1), Florida Statutes, which provides: + +- (1) A person has a cause of action for compensatory and punitive damages against: + - (a) A person who coerces that person into prostitution; + - (b) A person who coerces that person to remain in prostitution, or + - (c) A person who uses coercion to collect or receive + +But the question before us is not whether prior acts of prostitution (or the receipts of earnings therefrom) which might be revealed by answering the interrogatories could be used as a defense to the complaint, but rather whether evidence of such conduct or such earnings would be relevant in determining whether the employees were, in fact, "coerced" into prostitution, into remaining prostitutes, or into sharing the proceeds of their services with defendants. The relevancy of this information depends, of course, on what constitutes coercion. + +If we apply the definition of "coercion" which is commonly accepted, then the relevancy of the requested information is apparent and this appeal has no merit at all. Webster defines "coercion" as: (1) to restrain or dominate by force, (2) to compel an act or choice, or (3) to enforce or bring about by force or threat. In sexual battery cases, the legislature has adopted the common meaning of the word "coercion" and has even placed limits on it. It has provided that consent will not be recognized if submission is coerced by threats of force or violence if the victim reasonably believes the perpetrator has the present ability to execute the threat.[n] Consent also will not be recognized if submission is coerced by a threat of retaliation against the victim or another if the victim reasonably believes that the perpetrator has the ability to execute the threat in the future.[n] And in sexual battery cases, the legislature has vitiated what might otherwise be con- + +703 So.2d 1076 703So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 (ale as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +sIdered as consensual if one exploits a known phys-Ltd Vl IMAM WCYLIWS of the victim to achieve his or her goal or takes advantage of one who is physically helpless or involuntarily intoxicated.no Therefore, even in sexual battery cases, before coercion or exploitation will vitiate consent, the free will of the victim must be overcome by force or threat or some unfortunate circumstance suffered by the victim. + +> FN1. Section 794.011(4)(b), Florida Statutes. + +> P142. Section 794.011(4Xc), Florida Statutes. + +PN3. Section 794.011(4)(a),(d),(c), and (f), Florida Statutes. + +But then we get to the definition of "coercion" contained in section 796.09(3): + +;3) As used In this section, the term "coercion" means any practice of dominion, restraint, or inducement for the purpose of or with the reasonably foreseeable effect of causing another person to engage in or remain in prostitution or to relinquish earnings derived from prostitution, and includes, but is not limited to: + +.r,a) Physical force or throats of physical force. + +.b) r Physical or mental torture. + +Is) Kidnapping. + +"1081 (d) Blackmail. + +'AExtortion or claims of indebtedness. + +v,f) Threats of legal complaint or report of delinquency. + +',g) Threat to interfere with parental rights or responsibilities, whether by judicial or administrative action or otherwise. + +31) Promise of legal benefit + +'1) Promise of greater financial rewards. + +Page 6 + +ej) Promise of marriage. + +1,1c) Restraint of Speech or communications with others. + +) Exploitation of acondition of developmental disability, cognitive limitation, affective disorder, or substance dependency. + +:m) Exploitation of victimization by sexual abuse. + +:n) Exploitation of pornographic performance. + +',o) Exploitation of human needs for food, shelter, safety, or affection. + +The definition urged by the employees herein is the "promise of a greater financial reward." Whether the requested information is relevant to the issue of coercion in this case will depend on what the legislature intended by subsection (I) in the meaning of "coercion." + +Iagree with fudge Altenbernd's thoughtful analysis in State v. Brigham, 694 So.2d 793 (1997): + +There can be no dispute that the legislature's unusual definition of "percent" is not a: common dictionary definition. This Is perhaps an appropriate case in which to remind ourselves of Learned Hands famous observation that a"mature and developed Jurisprudence" does not "make afortress out of the dictionary." + +But even so, one would expect some nexus between the commonly accepted meaning of aword and the definition of that word ascribed by the legislature. If, for example, the legislature defined "canine" as Including cats, although one might, jurisprudentially speaking, expect to hear ameow emanate from aGreat Dane, the courts should nevertheless closely examine the legislative history to see if that Is really what the legislature intended. The court in Young v. O'Keefe, 246 Iowa 1182, 69 N.W.2d 534, 537(1955), stated this principle as: follows: "But + +(0 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. + +703 So.2d 1076 703So.2d 1076, 22 Pla. L Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 (Cite es: 703 Sold 1076) + +before a definition is construed so as to expand the onym ..., the intention of the le 'stature to that effect must be clear." As Judge observed in Carron v. Roger Bohn, D.C., . So.2d 814, 818 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991): + +it is our primary duty to give effect to legislative intent and, if a literal interpretation of a statute leads to unreasonable results, then we should exercise our power to interpret reason and logic to it. + +Unfortunately, it is apparent that in enacting this legislation, the legislature has, without redefining the terms for the purposes of this legislation, often used terms with commonly accepted meanings for purposes at great variance from those commonly accepted meanings. + +In our case, the legislature did define the term for the purpose of the act. But because the term (coercion) as so defined can be interpreted two ways-one consistent with the commonly accepted meaning and one at variance-we should not accept the "antonym" unless such legislative intent is clear. A free will decision, even if based on ahope of financial gain, is the opposite of a coerced decision. + +The employees urge that the mere promise of a greater reward brings them within the act. But if the mere promise of a greater reward is sufficient to establish coercion, then anyone who makes a voluntary and reasoned exercise of free will motivated by the hope of economic gain has been coerced. This definition removes the element of compulsion implicit in the commonly accepted meaning of coercion and substitutes therefor the mere desire for financial gain. The employees herein assert that since they were offered "a greater financial reward" for providing the services performed by them through defendants' establishment, they were coerced into their prostitution activities. This equates the giving Page 7 + +of an opportunity to make a decision with the coermean \*1082 that the promise of 'a greater reward is coercion only If such promised reward is sufficient to overcome ones natural revulsion to selling one's body for money. If there is no such revulsion, there can be no coercion. Becoming a prostitute only because one likes the hours and wages or "because it beats the heck out of working for a living" simply should not meet the test of section 796.09(1). + +At oral argument herein, it was suggested without contradiction, that at least one of the employees has acollege degree and gave up a well-paying, legitimate job in order to engage in this profession for the greater reward. Section 796.09 does not appear to be a general prostitute's relief act. It is based on a report by the Gender Bias Study Commission which recommended the equalization of treatment in rein" tion to the prostitute, the client and the "pimp." It is based on the premise that prostitutes are generally victims of economic, physical, and psychological coercion and choose prostitution in order to survive. Further, the Commission was concerned that 90percent of the street prostitutes are controlled by "pimps" who use avariety of coercive methods to maintain control. It seems clear that the legislature was not intending to depart from the precepts of the commonly understood meaning of "coercion" and to redefine it to include both free will decisions and compelled decisions.. The interpretation urged by the employees seems at variance with the stated goal of the legislature and the Gender Bias Commission. + +Since there is no cause of action provided for ono who makes a reasoned and voluntary exercise of their free will to enter or continue in the profession solely for financial rewards (assuming "coercion" is given the definition more consistent with its commonly accepted meaning and assuming that my interpretation of legislative intent is coirect), coercion becomes the critical issue in the trial of such action. The interrogatories propounded by defendants appear relevant to the issue of coercion. + +0 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Goy. Works. + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 8 + +This is a case of first impression based on a relatively new statute. As indicated, the legislative history of the new law suggests that the statute is designed to assist those who were forced to enter prostitution in order to keep a roof over their heads or food on their table. It does not appear to be intended to aid those who voluntarily enter the profession in order to drive a Mercedes instead of a ██████. The limited record before us indicates that even beginning employees of the defendants (those who do not have an established clientele) bring in \$700 a day and can keep 50% of their earnings. Based on a five-day work week, this would reflect an income of \$87,500 a year even with a two week vacation. And the employees herein are not beginners. + +There is no indication that the legislature intended to legalize prostitution or to make it a respectable profession. It merely intended to place the prostitute on the same footing with the client and the "pimp." If a prostitute voluntarily makes the decision to participate, free from force, intimidation, or disadvantageous circumstance, then he or she is on the same footing as the other participants and should be treated the same. + +Although it might well serve a legitimate public purpose to permit the cannibalistic demise of such enterprises (and I am not unsympathetic with this view), that does not appear to be the policy behind the current statute. Therefore, in cases where coercion is not present (and this may or may not be one), the court should continue its tradition of not interceding in civil conflicts involving transactions that are either illegal or are against public policy. *See Wechsler v. Novak*, 157 Fla. 703, 26 So.2d 884 (1946); *v. Ratiner*, 462 So.2d 1157, 1160 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), rev. denied, 472 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 1985) ("An action may lie for interference with an unenforceable contract and even perhaps a voidable contract. No such cause of action lies for interference with a contract void as against public policy [another's representation of a client obtained by a doctor/lawyer's illegal personal injury solicitation + +in the hospital] and which makes one who is a party thereto, as the appellant in the instant case, guilty of a criminal act for entering into such an agreement.") + +We are not asked in this proceeding to rule on the admissibility of the discovered information as evidence at the trial of this cause. We are to determine only if the information might lead to admissible evidence. Even \*1083 though we deny the Writ I suggest we certify the following question: + +DOES ONE, FREE FROM FORCE, INTIMIDATION, OR DISADVANTAGEOUS CIRCUMSTANCE, WHO MAKES A REASONED DECISION TO BECOME OR REMAIN A PROSTITUTE OR TO SHARE THE PROCEEDS THEREOF BECAUSE OF A PROMISE OF A GREATER FINANCIAL REWARD HAVE A CAUSE OF ACTION UNDER SECTION 796.09(1), FLORIDA STATUTES? + +*ON MOTIONS FOR REHEARING, FOR CLARIFICATION, FOR CERTIFICATION, AND FOR REHEARING EN BANC* + +W. SHARP, Judge. +Petitioners Balas and Shumate have filed motions for rehearing, clarification and certification. We deny the motions in full except for one regard. We delete the sentence in the last full paragraph of the opinion which reads: "These other causes of action carry no such protection from discovery." + +Motion for Clarification GRANTED as stated above; Motion for Rehearing and Certification DENIED. + +HARRIS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. +Fla.App. 5 Dist., 1997. +Balas v. Ruzzo +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 + +END OF DOCUMENT + +© 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM °EACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +A.C., + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129XXXXMB Al + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +E. EPSTEIN, and all + +Defendants. + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO PLAINTIFF AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANTS EXPENSES; INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion To Compel Responses To First Request To Produce To Plaintiff And To Overrule Plaintiffs Objections, & For Defendant's Expenses, Including Attorneys' Fees and the Court having heard argument of counsel and being fully advised in these premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion is hereby granted/ dented a", 4 174 .18) tdont)...aa€ ) . a.2 ±.0 4 22 a...a-) OvradoLef . Tesen4.0." 4 + +DONE AND ORDERED at Palm,Beach Cou C urthouse, West Palm Beach, Florida, this Z,5 day of 1-03 0 + +> Edward A. Garrison Circuit Judge + +Copies furnished: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ., and MICHAEL J. PIKE, FL 33401; JACK SCAROtA, ESQ., AND JACK P. Shipley, PA. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., GOLDBERGER, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 15\*dB Flagler Drive, Stine 400, Weal Palm Beath, ESQ., Seamy Denney Scarola Bamhart & tPalm Beach, FL 33409, and JACK A. P.A., One Clearlake Centre, Salle 1400, 250 A? if + +EXHIBIT (-% + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH +JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM +BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +A.C., + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129XXXXMB AI + +Plaintiff; + +v. + +JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, and [REDACTED], + +Defendants. + +ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO +INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR +DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion To +Compel Answers To Interrogatories And To Overrule Plaintiff's Objections, & For +Defendant's Expenses, Including Attorneys' Fees, and the Court having heard +argument of counsel and being fully advised in these premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion is hereby granted/ + +~~denied~~ as to #5, 12 #18 ; denied as +to #2. Response to be severe w/in +10 days. + +DONE AND ORDERED at Palm Beach County Courthouse, West Palm +Beach, Florida, this 73 day of 200 2009 + +![]()Copies furnished: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ., and MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ., 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, +FL 33401; JACK SCAROLA, ESQ., AND JACK P. [REDACTED], ESQ., Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A., 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., West Palm Beach, FL 33409, and JACK A. +GOLDBERGER, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A., One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 +Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +CC: JEN6, DE +CB: file being +in [REDACTED] for +2d of 10 +3/06 + +# IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 50 200SCA020614XXXXMB AF + +JANE DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and + +Defendants. + +COPY + +COURT REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS HAD BEFORE THE HONORABLE DIANA + +DATE: March 3, 2009 + +PLACE: Palm Beach County Courthouse 205 N. Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +> U.S. Legal. Support (561) 835-0220 EXHIBIT + +.// + +24' + +## APPEARANCES: + +IIIIIIILAW FIRM, P.A. Datura Avenue Suite 900 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Counsel for Plaintiff BY: ISIDRO M. all ESQUIRE + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN N. Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Counsel for Defendant BY: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE + +that but I'd just like to do that. + +THE COURT: Right. And if you want to •-•..013,•GLYA.. LJAG 1•41.41V-LUCC46a0 1,.04 I'm the one that's questioning whether or not these need to be before one judge. You may have adifferent perspective than your colleagues who are prosecuting some of the cases. + +Iunderstand the damages. I'm not saying consolidate. I'm saying transfer. it's not aconsolidation issue. Everybody gets that confused for some reason. The words are very different out of my mouth, your mouth and how they're written. + +So let me go ahead and take a gander at this. I did read it last night. I'm not sure that we need to get -- we need names? + +MR. CRITTON: Right. Well, here's what some of the issues are is that, as an example -- if I could approach the bench. + +THE COURT: Sure. + +MR. CRITTON: This is some of the information that we've obtained through discovery from some of the -- from at least in this instance, it would be this particular Jane Doe. + +THE COURT: You know who Jane Doe is I take + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +it? + +MR. CRITTON: Right. + +InG lAAJfll; LUIS hIlVW W13) WIC U011 + +MR. CRITTON: Yes, correct. And so this particular lady has kept in part a diary and she -- which appears to have started some time - this is not in any way significant -- but some time after she learned that she could file a lawsuit. I think she's also been to Oakwood Center some time after she learned she could file alawsuit and seek damages from Mr. Epstein. + +There's no history of this lady + +beforehand other than. in some of the Oakwood + +records where she, was -Baker Acted, she started + +• + +drinking beerat.16, she started Xanax at 16, + +started marijuIna at 15, that she's sexually + +active: + +So how she has interacted -- she has a claim. for emotional damages, mental pain and anguish, psychiatric-type damages. How she's interacted with friends, with family, the events in her life, school, work, her interpersonal relationships both with men and let's -- we'll use an'example men here, but other individuals. She's saying that this event with Mr. Epstein, + +1 this sexual assault and whatever occurred during +2 these events is that -- has caused her damage. + +3 And therefore damages in the case such + +4 as the emotional, mental, psychiatric-type +5 damages are completely subjective, I mean +6 separate and apart from any medical bills that +7 may be -- which are clearly intangible. So these +8 are intangible damages. And the jury is +9 instructed, you know, you advise the greater +10 weight of the evidence, what's fair and +11 reasonable under the circumstances. + +12 So what we would have is basically this +13 young lady's testimony as to what she claims her +14 damages are and what the circumstances are with +15 her situation with Mr. Epstein. She claims on +16 page 13, you know, I love this guy, I'm dating +17 this guy Chris. On page 15 -- + +18 THE COURT: Is this part of a diary for +19 treatment? + +20 MR. CRITTON: I have no idea what it is. It +21 was just produced in response to discovery. And +22 she apparently started in, I think this is +23 December of '08. You know I took Jay Lyntenis' +24 girl to the zoo, had an amazing day, I love her, +25 i.e., the girl. We have so much fun. I want a + +Case 9:08-cv 80811-KAM Document 54-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/02/2009 Page 6 of 14 + +14 + +1 2 4 baby especially with him. Okay. So I know who this person is. We are all so open together, AWV £SSZLt CAW-4 VgAy afl..4 EMMA, Wflt24 VW 1 44.1 WyLIt Chris, who is another guy in her life. + +5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 13 All right. This is circumstances where this young lady is saying, look, Jeffrey Epstein has ruined my life from a damage standpoint, okay. Let me depose other individuals with whom you've had arelationship. And what if it turns out -- as with some of these girls did -- is they had relationships or had escapades or circumstances with individuals, older men similar to Mr. Epstein well before Mr. Epstein. + +14 15 16 17 18 19 And this girl, I don't know one way or the other, but let's assume she had asituation where she was assaulted or molested or raped, ' that all is going to affect her emotional and her mental pain and anguish and it will all factor into evaluating damages. + +20 21 22 23 24 25 You know, it's not something that I'm going to spread around. b'm happy to keep it, you know, within the confines of the discovery of this case. But if she says every other relationship in my life has been perfect but Jeff Epstein has done this to me and it has affected + +my ability to trust men and my sexual relationships with other men, which is part of her interpersonal relationships, uAay, let to ME + +24 + +25 + +THE COURT: When does your client allege that she had her first encounter with Mr. Epstein? + +MR. WM At what age? + +THE COURT: Well, what year? + +MR. CRITTON: June of '03. + +MR. UM June of '03, Judge. + +'MR. CRITTON: She claims from June of '03 through November of '04. + +MR. : She was i believe 16 at the beginning and ended at 17. She was aminor during all this time. + +THE COURT: June of '03 to now is six years. + +Let me hear from Mr. + +MR. Judge, in the criminal case that was filed against Mr. Epstein, he would not have had a right to do this type of discovery and I-- if I could hand up -- + +THE COURT: They wouldn't care about the women. + +MR. : Right. Well, I mean -- + +2 THE COURT: This is damages. There's no they weren't seeking damages at the time. + +4 5 6 7 MR. nstgaL. nnu we nave not.a4seyeu in the complaint or in the answers to interrogatories that her ability to have a relationship with aman has been affected by Mr. Epstein's conduct. + +8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 We have alleged that she has been hospitalized for depression, anxiety but we have not alleged any damages concerning -- the, only reason this would be relevant is if we were making aclaim at her ability to have either sexual relations or to have emotional relations with men was effected by her experience with Mr. Epstein. + +16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 So this damages' claim is just asmoke screen to attempt to get evidence to show the jury that this woman has had other consensual relationships with young men that are approximately her age what I would characterize as a slut defense. She had it coming to her because she engaged in other voluntarily consensual -- + +24 25 THE COURT: Mr. Critton wouldn't try the slut defense in my courtroom, I'm sure. + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +\$ + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +MR. IIIIII : Maybe not, but certainly that's the way this discovery is going. And, Judge, + +what -- + +THE COURT: What are the damages you think your client is seeking? + +MR. : She is seeking emotional distress damages for depression and anxiety and she has been hospitalized at the Oakwood Center. Her friend -- she was on the phone to afriend who called the sheriff's office because she thought she was suicidal. The sheriffs responded. They Baker Acted her that day and they took her eventually to the Oakwood Center. + +THE COURT: How do we know it's not intertwined with her rejection by three other men since Mr. Epstein? + +MR. : Well, even if it was related to her rejection by three other men you mean other men's rejection of her? + +THE COURT: Yeah. Well, how do you not know that? I mean you'can't do it until you do discovery. Has anybody attempted to review the records from Oakwood to find out what's going on? + +MR. CRITTON: It's like aone-time visit when she was Baker Acted and then there's some + +other -- + +THE COURT: She didn't receive treatment? + +Mn nnymmewt. CIL ..... - + +that day and she's been back a couple of times. She's on medication. Again, I don't know what or the extent but she's got -- her medical bills are de minimis. + +Again as an example, Judge, did the Court have an opportunity to look at the case that I also attached to the motion? Because there's a case that's almost on all fours with this which I attached to our motion which is called Balles versus Russo. + +THE COURT: Right. + +MR. CRITTON: It was a case where the plaintiff was sued -- the plaintiff sued the former owners of a house of prostitution. So that part is different, but within it there were anumber of claims including asexual assault claim and they sought emotional pain, humiliation and emotional distress. + +Within the complaint that was filed in this particular case, she is seeking severe emotional distress, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, past and future, compensatory + +1 + +2 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +9 + +10 + +7.1 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +27. + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +humiliation, loss of reputation, mental anguish, pain and suffering, the same type of damages. + +nn4 fln4, ..... 4q}14 + +THE COURT: How old is she now? + +MR. She's 21 now. + +MR. CRITTON: She's 21 now. What the Court said is, you know, if you'd only brought this claim under 796 evidence of past issues, it's not an issue. You can't use this defense for anything, but because you brought these other claims which include, you know, sexual assault and you're seeking damages for other causes of action since the information sought by discovery may be relevant or may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in one or more of the other causes of action or determination of damages, we cannot conclude the trial court parted from essential requirements of law in granting -- + +THE COURT: So in other words, she's'not only seeking -- she's seeking current emotional damage as aresult of this relationship and you're trying to find out if she had prior relationships. that perhaps could be intertwined with it so that it's not just Mr. Epstein's -- + +MR. CRITTON: Right. A perfect example is + +1 2 4 5 6 one of the cases that I have is there's a' young lady who claims that she was molested in the past • oi 4 °nu saycm, F.t.c'Ly 0Syll1111.:0116 Sa\*UC3f WC4S Ill advance of her even meeting with Mr. Epstein. And they seem to play a large role in her psychiatric and psychological evaluation. + +7 8 9 10 11 12 13 We're going to come to the Court in this case as we have others and ask for a psychological evaluation of this lady, and if she was raped or if she was molested or just she had a bad experience or some -- whether it was a young or old man assaulted her in some fashion, that may play a role in her damages and what -- + +14 15 16 17 18 THE COURT: What I'm going to allow for discovery purposes only not necessarily getting it in at the time trial are two years before her first encounter with Mr. Epstein and anything subsequent. + +19 20 21 22 23 MR. : Judge, I just wanted tot say on the record because I forgot to mention it, there's also -- I did state an objection to the identity of people that are unrepresented in this courtroom. They have rights too. So what i -- + +24 25 THE COURT: Well, my suggestion is that you send those people a letter and tell them that + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +you're going to disclose them and if they have a problem with it that they come to see me before you usscsose + +So I'm going to give you 20 days to respond to this rather than the usual five and that will give you time to put these people on notice and if they want to come visit with me and have a John Doe, I'll have a John Doe hearing but, you know, this is her case. She's doing it. She's the one seeking damages, and he is entitled to be able to confront other individuals to find out information that may be relevant to the damages she's seeking or she can drop the damages. That's her choice. If you seek. damages, you've got to do it -- if you could put that in an order so that we have a time for him to do this. + +Just fill out an order, hand it back up to me and I'll deal with it. + +(The proceedings were concluded.) + +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH. + +I, Teresa Bell, Court Reporter, certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings and that the transcript is a true and complete record of my stenographic notes. + +I further certify that the proceedings were taken at the time and place shown herein and that all counsel and persons as hereinabove shown were present + +I further certify that I am not a relative, employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor am I a relative or employee of any of the parties' attorney or counsel connected with the action, nor am I financially interested in the a tion. + +Dated this 11th day + +TERESK BELL, Court Reporter + +# Kikka M. Claudio + +From: cmecfautosender@flsd.uscourts.gov Sent: April 02, 20091:54 PM To: flsd\_cmecf notice@flsd.uscourts.gov Subject: Activity in Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM C.M.A. v. Epstein et al Motion to Compel + +This is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system. Please DO NOT RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended. + +\*\*\*NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS\*\*\* Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not apply. + +U.S. District Court + +Southern District of Florida + +# Notice of Electronic Filing + +The following transaction was entered by Critton, Robert on 4/2/2009 at 1:53 PM EDT and filed on 4/2/2009 + +Case Name: C.M.A. v. Epstein et al + +Case Number: 9:08-cv-80\$11 + +Filer: Jeffrey Epstein + +Document Number: 54 + +# Docket Text: + +Defendant's MOTION to Compel Response to 1st RTP and 1st Interrogs by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 4/20/2009 (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D)(Critton, Robert) + +9:08-cv-80811 Notice has been electronically mailed to: + +Bruce Reinhart ecf®brucereinhartlaw.com + +Guy Alan- + +Jack Alan Goldberger iaueso@bellsouth.net, nalanis®agwoa.com + +Jack ivh@,searcvlaw.com, clw@searcvlaw.com, kmclasearcvlaw,com, s.slater@searcvlaw.corn sas@,searcvlaw.corn, vat@searcvlaw.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bc1claw.com + +Michael - Tein tein@lewistein.com, jcmeyers@levvistein.cont, mcapote@lewistein.com + +Robert Deweese Critton , Jr Tcritabc1claw.com, bobbie@bciclaw.com + +9:08-cv-80811 Notice bas not been delivered electronically to those listed below and will be provided by other means. For further assistance, please contact our Help Desk at 1-888-318-2260.: + +The following document(s) are associated with this transaction: + +Document description:Main Document + +Original filename:n/a + +Electronic document Stamp: + +[STAMP dcecfStamp\_ED=1105629215 [Date=4/2/2009] [FileNumber=6195964-0] + +[49f0c2d75486f6d6a6101a08c395b2c7992778ee9920e8793e30a05701c38a82a7ccl + +0c0764948284cbee2a315cedf37038a790bd53308696a153=35dd4a2eb]] + +Document description:Exhibit A + +Original filename:n/a + +Electronic document Stamp: + +[STAMP dcecfStamp\_ID=1105629215 [Date=4/2/2009] [FileNumber=6195964-1] + +[5442dd228c17016a18a93a482a085529427a84c328a0e54754cdf751967853bb92be + +ecb01757337952095593597ccfc9a41571176b352bb55db83a21a343d276]) + +Document description:Exhibit B + +Original filename:n/a + +Electronic document Stamp: + +[STAMP dcecfEtampiD=1105629215 [Date=4/2/2009] [FileNumber=6195964-2] + +[25cedd880cca3d8978be178b71fldefe7a045549a477d2d9547e32020ef01488969e + +bad8c2e920f70317c10d9120ceca0890948393f1d74268del8e9f188192d]] + +Document description:Exhibit C + +Original filename:n/a + +Electronic document Stamp: + +[STAMP dcecfStamp\_ID=1105629215 [Date=4/2/2009] [FileNumber=6195964-3] + +[378 92711fafeel0f7c7b9b1c0cadl0ac25fillcfa940376210a3a511f5b8fc66e25 + +7a72e8a82acif8d04c63aa2721bce8e1445577efdde123db7e50acecc99aJ] + +Document description:Exhibit D + +Original filename:n/a + +Electronic document Stamp: + +[STAMP dcecfStamp\_ID=1105629215 [Date=4/2/2009] [FileNumber=6195964-4] + +[30891fd9cd081f85da5c8b8446571f54389e681aa2a5lbf899667fcfbea8f86fccf8 + +b5cc59c87a711c75abbeaaf0e49106318132669f8731cecdd18b8714e895]] \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745239/EFTA02745239.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745239/EFTA02745239.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3c4498b3f80b3b9b1cb4fc28254053d88f9cd610 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745239/EFTA02745239.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,2844 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745239.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 46, + "chars": 86417, + "elapsed_seconds": 89.92, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSMITHFRN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 136.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 388.1668395996094, + 136.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 388.1668395996094, + 160.38 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 160.38 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Motion To Compel Responses to Production Requests Nos. 1, 2, 4.5. and 19, \nand Answers to Interrogatories Nos. 2, 18. and 23.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 112.608, + 212.22000000000003 + ], + [ + 478.92926025390625, + 212.22000000000003 + ], + [ + 478.92926025390625, + 238.8629150390625 + ], + [ + 112.608, + 238.8629150390625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 233.17200000000003, + 247.86 + ], + [ + 356.79599999999994, + 247.86 + ], + [ + 356.79599999999994, + 261.40765380859375 + ], + [ + 233.17200000000003, + 261.40765380859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 85.06800000000001, + 321.57000000000005 + ], + [ + 145.36207580566406, + 321.57000000000005 + ], + [ + 145.36207580566406, + 336.6173400878906 + ], + [ + 85.06800000000001, + 336.6173400878906 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 171.972, + 380.7 + ], + [ + 425.4573059082031, + 380.7 + ], + [ + 425.4573059082031, + 396.60748291015625 + ], + [ + 171.972, + 396.60748291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No. 2", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 238.06800000000004, + 459.2699999999999 + ], + [ + 365.0497741699219, + 459.2699999999999 + ], + [ + 365.0497741699219, + 475.08392333984375 + ], + [ + 238.06800000000004, + 475.08392333984375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 89.964, + 557.28 + ], + [ + 148.31785583496094, + 557.28 + ], + [ + 148.31785583496094, + 571.9400787353516 + ], + [ + 89.964, + 571.9400787353516 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "1..egal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 177.48, + 599.4000000000001 + ], + [ + 432.5745544433594, + 599.4000000000001 + ], + [ + 432.5745544433594, + 618.5091552734375 + ], + [ + 177.48, + 618.5091552734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No. 4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 238.68, + 461.69999999999993 + ], + [ + 363.8017883300781, + 461.69999999999993 + ], + [ + 363.8017883300781, + 475.13134765625 + ], + [ + 238.68, + 475.13134765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.74, + 535.41 + ], + [ + 150.08494567871094, + 535.41 + ], + [ + 150.08494567871094, + 549.8470001220703 + ], + [ + 88.74, + 549.8470001220703 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 176.868, + 594.54 + ], + [ + 430.6019592285156, + 594.54 + ], + [ + 430.6019592285156, + 609.9654388427734 + ], + [ + 176.868, + 609.9654388427734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "2) Disclosure of Expert Testimony.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 103.428, + 142.56 + ], + [ + 269.306396484375, + 142.56 + ], + [ + 269.306396484375, + 155.52 + ], + [ + 103.428, + 155.52 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(e) Supplementing Disclosures and Responses.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 581.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 338.2679443359375, + 581.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 338.2679443359375, + 595.3819580078125 + ], + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 595.3819580078125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No. 5", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 237.45600000000002, + 387.18 + ], + [ + 361.9956970214844, + 387.18 + ], + [ + 361.9956970214844, + 400.5101013183594 + ], + [ + 237.45600000000002, + 400.5101013183594 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.74, + 473.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 149.0924530029297, + 473.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 149.0924530029297, + 487.6006774902344 + ], + [ + 88.74, + 487.6006774902344 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 175.03199999999998, + 520.83 + ], + [ + 428.7219543457031, + 520.83 + ], + [ + 428.7219543457031, + 535.3429260253906 + ], + [ + 175.03199999999998, + 535.3429260253906 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Interrogatory No. Z", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.86, + 140.94 + ], + [ + 341.7328186035156, + 140.94 + ], + [ + 341.7328186035156, + 154.13104248046875 + ], + [ + 247.86, + 154.13104248046875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.456, + 239.76 + ], + [ + 132.61878967285156, + 239.76 + ], + [ + 132.61878967285156, + 251.91 + ], + [ + 84.456, + 251.91 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 170.74800000000002, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 424.6382751464844, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 424.6382751464844, + 313.7411804199219 + ], + [ + 170.74800000000002, + 313.7411804199219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Interrogatory No.18", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 190.35 + ], + [ + 348.076416015625, + 190.35 + ], + [ + 348.076416015625, + 205.49041748046875 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 205.49041748046875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 173.19599999999997, + 322.38 + ], + [ + 428.6768493652344, + 322.38 + ], + [ + 428.6768493652344, + 339.93865966796875 + ], + [ + 173.19599999999997, + 339.93865966796875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Inter ociatory No. 23", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 349.0506896972656, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 349.0506896972656, + 374.6935119628906 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 374.6935119628906 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 175.03199999999998, + 520.02 + ], + [ + 429.8432922363281, + 520.02 + ], + [ + 429.8432922363281, + 535.7131958007812 + ], + [ + 175.03199999999998, + 535.7131958007812 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.308, + 412.29 + ], + [ + 353.1663818359375, + 412.29 + ], + [ + 353.1663818359375, + 424.65191650390625 + ], + [ + 250.308, + 424.65191650390625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 265.608, + 583.2 + ], + [ + 376.7640075683594, + 583.2 + ], + [ + 376.7640075683594, + 595.6442108154297 + ], + [ + 265.608, + 595.6442108154297 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "School behavioral problems, received counseling prior to the ii rt.ideiit.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 113.83200000000001, + 153.09 + ], + [ + 480.58807373046875, + 153.09 + ], + [ + 480.58807373046875, + 172.00103759765625 + ], + [ + 113.83200000000001, + 172.00103759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 115.66799999999999, + 244.61999999999998 + ], + [ + 170.4210968017578, + 244.61999999999998 + ], + [ + 170.4210968017578, + 257.65826416015625 + ], + [ + 115.66799999999999, + 257.65826416015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 119.952, + 379.89 + ], + [ + 174.62832641601562, + 379.89 + ], + [ + 174.62832641601562, + 392.6356201171875 + ], + [ + 119.952, + 392.6356201171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.01200000000001, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 178.05630493164062, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 178.05630493164062, + 526.8732604980469 + ], + [ + 123.01200000000001, + 526.8732604980469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 113.22, + 217.89000000000004 + ], + [ + 168.32749938964844, + 217.89000000000004 + ], + [ + 168.32749938964844, + 230.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 113.22, + 230.03999999999996 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 116.892, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 172.2859344482422, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 172.2859344482422, + 438.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 116.892, + 438.21000000000004 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(3) Pretrial Procedure 307A 4;:=36.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 315.18, + 230.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 467.060302734375, + 230.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 467.060302734375, + 246.23065185546875 + ], + [ + 315.18, + 246.23065185546875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307A Pretrial Procedure", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 315.18, + 250.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 410.58758544921875, + 250.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 410.58758544921875, + 262.7232666015625 + ], + [ + 315.18, + 262.7232666015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 315.18, + 300.51 + ], + [ + 340.884, + 300.51 + ], + [ + 340.884, + 311.04 + ], + [ + 315.18, + 311.04 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DI Pretrial Procedure 307A (C=r31 *1076 RI chard E. nd Heather Fisher Lind-", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.86, + 432.54 + ], + [ + 517.3848266601562, + 432.54 + ], + [ + 517.3848266601562, + 446.336669921875 + ], + [ + 94.86, + 446.336669921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307A Pretrial Procedure", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.86, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 187.95718383789062, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 187.95718383789062, + 465.2082824707031 + ], + [ + 94.86, + 465.2082824707031 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 552.4200000000001 + ], + [ + 236.232, + 552.4200000000001 + ], + [ + 236.232, + 564.5699999999999 + ], + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 564.5699999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 573.48 + ], + [ + 187.88400000000001, + 573.48 + ], + [ + 187.88400000000001, + 584.8199999999999 + ], + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 584.8199999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 406.98, + 336.15 + ], + [ + 419.22, + 336.15 + ], + [ + 419.22, + 348.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 406.98, + 348.29999999999995 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 406.98, + 396.90000000000003 + ], + [ + 419.22, + 396.90000000000003 + ], + [ + 419.22, + 409.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 406.98, + 409.04999999999995 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 406.98, + 486.0 + ], + [ + 419.22, + 486.0 + ], + [ + 419.22, + 498.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 406.98, + 498.15000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IV.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 406.98, + 567.0 + ], + [ + 419.22, + 567.0 + ], + [ + 419.22, + 579.15 + ], + [ + 406.98, + 579.15 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ON MOTIONS FOR REHEARING, FOR CLARIFICATION, FOR CERTIFICATION, AND FOR REHEARING EN BANC", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 27, + "polygon": [ + [ + 316.404, + 356.4 + ], + [ + 511.02, + 356.4 + ], + [ + 511.02, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 316.404, + 389.61 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO \nFIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO PLAINTIFF AND TO OVERRULE \nPLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANTS EXPENSES; \nINCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 28, + "polygon": [ + [ + 114.44400000000002, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 477.3030700683594, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 477.3030700683594, + 345.87 + ], + [ + 114.44400000000002, + 345.87 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 29, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.16, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 475.524, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 475.524, + 337.77 + ], + [ + 110.16, + 337.77 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT \nIN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 178.704, + 118.25999999999999 + ], + [ + 483.9962463378906, + 118.25999999999999 + ], + [ + 483.9962463378906, + 156.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 178.704, + 156.32999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "APPEARANCES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 31, + "polygon": [ + [ + 130.968, + 144.99 + ], + [ + 233.26895141601562, + 144.99 + ], + [ + 233.26895141601562, + 157.14000000000001 + ], + [ + 130.968, + 157.14000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 43, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.74, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 396.576, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 396.576, + 124.74 + ], + [ + 241.74, + 124.74 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Kikka M. Claudio", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 44, + "polygon": [ + [ + 38.556, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 139.82437133789062, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 139.82437133789062, + 89.4405517578125 + ], + [ + 38.556, + 89.4405517578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Notice of Electronic Filing", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 44, + "polygon": [ + [ + 41.61600000000001, + 332.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 191.2869415283203, + 332.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 191.2869415283203, + 347.0705871582031 + ], + [ + 41.61600000000001, + 347.0705871582031 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Docket Text:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 44, + "polygon": [ + [ + 41.61600000000001, + 443.07 + ], + [ + 113.28488159179688, + 443.07 + ], + [ + 113.28488159179688, + 457.7005615234375 + ], + [ + 41.61600000000001, + 457.7005615234375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 255 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 309 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 316 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 481 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 325 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 327 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 433 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 301 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 342 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 403 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 347 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 317 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 367 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 429 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 397 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 340 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 318 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 251 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 388 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 298 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 611 + ], + [ + "Line", + 67 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 821 + ], + [ + "Line", + 93 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 646 + ], + [ + "Line", + 84 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 810 + ], + [ + "Line", + 90 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 315 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 117 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 145 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 296 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 298 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 38 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 297 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 320 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 263 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 285 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 38, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 299 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 39, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 277 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 40, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 302 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 41, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 118 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 42, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 103 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 43, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 44, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 96 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 45, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 170 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745239" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745239/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745239/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fe91f241973d6dd39080d9ccd04e15e44a1141e7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745239/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6486003649b2933609ff445fb1985807d7230a7446342ae1d1d74b0b3b98b83e +size 12081 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745285/EFTA02745285.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745285/EFTA02745285.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ccae21cfeeed23d818232ae79ff6716f81ba9100 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745285/EFTA02745285.md @@ -0,0 +1,209 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2 CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRN + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6 CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A. + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA/ + +DOE II CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRA/M= + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRAM= + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRAMME + +### PLAINTIFF, C.M.A.'S, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING TREATMENT RECORDS FROM PARENT-CHILD CENTER, INC, DR. SERGE THYS, DOMINIQUE HYPPOLITE/SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL, ST. MARY'S HOSPITAL, FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY AND GLORIA C. HAKKARAINEN, M.D. AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through her undersigned attorneys, hereby files her Motion For Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, and in support there of states as follows: + +1. This is an action to recover money damages against Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, for acts of sexual abuse and prostitution committed upon the thenminor, C.M.A. + +2. Plaintiff has plead thirty separate counts against EPSTEIN for separate incidences of abuse committed by EPSTEIN against Plaintiff pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255. 18 U.S.C. §2255, entitled "Civil remedy for personal injuries", creates a private right of action for minor children who were the victims of certain enumerated sex offenses. 18 U.S.C. §2255 also creates a statutory floor for the amount of damages a victim can recover for a violation of same. Plaintiff has also alleged a single count of Sexual Battery against EPSTEIN. + +3. There presently exists between the Plaintiff and EPSTEIN a disagreement as to whether the statutory damage floor established in 18 U.S.C. §2255 is recoverable for each commission of an enumerated sex offenses listed in 18 U.S.C. §2255, or whether the statutory damage floor can only be enforced once, regardless of how many times a defendant perpetrates an enumerated sex offense against a minor victim. + +4. This disagreement between the parties is properly the subject of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint For Failure to State a Cause of Action, and Motion For More Definite Statement; Motion to Strike, and Supporting Memorandum of Law (Attached hereto as Exhibit "A") which is currently pending before this Court. + +5. In the event that the Court rules that Plaintiff can recover the statutory damage floor established in 18 U.S.C. §2255 for each proven incident of abuse committed by EPSTEIN upon her, Plaintiff intends to rely exclusively on the statutory damages, rather than those damages which are available at common law. (See Plaintiff, C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255 attached hereto as Exhibit "B"). If however, the Court rules that the statutory floor applies only one time, regardless of the number of times EPSTEIN committed an enumerated sexual offense against her, Plaintiff will be pursuing all damages available to her at both common law and by statute. + +6. Given Plaintiffs intent to rely exclusively on the statutory damages available to her under 18 U.S.C. §2255 as outline above, Plaintiff will not be presenting any evidence of the extent of her physical, emotional, or pecuniary injuries, beyond evidence that she was the victim of sexual contact to which she was legally incapable of consenting by virtue of her age (including, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, and loss of the capacity to enjoy life). Accordingly, any testimony and/or discovery regarding those types of damages would not be relevant to any material issue pending in this case. + +7. Presently pending before the Court is Defendant EPSTEIN's Motion to Compel Plaintiff C.M.A. to Respond to Defendant's First Request to Produce and Answer Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories, and to Overrule Objections, and For an Award of Defendant's Reasonable Expenses (Attached hereto as Exhibit "C"). + +EPSTEIN is seeking from Plaintiff the production of certain treatment records of hers from the Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, a psychiatrist, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. + +8. None of the treatment records from the Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. will have any relevance whatsoever in the event that Plaintiff pursues only those statutory damages available to her under 18 U.S.C. §2255. To the contrary, the production of these confidential and private treatment records would only serve to further humiliate, embarrass, and victimize C.M.A. + +9. Furthermore, C.M.A.'s treatment records from the Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. are protected by the psychotherapist-patient privilege pursuant to the Supreme Court's decision in Jaffee v. Redmond, 518U.S. 1, 116 S.Ct. 1923 (1996)("All agree that a psychotherapist privilege covers confidential communications made to licensed psychiatrists and psychologists. We have no hesitation in concluding in this case that the federal privilege should also extend to confidential communications made to licensed social workers in the course of psychotherapy.") Ordinarily, a plaintiff does not place her mental condition in controversy merely by requesting damages for mental anguish or "garden variety" emotional distress. In order to place a party's mental + +condition in controversy the party must allege a specific mental or psychiatric disorder or intend to offer expert testimony to support their claim of emotional distress. Turner v Imperial Stores, 161 F.R.D. 89 (S.D.Cal. 1995). The evidence sought is also protected under the substantive privacy rights recognized in Florida Statute §§90.503 and 90.5035. + +10. Accordingly, Plaintiff respectfully moves for the entry of a protective order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 26(c) regarding Plaintiff's treatment records from the Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. More particularly, Plaintiff requests the entry of an order precluding the discovery of those records until such time as the Court rules on the issue regarding whether the statutory damage floor as contained in 18 U.S.C. §2255 applies to each proven commission of an enumerated sexual offense by EPSTEIN against CMA. Should the Court rule that 18 U.S.C. §2255 provides a per incident damage floor, the treatment records would have absolutely no relevance whatsoever. In the event that the Court rules that the damage floor applies only once, the parties can then further brief the Court as to whether C.M.A has placed her mental condition "in controversy" such that it operates as a waiver of the psychotherapist-patient privilege. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, C.M.A., respectfully requests that this Court enter a protective order preventing the discovery of Plaintiffs treatment records from the Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. until such time as the Court decides whether the statutory damages pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 are available to a victim of an enumerated sexual offense on a per incident basis. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1 + +Counsel for the movant conferred via telephone with counsel for the Defendant and counsel for the Defendant is not in agreement with Plaintiffs Motion For Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From the Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. and Incorporated Memorandum of Law. + +Is/ Jack P. + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 20th day of July, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of electronic filing to all counsel of record on the attached service list. + +Mack P + +Jack Scarola + +Florida Bar No.: 169440 + +Jack P. + +Florida I- No.: 0547808 + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +Phone: (561) 686-6300 + +Fax: (561) 383-9424 + +Attorneys for Plaintiff + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Phone: (561) 582-7600 + +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Robert Critton, Esquire + +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP + +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 + +Phone: (561) 842-2820 + +Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire + +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 South Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 202-6360 + +Fax: (561) 828-0983 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745285/EFTA02745285.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745285/EFTA02745285.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7f9b66f7142ac6eed9d48798f3711c2da31a3bbe --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745285/EFTA02745285.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,454 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745285.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 10543, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.23, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 407.5214538574219, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 407.5214538574219, + 102.16998291015625 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 102.16998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF, C.M.A.'S, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING \nTREATMENT RECORDS FROM PARENT-CHILD CENTER, INC, DR. SERGE THYS, \nDOMINIQUE HYPPOLITE/SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, GOOD \nSAMARITAN HOSPITAL, ST. MARY'S HOSPITAL, FLORIDA ATLANTIC \nUNIVERSITY AND GLORIA C. HAKKARAINEN, M.D. AND INCORPORATED \nMEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.768, + 499.77 + ], + [ + 540.421875, + 499.77 + ], + [ + 540.421875, + 586.6699981689453 + ], + [ + 69.768, + 586.6699981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 139.536, + 170.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 465.8126220703125, + 170.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 465.8126220703125, + 185.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 139.536, + 185.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 418.77 + ], + [ + 384.7554626464844, + 418.77 + ], + [ + 384.7554626464844, + 433.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 433.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 102.87 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 298 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 48 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745285" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745294/EFTA02745294.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745294/EFTA02745294.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f7261523c8efd367bf13e94e5313760e4d75eee5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745294/EFTA02745294.md @@ -0,0 +1,119 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08430893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's, Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time in which to Submit an Agreed Order Pursuant to this Court's Order dated July 7, 2009 (DE 192). Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiffs' counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Parties shall have until before July 24, 2009 to comply with Order (DE 192). + +DONE and ORDERED this day of 2009. + +Kenneth A. Main United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745294/EFTA02745294.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745294/EFTA02745294.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0ffe3eba57a0cfd6edbdcc3746cbce22753bb958 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745294/EFTA02745294.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,188 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745294.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1630, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.32, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 411.73565673828125, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 411.73565673828125, + 105.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 105.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745294" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745298/EFTA02745298.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745298/EFTA02745298.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3b75448a50e3cb7c3078df51a7dd89ff2d962b36 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745298/EFTA02745298.md @@ -0,0 +1,292 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +Jhil REY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/, + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRAJ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-a + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA-a + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO SUBMIT AGREED ORDER PURSUANT TO COURT ORDER(DE 192) + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which to submit an + +Agreed Order, if possible, pursuant to this Court's Order dated July 7, 2009 (DE 192) granting Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe 102's Motion for an Order for Preservation of Evidence. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: + +- 1. On May 26, 2009, Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102, filed a Motion for an Order for Preservation of Evidence with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 114). +- 2. On June 10, 2009, Defendant Epstein, filed his Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion (DE 151). +- 3. On June 22, 2009, Plaintiffs filed their Reply to Defendant's Response in Opposition (DE 168). +- 4. On July 7, 2009, this Court entered an Order directing parties to attempt to submit an agreed order granting Plaintiffs' Motion on or before July 20, 2009 (DE 192). +- 5. Both Plaintiff and Defense counsel need an additional five (5) days to attempt to reach an agreement. +- 6. As certified below, counsel for Defendant conferred with counsel for Plaintiffs, and Plaintiffs' counsel is in agreement with the requested extension. + +WHEREFORE Defendant respectfully requests that this Court enter an Order granting an extension until July 24, 2009, to file an agreed order. + +## Local Rule 7.1 Statement + +Counsel for the movant conferred by telephone and correspondence with counsel for the Plaintiffs and counsel for Plaintiffs' is in agreement wi the requested extension until July 24, 2009 for the parties to file an agreed order. + +> Robert D. Cri ton, Esq. Attorney for P efendant + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 20th day of July, 2009 + +Respectfully su 1 itted, + +By: ROBERT D. RITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar 224162 rcrit@bcicla .com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomey.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Brad Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P.M, Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isx@searcvlaw.com + +jph@searcylaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf@brucereinhartlaw con + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +tleopold@riccilaw.com + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. =, Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesq@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745298/EFTA02745298.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745298/EFTA02745298.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dc2391e5a9634adb13e40ccfffcbbbd90f5ec400 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745298/EFTA02745298.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,341 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745298.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 5955, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.31, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 413.23565673828125, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 413.23565673828125, + 107.2230224609375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 107.2230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Local Rule 7.1 Statement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.02400000000003, + 571.05 + ], + [ + 369.74884033203125, + 571.05 + ], + [ + 369.74884033203125, + 585.3630218505859 + ], + [ + 246.02400000000003, + 585.3630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 363.4869689941406, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 363.4869689941406, + 87.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 87.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 431.73 + ], + [ + 363.8669738769531, + 431.73 + ], + [ + 363.8669738769531, + 446.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 446.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 109 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 155 + ], + [ + "Line", + 77 + ], + [ + "Text", + 74 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745298" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745304/EFTA02745304.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745304/EFTA02745304.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9a3904ab0c232f69595aeeec9551ed95631f58d8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745304/EFTA02745304.md @@ -0,0 +1,139 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 6. + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRA I + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO: 09-CV-80469-MARRA I + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 09-CV-80591-MARRa + +CASE NO: 09-CV-80656-MARRa + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Plaintiff, Jane Doe's, Unopposed Motion to Exceed Page Limitation in her Reply to Defendant's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Jane Doe's Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets. Having considering Plaintiff's motion and Defense counsel being in agreement with the request, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Reply to Defendant's Memorandum of Law may be in excess of 10 pages, not to exceed 20. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745304/EFTA02745304.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745304/EFTA02745304.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..79952d52cda42284848c85b62e49bc507f9a0744 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745304/EFTA02745304.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745304.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1661, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.17, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 99.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 99.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 416.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 330.9905700683594, + 416.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 330.9905700683594, + 431.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 431.04998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745304" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745308/EFTA02745308.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745308/EFTA02745308.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..98bb89bb94dfb6ae2fef31541905c1d0739effe0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745308/EFTA02745308.md @@ -0,0 +1,185 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 6. + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO: 09-CV-80656-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +#### PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN HER REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR INJUNCTION RESTRAINING FRAUDULENT TRANSFER OF ASSETS + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe, hereby moves to exceed the page limitation of 10 pages for a reply memorandum of law found in Local Rule 7.1C.2. + +Jane Doe is preparing a reply to Defendant's opposition to her motion for an injunction restraining fraudulent transfer of assets. Local Rule 7.1.C.2. provides that "[a]bsent prior permission of the court" a reply memorandum of law may not exceed 10 pages in length. It is clear that, given the many issues raised by defendant's opposition to Plaintiff's motion (which opposition is itself 24 pages long) that more than 10 pages will be required to fully and adequately respond to and discuss the issues raised. Moreover, the issues raised are quite complicated, as they go to questions surrounding how the court should respond to fraudulent transfers of substantial assets to overseas locations by defendant Jeffrey Epstein, a billionaire. In addition, substantial financial assets are at stake; Jane Doe has moved, for example, for a receiver to take control of Defendant's assets to permit the posting of a \$15 million bond. + +As certified below, Defendant's counsel have agreed to the request to exceed 10 pages. + +WHEREFORE, Jane Doe respectfully requests that this Court grant her motion and enter an order allowing a reply in excess of 10 pages. + +# Local Rule 7.1 statement + +Counsel for movant Jane Doe have conferred with counsel for the defendant, and counsel for Defendant kindly agreed to the requested filing in excess of ten pages. + +DATED July 20, 2009 + +Respectfully Submitted, + +s/ J. + +J. ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwardsOrra-law.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice + +332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 20, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> s/ J. J. + +### SERVICE LIST Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberaer@aawoa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745308/EFTA02745308.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745308/EFTA02745308.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8e24e9f024ef7fd761dfe7a04db13273c6a84d1a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745308/EFTA02745308.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,398 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745308.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 4308, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.41, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 127.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 127.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION \nIN HER REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO \nJANE DOE'S MOTION FOR INJUNCTION RESTRAINING FRAUDULENT \nTRANSFER OF ASSETS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.5, + 443.8074951171875 + ], + [ + 536.53662109375, + 443.8074951171875 + ], + [ + 536.53662109375, + 500.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 76.5, + 500.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Local Rule 7.1 statement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 236.232, + 345.87 + ], + [ + 375.384521484375, + 345.87 + ], + [ + 375.384521484375, + 362.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 236.232, + 362.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 195.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 195.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 210.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 210.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nJane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 143.82, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 468.96051025390625, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 468.96051025390625, + 113.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 143.82, + 113.79998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 33 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745308" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745315/EFTA02745315.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745315/EFTA02745315.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6b150cb2bfa9125b6a6076c7591cda19b15b8bf3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745315/EFTA02745315.md @@ -0,0 +1,306 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 6. + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO: 09-CV-80591-MARRa + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO: 09-CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION + +Plaintiff Jane Doe, hereby moves this Court for an order compelling defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, to answer her first request for production or, in the alternative, to prove that his invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege is proper. Jane Doe also requests production of a privilege log. + +Jane Doe has propounded 16 requests for production, including such straightforward requests as requests for production of: + +Request No. 1: Copies of all telephone records; + +Request No. 2: Photos of the inside of your home located at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, Florida, that depict the room(s) where massages took place (including massage table). + +Request No. 10: Correspondence between Epstein and federal prosecutors; + +Request No. 12: Personal tax returns; + +Request No. 13: Photocopies of Epstein's passport; + +Request No. 14: A statement of net worth; and + +Request No. 16: Medical records. + +In response to each and every one of these requests, Epstein has given the following response (with only minor variations here and there): + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +This Court should order Epstein to provide all of the requested information or, in the alternative, prove that his Fifth Amendment invocations are valid. It is for the court, not the claimant, to determine whether the hazard of incrimination is justified. United States v. Argomaniz, 925 F.2d 1349, 1355 (11th Cir. 1991). "A court must make a particularized inquiry, deciding, in connection with each specific area that the + +questioning party wishes to explore, whether or not the privilege is well-founded." Id. Typically this is done in an in camera proceeding wherein the person asserting the privilege is given the opportunity "to substantiate his claims of the privilege and the district court is able to consider the questions asked and the documents requested by the summons." Id. + +Here Epstein has made boilerplate invocation of the Fifth Amendment to each and every request propounded by Jane Doe, including for example the request for correspondence with federal prosecutors and for production of federal tax returns. This obviously is not a request with Fifth Amendment implications, as the information has already been fully disclosed to the Government. + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to answer the requests or provide a particularized justification for his Fifth Amendment invocation with regard to each request. + +Epstein's "cut and paste" response to the request for production also blatantly disregards the requirements for invoking privilege under the Court's local rules. Local rule 26.1.G very specifically requires the preparation of a privilege log with respect to all documents and oral communications (among other things) that are withheld on the basis of privilege. Epstein has failed to prepare such a log, making it impossible for Jane Doe to effectively challenge his generic assertions. Indeed, with respect to a few requests, Epstein has stated: "Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege." Of course, the whole purpose of forcing a defendant to prepare a privilege log is to force the defendant to decide whether or not + +information is privileged. An assertion that something "may" be privileged is obviously woefully deficient. The Local Rules do not permit this tactic, and Epstein should be (at a minimum) promptly required to produce a privilege log. + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to provide a privilege log and to answer the interrogatories or provide a particularized justification for his Fifth Amendment invocation with regard to each request. + +It should be noted that (with minor exceptions) the only grounds on which Epstein can refuse to answer the request for production is proof of a valid Fifth Amendment privilege. This the only objection Epstein has asserted (with minor exceptions). As a result, any other objections to production are deemed waived. See Local Rule 26.1G.3.(a) ("Any ground [for an objection] not stated in an objection within the time provided by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or any extensions thereof, shall be waived."). + +# SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION + +For the convenience of the court — and in compliance with Local Rule 26.1 H (party filing motion to compel shall list specific requests in succession) — Jane Doe's requests for production and Epstein's objections are as follows: + +Request No. 1: Copies of all telephone records in your or your attorney's possession from 2002 through 2005 that in any way relate to you (including all phone lines owned by you or that were used to contact girls for the purposes of scheduling massages for you.) + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective + +representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 2: All massage appointment books, diaries, computer calendars or scheduling entities, scheduling books or any other writing or correspondence that contains the names of any of the girls that were called, contacted, scheduled or who otherwise went to your home located at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, Florida, for the purpose of giving you a massage. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 3: Any and all documentation in your possession that contains Plaintiff's name or that refers to Plaintiff, directly or indirectly, (includes e-mails, letters, message pads, diaries, appointment books, computer print outs). + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 4: Any and all photos, videos, downloaded digital prints or any other visual depiction of Plaintiff, or of any other known or suspected minor females introduced to you, directly or indirectly, by Plaintiff. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 5: Photos of the inside or your home located at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, Florida, that depict the room(s) where the massages too place (including massage table). + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 6: Any and all documentation of cancelled checks or evidence of payment to Plaintiff of any kind and for any reason whatsoever. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 7: All discovery information obtained by you or your attorneys as a result of the exchange of discovery in the State criminal case against you or the Federal investigation against you. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Federal Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and § 90.410, Fla. Stat.1 Further, the request may including information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege. + +Request No. 8: All financial documents evidencing asset transfers from 2005 to present for you personally or any company or corporation owned by you. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +--- + +1 Jane Doe does not intend to use these materials to draw a forbidden inference of guilt from the mere fact that information was provided to law enforcement officials as part of plea discussions, but rather for other purposes. These materials are also quite clearly likely to lead to the discovery of other admissible evidence, as they relate to the same subject matter as this lawsuit. To the extent that Epstein relies on the non-prosecution agreement, nothing in that agreement bars *discovery* of information relevant to this lawsuit. + +Request No. 9: Any documents or other evidentiary materials provided to local, state, or federal law enforcement investigators or local, state or federal prosecutors investigating your sexual activities with minors. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and § 90.410, Fla. Stat.2 Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege. + +Request No. 10: All correspondence between you and your attorneys and state or federal law enforcement or prosecutors (includes, but not limited to, letters to and from the States Attorney's office or any agents thereof). + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, + +--- + +2 Jane Doe does not intend to use these materials to draw a forbidden inference of guilt from the mere fact of plea discussions, but rather for other purposes. These materials are also likely to lead to the discovery of other admissible evidence. To the extent that Epstein relies on the non-prosecution agreement, nothing in that agreement bars discovery of information relevant to this lawsuit. + +Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and § 90.410, Fla. Stat.3 Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege. + +Request No. 11: Any and all documents reflecting your current net worth. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 12: Personal tax returns for all years from 2002 through the present. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution; overly broad. + +Request No. 13: A photocopy of your passport, including any supplemental pages reflecting travel to locations outside the 50 United States between 2002 and 2008, including any documents or records regarding plane tickets, hotel receipts, or transportation arrangements. + +--- + +3 Jane Doe does not intend to use these materials to draw a forbidden inference of guilt from the mere fact of correspondence in connection with plea discussions, but rather for other purposes. These materials are also likely to lead to the discovery of other admissible evidence. To the extent that Epstein relies on the non-prosecution agreement, nothing in that agreement bars *discovery* of information relevant to this lawsuit. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional protections and privileges, the scope of information is so overbroad that it seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence; compiling such information over a six year period would be unduly burdensome and time consuming.4 + +Request No. 14: A sworn statement of your net worth (including a detailed financial statement depicting all current assets and liabilities). + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 15: All financial statements or affidavits produced by you for any reason, to any person, company, entity or corporation since 2005. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United + +--- + +4 Jane Doe believes that Epstein used overseas travel as a means of obtaining underage girls for sexual purposes and for avoiding criminal prosecution for such activities. Also, providing a copy of a passport is hardly "burdensome." Also, given the fact that Epstein is likely to have used the services of a travel agent or another intermediary, it should not be difficult for him to provide evidence of his overseas travels from such intermediaries. + +States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution; overly broad. + +Request No. 16: All medical records of Defendant Epstein from Dr. Stephan Alexander. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +### CONCLUSION + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to answer the request for production, or provide a particularized justification for his Fifth Amendment invocation with regard to each request. Epstein should also be required to provide a privilege log. Counsel for Jane Doe have conferred with opposing counsel on the issues raised in this motion, and no resolution was possible. + +DATED July 20, 2009 + +Respectfully Submitted, + +s/ [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] +[REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER +Las Olas City Centre +401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 +Telephone (954) 522-3456 +Facsimile (954) 527-8663 +Florida Bar No.: 542075 +E-mail: [bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 20, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> s/ J. + +## SERVICE LIST Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberaer@aawpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bcIclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrooarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bciclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawverswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745315/EFTA02745315.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745315/EFTA02745315.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b110b7423e5d9e76dabe9777220e49df576d7931 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745315/EFTA02745315.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,691 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745315.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 16, + "chars": 26264, + "elapsed_seconds": 13.75, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 135.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 135.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S FIRST \nREQUEST FOR PRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.05199999999999, + 520.83 + ], + [ + 538.7138671875, + 520.83 + ], + [ + 538.7138671875, + 549.4335174560547 + ], + [ + 74.05199999999999, + 549.4335174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 464.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 428.1395568847656, + 464.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 428.1395568847656, + 480.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 480.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 369.36 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 369.36 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 382.32 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 382.32 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 314.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 314.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 329.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 329.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nJane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 143.82, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 468.96051025390625, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 468.96051025390625, + 163.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 143.82, + 163.67999267578125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745315" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745331/EFTA02745331.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745331/EFTA02745331.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e3554336d2850c0a238134b7a0e7d9f19867082f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745331/EFTA02745331.md @@ -0,0 +1,264 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAMM + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 6. + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAMM + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80811-MARRAi + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendants. + +CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA, + +CASE NO: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO: 09-CV-80591-MARRa + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO: 09-CV-80656-MARRAi + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +### PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO DEFENDANT + +Plaintiff Jane Doe, hereby moves this Court for an order compelling defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, to answer her first requests for admissions or, in the alternative, to prove that his invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege is proper. + +Jane Doe has propounded 23 requests for admission to Epstein, including such straightforward requests as: + +- Your net worth is greater than \$1 billion. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +- You own or control, directly or indirectly, real estate property in foreign countries. +- You are moving significant financial assets overseas, outside of the direct territorial reach of the U.S. and Florida Courts. +- You currently have the ability to post a bond of \$15 million to satisfy a judgment in this case without financial or other difficulty. + +In response to each and every one of these questions, Epstein has given the following response: + +In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +This Court should order Epstein to answer all of the requests for admission or, in the alternative, prove that his Fifth Amendment invocations are valid. It is for the court, not the claimant, to determine whether the hazard of incrimination is justified. United States v. Argomaniz, 925 F.2d 1349, 1355 (11th Cir. 1991). "A court must make a particularized inquiry, deciding, in connection with each specific area that the questioning party wishes to explore, whether or not the privilege is well-founded." Id. Typically this is done in an in camera proceeding wherein the person asserting the privilege is given the opportunity "to substantiate his claims of the privilege and the + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +district court is able to consider the questions asked and the documents requested by the summons." Id. + +Here Epstein has made boilerplate invocation of the Fifth Amendment to each and every question propounded by Jane Doe, including for example a request that he admit that his net worth is more than \$500 million. It is not apparent how admitting his net worth is incriminating in the circumstances of this case. In any event, the Fifth Amendment does not operate in this fashion. It is Epstein's obligation to explain his claims on a "question-by-question basis." Id. + +The only issue before the Court is Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege. Epstein has only asserted a Fifth Amendment objection to production. As a result, any other objections to production are deemed waived. See Local Rule 26.1G.3.(a) ("Any ground [for an objection] not stated in an objection within the time provided by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or any extensions thereof, shall be waived."). + +# SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION + +For the convenience of the court — and in compliance with Local Rule 26.1 H (party filing motion to compel shall list specific requests in succession) — Jane Doe's requests for admission are as follows: + +- 1. Your net worth is greater than \$10 million. +- 2. Your net worth is greater than \$50 million. +- 3. Your net worth is greater than \$100 million. +- 4. Your net worth is greater than \$500 million. +- 5. Your net worth is greater than \$1 billion. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +6. Since being incarcerated you have, directly or indirectly (through the services or assistance of other persons), conveyed money or assets in an attempt to insulate or protect your money or assets from being captured in any civil lawsuits filed against you. + +7. You own or control, directly or indirectly, real estate property in the Caribbean. + +8. You own or control, directly or indirectly, real estate property in foreign countries. + +9. In the last 2 years you have transferred assets and/or money and/or financial instruments to countries outside the United States. + +10. You have provided financial support to the modeling agency MC2. + +11. You have committed sexual assault against Plaintiff, a minor. + +12. You committed battery against Plaintiff. + +13. You digitally penetrated Plaintiff when she was a minor. + +14. You offered Plaintiff more money contingent upon her having sex with your or giving you oral sex. + +15. You intended to harm Plaintiff when you committed these sexual acts against her. + +16. You knew Plaintiff was under the age of 16 when you sexually touched and fondled her. + +17. You intend to hire investigators to intimidate and harass Plaintiff during this litigation. + +18. You were engaged in the act of trafficking minors across state or country borders for the purposes of sex or prostitution between 2000 and the present. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +- 19. You coerced Plaintiff into being a prostitute and remaining in prostitution. +- 20. You are guilty of the following offenses against Jane Doe: +- A. Procuring a minor for the purpose of prostitution as defined in F.S. 796.03; +- B. Battery as defined by Florida Statutes. +- C. Sexual Battery. +- 21. You are moving significant financial assets overseas, outside of the direct territorial reach of the U.S. and Florida Courts. +- 22. You are making asset transfers with the intent to defeat any judgment that might be entered against you in this or similar cases. +- 23. You currently have the ability to post a bond of \$15 million to satisfy a judgment in this case without financial or other difficulty. + +### CONCLUSION + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to answer the requests for admission or provide a particularized justification for his Fifth Amendment invocation with regard to each request. Counsel for Jane Doe have conferred with opposing counsel on the issues raised in this motion, and no resolution was possible. + +DATED July 20, 2009 Respectfully Submitted, + +s/ J. J. + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRia + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Flac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 20, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> s/ J. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +### SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jooldberaer@aawoa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bcIclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745331/EFTA02745331.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745331/EFTA02745331.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..da443805d87bce0fab6da6913c8061be81902cdb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745331/EFTA02745331.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,559 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745331.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 9107, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.96, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 135.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 135.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S \nFIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO DEFENDANT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.384, + 506.25 + ], + [ + 538.064697265625, + 506.25 + ], + [ + 538.064697265625, + 535.5635375976562 + ], + [ + 111.384, + 535.5635375976562 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 464.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 421.76513671875, + 464.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 421.76513671875, + 480.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 480.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.384, + 410.6700000000001 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 410.6700000000001 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 425.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 264.384, + 425.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 285.92999999999995 + ], + [ + 387.3754577636719, + 285.92999999999995 + ], + [ + 387.3754577636719, + 301.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 301.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 350.1988220214844, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 350.1988220214844, + 122.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 122.04998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745331" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745341/EFTA02745341.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745341/EFTA02745341.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c468ee13bb34534fcd69ee82885bcdd49ee79a74 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745341/EFTA02745341.md @@ -0,0 +1,342 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAMM + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 6. + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAi + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendants. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRIa + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO: 09-CV-80591-MARRa + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO: 09-CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +### PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES + +Plaintiff Jane Doe, hereby moves this Court for an order compelling defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, to answer her first set of interrogatories or, in the alternative, to prove that his invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege is proper. + +Jane Doe has propounded 23 interrogatories, including such straightforward requests as: + +Interrogatory No. 2: Describe financial assets that are under your control, directly or indirectly, including interests in corporations or other business entities. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Interrogatory No. 3: Describe which financial assets listed in your answer to interrogatory #2 are located outside the 50 states of the United States and where they are located. + +Interrogatory No. 4: Describe your net worth, including income and expenses for 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. + +Interrogatory No. 5: Describe any real property in which you have a total or partial interest, either directly or indirectly. + +Interrogatory No. 7: Describe any transfer of assets under your control, either directly or indirectly, to locations outside the 50 United States in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. + +Interrogatory No. 8: Describe, with specificity, your travel to locations outside the 50 states of the United states in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008, including your dates of travel, location to which you traveled and persons that accompanied you in each such travel. + +Interrogatory No. 11: Have you heard or do you know about any statement or remark (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of any party to this lawsuit, other than yourself, concerning any issue in this lawsuit? If so, state the name and address of each person who heard or read it, and the date, time, place and substance of each statement or remark. + +Interrogatory No. 12: Do you intend to elicit testimony of witnesses other than Plaintiff regarding any statements she has ever made? If so, what statements do you + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +intend to produce through testimony? Through which witness do you intend to elicit such statement? And for what purpose do you intend to admit such statement? + +Interrogatory No. 23: State the facts upon which you rely for each affirmative defense in your answer. + +In response to these interrogatories, Epstein has given the following response (with only slight variations on the overbreadth objection): + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +This Court should order Epstein to answer all of these interrogatories or, in the alternative, prove that his Fifth Amendment invocations are valid. It is for the court, not the claimant, to determine whether the hazard of incrimination is justified. United States v. Argomaniz, 925 F.2d 1349, 1355 (11th Cir. 1991). "A court must make a particularized inquiry, deciding, in connection with each specific area that the questioning party wishes to explore, whether or not the privilege is well-founded." Id. Typically this is done in an in camera proceeding wherein the person asserting the privilege is given the opportunity "to substantiate his claims of the privilege and the + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +district court is able to consider the questions asked and the documents requested by the summons." Id. + +Here Epstein has made boilerplate invocation of the Fifth Amendment to each and every question propounded by Jane Doe, including for example the question: Do you intend to elicit testimony of witnesses other than Plaintiff regarding any statements she has ever made? This obviously is not an interrogatory with Fifth Amendment implications. Nor is Epstein's claim that this interrogatory is somehow "overbroad" or "not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence" even facially plausible. + +Epstein's "cut and paste" response to the interrogatories also blatantly disregards the requirements for invoking privilege under the Court's local rules. Local rule 26.1.G very specifically requires the preparation of a privilege log with respect to all documents and oral communications (among other things) that are withheld on the basis of privilege. Epstein has failed to prepare such a log, making it impossible for Jane Doe to effectively challenge his generic assertions. The Local Rules do not permit this tactic, and Epstein should be (at a minimum) promptly required to produce a privilege log. + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to answer the interrogatories or provide a particularized justification for his Fifth Amendment invocation with regard to each request. + +It should be noted that the only two grounds on which Epstein can refuse to answer the interrogatories are either proof of a valid Fifth Amendment privilege or proof + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +of a valid overbreadth objection. These are the only two objections Epstein has asserted. As a result, any other objections to production are deemed waived. See Local Rule 26.1G.3.(a) ("Any ground [for an objection] not stated in an objection within the time provided by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or any extensions thereof, shall be waived."). + +# SPECIFIC INTERROGATORIES + +For the convenience of the court — and in compliance with Local Rule 26.1 H (party filing motion to compel shall list specific requests in succession) — Jane Doe's interrogatories are as follows: + +- 1. What is the full name and Florida address of the person answering these interrogatories, and, if applicable, the person's official position or relationship with the party to whom the interrogatories are directed? + +[Note: This is the only interrogatory Epstein answered in any way.] + +- 2. Describe financial assets that are under your control, directly or indirectly, including interests in corporations or other business entities. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 3. Describe which financial assets listed in your answer to interrogatory #2 that are located outside the 50 states of the United States and where they are located. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 4. Describe your net worth, including income and expenses for 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 5. Describe any real property in which you have a total or partial ownership interest, either directly or indirectly. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled + +me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 6. Describe which real properties listed in your answer to interrogatory #5 are located outside the 50 United States and where the properties are located. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 7. Describe any transfer of assets under [y]our control, either directly or indirectly, to locations outside the 50 United States in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my + +constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 8. Describe, with specificity, your travel to locations outside the 50 states of the United States in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008, including your dates of travel, location to which you traveled and persons that accompanied you in each such travel. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 9. List each telephone number used by you or your assistants to call minor females directly, or indirectly, for the purpose of scheduling a massage to take place at your house located at 358 El Brillo Way, West Palm Beach (includes landlines, cell phones, and private jet or airplane lines). For each cell phone, list the provider. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my + +constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +1. 10. List the last known name, address and telephone numbers of all persons that may have any knowledge about any of the allegations in the Complaint, including, but not limited to, friends, acquaintances, employees, or others to whom you have spoken about the subject matter which forms the basis of this Complaint or who have observed such activity. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The scope of the information is so overbroad that it also includes information that is attorney-client and work-product privileged. + +1. 11. Have you heard or do you know about any statement or remark (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of any party to this lawsuit, other than yourself, concerning any issue in this lawsuit? If so, state the name and address of each person who made the statement or remark, the name and address of each person who heard or read it, and the date, time, place and substance of each statement or remark. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit,, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate + +the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The scope of the information is so overbroad that it also includes information that is attorney-client and work-product privileged. + +1. 12. Do you intend to elicit testimony of witnesses other than Plaintiff regarding any statements she has ever made? If so, what statements do you intend to produce through testimony? Through which witness do you intend to elicit such statement? And for what purpose do you intend to admit such statement? Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Additionally, work-product and attorney-client. +2. 13. Are you transferring, or do you plan to, or might you transfer money or assets out of the country during the course of this litigation? + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, + +thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 14. Describe each property owned by you, including location, approximate value, and whether there is a mortgage on the property and the amount of any such mortgage. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +1. 15. Describe with specificity the amount of money available to you in cash or that can be readily liquidated as such. Include the bank financial institution, holding company, or other location of this money and the name of the account. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +16. State with as much specificity as possible when you met the Plaintiff, and including in your answer the following: (a) the circumstances and location of how and where you met (b) describe the nature of your relationship, (c) describe how many occasions she was with you at your residence located at 358 El Brillo Way in Palm Beach, Florida. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +17. Provide the names, addresses, and phone numbers of all your current accountants, financial planners or money managers handling, or assisting in the handling, of your money or assets. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +18. Did you ever ask the Plaintiff to introduce you to minor females and/or to bring minor females to your house in Palm Beach, Florida and if so, when did this occur, and what was she asked by you to do, and what did you tell her about the reason for her to bring these other minor girls? + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +1. 19. Did you ever engage in sexual activity of any kind whatsoever with the Plaintiff, and including in your answer what type of sexual activity took place, where it took place, and the dates or general timeframe when this activity occurred. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +1. 20. Were there parameters or instructions by you to the Plaintiff as to the types of girls to bring to your Palm Beach, Florida house, including age, range, what they would be asked to do, body type or socio-economic background? + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +21. Describe any words or actions that you made to assure the Plaintiff that sexual activity with you was proper[] or appropriate? + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +22. Describe what age you thought the Plaintiff was when you first had sexual activity with her, including your reasons for that belief. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +23. State the facts upon which you rely for each affirmative defense in your answer. + +Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRIa + +thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. No answer has yet been filed, so not applicable. + +# CONCLUSION + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to answer the interrogatories or provide a particularized justification for his Fifth Amendment invocation with regard to each request. Epstein should also be required to produce a privilege log. Counsel for Jane Doe have conferred with opposing counsel on the issues raised in this motion, and no resolution was possible. + +DATED July 20, 2009 + +Respectfully Submitted, + +J. + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassello@law.utah.edu + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRS + +### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 20, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> s/ J. J. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +### SERVICE LIST Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bcIclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrooarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bciclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745341/EFTA02745341.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745341/EFTA02745341.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..47570d685055c030e323b434076b28c6dfdf91ba --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745341/EFTA02745341.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,839 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745341.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 20, + "chars": 36024, + "elapsed_seconds": 14.92, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 106.11000000000001 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 106.11000000000001 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 135.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 135.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S FIRST \nSET OF INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.44, + 451.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 538.81298828125, + 451.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 538.81298828125, + 480.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 73.44, + 480.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SPECIFIC INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 215.42399999999998, + 244.61999999999998 + ], + [ + 397.0257568359375, + 244.61999999999998 + ], + [ + 397.0257568359375, + 260.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 215.42399999999998, + 260.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.772, + 175.76999999999998 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 175.76999999999998 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 191.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 263.772, + 191.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 120.69 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 120.69 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 135.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 135.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nJane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 143.82, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 468.96051025390625, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 468.96051025390625, + 163.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 143.82, + 163.67999267578125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745341" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745361/EFTA02745361.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745361/EFTA02745361.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b802d1b21d6720e2d0bcb84cc766053256a9c034 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745361/EFTA02745361.md @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +**UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA** + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED] + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/[REDACTED] + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/[REDACTED] + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 6. + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/IMII + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO: 09-CV-80469-MARRA I + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendants. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAi + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO: 09-CV-80591-MARRAi + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO: 09-CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +## PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S MOTION TO PROVIDE RECENTLY-OBTAINED AFFIDAVIT OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN IN SUPPORT OF MATERIALS FACTS SUPPORTING MOTON FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe, hereby moves for leave to provide the recently-obtained Affidavit of Jeffrey E. Epstein in support of the Material Facts section of her Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets (DE #165). + +On June 19, 2009, Jane Doe filed a motion asking the Court to appoint a receiver to take charge of the assets of defendant Jeffrey Epstein to block further fraudulent transfers of his assets. The motion began with a statement of Material Fact, including + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARla + +facts regarding defendant Epstein's phenomenal wealth, ownership of a Caribbean Island, international contacts, and financial sophistication. The motion was supported by an affidavit of Jane Doe's counsel. + +On July 13. 2009, defendant Epstein filed his response to the motion, arguing (among other things) that the affidavit supporting the material facts section was based on hearsay. While not contesting Jane Doe's Material Facts, Epstein argued that Jane Doe had failed to provide admissible evidence in support of those facts. + +On or about that same day, June 13, 2009, counsel for Jane Doe received a copy of a sworn affidavit filed by Jeffrey E. Epstein in a civil case in the Southern District of New York. In his sworn affidavit, Epstein admits the following facts that are relevant to Jane Doe's pending motion: + +- That he is President and Director of Financial Trust Company, Inc., a business that provides financial and business consulting services from the U.S. Virgin Islands to its clients. +- That he has been a legal resident of the U.S. Virgin Islands since 1999, residing at Little St. James Island — a 70-acre island that he owns through a wholly-owned limited liability company. +- From 1987 through the date of the affidavit, Epstein was one of Citibank's most important individual clients. +- In 1999, Epstein and Citibank did a \$10 million deal together, followed by another similar \$10 million deal the next year. These deals involved Epstein borrowing \$20 million from Citibank and then immediately reinvesting them in a fund that Citibank was touting. + +Of course, as admissions by Epstein, none of these statements are hearsay and they are all admissible against Epstein. See Fed. R. Evid. 801. And, because they all come from a sworn affidavit contained in the official court files of the United States + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRia + +District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Court can take judicial notice of their authenticity. See Fed. R. Evid. 201. + +Counsel for Jane Doe could not have provided this affidavit in support of its earlier motion, because it was not received until on or about July 13, 2009. + +For all these reasons, the Court should grant Jane Doe leave to supplement the support for her material facts with this newly-obtained affidavit of Jeffrey Epstein. + +DATED July 20, 2009 + +Respectfully Submitted, + +s/ J. J. + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwardsPrra-law.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellrxThlaw.utah.edu + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 20, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> s/ J. J. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +## SERVICE LIST Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberaer@aawoa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcvlaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg riosefsberg@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattornev.com + +William J. Berger wberuerOrra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745361/EFTA02745361.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745361/EFTA02745361.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3e8f7fc10158391488b81f88bf574dfffbd0824c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745361/EFTA02745361.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,413 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745361.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 5886, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.18, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.81600000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.81600000000003, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 99.63 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S MOTION TO PROVIDE RECENTLY-OBTAINED \nAFFIDAVIT OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN IN SUPPORT OF MATERIALS FACTS \nSUPPORTING MOTON FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE \nOF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.5, + 480.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 537.0100708007812, + 480.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 537.0100708007812, + 536.8000030517578 + ], + [ + 76.5, + 536.8000030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 107.73000000000002 + ], + [ + 387.3754577636719, + 107.73000000000002 + ], + [ + 387.3754577636719, + 122.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 122.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nJane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 143.82, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 468.96051025390625, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 468.96051025390625, + 150.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 143.82, + 150.54998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745361" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745369/EFTA02745369.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745369/EFTA02745369.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..386bdc185cd3ced9347fb8c0dbdad84a215c30af --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745369/EFTA02745369.md @@ -0,0 +1,344 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEI-PREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-806S6-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Response In Opposition to Plaintiff, Motions For Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc. And Dr. Serge Thvs, Records Of Dominique !hypolite/School District Of Palm Beach County. Good Samaritan Hospital, St, Marv's Hospital , Florida Atlantic University And Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D., With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law (DE 207)' + +#### And + +Motion to Strike C.M.A.'S Conditional Notice Of Intent To Exclusively Rely On Statutory Damages Provided BY 18 US.C. 42255 (DE 113), With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law 2 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN (hereinafter "EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Response In Opposition to Plaintiff, + +Motions For Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc. And Dr. Serge Thys, and Records Of Dominique Hyppolite/School District Of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St, Mary's Hospital , Florida Atlantic University And Gloria C. Haldcarainen, M.D. (previously DE 114 and 121, now combined in DE 207)(the "Motions for Protective Orders") And Motion to Strike C.M.A.'S Conditional Notice Of Intent To Exclusively Rely On Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255 (DE 113) (the "Notice of Conditional Reliance"), With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. An expeditious ruling by this Court is now critical.3 In support, Epstein states: + +DE 114 and DE 121 were stricken because they were incorrectly filed pursuant to the Court's Order consolidating cases. Plaintiff refilled as one Protective Order (DE 207). Epstein is now re-filing his Response (previously DE 137) with minor changes. + +2 The Response in Opposition to the Motions for Protective Order and the Motion to Strike are inextricably woven together in that each deal with critical discovery issues. Thus, the Response and the Motion to Strike must be handled simultaneously by the Court. + +3 CMA blocked all direct third party discovery by Epstein, stating use of her name on a third party subpoena would violate anonymity. Just when CMA capitulated and allowed Epstein to use her name, she filed protective orders regarding records on June 5, 2009. Instead of being fully briefed so that critical discovery could proceed, the Court struck their Motions for Protective Order (DE 114 and DE 121), Plaintiff filed the motion again, and the "clock" has been reset. The Court denied Epstein's motion to move the trial date; Epstein is staring at discovery cutoffs, and yet Epstein cannot serve third party subpoenas) Epstein is being denied his due process right to defend himself. + +## I. Background + +1. C.M.A. was filed on February 23, 2008. The case was removed to federal court on July 21, 2008. A Motion for Stay was filed on July 25, 2008 (DE 33), which this Court subsequently denied on December 12, 2008 (DE 28). The case was transferred from Judge Zloch to this division on September 3, 2008 (DE 21). C.M.A. filed her First Amended Complaint on February 10, 2009. (C.M.A. DE 39-40). Epstein's Motion to Dismiss same was filed on March 12, 2009. (C.M.A. DE 47). The Motion to Dismiss remains outstanding, and addresses several of the arguments set forth in C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely of Statutory Damages Provided By 18 U.S.C. §2255 and, therefore, same is incorporated herein by reference. + +2. Up until May 20, 2009, Plaintiff refused to allow Defendant to identify her by name in various third-party subpoenas which Defendant intended to serve directed to Plaintiff's health care providers, past and current, which involves basic personal injury discovery. If Defendant could not use CMA's name, how could the provider have provided records from solely a "CMA" designation? Defendant did not want to violate the court's order on anonymity. Thus, Defendant served its April 29, 2009 Motion to Identify (DE 67) and Reply (DE 181) requesting the right to serve third-party subpoenas and/or dismissed Plaintiff's case. Plaintiff offered to allow Defendant access to her medical history only after her attorneys were able to obtain and filter through same. Only then would Plaintiff turnover the "filtered" relevant information. Obviously, such an offer is unrealistic and does not comport with the basic discovery rules or afford Epstein his constitutional due process rights to defend himself. + +3. On May 20, 2009, C.M.A. capitulated and filed her Notice of Withdrawal of Previously Raised Objections to Epstein's Motion to Compel and/or Identify C.M.A. in the Style of this + +Case and Motion to Identify C.M.A. in Third-Party Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sue Sponte (DE 23)(the "Notice of Withdrawal"). Obviously, by filing the Notice of Withdrawal, Plaintiff recognized that her attempts to prevent meaningful discovery were delaying this matter and would ultimately delay her trial. + +4. Defendant expeditiously set about to obtain basic background discovery on C.M.A. for use for her deposition and for an eventual medical/psychological exam. But then, on June 5, 2009, C.M.A. filed a Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc. and Dr. Serge Thys (DE 114), and of even date she filed her Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on the Statutory Damages provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255. (DE 113). On June 17, 2009, Plaintiff then filed a subsequent Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Palm Beach County School District, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital Dr. Gloria C. Hakkarinen, and Florida Atlantic University (DE 121). The Court struck DE 121 on July 17, 2009 because the pleading was incorrectly filed pursuant to the Court's Order consolidated cases. The Plaintiff refilled one (1) Motion for Protective Order (DE 207). While Plaintiff agreed to allow Defendant to identify her in various third-party subpoenas directed to her physicians, she now employed yet another strategy to block discovery of her past medical and psychological history from being discovered by and through the Conditional Notice and the Motions for Protective Order. Without the health care provider information, including psychological/ psychiatric records, it will be impossible to conduct a thorough deposition of C.M.A and have a meaningful compulsory psychological examination by a defense expert. C.M.A. knows full well that such discovery is relevant to the claims she asserts against Epstein. + +5. Plaintiff opposed Defendant's motion to strike the current trial date, and this court in denying Defendant's motion instructed Defendant to move forward with discovery. Yet, Plaintiff's own strategy prevents the very discovery this court said Defendant should undertake! Comically, Plaintiff claims in the Notice of Conditional Reliance Notice and in the Motions for Protective Order (which rely solely on the Notice of Conditional Reliance) that if she is successful in opposing Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, she intends to rely exclusively on the statutory damages provided under 18 U.S.C. 2255 rather than those damages provided for under common law (state tort claims). On the flipside, Plaintiff then claims that ". . .should the court rule. . .that the statutory damage floor can only be applied once, Plaintiff will be pursuing any and all damages available to her, whether they be pursuant to statute or by common law." (DE 113 at 15-6 and DE 207at 14-7). The undersigned assumes this is part of the "conditional" aspect of the notice. Defendant can find no cases dealing with such a notice in any Federal Court in the United States. Based upon the court's ruling referenced below, such a position is not warranted at Motion to Dismiss stage. What if this motion is not ruled upon until after the discovery cutoff or only the week before the trial? Under that scenario, the Defendant will be prevented from obtaining critical discovery to defend this case. When has a Plaintiff ever been afforded the option to "conditionally" prove damages? Never. Is Epstein forced to take C.M.A.'s deposition without having allowed access to any prior or current medical/psychological treatment? Defendant will request a compulsory medical examination of Plaintiff. If the Plaintiff has it her way, the examiner will perform the examination in a vacuum. + +6. It appears C.M.A. intends to further stall discovery pending the outcome of the Motion to Dismiss and any future Motion for Summary Judgment. See infra. That is, C.M.A. wishes to + +rely on the statutory damage floor if she is successful in opposing Defendant's motion to dismiss. She then will assert that her medical history will not be at issue at trial and thus no evidence regarding her physical, emotional and pecuniary injuries will be presented at trial. First, that is not what is currently alleged in the 89-page Amended Complaint. Second, paragraph 6 of Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order (DE 207) is cleverly worded in that it states "[p]laintiff will not be presenting any evidence of the extent of her physical, emotional or pecuniary injuries, beyond evidence that she was a victim of sexual contact to which she was legally incapable of consenting by virtue of her age (including, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, and loss of the capacity to enjoy life)." This court must ask what Plaintiff intends to use "beyond" evidence of the extent of her physical, emotional or pecuniary injuries. Does "beyond" mean Plaintiff still intends to produce evidence of her pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma etc... even if she is successful at Motion to Dismiss? Third, Plaintiff misconstrues the application of the statute as delineated below. + +7. This court ruled in its May 28, 2009 Order that "[i]ssues regarding the minimum amount of damages available to Plaintiff under 18 U.S.C. §2255 do )291 affect whether plaintiff has stated a claim and are not appropriate for Motion to Dismiss. These damages issues will be resolved at summary judgment or trial." See Order (DE 101). Hence, if this Court accepts Plaintiff's position and her bogus Notice of Conditional Reliance, Defendant may not be permitted (unless Plaintiffs motion for protective order are immediately denied) discovery as to C.M.A.'s damages alleged in the Amended Complaint until a Motion for Summary Judgment is + +ruled upon, which could be right before and/or at trial. Certainly, such a result would be inherently unfair, but exactly what Plaintiff is strategizing to accomplish. + +8. Moreover, it is unreasonable for this court to accept Plaintiffs position set forth in the Notice of Conditional Reliance and in the Motions for Protective Order because this court has already ruled that Plaintiff can only be deposed once. (Case #80119, DE 98 at 15 — "Defendant is limited to a single deposition of each Plaintiff, during which defendant may depose the Plaintiff as both a party and a witness.") As such, Plaintiff cannot force the taking of her deposition and any expert depositions while key discovery remains unavailable due to the Plaintiffs Motions for Protective Order. Moreover, if Defendant prematurely takes Plaintiff's deposition based on one (1) theory of recovery (which is exactly what Plaintiff is attempting to accomplish), then under this Court's prior ruling, an additional deposition of Plaintiff may not be allowed despite Plaintiff's success at Motion to Dismiss or Motion for Summary Judgment in connection with her 18 U.S.C. 2255 claims and/or conditional reliance; or even if allowed, there will be no time to conduct necessary relevant discovery. + +9. Recognizing Plaintiff's delay tactics and refusal to produce meaningful discovery, Epstein requested that this court strike this case from the current docket, continue the trial, and/or to modify the court's scheduling order. (DE 104). On July 6, 2009, the Court denied that Motion. (DE 187) Plaintiff now uses her delay tactics and the court's order as sword and shield. That is, Epstein is now precluded from taking and/or receiving meaningful basic personal injury discovery in connection with C.M.A.'s claims, which is substantively unfair and directly violates Epstein's due process rights — yet, he is being forced to trial. + +## I1. Argument and Memorandum of Law + +# a. The Motions For Protective Order Should Be Denied or Stricken + +10. In order to understand the absurdity of Plaintiff's motions, the Court needs some background on CMA to conclude that the information sought is relevant and material and may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +A. CMA was born on January 2, 1987, and has two children by two different men. CMA had her first child at the age of seventeen and her second at the age of twenty-one. + +B. Plaintiffs counsel without waiving his work product privilege, has information which suggests CMA had drug and psychological problems that pre-dates any contact by CMA with Epstein. + +C. CMA is Answers to Interrogatories (#10) indicates that her mother, Dorothy Groenert, her brother, and the father of her first child, all drove her to Epstein's house on various occasions. These people had to have known what CMA was allegedly doing at Epstein's house. So the question remains, who is CMA, what is her history, and why is the information being sought relevant + +D. CMA is seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages. The following represents conduct and events that had to have had a substantial effect on CMA's life and emotional/psychological makeup. These are merely examples and just the tip of the iceberg. + +- On March 27, 2000, in Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Case #00-54914, CMA threw a cinder block at her mother's boyfriend's car. +- On April 11, 2000, in Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Case #00-61772, officers responded to the house in reference to child abuse involving CMA, her brothers, and her mother. + +- On June 29, 2000, in Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Case #00-95746, CMA's mother contacted the police after hearing CMA's friends threaten to kill her (CMA). +- On July 26, 2000, in Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Case #00-106500, officers responded in reference to Criminal Mischief. CMA was a victim of having her window broken at her house by a Tonya =stated she went to CMA's house to confront CMA about CMA having sexual relations with her boyfriend. CMA would have been thirteen (13) years old at this time. +- On August 24, 2000, in Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Case #00-118442, CMA was arrested for aggravated assault after chasing her brother around the house with a knife. +- On September 5, 2001, in Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Case #01-119103, CMA's mother reported her missing. At the time CMA was on house detention for previous crimes and for being truant from school. A pick-up order was in effect and CMA was subsequently detained. +- On November 24, 2001, in Palm Beach County Sheriffs Office Case #01-150237, officers responded in reference to a Battery. CMA and her brother witnessed their mother being beaten by her then boyfriend, Lance Bell. +- On March 26, 2002, in Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Case #02-48096, officers responded to the house in reference to child abuse involving CMA, her brothers, and her mother. +- On April 6, 2002, in Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Case #02-571, CMA's mother was arrested for possession of crack cocaine and CMA and her brothers were removed from their home. +- On October 8, 2002, in Palm Beach County Case #02MH1402, CMA's mother filed a Marchman Act Petition naming CMA after she told a judge that she was hospitalized for overdosing on Xanax and Marijuana, was truant from school, has anger issues, mental disabilities, and needs treatment for self inflicting wounds. The case was closed on October 31, 2002, because CMA was to be in court the following day for a probation violation. +- On July 27, 2004, in Palm Beach County Case #04MH1530, CMA's mother filed a Marchman Act Petition naming CMA after she told a judge that she was constantly testing positive for cocaine and marijuana. + +- On August 16, 2004, in Palm Beach County Case #04MH1676, CMA's mother filed a Marchman Act Petition naming CMA after she told a judge that treatment at home was not working and a residential facility would be needed. +- On August 22, 2004, in Palm Beach County Case #05MH1934, CMA's mother filed a case naming CMA for a Petition for Involuntary Assessment for Substance Abuse. CMA's mother stated that CMA was homeless, unclean, and prostituting herself. +- On August 22, 2005, in Palm Beach County Case #05MH1667, CMA's mother filed a case naming CMA for a Petition for Involuntary Assessment for Substance Abuse. CMA's mother claimed that CMA was homeless, unclean, has been prostitution herself for crack cocaine, is addicted to Xanax, is a cutter and self mutilator, living in a hotel, and has been diagnosed as Bipolar and Schizophrenic. + +11. As stated above, Plaintiff filed the Motions for Protective regarding medical, psychological and school records in an effort to chill discovery. As to the Motion for Protective Order concerning Records from Parent Child-Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Palm Beach County School District, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Dr. Gloria C. Hakkarinen, and Florida Atlantic University (DE 207), Plaintiff raises in each the Notice of Conditional reliance as authority for this court to consider in granting same. Accordingly, for the same reasons set out in section H. (a) above, this court should strike or deny the Motions for Protective Order as Plaintiff must still prove "actual damages" under the statute, thereby making her medical and psychological history relevant. Rule 12(f) - Motion to Strike, "the court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter." + +12. Next, Plaintiff states in her Motions for Protective Order that "[o]rdinarily a plaintiff does not place her mental condition in controversy merely by requesting damages for mental anguish or 'garden variety' emotional distress. In order to place a party's mental condition in controversy the party must allege a specific mental or psychiatric disorder or intend to offer expert testimony to support their claim of emotional distress." (DE 207) Plaintiff cites Turner v. Imperial Stores, 161 F.R.D. 89 (S.D. Cal. 1995); however, that case dealt primarily with compelling the mental examination of a patient, not the production of records. Nonetheless, the case supports Defendant's position for the production of information by subpoena. For instance, Plaintiff once again seems to forget her answers to interrogatories and the allegations in her First Amended Complaint, which is the OPERATIVE pleading. For instance, in her answers to interrogatory nos. 9 and 10, which seek information about C.M.A.'s damage claims, Plaintiff answered that: + +I have bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent injuries are psychological. (Interrog. No. 9). + +I am claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a jury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. §2255. (Interrog. No. 10). + +13. In her 1" Amended Complaint, relevant to her damages claims, Plaintiff alleges: + +C.M.A., has in the past suffered, and will in the future suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy and other damages ... . The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses ... and will in the future suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. The Plaintiff C.M.A. has suffered loss of income, a loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of capacity to enjoy life. These injuries are permanent in nature and the Plaintiff, C.M.A., will continue to suffer these losses in the future. + +(1&#x27; Am. Complaint, Counts I - XXX (18 U.S.C. §2255),1125, 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193; Count XXXI (Sexual Battery), 1199.) + +See Faiardo v. Pierce County, 2009 WL 1765756 (W.D. Wash. 2009)(allegations of specific disorders amount to more than garden variety disorders and thus Plaintiff waived physicianpatient privilege as it involved a complex medical issue)• Alexander v. City of Bellingham, 2008 WL 2077970 (W.D. Wash. 2008); Grit v. Target Corp. 2008 WL 1777744 (M.D. Fla. 2008); Trenary v. Bush Entertainment Corp., 2006 WL 3333621 (M.D. Fla. 2006)(responses to interrogatories placed plaintiff's mental condition at issue); Tracey P. v. Sarasota County, 2006 WL 1678908 (M.D. Fla. 2006)(responses to interrogatories delineating depression and bi-polar disorder are more than simple allegations of emotional distress thus placing plaintiffs mental condition at issue). + +14. Clearly, Plaintiff has alleged specific psychological disorders (bi-polar and manic depression), and seeks to recover medical expenses associated with those complex medical issues. Accordingly, the Motions for Protective Order should be denied and/or stricken. See also United States v. Bear Stops, 997 F.2d 451 (8th Cir. 1993)(dealing with "admissibility of other acts of sexual abuse by individuals other than the defendant to explain why a victim of abuse exhibited behavioral manifestations of a sexually abused child. Fed.R.Evid. 403, 412 and 412(b)(1). + +15. Here, the information sought by subpoena may show that Plaintiff suffered from bipolar disorder and manic depression (specifically pled by her) as a result of other life events or sexual activity prior to, during or after the acts alleged in the Amended Complaint. Did other life events and/or other sexual activity with others, which may be similar to alleged Epstein conduct, cause "emotional distress, psychological trauma, loss of dignity, humiliation or embarrassment", and if so or not, why? See Interrogatory Numbers 9 and 10, Exhibit "A". Accordingly, the + +probative value of obtaining full and complete copies of the basic personal injury discovery sought by subpoena goes to the heart of Plaintiff's damages or lack thereof, including medical, psychiatric, psychological, employment and school records, i.e. standard personal injury discovery. + +## b. The Notice of Conditional Reliance Allegedly Under 18 U.S.C. \*2255 Lacks Substantial Merit And Conflicts With the Allegations In The First Amended Complaint + +16. Plaintiff's Motions for Protective Order rely solely upon her twisted interpretation of 18 U.S.C. §2255 as set forth in her Notice of Conditional Reliance. In an effort to artificially inflate her alleged damages beyond that of which the statute permits, Plaintiff claims that 18 U.S.C. §2255 creates a statutory damage floor for recovery of damages for each commission of an enumerated sex offense listed under said statute and, therefore, prevents her from having to prove "actual damages." or any damages if Plaintiff's theory is accepted. + +Defendant claims in his Motion to Dismiss that the civil remedy afforded creates only a single civil remedy or cause of action (one recovery) on behalf of a minor plaintiff against a defendant. + +In other words, there is nothing in the statute which would allow a plaintiff to duplicate or multiply her "actual damages" sustained and proven on a per violation or per count basis. A §2255 plaintiff is entitled to a single recovery of her "actual damages;" if she sustains and proves an amount less than the statutory minimum, she recovers at least that amount. Of course, she can prove her actual damages were greater. + +At this juncture, Plaintiff wishes to have it both ways. That is, if she is successful at Motion to Dismiss and her interpretation of 18 U.S.C. §2255 is accepted, then Plaintiff claims + +she will only seek statutory damages available thereunder. (DE 113) If, however, Plaintiff is not successful at Motion to Dismiss, she will then seek "any and all damages available to her, whether they be pursuant to statute or common law." In short, Plaintiff wishes to prevent basic discovery until such time as she decides what damages she will seek based upon her success on certain outstanding substantive motions, and that determination can only be made after Motion to Dismiss and/or Motion for Summary Judgment. Thus, discovery will be conveniently stayed for Plaintiff until that time, thereby prejudicing the Defendant and deny him his due process rights. Moreover, if this Court chooses not to rule on the Motion to Dismiss solely as to Plaintiff's loose interpretation of 18 U.S.C. §2255, Plaintiff will then file a Motion for Summary Judgment and will refuse to produce any meaningful discovery until such time as the court rules on that motion. This court must not delay critical discovery based upon Plaintiff's misplaced interpretation of the subject statute, and her hope that she will be successful at Motion to Dismiss or Motion for Summary Judgment. The court has told Defendant to "move forward" - yet the Plaintiff continues to throw up roadblocks. + +17. While Epstein's Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint (DE 47) fully sets forth why Plaintiff's argument concerning the statutory damages floor should not apply, a brief summary is required herein to explain why Plaintiffs Notice of Conditional Reliance is meritless. Contrary to Plaintiff's attempted assertion of 30 separate counts pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. §2255 - Civil Remedy for Personal Injuries, 18 U.S.C. §2255 creates a single federal cause of action or "civil remedy" (recovery) for a minor victim of sexual abuse, molestation and exploitation. (Even if this Court were to agree with Plaintiff that a Plaintiff could allege multiple §2255 causes of action or counts, the Plaintiff is still entitled to only a single recovery of her + +actual damages in an amount no less than § minimum). Under the plain meaning of the statutory text, §2255 does not create separate causes of action on behalf of a minor against a defendant on a "per violation" basis. Nowhere in the statutory text is there any reference to the civil remedy afforded by this statute as being on a "per violation" basis. 18 U.S.C. 2255(a) creates a civil remedy for "a minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation ... ." See v. Husband, 428 F.Supp.2d 432 (ED. Va. 2006); Mr Husband, 376 F.Supp.2d 603 (E.D. Va. 2006); Doe v. Liberatore, 478 F.Supp.2d 742, 754 (M.D. Pa. 2007); and the recent cases in front of this court on Defendant's Motions to Dismiss and For More Definite. + +18. There is no reported case supporting Plaintiff's tortured and nonsensical interpretation of §2255. In all of these cases (cited above), each of the Plaintiffs brought a single count or cause of action attempting to allege numerous violations of the "predicate acts" specifically identified in §2255. "18 U.S.C. §2255 gives victims of sexual conduct who are minors a private right of action." na 492 F.Supp.2d 1186, 1188 (N.D. Cal. 2007), (emphasis added). 18 U.S.C.A. §2255 "merely provides a cause of action for damages in 'any appropriate United States District Court.' Id, at 1189. + +19. Moreover, Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children." 18 U.S.C. §2255 (2003), the statute in effect at the time of the alleged incident, is entitled Civil remedy for personal injuries, and specifically provides: + +(a) Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than \$50,000 in value. + +- (b) Any action commenced under this section shall be barred unless the complaint is filed within six years after the right of action first accrues or in the case of a person under a legal disability, not later than three years after the disability. + +Reading the entire statute in context, no where is there any language indicating that a minor plaintiff has a private right of action against a defendant "per violation." Under the statutory rules of construction, had the legislature intended to give a plaintiff multiple causes of action against a defendant on a per violation basis, the statute would have included such language. Had Congress wanted to create such a remedy as Plaintiff attempts to bring, it could have easily included language of "per violation" after the presumptive damages amount in subsection (a). By its own terms, the statute provides for the single recovery of "actual damages the minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including attorney's fees." Moreover, even if Plaintiffs strained interpretation of the statute were accepted by this court, it does not relieve Plaintiff from having to prove "actual damages" as set forth in subsection (a) above. Importantly, the statute reads that "[a]ny minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than \$50,000 in value." Id. That is, if Plaintiff shows that she sustained only \$10,000 in actual, personal injury damages, she would still receive no less than \$50,000. As well, Plaintiff can be awarded \$75,000, \$125,000 or whatever amount of actual damages that are awarded by the fact finder, i.e. §2255 has no cap. Thus, under both scenarios, Plaintiff is not relieved from proving actual damages. + +20. Defendant does not have the luxury of waiting for a ruling on the 2255 issues. Instead, he must complete discovery as per this court's order. C.M.A. and her attorneys wish to control how discovery will take place and who will be deposed, control what questions will be asked and to whom, and Plaintiff wishes to decide what damages she may seek pending the outcome of a substantive motion despite what her Amended Complaint already alleges. Epstein's due process rights in connection with the defense of this matter are being violated by the Plaintiff who wishes to force Epstein to trial with various legal issues up in the air and incomplete discovery. + +21. In sum, C.M.A.'s motions for protective orders reflect her tactics to delay and prevent meaningful discovery in hopes that C.M.A. will be able to prevent Epstein from putting on critical evidence in defense of his case. Epstein cannot defend this matter when the element of unfair and prejudicial "surprise" is ever so present. Schearbrook Land and Livestock Company v. U.S. et. al, 124 F.R.D. 221 (M.D. Fla. 1988). Plaintiffs trial by ambush tactics should not be tolerated. + +22. Accordingly, the Notice of Conditional reliance should be stricken from the record pursuant to Rule 12(0 - Motion to Strike, "the court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter." Moreover, to the extent necessary, this portion of this Motion shall also serve as any Opposition Response to the Notice of Conditional Reliance. + +### Rule 7.1 Certification + +I hereby certify that counsel for the respective parties communicated by telephone in a good faith effort to resolve the discovery issues prior to the filing of this motion to compel. Counsel was unable to resolve the issues outlined herein. + +WHEREFORE, Epstein, through his counsel, requests that this court enter an Order: + +- a. striking the Notice of Conditional Reliance; +- b. striking and/or denying the Motions for Protective Order; +- c. allowing the Defendant to obtain all documents which are the subject of the subpoenas associated with the Motions for Protective Order; and +- d. for such other and further relief as this court dee just and proper. + +By: ROBERT . CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida B No. 224162 MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 21u day of July, 2009 + +Respectfully submitt + +By: ROBERT D. RITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar o. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bc1claw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/J** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.c m Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Ricci-Leopold, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 skuvin@riccilaw.com tleopold@riccilaw.com + +riosefsberg@podhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745369/EFTA02745369.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745369/EFTA02745369.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..15e78a52352525f827feca196c6762d48cffadbf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745369/EFTA02745369.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1048 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745369.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 22, + "chars": 37093, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.03, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 413.5903625488281, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 413.5903625488281, + 118.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 118.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "And", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 293.76, + 185.49 + ], + [ + 319.4267578125, + 185.49 + ], + [ + 319.4267578125, + 198.714599609375 + ], + [ + 293.76, + 198.714599609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 108.53999999999999 + ], + [ + 359.215087890625, + 108.53999999999999 + ], + [ + 359.215087890625, + 123.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 123.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I1. Argument and Memorandum of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.108, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 425.7410888671875, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 425.7410888671875, + 129.35302734375 + ], + [ + 189.108, + 129.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. The Motions For Protective Order Should Be Denied or Stricken", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 119.952, + 140.13 + ], + [ + 495.0245361328125, + 140.13 + ], + [ + 495.0245361328125, + 157.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 119.952, + 157.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "b. The Notice of Conditional Reliance Allegedly Under 18 U.S.C. *2255 Lacks \nSubstantial Merit And Conflicts With the Allegations In The First Amended Complaint", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 79.56, + 221.94 + ], + [ + 534.9623413085938, + 221.94 + ], + [ + 534.9623413085938, + 254.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 79.56, + 254.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.204, + 609.9300000000001 + ], + [ + 364.5087890625, + 609.9300000000001 + ], + [ + 364.5087890625, + 624.8035125732422 + ], + [ + 255.204, + 624.8035125732422 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 375.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 365.70050048828125, + 375.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 365.70050048828125, + 390.363037109375 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 390.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/J", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 111.78000000000002 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 111.78000000000002 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 153.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 153.89999999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 72 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 155 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745369" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745391/EFTA02745391.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745391/EFTA02745391.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..61c4d046c77ae86bf353208ce1cb82c83c365fe5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745391/EFTA02745391.md @@ -0,0 +1,106 @@ +PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR INJUNCTION RESTRAINING FRAUDULENT TRANSFER OF ASSETS, APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN AND TO POST A \$15 MILLION BOND TO SECURE POTENTIAL JUDGMENT + +CASE NO: OS-CV-80119-MA RRa + +## EXHIBIT A + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK + +CITIBANK, N.A., + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN and FINANCIAL TRUST COMPANY, INC., + +Defendants. + +Index No. 02 Civ. 5332(SHS) + +## DECLARATION OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN + +JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN declares under penalty of perjury pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1746 that the following is true and correct: + +- 1. I am one of the Defendants in the above-captioned action and the sole shareholder, the President and a Director of Defendant Financial Trust Company, Inc. ("FTCI") and make this Declaration based upon my personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein. I submit this Declaration in opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. +- 2. I have been a legal resident of the U.S. Virgin Islands since 1999. 1 reside at Little St. James Island, in the U.S. Virgin Islands, which is an approximately 70 acre island that I have owned, through a wholly-owned limited liability company, since 1998. +- 3. 1 am registered to vote and have voted -- in the U.S. Virgin Islands. I have a current and valid U.S. Virgin Islands driver's license and firearms license, and maintain a personal bank account and IRA account in the U.S. Virgin Islands. +- 4. Through my wholly-owned limited liability company, which is also resident in the U.S. Virgin Islands, I employ approximately 20 people, maintain two more bank accounts, own two cars and three boats and maintain several telephone numbers, all in the U.S. Virgin Islands. + +5. My only business is a U.S. Virgin Islands corporation organized in the U.S. + +Virgin Islands in 1999 as "Financial Trust Company, Inc." FTCI maintains its principal and only • .place of business. consisting of 2800 square feet of office space. in St. a. 1.!.S. Virgin Islands. All eleven of rfel's employees. including myself. arc U.S. Virgin Islands residents. FTC' is qualified under the U.S. Virgin Islands Economic Development Commission. as authorized under the laws of the U.S. Virgin Islands. + +b. ITC maintains three local bank accounts. a local IRA account and its books and records in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Between May 1999 and March 2002. FTCI maintained tWo bank accounts with the St. branch of Citibank. + +7. FTCI is engaged in the business of providing financial and business consulting services from the U.S. Virgin Islands to its clients. In connection with its consulting business. FTCI makes investments in securities and other investments which we reasonably expect to be profitable and appropriate for ourselves and our clients. + +8. My business dealings and relationship with Citigroup and its predecessor. Citicom. date back to the 1930's. I became a client of the Citibank Private Bank in or about 1937. For approximately 15 years, Citicorp. Citibank and, ultimately. Citigroup provided banking and financial services to me and my business clients. through the Citibank Private Bank, • which, upon information and belief, changed its name to the Citigroup Private Bank some time in 2001 (collectively. "Citigroup" or the "Private Bank"). The Citigroup "relationship manager" responsible for these services during most of that period was Dayle Davison. + +9. In early 1999, I learned from Ms. Davison, an employee of the Private Bank, that ('itigroup had targeted me as one of its most important individual clients and was seeking to + +fi + +e. + +capitalize on its longstandingselationship with me to persuade me to purchase awide array of additional financial products and financial services, which were now available from Citigroup. + +10. Citibank began the hard-sell of their new products and services in or around late April of 1999, while I was in the U.S. Virgin Islands. At that time Citibank first introduced me to what was characterized as an exceptional investment opportunity involving a fund to be . managed by MG Global Investment Corp. ("MG"). -In aseries of telephone calls which 1 received in the U.S. Virgin Islands between on or about April 20, 1999 and on or about May 2, ' 1999, employees of the Private Bank, including Ms. Davison, aggressively solicited my participation in this "oppOrtunity" ultimately retaining in asubstantial investment by FTC! in the amount of SIO million (the "AIG Investment"). + +11. During that period, I remember telephone conversations with Ms. Davison, in which she counseled me to subscribe for the A1G Investment. She told me that it was an exceptional opportunity which has already generated so much preliminary interest that it will be substantially over-subscribed, Ms. Davison told me that Citigroup was offering this opportunity first to me, as one the Private Bank's most important clients, to ensure that I have an opportnnity to subscribe. Ms. Davison also stated, in essence, that I was virtually assured of receiving an 18- 20% return on my investment, with a possible remit of as much as 30%. She further emphasized that Citibank "really did their due diligence" on this deal and was anticipating putting its own money in as an investor. Finally, Ms. Davison made affirmative assurances regarding my ability to protect my interest in the investment she advised that 1 should not worry because Citibank was going to remain actively "involved in the deal," including possibly as an investor. + +4 + +V + +:• + +•s. + +• A + +12. In light of Ms. Davison's statements regarding the exceptional merits of the MG Investment, and particularly the fact that Citibank was anticipating making its own investment in the deal, Iinquired whether Citibank was confident enough in the assurances Ms. Davison had made to me to loan me the necessary funds for the MG Investment. After further discussion between me, Ms. Davison and other representatives of FTC!, Citibank offered to loan me \$10 million on the express condition that the loan be used exclusively to fund FTCI's investment hi the MO Investment. + +13. 1 did not need to borrow the money for FTCI to make the A1G Investment. However, Citibank offered the loaii at an interest rate substantially lower than the rate of the return that Ms. Davison assured would result from the MG Investment. Moreover, Citibank promised to loan me the funds for the life of the A1G Investment.' Consequently, on the basis of Ms. Davison's assurances, I understood Citigroup to be offering me, as one of the Private Bank's most important clients, the, opportunity to use Citibank's money to fund an investment by FTC in atransaction that was assured of yielding asubstantial net positive return, was backed by Citibank's extensive due diligence and would be protected by the continued involvenaent of `Citibank, which was anticipating making an investment in the deal. Under the circumstances, I could not refuse such an offer. + +14. At some point prior to August of 1999, I was provided with aso-called "Pitch Book" promoting the AIG Investment. I am certain that such materials did not contain any information that even remotely suggested to me that 1 had any reason to doubt Ms. Davison's assurances, or raise any concern that my long-standing bankers, and now advisors, were not + +• + +The loan was originally structured as a10-year loan in order to be coterminous with theMG Investment Howeva, Ms. Davison asked me if I "would not mind" structuring the loan as ashort-term loan because, she said, short-term loans are accounted for more favorably on the bank's books than long term 1013115. She assured cue that + +acting in my or FTCI's best interests in recommending this investment. To the contrary, I was persuaded by Ms. Davison's assurances that the Private Bank would be "involved" in the deal, including potentially as an investor. + +15. Based upon all of the foregoing, I decided to proceed with the transaction that 1 had discussed with Ms. Davison, and on or about August 2, 1999, I executed a promissory note in the face amount of \$IO million in favor of Citibank (the "1999 Note"), and then, with the Private Bank's knowledge and approval, and, as required by Citibank, the loan proceeds were wired by Citibank to my Citibank account, and then transferred to FTC1's Citibank account, and then transferred to the bank account designated by Citibank for making the AIG Investment. + +16. At some point, I also received an Offering Circular describing the MG Investment. Based upon what I recall receiving I understood that investors such as FTCI would have the right to change the manager of the fund -- AIG by vote of acertain percentage of the investment or note holders. + +17. This fact was very important to me since it represented the most significant way in which FTCI's interest in the MG Investment could be protected in the event that the fund manager was not pursuing afavorable or successful investment strategy. In fact, I believed, based upon Ms. Davison's assurance that the Private Bank was going to be "involved," coupled with the fact that 1 understood that Citibank's affiliate — Salomon Barney — was acting as Placement Agent, that, if there was ever aproblem with the fund's management, in order to protect the collective interests of FTCI, Citigroup's other important clients and the Private Bank, itself, the Private Bank would have the ability to either influence the fund manager appropriately or amass the consent of the necessary interests in the fund to promptly replace the fund manager. + +the maturity date of the loan would be extended annually, so that neither 1, nor FTC!, would over have to come out of pocket in connection with this investment. + +IS. During 2000, Ms. Davison spoke lame about another, similar investment fund, this one to be managed by MassMutual (the "MassMutual Fund"). 1 understood, based upon my prior discussions with Ms. Davison in 1999, that there would be additional investment opportunities similar to the AM Investment, and 1 further understood the MasiMutual Fund tube such an opportunity. There were negotiations between my representatives and legal advisors, including while they and I were in the U.S. . Virgin Islands, and Ms. Davison and other . representatives of Citigroup, including, but not limited to the Private Bank, concerning the MassMutual Fund. Ultimately, and based upon discussions substantially similar to those that occurred in 1999,1 borrowed another \$10 million from Citibank, which funds were expressly required to be contemporaneously used by me to fund FTCI's investment in the MassMutual Fund. Again, I signed a promissory note payable to Citibank (the "2000 Note"), and the underlying funds were transferral from Citibank to my Citibank account, to FTCI's account, and then to the account designated by Citibank for the investment in the MassMutual Fund. + +• 19. By the Spring of 2001, we made a shocking discovery. Largely through the review of monthly statements furnished by MG, we discovered that the MG Investment was suddenly and rapidly deteriorating, at adine when the similarly-structured MassMutual Fund appeared to be performing as expected. These inconsistent results suggested to me that the problems resided with the manager of the AD) Investment, as opposed to prevailing market conditions; and that my bankers and advisors at the Private Bank were not monitoring the progress of this fund as Ms. Davison assured me they would. + +20. At my insistence, in order to protect FTCI's sizeable investment, ETCI's advisors promptly initiated communications with Ms. Davison and other employees of the Private Bank to + +3 Inote that FTC's investment in the MassMutual Fund now also has drastically declined in value. + +F + +share our concerns, find out what was transpiring with the MG Investment and to request that the Private Bank take action, including coordinating the replacement of the fund manager. + +21. [ understand that Ms. Davison initially indicated to FTCI's representatives that she would cooperate with FTC! in pursuing the removal of AIG as manager. However, 'I subsequently learned the horrifying truth of Citibank's betrayal. I was informed that not only was Ms. Davison unable to timely provide FTCI with the information we needed to pursue a change of managers, but that Citigroup/Citibank was unwilling to assist us at all since to do so would jeopardize an apparently more lucrative relationship that Citibank's affiliate, SSB, had with MG. + +22. Citibank's inability and, ultimately, unwillingness to assist FTC! in pursuing its rights in order to protect its interests, delayed FTCI from effectively pursuing its rights to change 'the manager of the MG Investment, until such time that changing the manager would have been futile since the investment rapidly deteriorated to near zero. + +23. Prior to 2001, I had every reason to believe that the assurances on which I had based my decision to borrow the investment funds from Citibank and cause FTCI to subscribe for the AIG Investment were truthful. Prior to that time, I was never was informed by Ms. Davison or anyone else at Citigroup/Citibank, and never learned through my review of any of the materials provided to me, that Citigroup or Citibank or the Private Bank would in any way be unable or unwilling to assist me or FTC! in pursuing our rights with respect to the MG Investment. Nor did I ever learn prior to 2001 that SSB had an investment banking relationship with MG, much less a relationship that my bankers and advisors would hold in higher regard than my long-standing relationship with the Private Bank. + +24. Had I known of these conflicts and the fact that the Private Bank's advice and recommendation was impaired and tainted in such a meaningfill way, or that Ms. Davison's assurances that Citibank would be •'involved" in the deal were untrue in any way, I never would have proceeded with either the AIG Investment or the MassMutual Fund, never would have executed either the 1999 Note or the 2000 Not; and never would have caused FTC! to invest \$20 million in the investments that were being "placed" by SSB. + +25. I now understand that FTCI's interest in the MG Investment is nearly worthless, and further that FTCI's interest in the MassMutual Fund has drastically decreased in value. + +26. For the foregoing reasons, and those set forth in the accompanying memorandum of law and other submissions made on my and FTCI's behalf; I respectfully request that the Court deny Citibank's motion in its entirety. + +Executed this day of October, 2002 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745391/EFTA02745391.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745391/EFTA02745391.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f5611a3ede866b4e75797a99b77ce60c621dea0c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745391/EFTA02745391.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,462 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745391.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 14698, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.56, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 168.3, + 379.8500061035156 + ], + [ + 453.41070556640625, + 379.8500061035156 + ], + [ + 453.41070556640625, + 436.20001220703125 + ], + [ + 168.3, + 436.20001220703125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.216, + 63.99000000000001 + ], + [ + 285.5591735839844, + 63.99000000000001 + ], + [ + 285.5591735839844, + 94.47802734375 + ], + [ + 72.216, + 94.47802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DECLARATION OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 293.76, + 159.57000000000002 + ], + [ + 536.2055053710938, + 159.57000000000002 + ], + [ + 536.2055053710938, + 177.72802734375 + ], + [ + 293.76, + 177.72802734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 398 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 412 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 412 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 384 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 144 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745391" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745401/EFTA02745401.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745401/EFTA02745401.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..01d85e36b5c2d2976efb41fbcf197115e831668d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745401/EFTA02745401.md @@ -0,0 +1,369 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/1 + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-801.19-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6., + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80351-MARRA/ + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAJ + +C.M.A.. CASE NO: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO: 09-CV-S0591-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO: 09-CV-80656-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR INJUNCTION RESTRAINING FRAUDULENT TRANSFER OF ASSETS, APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN AND TO POST A \$15 MILLION BOND TO SECURE POTENTIAL JUDGMENT + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe, hereby files this Reply Memorandum in Support of her Motion, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 64, for appointment of a receiver to take charge of Epstein's property and to post a \$15 million bond to secure any potential judgment in this case. + +As explained in Jane Doe's motion, Epstein is a billionaire who recently has been fraudulently transferring his assets overseas and elsewhere with the intent to prevent Jane Doe (and possibly several dozen other victims of his sexual abuse) from satisfying any judgment they might obtain against him. In response, Epstein does not deny these allegations, but essentially argues: "Prove It ... If You Can." Jane Doe is willing to take up his challenge in three ways. First, in the face of a supported motion seeking protection against fraudulent transfers, Epstein cannot simply refuse to confirm or deny that he + +is making them. Because he has failed to controvert Jane Doe's claims, they are deemed admitted. Second, in any event, Jane Doe has clear evidentiary support that Epstein is hiding his assets through an adverse inference from his Fifth Amendment invocations. That inference is entirely appropriate in this case, because Epstein has personal knowledge of the subject at hand (whether he is fraudulently transferring assets) and the inference is entirely reasonable on the facts of the case. Third, in addition to the adverse inference, Jane Doe has a perfect circumstantial case of fraudulent transfers: Epstein has the means, motive, and opportunity to hide his assets. + +In view of this proof of fraudulent transfers, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 64 guarantees Jane Doe all available state law pre-judgment remedies to protect her interests. Florida has adopted the Florida Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (FUFTA), Fla. Stat. Ann. § 726.101 a seq., which gives the Court power to appoint a receiver to take charge of assets that are being fraudulently transferred. Epstein's argument that this Court lacks the ability to make such an appointment conflates an ordinary case (where courts are reluctant to take control of a defendant's assets before entry of judgment) and a case in which fraudulent transfers have been proven — in which case seizure of assets is entirely appropriate. + +Given that the Court has the power to appoint a receiver, it should appoint a receiver. Jane Doe has advanced extremely serious allegations of sexual abuse against Epstein, which is likely to produce a substantial judgment in her favor (not to mention judgments of a similar nature in several dozen other cases). This Court should not allow Epstein to move hundreds of millions of dollars overseas before Jane Doe can obtain her judgment, but should instead appoint a receiver - now - to take control of Epstein's assets and to post a \$15 million bond with this Court on behalf of Epstein to satisfy any judgment that Jane Doe might obtain. + +DEFENDANT ESPTEIN HAS NOT DISPUTED JANE DOE'S MATERIAL FACTS WITH HIS OWN MATERIAL FACTS. SO JANE DOE'S FACTS SHOULD BE ACCEPTED + +In her moving papers, Jane Doe provided 14 specific material facts, each supported by evidence. In response, Epstein choose to ignore most of the facts, resorting instead to generalized attacks that the facts are "irrelevant, speculative, and hearsay." Epstein's Memo. in Opp. [DE 198 at 5]. Epstein should not be permitted to proceed in this blunderbuss fashion. Epstein should be required to explain which of the 14 specific facts he disputes — and which he does not. Indeed, his failure to controvert the facts specifically should lead the Court to deem all of them admitted. + +A specific response to each of Jane Doe's material facts is certainly the approach envisioned in this Court's rules. Local Rule 7.5.C.3 explains that, for summary judgment motions, that statements of material facts "shall correspond with the order and with the paragraph numbering scheme used by the movant . . . ." Additional facts "shall be numbered and placed at the end of the opposing party's statement of material facts . . . ." Id. The rule concludes that "[a]II material facts set forth in the movant's statement filed and supported as required by Local Rule 7.5.0 will be deemed admitted unless controverted by the opposing party's statement, provided that the Court finds that the movant's statement is supported by evidence in the record." Id. + +The obvious underlying reason for this point-counterpoint approach is to narrow the range of disputes presented to the court. A party needs to provide a specific basis for contesting the proposed facts of the other side and, without such a basis, should not contest the fact. Epstein has short-circuited this process by refusing to explain which of Jane Doe's facts he contests — and which he admits. + +Obviously, some of Jane Doe's facts are incontestable. For example, Jane Doe has asserted that she seeks more than \$50 million in damages and many other, similarly-situated defendants seek at least the same amount in similar lawsuits pending before this Court and Florida courts. Thus, Epstein is facing more than \$1 billion in damages claims. See Material Facts #1 and #4. If these facts are true, + +then Epstein has an undeniable motive to fraudulently hide his assets. But Epstein sidesteps and obscures this point by refusing to say whether or not he disputes these (quite incontestable) facts. + +Similarly, Jane Doe has alleged that Epstein has international contacts, having travelled overseas with such famous persons as President Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, and Donald Trump. Is Epstein contesting that he has these international travels? Here again, it is impossible to tell because Epstein has not explained whether he is contesting or accepting these facts. + +With regard to several of Jane Doe's facts, Epstein responds generally that they are supported by "hearsay" information. For example, Epstein argues "[t]his appearance of extreme wealth and sophistication in international financial matters is based on inadmissible hearsay . . . ." Epstein's Memo. in Opp. [DE 198 at 6]. Epstein does not deny the truth of these allegations. And, to the extent that the supporting sources for these claims are inadequate, Jane Doe has now filed a motion to supplement her supporting evidence with a new, recently-obtained Declaration — from Epstein himself. See Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motion to Provide Recently-Obtained Affidavit of Jeffrey E. Epstein in Support of Material Facts Supporting Motion for Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein [DE 213]. This Declaration was signed by Esptein in October of 2002 and filed in support of a Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment filed in the matter of Citibank, N.A. v. Jeffrey E. Epstein and Financial Trust Company, Inc., Index No. 02 Civ. 5332(SHS) in United States Southern District of New York, in which Epstein was named individually and as President and Director of Financial Trust Co., Inc. as Defendant. A copy of the Declaration has been provided to Defendant and is attached hereto as Exhibit "A.". In this Declaration Epstein declares under penalty of perjury: + +- That he is President and Director of Financial Trust Company, Inc., a business that provides financial and business consulting services from the U.S. Virgin Islands to its clients. + +- That he has been a legal resident of the U.S. Virgin Islands since 1999, residing at Little St. James Island — a 70-acre island that he owns through a wholly-owned limited liability company. +- From 1987 through the date of the affidavit, Epstein was one of Citibank's most important individual clients. +- In 1999, Epstein and Citibank did a \$10 million deal together, followed by another similar \$10 million deal the next year. These deals involved Epstein borrowing \$20 million from Citibank and then immediately reinvesting them in a fund that Citibank was touting. + +Of course, all of these admissions fully support the claims that Jane Doe made in her initial moving papers. + +Presumably the reason for Epstein refusing to respond point-by-point to Jane Doe's facts is that he does not want to have to respond specifically to Jane Doe's position that he has fraudulently transferred assets in the past and is currently transferring his assets overseas — transfers that are being used to defeat any judgment that might be entered against him in this case. If Epstein were required to go point-by-point through Jane Doe's facts — as the Local Rules envision — then Epstein's counsel would have to either sign a pleading admitting that such fraudulent transfers are taking place or representing, as an officer of the court, that no such transfers are taking place. Far better, Epstein has apparently concluded, to simply duck the issue entirely by blustering in general about how some aspects of Jane Doe's are "speculative" or "irrelevant." + +Because of Epstein's failure to provide specific material facts in opposition to the facts proffered by Jane Doe, all of these facts should be taken as admitted. + +#### JANE DOE HAS PROVIDED SUFFICIENT, UNREBUTTED PROOF THAT EPSTEIN IS FRAUDULENTLY TRANSFERRING ASSETS + +# Jane Doe Has Provided Sufficient Support of Her Alleged Facts + +In addition to Epstein's procedural failures, he has also failed to provide any substantive reason for the court to refuse to accept the facts. Many of the facts are well supported by the affidavit of Paul + +Cassell, Esq., that Jane Doe initially filed. To the extent that any of the information provided in the Cassell affidavit was hearsay, that problem has now disappeared in view of the Declaration signed by Epstein that Jane Doe is providing to the Court. + +The facts regarding Epstein's fraudulent transfers of assets overseas are also sufficiently supported. As envisioned by the local rule, Jane Doe supported her allegations on this point with specific materials "on file with the Court," Local Rule 7.5.C.2, namely, Epstein's answers to her requests for admissions and interrogatories. When asked directly whether he was perpetrating such a fraud, Epstein invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. + +Epstein's invocation should lead the Court to draw the obvious adverse conclusion — that he is, in fact, fraudulently transferring assets overseas. Epstein concedes that the Court has the power to draw such an inference. See Epstein's Memo. in Opp. at 8. He gamely maintains, however, that such an inference is somehow not proper under the test laid out by United States v. Custer Battles, LLC, 415 F.Supp.2d 628, 633 (ED. Va. 2006). + +Custer Battles lays out a two-prong test for deciding whether a factfinder can appropriately draw an adverse inference. The first prong is whether there is "a valid basis for asserting the privilege." Id. at 633. "When the privilege is invoked during discovery, this validity issue is typically resolved via a motion to compel." Id. Because the burden rests squarely on Epstein to show the specific basis for his invocation, Jane Doe has filed currently-pending motions to compel answers to her requests for admissions, requests for production, and interrogatories. See, e.g., Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motion to Compel Answers to Plaintiff's First Request for Admissions to Defendant [DE 211) (filed July 20, 2009). If after reviewing Jane Doe's motion to compel, the Court concludes that Epstein does not have a valid basis for invoking privilege about asset transfers, then Epstein will have to explain where he has transferred his assets and this motion can be resolved in light of specific explanations from + +Epstein. If, on the other hand, the Court concludes that Epstein does have a valid basis for invoking privilege about asset transfers, then the Court will have concluded that Epstein "might be prosecuted in this country" for making fraudulent transfers. Custer Battles, 415 F.Supp.2d at 633. The issue then arises about what the court should infer from this fact. + +The second-prong of the Custer Battles test explains how the Court should resolve whether to draw the obvious inference against Epstein. The Court should make "an assessment [of] whether the requested inference, which [is] a form of evidence, compl[ies] with the Federal Rules of Evidence. Thus, any adverse inferences must be relevant, reliable, and not unfairly prejudicial, confusing, or cumulative." Id. at 634 (internal citation omitted), quoted in Epstein's Memo. in Opp. [DE 198 at 9]. Surprisingly, having set out this governing, second prong of the test, Epstein does not pause to analyze whether it is satisfied. Presumably that is because the test obviously is satisfied. The inference that Epstein is fraudulently transferring assets is plainly "relevant" to Jane Doe's motion to have the Court intervene to stop the fraud. The inference is likewise "reliable," because Epstein makes no argument (nor offers any evidence) to the contrary. And the inference is clearly "not unfairly prejudicial, confusing, or cumulative" because it goes to the central issue in this motion. + +## The Fifth Amendment Cases Do Not Require Independent Evidence Before An Adverse Inference Can Be Drawn + +Rather than analyze whether the inference satisfies the two-prong Custer Battles test, Epstein pulls another sentence out of context from the opinion, which he claims forms yet a third prong of what Custer Battles itself describes as a "two step inquiry." Id. at 633. Epstein argues that an adverse inference can only be drawn when independent evidence exists of the fact to which the party refuses to answer. Epstein's Memo. in Opp. [DE 198 at 9]. But that is not what Custer Battles actually says. Instead, Custer Battles discusses the need to show through independent evidence that an adverse inference satisfies the requirement of "personal knowledge" (one of the requirements for admissible + +evidence under Fed. It. Evid. 602). The case explains: "This finding of personal knowledge must itself rely on the other evidence to be presented at trial; a conclusion as to the reliability of an inference cannot derive by bootstrapping from Morris' [the defendant's] seemingly blanket invocation of the privilege against self-incrimination." Custer Battles, 41 F.Supp.2d at 634-35 (emphasis added). Thus, Custer Battles cautioned against drawing inferences about other people's state of mind via an adverse inference from defendant Morris' invocation of his Fifth Amendment rights. But the Court had no difficulty in finding an inference proper regarding Morris' own state of mind: "This [need for proof of personal knowledge] is not a problem here, as none of the six deposition questions [as to which Morris took the Fifth] inquire into matters as to which there is any doubt about Morris' personal knowledge." Id. So too here: There can be no doubt about Epstein's personal knowledge about whether he himself is fraudulently transferring assets — which is the narrow question that Jane Doe propounded in her requests for admission. Accordingly, an adverse inference would be entirely reliable and proper in this case. + +Epstein also provides two "see also" citations in support of his claim that Jane Doe must provide some kind of "independent evidence" of his fraudulent transfers in order to gain the inference of fraudulent transfers. The first is Avirgan v. Hull, 932 F.2d 1572, 1580 (11th Cir. 1991), in which Plaintiffs who had filed a frivolous lawsuit appealed from a district court decision granting summary judgment against them. The plaintiffs in that case had attempted to defeat summary judgment by arguing that several of the defendants had not complied with discovery and invoked the Fifth Amendment in response to certain questions during discovery. The Eleventh Circuit, however, rejected that claim by explaining that the fact that several defendants had raised Fifth Amendment objections to discovery did not bar a summary judgment grant: "Invocation of the fifth amendment privilege did not give rise to any legally cognizable inferences sufficient to preclude entry of summary + +judgment. The negative inference, if any, to be drawn from the assertion of the fifth amendment does not substitute for evidence needed to meet the burden of production. Most importantly, Avirgan and Honey did not demonstrate that further discovery would have led to evidence which would have precluded summary judgment . . . . " Id. at 1580 (citing United States v. Rylander, 460 U.S. 752 (1983)). Avirgan thus stands for the unexceptional proposition that the mere fact that someone has raised the Fifth Amendment does not prevent them from filing a well-supported summary judgment motion. That principle has little application, however, to this case; here it is Jane Doe who is the moving party. Epstein has not provided any evidence that the Court should not draw an adverse inference — or, indeed, any evidence at all in opposition to her motion. Accordingly, Avirgan is not on point and certainly does not suggest that Jane Doe needs to provide some sort of independent evidence to obtain an adverse inference.' + +The other case cited by Epstein -- Eagle Hospital Physicians, LLC v. SRC Consulting, Inc., 561 F.3d 1298 (1 Cir. 2009) -- is likewise unavailing. There, a defendant presented an affidavit to the district court that attached attorney-client privileged e-mails of the plaintiff company. When the company deposed the defendant in an effort to learn how he obtained these sensitive documents, the defendant took the Fifth. Based on these facts alone, the district court drew the adverse inference that the plaintiff maintained the ability to monitor the company's confidential e-mails. On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's decision to draw an adverse inference. The Circuit explained that "Mlle decision to invoke the Fifth Amendment does not have to be consequence-free." Id. Instead, a court need only avoid "an undue burden" on the constitutional invocation. An undue burden would exist from "[title automatic entry of an adverse judgment solely as a result of the + +In addition, as explained below, Jane Doe has independent evidence via the circumstantial evidence of fraudulent transfers that she has provided to the Court, specifically the means, motive, and opportunity evidence. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/a + +assertion of the Fifth Amendment." Id. at 1304. Similarly, "a dismissal following the assertion of the Fifth Amendment violates the Constitution where the inferences drawn from the Fifth-Amendmentprotected silence are treated as a substitute for the need for evidence on an ultimate issue of fact." Id. + +Here, Jane Doe does not propose either the "automatic entry of an adverse judgment" or "a dismissal" based on a conclusion of "ultimate fact." Rather, Jane Doe asks this Court to draw the specific adverse inference that Epstein is fraudulently transferring assets. That adverse inference then becomes a link in a chain of reasoning asking not for ultimate entry of final judgment in her favor, but rather for interim appointment of a receiver over Epstein's assets to preserve the status quo and prevent any further fraudulent transfers. At the end of the case, after paying whatever judgment the jury returns, Epstein will then regain control over his remaining assets. Therefore, drawing the inference as part of resolving this motion does not burden Epstein with any conclusion of ultimate fact, but instead does no more than was done in Eagle Hospital: "assign the proper evidentiary weight to [Epstein's] silence." Id. at 1304. + +The conclusion that the Court can draw an adverse inference on the facts of this case is also supported by common sense. It is exceedingly difficult for Jane Doe to get information about Epstein's assets. Indeed, this Court has previously recognized that "Din the fraudulent transfer context, . . . the defendant, as opposed to the plaintiff, is more likely to possess the particularized information about the complained-of conduct." Special Purpose Accounts Receivable Co-op Corp. v. Prime One Capital Co., .L.L.C, 2007 WL 4482611 (S.D. Fla. 2007) (Marra, J.). Obtaining information about the whereabouts of Epstein's assets is particularly difficult, given his financial sophistication in structuring control over those assets. See. e.g., Declaration of Jeffrey E. Epstein, Attachment I, at 1 (noting ownership of of Little St. James Island in the U.S. Virgin Islands through a wholly-owned limited liability company itself resident in the Virgin Islands). Therefore, the Court should draw the + +obvious inference that the reason Epstein is taking the Fifth when asked about his fraudulent transfers of assets is because he is making fraudulent transfers of assets. + +# In Any Event, Jane Doe Has Provided Circumstantial Evidence of Epstein's Fraudulent Transfers. + +Even assuming, for sake of argument, that these cases could be read as establishing some sort of requirement that Jane Doe produce independent evidence of fraudulent transfers before obtaining an adverse inference, Jane Doe has produced that evidence. As explained in detail in her moving papers, Jane Doe has a "perfect circumstantial evidence case that [Epstein] ha[s] means, motive, and opportunity to fraudulently transfer assets." Jane Doe's Motion to Restrain Fraudulent Transfer of Assets at 11 (quoting United States v. Sparks, 265 F.3d 825, 830 (9th Cir. 2001)).2 Epstein completely misses the point of Jane Doe's means, motive, and opportunity argument, construing it as some sort of new "test" for deciding whether asset transfers are fraudulent. See Epstein's Memo. in Opp. at [DE 198 at 19-20]. But Jane Doe offers this circumstantial evidence not as a test for determining a fraudulent transfer, but as evidence that Epstein is making fraudulent transfers. Epstein cannot plausibly deny that he has the means, motive, and opportunity to move all of his substantial assets overseas beyond the reach of Jane Doe. This circumstantial evidence should be more than enough to meet whatever sort of burden of production Epstein wants to tease out of the adverse inferences cases. + +Indeed, taken to its logical conclusion, Epstein's argument about Jane Doe's purported need to provide "independent evidence" of fraudulent transfers ultimately collapses under its own weight. Epstein would apparently require Jane Doe to track down his fraudulent asset transfers to foreign countries, providing documentation of these fraudulent transfers. Of course, if she had clear + +2 Epstein claims that the Sparks decision is "completely inapposite" because it concerns probable cause for an arrest, rather than a fraudulent asset determination. Epstein's Memo. in Opp. at 20. But the legal principle at stake — that circumstantial evidence can provide strong proof — is the same regardless of the precise facts of the case. Indeed, if circumstantial evidence can be used at the basis for arresting a man and throwing him into jail (as in Sparks), then it would easily seem to provide a sufficient basis for the interim appointment of receiver to prevent fraudulent asset transfers. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/a + +documentation of these transfers, there would be no need to rely on an adverse inference. In other words, Epstein's interpretation of the burden that Jane Doe must sustain to obtain an adverse inference would make the inference all but irrelevant. + +Epstein's position also ignores the realities of this case. As Jane Doe proffered in her statement of facts, without direct response from Epstein, "Epstein has blocked all discovery, in this and other related cases, regarding his assets." Jane Doe's Motion to Restrain Fraudulent Transfer of Assets at 8 (supported by uncontested affidavit of her legal counsel). Jane Doe had further proffered that Epstein is a man of great financial sophistication, id. at 6 — a fact now undeniably supported by Epstein's own affidavit. See Declaration of Jeffrey E. Epstein at 2, Attachment 1 (swearing under oath that Epstein provides financial advice from the U.S. Virgin Islands in securities and other matters to his clients and that he is viewed by Citibank as "one of its most important individual clients"). Given the fact that asset transfers can take place to such countries as Israel, Switzerland, and the Cayman Islands, placing the burden on Jane Doe to document fraudulent asset transfers to such destinations effectively gives a light to massive fraud — a fraud that could ultimately total in the neighborhood of one billion dollars (\$1,000,000,000.00). See Jane Doe's Motion to Restrain Fraudulent Transfer of Assets at [DE 165 at 5] (statement of material fact that Epstein is a billionaire). The Fifth Amendment does not require such obtuse results. Instead, it permits the narrow and reasonable inference that Epstein is fraudulently transferring his assets, permitting the Court to take appropriate remedial action. + +# Drawing an Adverse Inference Would Not Violate the Fifth Amendment + +Epstein also tries to argue that drawing an adverse inference on these facts would violate his Fifth Amendment rights. Epstein contends that "a judgment cannot rest solely upon a privileged refusal to admit or deny at the pleading stage." Epstein Memo. in Opp. [DE 198 at 10] (quoting LaSalle Bank Lake View v. Seguban, 54 F.3d 387, 391 (7th Cir. 1995) (emphasis added)). As just + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/a + +explained, Jane Doe has circumstantial evidence of fraudulent transfers. But more important for purposes of this argument, Jane Doe is not asking for a final judgment to be entered on Epstein's fraudulent transfer of assets. Instead, she is asking merely for an adverse evidentiary inference that then becomes a piece of evidence supporting her motion. In turn, her motion merely asks for an interim measure that would protect the status quo: a receiver to account for Epstein's assets and prevent him from hiding them overseas. + +Blocking fraudulent transfers is hardly the sort of "coercive" practice that is of concern in the cases cited by Epstein. The cases are clear that using the Fifth Amendment to block discovery need not be "cost free." McKune v. Lik, 536 U.S. 24, 41 (2002). Here, there is no real cost to Epstein from the appointment of a receiver. All Jane Doe wants is a receiver to control Epstein's assets to keep them from dissipating overseas and to post a bond (in an interest-bearing account) to satisfy any judgment that she might obtain. These measures will only harm Epstein if he is attempting to fraudulently transfer his assets outside the reach of the Court. This is not the sort of burden that might even conceivably implicate true Fifth Amendment concerns. + +#### Jane Doe Has Met the Elements to Obtain Relief Under Florida's Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act + +Somewhat out of order, Epstein argues in the tail end of his response that Jane Doe has failed to sufficiently prove fraudulent transfers under Florida's Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act ("FUFTA"), Fla. Stat. §§ 726.101 et seq. Memo. in Opp. at [DE 198 at 1821]. Epstein argues that a fraudulent transfer is proven where: (1) a transfer of property has in fact occurred; (2) the property transferred belonged to the debtor; (3) the transfer occurred within certain statutory time periods; and (4) the debtor made the transfer with the intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors. Memo. in Opp. at [DE + +198 at 18] (citing In re Leneve, 341 B.R. 53, 56 (Bkrtcy S.D. Fla. 2006)? However, Epstein does not grapple with the fact that Jane Doe has properly proven each of these four points with regard to the first factor — transfer of property — Jane Doe's Material Fact #9 is that Epstein has "conveyed money and assets in an attempt to insulate and protect his money and assets from being capture[d] in civil lawsuits filed against him." + +With regard to the second factor — that the property belonged to the debtor — Jane Doe's Material Fact #9 and #12 (among others) is that he is moving his assets (which total more than \$1 billion, according to Material Fact #8) overseas. + +With regard to the third factor — that the transfers occurred within the appropriate time limits — Jane Doe's Material Fact #9 is that the fraudulent transfers have been taking place "since he was incarcerated" (i.e., since June 2008) and Material Fact #11 is that they are going on "currently." This on-going activity obviously satisfies whatever applicable time limits may apply.' + +With regard to the fourth factor — that Epstein made the transfers with the intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors — Jane Doe's Material Fact #9 is that Epstein has "conveyed money and assets in an attempt to insulate and protect his money and assets from being captured in civil lawsuits filed against him" and Material Fact #12 is that "Epstein is transferring these assets with the intent to defeat any judgment that might be entered against him in this and other similar cases." Plainly Jane Doe has covered the required elements of a case under the FUFTA .5 There is thus no need for the + +3 Epstein incorrectly cites this case has having been decided by this Court (the U.S. District Court for the S.D. of Florida), when in fact it was decided by the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida. + +It is not clear that any time limit applies under the FUFTA. The case cited by Epstein is a bankruptcy case, which refers to the need to prove that "[t]he transfer was within one year of the date of the filing of the [bankruptcy] petition." See In re Leneve, 351 B.R. at 56, citing In re Ingersoll. 124 B.R. 116, 120 (M.D. Fla. 1991). The FUFTA eschews any rigid time limit if it can be shown that transfer was made with the "intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any creditor of the debtor." Ha. Stat. Ann. § 726.105(1)(a). Jane Doe has made such a showing, as explained in the next paragraph in text. + +5 For this reason, Epstein's citation of In re Stewart, 280 B.R. 268, 285 (Bkrtcy. M.D. Ha. 2001), is not on point. In that case, the plaintiff had merely made allegations without providing any supporting evidence — + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/a + +Court to delve into the "badges of fraud" sometimes needed to determine fraudulent intent. See, e.g., In re Dealers Agency Services, Inc., 380 B.R. 608, 613 (Bkrtcy. M.D. Fla. 2007). Courts use these badges of fraud because it is, in some cases, "difficult to establish a transferor's actual intent." In re Ratnsurat, 361 B.R. 246, 254 (Bkrtcy. M.D. Fla... 2006). Here, however, Jane Doe's material facts establish the fraudulent intent. It could hardly be otherwise: Epstein has not alleged (much less proven) that he is moving his assets to overseas for any legitimate business purpose. + +For all these reasons, the Court should conclude that Epstein is fraudulently transferring his assets. + +#### JANE DOE IS ENTITLED TO RELIEF TO BLOCK EPSTEIN'S FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS UNDER THE UNIFORM FRAUDULENT TRANSFER ACT AS ADOPTED BY FLORIDA + +In light of Epstein's fraudulent asset transfers, Jane Doe is entitled to pre judgment remedies to protect her. For purposes of navigating through the Court's PACER filing system, Jane Doe has checked the "injunction" box in the automated system. But. as made clear in the body of Jane Doe's motion, while the relief can be viewed as a form of injunctive relief, is more precisely viewed as a prejudgment seizure of property. In any event, the name is not important. See v. Cascade Intern., Inc., 21 F.3d 1520, 1530 (11th Cir. 1994) ("federal courts look past the terminology to the actual nature of the relief requested") (internal quotation omitted). Jane Doe's requested relief is specifically authorized by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 64,6 which guarantees Jane Doe during the course of + +unlike Jane Doe, who has provided an affidavit of counsel, adverse inferences from discovery propounded to Epstein, and circumstantial evidence of the mean, motive, and opportunity for fraudulent transfers. Moreover, in Stewart, that plaintiff did not "allege any specific fact which, even if admitted, would support a finding that transfer was made with the actual intent to defraud a creditor." Id. at 286. Here, of course, that is precisely what Jane Doe has alleged — and proven — all without any denial from Epstein. + +6 Because Jane Doe is proceeding under Fed. R. Civ. P. 64 ("Seizure of Person or Property") rather than Fed. R. Civ. P. 64 ("Injunctions"), she has not organized her brief around the well-known four factor test for obtaining injunctive relief. At the same time, however, her moving papers specifically discuss each of the four factors and it is obviously that she easily satisfies them. First, Jane Doe has shown a likelihood of success on the merits. As explained in her moving papers (see Jane Doe's Motion at 16-18), at trial she and several dozen young girls will all testify to a pattern of sexual abuse by + +this suit "all remedies providing for seizure of person or property for the purpose of securing satisfaction of the judgment ultimately to be entered in the action" that are "available under the circumstances and in the manner provided by the law of the state in which the court is held." The Rule goes on to provide that "[t]he remedies thus available include arrest, attachment, garnishment, replevin, sequestration, and other corresponding or equivalent remedies, however designated and regardless of whether by state procedure the remedy is ancillary to an action or must be obtained by an independent action." This "long-settled federal law provid[es] that in all cases in federal court , . . . state law is incorporated to determine the availability of prejudgment remedies for the seizure of person or property to secure satisfaction of the judgment ultimately entered." =, 21 F.3d at 1531. Accordingly, under this Rule, this Court looks to Florida law to determine Jane Doe's rights to prejudgment relief.' + +To prevent fraudulent transfers of assets before judgment, Florida has adopted the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act. Fla. Stat. Ann. § 726.101 et seq. Under Florida's Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (FUFTA), courts are broadly empowered to take action to block fraudulent transfers of assets. Epstein attempts to obscure the power of this Court to block his fraud by arguing to the Court that "freezing a defendant's assets to establish a fund with which to satisfy a potential judgment for money damages is not an appropriate exercise of a federal district court's authority." Mem. in Opp. + +Epstein. Epstein has pled guilty to abusing some of these girls and has invoked the Fifth Amendment rather than answer any questions about it. Second. Jane Doe will obviously be irreparably harmed if Epstein succeeds in fraudulently transferring his assets beyond the reach of this Court, has she will be unable to satisfy any judgment that she might obtain against him. Third, this injury clearly outweighs any injury to Epstein, as Epstein has not explained how he would be in any way harmed by the existence of a receiver whose job is merely to account for assets and block fraudulent transfers. Finally, such an injunction would serve the public interest, as it would prevent a billionaire sex offender from depriving Jane Doe (and his other victims) of compensation for the abuse he committed against them. + +Because Jane Doe is proceeding under Fed. R. Civ. P. 64, there is no requirement that she engage in a paper faby filing some sort of separate state law claim, as Epstein seems to argue. Mem. in Opp. at II. See , 21 F.3d at 1531 ("Rule 64 commands that the proper pretrial remedy to ensure that a fund will be available with which to satisfy a money judgment . . . is available according to the provisions of the forum state's law."). + +[DE 198 at 12-13] (citing v. Cascade Intern., Inc., 21 F.3d 1520, 1531 (11th Cir. 1994)). But Jane Doe stands not in the position of an ordinary tort claimant who is merely trying to gain a leg up on the collection of an anticipated judgment; instead, she is trying to block Epstein from altering the status quo by hiding all of his assets. + +The difference between trying to gain an advantage in the collection process versus blocking fraudulent transfers is widely recognized in the case law. For example, Epstein's lead case — v. Cascade Intern., Inc., 21 F.3d 1520 (11th Cir. 1994) — refused to approve a pre-judgment injunction seizing assets where the plaintiff had merely argued that this would help in collecting a judgment down the road. The Eleventh Circuit specifically recognized that fraudulent transfers of assets presented an entirely different problem: + +Contrary to [plaintiff's] assertion, our holding that a district court is without the power to grant such preliminary injunctive relief does not mean that a federal court is powerless to protect a potential future damages remedy against a recalcitrant defendant with highly liquid assets, no matter how wrongful its conduct, how bad the injury it caused, or how brazen its attempt to evade judgment by secreting assets. On the contrary, Rule 64 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorizes the prejudgment attachment of property for the benefit of a plaintiff in certain situations and provides the proper vehicle for plaintiffs seeking to restrain a defendant's assets with an eye towards satisfying a potential money judgment. + +21 F.3d at 1520. In this case, of course, Jane Doe is face with a brazen attempt by Epstein to hide his assets. She has responded by proceeding under Rule 64, which plaintiffs in her position. calls the "proper vehicle" for + +Equally off point is Epstein's other main case — De Beers Canso!. Mines v. United States, 325 U.S. 212, 219 (1945) — in which the "Government disclaim( ed any benefit of [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 64], which provides for an attachment . . . during the course of an action for the purpose of securing payment of any judgment" (emphasis added). Here, of course, far from "disclaiming" use of Fed. R. Civ. 64, Jane Doe is proceeding under it. The apparent reason that the Government + +disclaimed use of Rule 64 in De Beers was that it was not seeking any sort of money damages. See Hoxworth v. Blinder, & Co., Inc., 903 F.2d 186, 195 (3rd Cir. 1990) (explaining why De Beers is a peculiar case that "must be understood in its context"). In later cases, the Supreme Court has not hesitated to approve relief to prevent fraudulent dissipation of assets that might be used to satisfy a judgment awarding money damages. See, e.g., United States v. First National City Bank, 379 U.S. 378, 385 (1965) (approving a temporary injunction to prevent "transfer[ring] assets abroad" and distinguishing De Beers). + +In one final attempt to obscure this Court's power, Epstein cites Lawhon v. Mason, 611 So.2d 1367, 1368 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993), as rejecting plaintiff's motion to prohibit a defendant from transferring assets. Mem. in Opp. at 14. But the specific reason given for rejecting the motion was that the plaintiffs were not proceeding "under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act." 611 So.2d at 1368. Of course, in this case, Jane Doe is proceeding under Florida's Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, incorporated as a state law remedy into Fed. R. Civ. P. 64.8 + +For all these masons, the Court has the power to protect Jane Doe through the provisions of the FUFTA. + +#### UNDER FLORIDA'S UNIFORM FRAUDULENT TRANSFER ACT, JANE DOE IS ENTITLED TO THE REMEDIES OF APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF EPSTEIN'S ASSETS, FILE AN ACCOUNTING OF THOSE ASSETS WITH THE COURT. AND TO POST A \$15 MILLION BOND + +In her motion, Jane Doe sought appointment of a receiver to take charge of Epstein's assets, to file an accounting of those assets, and to post a \$15,000,000 bond. Jane Doe explained that the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act gives this Court broad remedial powers to prevent fraudulent transfers of assets. The remedies provided by the Act include: + +8 Epstein cites certain cases regarding the nature of affidavits and other proof that must be provided when a plaintiff proceeds under the general prejudgment attachment provisions found in Fla. Stat. § 76.01. See Mem. in Opp. at 15-16. Those requirements have no bearing on Jane Doe's motion, which proceeds under the FUFTA. + +- I. An injunction against further disposition by the debtor ... of the asset transferred ... +- 2. Appointment of a receiver to take charge of the asset transferred or of other property of the transferee; or +- 3. Any other relief the circumstances may require. Ha. Stat. Ann. § 726.108(c). + +In response, Epstein argues that this Court is powerless to appoint a receiver, because section + +(2) of the META refers to a receiver to take control "of the asset transferred or of other property of the transferee." But Epstein does not deny that the Court obviously has the power to appoint a receiver under section (3) of the FUFTA, which broadly confers power on court to award "[ably other relief the circumstances may require." For this reason, it is not important that Jane Doe shoehorn her claim within section (2). Instead, she can rely on (3), which is "a 'catch-all' phrase that allows courts to award "other relief." Freeman v. First Union Nat. Bank, 865 So.2d 1272, 1276 (Fla. 2004). The intent of this provision was "to facilitate the use of the other remedies provided in the statute," id. presumably including receivers, since they are discussed in the statute. The only question, then, is whether the "circumstances" here make the appointment of a receiver appropriate. A receiver is the remedy that makes the most sense, because the receiver can identify where Epstein's assets are and can prevent further fraudulent transfers, + +Epstein does not even argue (much less, convincingly argue) that appointment of a receiver is inappropriate. Instead, he dives off on a detour regarding the circumstances in which fiduciaries can obtain an equitable accounting. See Memo. in Opp. at 16-17. However, those cases allow an accounting where "the remedy at law is inadequate." Florida Software Systems, Inc. v. Columbia/HCA Helathcare Corp., 46 F.Supp. 1276, 1285 (M.D. Fla. 1999) (citing Kee v. National Reserve Life Insurance Co., 918 F.2d 1538, 1540 (11th Cir. 1990). If the Court denies Jane Doe's motion, then she will be completely without any remedy to bar Epstein's fraudulent transfers — leaving her with no + +9A receiver to account for Epstein's assets also makes sense because there are more than twenty other plaintiffs with sexual abuse claims against Epstein, who may be similarly situated to Jane Doe. A receiver can block fraudulent transfers that would harm these victims as well. + +"remedy at law." Moreover, Epstein pretends that the only point of the receiver is to provide an itemized list of his assets, as though this were a mere accounting exercise. But the main point of the receiver is block further fraudulent transfers by exercising control over Epstein's assets. Jane Doe will not be comforted to get an accounting next year after trial showing that Epstein has moved his hundreds of millions of dollars to Swiss bank accounts, Israeli corporations, and Cayman Island investment trusts. Instead, she wants a receiver appointed now to keep Epstein from fully perpetrating a billion-dollar fraud. + +After the receiver is in place, Jane Doe also asks for the posting of \$15,000,000 bond. Here again, Epstein quibbles about the Court's authority to order such an award, without addressing the fact that this Court has broad power to give Jane Doe "[a]ny other relief the circumstances may require." Fla. Stat. Ann. § 726.108(c). Such a bond is appropriate in the circumstances here, particularly given that Epstein never contests Jane Doe's argument as to why such a bond is a reasonable given the judgment she is likely to obtain. See Jane Doe's Motion to Restrain Fraudulent Transfer of Assets at [DE 165 at 16-17]. + +### THE COURT ALSO HAS EQUITABLE POWERS TO PREVENT FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS + +For all the reasons just explained, the Court has specifically direct power to appoint a receiver under the FUFTA. But Jane Doe also explained in her motion that the Court has additional equitable powers. As the Florida cases explain, the UFTA "grants the court equity powers to remedy . .. fraud." Invo Florida, Inc. v. Somerset Venturer, Inc., 751 So.2d 1263, 1267 (Fla. Ct. Apps. 2000). The FUFTA's provisions are "supplement[ed]" by "the principles of law and equity." Ha. Stat. Ann. § 726.111. Epstein does not contest Jane Doe's argument that "equity will do what ought to be done." Jane Doe's Motion to Restrain Fraudulent Transfer of Assets at 17 (citing Sterling v. Brevard County, 776 So.2d 281, 284 (Fla. CL Apps. 2000)). The only question then is "what ought to be done?" + +Epstein's answer to that question, at least as can be inferred from his pleadings, is that he should be allowed to take the Fifth on all questions about his sexual abuse of Jane Doe and where his assets are, and then be left free to fraudulently transfer all of hundreds of millions of dollars of assets to such places as Switzerland, Israel, and tax havens in the Caribbean — ultimately leaving Jane Doe unable to obtain any financial compensation for the abuse he inflicted on her and the financial losses that it he entails. This Court should not allow such an affront to Jane Doe (and other victims of Epstein, a convicted sex offender) — not to mention the affront to the ability of this Court to enforce any judgment the jury might ultimately return. When this Court proceeds in equity, it "will not suffer a wrong to be without a remedy." Connell v. Mittendwf, 147 So.2d 169, 172 (Fla. Ct. Apps. 1962). Jane Doe asks for the straightforward relief of appointing a receiver to take control over Epstein's assets and make arrangement to prevent further fraudulent transfers. Jane Doe has explained precisely how the receiver should operate, providing a proposed order for the Court's consideration. Epstein has not argued that the proposed order is burdensome in any way or suffers from any flaws. Indeed, the Court can read his entire response without finding any substantive reason why the Court should not take the obvious step of intervening to block fraudulent movement of his assets overseas. Instead, Epstein raises alleged legal roadblocks and procedural requirements that somehow keep the Court from doing "what ought to be done." + +For all the reasons explained here and in Jane Doe's opening papers, the Court should do what equity demands: It should reject Epstein's makeweight arguments and intervene to block Epstein's fraud by appointing a receiver to take charge of his assets. + +## CONCLUSION + +WHEREFORE, in view of the fraudulent transfers being made by Jeffrey Epstein to prevent Jane Doe from satisfying any judgment she might obtain in this case, the Court should appoint a + +receiver to take charge of Epstein's property and direct the receiver to provide the Court with an accounting of Epstein's assets and post a \$15 million bond to secure any potential judgment that Jane Doe might obtain in this case. + +DATED July 23, 2009 Respectfully Submitted, + +s/ J. + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: ca.ssellp@law.utah.edu + +### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 23, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> J. J. + +#### SERVICE LIST Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jeoldberger@agwoa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bciclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg riosefsberg@oodhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745401/EFTA02745401.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745401/EFTA02745401.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..23bc384fc866a978087fedf8bc208fb2d0115480 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745401/EFTA02745401.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1335 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745401.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 26, + "chars": 50081, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.01, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 55.89000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.1572570800781, + 55.89000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.1572570800781, + 85.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 85.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR \nINJUNCTION RESTRAINING FRAUDULENT TRANSFER OF ASSETS, APPOINTMENT \nOF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN AND TO POST A $15 \nMILLION BOND TO SECURE POTENTIAL JUDGMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 59.976, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 552.5664672851562, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 552.5664672851562, + 485.60302734375 + ], + [ + 59.976, + 485.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JANE DOE HAS PROVIDED SUFFICIENT, UNREBUTTED PROOF THAT EPSTEIN IS \nFRAUDULENTLY TRANSFERRING ASSETS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 67.932, + 621.27 + ], + [ + 545.51806640625, + 621.27 + ], + [ + 545.51806640625, + 649.8630218505859 + ], + [ + 67.932, + 649.8630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Jane Doe Has Provided Sufficient Support of Her Alleged Facts", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 90.576, + 661.77 + ], + [ + 414.1274108886719, + 661.77 + ], + [ + 414.1274108886719, + 677.6030197143555 + ], + [ + 90.576, + 677.6030197143555 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Fifth Amendment Cases Do Not Require Independent Evidence Before An Adverse \nInference Can Be Drawn", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 90.576, + 507.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 557.1655883789062, + 507.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 557.1655883789062, + 537.3630218505859 + ], + [ + 90.576, + 537.3630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "In Any Event, Jane Doe Has Provided Circumstantial Evidence of Epstein's Fraudulent Transfers.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 54.467999999999996, + 148.23 + ], + [ + 550.3609619140625, + 148.23 + ], + [ + 550.3609619140625, + 164.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 54.467999999999996, + 164.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Drawing an Adverse Inference Would Not Violate the Fifth Amendment", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 89.964, + 589.6800000000001 + ], + [ + 453.4437255859375, + 589.6800000000001 + ], + [ + 453.4437255859375, + 605.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 89.964, + 605.9830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Jane Doe Has Met the Elements to Obtain Relief Under Florida's Uniform Fraudulent \nTransfer Act", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 480.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 542.1641845703125, + 480.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 542.1641845703125, + 509.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 509.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JANE DOE IS ENTITLED TO RELIEF TO BLOCK EPSTEIN'S FRAUDULENT \nTRANSFERS UNDER THE UNIFORM FRAUDULENT TRANSFER ACT AS \nADOPTED BY FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 90.576, + 315.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 521.9583740234375, + 315.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 521.9583740234375, + 357.363037109375 + ], + [ + 90.576, + 357.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNDER FLORIDA'S UNIFORM FRAUDULENT TRANSFER ACT, JANE DOE IS \nENTITLED TO THE REMEDIES OF APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE \nCHARGE OF EPSTEIN'S ASSETS, FILE AN ACCOUNTING OF THOSE ASSETS \nWITH THE COURT. AND TO POST A $15 MILLION BOND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 99.144, + 507.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 549.576, + 507.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 549.576, + 564.7330169677734 + ], + [ + 99.144, + 564.7330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "THE COURT ALSO HAS EQUITABLE POWERS TO PREVENT \nFRAUDULENT TRANSFERS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 22, + "polygon": [ + [ + 148.71599999999998, + 480.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 499.5085754394531, + 480.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 499.5085754394531, + 509.60302734375 + ], + [ + 148.71599999999998, + 509.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 23, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 645.5699999999999 + ], + [ + 349.43621826171875, + 645.5699999999999 + ], + [ + 349.43621826171875, + 661.1030120849609 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 661.1030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 24, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 536.22 + ], + [ + 388.5423889160156, + 536.22 + ], + [ + 388.5423889160156, + 550.863037109375 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 550.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nJane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 25, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 455.6502685546875, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 455.6502685546875, + 191.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 191.68353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 74 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 78 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 68 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745401" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745427/EFTA02745427.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745427/EFTA02745427.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8b3cac94c9661958b3b90115b34764faa095c1da --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745427/EFTA02745427.md @@ -0,0 +1,119 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRAM= + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEI-I-REY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/1 + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's, Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time in which to Submit an Agreed Order Pursuant to this Court's Order dated July 7, 2009 (DE 192). Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiffs' counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Panics shall have until before July 28, 2009 to comply with Order (DE 192). + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745427/EFTA02745427.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745427/EFTA02745427.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bb63d2bf662e03507c6f7b5666e9d5787e29c00b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745427/EFTA02745427.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745427.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1636, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.39, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 413.60565185546875, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 413.60565185546875, + 104.60302734375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 104.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.744, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 332.6433410644531, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 332.6433410644531, + 641.6030120849609 + ], + [ + 282.744, + 641.6030120849609 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745427" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745431/EFTA02745431.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745431/EFTA02745431.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..74e73a405f2ed37807ced7d60c39c6dda2df12d7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745431/EFTA02745431.md @@ -0,0 +1,369 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEI-PREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEPPREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEWREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA I + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-NIARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRAJ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO SUBMIT AGREED ORDER PURSUANT TO COURT ORDER(DE 192) + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which to submit an + +Agreed Order, if possible, pursuant to this Court's Order dated July 7, 2009 (DE 192) granting Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe 102's Motion for an Order for Preservation of Evidence. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: + +- 1. On May 26, 2009, Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102, filed a Motion for an Order for Preservation of Evidence with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 114). +- 2. On June 10, 2009, Defendant Epstein, filed his Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion (DE 151). +- 3. On June 22, 2009, Plaintiffs filed their Reply to Defendant's Response in Opposition (DE 168). +- 4. On July 7, 2009, this Court entered an Order directing parties to attempt to submit an agreed order granting Plaintiffs' Motion on or before July 20, 2009 (DE 192). +- 5. Both Plaintiff and Defense counsel need an additional five (5) days to attempt to reach an agreement. +- 6. As certified below, counsel for Defendant conferred with counsel for Plaintiffs, and Plaintiffs' counsel is in agreement with the requested extension. + +WHEREFORE Defendant respectfully requests that this Court enter an Order granting an extension until July 28, 2009, to file an agreed order. + +## Local Rule 7.1 Statement + +Counsel for the movant conferred by telephone and corresponde with counsel for the Plaintiffs and counsel for Plaintiffs' is in agreement ith the uested extension until July 28, 2009 for the parties to file an agreed order. + +> Robert Y. AttornIy r De + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 24th day of 2009 + +Respectf itted, + +By: + +ROB T D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bc1claw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +moike@bc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Brad , Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80811* + +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) + +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-08804* + +[skuvin@riccilaw.com](mailto:skuvin@riccilaw.com) + +[tleopold@riccilaw.com](mailto:tleopold@riccilaw.com) + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. + +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) + +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* + +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745431/EFTA02745431.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745431/EFTA02745431.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..63346e083f3d37959c9dfa75f25cec70db65146b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745431/EFTA02745431.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,333 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745431.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 6383, + "elapsed_seconds": 13.12, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 415.1464538574219, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 415.1464538574219, + 104.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 104.9730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Local Rule 7.1 Statement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.8, + 570.24 + ], + [ + 368.6029052734375, + 570.24 + ], + [ + 368.6029052734375, + 585.3630218505859 + ], + [ + 244.8, + 585.3630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.308, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 364.2369689941406, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 364.2369689941406, + 88.863037109375 + ], + [ + 250.308, + 88.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 432.54 + ], + [ + 364.54791259765625, + 432.54 + ], + [ + 364.54791259765625, + 447.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 447.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 44 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 148 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745431" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745437/EFTA02745437.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745437/EFTA02745437.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..11d9e526a93628021a08c9a9f456d59f5e13148d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745437/EFTA02745437.md @@ -0,0 +1,145 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA. + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +EXH9IT c4 + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/JOHNSON + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-8081l-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE #114), filed May 26, 2009, and this court's order (DE #192). The parties having agreed and the Court having carefully considered the motion and being otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiffs' Motion (DE # 114) is GRANTED as follows: + +A.1 Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and such employees and agents (currently under his control) and his attorneys are directed to take every reasonable step to preserve any evidence, resulting from the October 25, 2005 search of his home as set forth in this Court's order (DE #151-2; DE #20 in Case 9:08 -CV-80804-KAM) previously entered. + +A.2 Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and such employees and agents (currently under his control) and his attorneys are directed to take every reasonable step to preserve any evidence relevant to these cases that have been filed in federal court or that may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence relevant to these cases which includes, documents, data, and tangible things, including, writings; records; files; correspondence; digital or chemical process photographs (including negatives); reports; memoranda; calendars; diaries; minutes; electronic messages; voicemail; email; telephone message records or logs; computer and network activity logs; hard drives; backup data; removable computer storage media, such as tapes, disks, and cards; printouts; document image files; web pages; databases; spreadsheets; software; books; ledgers; journals; orders; invoices; bills; vouchers; checks; statements; worksheets; summaries; compilations; computations; charts; diagrams; graphic presentations; drawings; films; charts; video, phonographic, tape, or digital recordings or transcripts thereof; drafts; jottings; and notes. Information that serves to identify, locate, or link such material, such as file inventories, file folders, and indices, is also included. Specifically, Defendant must preserve the following evidence as defined herein: records of phone communications; records of domestic and international travel, including travel in Defendant's private airplanes; former and current employee records; tax returns; any document evidencing payment by Defendant of U.S. currency and/or merchandise to each person on the list provided by the United States Attorney's Office ("USAO list"); any evidence stored in Defendant's storage unit; all photographs of the interior and exterior of Defendant's Palm Beach residence as it appeared in 1998 through October 2005; any diary, log, memo pad, calendar, or other writing which reflected the date that each person on the USAO list visited Defendant's residence; any diary or document wherein each person on the USAO list wrote regarding any visit(s) to Defendant's residence; all documents sent by the Palm Beach Police Department ("PBPD"), the FBI, the USAO, or the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office ("PBSAO") to the defendant; and all computers used by Defendant and/or such agents and employees (currently under his control) to the extent the computers have evidence relating to these cases. The time period for the preservation of evidence shall be 1998 - 2002 as it relates to Jane Doe 102; and 2002 through October 25, 2005 as it relates to other persons on the USAO list. + +B. "Evidence" is defined as any document or information that is in the possession, custody or control of the defendant as of the date of this order and that is relevant to these cases or that may lead to the discovery of evidence relevant to these cases. The duty to preserve evidence extends to documents, data, and tangible things in the possession, custody, and/or control of Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and such employees or agents (currently under his control) or attorneys who possess materials reasonably anticipated to be subject to discovery in these actions. Counsel for the Defendant shall be directly responsible only to the extent they are in possession or control of evidence. Counsel shall provide a copy of this Order to the Defendant and to those employees or agents whom defense counsel knows or has reason to believe may have evidence. + +C. "Preservation" is to be interpreted broadly to accomplish the goal of maintaining the integrity of all documents, data, and tangible things reasonably anticipated to be subject to discovery in these actions under Rules 26, 45, and 56(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +D. If an objection or privilege is raised, the parties may raise the issue with this Court in a timely fashion and shall preserve the evidence in question pending resolution by the Court. An agreement to preserve evidence and this Order is not a waiver of any existing or future right to object to production or any constitutional or evidentiary basis. + +E. The parties, without leave of Court, may agree in writing that certain documents or categories of evidence need not be preserved as otherwise required by this Order. If such agreement is reached, such agreement is effective upon signing and without further order of this Court. + +F. If this Court determines that evidence has been wrongfully destroyed or lost in violation of this Order, it may impose appropriate sanctions based upon motion and an evidentiary hearing, if necessary. + +G. Each party shall bear its own costs for complying with this Order. + +DONE AND ORDERED inIIIMI at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this of , 2009. + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Court Judge + +Copies to: All counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745437/EFTA02745437.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745437/EFTA02745437.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1f2713aa4a2f2e8d0eda47554f62b0f8f3706a3a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745437/EFTA02745437.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,317 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745437.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 6766, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.51, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 74.2315673828125 + ], + [ + 406.68707275390625, + 74.2315673828125 + ], + [ + 406.68707275390625, + 101.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 101.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.744, + 156.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 332.2633361816406, + 156.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 332.2633361816406, + 170.60302734375 + ], + [ + 282.744, + 170.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745437" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745444/EFTA02745444.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745444/EFTA02745444.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2d3580c5ab96c6a3aa39b980f1431a6b45f5dda4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745444/EFTA02745444.md @@ -0,0 +1,216 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAJ I + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +PlaintifL + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRAJJOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-8081 l-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRAJ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +**DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE +WITH COURT ORDER (DE #192)** + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, by and through his undersigned attorneys, in compliance with the Court's Order (DE #192) hereby submits a proposed order on Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order (DE #114), and states: + +1. 1. The Court granted the Plaintiff's Motion for an Order for Preservation of Evidence, (DE #192). However the Court determined that the Plaintiff's proposed order was overly broad and directed that the parties attempt to submit an agreed order. The parties have worked diligently to provide an agreed order, and have reached common ground on many sections. However, we were unable to finalize an order. + +Therefore, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, is providing his proposed order attached as **Exhibit A**. Plaintiff's counsel will be serving their proposed order. + +1. 2. Should the Court allow, counsel for the parties are willing to provide the Court a brief joint statement setting forth the differences in their proposed order and their respective positions. However, neither party, absent this Court's permission believed it was appropriate. + +**Certificate of Service** + +![]()I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court + +using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on thisity o , 2009. + +Respectfully, mined, + +By: + +ROBER CR1TTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida r ar No. 224162 + +rcr + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CR1TTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/stein + +Smart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssmOsexabuseattomev.com + +ahorowitzesexabuseattomey.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horacc Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhwOhotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. MI, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsxasearcylaw.corn inlasearcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecfabrucereinhartlaw. m Counsel for Defendant + +Brad M, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwardsOrra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 0840893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellpRlaw.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. =, Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datum Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouthatet Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 0840469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsbereeoodhurst.com kezellapodhurst.cont Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 + +and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +Theodore 3. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561.684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +,kavitaxiceilaw.com + +tleopold@riccilaw.com + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +inesaebellsoutknet + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745444/EFTA02745444.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745444/EFTA02745444.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3a3525eb911d4a5d4e99d8f9fb74db6e551e0db9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745444/EFTA02745444.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,367 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745444.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 5299, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.31, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 407.1959533691406, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 407.1959533691406, + 106.61248779296875 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 106.61248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE WITH COURT ORDER (DE #192)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.01200000000001, + 172.53 + ], + [ + 487.15200000000004, + 172.53 + ], + [ + 487.15200000000004, + 200.07 + ], + [ + 123.01200000000001, + 200.07 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.712, + 641.52 + ], + [ + 354.34799999999996, + 641.52 + ], + [ + 354.34799999999996, + 653.6700000000001 + ], + [ + 260.712, + 653.6700000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E\nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/stein", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 188.496, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 392.99993896484375, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 392.99993896484375, + 128.465087890625 + ], + [ + 188.496, + 128.465087890625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 38 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 177 + ], + [ + "Line", + 87 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745444" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745451/EFTA02745451.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745451/EFTA02745451.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cda9df786c35854704f8401ad72d4da0f395cf64 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745451/EFTA02745451.md @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Court Judge \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745451/EFTA02745451.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745451/EFTA02745451.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9fe4c33fc125679ed82e2db453f51587d478f9da --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745451/EFTA02745451.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745451.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 51, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.41, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 7 + ], + [ + "Line", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745451" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745452/EFTA02745452.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745452/EFTA02745452.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..973507f6f2f43861d599941bd9fde7ff529eb04b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745452/EFTA02745452.md @@ -0,0 +1,237 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA I + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MAR + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA I + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811- + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MAR + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## NOTICE OF STRIKING DOCKET ENTRY + +Plaintiffs, JANE DOE NO. 101 and JANE DOE NO. 102, hereby give notice of striking their Notice of Filing Proposed Order for the Preservation of Evidence in Compliance with Court's Order (DE # 192) and Certificate of Having Conferred and proposed Order (D.E. # 221) due to the document not being linked correctly. The document is being re-filed with the Court. + +Dated: July 29, 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: Katherine W. Ezell Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Bar No. 040856 riosefsberg©podhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell@oodhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 291b day of July, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: Katherine W. Ezell Robert C. Josefsberg Ha. Bar No. 040856 riosefsbergapodhurst.cont Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell@podhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## SERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Case No. 08-CV-80119- United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820/Fax: (561) 515-3148 rcritObc1claw.com mpike@bciclaw.com Counsel for Defendant. Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300/Fax: (561) 835-8691 iagesu®bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant. Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360/Fax: (561) 828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw,com Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300/Fax: (561) 383-9456 jsx61searcylaw.com joh@searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintdfin related Case No. 08-80811 Adam Horowitz, Esq. + +Stuart Memelstein, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +Phone: (305) 931-2200/Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +phorowitzasexabuseattomev.corn + +smennelstein@sexabuseattornev.com + +Counsellor Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,08-80232, 08-80380, 08- 80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. + +Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. + +Leopold Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +Phone: (561) 515-1400/Fax: (561) 515-1401 + +skuvinaleopoldkuvin.com + +deopold@leopoldkuvin.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +229010'" Ave North, Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Phone: (561) 582-7600/Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +jawyerwillits@aolcom + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +Brad M, Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-4252 + +Phone: (954) 522-3456/Fax: (954) 527-8663 + +bedwards@zra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Isidro Manuel Esq. + +Elkins & Bochringcr + +224 Datura Avenue, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 832-8033/Fax: (561) 832-7137 + +isidroftarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745452/EFTA02745452.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745452/EFTA02745452.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0200b121ab4aff5a76efaab196c05bb4159f7238 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745452/EFTA02745452.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,405 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745452.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 5206, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.93, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.37400000000002, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 406.3081359863281, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 406.3081359863281, + 104.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 209.37400000000002, + 104.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF STRIKING DOCKET ENTRY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.95399999999998, + 596.97 + ], + [ + 424.833740234375, + 596.97 + ], + [ + 424.833740234375, + 613.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 190.95399999999998, + 613.4830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.56599999999997, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 390.3902587890625, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 390.3902587890625, + 90.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 226.56599999999997, + 90.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.02, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 352.9140625, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 352.9140625, + 90.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 264.02, + 90.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745452" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745460/EFTA02745460.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745460/EFTA02745460.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8d2bd39828a30569ab240e0d2f1220bec4ea1005 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745460/EFTA02745460.md @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@ +## The Psychological Trauma Center + +a division of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, inc. + +Medical Director: Gilbert W. Kliman, M. D. + +2105 Divisadcro St., San Francisco, CA 94115 + +Phone (415)292.7119 Fax (415)749-2802 + +www.epridao r rajggysty0 + +Forensic Child Psychiatric Evaluations. Life Care Plans & Testimony + +## DECLARATION OF GILBERT KLIMAN, M. D. + +June 4, 2009 + +## RE: EXPECTATION OF HARM FROM DISCLOSING THE PLAINTIFFS' IDENTITIES IN DOES V JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +- 1. I, Gilbert W. Kliman, M.D., of 2105 Divisadero Street, San Francisco, California, CA. Physicians License G55912, declare the following under penalty of perjury: +- 2. I have been retained by plaintiffs' law firm, Mermelstein & Horowitz, to give expert testimony. If called as a witness, I would testify truthfully and competently concerning my psychiatric findings about each of the plaintiffs' alleged experiences of sexual abuse, and the enduring effects that I fmd each of the young women have suffered as a direct result of the sexual acts perpetrated by the defendant. +- 3. I have been asked to respond to the Defense motion, which requests that some of the plaintiffs, who are now adults, should be publicly named. It is my opinion that involuntary public disclosure will result in the plaintiffs experiencing revictimization, albeit by a justice system that is designed to protect them. If their identities are released, the victims will be at-risk of having their personal lives scrutinized by friends, extended family, spouses, children, fellow students, employers and fellow employees, the media and general public. This type of exposure humiliates many victims and represents another betrayal of trust. Public exposure places the plaintiffs at further risk of stigmatization, shame and retraumatization. +- 4. Due to traumatization the plaintiffs are arrested in their development, and even those who are now legally adults are arrested in part to adolescent aspects of psychology. +- 5. The plaintiffs do not hold their heads high with pride for having been sexually controlled by Mr. Epstein. They hold their heads low with shame. The internal life of a typical adolescent, into late adolescence and early adult years in the best of circumstances, usually involves generous proportions of self-consciousness, shame, selfabsorption and self-doubt and self-blame about sexual acts. + +![](_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg) + +6. Clinically harmful levels of shame, self-consciousness, self-doubt and self-blame are even more prominent among victims of molestations than among the general population. + +7. Molested teenagers are particularly vulnerable to wrongful manipulations and special clinical harms from the experiences of shame and humiliation. In fact, shame and efforts to cope with it played an underlying role in the harm to each plaintiff. Each was lured into Mr. Epstein's sexual lair with the promise of overcoming bodily and sexual shame by earning money and bettering their lot in life. The defendant capitalized on their sexual naiveté, insecurities and effort to better themselves, and he worked hard to overcome their shame at his enlistment of them in his selfish gratifications. + +8. The defendant who wishes to make their identities public is one whom the criminal justice system has already determined is a person who has already committed a crime of child molestation. That surely means he has already exploited and manipulated the girls' state of adolescent sexuality, including their embarrassment, awkwardness and bodily self-consciousness. He perverted their nascent and developing moral structures by posing as a generous, avuncular mentor who could coach them about their bodies, sex and love. + +The exploitation of adolescent bodies, sex and love is – from a psychoanalytic point of view – an influence on the developing moral conscience of the children, as well as on their sexual urges. Now the ravaging of their internal and private moral conscience is intended by the perpetrator to be made a public ravaging. + +9. Among sexual trauma victims, the insidious and destructive persistence of shame, humiliation and associated self-blame is well-documented (Finkelhor and [REDACTED], 1985). Stigmatization, as experienced by a sexual trauma victim, has especially painful and pathologic consequences. Shame lingers and becomes integrated within the adolescent victim's malleable emerging identity, character structure and self image. Moral clarity is distorted. Perceptions of self-blame and guilt are magnified. The impact of shame lends to cultivating a self image of being "spoiled goods." + +10. Stigmatization following sexual trauma results in long-term risks that can negatively shape multiple facets of adult development: sexual, emotional, interpersonal and vocational. Stigmatization, which is generally to be avoided among psychiatric patients, increases risks among those – as in our plaintiffs as a group – who experience clinical depression and self-destructive behaviors: drug use, criminal activity, even prostitution. + +Stigmatization following abuse is associated with delinquency due to increased anger and affiliation with deviant peers (Feiring et al., 2007). + +11. Shame and guilt are important dimensions of both complex and single event, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Symptoms of shame are associated with feelings of helplessness and powerlessness, which each of the plaintiffs endorsed experiencing in relation to Mr. Epstein. + +12. The DSM-IV-TR recognizes both powerlessness and helplessness as requisite parts of the traumatic experience in Criterion A for the diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder trauma ( Seligman, recent Past President of the American Psychological Association, coined relevant terms of "learned helplessness and "Loss of Personal Locus of Control." See Seligman, M.P. 1975: Helplessness, Depression, Development and Death. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco). The teenaged girls suffered the loss of personal locus of control to a much more experienced, sexually aggressive, powerful and dominant, manipulative perpetrator. + +13. Releasing names of the plaintiffs to the public will reenact experiences of powerlessness and helplessness in the face of a boundary violation. Repetition and reenactment represent central features of Criterion B in the DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder trauma. In effect, release of their identity and public intrusion into their personal life represents a reenactment of the shame of sexual traumatization. Repetition and reenactment are central pathologies that afflict sexual trauma survivors. + +14. Victims of sexual abuse often rely upon some form of dissociation, splitting or denial, as a defensive means to manage overwhelming affects associated with the sexual trauma. Each of the plaintiff girls has employed some variation of this defense, both during the massages and then subsequently following disclosure of the abuse. Primitive, maladaptive responses of this nature will become additionally reinforced as a result of public disclosure. + +15. Another aspect of the plaintiffs' experience, which is recognized by DSM-IV-TR, is that the trauma was associated with human design factors (such as cruel intention to do harm, rape, torture). Trauma of this origin has a tendency to produce more "severe or long lasting" posttraumatic stress disorder than natural events (DSM IV TR p. 464). A policy of deliberate revelation of the names of the victims would reinforce the sense of design, pattern and policy of human intentions. + +16. Negative expectations about significant activities are noted in DSM-IV-TR, as part of Criterion C. Symptoms of foreshortened future are characteristic of a traumatized individual's clinical course (C4). They expect revictimization. They expect bad outcomes (C7) in their social, educational, vocational, relational plans. They are hypervigilant (Criterion D4) for further trauma, and this affects lifestyle choices and future planning. Hypervigilance is part of the arousal set of criteria. Public disclosure of the victims' identity will aggravate existing symptoms of hypervigilance. + +17. The DSM-IV-TR diagnostic category of "chronic" is justified for each of the plaintiffs. Scientific literature shows that the prognostic consequences of PTSD and residual effects may last for decades (U.S. Dept. of Health, 2005; Issues in Child Abuse Prevention Number 9 Autumn] 998: Long-term Effects of Child Sexual Abuse, Paul E Mullen and Jillian Fleming). The lasting impact upon character, identity and moral development will probably affect long-term influences upon adult development. It is more probable than not that stigmatization associated with public disclosure of the + +plaintiffs' identities will intensify the scope, nature and severity of the chronic symptom course. + +18. In addition to PTSD, shame and humiliation themselves have also been associated with causing clinical depression. Coexisting PTSD and clinical depression places the plaintiff's at increased risk for re-victimization and high risk sexual behaviors (e.g., sexually transmitted disease, premature pregnancy, rape) (Nelson, 2002), and at greater risk to victimize others (Filipas and Ullman, 2006; Desai, Centers for Disease Control, 2002) who are in their control. Studies have also shown that chronic symptoms of PTSD, in association with a single episode of Major Depressive Disorder, can produce lifetime adjustment difficulties, which include suicidality (Oquendo et al, 2005; Dube et al, CDC, 2001; Rohde, J. Am. Acad. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 2005). The plaintiffs will be additionally vulnerable to these clinical outcomes, if they suffer the stigmatization and humiliation associated with public disclosure of their identities. + +19. Alternative hypothesis: I have applied the evidence shown from examination and testing of the plaintiffs and relevant observations and information from other professionals while testing an alternative hypothesis: that no harm would result from public disclosure of the plaintiffs' identities. During the evaluations with the six plaintiffs, I used generally acceptable criteria for establishing whether a DSM-IV-TR disorder occurred. I established that there were provable and diagnosable injuries, primarily posttraumatic stress disorder and comorbid depression. Based upon these diagnostic signs, it is more probable than not, that exposing the plaintiff's identity to the public is not a trivial concern or one without substantial clinical repercussions. I believe that most child, adolescent and adult psychiatrists would share the opinion that additional psychiatric injury will result from such exposure. + +20. However, consider for the sake of argument, that my diagnostic conclusions are incorrect, notwithstanding having fulfilled standard psychiatric evaluation procedures of taking a history from multiple sources, videotaping and transcribing my initial interview, and reviewing available medical and legal documents. Even if this was the case, and my diagnostic conclusions were faulty, I believe that multiple experts, even those who may now propose publication of the victims' names, would still come to a conclusion that the plaintiffs suffered sexual abuse, and in some cases, multiple acts of ongoing abuse, at the hands of Jeffery Epstein. Even without developing a subsequent disorder, there is much clinical evidence and scientific literature showing likelihood of substantial psychiatric harm to these sexually abused plaintiffs. + +21. To form these conclusions, I have used my extensive experience in forming these opinions. That experience is both as a treating child psychiatrist and separately as a forensic psychiatrist. I have treated hundreds of minor patients, as well as additionally evaluated hundreds of children and adolescents who have suffered sexual abuse. I have made long term followups of many of the children and have treated many adults who have been molested as adolescents. It is my opinion, with a reasonably high degree of medical certainty that the defense motion to allow public disclosure of the plaintiffs' identities is clinically and ethically a wrongful plan. The act of revealing their identities against their wishes places the plaintiffs at risk, in the best of circumstances, of suffering + +an aggravation of existing diagnostic concerns. It is more probable than not that releasing personal identities will [REDACTED] an exacerbation and magnification of symptoms lending to increased risk of revictimization and retraumatization. + +I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing statements are true and correct, and that this declaration was executed at San Francisco, California on June 4, 2009. + +Sincerely, + +![]()Gilbert Kliman, M.D. + +Distinguished Life Fellow, American Psychiatric Association +Senior Fellow, American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry +[REDACTED] Brockman Award Holder, for Distinguished Lifetime Contributions to Psychoanalysis and Psychiatry, bestowed by the American College of Psychoanalysis and Psychiatry + +![](_page_4_Picture_22.jpeg) + +State of California, City & County of San Francisco +Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this +21 day of June 2009, by Gilbert Kliman +proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence +to be the person[e] who appeared before me. + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745460/EFTA02745460.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745460/EFTA02745460.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..233fffa2eff9769b3c4c2ff687632fda705546c1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745460/EFTA02745460.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,271 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745460.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 13407, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.27, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg", + "_page_4_Picture_22.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "The Psychological Trauma Center", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 221.293, + 93.265 + ], + [ + 395.3962097167969, + 93.265 + ], + [ + 395.3962097167969, + 108.853515625 + ], + [ + 221.293, + 108.853515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DECLARATION OF GILBERT KLIMAN, M. D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 183.28699999999998, + 230.32399999999996 + ], + [ + 434.3980407714844, + 230.32399999999996 + ], + [ + 434.3980407714844, + 245.7335205078125 + ], + [ + 183.28699999999998, + 245.7335205078125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "RE: EXPECTATION OF HARM FROM DISCLOSING THE PLAINTIFFS' IDENTITIES \nIN DOES V JEFFREY EPSTEIN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 100.532, + 296.015 + ], + [ + 458.90325927734375, + 296.015 + ], + [ + 458.90325927734375, + 323.8170471191406 + ], + [ + 100.532, + 323.8170471191406 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 82 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745460" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745460/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745460/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0449085c3c07f1d85d64e39df7670d496952d370 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745460/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:9a362c52ee54a48f272f9222ac3c40992e373e7ebb50688884466292fed46e5c +size 9279 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745460/_page_4_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745460/_page_4_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d078fe14e331c6c22015bb346ed28dbac4b0c922 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745460/_page_4_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:81f099064aec5cfead7c7191a2ee80d53d21e6167325bc5d28095da1b51b65dd +size 11604 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745465/EFTA02745465.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745465/EFTA02745465.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..530a8ec79c1dc886074e699596a0275bd5bf0450 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745465/EFTA02745465.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +## DECLARATION OF JANE DOE NO. 4 + +I, a, state as follows: + +1. I am the Plaintiff identified as Jane Doe No. 4 in this lawsuit. + +2. During the past week, three investigators working on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein contacted the office of my former employer, Florida Realty, on three separate occasions. + +3. During the contacts, the investigators asked my former employer personal questions about me, including whom I am dating and how they can contact my ex-boyfriend. The investigators obtained the name of my ex-boyfriend from my former employer and have been repeatedly contacting a former co-worker to get the telephone number of my ex-boyfriend. Once they obtained the number of my ex-boyfriend, they have repeatedly contact him, asking very personal questions about my relationship with him, as well as my current relationship, employment, and residence. + +4. None of the individuals whom the investigators have contacted or attempted to contact knew that I am aplaintiff in achildhood sexual abuse lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein, but now they are asking me questions about it. + +5. I am worried that Jeffrey Epstein will continue to send investigators to speak with people I know who do not know that I am aPlaintiff in this lawsuit. I am concerned that the investigators will ask these people very personal questions about my life and disclose that I am a Plaintiff in a sexual abuse lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein. It could cause problems in my social circle and with my future employment and educational opportunities if people fmd out that I am aplaintiff in achildhood sexual abuse suit against Jeffrey Epstein. + +Ideclare under penalty of perjury the foregoing to be true and correct. + +![](_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg) + +Dated this 11day of "IAA V , 2009 + +![](_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg) + +illa aAcal J Doe No. 4 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745465/EFTA02745465.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745465/EFTA02745465.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c3fc035530b53357b3151e9aa67b25506d8d0111 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745465/EFTA02745465.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745465.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1853, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.69, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "DECLARATION OF JANE DOE NO. 4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 211.48499999999996, + 95.698 + ], + [ + 427.6199035644531, + 95.698 + ], + [ + 427.6199035644531, + 111.91800000000002 + ], + [ + 211.48499999999996, + 111.91800000000002 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 336 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745465" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745465/_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745465/_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f8ae810ab4e99b89959a385651ce061b3517c26f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745465/_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:67a278eef61109199ac26b7ebfd0881c995d5ef6e30a2737134ee48b0dc929f8 +size 8554 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745465/_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745465/_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3ced0f4cfa0ead0c7322e92cdd4e76828b0fc630 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745465/_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:85e581058da02da0cbfc7119e9ea5699f9f005ebe5aca56784e341c01af2b39c +size 3729 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745467/EFTA02745467.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745467/EFTA02745467.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c45ed513fb9a74ade154bf540f829fbe11532156 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745467/EFTA02745467.md @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +## DECLARATION OF JANE DOE NO. 6 + +I, INS state as follows: + +I. I am the Plaintiff identified as Jane Doe No. 6 in this lawsuit. + +2. On July 9, 2009, an investigator came to the office of my former employer, A Affordable Auto Insurance, in Lake Worth, Florida. + +3. After the investigator left, I was contacted by my former employer and told that the investigator was asking personal questions about me. + +4. I am worried that Jeffrey Epstein will continue to send investigators to speak with other people I know who do not know that I am a Plaintiff in this lawsuit. I am concerned that the investigators will ask these people very personal questions about my life and disclose that I am a Plaintiff in a sexual abuse lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein. + +I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing to be true and correct. + +Dated this22.day of , 2009 + +![](_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg) + +a/lca/ Jane Doe N \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745467/EFTA02745467.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745467/EFTA02745467.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9aac90351f3b93700cb736177965624efe4f16ba --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745467/EFTA02745467.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745467.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 899, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.6, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "DECLARATION OF JANE DOE NO. 6", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.064, + 98.79888916015625 + ], + [ + 414.388, + 98.79888916015625 + ], + [ + 414.388, + 115.16199999999998 + ], + [ + 201.064, + 115.16199999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745467" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745467/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745467/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ce7ad03daf7ca57c5ed2bd1e470494a7d0313164 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745467/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3a90a9fc4c0980aa67f1b4e2fb89901b849efb37cea79b221fbe0f1257a7f07b +size 8188 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745468/EFTA02745468.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745468/EFTA02745468.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7faf5b31a9d5feacc039e1d3572110908d3f79dc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745468/EFTA02745468.md @@ -0,0 +1,157 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +I + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARR A4! + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08- CV-80811 -MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 08-CV- 80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al., + +Defendant. / + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80591-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES' 2- 7 MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-7 ("Plaintiffs" or individually, "Plaintiff"), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby file Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order, pursuant to S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1, and state as follows: + +I. Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 are proceeding with a Jane Doe pseudonym as this case involves facts of the utmost intimacy and there is a genuine risk of psychological harm if their identities are disclosed. See Exhibit "A" (Declaration of Gilbert Kliman, M.D.) (ate also DE 144, Jane Does' 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity. et al.). + +2. Despite the obvious need for Plaintiffs to have their identities protected, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein has employed investigators who have made repeated contacts with exboyfriends, former employers, and others who know nothing of the underlying facts of the case. These investigators have contacted such nonparties asking them for extensive personal information about a Plaintiff, such as names and contact information of former boyfriends and other friends and acquaintances in the Plaintiff's community. + +3. The Defendant's repeated contacts with these nonparties is harassing and designed to intimidate the Plaintiffs. The purpose and intent of these contacts is to brand the Plaintiffs as alleged sexual abuse victims to their families, friends and communities. + +4. A Motion is pending in which this Court is being asked to determine whether and how Defendant may obtain discovery from nonparties. (DE 91, 144). Defendant's investigative efforts improperly circumvent the issues in the pending Motion, and only serve to highlight the need for this Court to implement appropriate protective measures to prevent Defendant from harassing, intimidating, and intruding unnecessarily into the personal lives of the Plaintiffs. + +5. While it is not unusual for a defendant to use appropriate means to obtain records from former employers and others referenced in a plaintiff's discovery responses, it is not customary for a defendant to retain private investigators to make personal contact with these individuals. Indeed, this practice is particularly inappropriate in a sexual abuse case where these nonparties are unaware of the underlying abuse. Plaintiffs have a well-grounded fear that the investigators will use the opportunity of their contacts with these nonparties to "out" the Plaintiffs' as alleged childhood sexual abuse victims of Jeffrey Epstein. (See Kliman Decl., Exh. "A" hereto). + +6. As an example of the investigators' intimidation tactics, three of Defendant's investigators recently called the former employer of Jane Doe 4 on repeated occasions over a two-day period, asking personal questions about her, including the name and telephone number of her ex-boyfriend. See Exhibit "B", Declaration of Jane Doe 4. + +7. Similarly, one of Defendant's investigators contacted the former employer of Jane Doe 6. See Exhibit "C", Declaration of Jane Doe 6. + +8. Them is no basis for Defendant or his multiple investigators to make repeated personal contacts with former employers and ex-boyfriends to ask personal questions about a Plaintiff. It is apparent that these contacts are not designed to obtain relevant information, but rather are intended to intimidate the Plaintiffs and to reveal that they are childhood sexual abuse victims. + +9. Accordingly, Plaintiffs request the entry of a protective order that would prevent Defendant, his attorneys and investigators from making ex pane contacts concerning this litigation with nonparties who have no knowledge that a Plaintiff was a childhood sexual abuse victim of Jeffrey Epstein. + +10. This Court has discretion to enter a protective order designed to protect a party from, among other things, annoyance or embarrassment. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c). As set forth above, given the investigators' conduct, a protective order is appropriate to prevent unnecessary intrusion into the Plaintiffs' personal lives and divulgation of Plaintiffs in their communities as childhood sexual abuse victims. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7, respectfully request that this Court grant Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order, as follows: (i) order Defendant, his attorneys and investigators to cease making ex pane contacts with nonparties identified in plaintiffs' discovery + +responses, such as, for example, former employers; (ii) order Defendant, his attorneys and investigators to cease making ex parte contacts with nonparties found during the course of discovery or investigation who know the Plaintiff or live in her community, such as, for example, current and former boyfriends and family friends of the Plaintiffs; (iii) order Defendant, his attorneys and investigators to cease making ex parte contacts with nonparties who otherwise know one of the Plaintiffs personally but who are unaware that she is an alleged victim of childhood sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein; and (iv) grant all such other relief this Court deems just and appropriate. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A.3 + +Undersigned counsel has conferred with Defendant's counsel in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this motion, and has been unable to do so, as Defendant's counsel has advised that Defendant opposes this motion. + +Dated: July 29, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: sI Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on July 29, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. ieoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellv@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawverwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745468/EFTA02745468.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745468/EFTA02745468.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8335b2708e982da6bc255e108a790d7a83c2cc76 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745468/EFTA02745468.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,432 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745468.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 7833, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.69, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES' 2- 7 MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE \nORDER AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 135.864, + 456.8399999999999 + ], + [ + 476.66876220703125, + 456.8399999999999 + ], + [ + 476.66876220703125, + 486.363037109375 + ], + [ + 135.864, + 486.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.744, + 291.6 + ], + [ + 483.1547546386719, + 291.6 + ], + [ + 483.1547546386719, + 306.7330627441406 + ], + [ + 129.744, + 306.7330627441406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 71.17889404296875 + ], + [ + 386.0939636230469, + 71.17889404296875 + ], + [ + 386.0939636230469, + 85.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745468" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745476/EFTA02745476.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745476/EFTA02745476.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2c5f276ce8a7a31a12206265955613834e2428ff --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745476/EFTA02745476.md @@ -0,0 +1,142 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232- + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE #114), filed May 26, 2009. and the Court's Order ( DE #192), filed July 6, 2009. The parties having agreed and the Court having carefully considered the motion and being otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiffs' Motion (DE # 114) is GRANTED as follows: + +A. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and his employees, his agents, and his attorneys are directed to take every reasonable step to preserve all evidence, to the extent it exists, including, but not limited to, evidence related to the October 25, 2005 search, documents, data, and tangible things, which includes, but is not limited to, writings; records; files; correspondence; digital or chemical process photographs (including negatives); reports; memoranda; calendars; diaries; minutes; electronic messages; voicemail; e-mail; telephone message records or logs; computer and network activity logs; hard drives; backup data; removable computer storage media, such as tapes, disks, and cards; printouts; document image files; web pages; databases; spreadsheets; + +software; books; ledgers; journals; orders; invoices; bills; vouchers; checks; statements; worksheets; summaries; compilations; computations; charts; diagrams; graphic presentations; drawings; films; charts; video, phonographic, tape, or digital recordings or transcripts thereof; drafts; jottings; and notes. Information that serves to identify, locate, or link such material, such as file inventories, file folders, indices, and metadata, is also included. Specifically, Defendant must preserve the following evidence: records of phone communications; records of domestic and international travel, including travel in Defendant's private airplanes; former and current employee records; tax returns; medical bills; bills regarding any other expenses related in any way to these Plaintiffs; all documents evidencing payment by Defendant of U.S. currency and/or merchandise to each person on the list of victims provided by the United States Attorney's Office ("USAO list"); any evidence stored in Defendant's storage unit; all photographs of the interior and exterior of Defendant's Palm Beach mansion as it appeared in 1998 through October 2005; any diary, log, memo pad, calendar, or other writing reflecting the date that each person on the USAO list visited Defendant's mansion; any diary or document wherein each victim on the USAO list wrote regarding any visit(s) to Defendant's mansions; all documents sent to or by the Palm Beach Police Department ("PBPD"), the FBI, the USAO, or the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office ("PBSAO")to or by the Defendant; and all computers used by Defendant and/or his agents and/or employees during 1998 through and including October 25, 2005, the date of the search warrant. + +B. The duty extends to documents, data, and tangible things in the possession, custody, + +and/or control of the parties to this action and any employees, agents, or attorneys who possess materials reasonably anticipated to be subject to discovery in these actions. Counsel shall be directly responsible only to the extent they arc in possession or control of evidence. Counsel shall provide a copy of this Order to Defendant and those employees or agents whom defense counsel knows, or has reason to know, may have evidence. + +- C. "Preservation" is to be interpreted broadly to accomplish the goal of maintaining the integrity of all documents, data, and tangible things reasonably anticipated to be subject to discovery in these actions under Rules 26, 45, and 56(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Preservation includes taking reasonable steps to prevent the partial or full destruction, alteration, testing, deletion, shredding, incineration, wiping, relocation, migration, theft, or mutation of such material, as well as negligent or intentional handling that would make material incomplete or inaccessible. +- D. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and his employees, agents, and attorneys shall preserve any evidence from the October 25, 2005 execution of a search warrant at his mansion at 358 El Brillo Way in Palm Beach, Florida, that has been, or will be, returned to him by the PBPD. +- E. If an objection or privilege is raised, the parties may raise the issue with this Court in a timely fashion and shall preserve the evidence in question pending resolution by the Court. +- F. The parties, without leave of Court, may agree in writing that certain documents or categories of evidence need not be preserved as otherwise required by this Order. If + +such agreement is reached, such agreement is effective upon signing and without further order of this Court. + +G. If this Court determines that evidence has been destroyed or lost, it may impose appropriate sanctions based upon motion and an evidentiary hearing, if necessary. + +H. Each party shall bear its own costs for complying with this Order. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this of 2009. + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Court Judge + +Copies to: All counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745476/EFTA02745476.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745476/EFTA02745476.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f6a0aed74d6712889d36eb7c31d685a5a4873c7a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745476/EFTA02745476.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,325 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745476.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 6288, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.48, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 208.14600000000002, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 406.8176574707031, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 406.8176574707031, + 103.23248291015625 + ], + [ + 208.14600000000002, + 103.23248291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 283.668, + 203.5250244140625 + ], + [ + 332.6430969238281, + 203.5250244140625 + ], + [ + 332.6430969238281, + 217.61248779296875 + ], + [ + 283.668, + 217.61248779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745476" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745483/EFTA02745483.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745483/EFTA02745483.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7b2cf283e07c6a6526a40952e8ee12c45615ade2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745483/EFTA02745483.md @@ -0,0 +1,261 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119- + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRAi + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRAM= + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/JOIINS0N + +Plaintif& + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591- + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA/MIN + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS.101 AND 102'S NOTICE OF FILING PROPOSED ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE IN COMPLIANCE WITH COURT'S ORDER (DE # 192) AND CERTIFICATE OF !MI/11%1G CONFERRED + +Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 101 and 102 ( "Plaintiffs") hereby give notice of filing their + +Proposed Order for the Preservation of Evidence and further certify that they have conferred as directed in compliance with Court's Order (DE # 192), filed July 6, 2009. In the course of conferring the Parties worked out a number of their differences but were unable to finalize and submit a fully agreed order. + +If an explanation of the few remaining differences would assist the Court, the Parties will jointly submit by July 30, 2009, a brief statement explaining the areas on which they are unable to agree. + +Dated: July 29, 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: s/Katherine W. Ezell + +Robert C. Josefsberg + +Fla. Bar No. 040856 + +riosefsbere@podhurst.com + +Katherine W. Ezell + +Fla. liar No. 114771 + +kezell@podhurst.com + +City National Bank Building + +25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +Telephone: (305) 358-2800 + +Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 29th day of July, 2009, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. We also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +Respectfully submitted, + +PODHURS'I' ORSECK, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 + +By: s/Katherine W. Ezell Robert C. Josefsberg Fla. Bar No. 040856 riosefsberg(a)podhurst.com Katherine W. Ezell Fla. Bar No. 114771 kezell.dnodhurst.com City National Bank Building 25 W. Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 Facsimile: (305) 358-2382 + +## SERVICE LIST + +JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Case No. 08-CV-80119- United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Robert Critton, Esq. Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 842-2820/Fax: (561) 515-3148 rcrit@bciclaw.com nmike@bc1claw.com Counsel for Defendant, Jeffiey Epstein + +Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, PA. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 659-8300/Fax: (561) 835-8691 iattesoObellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360/Fax: (561) 828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Co-Defendant, + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300/Fax: (561) 383-9456 issabsearcvlaw.com jvhQsearcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff in related Case No. 0840811 Adam Horowitz, Esq. + +Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +Phone: (305) 931-2200/Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorncv.com + +smermelstein(Thsexabuseattornev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 0840069, 08-80119,08-80232, 0840380, 08- 80381, 0840993, 08-80994 + +Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. + +Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. + +Leopold Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +Phone: (561) 515-1400/Fax: (561) 515-1401 + +5kuvin@leopoldkuvin.coni + +tleonold@leonoldkuvin.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Richard Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +229010' Ave North, Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Phone: (561) 582-7600/Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +lawycrwillits@aol.com + +reelrhwC)hotmail.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +Brad S Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeld' Adler + +401 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 333014252 + +Phone: (954) 522-3456/Fax: (954) 527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-Iaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 0840893 + +Isidro Manuel =, Esq. + +Elkins & Boehringer + +224 Datum Avenue, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 832-8033/Fax: (561) 832-7137 + +jsidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plainnff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745483/EFTA02745483.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745483/EFTA02745483.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7ca42b86063842a90a0215ebde50cefb31316018 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745483/EFTA02745483.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,405 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745483.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 5651, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.88, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.69, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 405.69390869140625, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 405.69390869140625, + 103.61248779296875 + ], + [ + 205.69, + 103.61248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS.101 AND 102'S NOTICE OF FILING \nPROPOSED ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE \nIN COMPLIANCE WITH COURT'S ORDER (DE # 192) AND \nCERTIFICATE OF !MI/11%1G CONFERRED", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 128.94, + 596.97 + ], + [ + 472.83709716796875, + 596.97 + ], + [ + 472.83709716796875, + 655.2324981689453 + ], + [ + 128.94, + 655.2324981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.496, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 388.1402587890625, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 388.1402587890625, + 89.60302734375 + ], + [ + 223.496, + 89.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.95, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 351.0862731933594, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 351.0862731933594, + 90.49249267578125 + ], + [ + 260.95, + 90.49249267578125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745483" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745491/EFTA02745491.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745491/EFTA02745491.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7e15ee5126673e142fd0774e268366121684598c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745491/EFTA02745491.md @@ -0,0 +1,85 @@ +## The Psychological Trauma Center + +a division of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, inc. + +Medical Director: Gilbert W. Kliman, M. D. + +2105 Divisedcro St., San Francisco, CA 94115 + +Phone (415)292.7119 Fax (415)749-2802 + +Forensic Child Psychiatric Evaluations. Life Care Plans & Testimony + +## DECLARATION OF GILBERT KLIMAN, M. D. + +June 4, 2009 + +## RE: EXPECTATION OF HARM FROM DISCLOSING THE PLAINTIFFS' IDENTITIES IN DOES V JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +- 1. I, Gilbert W. Kliman, M.D., of 2105 Divisadero Street, San Francisco, California, CA. Physicians License G55912, declare the following under penalty of perjury: +- 2. I have been retained by plaintiffs' law fine, Mermelstein & Horowitz, to give expert testimony. If called as a witness, I would testify truthfully and competently concerning my psychiatric findings about each of the plaintiffs' alleged experiences of sexual abuse, and the enduring effects that I find each of the young women have suffered as a direct result of the sexual acts perpetrated by the defendant. +- 3. I have been asked to respond to the Defense motion, which requests that some of the plaintiffs, who are now adults, should be publicly named. It is my opinion that involuntary public disclosure will result in the plaintiffs experiencing revictimization, albeit by a justice system that is designed to protect them. If their identities are released, the victims will be at-risk of having their personal lives scrutinized by friends, extended family, spouses, children, fellow students, employers and fellow employees, the media and general public. This type of exposure humiliates many victims and represents another betrayal of trust. Public exposure places the plaintiffs at further risk of stigmatization, shame and retraumatization. +- 4. Due to traumatization the plaintiffs are arrested in their development, and even those who are now legally adults are arrested in part to adolescent aspects of psychology. +- 5. The plaintiffs do not hold their heads high with pride for having been sexually controlled by Mr. Epstein. They hold their heads low with shame. The internal life of a typical adolescent, into late adolescence and early adult years in the best of circumstances, usually involves generous proportions of self-consciousness, shame, selfabsorption and self-doubt and self-blame about sexual acts. + +![](_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg) + +6. Clinically harmful levels of shame, self-consciousness, self-doubt and self-blame are even more prominent among victims of molestations than among the general population. + +7. Molested teenagers are particularly vulnerable to wrongful manipulations and special clinical harms from the experiences of shame and humiliation. In fact, shame and efforts to cope with it played an underlying role in the harm to each plaintiff. Each was lured into Mr. Epstein's sexual lair with the promise of overcoming bodily and sexual shame by earning money and bettering their lot in life. The defendant capitalized on their sexual naiveté, insecurities and effort to better themselves, and he worked hard to overcome their shame at his enlistment of them in his selfish gratifications. + +8. The defendant who wishes to make their identities public is one whom the criminal justice system has already determined is a person who has already committed a crime of child molestation. That surely means he has already exploited and manipulated the girls' state of adolescent sexuality, including their embarrassment, awkwardness and bodily self-consciousness. He perverted their nascent and developing moral structures by posing as a generous, avuncular mentor who could coach them about their bodies, sex and love. + +The exploitation of adolescent bodies, sex and love is – from a psychoanalytic point of view – an influence on the developing moral conscience of the children, as well as on their sexual urges. Now the ravaging of their internal and private moral conscience is intended by the perpetrator to be made a public ravaging. + +9. Among sexual trauma victims, the insidious and destructive persistence of shame, humiliation and associated self-blame is well-documented (Finkelhor and [REDACTED], 1985). Stigmatization, as experienced by a sexual trauma victim, has especially painful and pathologic consequences. Shame lingers and becomes integrated within the adolescent victim's malleable emerging identity, character structure and self image. Moral clarity is distorted. Perceptions of self-blame and guilt are magnified. The impact of shame lends to cultivating a self image of being "spoiled goods." + +10. Stigmatization following sexual trauma results in long-term risks that can negatively shape multiple facets of adult development: sexual, emotional, interpersonal and vocational. Stigmatization, which is generally to be avoided among psychiatric patients, increases risks among those – as in our plaintiffs as a group – who experience clinical depression and self-destructive behaviors: drug use, criminal activity, even prostitution. + +Stigmatization following abuse is associated with delinquency due to increased anger and affiliation with deviant peers (Feiring et al., 2007). + +11. Shame and guilt are important dimensions of both complex and single event, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Symptoms of shame are associated with feelings of helplessness and powerlessness, which each of the plaintiffs endorsed experiencing in relation to Mr. Epstein. + +12. The DSM-IV-TR recognizes both powerlessness and helplessness as requisite parts of the traumatic experience in Criterion A for the diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder trauma ( Seligman, recent Past President of the American Psychological Association, coined relevant terms of "learned helplessness and "Loss of Personal Locus of Control." See Seligman, M.P. 1975: Helplessness, Depression, Development and Death. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco). The teenaged girls suffered the loss of personal locus of control to a much more experienced, sexually aggressive, powerful and dominant, manipulative perpetrator. + +13. Releasing names of the plaintiffs to the public will reenact experiences of powerlessness and helplessness in the face of a boundary violation. Repetition and reenactment represent central features of Criterion B in the DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder trauma. In effect, release of their identity and public intrusion into their personal life represents a reenactment of the shame of sexual traumatization. Repetition and reenactment are central pathologies that afflict sexual trauma survivors. + +14. Victims of sexual abuse often rely upon some form of dissociation, splitting or denial, as a defensive means to manage overwhelming affects associated with the sexual trauma. Each of the plaintiff girls has employed some variation of this defense, both during the massages and then subsequently following disclosure of the abuse. Primitive, maladaptive responses of this nature will become additionally reinforced as a result of public disclosure. + +15. Another aspect of the plaintiffs' experience, which is recognized by DSM-IV-TR, is that the trauma was associated with human design factors (such as cruel intention to do harm, rape, torture). Trauma of this origin has a tendency to produce more "severe or long lasting" posttraumatic stress disorder than natural events (DSM IV TR p. 464). A policy of deliberate revelation of the names of the victims would reinforce the sense of design, pattern and policy of human intentions. + +16. Negative expectations about significant activities are noted in DSM-IV-TR, as part of Criterion C. Symptoms of foreshortened future are characteristic of a traumatized individual's clinical course (C4). They expect revictimization. They expect bad outcomes (C7) in their social, educational, vocational, relational plans. They are hypervigilant (Criterion D4) for further trauma, and this affects lifestyle choices and future planning. Hypervigilance is part of the arousal set of criteria. Public disclosure of the victims' identity will aggravate existing symptoms of hypervigilance. + +17. The DSM-IV-TR diagnostic category of "chronic" is justified for each of the plaintiffs. Scientific literature shows that the prognostic consequences of PTSD and residual effects may last for decades (U.S. Dept. of Health, 2005; Issues in Child Abuse Prevention Number 9 Autumn] 998: Long-term Effects of Child Sexual Abuse, Paul E Mullen and Jillian Fleming). The lasting impact upon character, identity and moral development will probably affect long-term influences upon adult development. It is more probable than not that stigmatization associated with public disclosure of the + +plaintiffs' identities will intensify the scope, nature and severity of the chronic symptom course. + +18. In addition to PTSD, shame and humiliation themselves have also been associated with causing clinical depression. Coexisting PTSD and clinical depression places the plaintiff's at increased risk for re-victimization and high risk sexual behaviors (e.g., sexually transmitted disease, premature pregnancy, rape) (Nelson, 2002), and at greater risk to victimize others (Filipas and Ullman, 2006; Desai, Centers for Disease Control, 2002) who are in their control. Studies have also shown that chronic symptoms of PTSD, in association with a single episode of Major Depressive Disorder, can produce lifetime adjustment difficulties, which include suicidality (Oquendo et al, 2005; Dube et al, CDC, 2001; Rohde, J. Am. Acad. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 2005). The plaintiffs will be additionally vulnerable to these clinical outcomes, if they suffer the stigmatization and humiliation associated with public disclosure of their identities. + +19. Alternative hypothesis: I have applied the evidence shown from examination and testing of the plaintiffs and relevant observations and information from other professionals while testing an alternative hypothesis: that no harm would result from public disclosure of the plaintiffs' identities. During the evaluations with the six plaintiffs, I used generally acceptable criteria for establishing whether a DSM-IV-TR disorder occurred. I established that there were provable and diagnosable injuries, primarily posttraumatic stress disorder and comorbid depression. Based upon these diagnostic signs, it is more probable than not, that exposing the plaintiff's identity to the public is not a trivial concern or one without substantial clinical repercussions. I believe that most child, adolescent and adult psychiatrists would share the opinion that additional psychiatric injury will result from such exposure. + +20. However, consider for the sake of argument, that my diagnostic conclusions are incorrect, notwithstanding having fulfilled standard psychiatric evaluation procedures of taking a history from multiple sources, videotaping and transcribing my initial interview, and reviewing available medical and legal documents. Even if this was the case, and my diagnostic conclusions were faulty, I believe that multiple experts, even those who may now propose publication of the victims' names, would still come to a conclusion that the plaintiffs suffered sexual abuse, and in some cases, multiple acts of ongoing abuse, at the hands of Jeffery Epstein. Even without developing a subsequent disorder, there is much clinical evidence and scientific literature showing likelihood of substantial psychiatric harm to these sexually abused plaintiffs. + +21. To form these conclusions, I have used my extensive experience in forming these opinions. That experience is both as a treating child psychiatrist and separately as a forensic psychiatrist. I have treated hundreds of minor patients, as well as additionally evaluated hundreds of children and adolescents who have suffered sexual abuse. I have made long term followups of many of the children and have treated many adults who have been molested as adolescents. It is my opinion, with a reasonably high degree of medical certainty that the defense motion to allow public disclosure of the plaintiffs' identities is clinically and ethically a wrongful plan. The act of revealing their identities against their wishes places the plaintiffs at risk, in the best of circumstances, of suffering + +an aggravation of existing diagnostic concerns. It is more probable than not that releasing personal identities will [REDACTED] an exacerbation and magnification of symptoms lending to increased risk of revictimization and retraumatization. + +I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing statements are true and correct, and that this declaration was executed at San Francisco, California on June 4, 2009. + +Sincerely, + +![]()Gilbert Kliman, M.D. + +Distinguished Life Fellow, American Psychiatric Association +Senior Fellow, American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry +[REDACTED] Brockman Award Holder, for Distinguished Lifetime Contributions to Psychoanalysis and Psychiatry, bestowed by the American College of Psychoanalysis and Psychiatry + +![](_page_4_Picture_24.jpeg) + +State of California, City & County of San Francisco +Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this +21 day of June 2009, by Gilbert Kliman +proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence +to be the person[e] who appeared before me. + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745491/EFTA02745491.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745491/EFTA02745491.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7a3eb44feb99ffc3b87e78a0e43e0279b005fa05 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745491/EFTA02745491.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,271 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745491.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 13382, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.28, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg", + "_page_4_Picture_24.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "The Psychological Trauma Center", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 221.293, + 94.076 + ], + [ + 395.3962097167969, + 94.076 + ], + [ + 395.3962097167969, + 108.853515625 + ], + [ + 221.293, + 108.853515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DECLARATION OF GILBERT KLIMAN, M. D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 183.28699999999998, + 231.135 + ], + [ + 434.3980407714844, + 231.135 + ], + [ + 434.3980407714844, + 245.7335205078125 + ], + [ + 183.28699999999998, + 245.7335205078125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "RE: EXPECTATION OF HARM FROM DISCLOSING THE PLAINTIFFS' IDENTITIES \nIN DOES V JEFFREY EPSTEIN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 100.532, + 296.015 + ], + [ + 458.90325927734375, + 296.015 + ], + [ + 458.90325927734375, + 323.8170471191406 + ], + [ + 100.532, + 323.8170471191406 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745491" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745491/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745491/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f2a88a1d062ab07eca68e3263ba64fe546ef5a1b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745491/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1f4ee172d7500859c991c5df21e7a6030cc7c2ff3cfad6c99716d655553bf9f5 +size 7887 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745491/_page_4_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745491/_page_4_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3c6eab560932e70e59da3205d3a98c4aa475b71e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745491/_page_4_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1089e949f582d019b438188c45ee601eb2bd9afffffff1a8f47efd6770022086 +size 11524 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745496/EFTA02745496.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745496/EFTA02745496.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d99d74e22b1b4124ff7066f39aa12fc74da57dbe --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745496/EFTA02745496.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +## DECLARATION OF JANE DOE NO. 4 + +I, S, state as follows: + +1. I am the Plaintiff identified as Jane Doe No. 4 in this lawsuit. + +2. During the past week, three investigators working on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein contacted the office of my former employer, Florida Realty, on three separate occasions. + +3. During the contacts, the investigators asked my former employer personal questions about me, including whom I am dating and how they can contact my ex-boyfriend. The investigators obtained the name of my ex-boyfriend from my former employer and have been repeatedly contacting a former co-worker to get the telephone number of my ex-boyfriend. Once they obtained the number of my ex-boyfriend, they have repeatedly contact him, asking very personal questions about my relationship with him, as well as my current relationship, employment, and residence. + +4. None of the individuals whom the investigators have contacted or attempted to contact knew that I am aplaintiff in achildhood sexual abuse lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein, but now they are asking me questions about it. + +5. I am worried that Jeffrey Epstein will continue to send investigators to speak with people I know who do not know that I am aPlaintiff in this lawsuit. I am concerned that the investigators will ask these people very personal questions about my life and disclose that I am a Plaintiff in a sexual abuse lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein. It could cause problems in my social circle and with my future employment and educational opportunities if people find out that I am aplaintiff in achildhood sexual abuse suit against Jeffrey Epstein. + +Ideclare under penalty of perjury the foregoing to be true and correct. + +![](_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg) + +Dated this      day of      July     , 2009 + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] a/ka/ Jane Doe No. 4 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745496/EFTA02745496.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745496/EFTA02745496.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1fc3e2066529897ad80c635b4a710f31fb8ab86e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745496/EFTA02745496.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,122 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745496.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1856, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.79, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "DECLARATION OF JANE DOE NO. 4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 211.48499999999996, + 96.50899999999999 + ], + [ + 427.2499084472656, + 96.50899999999999 + ], + [ + 427.2499084472656, + 111.91800000000002 + ], + [ + 211.48499999999996, + 111.91800000000002 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 337 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745496" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745496/_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745496/_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d7b1640e747729c0936abb3977989c578d5edac8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745496/_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e4f6d3f67bc0d58ec3fdc11a92b381673b001701b944f97f2f76fadc11e6f7e0 +size 7695 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745498/EFTA02745498.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745498/EFTA02745498.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..238a71bfd874a1eafc4320161d5ef10374a7a6d1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745498/EFTA02745498.md @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +## DECLARATION OF JANE DOE NO. 6 + +I, InaIS state as follows: + +I. I am the Plaintiff identified as Jane Doe No. 6 in this lawsuit. + +2. On July 9, 2009, an investigator came to the office of my former employer, A Affordable Auto Insurance, in Lake Worth, Florida. + +3. After the investigator left, I was contacted by my former employer and told that the investigator was asking personal questions about me. + +4. I am worried that Jeffrey Epstein will continue to send investigators to speak with other people I know who do not know that I am a Plaintiff in this lawsuit. I am concerned that the investigators will ask these people very personal questions about my life and disclose that I am a Plaintiff in a sexual abuse lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein. + +I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing to be true and correct. + +Dated this22.day of , 2009 + +![](_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg) + +a/lca/ Jane Doe N \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745498/EFTA02745498.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745498/EFTA02745498.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b450e640f601a54e9901af54cdd72db98563a058 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745498/EFTA02745498.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745498.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 901, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.61, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "DECLARATION OF JANE DOE NO. 6", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.064, + 99.6015625 + ], + [ + 414.388, + 99.6015625 + ], + [ + 414.388, + 114.35099999999998 + ], + [ + 201.064, + 114.35099999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745498" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745498/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745498/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9dada84067ece6f0f3d734d648fe7c36206040ce --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745498/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:dfe03278cfd0230d90f6b61ec369f468a1980890e101d19f46ae6f49e09295eb +size 8189 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745499/EFTA02745499.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745499/EFTA02745499.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fefadaccfbaf7a4092e46cc0f12d58dabb0a4557 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745499/EFTA02745499.md @@ -0,0 +1,157 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I -MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRAMM + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08- CV-80811 -MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 08-CV- 80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al., + +Defendant. / + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80591-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES' 2- 7 MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-7 ("Plaintiffs" or individually, "Plaintiff'), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby file Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order, pursuant to S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1, and state as follows: + +I. Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 are proceeding with a Jane Doe pseudonym as this case involves facts of the utmost intimacy and there is a genuine risk of psychological harm if their identities are disclosed. See Exhibit "A" (Declaration of Gilbert Kliman, M.D.) (See also DE 144, Jane Does' 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity, et al.). + +2. Despite the obvious need for Plaintiffs to have their identities protected, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein has employed investigators who have made repeated contacts with exboyfriends, former employers, and others who know nothing of the underlying facts of the case. These investigators have contacted such nonparties asking them for extensive personal information about a Plaintiff, such as names and contact information of former boyfriends and other friends and acquaintances in the Plaintiff's community. + +3. The Defendant's repeated contacts with these nonparties is harassing and designed to intimidate the Plaintiffs. The purpose and intent of these contacts is to brand the Plaintiffs as alleged sexual abuse victims to their families, friends and communities. + +4. A Motion is pending in which this Court is being asked to determine whether and how Defendant may obtain discovery from nonparties. (DE 91, 144). Defendant's investigative efforts improperly circumvent the issues in the pending Motion, and only serve to highlight the need for this Court to implement appropriate protective measures to prevent Defendant from harassing, intimidating, and intruding unnecessarily into the personal lives of the Plaintiffs. + +5. While it is not unusual for a defendant to use appropriate means to obtain records from former employers and others referenced in a plaintiff's discovery responses, it is not customary for a defendant to retain private investigators to make personal contact with these individuals. Indeed, this practice is particularly inappropriate in a sexual abuse case where these nonparties are unaware of the underlying abuse. Plaintiffs have a well-grounded fear that the investigators will use the opportunity of their contacts with these nonparties to "out" the Plaintiffs' as alleged childhood sexual abuse victims of Jeffrey Epstein. (See Kliman Decl., Exh. "A" hereto). + +6. As an example of the investigators' intimidation tactics, three of Defendant's investigators recently called the former employer of Jane Doe 4 on repeated occasions over a two-day period, asking personal questions about her, including the name and telephone number of her ex-boyfriend. See Exhibit "B", Declaration of Jane Doe 4. + +7. Similarly, one of Defendant's investigators contacted the former employer of Jane Doe 6. See Exhibit "C", Declaration of Jane Doe 6. + +8. Them is no basis for Defendant or his multiple investigators to make repeated personal contacts with former employers and ex-boyfriends to ask personal questions about a Plaintiff. It is apparent that these contacts are not designed to obtain relevant information, but rather are intended to intimidate the Plaintiffs and to reveal that they are childhood sexual abuse victims. + +9. Accordingly, Plaintiffs request the entry of a protective order that would prevent Defendant, his attorneys and investigators from making ex pane contacts concerning this litigation with nonparties who have no knowledge that a Plaintiff was a childhood sexual abuse victim of Jeffrey Epstein. + +10. This Court has discretion to enter a protective order designed to protect a party from, among other things, annoyance or embarrassment. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c). As set forth above, given the investigators' conduct, a protective order is appropriate to prevent unnecessary intrusion into the Plaintiffs' personal lives and divulgation of Plaintiffs in their communities as childhood sexual abuse victims. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7, respectfully request that this Court grant Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order, as follows: (i) order Defendant, his attorneys and investigators to cease making ex pane contacts with nonparties identified in plaintiffs' discovery + +responses, such as, for example, former employers; (ii) order Defendant, his attorneys and investigators to cease making ex parte contacts with nonparties found during the course of discovery or investigation who know the Plaintiff or live in her community, such as, for example, current and former boyfriends and family friends of the Plaintiffs; (iii) order Defendant, his attorneys and investigators to cease making ex parte contacts with nonparties who otherwise know one of the Plaintiffs personally but who are unaware that she is an alleged victim of childhood sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein; and (iv) grant all such other relief this Court deems just and appropriate. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A.3 + +Undersigned counsel has conferred with Defendant's counsel in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this motion, and has been unable to do so, as Defendant's counsel has advised that Defendant opposes this motion. + +Dated: July 29, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on July 29, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawverwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745499/EFTA02745499.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745499/EFTA02745499.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..84ba25182540764b31c195424dba611dfeee2583 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745499/EFTA02745499.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,432 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745499.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 7837, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.83, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES' 2- 7 MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE \nORDER AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 135.864, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 476.66876220703125, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 476.66876220703125, + 486.363037109375 + ], + [ + 135.864, + 486.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.744, + 291.6 + ], + [ + 483.1588134765625, + 291.6 + ], + [ + 483.1588134765625, + 306.7330627441406 + ], + [ + 129.744, + 306.7330627441406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 85.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745499" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745507/EFTA02745507.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745507/EFTA02745507.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7cf41560c4b7a2f68ac0eb3ae50ccfcaf2a38170 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745507/EFTA02745507.md @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg) + +1. MICHAEL BURMAN. PA., GREGORY W. COLEMAN, PA. ROBERT D. CRITTON.JR.. PA" BERNARD LEREDEKER MARX T. =TIER. PA. JEFFREY C. PEPPN PA/CHAD-1. PIKE HEATHER MCNAMARA RUDA + +FLORIDA BOARD CERTIFIED Civic/nowt LAWYER + +## BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN LLP + +A LIMITED UABILLTY PARTNERSHIP + +July 23, 2009 + +## Sent via E-Mail and US. Mail + +Jack II Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, PA 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +Re: C.M.A. v. Epstein, et al. + +Dear Jack: + +ADELINE). BENAVENIE MMAUNALI ridvallOARX + +BARBARA M. McKENNA ASHLIE STOKENBARING BETTY STOKES MRALECIALS + +RITA H. BUDNYK 01. COUtala + +Please be advised that I intend to schedule the depositions of Susan Pope and Dr. Serge Thys as witnesses in C.M.A.'s case within the next ten (10) days. Would you please provide me with a date(s) that will work with your schedule? Also, will you agree to a compulsory psychological/psychiatric exam of C.M.A. within the next two (2) weeks? + +If you intend to file protective orders regarding the above matters, please advise, and I will go ahead and notice the depositions and file amotion with the court regarding the exam paving the way for you to file your protective orders and response. + +As you know, we have deadlines in this case that are rapidly approaching and it is my intention to getthings moving as soon as we can. Please let me know your position as soon as possible. + +RDC/clz + +cc: Richard Willits, Esq. Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. + +mailebelelaw.tom ...XHIBIT \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745507/EFTA02745507.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745507/EFTA02745507.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..358b1dced2420cd67b69c341ab0f228bf4131738 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745507/EFTA02745507.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,115 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745507.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1546, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.21, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER \n& COLEMAN LLP", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 417.3687744140625, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 417.3687744140625, + 142.56 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 142.56 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Sent via E-Mail and US. Mail", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 85.68, + 246.24 + ], + [ + 238.33712768554688, + 246.24 + ], + [ + 238.33712768554688, + 259.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 85.68, + 259.20000000000005 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 345 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745507" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745507/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745507/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c79ec779fc776914f478fe3978286e62f4b44546 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745507/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:18beb6b408ff67fd2c31078341e17d98a2a15b0527c86cc03f7068a47713bd42 +size 7679 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745508/EFTA02745508.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745508/EFTA02745508.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bef58052541fdc2652e262dad2bb36fc4e5ddb13 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745508/EFTA02745508.md @@ -0,0 +1,81 @@ +## #281849/clw UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE N : - V-80811-CIV- + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff(s), + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and + +Defendant(s). + +## NOTICE OF SERVING ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES + +COMES NOW the Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through undersigned counsel, and hereby files this Notice with the Court that Answers to Interrogatories propounded by the Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, on January 16, 2009, have been furnished to the attorney for the Defendant. + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that atrue copy of the foregoing has been furnished by mail this RCL day of February, 2009, to: See attacked list of counsel. + +9N + +JACK SCR OLA Florida Bar No.: 169440 JACK P. Florida Bar No.: 0547808 Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A., 2139Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9410 Attorney for Plaintiff(s) + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRJUJOHNSON Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +# School behavioral problems, received counseling prior to the incident + +- 8. Did you consume any alcoholic beverages or take any drugs or medications within 12 hours before the time of each incident(s) described in the complaint? If so, state the type and amount of alcoholic beverages, drugs, or medication which were consumed, and when (dates) and where you consumed them. + +### ANSWER + +- 1. On one occasion I had taken "Morning Glory" and "Angel Trumpets". I do not recall the date. +- 2. On another occasion I used cocaine powder. I do not recall the date. +- 9. Describe each injury (physical, emotional, mental) for which you are claiming damages in this case, specifying the part of your body that was injured, the nature of the injury and as to any injuries you contend are permanent, the effects on you that you claim are permanent. + +#### ANSWER + +Ihave bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent injuries are psychological. + +- 10. Please state each item of damage that you claim, and include in your answer: the count to which the item of damages relates; the factual basis for each item of damages; and an explanation of how you computed each item of damages, including any mathematical formula used. + +### ANSWER + +Iam claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by ajury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. § 2255. + +Discovery is ongoing. + +- 11. List the names and business addresses of each physician (including psychiatrist, psychologist, chiropractor or medical provider) who has treated or examined you, + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. +Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRA/ [REDACTED] +Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +Carolyn Marguet Andrsen +Signature of Answering Party + +STATE OF Florida ) + +COUNTY OF Palm Beach ) + +The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 17 day of February, 2009 +by [REDACTED] [REDACTED] who is personally known to me or who has produced +\_\_\_\_\_ (type of identification) as identification and who did/did +not take an oath. + +![]()![](_page_2_Picture_153.jpeg) + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRABOHNSON Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +## COUNSEL LIST + +Jack A. Goldberger Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue S. West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 863-9100 Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561)-202-6360 Fax: (561)-82 -0 Attorneys for + +c + +et , Robert Critton Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP 515North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33414 Phone: (561)-842-2820 Fax: (561)-844-6929 Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire lawyerwillits@aol.com Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 Phone: (561)-582-7600 Fax: (561)-588-8819 Attorneys for Party \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745508/EFTA02745508.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745508/EFTA02745508.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d05c4d15b4a9c3b9cf8e851a2c8c6c0e4887179d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745508/EFTA02745508.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,348 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745508.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4238, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.82, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_2_Picture_153.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "#281849/clw UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 65.71094512939453, + 50.22 + ], + [ + 506.2268371582031, + 50.22 + ], + [ + 506.2268371582031, + 81.81 + ], + [ + 65.71094512939453, + 81.81 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF SERVING \nANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 288.35999999999996 + ], + [ + 415.0834045410156, + 288.35999999999996 + ], + [ + 415.0834045410156, + 319.14000000000004 + ], + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 319.14000000000004 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "School behavioral problems, received counseling prior to the incident", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 101.59200000000001, + 125.55000000000001 + ], + [ + 513.8839721679688, + 125.55000000000001 + ], + [ + 513.8839721679688, + 149.04 + ], + [ + 101.59200000000001, + 149.04 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.652, + 230.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 165.5766143798828, + 230.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 165.5766143798828, + 244.61999999999998 + ], + [ + 104.652, + 244.61999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 108.32399999999998, + 382.32 + ], + [ + 168.97921752929688, + 382.32 + ], + [ + 168.97921752929688, + 395.28 + ], + [ + 108.32399999999998, + 395.28 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.99600000000001, + 532.98 + ], + [ + 172.81991577148438, + 532.98 + ], + [ + 172.81991577148438, + 546.75 + ], + [ + 111.99600000000001, + 546.75 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.744, + 149.04 + ], + [ + 380.5215759277344, + 149.04 + ], + [ + 380.5215759277344, + 163.69134521484375 + ], + [ + 282.744, + 163.69134521484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 185 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 371 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 115 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 174 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745508" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745508/_page_2_Picture_153.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745508/_page_2_Picture_153.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..15d0122b7042f693fd1db94d8eaaa3101b1053e0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745508/_page_2_Picture_153.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:5b33c24d4215b298ad16705111dd9cbafc9aa63a32a118745e4baffe0b5076eb +size 20116 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745512/EFTA02745512.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745512/EFTA02745512.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c4227b20b344e0ecc451a014f622c71093e06054 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745512/EFTA02745512.md @@ -0,0 +1,243 @@ +# CURRICULUM VITAE + +Ryan C. W. ■, **M.D.** + +**EXHIBIT C..** + +### TABLE OF CONTENTS + +| PRESENT POSITION | 2 | +|---------------------------------------|----| +| EDUCATION | 2 | +| MEDICAL LICENSE | 2 | +| CERTIFICATION | 3 | +| ADDITIONAL TRAINING | 3 | +| SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT | 3 | +| COMMITTEES | 3 | +| HONORS | 4 | +| PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES | 4 | +| REVIEWER | 5 | +| BOOK REVIEWS | 5 | +| PUBLICATIONS | 5 | +| ABSTRACTS | 7 | +| AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES | 9 | +| MEDIA | 12 | + +NAME: Ryan Chaloner Winton♦", **M.D.** + +**DATE OF BIRTH: May 10, 1976** + +**PLACE OF BIRTH: Titusville, Florida** + +**MARITAL STATUS: Single** + +### **PRESENT POSITION:** + +**07/2008 — Present Psychiatrist Richard C. W..", MD, PA 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd; Ste 219 Lake Mary, FL 32746 Ph: 407-322-8199** + +**03/01/2008 - 07/31/2011 Affiliate Instructor University of South Florida Department of Psychiatry** + +**03/03/09 — Assistant Professor of Psychiatry 06/30/12 University of Central Florida College of Medicine Department of Medical Education** + +#### **EDUCATION:** + +**1995 - 1999 Johns University Baltimore, Maryland Double Major - Biology and Psychology B.A. Degree, graduated Phi Beta Kappa with honors** + +**1999 - 2003 Georgetown University School of Medicine Washington, DC M.D. Degree** + +**2003 -2004 Internal Medicine Internship Sinai Hospital of Baltimore/Johns Baltimore, Maryland** + +**2004 -2007 Resid Johns.. Hospital Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Baltimore, Maryland** + +**2007 - 2008 Fellow in Forensic Psychiatry Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio** + +#### MEDICAL LICENSE: + +2004 Maryland — D62746 - Inactive 2007 Ohio - 89483 - Inactive 2007 Florida — ME99792 + +#### CERTIFICATION: + +2008 Diplomate, American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, #58286 2009 with added qualifications for Forensic Psychiatry + +### ADDITIONAL TRAINING: + +2006 Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Chicago, IL + +2007 Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Miami Beach, FL + +2008 Florida Forensic Examiner Training University of South Florida College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, Ft. Lauderdale, FL + +## SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT: + +Member, Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine Member, American Psychiatric Association Member, Maryland Psychiatric Society Member, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Member, American Medical Association Member, Ohio Psychiatric Association Member, Florida Psychiatric Society Member, Southem Psychiatric Association Member, The American College of Psychiatrists Member, Florida Medical Association Member, Seminole County Medical Society + +#### COMMITTEES: + +2005 - 2007 Public Relations Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +2005 - 2007 Legislative Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +2005 - 2007 Disaster Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society 2005 - 2007 Resident and Fellows Committee, Maryland Psychiatry Society + +2007 - present Psychopharmacology Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +2007 - present Research Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +2007 - 2009 Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, American Psychiatric Association + +2008 - 2009 Member, New Member Task Force, Southem Psychiatric Association + +### HONORS: + +1999 Phi Beta Kappa, Johns... University + +2004 "Superior" performance rating, 1st-year residency, by Sinai Hospital Department of Medicine's Clinical Competency and Evaluation Committee + +2005 Dorfman Award, presented by The Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine for best review article of the year for Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3):195-202, May-June 2005. + +2005 Rappeport Fellowship, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +#### PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES: + +2008 Written testimony on Elder Abuse in support of bills HB873/SB501 Criminal Law— Crimes Against the Elderly or Persons with a Disability— Penalties, pr uggralao Maryland House J • " Committee for Delegate Kramer, District 19 County, Maryland. Hearing March 4. + +2009 Central Florida Psychiatric Society representative to Florida Psychiatric Society's Council Meeting, January 10. + +2009 Testified before the Florida Senate Banking and Insurance Committee (SB 354) on Mental Health Parity. March 17. + +2009 Florida Psychiatric Society delegate to Florida Medical Association + +#### REVIEWER: + +-Archives of Internal Medicine -Clinical Geriatrics -Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness -European Psychiatry -Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience -Nature Clinical Practice Neurology -Neurology India -Psychosomatics -Social Science & Medicine -World Joumal of Surgical Oncology + +#### BOOK REVIEWS: + +- 1. Clark MR and Treisman GJ: Pain and Depression: An Interdisciplinary, Patient-Centered Approach. Psychosomatics, July-August 2006, 47(4)365-366. + +#### PUBLICATIONS: + +- 1. **RCW, Dunlap PK,Ill RCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid disease and abnormal thyroid function tests in patients with eating disorders and depression. The Journal of the Florida Medical Association, Inc. 82(3)187-192, 1995.** +- **2. III RCW: Anxiety and Endocrine Disease. In Popkin, MK, Seminars in Clinical Neuropsychiatry 4(2)72-83, 1998.** +- **3. RCW, El DE, RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts. Psychosomatics 40:(1)18-27, 1999.** +- **4. RCW,MI RCW: Fee-Splitting: Ethical Implications and Principles for Practice Management. Transference 20(2)14, 1999.** +- **5. RCW,M RCW: Long-term Psychological and Neurological Complications of Lindane Poisoning. Psychosomatics 40(6)513-517, 1999.** +- **6. RCW, RCW: False Allegations: The Role of the Forensic Psychiatrist. Journal of Psychiatric Practice 7(5)343-346, September 2001.** +- **7. RCW, RCW: Principles of Physician Recruiting. In Handbook of Mental Health Administration and Management; Reid WH and Silver S (ed.): Brunner-Routledge, New York, NY; Chapter 34:440-448, 2003.** +- **8. RCW, RCW, Chapman M: Identifying Geriatric Patients at Risk for Suicide and Depression. Clinical Geriatrics 11(10)36-44, October 2003.** + +- 9. IERCW, IRRCW: Establishing Liaison Before Disaster Strikes. http://www.psy .org/disasterpsych/pdfs/apadisasterhandbk.pdf; Chapter 2:12-19. 2004. +- 10. •RCW, IERCW, Chapman MJ: Emotional and Psychiatric Effects of Weapons of Mass Destruction in First Responders. In: Bioterrorism: Psychological and Public Health Interventions; Ursano RJ, Norwood AE & Fullerton CS (eds). Cambridge University Press:Cambridge; Chapter 14:250-273; 2004. +- 11. MRCW, Appleby B, RIRCW: Atypical Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome Presenting as Fever o nknown Origin in the Elderly. Southern Medical Journal 1(98) 114-117, January 2005. +- 12. •RCW, iiRCW, Chapman MJ: Exploitation of the Elderly: Undue Influence as a Form of El er Abuse. Clinical Geriatrics 13(2)28-36, February 2005. +- 13. •RCW, MRCW, Chapman MJ: Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implicationso Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3)195-202, May-June 2005. +- 14. RCW, uiRCW: Abuse of Supraphysiologic Doses of Anabolic Steroids. Phem Medical Journal, 98(5)550-555, May 2005. +- 15. ERCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Complications of Anabolic Steroid Abuse. Psyc osomatics, 46(4)285-290, July-August 2005. +- 16. •RCW, uRCW, Chapman MJ: Medical and Psychiatric Casualties caused by Conventiona and Radiological (Dirty) Bombs. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(3):242-248, May-June 2006. +- 17. ERCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Postconcussional Syndrome: A Work in Progress ( esponse to Dr. =. Letter to the Editor. Psychosomatics, 47(3):272, May-June 2006. +- 18. •RCW, ■RCW, **Chapman MJ: Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome in the Elderly: Diagnostic Criteria, Incidence, Risk Factors, Pathophysiology, and Treatment. (CME article) Clinical Geriatrics, 14(5):39-46, 2006.** +- **19. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part I: Medical an Psychiatric Complications of Bombings and Biological, Chemical, and Nuclear Attacks. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(8):26-35. 2006.** +- **20. RCW, ERCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part 2: Posttraumatic Stress, Acute Stress, and Affective Disorders. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(9):17-24, 2006.** +- **21. RCW, RCW: Malingering of PTSD: forensic and diagnostic considerat ons, characteristics of malingerers and clinical presentations. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(6):525-535, 2006.** + +- 22. RCW: A Profile of Pedophilia: Definition, Characteristics of Offenders, Recidivism, Treatment Outcomes, and Forensic Issues. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 82(4):457-471, 2007. +- 23. **RCW, RCW: Detection of Malingered PTSD: An Overview of Clinical, Psychometric, and Physiological Assessment: Where Do We Stand? Journal of Forensic Sciences, 52(3):717-725, 2007. 24.. RCW, Macvaugh GS Ill, Merideth P, J: Commentary: Delving Further Into Liability for Psychotherapy Supervision. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 35(2):196-9, 2007.** +- **25. RCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Effects of Terrorism: Medical and Societal Implications of Recent Attacks. In: Focus on Terrorism, Vol. 9; Linden EV (ed), Nova Science:New York; Chapter 11, Publication date: 3rd Quarter, 2007.** +- **26. IN RCW, RCW: The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak Model of virus properties on system capacity and function: A lesson for future viral epidemics. American Journal of Disaster Medicine, 2(5):270-276, 2007** +- **27. III RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part (— Causative Agents, Presentation, and Differential Diagnosis. Clinical Geriatrics, 15(12):18-25, 2007.** +- **28. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part II Pathophysiology, Drug Interactions, and Treatment. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(1):24-28, 2008** +- **29. RCW, Resnick PJ: Psychotherapy Malpractice: New Pitfalls. Journal of Psychiatric Practice, 14(2):119-121, 2008** +- **30. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part I Occurrence in Forensic/Criminal Situations, Partner Relationships, and Sexual Offenses. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(5):27-32, 2008** +- **31. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence In Older Persons: Part II — Occurrence in Hospitals and Pharmacological/Behavioral Treatment of Agitation, Aggression and Violence. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(6):28-32, 2008.** +- **32. III RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ. The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak: lessons hospitals and physicians can apply to future viral epidemics. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2008Sep-Oct;30(5):446-52. Epub 2008 Jul 23** +- **33. RCW, SH: Drug Diversion Program Rights. Legal Digest. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 36(4):579-580, 2008** +- **34. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Interventions. Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009** + +- 35. Paul RK, Lockey C, RCW, Bursztajn H: Practice Management: Managing Risks When Practicing in ree-Party Care Settings. Psychiatrictimes.com, 26(2), Feb. 3, 2009. +- 36. •RCW, ERCW, Chapman MJ: Letter to the Editor response re: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Interventions) Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009), Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(4):17-21, 2009. +- 37. IMIRCW, uRCW, Myers W, Chapman M: Testamentary Capacity: History, Physicians' ole, Requirements, and Why Wills are Challenged. Clinical Geriatrics, 17(6):18-24, 2009. + +\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W.. MD + +#### ABSTRACTS: + +- 1. IIIRCW, Hazard SC, uRcw,!. CA, Blakey RE, faJ: Thyroid Disease in Eating Disor Bred anDepressed Patients. -146th Annual Meeting, American Psychiatric Association, May 25, 1993, San Francisco, CA, P.1.57 (Poster Session). +- 2. -DE, u RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 00 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts: Evaluation of Suicide Risk in a Time of Managed Care. + - Psychiatric Practice and Managed Care, American Psychiatric Association, Vol. 5, No. 5, P 12, Sept-Oct 1999. +- 3. IIIRCW, Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J: The Role of Morphine in the Development of Acute Stress Disorder and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Severe Burn Injury. + - 41" Annual Meeting, American Burn Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009. +- 4. Gould N, McCann U, McKibben JpRCW: Ped-traumatic Heart Rate as a Predictor of Acute Stress Disor er and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Burn Injury. + - 4161 Annual Meeting, American Bum Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009. + +\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W. I. MD + +#### PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES: + +- 1. EIRCW, Hazard SC, Dunlap PK, Ill RCW, lin CA, Blakey RE, "NUJ: Thyroid disease and abnormal function tests n patients with eating sor ers and depression. Poster Session - American Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, May 25, 1993 +- 2. RCW, RRCW: Management of Hostage Situations. Psychiatric Responses "rams, State Department Conference on international Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999 +- 3. RCW, ERCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective — Part I. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999 +- 4. **RCW, RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective - Part II. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **5.** ■RCW, **RCW, -DE: Impact of Managed Care on Suicide Risk Assessment. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 1999 Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD, October 15, 1999** +- **6. liRCW, RCW: Ethical Issues in Managed Care. American Psychiatric Association, 1999 Ethics Workshop, Washington, DC, November 3, 1999** +- **7. •RCW, illRCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Disaster -Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **8. III RCW, RCW: Bioterrorism Dealing with Medical and Psychiatric Consequences of Victims and Responders. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **9. RCW, MRCW: Psychiatric Consequences of Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Disaster. Rocky Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 29, 2000** +- **10. RCW, RCW: Suicide in an Era of HMO's and Managed Care. Rocky ountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 30, 2000** +- **11. RCW, RCW: Psychological Response to Disasters and Terrorism. International ociety of Political Psychology, 23rd Annual Scientific Meeting, Seattle,** + +WA, July 4, 2000 + +- 12. El RCW, RCW: Biological Warfare Attack Scenarios, Response to Terrorist Attacks, and Sources of Conflict. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000 +- 13. RCW, RCW, Chapman M: Workplace Violence. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000 +- 14. **RCW, RCW: Biological Warfare: Attack Scenarios and Public Health Issues. Grand Rounds, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, December 8, 2000** +- **15. RCW, RCW: Bioterrorism: A Short History of Blowarfare & Analysis of the Threat. Grand Rounds, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, August 15, 2001** +- **16. RCW, RCW: Situational Suicide. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, FL, September 13, 2001** +- **17. III RCW, RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, FL, September 14, 2001** +- **18. III RCW, IMIRCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Assault with Anthrax as a Biological Weapon. -Florida Psychiatric Society, Fall Meeting, Coconut Grove, FL, November 4, 2001 -Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002** +- **19. I IRCW, RCW: Smallpox. Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health ciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002** +- **20. III RCW, RCW: Psychopharmacology Forensic Risk and Clinical Practice: Things the clinician must know. Apopka Community Health Center, Apopka, FL, March 13, 2002** +- **21. El RCW, RCW: Overview of Terrorism and Bioterrorism. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002** +- **22. SI RCW, RCW: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002** +- **23. a RCW, RCW: Smallpox as aBiological Weapon. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002** +- **24. III RCW, RCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Southem Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, Loews Ventana Canyon Resort, Tucson, AZ, October 3, 2002** + +- 25. **RCW,MI RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Mandatory Madness, Halifax Medical Center, Daytona USA, Daytona Beach, FL, December 14, 2002** +- **26. RCW,. RCW, Chapman MJ: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003** +- **27. RCW, RCW: Medical and Psychological Sequelae of Bombings: Implications for First Responders and Critical Government Staff. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003** +- **28. RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Florida Psychiatric Society Spring Meeting, Orlando, FL, April 5, 2003** +- **29. RCW,. RCW: Terrorist Bombings: Medical and Psychiatric Impact. Southem Psychiatric Association's Annual Meeting, Nashville, TN, October 11, 2003** +- **30. RCW,M RCW: Terrorism, Bombings, and Psychiatric Casualties. University of Florida, Department of Psychiatry, Visiting Professor Program, November 7, 2003** +- **31. RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Tampa Bay Psychiatric Society, Tampa, FL, sponsored by Pfizer, January 29, 2004** +- **32. RCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004** +- **33. El RCW: Medical and Psychiatric Casualties of Terrorist Bombings. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004** +- **34. RCW, RCW: Medical and Psychological Consequences of Bombings. Grand Rounds, Tulane University, Department of Psychiatry, New Orleans, LA, January 28, 2005** +- **35. In RCW, RCW: Psychological Sequeiae of Weapons of Mass Destruction on First Responders. South Central Center for Publ' Preparedness/Alabama Department of Public Health, , AL, Satellite Conference, May 6, 2005** +- **36. III RCW, RCW: Medical and Psychological Aspects of Terrorist Bombings. Grand Rounds, Sinai Hospital, Department of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, June 2, 2005** +- **37. III RCW, RCW: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationship: The New Realities. (Abbreviated version) Forensic Psychiatry Fellows and Residents, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, January 24, 2006 38.. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-** + +Patient Relationship: The New Realities. Presidential Address. Southern Psychiatric Association, Baltimore, MD, September 30, 2006. + +- 39. MI RCM. RCW: When the System is Overwhelmed: Protecting the Provider during Biodisaster. Satellite Conference, University of Alabama Birmingham South Central Center for Public Health Preparedness/Ala Department of Public Health/Tulane University School of Public Health, AL, February 27, 2007. 40.. RCW: Testamentary Capacity from Isaac Ray to Anna N ei. Grand Rounds, Case Western Reserve School of Medicine, Cleveland,MI, March 28, 2008 +- 41. RCW,E1 RCW, Rundell JR, Winstead DK: Psychiatrists' Role in Disaster Management: Lessons Learned. Course 14, American Psychiatric Association, Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, May 3, 2008. +- 42. RCW: Violence in the Elderly: Forensic and Treatment Concerns. Forensic Forum, Florida Psychiatric Society, ChampionsGate, FL, September 20, 2008. +- 43. RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole. Southem Psychiatric Association, September 25, 2008. +- 44. El RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole-Forensic Psychiatry Program, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, January 29, 2009. 45.. RCWIN RCW: Domestic Violence as Portrayed in Film — A Realistic Appraisal? Florida Psychiatric Society, St. Petersburg Beach, FL, March 20, 2009. +- 46. RCW, Silberman E, Preven D, Weissman S (chairperson): Indications for the Use of Combined Talking Therapy and Pharmacotherapy and How to Teach in Residency. Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, CW16, American Psychiatric Association, San Francisco, CA, May 19, 2009. + +\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W.I., MD + +### MEDIA: + +- 1. Time Magazine, Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome, May 16, 2005 +- 2. Reach MD Radio, Pedophilia. April 25, 2007 +- 3. MD Consult. Doug . Joint telephone interview with Richard C. W. U, MD, Pedophilia. May 2, 2007 +- 4. The Korean Broadcasting System, KBS Special, Pedophilia. March 11, 2008. + +- 5. Tony Pipitone, WKMG-TV Channel 6, Mothers Who Kill Their Children. October 28, 2008. +- 6. J. L. la Orlando Medical News. Cyberchondriacs. November 13, 2008. +- 7. Fox 35 News, Orlando. Forensic Implications of =Anthony case. December 11, 2008. +- 8. Fox 35 News, Orlando. The =Anthony Case: DNA Evidence. December 12, 2008. +- 9. Jessica MI WKMG-TV Channel 6. The =Anthony Case: Baker Act and Stressors. January 23, 2009. +- 10. Nam Nae Won and Jihyun Song. Korea Educational Broadcasting System. Pedophilia. March 30, 2009. +- 11. Keith Landry, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress and Financial Strain. June 15, 2009. +- 12. Heidi Hatch, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress on Families. June 16, 2009. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745512/EFTA02745512.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745512/EFTA02745512.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9e9a533fe3334ad70e643e9c0f521d4e844b1e0c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745512/EFTA02745512.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,980 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745512.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 22941, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.98, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "CURRICULUM VITAE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 358.02 + ], + [ + 365.29547119140625, + 358.02 + ], + [ + 365.29547119140625, + 375.6870422363281 + ], + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 375.6870422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TABLE OF CONTENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.74, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 367.6925964355469, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 367.6925964355469, + 90.570556640625 + ], + [ + 241.74, + 90.570556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRESENT POSITION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.096, + 204.12 + ], + [ + 187.34909057617188, + 204.12 + ], + [ + 187.34909057617188, + 219.721435546875 + ], + [ + 66.096, + 219.721435546875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EDUCATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 145.71798706054688, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 145.71798706054688, + 420.3514099121094 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 420.3514099121094 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDICAL LICENSE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.708, + 89.91 + ], + [ + 178.67364501953125, + 89.91 + ], + [ + 178.67364501953125, + 105.3170166015625 + ], + [ + 66.708, + 105.3170166015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.708, + 166.04999999999998 + ], + [ + 163.2903594970703, + 166.04999999999998 + ], + [ + 163.2903594970703, + 181.0570068359375 + ], + [ + 66.708, + 181.0570068359375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ADDITIONAL TRAINING:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.708, + 228.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 201.53854370117188, + 228.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 201.53854370117188, + 244.0570068359375 + ], + [ + 66.708, + 244.0570068359375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 67.932, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 328.2855529785156, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 328.2855529785156, + 406.81707763671875 + ], + [ + 67.932, + 406.81707763671875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COMMITTEES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.768, + 579.96 + ], + [ + 153.53689575195312, + 579.96 + ], + [ + 153.53689575195312, + 595.0570373535156 + ], + [ + 69.768, + 595.0570373535156 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "HONORS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 67.932, + 264.87 + ], + [ + 128.0409698486328, + 264.87 + ], + [ + 128.0409698486328, + 280.4370422363281 + ], + [ + 67.932, + 280.4370422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 67.932, + 478.71 + ], + [ + 229.65614318847656, + 478.71 + ], + [ + 229.65614318847656, + 494.18701171875 + ], + [ + 67.932, + 494.18701171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REVIEWER:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.708, + 81.81 + ], + [ + 132.29928588867188, + 81.81 + ], + [ + 132.29928588867188, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 66.708, + 93.15 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BOOK REVIEWS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 255.96000000000004 + ], + [ + 163.404, + 255.96000000000004 + ], + [ + 163.404, + 269.01275634765625 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 269.01275634765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PUBLICATIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 332.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 159.12, + 332.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 159.12, + 345.87 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 345.87 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ABSTRACTS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.708, + 297.27 + ], + [ + 145.74639892578125, + 297.27 + ], + [ + 145.74639892578125, + 310.5188293457031 + ], + [ + 66.708, + 310.5188293457031 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS AND INVITATIONAL \nACADEMIC LECTURES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 65.484, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 523.72607421875, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 523.72607421875, + 106.99951171875 + ], + [ + 65.484, + 106.99951171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDIA:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.992, + 561.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 117.16598510742188, + 561.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 117.16598510742188, + 577.4370422363281 + ], + [ + 70.992, + 577.4370422363281 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 13 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "TableOfContents", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 286 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 88 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 383 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 308 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 412 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 369 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 365 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 78 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745512" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745526/EFTA02745526.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745526/EFTA02745526.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..acda83a91f0c560c566651ed660c5471fd9c0982 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745526/EFTA02745526.md @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +## AFFIDAVIT OF RYAN CW.IIII.S12, + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Ryan C.W. M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Ryan C.W. O., M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- z. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 2008. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as an Affiliate Instructor of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine at the University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, and Assistant Professor of the University of Central Florida College of Medicine. +- 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and medical degree from the Georgetown University. +- 5. I have been requested to perform an Independent Medical Examination. Scope of examination: Time: 9 am, 8/20/09 + +EXHIBIL1 + +- 6. Place: Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman, 515 N. Flagler Dr, Ste. 400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +- 7. Manner: Face-to-face Independent Medical/Psychiatric Examination +- 8. Duration: Anticipated 6-8 hours +- 9. Conditions: Exam to take place with only evaluator and evaluee in the room with the evaluation being videotaped with appropriate audio and visual recordings. +- 10. Scope: Full medical and psychiatric history, including chief complaint, history of present illness, specific complaints of symptoms or injury, medical history, past psychiatric history, family history, abuse history, birth history, childhood history, school history, occupational history, violence history, legal history, relationship history, substance use history, sexual history, review of systems, activities of daily living, mental status examination, diagnoses using DSM-IV ares, and discussion of case findings and opinions. + - 11. Psychological tests and questionnaires: Zung Depression Scale, Zung Anxiety Scale, Mini Mental State Examination, M/v1PI -2 with forensic implications, Life History Questionnaire, and Forensic Questionnaire. + +- 12. No opinion of mine has ever been disqualified in a legal pioceeding. +- 13. I declare under penalty and perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. + +Executed this 2-9 day of 2009, in Lake Mary, Florida. + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +CArt3I-cka mo RY N C.W. M.D. + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared RYAN C.W. MN, M.D., who is (c71- personally known to me or ( ) who has produced as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this cael+h day of Itata 2009. + +fl tatrttq Notaz Public Printed Name: My Commission Expires: + +![](_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745526/EFTA02745526.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745526/EFTA02745526.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f17074e6486c49d396618f86dd349f6167c9579c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745526/EFTA02745526.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,180 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745526.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2856, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.73, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RYAN CW.IIII.S12,", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 188.496, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 425.95199999999994, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 425.95199999999994, + 169.29 + ], + [ + 188.496, + 169.29 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 197 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 197 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 184 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745526" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745526/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745526/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..99f1fbe6014ca4510df18fad684a34cde13cb07b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745526/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:fd9fa9083769823bcb8443d6a90fe122cf2e8fe25952cf72e8cd81ee823605d0 +size 12974 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745529/EFTA02745529.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745529/EFTA02745529.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c99a34db4cf81e6460915a5165bd750d95fe8223 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745529/EFTA02745529.md @@ -0,0 +1,197 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRAMIll + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRAMMI + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRAIMI + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRAIIM + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRAIIM + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRAMEM + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "Epstein") by and through his attorneys, and pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P. and 7.1(E) of the Local Rules for the Southern District of Florida, hereby moves this Court for an emergency order directing that the Plaintiff, submit to a compulsory psychological/psychiatric medical examination (a/k/a independent medical examination) by Ryan ■, **M.D. of Richard M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on August 20, 2009 at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP. located at 515 N. Flagler Drive, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401. In support, Epstein states:** + +# **Background** + +**1. While this matter was filed on February 23, 2008 and thereafter removed to federal court on July 21, 2008, Plaintiff continues to prevent Epstein from conducting meaningful discovery. In particular, Plaintiff now objects to her compulsory psychological/psychiatric examination from taking place despite her damage allegations in the operative Complaint. This will be discussed in further detail below after a brief overview of Plaintiffs continued delay tactics.** + +**2. Up until May 20, 2009, Plaintiff refused to allow Defendant to identify her by name in various third-party subpoenas which Defendant intended to serve directed to Plaintiffs health care providers, past and current, which involves basic personal injury discovery — obviously in anticipation of a future compulsory psychological/psychiatric examination. If Defendant could not use CMA's name, how could the provider have** + +provided records from solely a"CMA" designation? Defendant did not want to violate the court's order on anonymity. Thus, Defendant served its April 29, 2009 Motion to Identify (DE 67) and Reply (DE 181) requesting the right to serve third-party subpoenas and/or dismissed Plaintiffs case. Plaintiff then offered to allow Defendant access to her medical history only after her attorneys were able to obtain and filter through same. Was Plaintiff serious? On May 20, 2009, C.M.A. then capitulated and filed her Notice of Withdrawal of Previously Raised Objections to Epstein's Motion to Compel and/or Identify C.M.A. in the Style of this Case and Motion to Identify C.M.A. in Third-Party Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte (DE 23)(the "Notice of Withdrawal"). Obviously, by filing the Notice of Withdrawal, Plaintiff recognized that her attempts to prevent meaningful discovery were delaying this matter and would ultimately delay her trial. + +3. Defendant then expeditiously set about to obtain basic background discovery on C.M.A. for use for her deposition and for an eventual medical/psychological exam which, as discussed in more detail below, is now being prevented by Plaintiff. Then, on June 5, 2009, C.M.A. filed a Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc. (Susan Pope) and Dr. Serge Thys (DE 114, now DE 207). On June 17, 2009, Plaintiff then filed a subsequent Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Palm Beach County School District, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital Dr. Gloria C. Hakkarinen, and Florida Atlantic University (DE 121, now DE 207). While Plaintiff agreed to allow Defendant to identify her in various third-party subpoenas directed to + +her physicians, she now employs yet another strategy to block discovery of her past medical and psychological history from being discovered by and through the Conditional Notice (DE 113) and the Motions for Protective Order. Without the health care provider information, including psychological/ psychiatric records, it will be impossible to conduct athorough deposition of C.M.A. and have a meaningful independent medical/psychological examination by Epstein's defense expert, Dr. ■. **C.M.A. knows full well that such discovery is relevant to the claims she asserts against Epstein.** + +**4. On July 23, 2009, the undersigned sent Plaintiff's counsel a letter requesting that Plaintiff provide Defendant with dates of availability for the depositions for Susan Pope of the Parent-Child Center, Inc. and Dr. Serge Thys within 10 days so that the appropriate information could be obtained for this case and for the future compulsory psychological/psychiatric examination of C.M.A.. See Exhibit "A". On that same date, Epstein requested that Plaintiff provide him a date for the independent medical/psychological examination of C.M.A. On July 29, 2009, the undersigned discussed the foregoing issues with counsel for Plaintiff, and plaintiffs attorney advised that he objected to the depositions of Susan Pope and Dr. Serge Thys and would be filing amotion for protective order as to the independent medical/psychological examination of C.M.A. The conclusion is simple - as a result of the pending Motions before this court as well as the delay tactics taken by Plaintiff, Epstein is being forced to trial without one shred of meaningful discovery. Importantly, Plaintiff opposed Defendant's motion to strike the current trial date, and this court in denying Defendant's motion instructed Defendant to move forward with discovery. Yet, Plaintiffs own** + +strategy and the pending motions before this court continues to prevent the very discovery this court said Defendant should undertake! Discovery cutoff is only (1) one month away (i.e., at the end of August 2009). + +5. This court has already ruled that Plaintiff can only be deposed once (Case #80119, DE 98 at ¶5 - "Defendant is limited to a single deposition of each Plaintiff, during which defendant may depose the Plaintiff as both a party and a witness."). However, Epstein is being compelled to take C.M.A.'s deposition without C.M.A.'s medical records/history. As such, the undersigned will not be able to cross-examine C.M.A. about her past medical history and, as aresult, Epstein's expert physician will not have the benefit of that type of questioning and answers thereto before the compulsory psychological/psychiatric examination of C.M.A.. This is inherently unfair, nonsensical and directly violates Epstein's due process rights. + +6. Plaintiff has alleged in her action that the Defendant sexually assaulted the Plaintiff. As a result of the alleged conduct, she claims she suffered the following damages set forth in paragraph 25 (and the same damages in 30 additional counts). + +> "As a direct and proximate result of the offenses enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, being committed against the then minor Plaintiff, C.M.A., has in the past suffered, and will in the future suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy and other damages associated with Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, controlling, manipulating and coercing her into a perverse and unconventional way of life for a minor. The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses and the Plaintiff, C.M.A., will in the future suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. The Plaintiff, C.M.A., has suffered a loss of income, aloss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of the capacity to enjoy life. + +> These injuries are permanent in nature and the Plaintiff, C.M.A., will continue to suffer these losses in the future." + +7. Additionally, in her answers to interrogatories, in response to interrogatory 10, she claims the following damages as a result of the incident set forth in her complaint: + +> "I am claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a jury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A § 2255." See Exhibit "B". + +8. Pursuant to Rule 35, Fed.R.Civ.Pro, a party may move for an examination by a qualified examiner if the Plaintiffs mental/emotional and/or psychological status is at issue in a case. Additionally, the Plaintiff has been unable in the answers to interrogatories to identify any past or future medical care which she has sustained or may sustain. Yet, she has claimed the aforementioned damages. + +9. Defendant would be severely prejudiced unless he is able to have an examination conducted by a qualified examiner separate and apart from any psychologist/psychiatrist or similar behavioral health provider who may have or may ultimately see the Plaintiff and testify in court. + +10. Defendant's counsel has retained the services of Richard ■, **M.D. and Ryan M.D., of C.W.** ■, **M.D., P.A. located at 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd., #219 Lake Mary, FL 32746. Ryan** ■, **M.D., will be performing the examination. Dr. Ryan Halls' specialties include forensic psychiatry, general psychiatry and medical psychiatry. Attached as Exhibit "C" hereto is Ryan** ■, **M.D.'s qualifications and the scope of the examination which he intends and is required to conduct in order to render a report. See** + +also Exhibit "D", Affidavit of Ryan C.W. ■, **M.D., inclusive of the scope of examination and other Rule 35 requirements. Accordingly, this motion comports with Rule 35. The applicable notice will be filed simultaneously herewith.** + +**11. Defendant will arrange for a videotape of the examination.** + +**WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an Order directing that the examination takes place at 9:00 a.m. on August 20, 2009 at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP. located at 515 N. Flagler Drive, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401under the protocol set forth by Dr.** ■ **in his affidavit, by videotape and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper.** + +#### **Rule 7.1 Certification** + +**Ihereby certify that counsel for the respective parties communicated by telephone in agood faith effort to resolve the discovery issues prior to the filing of this motion. Counsel was unable to resolve the issues outlined her** + +### **Certificate of Service** + +**IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was blbctronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also cert. th the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identi he following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 1.9\ day of 2009** + +**Resp ctf II submitted,** + +**By: ROB. JR., ESQ. Flori o. 2 62 rcrit(a\_bcic aw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 moike@belclaw.com** + +> BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Fiagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssmOsexabuseattornev.com ahorowitzAsexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08- 80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case 08-80811 reelrhwahotmail.com + +Jack S Ia, Esq. Jack P. Esq. + +Brad , Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwardsPrra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellpAlaw.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +No. 1. , Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidroga rciaA bellsouth. net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & 08-80469 + +Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsxasearcvlaw.com jPh searcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C. M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecfabrucereinhartlaw. com Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Ricci-Leopold, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 skuvinariccilaw.com tleonoldAriccilaw.com + +cc. Dr. Ryan. + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsberq podhurst.com kezellapodhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jaiaesq bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745529/EFTA02745529.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745529/EFTA02745529.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f40739dce31458dba27636d3a7fa5a5d44bb0fb7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745529/EFTA02745529.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,553 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745529.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 14357, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.07, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 80.19 + ], + [ + 410.5108642578125, + 80.19 + ], + [ + 410.5108642578125, + 109.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 109.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR \nINDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF \nWITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 113.83200000000001, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 494.631591796875, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 494.631591796875, + 157.14000000000001 + ], + [ + 113.83200000000001, + 157.14000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 269.892, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 345.4081115722656, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 345.4081115722656, + 405.7851257324219 + ], + [ + 269.892, + 405.7851257324219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 365.3204040527344, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 365.3204040527344, + 376.65000000000003 + ], + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 376.65000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.412, + 472.23 + ], + [ + 371.3138122558594, + 472.23 + ], + [ + 371.3138122558594, + 486.0 + ], + [ + 245.412, + 486.0 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 253.53000000000003 + ], + [ + 421.69805908203125, + 253.53000000000003 + ], + [ + 421.69805908203125, + 295.56683349609375 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 295.56683349609375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 87 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 292 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 328 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 327 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 379 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 338 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 289 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 291 + ], + [ + "Line", + 66 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 238 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745529" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745540/EFTA02745540.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745540/EFTA02745540.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..56173cdf10c53cecb008110783f45ec6e90df199 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745540/EFTA02745540.md @@ -0,0 +1,239 @@ +# CURRICULUM VITAE + +Ryan C. W.■ **M.D.** + +**EXHIBIT A** + +## TABLE OF CONTENTS + +| PRESENT POSITION | 2 | +|---------------------------------------------|----------| +| EDUCATION | 2 | +| MEDICAL LICENSE | 2 | +| CERTIFICATION | 3 | +| ADDITIONAL TRAINING | 3 | +| SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS , PAST AND PRESENT | 3 | +| COMMITTEES | 3 | +| HONORS | 4 | +| PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES | 4 | +| REVIEWER | 5 | +| BOOK REVIEWS | 5 | +| PUBLICATIONS | 5 | +| ABSTRACTS | 7 | +| PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL | MEETINGS | +| AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES | 9 | +| MEDIA | 12 | + +NAME: Ryan Chaloner Winton., M.D. + +DATE OF BIRTH: May 10, 1976 + +PLACE OF BIRTH: Titusville, Florida + +MARITAL STATUS: Single + +## PRESENT POSITION: + +07/2008 — Psychiatrist Present Richard C. W.., MD, PA 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd; Ste 219 Lake Mary, FL 32746 Ph: 407-322-8199 + +03/01/2008 - 07/31/2011 Affiliate Instructor University of South Florida Department of Psychiatry + +03/03/09 — Assistant Professor of Psychiatry 06/30/12 University of Central Florida College of Medicine Department of Medical Education + +#### EDUCATION: + +1995- 1999 Johns University Baltimore, Maryland Double Major - Biology and Psychology B.A. Degree, graduated Phi Beta Kappa with honors + +1999- 2003 Georgetown University School of Medicine Washington, DC M.D. Degree + +2003-2004 Internal Medicine Internship Sinai Hospital of Baltimore/Johns Baltimore, Maryland + +2004 -2007 Resid Johns Hospital Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Baltimore, Maryland + +2007- 2008 Fellow in Forensic Psychiatry Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio + +#### MEDICAL LICENSE: + +2004Maryland — D62746 - Inactive 2007 Ohio — 89483 - Inactive 2007 Florida — ME99792 + +#### CERTIFICATION: + +2008Diplomate, American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, #58286 2009with added qualifications for Forensic Psychiatry + +## ADDITIONAL TRAINING: + +2006 Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Chicago, IL + +2007 Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Miami Beach, FL + +2008 Florida Forensic Examiner Training University of South Florida College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, Ft. Lauderdale, FL + +## SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT: + +Member, Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine Member, American Psychiatric Association Member, Maryland Psychiatric Society Member, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Member, American Medical Association Member, Ohio Psychiatric Association Member, Florida Psychiatric Society Member, Southern Psychiatric Association Member, The American College of Psychiatrists Member, Florida Medical Association Member, Seminole County Medical Society + +#### COMMITTEES: + +2005 - 2007 Public Relations Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +2005 - 2007 Legislative Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +2005 - 2007 Disaster Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society 2005- 2007 Resident and Fellows Committee, Maryland Psychiatry Society + +2007- present Psychopharmacology Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +2007- present Research Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +2007- 2009 Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, American Psychiatric Association + +2008- 2009 Member, New Member Task Force, Southern Psychiatric Association + +#### HONORS: + +1999Phi Beta Kappa, Johns University + +2004"Superior" performance rating, 1st-year residency, by Sinai Hospital Department of Medicine's Clinical Competency and Evaluation Committee + +2005Dorfman Award, presented by The Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine for best review article of the year for Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcusslonal Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3):195-202, May-June 2005. + +2005Rappeport Fellowship, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +### PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES: + +2008Written testimony on Elder Abuse in support of bills HB873/SB501 Criminal Law— Crimes Against the Elderly or Persons with a Disability— Penalties, pr Maryland House J " Committee for Delegate Ela Kramer, District 19 County, Maryland. Hearing March 4. + +2009 Central Florida Psychiatric Society representative to Florida Psychiatric Society's Council Meeting, January 10. + +2009 Testified before the Florida Senate Banking and Insurance Committee (SB 354) on Mental Health Parity. March 17. + +2009 Florida Psychiatric Society delegate to Florida Medical Association + +#### REVIEWER: + +-Archives of Internal Medicine -Clinical Geriatrics -Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness -European Psychiatry -Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience -Nature Clinical Practice Neurology -Neurology India -Psychosomatics -Social Science & Medicine -World Journal of Surgical Oncology + +## BOOK REVIEWS: + +- 1. Clark MR and Treisman GJ: Pain and Depression: An Interdisciplinary, Patient-Centered Approach. Psychosomatics, July-August 2006, 47(4)365-366. + +#### PUBLICATIONS: + +- 1. al RCW, Dunlap PK,Ill RCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid disease and abnormal thyroid function tests in patients with eating disorders and depression. The Joumal of the Florida Medical Association, Inc. 82(3)187-192, 1995. +- 2. III RCW,. RCW: Anxiety and Endocrine Disease. In Popkin, MK, Seminars in Clinical Neuropsychiatry 4(2)72-83, 1998. +- 3. In RCW, DE, s RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts. Psychosomatics 40:(1)18-27, 1999. +- 4. MI RCW: Fee-Splitting: Ethical Implications and Principles for Practice Management. Transference 20(2)14, 1999. CW,IN RCW: Long-term Psychological and Neurological Complications of 5. t. R Lindane Poisoning. Psychosomatics 40(6)513-517, 1999. +- 6. III RCW: False Allegations: The Role of the Forensic Psychiatrist. Journal of Psychiatric Practice 7(5)343-346, September 2001. +- 7. III RCW, RCW: Principles of Physician Recruiting. In Handbook of Mental Health Administration and Management; Reid WH and Silver S (ed.): Brunner-Routledge, New York, NY; Chapter 34:440-448, 2003. +- 8. III RCW, **RCW, Chapman M: Identifying Geriatric Patients at Risk for Suicide and Depression. Clinical Geriatrics 11(10)36-44, October 2003.** + +- 9. ifiRCW, atRCW: Establishing Liaison Before Disaster Strikes. h://www.psyc .org/disasterpsych/pdfs/apadisasterhandbk.pdf; Chapter 2:12-19. 2004. +- 10. RCW, IIRCW, Chapman MJ: Emotional and Psychiatric Effects of Weapons oass Destruction in First Responders. In: Ellotem9rism: Psychological and Public Health Interventions; Ursano RJ, Norwood AE & Fullerton CS (eds). Cambridge University Press:Cambridge; Chapter 14:250-273; 2004. +- 11. IIIRCW, Appleby B, IMIRCW: Atypical Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome Presenting as Fever o nknown Origin in the Elderly. Southern Medical Journal 1(98) 114-117, January 2005. +- 12. R RCW, IFIRCW, Chapman MJ: Exploitation of the Elderly: Undue Influence as aorm of E er Abuse. Clinical Geriatrics 13(2)28-36. February 2005. +- 13. I IIRCW, Chapman MJ: Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic picationso Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3)195-202, May-June 2005. +- 14. RCWAIRCW: Abuse of Supraphysiologic Doses of Anabolic Steroids. outhern ical Journal, 98(5)550-555, May 2005. +- 15. .RCW, IIIIRCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Complications of Anabolic Steroid Abuse. Psyc osomatics, 46(4)285-290, July-August 2005. +- 16. MIRCW, iRCW, Chapman MJ: Medical and Psychiatric Casualties caused by Conventiona and Radiological (Dirty) Bombs. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(3):242-248, May-June 2006. +- 17. IIIIRCW, IERCW, Chapman MJ: Postconcussional Syndrome: A Work in Progress (Response to Dr. MO. Letter to the Editor. Psychosomatics, 47(3):272, May-June 2006. +- 18. ppRCW, IIRCW, Chapman MJ: Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome in the erly: Diagnostic Criteria, Incidence, Risk Factors, Pathophysiology, and Treatment. (CME article) Clinical Geriatrics, 14(5):39-46, 2006. +- 19. RCW, I.RCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part I: Medical an Psychiatric Complications of Bombings and Biological, Chemical, and Nuclear Attacks. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(8):26-35, 2006. +- 20. i RCW, ■ **RCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part 2: osttraumatic Stress, Acute Stress, and Affective Disorders. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(9):17-24, 2006.** +- **21. III RCW, RCW: Malingering of PTSD: forensic and diagnostic considerat ons, characteristics of malingerers and clinical presentations. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(6):525-535, 2006.** + +- 22. RCW, RCW: A Profile of Pedophilia: Definition, Characteristics of Offenders, Recidivism, Treatment Outcomes, and Forensic Issues. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 82(4):457-471, 2007. 23.. RCW: Detection of Malingered PTSD: An Overview of Clinical, Psychometric, and Physiological Assessment: Where Do We Stand? Journal of Forensic Sciences, 52(3):717-725, 2007. +- 24. MI RCW, Macvaugh GS III, Merideth J: Commentary: Delving Further Into Liability for Psychotherapy Supervision. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 35(2):196-9, 2007. +- 25. In RCW,Ill RCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Effects of Terrorism: Medical and Societal Implications of Recent Attacks. In: Focus on Terrorism, Vol. 9; Linden EV (ed), Nova Science:New York; Chapter 11, Publication date: 3 rd Quarter, 2007. +- 26. II RCW,Ill RCW: The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak Model of virus properties on system capacity and function: A lesson for future viral epidemics. American Journal of Disaster Medicine, 2(5):270-276, 2007 27.. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part (— Causative Agents, Presentation, and Differential Diagnosis. Clinical Geriatrics, 15(12):18-25, 2007. +- 28. RCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part II Pathophysiology, Drug Interactions, and Treatment. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(1):24-28, 2008 +- 29. RCW, Resnick PJ: Psychotherapy Malpractice: New Pitfalls. Journal of Psychiatric Practice, 14(2):119-121, 2008 +- 30. RCW, IN RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part I Occurrence in Forensic/Criminal Situations, Partner Relationships, and Sexual Offenses. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(5):27-32, 2008 31.. RCW, Ill RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part II — Occurrence in Hospitals and Pharmacological/Behavioral Treatment of Agitation, Aggression and Violence. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(6):28-32, 2008. 32.. RCW,Ill RCW, Chapman MJ. The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak: lessons hospitals and physicians can apply to future viral epidemics. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2008Sep-Oct;30(5):446-52. Epub 2008 Jul 23 +- 33. al RCW, SH: Drug Diversion Program Rights. Legal Digest. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 36(4):579-580, 2008 34.. RCW, ■ **RCW, Chapman MJ: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Interventions. Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009** + +- 35. Paul RK, Lockey C, IIIRCW, Bursztajn H: Practice Management: Managing Risks When Practicing in Three-Party Care Settings. Psychiatrictimes.com, 26(2), Feb. 3, 2009. +- 36. IIIRCW, IIIIRCW, Chapman MJ: Letter to the Editor response re: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Interventions) Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009), Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(4):17-21, 2009. +- 37. IIIRCW, IIIRCW, Myers W, Chapman M: Testamentary Capacity: History, Physicians' Role, Requirements, and Why Wilts are Challenged. Clinical Geriatrics, 17(6):18-24, 2009. + +\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W. MD + +#### ABSTRACTS: + +- 1. IIIRCW, Hazard SC, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid Disease in Eating Disordered an epressed Patients. -146th Annual Meeting, American Psychiatric Association, May 25, 1993, San Francisco, CA, P.1.57 (Poster Session). +- 2. IIIRCW, INDE, IIRCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts: Evaluation of Suicide Risk in a Time of Managed Care. + - Psychiatric Practice and Managed Care, American Psychiatric Association, Vol. 5, No. 5, P 12, Sept-Oct 1999. +- 3. IIIRCW, Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J: The Role of Morphine in the Development of Acute Stress Disorder and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Severe Burn Injury. + - 41° Annual Meeting, American Bum Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009. +- 4. Gould N. McCann U, McKibben J, Ped-traumatic Heart Rate as a Predictor of Acute Stress Disorder and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Burn Injury. + - 41' Annual Meeting, American Burn Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009. + +\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W.I. MD + +## PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES: + +- 1. RCW, Hazard SC, Dunlap PK, -RCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid disease and abnormal function tests in patients with eating disorders and depression. Poster Session - American Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, May 25, 1993 +- 2. a RCW, RCW: Management of Hostage Situations. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999 +- 3. **RCW, RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective — Part I. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **4. III RCW, RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective - Part II. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **5. RCW, RCW, DE: Impact of Managed Care on Suicide Risk Assessment. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 1999 Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD, October 15, 1999** +- **6. RCW: Ethical Issues in Managed Care. American Psychiatric Association, 1999 Ethics Workshop, Washington, DC, November 3, 1999** +- **7. RCW, RCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Disaster Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **8. RCW, RCW: Bioterrorism Dealing with Medical and Psychiatric Consequences of Victims and Responders. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **9. NI RCW, RCW: Psychiatric Consequences of Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Disaster. Rocky Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 29, 2000** +- **10. RCW, RCW: Suicide in an Era of HMO's and Managed Care. Rocky Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 30, 2000** +- **11. RCW, RCW: Psychological Response to Disasters and Terrorism. Internationa ociety of Political Psychology, 23rd Annual Scientific Meeting, Seattle,** + +WA, July 4, 2000 + +- 12. **RCW,III RCW: Biological Warfare Attack Scenarios, Response to Terrorist Attacks, and Sources of Conflict. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000** +- **13. RCW,Ill RCW, Chapman M: Workplace Violence. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000** +- **14. RCW,. RCW: Biological Warfare: Attack Scenarios and Public Health Issues. Grand Rounds, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, December 8, 2000 15.. RCW,. RCW: Bioterrorism: A Short History of Blowarfare & Analysis of the Threat. Grand Rounds, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, August 15, 2001** +- **16. ROWAN RCW: Situational Suicide. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, FL, September 13, 2001** +- **17. RCW,. RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, FL, September 14, 2001** +- **18. RCW,Ill RCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Assault with Anthrax as a Biological Weapon. -Florida Psychiatric Society, Fall Meeting, Coconut Grove, FL, November 4, 2001 -Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002** +- **19. RCW,IIII RCW: Smallpox. Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002** +- **20. RCWIIII RCW: Psychopharmacology Forensic Risk and Clinical Practice: Things the clinician must know. Apopka Community Health Center, Apopka, FL, March 13, 2002** +- **21. RCW,II RCW: Overview of Terrorism and Bioterrorism. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002** +- **22. RCW,. RCW: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002** +- **23. RCW,Ill RCW: Smallpox as aBiological Weapon. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002** +- **24. RCW,. RCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Southern Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, Loews Ventana Canyon Resort, Tucson, AZ, October 3, 2002** + +- 25. F RCW,AIRCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Mandatory aness, a ax Medical Center, Daytona USA, Daytona Beach, FL, December 14, 2002 +- 26. IIIRCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003 +- 27. IIIRCW, IIIRCW: Medical and Psychological Sequelae of Bombings: Implications for First Responders and Critical Government Staff. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003 +- 28. i RCW, Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Florida sychiatric ociety Spring Meeting, Orlando, FL, April 5, 2003 +- 29. IIIROW, Terrorist Bombings: Medical and Psychiatric Impact. Southern Psyc iatric Association's Annual Meeting, Nashville, TN, October 11, 2003 +- 30. RCW, RCW: Terrorism, Bombings, and Psychiatric Casualties. Persity o orida, Department of Psychiatry, Visiting Professor Program, November 7, 2003 +- 31. i RCW, LIIRCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Tampa Bay sychiatric ociety, Tampa, FL, sponsored by Pfizer, January 29, 2004 +- 32. ppRCW, IIIRCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Orlando oice Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004 +- 33. MIRCW, ice Medical and Psychiatric Casualties of Terrorist Bombings. rando Po Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004 +- 34. F RCW,TRCW: Medical and Psychological Consequences of Bombings. rand Roun s, Tulane University, Department of Psychiatry, New Orleans, LA, January 28, 2005 +- 35. IIIRCW, IIIRCW: Psychological Sequelae of Weapons of Mass Destruction on First Responders. South Central Center for Public Health Preparedness/Alabama Department of Public Health, Nat AL, Satellite Conference, May 6, 2005 +- 36. RCW, Medical and Psychological Aspects of Terrorist Bombings. rand Roun s, Sinai Hospital, Department of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, June 2, 2005 +- 37. IIIRCW, IIIRCW: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationship: he New Realities. (Abbreviated version) Forensic Psychiatry Fellows and Residents, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, January 24, 2006 +- 38. IIIRCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician- + +Patient Relationship: The New Realities. Presidential Address. Southern Psychiatric Association, Baltimore, MD, September 30, 2006. + +- 39. III RCW, RCW: When the System is Overwhelmed: Protecting the Provider during Biodisaster. Satellite Conference, University of Alabama Birmingham South Central Center for Public Health Preparedness/Alab Department of Public Health/Tulane University School of Public Health, AL, February 27, 2007. 40.. RCW: Testamentary Capacity from Isaac Ray to Anna Niggle Grand Rounds, Case Western Reserve School of Medicine, Cleveland, M, Pt 28, 2008 +- 41. **RCW, IIIRCW, Rundell JR, Winstead DK: Psychiatrists' Role in Disaster Management: Lessons Learned. Course 14, American Psychiatric Association, Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, May 3, 2008.** +- **42. IN RCW: Violence in the Elderly: Forensic and Treatment Concerns. Forensic Forum, Florida Psychiatric Society, ChampionsGate, FL, September 20. 2008. 43.. RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole IIII. Southern Psychiatric Association, September 25, 2008.** +- **44. RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole Forensic Psychiatry Program, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, January 29, 2009.** +- **45. RCW: Domestic Violence as Portrayed In Film A Realistic Appraisal? Florida Psychiatric Society, St. Petersburg Beach, FL, March 20. 2009.** +- **46. III RCW, Silberman E, Preven D, Weissman S (chairperson): Indications for the Use of Combined Talking Therapy and Pharmacotherapy and How to Teach in Residency. Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, CW16, American Psychiatric Association, San Francisco, CA, May 19, 2009.** + +**' Boldface indicates Ryan C. W. I. MD** + +#### **MEDIA:** + +- **1. Time Magazine, Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome, May 16, 2005** +- **2. Reach MD Radio, Pedophilia. April 25, 2007** +- **3. MD Consult. Doug IIIIII. Joint telephone interview with Richard C. MD, Pedophilia. May 2, 2007** +- **4. The Korean Broadcasting System, KBS Special, Pedophilia. March 11, 2008.** + +- 5. Tony Pipitone, WKMG-TV Channel 6, Mothers Who Kill Their Children. October 28, 2008. +- 6. J. Lie. Orlando Medical News. Cyberchondriacs. November 13, 2008. +- 7. Fox 35 News, Orlando. Forensic Implications o. Anthony case. December 11, 2008. +- 8. Fox 35 News, Orlando. Thee§ Anthony Case: DNA Evidence. December 12, 2008. +- 9. Jessica, WKMG-TV Channel 6. The Anthony Case: Baker Act and Stressors. January 23, 2009. +- 10. Nam Nae Won and Jihyun Song. Korea Educational Broadcasting System. Pedophilla. March 30, 2009. +- 11. Keith Landry, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress and Financial Strain. June 15, 2009. +- 12. Heidi Hatch, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress on Families. June 16, 2009. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745540/EFTA02745540.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745540/EFTA02745540.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..04665b6ee23a82c796660362b1e76de48f8f4903 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745540/EFTA02745540.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,980 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745540.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 23394, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.06, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "CURRICULUM VITAE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 368.302978515625, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 368.302978515625, + 379.4370422363281 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 379.4370422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TABLE OF CONTENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 81.81 + ], + [ + 366.0063781738281, + 81.81 + ], + [ + 366.0063781738281, + 96.07830810546875 + ], + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 96.07830810546875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRESENT POSITION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.096, + 213.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 181.76399999999998, + 213.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 181.76399999999998, + 226.8 + ], + [ + 66.096, + 226.8 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EDUCATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.38, + 413.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 144.432, + 413.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 144.432, + 427.03839111328125 + ], + [ + 70.38, + 427.03839111328125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDICAL LICENSE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 64.872, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 176.7598419189453, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 176.7598419189453, + 110.96270751953125 + ], + [ + 64.872, + 110.96270751953125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.708, + 174.14999999999998 + ], + [ + 161.74932861328125, + 174.14999999999998 + ], + [ + 161.74932861328125, + 186.9254150390625 + ], + [ + 66.708, + 186.9254150390625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ADDITIONAL TRAINING:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.708, + 236.51999999999998 + ], + [ + 201.01235961914062, + 236.51999999999998 + ], + [ + 201.01235961914062, + 250.08905029296875 + ], + [ + 66.708, + 250.08905029296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.38, + 397.71 + ], + [ + 329.00274658203125, + 397.71 + ], + [ + 329.00274658203125, + 413.1623229980469 + ], + [ + 70.38, + 413.1623229980469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COMMITTEES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.05199999999999, + 588.06 + ], + [ + 156.89068603515625, + 588.06 + ], + [ + 156.89068603515625, + 600.90673828125 + ], + [ + 74.05199999999999, + 600.90673828125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "HONORS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.156, + 274.59000000000003 + ], + [ + 129.77259826660156, + 274.59000000000003 + ], + [ + 129.77259826660156, + 287.303466796875 + ], + [ + 69.156, + 287.303466796875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.44, + 486.80999999999995 + ], + [ + 233.50689697265625, + 486.80999999999995 + ], + [ + 233.50689697265625, + 500.2151794433594 + ], + [ + 73.44, + 500.2151794433594 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REVIEWER:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.096, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 136.9130859375, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 136.9130859375, + 101.56549072265625 + ], + [ + 66.096, + 101.56549072265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BOOK REVIEWS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.156, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 168.3014373779297, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 168.3014373779297, + 277.56781005859375 + ], + [ + 69.156, + 277.56781005859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PUBLICATIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.38, + 341.01 + ], + [ + 164.57553100585938, + 341.01 + ], + [ + 164.57553100585938, + 354.0617980957031 + ], + [ + 70.38, + 354.0617980957031 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ABSTRACTS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 305.37 + ], + [ + 147.87896728515625, + 305.37 + ], + [ + 147.87896728515625, + 318.5706481933594 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 318.5706481933594 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS AND INVITATIONAL \nACADEMIC LECTURES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 62.424, + 79.38 + ], + [ + 521.4171752929688, + 79.38 + ], + [ + 521.4171752929688, + 114.30767822265625 + ], + [ + 62.424, + 114.30767822265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDIA:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.5, + 567.0 + ], + [ + 121.26749420166016, + 567.0 + ], + [ + 121.26749420166016, + 579.96 + ], + [ + 76.5, + 579.96 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 84 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "TableOfContents", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 197 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 217 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 257 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 289 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 361 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 380 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 305 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 414 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 364 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 376 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 336 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 145 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745540" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745554/EFTA02745554.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745554/EFTA02745554.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..86079abed575d31717dc05bab78417081dfda6e7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745554/EFTA02745554.md @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +## AFFIDAVIT OF RYAN CW. M.D. + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Ryan C.W. III M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Ryan C.W. III M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 2008. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as an Affiliate Instructor of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine at the University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, and Assistant Professor of the University of Central Florida College of Medicine. +- 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and medical degree from the Georgetown University. +- 5. I have been requested to perform an Independent Medical Examination. Scope of examination: Time: 9 am, 8/20/09 + +- 6. Place: Burman, Critton, Luttier Sr Coleman, 515 N. Flagler Dr, Ste. 400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +- 7. Manner: Face-to-face Independent Medical/Psychiatric Examination +- 8. Duration: Anticipated 6-8 hours +- 9. Conditions: Exam to take place with only evaluator and evaluee in the room with the evaluation being videotaped with appropriate audio and visual recordings. +- 10. Scope: Full medical and psychiatric history, including chief complaint, history of present illness, specific complaints of symptoms or injury, medical history, past psychiatric history, family history, abuse history, birth history, childhood history, school history, occupational history, violence history, legal history, relationship history, substance use history, sexual history, review of systems, activities of daily living, mental status examination, diagnoses using DSM-IV axes, and discussion of case findings and opinions. + - 11. Psychological tests and questionnaires: Zung Depression Scale, Zung Anxiety Scale, Mini Mental State Examination, MCMI-III, MMPI -2 with forensic implications, Life History Questionnaire, and Forensic Questionnaire. + +- 12. No opinion of mine has ever been disqualified in a legal proceeding. +- 13. I declare under penalty and perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. + +Executed this 2-1 day of 2009, in Lake Mary, Florida. + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +RYAN C.W. , M.D. :-tr\_Afiwcjw\_n + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared RYAN C.W. , M.D., who is (oil - personally known to me or ( ) who has produced as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this al -44% day of 1ktit , 2009. + +A.o\_ No Public Printed Name: My Commission Expires: + +![](_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745554/EFTA02745554.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745554/EFTA02745554.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4aabd5c6d563b8fd1b42aa15af8f9cf630f2e003 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745554/EFTA02745554.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,180 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745554.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2866, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.73, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RYAN CW. M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.66, + 144.94189453125 + ], + [ + 429.64385986328125, + 144.94189453125 + ], + [ + 429.64385986328125, + 169.29 + ], + [ + 186.66, + 169.29 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 201 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 209 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 206 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745554" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745554/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745554/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7bece164f65fee1d70bf520e6f9428f0367946c3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745554/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1154eebbc2a9ae7c0a2c9b8f79552faa7aa27c124398d9664c60a4f1090a97d2 +size 13216 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745557/EFTA02745557.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745557/EFTA02745557.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..93675e915058f3442a35d04a34f2f205fe0bd2da --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745557/EFTA02745557.md @@ -0,0 +1,210 @@ +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80811-MARRAMMI + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRAMMII + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRAIIIMI + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRAMMIN + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRN + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRALIMMI + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA,MI + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA-M. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRAJJOHNSON + +# DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF ION OF PLAINTIFF, C.M.A., + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan M.D. of C.W. Mt M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on August 20, 2009 at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP. located at 515 N. Flagler Drive, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring a sweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. See infra and attached. + +2. Unless a timely and valid objection to this Notice is filed within the time set forth by Rule 35 or as ordered by the court on an emergency basis (Rule 7,1(E)), the Plaintiff is required by this Rule to be in attendance at the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as a witness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached hereto as + +Exhibit "A". The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached hereto as Exhibit "B". See Affidavit + +**Certificate of Service** + +![]()I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 29 day of July, 2009 + +![]()![]()BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +### Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08- 80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhwAhotmail.com + +Jack Sc la, Esq. Jack P. Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsxAsearcvlaw.com iphasearcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecfabrucereinhartlaw. Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Ricci-Leopold, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellpelaw.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +' Esq. Law Firm,P.k 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F isidrogarciaAbellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsbergApodhurst.com kezella.podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jabesq@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Page 7 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +skuvinAriccilaw.com + +tleopoldAriccilaw.com + +cc. Dr. Ryan. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745557/EFTA02745557.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745557/EFTA02745557.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6ea8886e55ba21b59f499fddfaf0e829aa5d0e80 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745557/EFTA02745557.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,409 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745557.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 5730, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.43, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 411.6553649902344, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 411.6553649902344, + 129.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 129.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 167.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 411.6607360839844, + 167.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 411.6607360839844, + 198.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 198.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF ION OF \nPLAINTIFF, C.M.A.,", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 123.12 + ], + [ + 515.0055541992188, + 123.12 + ], + [ + 515.0055541992188, + 154.66998291015625 + ], + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 154.66998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 277.848, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 401.47200000000004, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 401.47200000000004, + 155.52 + ], + [ + 277.848, + 155.52 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 527.3100000000001 + ], + [ + 391.68, + 527.3100000000001 + ], + [ + 391.68, + 568.62 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 568.62 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Counsel for Plaintiffs", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 65.484, + 115.01999999999998 + ], + [ + 180.71298217773438, + 115.01999999999998 + ], + [ + 180.71298217773438, + 127.98000000000002 + ], + [ + 65.484, + 127.98000000000002 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 346 + ], + [ + "Line", + 81 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745557" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745564/EFTA02745564.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745564/EFTA02745564.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4da5fc265a6e6586824bcd8dd35bc7aaa5d6a3bb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745564/EFTA02745564.md @@ -0,0 +1,84 @@ +**WEST PALM BEACH OFFICE:** + +2139 PALM BEACH LAKES BLVD. +WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33409 +P.O. DRAWER 3626 +WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33402 +(561) 686-6300 +1-800-780-8607 +1-800-220-7006 Spanish + +**SEARCY +DENNEY +SCAROLA +BARNHART +& SHIPLEY.** +*Attorneys +at Law* + + **TALLAHASSEE OFFICE:** + +THE TOWLE HOUSE +517 NORTH CALHOUN STREET +TALLAHASSEE, FL 32301-1231 +P.O. DRAWER 1230 +TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32302 +(850) 224-7600 +1-868-549-7011 + +July 29, 2009 + +Via E-Mail and U.S. Mail + +ATTORNEYS AT LAW: + +ROSALYN SIA BAKER-BARNES +F. GREGORY BARNHART\*\* +T. HARDEE BASS, III +LAURIE J. BRIGGS +BRIAN R. DENNEY +EARL L. DENNEY, JR.\*\* +BRENDA S. FULMER\*\* +JAMES W. GUSTAFSON, JR.\*\* +J. K. FLEET\*\* +DAVID KEENEY\*\* +WILEYMAN\*\* +DERECK \*\* +[REDACTED] ROBERT\*\* +[REDACTED] GUINLAN +EDWARD V. FIOCI +DAVID J. SALES\*\* +JOHN SCAROLA\*\* +CHRISTIAN D. SCARCY\*\* +[REDACTED] Y S\*\* +[REDACTED] SPEED\*\* +TOREN E. TORRY\*\* +C. CALVIN WARRINER II\*\* + +Robert Critton, Esquire +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 + +Re: C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. +Our File No.: 281849 + +Dear Bob: + +In response to your letter of July 23, 2009, we object to your setting both Susan Pope and Dr. Serge Thys for deposition in this matter. As you know, we have a pending motion for protective order regarding their records that has not yet been ruled on. Any attempts to set either Dr. Thys or Susan Pope will likewise draw a motion for protective order. + +We object to any CME of Carolyn as well. I will formally respond to your request for a CME after you have filed your motion for same pursuant to Rule 35. + +Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. + +Very truly yours, +*[Signature]* + +JACK P. [REDACTED] +JPH/kmc +cc: Richard Willits, Esquire + +![](_page_0_Picture_44.jpeg) + +EXHIBIT "A" +cc: JE, DJ, KJP \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745564/EFTA02745564.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745564/EFTA02745564.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ecec451fc6611c36584d581595f65df7956ad984 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745564/EFTA02745564.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,153 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745564.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1924, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.83, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_44.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "WEST PALM BEACH OFFICE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 35.496, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 124.848, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 124.848, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 35.496, + 112.59 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SEARCY DENNEY SCAROLA BARNHART & SHIPLEY. Attorneys at Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.8, + 53.46 + ], + [ + 358.02, + 53.46 + ], + [ + 358.02, + 152.28 + ], + [ + 244.8, + 152.28 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TALLAHASSEE OFFICE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 504.9, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 585.684, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 585.684, + 110.97 + ], + [ + 504.9, + 110.97 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ATTORNEYS AT LAW:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 47.736000000000004, + 254.34 + ], + [ + 98.53200000000001, + 254.34 + ], + [ + 98.53200000000001, + 262.44 + ], + [ + 47.736000000000004, + 262.44 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 36 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745564" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745564/_page_0_Picture_44.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745564/_page_0_Picture_44.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..38ca7ca17844c684e7f83300230fc18ca63dff9e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745564/_page_0_Picture_44.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c5af6ef7436590dd9d4c4a54bb51ee40d49049f51f574a93278c4afb53cf4c5c +size 7424 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745565/EFTA02745565.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745565/EFTA02745565.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a6a7f3dee11c4da3f1a5410921510650b19b2b26 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745565/EFTA02745565.md @@ -0,0 +1,275 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +I + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +I + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +/ CASE N • 93-CIV-MARR + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +/ + +DOE II, : 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 101, : 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102, • 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +**DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S NOTICE OF FILING ADDITIONAL +EXHIBIT IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S EMERGENCY MOTION +FOR INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF +[REDACTED] WITH INCORPORATED +MEMORANDUM OF LAW (DE 228)** + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Notice of Filing Additional Exhibit in Support of Defendant's Emergency Motion for Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff, [REDACTED] with Incorporated Memorandum of Law: + +1. Letter dated July 29, 2009 from Plaintiff's counsel to defense counsel regarding depositions and independent medical examination. + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 30th day of July, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: + +![]()**Certificate of Service** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[isx@searcylaw.com](mailto:isx@searcylaw.com) +[iph@searcylaw.com](mailto:iph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com + +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-08804* + +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +tleopold@riccilaw.com + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesq@bellsouth.net + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745565/EFTA02745565.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745565/EFTA02745565.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d45469135613045911d374cf2b56a8435f2ce55c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745565/EFTA02745565.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,313 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745565.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 4970, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.39, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 411.270751953125, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 411.270751953125, + 103.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 103.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S NOTICE OF FILING ADDITIONAL EXHIBIT IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF [REDACTED] WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW (DE 228)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 108.93599999999999, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 503.06399999999996, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 503.06399999999996, + 157.14000000000001 + ], + [ + 108.93599999999999, + 157.14000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 243.57600000000002, + 334.53 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 334.53 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 349.92 + ], + [ + 243.57600000000002, + 349.92 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.188, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 244.188, + 101.25 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 52 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745565" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745571/EFTA02745571.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745571/EFTA02745571.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..60850c9c9a058fdebb70e93ce615d0ed8191c3ae --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745571/EFTA02745571.md @@ -0,0 +1,144 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/=M + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA' + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-8081 I -MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 114), filed May 26, 2009, and the Court's Order ( DE 192), entered July 6, 2009. The parties are in agreement as to a substantial part of the language in their proposed orders, and the Court has carefully considered the motion, the proposed orders, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiffs' Motion (DE 114) is GRANTED as follows: + +A. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and his employees, his agents, and his attorneys are directed to take every reasonable step to preserve all evidence relevant to these cases that have been filed in federal court or that may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence relevant to these cases, which includes evidence related to the October 25, 2005 search, documents, data, and tangible things, including writings; records; files; correspondence; digital or chemical process photographs (including negatives); reports; memoranda; calendars; diaries; minutes; electronic messages; voicemail; email; telephone message records or logs; computer and network activity logs; hard drives; backup data; removable computer storage media, such as tapes, disks, and cards; printouts; document image files; web pages; databases; spreadsheets; software; books; ledgers; journals; orders; invoices; bills; vouchers; checks; statements; worksheets; summaries; compilations; computations; charts; diagrams; graphic presentations; drawings; films; charts; video, phonographic, tape, or digital recordings or transcripts thereof; drafts; jottings; and notes. Information that serves to identify, locate, or link such material, such as file inventories, file folders, indices, and metadata, is also included. Specifically, Defendant must preserve the following evidence: records of phone communications; records of domestic and international travel, including travel in Defendant's private airplanes; former and current employee records; tax returns; medical bills; bills regarding any other expenses related in any way to these Plaintiffs; all documents evidencing payment by Defendant of U.S. currency and/or merchandise to each person on the list of victims provided by the United States Attorney's Office ("USAO list"); any evidence stored in Defendant's storage unit; all photographs of the interior and exterior of Defendant's Palm Beach mansion as it appeared in 1998 through October 2005; any diary, log, memo pad, calendar, or other writing reflecting the date that each person on the USAO list visited Defendant's mansion; any diary or document wherein each victim on the USAO list wrote regarding any visit(s) to Defendant's mansions; all documents sent to or by the Palm Beach Police Department ("PBPD"), the FBI, the USAO, or the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office ("PBSAO") to or by the Defendant; and all computers used by Defendant and/or his agents and/or employees during 1998 through and including October 25, 2005, the date of the search warrant. + +- B. The duty to preserve evidence extends to documents, data, and tangible things in the + +possession, custody, and/or control of the parties to this action and any employees, agents, or attorneys who possess materials reasonably anticipated to be subject to discovery in these actions. Counsel shall be directly responsible only to the extent they are in possession or control of evidence. Counsel shall provide a copy of this Order to Defendant and those employees or agents whom defense counsel knows, or has reason to know, may have evidence. + +- C. "Preservation" is to be interpreted broadly to accomplish the goal of maintaining the integrity of all documents, data, and tangible things reasonably anticipated to be subject to discovery in these actions under Rules 26, 45, and 56(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. +- D. If an objection or privilege is raised, the parties may raise the issue with this Court in a timely fashion and shall preserve the evidence in question pending resolution by the Court. An agreement to preserve evidence and this Order is not a waiver of any right to object to production. +- E. The parties, without leave of Court, may agree in writing that certain documents or categories of evidence need not be preserved as otherwise required by this Order. If such agreement is reached, such agreement is effective upon signing and without further order of this Court. +- F. If this Court determines that evidence has been destroyed or lost in violation of this Order, it may impose appropriate sanctions based upon motion and an evidentiary hearing, if necessary. + +G. Each party shall bear its own costs for complying with this Order. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, + +Florida, this 30th of July, 2009. + +/e rse- 2- KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Court Judge + +Copies to: All counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745571/EFTA02745571.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745571/EFTA02745571.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7f7c18b68e9274956197a487eb2f4cb4f5df60b0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745571/EFTA02745571.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,333 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745571.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 6070, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.46, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.5581359863281, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 168.48 + ], + [ + 330.7633361816406, + 168.48 + ], + [ + 330.7633361816406, + 182.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 182.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 26 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745571" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745578/EFTA02745578.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745578/EFTA02745578.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4bb176b385a857087e8cb270a5cfde35b2f5e152 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745578/EFTA02745578.md @@ -0,0 +1,322 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO.2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO.3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO.4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.; 08-CV-80381-MAR1 + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, vs. CASE NO.; 08-CV-80994-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. C.M.A., CASE NO.; 08-CV-80811-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. JANE DOE, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendants. DOE II, + +vs. Plaintiff, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80469-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80591-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.; 08-CV-80656-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe Numbers 2-7 Notice Of Joinder In Plaintiffs' Jane Does 101 and 102's Motion for No-Contact Order, with Incorporated Memorandum of Law + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Response in Opposition to Jane Doe Numbers 2-7 Notice of Joinder In Plaintiffs' Jane Does 101 and 102's Motion for No-Contact Order, with Incorporated Memorandum of Law. In support, EPSTEIN states: + +### I. Introduction + +1. Jane Doe 101 and 102 filed their Motion for No-Contact Order on May 22, 2009. (DE 113). + +2. Epstein filed his Response In Opposition to the Motion for No Contact Order on May 29, 2009. (DE 127). The arguments set forth in the Response In Opposition to the Motion for No-Contact Order are incorporated herein by reference as if same were outlined herein. + +3. Jane Doe 101 and 102 filed their Reply to Epstein's Response to their Motion for No-Contact Order on June 4, 2009. (DE 136). + +4. On June 8, 2009, Jane Doe Numbers 2-7 filed their Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs' Jane Does 101 and 102's Motion for No-Contact Order. (DE 45)(the "Notice of Joinder"). + +## II. Response + +5. The Notice of Joinder is unwarranted and simply a waste of attorney time and judicial resources. However, it does once again telegraph for this court Plaintiffs' collective efforts to stall this case by any means possible. + +6. The Notice of Joinder is riddled with inaccuracies and misstatements. For example, has not been asked to gather any information relative to Jane Doe 4 and Jane Doe 7. See Affidavit of Exhibit "A". Moreover, only spoke to Jane Doe 7 when approached by her and her boyfriend at a local West Palm Beach bar. Id. At that time, told Jane Doe 7 that she "[] could not believe she was bringing a lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein, as I knew] she has taken money from a number of older men and even traveled to Chicago with one of them." Id. also told Jane Doe 7 that she intended to tell the truth about everything she knew about Jane Doe 7 and her escapades with other men. Id. As such, any contact was initiated by Jane Doe 7 in a public forum. + +7. It is clear from the attached Affidavit that at least Jane Does 4 and 7 have made misstatements in order to stall this case. As to Jane Doe numbers 2, 3, 5, and 6, no supporting + +allegations exist to substantiate the entry of any such order. Plaintiffs simply make much to do about nothing. + +8. For the reasons set forth herein and in Epstein's Response Motion (DE 127), Epstein asks that this Court deny Plaintiff's Notice/Motion for No-Contact Order. + +Wherefore, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, requests that this court deny the Notice/Motion for No-Contact Order, and for such other and further relief Court deems just and proper. + +By. + +MICH J. E, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identifi o he following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this a day of , 2009 + +Resp c Ily submitted, + +By: + +RO CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Flon a Bar No. 224162 + +rcritAbcIclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mnikeabcIclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[isx@searcylaw.com](mailto:isx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +Counsel for Defendant [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 +Fax: 561-515-2610 +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. +08-08804 +[skuvin@riccilaw.com](mailto:skuvin@riccilaw.com) +[tleopold@riccilaw.com](mailto:tleopold@riccilaw.com) + +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) + +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +# IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 502008CA006596XXXXMB + +Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, and + +Defendants. + +# AFFIDAVIT OF + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared who after being first duly sworn, deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is +- 2. I am and have been represented by McIntosh, Sawran, Peitz & Cartaya, P.A. +- 3. I was a Defendant in the case styled, Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein and Case No. 502008CA006596XXXXMB AB. +- 4. I have read the document entitled " Plaintiffs Jane Does' 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs' Jane Does 101 and 102's Motion for No-Contact Order." +- 5. I am writing this affidavit in response to the statements within the motion that refer to me. +- 6. I have not had any contact with Jeffrey Epstein since he was arrested. +- 7. I have not been asked by Mr. Epstein or his attorneys to gather information about Jane Doe 4 and Jane Doe 7. + +- 8. I am not being supported by Mr. Epstein nor did I say that to Jane Doe 4 and + - 7. +- 9. Based on the statements within the motion, I can identify Jane Doe 7 and only spoke to her when she and her boyfriend approached and confronted me at Dr. Feelgood's. +- 10. When Jane Doe 7 and her boyfriend confronted me, I told her that I could not believe she was bringing a lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein, as I know that she has taken money from a number of older men and even traveled to Chicago with one of them. +- 11. I also told Jane Doe 7 and her boyfriend that I intended to tell the truth about everything I know about her and what she has done with other men. +- 12. I will tell the truth about Mr. Epstein, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 7 or anyone else that I am asked about. I resent any suggestion that I would lie to assist Mr. Epstein. + +FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +SON + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me t (9neday of 30 , 20CR, by t\c t v AA 19' 0\io.M (name of person), who is personally known to me or who has produced\_ ( kt,nte (type of identification) as identification. + +SIGNAT + +PRINTED NAME OF NOTARY + +![](_page_8_Picture_6.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745578/EFTA02745578.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745578/EFTA02745578.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3f4d0acfb3a424564b0019683188458948158ca2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745578/EFTA02745578.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,545 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745578.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 9860, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.81, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_8_Picture_6.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 412.136474609375, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 412.136474609375, + 103.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 103.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe Numbers 2-7 Notice Of \nJoinder In Plaintiffs' Jane Does 101 and 102's Motion for No-Contact Order, with \nIncorporated Memorandum of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.5, + 421.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 537.948, + 421.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 537.948, + 464.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 76.5, + 464.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.384, + 588.06 + ], + [ + 366.1336975097656, + 588.06 + ], + [ + 366.1336975097656, + 602.6030120849609 + ], + [ + 264.384, + 602.6030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Response", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 297.27 + ], + [ + 347.135009765625, + 297.27 + ], + [ + 347.135009765625, + 312.35302734375 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 312.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 243.57600000000002, + 353.0574951171875 + ], + [ + 367.9053955078125, + 353.0574951171875 + ], + [ + 367.9053955078125, + 368.03997802734375 + ], + [ + 243.57600000000002, + 368.03997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.72, + 105.30000000000001 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 105.30000000000001 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 145.8 + ], + [ + 189.72, + 145.8 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR \nPALM BEACH COUNTY FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 87.51599999999999, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 521.7376098632812, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 521.7376098632812, + 115.74200439453125 + ], + [ + 87.51599999999999, + 115.74200439453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 196.452, + 300.51 + ], + [ + 404.532, + 300.51 + ], + [ + 404.532, + 316.74200439453125 + ], + [ + 196.452, + 316.74200439453125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745578" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745578/_page_8_Picture_6.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745578/_page_8_Picture_6.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8bd57ae5a808b81076a61f0a94c16d88a2c4c779 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745578/_page_8_Picture_6.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:caf16c565b310dc050c8f9715e89fc5a6f5a1ccd9ae7a2c60e6d45edc5f17287 +size 9727 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745587/EFTA02745587.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745587/EFTA02745587.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7bc3a419e8c0945edfb2d3479553621b9b27b14b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745587/EFTA02745587.md @@ -0,0 +1,335 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MAR + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MAR + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MAR + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRN + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MAR + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRAi + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA I + +PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO FILE A REPLY TO DE ENDANT. JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING TREATMENT RECORDS FROM PARENT-CHILD CENTER, INC., DR. SERGE THYS, RECORDS OF DOMINIQUE HYPPOLITE/SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PALM BEACH COUNTY. GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL, ST. MARY'S HOSPITAL, FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY AND GLORIA C. HAKKARAINEN, M.D., WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW (DE 207), AND A RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO STRIKE C.M.A.'S CONDITIONAL NOTICE OF INTENT TO EXCLUSIVELY RELY ON STATUTORY DAMAGES PROVIDED BY 18 U.S.C. §2255 (DE 113), WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through her undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which to file a reply to D.E. 216, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff, Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Records of Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkareinen, M.D., With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 207), and a response to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely On Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255 (DE 113), With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. Local General Rule 7.1 A.1 and Rule 6, Fed. R. Civ. P. (2009). Plaintiff seeks an extension until August 7, 2009, to file her reply and response. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Plaintiff states: + +1. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff, Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Records of Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkareinen, M.D., With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 207), and Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely On Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255 (DE 113), With Incorporated Memorandum of Law were jointly filed on July 21, 2009. Pursuant to Rule 15(3), Fed.R.Civ.P., Plaintiffs reply and response would be due on July 31, 2009. + +2. Defendant's counsel is in agreement with the requested extension until August 7, 2009, for Plaintiff to file a reply to D.E. 216, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff, Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Records of Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkareinen, M.D., With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 207), and a response + +to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely On Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255 (DE 113), With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. + +3. The undersigned counsel has been in a five week trial which was concluded on July 27, 2009. + +4. The requested extension is fair and reasonable under the circumstances as it will provide time to allow Plaintiff, C.M.A., to fully and adequately prepare a reply to D.E. 216, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff, Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Records of Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkareinen, M.D., With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 207), and a response to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely On Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255 (DE 113), With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, C.M.A., requests that this Court enter an order granting Plaintiff an extension until August 7, 2009, to file a reply to D.E. 216, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff, Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Records of Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkareinen, M.D., With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 207), and a response to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely On Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255 (DE 113), With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1 + +Counsel for the movant conferred via telephone with counsel for the Defendant and counsel for the Defendant is in agreement with requested extension until August 7, 2009, for Plaintiff to file a reply to to D.E. 216, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff, Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc. Dr. Serge Thys, Records of Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkareinen, M.D., With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 207), and a response to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely On Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255 (DE 113), With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. + +si Jack P. + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 31th day of July, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of electronic filing to all counsel of record on the attached service list. + +Lc/Jack P ■ + +**Jack Scarola** + +**Florida Bar No.: 169440** + +**Jack P.** ■ + +**Florida Bar No.: 0547808** + +**Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A.** + +**2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard** + +**West Palm Beach, Florida 33409** + +**Phone: (561) 686-6300** + +**Fax: (561) 383-9424** + +**Attorneys for Plaintiff, C.M.A.** + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Phone: (561) 582-7600 + +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Robert Critton, Esquire + +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP + +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 + +Phone: (561) 842-2820 + +Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire + +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 South Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 202-6360 + +Fax: (561) 828-0983 + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARM, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARIRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRN + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/M. + +AGREED ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO FILE A REPLY TO DEFENDANT. JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING TREATMENT RECORDS FROM PARENT-CHILD CENTER, INC., DR. SERGE THYS, RECORDS OF DOMINIQUE HYPPOLITE/SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL. ST. MARY'S HOSPITAL, FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY AND GLORIA C. HAKKARAINEN, M.D., WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW (DE 207), AND A RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO STRIKE C.M.A.'S CONDITIONAL NOTICE OF INTENT TO EXCLUSIVELY RELY ON STATUTORY DAMAGES PROVIDED BY 18 U.S.C. §2255 IDE 113), WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +This matter came before the Court upon the Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time in Which to File a reply to D.E. 216, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Response in + +Opposition to Plaintiff, Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Records of Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkareinen, M.D., With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 207), and a response to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely On Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255 (DE 113), With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. Having considered the motion and the agreement with the requested extension, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Plaintiffs motion is hereby granted. Plaintiff has until August 7, 2009, to file a reply to D.E. 216, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff, Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Records of Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkareinen, M.D., With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 207), and a response to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely On Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255 (DE 113), With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. + +DONE AND ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies to all Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745587/EFTA02745587.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745587/EFTA02745587.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4d28a72129a83bd47344f8f00fb5bf955c2d422d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745587/EFTA02745587.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,522 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745587.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 11414, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.35, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 96.1875 + ], + [ + 404.8868103027344, + 96.1875 + ], + [ + 404.8868103027344, + 124.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 124.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 96.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 481.7721862792969, + 96.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 481.7721862792969, + 111.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 111.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 221.54399999999998, + 386.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 383.2513122558594, + 386.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 383.2513122558594, + 401.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 221.54399999999998, + 401.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 96.38999999999999 + ], + [ + 345.78, + 96.38999999999999 + ], + [ + 345.78, + 110.97 + ], + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 110.97 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.676, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 404.8868103027344, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 404.8868103027344, + 100.2999267578125 + ], + [ + 197.676, + 100.2999267578125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 48 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 68 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745587" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745598/EFTA02745598.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745598/EFTA02745598.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..476dd09cabcfe6b2777beccea51e1f20e8b2ce37 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745598/EFTA02745598.md @@ -0,0 +1,119 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-ev-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S Unopposed Motion For Extension of Time in Which to File a Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and in Third Party Subpoenas, having considered Defendant's Unopposed Motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall file a Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and in Third Party Subpoenas on or before August 5, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this 31n day of July, 2009 + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies all counsel \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745598/EFTA02745598.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745598/EFTA02745598.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b57a75c4f97e9a7d87fdd814fd530ee0ad09aac2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745598/EFTA02745598.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,188 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745598.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1833, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.41, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.11566162109375, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.11566162109375, + 108.35302734375 + ], + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 108.35302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745598" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745602/EFTA02745602.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745602/EFTA02745602.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3638e74b5ecc56541d54c6bac2b18555bb4874b1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745602/EFTA02745602.md @@ -0,0 +1,159 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRAJJOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRAi + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRAIMMI + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEI.1-12EY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA, + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRAMME + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRAIMM + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-IIMM + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MAFtRA-IIMI + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRAMMI + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES 2-7 RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL IDENTITY IN THE STYLE OF THE CASE AND IN THIRD PARTY SUBPOENAS (DE 144) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves this Court for an extension of time until August 5, 2009, to file a Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and in Third Party Subpoenas, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 A.1(j) (S.D. Fla. 2008). As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +1. Counsel for Defendant communicated with Counsel for the Plaintiff, and Plaintiff's Counsel agrees to the requested extension of August 5, 2009, to file a Reply to Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the Case and Third Party Subpoenas. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff's counsel, by telephone, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested extension. + +By: + +MI , JR., ESQ. + +## Certificate of Service + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that atrue copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 3r day of July, 2009. + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhw @hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 isx@searcvlaw.com jph@searcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Brad , Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp@law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 gosefsberg@podhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf@bmcereinhar Counsel for Defendan + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Ricci-Leopold, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 skuvin@riccilaw.com tleopold@riccilaw.com + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfull + +By: TTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTffiR & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-842-2820 Fax: 561-515-3148 + +(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745602/EFTA02745602.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745602/EFTA02745602.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fa5b7f3cfb8022ab7398424897c96c71dfcb62a4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745602/EFTA02745602.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,310 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745602.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 4997, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.53, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 408.81600000000003, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 408.81600000000003, + 107.73000000000002 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 107.73000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 169.524, + 332.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 440.64, + 332.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 440.64, + 345.87 + ], + [ + 169.524, + 345.87 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 363.96728515625, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 363.96728515625, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 97.19999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 117 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 187 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 349 + ], + [ + "Line", + 78 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745602" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745608/EFTA02745608.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745608/EFTA02745608.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9c85e2d24eaf45283aa1a1a94229c80a6f53bfa4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745608/EFTA02745608.md @@ -0,0 +1,119 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA I + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA, + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRAI + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JE1-FREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES 2-7 RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL IDENTITY IN THE STYLE OF THE CASE AND IN THIRD PARTY SUBPOENAS + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion to Exceed Page Limitation in Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the case and in Third Party Subpoenas. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the request to exceed page limitation, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant's Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2- 7Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the case and in Third Party Subpoenas may exceed 10 pages. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745608/EFTA02745608.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745608/EFTA02745608.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f194c7f6cd5df7987091524a7d5aaa54d2c631a9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745608/EFTA02745608.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,188 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745608.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1988, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.38, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 411.35565185546875, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 411.35565185546875, + 102.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 102.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 144 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745608" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745612/EFTA02745612.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745612/EFTA02745612.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..376aca47c53badc692b656b7e037ccf1553ef8b6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745612/EFTA02745612.md @@ -0,0 +1,209 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/.. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEI-TREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES 2-7 RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL IDENTITY IN THE STYLE OF THE CASE ANS IN THIRD PARTY SUBPOENAS + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves to exceed the page limitation of 10 pages imposed by Loc. Gen. Rule 7.1. C. 2. (S.D. Fla.), Reply to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Identity in the Style of the case and in Third Party Subpoenas. In support of his motion, Defendant states: + +1. Local Gen. Rule 7.1 C. 2. provides in part that absent prior permission of the court, no party shall file any legal memorandum in the case of a reply which exceeds ten pages in length. Defendant is in the process of preparing his reply to Plaintiff's response, (which is due by an extension to August 5, 2009), and the reply will exceed the 10 page limitation. + +2. A length exceeding 10 pages is required so that Defendant may fully address the issues raised in Plaintiffs response. Under the constitutional guarantees of due process, including a fair and full opportunity to be heard, and in the interests of justice so that the Court may render a fully informed decision on the issue, Defendant is entitled to an order granting his motion to exceed the 10 page limitation in his reply. + +3. As certified below herein, Plaintiff's counsel agreed to the request to exceed ten pages. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court grant Defendant's motion, and enter an order allowing a reply in excess of 10 pages, for a total of 20 or less. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff's counsel, by telephone, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested extension. + +## Certificate of Service + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 3 et day of July, 2009. + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. E, Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Brad Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +Fax: 561-383-9424 isx @searcvlaw.com iph@searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff. C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Ricci-Leopold, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 skuvin@riccilaw.com tleopold@riccilaw.com + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsbere@riodhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfu By: RO Fl RT CRI rida No. rit@ claw. ON, 2416 m R., ESQ. + +MICHAEL J. I , ESQ. Florida Bar = 7296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-842-2820 Fax: 561-515-3148 + +(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745612/EFTA02745612.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745612/EFTA02745612.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2591e5a4ec64941379245fb3102d56ab65cd85da --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745612/EFTA02745612.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,310 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745612.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 5672, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.07, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.676, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 409.85565185546875, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 409.85565185546875, + 103.863037109375 + ], + [ + 197.676, + 103.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 169.524, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 442.23529052734375, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 442.23529052734375, + 641.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 169.524, + 641.2330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.74, + 171.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 367.9111022949219, + 171.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 367.9111022949219, + 186.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 241.74, + 186.43353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 137 + ], + [ + "Line", + 66 + ], + [ + "Text", + 36 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 127 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745612" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745618/EFTA02745618.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745618/EFTA02745618.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f4a448701a809d95442042a798ecac18ad164976 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745618/EFTA02745618.md @@ -0,0 +1,161 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 013-CV-80232-MARRA + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +/ + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRA1 + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CTV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Jane Doe. No 101 and IO2's Motion for No-Contact Order (DE 113) and Plaintiffs Jane Does' 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs' Motion (DE 145). The Court has reviewed the motions, responses, and replies (DE's 113, 127, 136, 145, 233), and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. Plaintiffs seek a Court order prohibiting Defendant or his agents from communicating with Plaintiffs directly or indirectly. Defendant. Defendant opposes the request as "needless, unwarranted and excessive." (DE 127 at 5). Nonetheless, Defendant states in his response that "neither Mr. Epstein nor his attorneys, nor their agents intend to have any direct or indirect contact with Plaintiffs counsels' clients." (DE 127 at 4). + +The Court notes that Defendant is already under court order not to have direct or indirect contact with any victims. See Transcript of Plea Conference at 20. During the course of Defendant's state plea conference of June 30, 2009, Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillio explicitly instructed Defendant as follows: + +Court: Okay. D is, you shall not have any contact with the victim, are there more than one victim? + +Ms. Belohlavek: There's several. + +Court: Several, all of the victims. So this should be plural. I'm making that plural. You are not to have any contact direct or indirect, and in this day and age I find it necessary to go over exactly what we mean by indirect. By indirect, we mean no text messages, no e-mail, no Face Book, no My Space, no telephone calls, no voice mails, no messages through carrier pigeon, no messages through third parties, no hey would you tell so and so for me, no having a friend, acquaintance or stranger approach any of these victims with a message of any sort from you, is that clear? + +Defendant: Yes, + +Id. at 20-21. + +In light of Defendant's response to Plaintiffs' motion for no contact order, suggesting that the state court's order only applies to some victims and that panics are always allowed to contact each other directly, the Court finds it necessary to state clearly that Defendant is under this + +court's order not to have direct or indirect contact with any plaintiffs, regardless of the intended scope of the state court's order. Accordingly, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: Plaintiffs Jane Doe. No 101 and 102's Motion for No-Contact Order (DE 113) is GRANTED. Defendant is hereby prohibited from communicating with all plaintiffs directly or indirectly', either personally or through agents, except that Defendant may communicate with plaintiffs only through plaintiffs' attorneys of record, for the duration of this Order. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 31m day of July, 2009 + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record + +&#x27;See infra, excerpt of Transcript of Plea Conference at 20-21, for examples of indirect contact. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745618/EFTA02745618.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745618/EFTA02745618.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ad6535daddcb9df1305a1457e427daacdf9cfe6d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745618/EFTA02745618.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,253 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745618.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 4084, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.48, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 330.740478515625, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 330.740478515625, + 610.3535461425781 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 610.3535461425781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745618" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745623/EFTA02745623.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745623/EFTA02745623.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8ad9f6a77b40544094edc395b4b83698f138d594 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745623/EFTA02745623.md @@ -0,0 +1,137 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARRial + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- + +80656-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records and Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Rely Exclusively on Statutory Damages (D.E. #216). For the following reasons said Motion is deferred to the United States District Court as the undersigned is without authority to grant the relief sought. The Response in Opposition, filed as part of the Motion, shall be considered by the undersigned when addressing Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order. + +By this Motion Plaintiff seeks two distinct forms of relief each of which, due to the nature of the relief sought, require a ruling by two different judges, the District Judge (regarding Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Rely Exclusively on Statutory Damages) and the Magistrate Judge (regarding Defendant's Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records ). This fact was brought to the attention of Plaintiff's counsel's office prior to filing of the instant motion, and for purposes of judicial efficiency and docket control, it was requested that instead of filing one motion seeking the dual relief sought here, Plaintiff instead file two separate motions. + +Rather than heed the Court's suggestion, however, Plaintiffs counsel has filed one motion seeking the dual relief described above, stating in a footnote "[t]he Response in Opposition to the Motions for Protective Order and the Motion to Strike are inextricably woven together in that each deal with critical discovery issues. Thus the Response and the Motion to Strike must be handled simultaneously by the Court." Defs Resp. and Mtn., p.4 (emphasis added). Obviously what the Court "must" do is for the Court, and not any particular party, to decide. Decision-making is and always has been the exclusive province of a judge, while a party's role is limited to that of requesting relief. This is a fact all parties would do well to remember. Having reviewed the pleadings filed incident to this Motion, and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records and Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Rely Exclusively on Statutory Damages (D.E. #216) is DEFERRED TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, as the undersigned is without authority to grant the relief sought. Epstein's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order, filed as part of the Motion, shall be considered by the undersigned when addressing Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order. + +DONE AND ORDERED this August 4, 2009, in Florida. , at West Palm Beach, + +> o LINNEA R. JO ON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745623/EFTA02745623.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745623/EFTA02745623.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e432a475465a201477e9cc205ada547629d4ab66 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745623/EFTA02745623.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,249 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745623.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 4002, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.48, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 624.4335174560547 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 624.4335174560547 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745623" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745628/EFTA02745628.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745628/EFTA02745628.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3f62c8012c55c79c6c662a5e846f40db214bf2c3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745628/EFTA02745628.md @@ -0,0 +1,137 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA I + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +1 + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- + +80656-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiff's Agreed Motion for Extension of Time in Which to File a Reply to Epstein's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order Re: Treatment Records and Agreed Motion for Extension of Time to File a Response to Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Rely Exclusively on Statutory Damages (D.E. #234 in 08-80119). For the following reasons said Motion is granted in part and deferred in part as follows. + +By this Motion Plaintiff seeks two distinct forms of relief each of which, due to the nature of the relief sought, require a ruling by two different judges, the District Judge (regarding response to Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Rely) and the Magistrate Judge (regarding reply in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order). The consolidation of several motions into one pleading is an accepted practice in this district. However, where the relief sought in the motions requires rulings by two different judges assigned to the case, in this instance a district judge and a magistrate judge, the practice is frowned upon as it results in a waste of judicial resources and creates general confusion in the court file. Accordingly, all parties are hereby put on notice that in the future the Court will strike any motion which groups together motions that require disposition by more than one judge. Having reviewed the pleadings filed incident to this Motion, and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Agreed Motion for Extension of Time in Which to File a Reply to Epstein's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order Re: Treatment Records and Agreed Motion for Extension of Time to File a Response to Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Rely Exclusively on Statutory Damages (D.E. #234) is GRANTED IN PART AND DEFERRED IN PART AS FOLLOWS: Plaintiffs Motion, to the extent it seeks an extension of time until August 7, 2009, to file a reply in support of Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Motion, to the extent it seeks an extension of time until August 7, 2009, to file a response to Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Rely is DEFERRED TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, as the undersigned is without authority to rule on same. + +DONE AND ORDERED this August 4, 2009, in Florida. , at West Palm Beach, + +> LINNEA R. JO41 SON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745628/EFTA02745628.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745628/EFTA02745628.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7b0dee2afdbdb970b1578e2ac1964fe7f832b3e3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745628/EFTA02745628.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,249 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745628.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 3729, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.47, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 624.4335174560547 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 624.4335174560547 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745628" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745633/EFTA02745633.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745633/EFTA02745633.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..758c953a2e9201dabe1bd540df84e756e3924df3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745633/EFTA02745633.md @@ -0,0 +1,229 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA I + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- + +80656-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents (D.E. #57). For the following reasons said Motion is granted in part and denied in part as follows. + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm beach, New York and St. , with the promise of money in exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +In 2008, Epstein entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement with the United States Attorney General's Office for the Federal Southern District of Florida and the State Attorney's Office for Palm Beach County. Under the terms of the Non-Prosecution Agreement, any criminal prosecution against Epstein is deferred as long as he abides by the certain terms and conditions contained therein. If at any time the United States Attorney's Office has reason to believe Epstein is in breach of the Agreement, it need only provide Epstein's counsel with notice of the breach and then move forward with Epstein's prosecution. Accordingly, the undersigned would agree with Epstein's statement at page 4 of its Response, that the fact there exists a Non-Prosecution Agreement does not mean that Epstein is free from future criminal prosecution, and that in fact, "the threat of prosecution is real, substantial, and present." Id. + +By this Motion, Plaintiff seeks to compel answers to certain interrogatories and requests for production that were propounded December 9, 2008. Defendant has responded by asserting several objections, the primary one of which is an assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege. + +The Fifth Amendment serves as a guarantee against testimonial compulsion and provides, in relevant part, that "[n]o person...shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against himself." Id. In practice, the Fifth Amendment's privilege against selfincrimination "permits a person not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings." Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985)(citing Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973)). The privilege is accorded "liberal construction in favor of the right it was intended to secure," Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951), and extends not only to answers that would in themselves support a criminal conviction, but extends also to those answers which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a crime. Id.; Blau v. United States, 340 U.S. 159 (1950). Thus, information is protected by the privilege not only if it would support a criminal conviction, but also in those instances where "the responses would merely 'provide a lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate." United States v. Neff, 615 F.2d 1235, 1239 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 925 (1980). + +The Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination comes into play only in those instances where the witness has "reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer." Hoffman, 341 U.S. at 486 (citing Mason v. United States, 244 U.S. 362, 365 (1917)). "The claimant must be 'confronted by substantial and 'real,' and not merely trifling or imaginary, hazards of incrimination." United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 128 (1980). + +When the Fifth Amendment privilege is raised as a bar to discovery, a blanket refusal to answer questions or to produce documents is improper. Anglada v. Sprague, 822 F.2d 1035, 1037 (11th Cir. 1987). Instead, the privilege must be asserted in response to a particular question, and in each instance the burden is on the claimant to justify invocation of the privilege. Id. Once a particularized showing has been made, "[i]t is for the court to decide whether a witness' silence is justified and to require him to answer if it clearly appears to the court that the witness asserting the privilege is mistaken as to its validity." In re Morganroth, 718 F.2d 161, 166-67 (6th Cir. 1983). In making this determination the judge is instructed to view the facts and evidence presented on a caseby-case basis, and "must be governed as much by his perception of the peculiarities of the case, as by the facts actually in evidence." Hoffman, 341 U.S. at 487. + +The law is well established that the Fifth Amendment privilege may not apply to specific documents "even though they contain incriminating assertions of fact or belief, because the creation of those documents was not 'compelled' within the meaning of the privilege." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 35-36 (2000). However, in certain instances, "'the act of production' itself may implicitly communicate 'statements of fact.'" Id. For this reason the Fifth Amendment privilege also encompasses the circumstance where the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena or production request has a compelled testimonial aspect Id. Thus, in those instances where the existence and/or location of the requested documents are unknown, or where production would "implicitly authenticate" the requested documents, the act of producing responsive documents is considered testimonial and is protected by the Fifth Amendment. In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 1 F.3d 87, 93 (2d Cir. 1993); see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391, 410 (1976)(issue expressed as whether compliance with a document request or subpoena "tacitly conceded" the item's authenticity, existence or possession by the defendant). + +The Court begins with an analysis of the Fifth Amendment privilege as applied to each request. In the event the Court determines that a certain request does not infringe upon Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege, Epstein's additional objections to that request shall be addressed. Where appropriate, the Court looks to Epstein's Response Memorandum for more particularized objections, rather than relying solely on Epstein's objections as initially stated, which in some cases were less specific in nature. The Court also notes Plaintiffs concession, stated at pages 3 and 5 of her Motion, that the act of producing items in response to Production Request Nos. 9, 12-13 and responding to Interrogatory No. 9, may implicate the Fifth Amendment. Finally, the Court approves Epstein's decision not to provide a detailed privileged log, in that it is reasonable under the circumstances to believe that in compelling production of same, the Court would in essence be compelling testimony to which Epstein's constitutional protections might apply. As such, the Court agrees with Epstein that it makes judicial sense to decide the constitutional issues first, before deciding the additional discovery request objections. + +## INTERROGATORIES + +Epstein's assertion of the Fifth Amendment as it relates to Interrogatories 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 is sustained and Plaintiff's Motion in this regard is denied. Interrogatories 3-6 ask Epstein to identify anyone who gave or were asked to give him massages. Epstein argues, and this Court agrees, that any answer to these questions involve compelled statements that could reasonably furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute Epstein in future criminal proceedings or even support a criminal conviction. Interrogatory No. 15 seeks information relating to alleged sexual abuse or misconduct on a minor. On its face, this interrogatory seeks incriminating evidence which Epstein is entitled to protect by asserting his Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination. Interrogatory No. 16 is a contention interrogatory seeking the facts upon which Epstein relies to support each of his pleading allegation denials and for each affirmative defense. As Epstein correctly observes, forcing him to answer this interrogatory unconstitutionally places him in the position of being compelled to testify as to his version of the facts, and, in asserting affirmative defenses, being compelled to admit to Plaintiffs version of the facts. + +Interrogatories 13, 14 and 17 ask Epstein to identify any persons or witnesses who have knowledge of the events in question, or who are in possession or control of any photos, videos, written statements, etc. pertaining to the events in question. Clearly these interrogatories, all of which relate to claims of sexual abuse and exploitation of a minor, implicate the Fifth Amendment, in that by requiring Epstein to list such persons or witnesses, Epstein is being forced to incriminate himself in the commission of crimes. + +Epstein's assertion of the Fifth Amendment as it relates to Interrogatories 1, 2, 9 and 12, is likewise sustained and Plaintiff's Motion in this regard denied. While these interrogatories ask for general, identification-type information, which on their face may not appear to infringe upon or otherwise implicate Epstein's rights under the Fifth Amendment, based on the particularized showing made by Epstein in his Response Memorandum, the facts alleged in the Complaints, and the undersigned's knowledge of the cases, it is clear they involve compelled statements that would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to convict him of a crime, allowing Epstein to assert his Fifth Amendment privilege. + +Interrogatory No. 1 asks Epstein to identify all employees who performed work or services inside his Palm Beach residence and Interrogatory No. 2 asks Epstein to identify all employees not identified in Interrogatory No. 1 who at any time came to Defendant's Palm Beach residence. Interrogatories 9 and 12 are similar in nature requesting information regarding the identity of persons providing transport services (Interrogatory 9), and a list of Epstein's employee's telephone numbers (Interrogatory 12). + +Epstein raises the same general objections to each of these interrogatories, referring to the allegations in the Complaints of sexual abuse, exploitation and battery, along with the alleged scheme of recruiting girls to come to his Palm Beach mansion to give him "massages," and then states that requiring him to identify his employees, his drivers, and his employee's telephone numbers, "would be a link in the chain of evidence needed to convict him of a crime." Then, in his Response Brief, Epstein goes further and makes a particularized showing for each of the subject interrogatories identified above explaining how answering these interrogatories present a real and substantial danger of self incrimination. See Epstein's Resp. Brief, pp. 18-20. + +As noted previously, the Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination is accorded "liberal construction," Hoffman, 341 U.S. at 486, and extends not only to answers that would in themselves support a criminal conviction, but extends also to those answers which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a crime. Id. Thus to be afforded protection, the answer need not necessarily be enough to support a criminal conviction; it is enough if the response merely provides a lead or clue to evidence having a tendency to incriminate. Neff, 615 F.2d at 1239. In asserting his Fifth Amendment privilege, Epstein expresses a concern that employees who either worked at his Palm Beach residence or visited his Palm Beach residence during the relevant time period, or drivers who drove himself or others to or from his Palm Beach residence would be privy to evidence that would implicate Epstein in a crime. Given the allegations raised in the Complaints and the elements required to convict Epstein of a crime, and considering the background facts underlying the case, these concerns are reasonable, real and not unjustified. As such, the subject requests, which essentially ask Epstein to identify potential witnesses against him, are subject to Epstein's assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination. + +In sustaining Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege, the Court has considered the facts alleged in the Complaints, the elements needed to convict Epstein of a crime, the particularized showing made in Epstein's Response Brief, and drawn upon the Court's knowledge of the cases at issue. On this basis the Court finds the privilege raised as to these interrogatories valid, and asserted by Epstein only with reference to "genuinely threatening questions." United States v. Goodwin, 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir. 1980). The danger Epstein faces by being forced to testify in this instance is "substantial and real, and not merely trifling or imaginary" as required. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 128. Accordingly, finding the above-mentioned interrogatories involve compelled statements that would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to convict Epstein of a crime, the Court finds Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege claim validly asserted. + +When one considers the nature of the allegations, to wit, a scheme and plan of + +sexual misconduct carried out at Epstein's various residences, and that at least one of Epstein's employees, , is alleged to have aided Epstein in his alleged sexual exploitation, then it is entirely reasonable for Epstein to assert that forcing him to testify as to anyone who came or went to his Palm Beach mansion or was employed at his Palm Beach mansion (Interrogatories 1-2), the identity of persons providing transport services (Interrogatory No. 9), and his employee's telephone numbers (Interrogatory 12), may provide a lead or clue to evidence tending to incriminate him. Not only would such compelled testimony self-incriminate him on the elements required to establish a criminal violation, and thus serve as a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute Epstein for a crime, but in some cases serve to incriminate him by asking Epstein to identify potential witnesses against him. Accordingly, Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege as it relates to Interrogatories 1, 2, 9 and 12 is sustained and Plaintiffs Motion in this regard is rejected. + +The same objections raised above with respect to Interrogatories 1, 2, 9 and 12 have been raised by Epstein to justify his refusal to answer Interrogatories 7 (dates of Florida travel), 8 (identification of health care providers), and 11 (identification of Epstein's telephone numbers). These Interrogatories ask for general, identification-type information, which neither on their face nor by implication implicate Epstein's rights under the Fifth Amendment. In this regard, the Court is left with only Epstein's blanket assertion of the privilege in which he claims that requiring him to identify his heath care providers, his various telephone numbers and his dates of Florida travel, "would be a link in the chain of evidence needed to convict him of a crime." See Epstein's Resp. Brief, pp. 18-20. Unfortunately for Epstein, this objection is so general and sweeping in nature it amounts to a blanket assertion of the privilege. In these circumstances, where a blanket assertion of the privilege is asserted, the Court is required to make a "particularized inquiry," and sustain only those privileges asserted as to "genuinely threatening questions." United States v. Goodwin, 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir. 1980). + +Here, Epstein's objections fall well short of the showing required of demonstrating that requiring him to answer these interrogatories would realistically and necessarily furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against him. Discovery requests that seek background information on events and experiences of the witness for which he cannot realistically or genuinely be expected to be charged with a crime are not subject to Fifth Amendment protection. See Krause v. 390 F.Supp. 1070, 1071-72 (N.D. Ohio 1974). In summary, Epstein has failed to sustain his burden of making a particularized showing to support his claim that forcing him merely to identify his health care providers, his dates of travel and his telephone numbers, would present a substantial and real threat of criminal prosecution. + +As for Epstein's non-privileged based objections, such as relevance, over breadth, over burdensomeness, and alleged HIPAA protection, said objections are also rejected. Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, allows any party to serve on any other party written interrogatories concerning matters within the scope of Federal Rule Civil Procedure 26(b). The scope of discovery under Rule 26(b) is broad: "[p]arties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claim or defense of any party involved in the pending action." Id. Relevant information need not be admissible at trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." Id.; see also Hickman + +v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 507-508 (1947); Farnsworth v. Proctor and Gamble Co., 758 F.2d 1545, 1547 (11th Cir. 1985)(the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure "strongly favor full discovery whenever possible"); Canal Authority v. Froehlke, 81 F.R.D. 609, 611 (M.D. Fla. 1979). + +Thus, under Rule 26, relevancy is "construed broadly to encompass any matter that bears on, or that reasonably could lead to another matter that could bear on any issue that is or may be in the case." Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 352 (1978). Discovery is not limited to the issues raised by the pleadings because "discovery itself is designed to help define and clarify the issues." Id. at 352. In short, information can be relevant and therefore discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the information is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Dunbar v. United States, 502 F.2d 206 (5th Cir. 1974). + +Under Fed. R. Civ. P., 26(b)(1) a court may limit discovery of relevant material if it determines that the discovery sought is unreasonably cumulative or duplicitive, or obtainable from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive, or the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs the likely benefit. Id. The party resisting discovery has a heavy burden of showing why the requested discovery should not be permitted. Rossbach v. Rundle, 128 F.Supp.2d 1348, 1354 (S.D. Fla. 2000) ("The onus is on the party resisting discovery to demonstrate specifically how the objected-to information is unnecessary, unreasonable or otherwise unduly burdensome."); Dunkin Donuts, Inc. v. Mary's Donuts, Inc., 2001 WL 34079319 (S.D. Fla. 2001)("the burden of showing that the requested information is not relevant to the issues in the case is on the party resisting discovery")(citation omitted); Gober v. City of Leesberg, 197 F.R.D. 519, 521 (M.D. Fla. 2000)("The party resisting production of information bears the burden of establishing lack of relevancy or undue burden in supplying the requested information"). + +To meet this burden, the party resisting discovery must demonstrate specifically how the objected-to request is unreasonable or otherwise unduly burdensome. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(4); Panola Land Buyers Ass'n v. Shuman, 762 F.2d 1550, 1559 (11th Cir. 1985); Rossbach, 128 F.Supp.2d at 1353. Thus, to even merit consideration, "an objection must show specifically how a discovery request is overly broad, burdensome or oppressive, by submitting evidence or offering evidence which reveals the nature of the burden." Coker v. & Co., 1777 F.R.D. 682, 686 (M.D. Ala. 1998). Once the resisting party meets its burden, the burden shifts to the moving party to show the information is relevant and necessary. Gober, 197 F.R.D. at 521; see also Hunter's Ridge Golf Co. Inc. v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., 233 F.R.D. 678, 680 (M.D. Fla. 2006). + +Here, the information requested concerns Epstein's dates of travel, health care provider identification, and list of phone numbers. This information is relevant in that it may lead to evidence to support Plaintiff's claims that Epstein lured her to his mansion for the purpose of sexual exploitation. Substantively, the interrogatories are narrowly tailored to discover only information that is directly relevant to Plaintiffs claims and/or Epstein's defenses. Epstein's H IPAA objections are unfounded as the request seeks only the identification of Epstein's health care providers.' + +Finally, the requested ten-year time frame is not overly broad considering the allegation that Epstein has a psychosexual condition, which, if true, could very well have existed most, if not all, of his adult life. The Court agrees with Epstein, however, that Plaintiff's allegation of child abuse, does not alone provide Plaintiff with carte blanche access to a list of ALL of Defendant's medical providers. Instead, the undersigned limits the interrogatory to a request for "identification, by name, title and address and/or telephone number, of all of Epstein's psychologists, psychiatrists, therapists, or mental health counselors for the last ten years." Accordingly, except as mentioned above with respect to health care professionals, the Court finds Epstein's objections to Interrogatories 7, 8 and 12 unfounded and orders Epstein to provide responses to same in accordance with the afore-stated terms, within ten (10) days from the date hereof. + +## PRODUCTION REQUESTS + +As noted previously, the Fifth Amendment privilege may not apply to specific + +&#x27; In addressing Interrogatory 8, both parties refer to the need for the Court to hold an in camera inspection of the documents to determine, as to each document, whether Fla. Stat. §39.204 is applicable. The request at issue, however, is an INTERROGATORY request, not a document request, and therefore these concerns are inapplicable. + +documents "even though they contain incriminating assertions of fact or belief, because the creation of those documents was not 'compelled' within the meaning of the privilege." Hubbell, 530 U.S. at 35-36. Accordingly, a party cannot avoid discovery merely because demanded documents contain incriminating evidence, "whether written by others or voluntarily prepared by himself." Id. In certain instances, however, "'the act of production' itself may implicitly communicate 'statements of fact.'" Id. For this reason the Fifth Amendment privilege also encompasses the circumstance where the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena or production request has a compelled testimonial aspect Id. Thus, in those instances where the existence and/or location of the requested documents are unknown, or where production would "implicitly authenticate" the requested documents, the act of producing responsive documents is considered testimonial and is protected by the Fifth Amendment. In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 1 F.3d 93. + +In response to Plaintiffs Requests for Production, Epstein has asserted an identical "blanket" objection to each of the 24 requests, stating essentially that while he initially intended to produce all responsive relevant documents, he has been advised by his attorneys to assert his "federal constitutional rights under the fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments" and refuse to produce them. In his Response Brief Epstein went further and explained that as to each of the production requests at issue, "the act of production itself involves a testimonial compulsion" in that, "[fin responding to each request, Epstein would be compelled to admit that such documents existed, admit that the documents were in his possession or control, and were authentic. In other words, the very act of production of the category of documents requested would implicitly communicate "statements of fact." Epstein's Resp. Brief, p.22. According to Epstein, the "act of production might not only + +provide evidence to support a conviction, but also a link in the chain of evidence for prosecution. Such compulsion to produce is the same as being compelled to testify." Id. + +The documents requested fall into several different categories consisting of agreements with the U.S. Attorney and State Attorney, and documents exchanged between the Defendant and the U.S. Attorney (Requests 1-4), telephone records (Requests 5-6), videos and photos of Epstein's Palm Beach residence (Request 7), documents relating to Plaintiff Jane Doe (Request 8), air travel records (Request 10), documents relating to model agencies (Request 11), correspondence with other witnesses (Request 14-17, 19), social networking documents (Request 18), gifts to minor females (Request 20), personal calendars and diaries (Requests 21-22), and, prescription medicines (Request 23).2 + +Defendant's Motion as it relates to Production Requests 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 20 is denied. The very act of producing documents in response to these requests is testimonial in nature, in that by production, Epstein would be implicitly communicating "statements of fact," to which the Fifth Amendment privilege may be validly asserted. Hubbell, 530 U.S. at 35-36. Not only do the subject requests implicitly involve "statements of fact," given the nature of the allegations against Epstein, they could also serve as links in the chain of evidence needed for prosecution. As such, Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege assertion as it relates to these requests is sustained. + +2 On page 5, footnote 6 of Plaintiffs Reply Brief, Plaintiff concedes that the act of producing items in response to Request 9, concerning witness statements, and Requests 12-13, concerning photographs or images of females, may implicate the Fifth Amendment. As such, Epstein's assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege as it relates to these requests stands and Epstein need not produce documents responsive to Requests 9, 12-13.. + +In sustaining Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege, the Court has considered the particular requests at issue, the facts alleged in the Complaints, the elements needed to convict Epstein of a crime, and has drawn upon the Court's knowledge concerning the cases at issue. On this basis, the Court finds the privilege raised as to these requests valid, and asserted by Epstein only with reference to "genuinely threatening questions." Goodwin, 625 F.2d at 701. Accordingly, finding the above-mentioned requests involve compelled statements that could furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to convict Epstein of a crime, the Court finds Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege claim as applied to these requests validly asserted. + +The Court notes that in making this determination it is cognizant that except in those instances where it is apparent from the face of the subject requests that the act of producing responsive items would be protected under the Fifth Amendment, it is the Defendant's burden to demonstrate that the act of producing any particular responsive documents would entail testimonial self-incrimination. U.S. v. Wujkowski, 929 F.2d 981, 984 (4th Cir. 1991). In the instant case, it is evident from the requests themselves, the allegations in the various Complaints, and the facts and circumstances surrounding these cases, that to demand from Epstein a more particularized showing of danger, would require Epstein "to surrender the very protection which the privilege is designed to guarantee." Hoffman, 341 U.S. at 479. As such, no more particularized showing than that offered by Epstein in his Response Brief is necessary. + +Plaintiffs Motion as it relates to Request 7 and 23 is granted. Request 7 seeks all surveillance videos or photographs of the Palm Beach residence. Request 23 seeks all documents referring or relating to Epstein's purchase or consumption of prescription medication. It is not evident from the face of these requests, even given the allegations contained in the Complaints and the undersigned's knowledge of the facts and circumstances surrounding the action, how production of these responsive documents can in any way be seen to implicitly communicate "statements of fact." Nor is it evident from the face of these requests how production of responsive documents may "implicitly authenticate" items that are not themselves incriminating. It is therefore incumbent on Epstein to make a particularized showing, demonstrating how the act of producing responses to these requests would entail testimonial incrimination. Wu'kowski 929 F.2d at 984 (4th Cir. 1991). Epstein has failed to sustain his burden in this regard. Accordingly, Epstein's assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination in response to Requests 7 and 23 is denied, and Plaintiff's Motion as it relates to these requests is granted. Defendant has ten (10) days from the date hereof in which to produce documents responsive to these requests. + +Plaintiffs Motion as it relates to requests for air travel documents (Request 10), model agency documents (Request 11), social networking site documents and photos (Request 18), witness statements (Request 19), and personal calendars or schedules (Request 21), is granted in part and denied in part. It is not evident from the face of these requests, even given the allegations contained in the Complaints and the undersigned's knowledge of the facts and circumstances surrounding the action, how production of responsive documents can in any way be seen to implicitly communicate "statements of fact." Nor is it evident from the face of the requests how production of responsive documents may "implicitly authenticate" items that are not themselves incriminating. It is therefore incumbent on Epstein to make a particularized showing, demonstrating how the act of producing responses to these requests would entail testimonial incrimination. Wu kowski, 929 F.2d at 984 (4th Cir. 1991). Epstein has failed to sustain his burden in this regard. + +Nonetheless, because the undersigned can imagine a scenario where production of documents responsive to these requests might constitute testimonial self incrimination, the Court defers ruling on the issue until such time as Epstein supplements his Response Brief by making a particularized showing, by in camera submission or otherwise, demonstrating how the Fifth Amendment may validly be asserted in response to these requests. Epstein shall have fifteen (days) from the date hereof in which to accomplish this task. Epstein has fifteen (15) days from the date hereof in which to produce documents responsive to any requests he elects not to address in the forthcoming supplementation. + +Plaintiff's Motion as it relates to Request 5, seeking "all telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone calls made by or to Defendant", is denied as overly-broad and unduly burdensome. Plaintiff has failed to satisfactorily explain the relevance of this information to this litigation. Given the tremendous burden of producing the requested information, coupled with its tenuous connection to the issues in this case, the Court declines to compel a response to this request. See, e.q., World Triathlon Corp. v. SRS Sports Centre SDN, BHD,Case No. 8:04-cv-1594-T-24TBM, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15412, at \*2 (M.D. Fla. July 29, 2005)("the court may limit discovery upon the determination that the discovery sought is unreasonably burdensome or expensive or the expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit, taking into account the needs of the case, the amount in controversy, the parties' resources, and the importance of the proposed discovery in resolving issues."); Priest v. Rotary, 98 F.R.D. 755, 761 (N.D. Cal. 1983)("When a discovery request '[a]pproaches the outer bounds of relevance and the information requested may only marginally enhance the objectives of providing information to the parties or narrowing the issues, the Court must then weigh that request with the hardship to the party from whom the discovery is sought.'")(quoting Carlson Cos., Inc. v. Sperry & Hutchinson Co., 374 F.Supp. 1080, 1088 (D.Minn. 1974)); 10 Federal Procedures Lawyer's Edition § 26:70 (1994 & Supp. 2005)("the district courts should not neglect their power to restrict discovery where justice requires protection for a party ... from undue burden or expense."). + +Finally, to the extent Epstein asks the Court to forbid the drawing of an adverse inference against Epstein for his failure to respond to discovery, said request is denied at this time, without prejudice and with leave to renew at a later date, as the request at this early juncture of the proceedings is premature. + +In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents (D.E. #57) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART in accordance with the terms of the within Order. In accordance herewith, Plaintiff's Motion as it relates to Interrogatories 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 and Production Requests 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 20 is denied, and Plaintiffs Motion as it relates to Interrogatories 7, 8 and 11, and Production Requests 17 and 23 is granted. A ruling on Plaintiff's Motion as it relates to Production Requests 10, 11, 18, 19, and 21 is deferred until Epstein files his Supplementary Response Brief, due fifteen (15) days from the date hereof, in which Epstein is required to make a particularized + +Amendment Fifth the how demonstrating otherwise, or submission camera in by showing, + +-mentioned above the of Any requests. these to response in asserted be validly may + +supplement forthcoming the in addressed not 21) and 19 18, 11, 10, (Requests requests + +must and privilege Amendment Fifth of claim valid a outside be to Court the by deemed are + +hereof. date the from days (15) fifteen within to responded be + +# Beach, Palm West at , in 2009, 4, August this ORDERED AND DONE + +Florida. + +JOHNJSON R. LINNEA JUDGE MAGISTRATE STATES UNITED + +Marra A. Kenneth Honorable The CC: Record of Counsel All \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745633/EFTA02745633.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745633/EFTA02745633.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a1e486af43c16f8b067e7af95371f79f1be3f656 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745633/EFTA02745633.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,916 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745633.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 22, + "chars": 35627, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.22, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 624.4335174560547 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 624.4335174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.8, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 367.2892761230469, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 367.2892761230469, + 610.5635223388672 + ], + [ + 244.8, + 610.5635223388672 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRODUCTION REQUESTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 539.46 + ], + [ + 380.77630615234375, + 539.46 + ], + [ + 380.77630615234375, + 554.6835174560547 + ], + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 554.6835174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Beach, Palm West at , in 2009, 4, August this ORDERED AND DONE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.29769897460938, + 564.5699999999999 + ], + [ + 506.124, + 564.5699999999999 + ], + [ + 506.124, + 580.77 + ], + [ + 68.29769897460938, + 580.77 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745633" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745655/EFTA02745655.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745655/EFTA02745655.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5e3314a0777509ef0ee905b47ef3ba07760d8bfa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745655/EFTA02745655.md @@ -0,0 +1,426 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/M. + +Epstein's Response to Jane Doe's Motion to Provide Recently Obtained Affidavit of Epstein + +Page 2 of 9 + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/a + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-8081I-CIV-MARRAMOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Epstein's Response to Jane Doe's Motion to Recently Obtained Affidavit of Epstein + +Page 3 of 9 + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +CASE NO.: 09-80469-C1V-MARRA-. + +CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA-. + +CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/BM + +## EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO JANE DOE'S MOTION TO PROVIDE RECENTLY-OBTAINED AFFIDAVIT OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN IN SUPPORT OF MATERIAL FACTS SUPPORTING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN + +Defendant, JEFFREY E EPSTEIN ("Epstein"), submits this response to Plaintiffs, Jane Doe ("Jane Doe"), Motion to Provide Recently-Obtained Affidavit of Jeffrey E. Epstein in + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Epstein's Response to Jane Doe's Motion to Provide Recently Obtained Affidavit of Epstein + +Page 4 of 9 + +Support of Material Facts Supporting Motion for Appointment of a receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein ("Motion"), and states: + +1. Jane Doe seeks to supplement her Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets (DE #165) ("Injunction Motion") with a "recently-obtained" affidavit of Epstein. The instant Motion was filed after Epstein served his Memorandum of Law in Opposition to the Injunction Motion (DE #198). Thus, if the Court were to consider this latefiled affidavit, Epstein would have no opportunity to respond to the affidavit or any arguments based thereon. Accordingly, the Court should deny Jane Doe's Motion and disregard the affidavit. + +2. Rule 6(c), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, requires "[a]ny affidavit supporting a motion must be served with the motion." (Emphasis added). Moreover, Local Rule 7.1C.3, U.S. District Court, Southern District Local Rules, provides "[t]o the extent a party wants the Court to consider affidavits, declarations, or other materials in support of or in opposition to the motion, then (a) the movant must serve with the motion all such materials. (Emphasis added). + +3. Despite Jane Doe's assertion that she did not receive the affidavit until July 13, 2009, there is no question Epstein's affidavit was available at the time Jane Doe served her Injunction Motion as the affidavit is almost seven years old (dated October 2002). + +4. While Jane Doe calls it a "newly-obtained affidavit," it is not newly-obtained in the sense that it could not have been discovered at the time she served her Injunction Motion. + +5. Simply put, the affidavit is untimely and the Court should therefore disregard it in determining Jane Doe's Injunction Motion. + +Case No. 08.CV-801 19-MARA/a Epstein's Response to Jane Doe's Motion to Provide Recently Obtained Affidavit of Epstein Page 5 of 9 + +6. Moreover, consideration of the affidavit would severely prejudice Epstein because cannot respond to Jane Doe's arguments, assertions and implications regarding the affidavit since he already filed his Memorandum of Law in Opposition to the Injunction Motion (DE 4198). + +7. This point is illustrated by Jane Doe's Reply to her Injunction Motion (DE #217), in which she attaches as Exhibit A Epstein's 2002 affidavit (before the Court ruled on the instant Motion) and uses it to make ridiculous and untenable conclusions about fraudulent asset transfers. For example, Jane Doe cites the portion of Epstein's affidavit in which he states he provides financial advice from the U.S. Virgin Islands in securities and other matters to his clients and that he is viewed as one of Citibank's most important individual clients. See DE #217 at 12. In the very next sentence, Jane Doe asserts "[g]iven the fact that asset transfers can take place to such countries as Israel, Switzerland, and the Cayman Islands, placing the burden on Jane Doe to document fraudulent asset transfers to such destinations effectively give a light to massive fraud — a fraud that could ultimately total in the neighborhood of one billion dollars (\$1,000,000,000.00)." + +8. Jane Doe somehow takes Epstein's assertion that he provides financial advice from the Virgin Islands and is an important Citibank client to essentially suggest he is involved in a billion-dollar international fraudulent transfer scheme. Such a conclusion is absurd and is pure fiction. + +9. Epstein will obviously be unfairly prejudiced by his inability to respond to these ludicrous theories. + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ Epstein's Response to Jane Doe's Eci,to rovide Recently Obtained Affidavit of Epstein Page 6 of 9 + +10. Accordingly, the Court should disregard the affidavit in consideration of the Injunction Motion and strike the affidavit from Jane Doe's Reply Brief (Exhibit A to DE #217). + +WHEREFORE, Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, respectfully requests the Court deny Jane Doe's Motion, strike the affidavit from Jane Doe's Reply Brief (Exhibit A to DE #217) and grant any additional relief the Court deems just and proper. + +By: ROBERT D. C ITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar N 224162 MICHAEL J. IKE, ESQ. Florida Bar # 17296 DAVID A. YAREMA, ESQ. Florida Bar No. 12492 + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattornev.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +Jane Doe v. Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAel + +Epstein's Response to Jane Doe's Motion to Provide Recently Obtained Affidavit of Epstein + +Page 7 of 9 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of August 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: ROBERT D CRIITON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida B No. 224162 + +rcritabc claw.com + +DAVID A. YAREMA, ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 12492 + +dyaremaabc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-M + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Epstein's Response to Jane Doe's Motion to Provide Recently Obtained Affidavit of Epstein + +Page 8 of 9 + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, +08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcylaw.com + +jph@searcylaw.com + +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com + +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +*Pro Hac Vice* + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. + +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* + +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesq@bellsouth.net + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRia + +Epstein's Response to Jane Doe's Motion to Provide Recently Obtained Affidavit of Epstein + +Page 9 of 9 + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +tleonold@riccilaw.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745655/EFTA02745655.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745655/EFTA02745655.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..324b7306ac217a20cb8a24d7af3dd1d6767da82e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745655/EFTA02745655.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,427 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745655.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 9697, + "elapsed_seconds": 13.18, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.78000000000003, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 405.74566650390625, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 405.74566650390625, + 106.10302734375 + ], + [ + 192.78000000000003, + 106.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO JANE DOE'S MOTION TO PROVIDE \nRECENTLY-OBTAINED AFFIDAVIT OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN IN \nSUPPORT OF MATERIAL FACTS SUPPORTING MOTION FOR \nAPPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.708, + 562.14 + ], + [ + 537.3875122070312, + 562.14 + ], + [ + 537.3875122070312, + 621.8625030517578 + ], + [ + 66.708, + 621.8625030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.74, + 138.51 + ], + [ + 358.17791748046875, + 138.51 + ], + [ + 358.17791748046875, + 154.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 241.74, + 154.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.412, + 524.88 + ], + [ + 360.42791748046875, + 524.88 + ], + [ + 360.42791748046875, + 541.4730072021484 + ], + [ + 245.412, + 541.4730072021484 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 38 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 99 + ], + [ + "Line", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 40 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 148 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 28 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745655" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745664/EFTA02745664.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745664/EFTA02745664.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b261d1df3be43e6f3a0536bed70df7f061d41032 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745664/EFTA02745664.md @@ -0,0 +1,1385 @@ +objection Is required to be overruled, and Defendant is entitled to the Information sought in the Interrogatory. + +# Interrogatory No. 18 + +18. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding Mr. Epstein, with whom you have had sexual activity since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual activity, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. + +Answer: + +Objection. Relevance and overbroad. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Plaintiffs only objection Is relevancy and overbroad, without any factual support or showing as required by Rule 26(c) and Local Gen. Rule 26.1 H (S.D. Fla. 2008). Nowhere does C.M.A. explain how such interrogatory is overbroad. + +It is well settled that relevant information is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(bX1), Fed.R.Civ.P.; Donahav v. Palm Beach Tours & trans.. Inc., 242 F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). Discoverabllity of an alleged victim's/plaintiffs sexual conduct or activity in civil cases is govemed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery Is broad. Donahav, supra, at 686, and cases cited therein. "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claims or defense of any party involved in the pending action." Id. + +In accordance with Rule 26, the discovery sought regarding Plaintiff's sexual activity with males and the nature thereof, Including whether she received any + +compensation or consideration therefore, in Interrogatory no. 18, are all relevant to Plaintiffs damages claims and the type of injury she claims she has, suffered. Defendant has no other means of obtaining such information and obtaining such Information through Plaintiff will better protect the confidentiality until the Court can make a determination in accordance with the procedures under Rule 412(c) whether such Information will be admissible at trial. See Rule 412(c), Fed.R.Civ.P. Defendant will agree to an order keeping the confidentiality of the information obtained through discovery. + +The evidence sought is relevant based on the facts and theories of this action. C.M.A.'s First Amended Complaint attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through XXX are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 — Clvii Remedies for Personal Injuries; Count XXXI is entitled 'Sexual Battery," and Count XXXII is entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortious Assault only against Defendant, + +In her answers to interrogatory nos. 9 and 10, which seek information about C.M.A.'s damages claims, Plaintiff answered that: + +Ihave bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent Injuries are psychological. (Interrog. No. 9). + +Iam claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a jury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.CA. §2255. (Interrog. No. 10). + +In her 1st Amended Complaint, relevant to her damages claims, Plaintiff alleges: + +C.M.A., has in the past suffered, and will in the future suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her + +> privacy and other damages ... . The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses ... and will in the future suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. The Plaintiff C.M.A. has suffered loss of Income, a loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of capacity to enjoy life. These injuries are permanent in nature and the Plaintiff, C.M.A., will continue to suffer these losses in the future. + +> (1st Am. Complaint, Counts I — XXX (18 U.S.C. §2255), ¶¶25, 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193; Count XXXI (Sexual Battery), ¶199.) + +In each of her "Wherefore" clauses, Plaintiff seeks "compensatory damages of at least the minimum provided by law." 18 U.S.C. §2255, pursuant to which Plaintiff attempts to bring certain of her claims, allows for recovery of "actual damages! See fn. 2 herein for applicable statutory text. + +C.M.A. also alleges that Defendant's conduct was "sexual assault and child abuse of a then minor." ¶2. She alleges that °beginning in approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003, the Defendant coerced and enticed the impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct.° ¶13. + +... These acts included, but were not limited to, fondling and inappropriate and illegal sexual touching of the then minor Plaintiff, sexual misconduct and masturbation of the Defendant in the presence of the then minor Plaintiff, soliciting and enticing the then minor Plaintiff to engage in sexual acts with another female in EPSTEIN's presence, and encouraging the then minor Plaintiff to become involved in prostitution; Defendant committed numerous criminal sexual offenses against the then minor Plaintiff Including, but not limited to, sexual battery, solicitation or prostitution, procurement of a minor for the purpose of prostitution, and lewd and lascivious assaults upon the person of the then minor plaintiff. (1st Am. Complaint ¶13). + +The information sought Is clearly relevant to the Injuries and damages claimed by Plaintiff. The nature of her claimed injuries and damages are such that Defendant is + +entitled to evidence which would show the nature of her relationship with males, whether she has suffered or engaged In other acts of sexual misconduct or activity as alleged in her complaint, and whether she suffered injury and damages as a result of the other claimed sexual misconduct or activity. See United States v. Bear Stops, 997 F.2d 451 (8th Cir. 1993)(Defendant charged with sexual abuse of six year old boy was entitled to admission of evidence relating to victim's sexual assault by 3 older boys to establish alternative explanation for why victim exhibited behavioral manifestations of sexually abused child.). + +in further support of Defendant's motion, a copy of Pak\* v. Ruzzo 703 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1998), is attached hereto as Exhibit B as it is on point to the discovery Issues In this action, and the relevancy and discoverability of Plaintiff's history of sexual activity and any payment, therefore. See interrogatories 8, 22 and 30 propounded In the Balas case and footnote 1 herein. 3 Additionally and significantly, in other pending state court civil actions against. Defendant EPSTEIN attempting to assert similar claims and damages, the Circuit Court Judges have already ruled that such information is discoverable as it Is relevant to the damages claims of Plaintiff. See Composite Exhibits C and D hereto. Composite Exhibit C are the Orders, dated February 23, 2009, entered in the case of A.C. v. Epstein, and , Case No. 502008CA025129 MB AI, 15th Judicial Circuit, In and For Palm Beach County, State of Florida, which granted Defendant's motion to compel therein directed + +3 In Dales v. Ruzzo supra, the Plaintiffs alleged a multicount complaint Including claims for "coercion of prostitution" pursuant to §796.09, Fla. Stat.; for battery for the unwanted and offensive touching of petitioners' bodies; false imprisonment for physically confining the petitioners against their will; Invasion of privacy; and Intentional Infliction of emotional distress. + +to discovery identical to Interrogatory no. 18 above. (In the A.C. case, the Plaintiff answered without objection Interrogatories identical to nos. 19, 20, and 21 herein.) + +Composite Exhibit D is a portion the transcript from a March 3, 2009 hearing on Defendant's motion to compel discovery in the case of Jane Doe II v. Epstein, and Case No. 502008CA020614 MB AF, 15I Judicial Circuit Court, In and For Palm Beach County, State of Florida. Again, the Circuit Court Judge determined that the information sought is relevant to the Issue of damages and, thus, discoverable. + +Accordingly, Plaintiff's objections are required to be overruled and Defendant is entitled to the discovery sought. + +## Interrogatory No. 23 + +23. State the names, addresses, ages, phcine numbers and dates of all females whom you claim were brought by you to Mr. Epsteln's home to give him a massage or for any other reason. As to each female, state the amount of money you claim you were paid to bring each female. + +### Answer: + +A.L. Age: 22 West Palm Beach, FL I was paid \$100.00 + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Counsel for the respective parties also discussed this interrogatory In an effort to come to a resolution. Plaintiff does not object to the discovery requested. Plaintiffs counsel indicated that he had a 'problem' disclosing the Identity of A.L. to the extent she was a minor at the time. Defendant would agree to an order protecting public disclosure of the true Identity of A.L. If she were indeed a minor at the time; however, as part of the order, Plaintiff should also be required to provide Defendant with the full + +name of A.L. so that Defendant may conduct meaningful discovery. It is Plaintiff who claims she brought A.L. to Epstein's home as part of the alleged "scheme." In addition, Plaintiff failed to provide any date or dates as to when she brought A.L. to Epstein's home. Plaintiff's counsel indicated they would attempt to provide this information. + +Accordingly, in granting Defendants motion to compel discovery, with respect t this interrogatory, Plaintiff should be required to provide the full name of A.L. (which Defendant agrees to keep confidential at this time), the date or dates which she brought A.L. or any female to Epstein's home, and how much she was allegedly paid each time. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court grant Defendant's motion to compel and award Defendant's reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, associated with this motion. + +## Rule 7.1 Certification + +Ihereby certify that counsel for the respective parties communicated by telephone in agood faith effort to resolve the discovery Issues prior to the filing of this motion to compel. Some of the issues were resolved or in the process of being resolved. + +> Robert D. Cri n, Jr. Attorney for efendant Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CWECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of r entitled on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on thi ay of April, 2009 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. reelrhwehotmail.core + +Jack Scii!a, Esq. + +Jack P. Esq. + +Seamy enney Scarola Barnhart Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 isxesearcvlaw.com .11oh searovlaw.com Co-Counsel for Plaintiff + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jaaesa@tellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. & Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecfabrucereinhartlaw. Counsel for Defendant + +Respectfully subm + +By: + +ROBERT D. ITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcritObdcladv.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +moike(a.bciclaw.corn + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-8081I-CIV-MARRABOHNSON Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Intenogatcnies + +# School behavioral problems, received counseling prior to the incident. + +- 8. Did you consume any alcoholic beverages or take any drugs or medications within 12 hours before the time of each incident(s) described in the complaint? If so, state the type and amount of alcoholic beverages, drugs, or medication which were consumed, and when (dates) and where you consumed them. + +### ANSWER + +- 1. On one occasion I had taken "Morning Glory" and "Angel Trumpets". I do not recall the date. +- 2. On another occasion I used cocaine powder. I do not recall the date. +- 9. Describe each injury (physical, emotional, mental) for which you are claiming damages In this case, specifying the part of your body that was injured, the nature of the Injury and as to any injuries you contend are permanent, the effects on you that you claim are permanent. + +### ANSWER + +Ihave bipolar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent injuries are psychological. + +- 10. Please state each item of damage that you claim, and include in your answer: the count to which the item of damages relates; the factual basis for each item of damages; and an explanation of how you computed each item of damages, including any mathematical formula used. + +## ANSWER + +Iam claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by ajury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. § 2255. + +Discovery is ongoing. + +- 11. List the names and business addresses of each physician (including psychiatrist, psychologist, chiropractor or medical provider) who has treated or examined you, + +13 'i A EXHIBIT r + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case tiff'08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRA/M No • Plain sAnswers to Defendant's First erroptaties + +> and each medical facility where you have received any treatment or examination for the injuries for which you seek damages in this case; and state as to each the date of treatment or examination and the injury or condition for which you were examined or treated. + +## ANSWER + +Dr. Serge Thys (Psychiatrist) Date: I do not recall the date. I would defer 215145th Street to the Doctor's records. West Palm Beach, FL 33407 + +Susan Pope (Counselor/Therapist) Date: Since high school. Ongoing. Parent Child Center 2001 W. Blue Heron Boulevard + +- 12. List the names and business addresses of all other physicians, medical facilities, rehab facilities (drug, alcohol or psychiatric) or other health care providers including psychiatrist, psychologist, mental health counselor and chiropractors by whom or at which you have been examined or treated in the past 10 years; and state as to each the dates of examination or treatment and the condition or injury for which you were examined or treated. + +## ANSWER + +Good Samaritan Hospital (3112104, 3125/08) Child Birth 1309 N Flagler Dr West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +St. Mary's Hospital (4107) DNC 901 46th Street West Palm Beach, FL 33407 + +Gloria C. Hakkarainen, MD Obleyn 2926 10th Avenue North, Suite 305 Palm Springs, FL. 33461 + +Theodore Ritota, DDS Dentist + +Wistlavt + +703 So.2d 1076 703So.2d 1076,22 Fla. L Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly DI69 (Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District. Kimberly BALM and Teresa Shumate, Petitioners, v. Marjorie A. RUZZO, and Exec., Inc., etc., Respondents. No. 9742. + +Page 1 + +307Ak31 k. Relevancy and Materiality. Most Cited Cases Party may be permitted to discover evidence that would be inadmissible at trial, if it would lead to discovery of re/avant evidence. West's F.S.A. RCP Rule 1.2.80(bX1). + +# [33 Pretrial Procedure 307A C:=36.1 + +Oct. 10, 1997. As Modified on Grant of Clarification Jan. 2, 1998. 307A Pretrial Procedure rev . dented p 21(c, C\lo` . 307An Depositions and Discovery Plaintiffs brought action against alleged house of \49\$) • 307AII(A) Discovery In General The Circuit Court, Brevard County, prostitution for, inter aim, coercion oistrtution. Pound, J., granted in part defendants' motion to compel discovery. Plaintiffs filed petition for writ of certiorari. The District Court of Appeal, W. Sharp, J., held that evidence of plaintiffs' past prostitution and their revenues relating to such activities was discoverable. + +Petition denied. + +Harris, J., concurred specially and filed opinion. + +West Headnotes + +# [I) Pretrial Procedure 307A IC=1 + +### 307A Pretrial Procedure + +307All Depositions and Discovery 307AII(A) Discovery In General 307Ak31 k. Relevancy and Materiality. + +Most Cited Cases Discovery in civil cases must be relevant to subject matter of case and must be admissible or reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. Wears F.S.A. RCP Rule 1.280(b)(1). + +## [2) Pretrial Procedure 307A C=.31 + +### 307A Pretrial Procedure + +307A11 Depositions and Discovery 307AII(A) Discovery in General 307Ak36 Particular Subjects of Disclos- ure 30744166.1 k. In General. Most Cited + +### Cases + +Evidence of plaintiffs' past prostitution and their revenues relating to such activities, including activities with alleged house of prostitution against which they had filed suit, was discoverable, where plaintiffs brought action not only for coercion of prostitution, but also for battery, false imprisonment, invasion of privacy, Intentional infliction of emotional distress, violation of their civil rights, and racketeering. Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, § 40302, 42 U.S.C.A. 13981; West's P.S.A. ¢§ 772.014, 796.09; West's F.S.A. RCP Rule 1 b 1). + +\*1076 Richard E. d Heather Fisher Lindsay, of Spriggs & Tallahassee, for Petitioners. + +Mark S. Peters of Amari, Theriac & Eisenmenger, P.A., Cocoa, for Respondents. + +W. SHARP, Judge. + +Bales and Shumate petition this court for a writ of certiorari to review certain portions of the lower court's order which granted, in part, amotion to compel discovery filed by respondents Ruzzo and Exec., Inc. Petitioners argue that those portions depart from the essential requirements of law and will cause them irreparable harm because they will be + +O 2O29 Thomson Ratters/West No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. + +n EXHIBIT p 703 So.2d 1076 703So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L Weekly D2375.23 Fla. L Weekly D169 (Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +compelled to disclose intimate details of their sexual history. We decline to issue the writ of certiorari. + +Bales and Shumate filed suit against Aram and Exec, Inc.. doing business as "The Boardroom." According to Batas and Shumate, The Boardroom op. mates ostensibly as •1077 a leisure spa but actually is a house of prostitution. Batas worked at The Boardroom from December 1993 until February 1996; Shumate worked there from October 1992 until March 1996. Rune, the sole officer and shareholder of Bxec, Inc., collected about fifty to sixty percent of each employees' earnings from performing sexual acts. + +According to Batas and Shumate, Rune exerted mental and emotional control over her employees and thus she was able to exploit them as prostitutes. Ruzzo required her employees to pay her substantial sums of money to attend "metaphysical workshops" conducted by Rune or persons associated with her. At the work place, the employees were required to participate in religious and quasi-religious "circles," rituals and incantations. These practices were allegedly designed to break down the persona of the women who worked for Ruzzo and to dependency and loyalty to herself. At one lime when the earnings of a new employee were missing and believed to be stolen, Ruzzo required that the petitioners be strip searched and body cavity searched. Russo caused the petitioners to believe their continued employment was dependent on their submission to these searches and that they might be arrested on felony charges if they refused to submit to the searches. + +Batas and Shumate's second amended complaint against Russo contains seven counts. Count I is an action for coercion of prostitution pursuant to section 796.09, Florida Statutes. Petitioners allege the requirement that they perform sexual acts to retain their employment constitutes inducement and coercion to engage in prostitution. Count II is a claim for battery for the unwanted and offensive touching of the petitioners' bodies. Count ID is a claim for false imprisonment for physically confining the petitioners against their will. Count IV alleges that respondents' actions constituted an invasion of petitioners' privacy. Count V is a claim for the intentional infliction of emotional distress. Count VI alleges acivil rights action-that respondents have violated petitioners' right to be free from crimes of violence motivated by gender within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. section 13981. Finally, count VU seeks civil remedies for criminal practices or racketeering pursuant to section 772.104, Florida Statutes. The petitioners claim that they suffered emotional pain, anguish, humiliation, insult, indignity, loss of selfesteem, inconvenience, hurt and emotional distress. They seek an award of general and punitive damages, among other relief. + +The discovery to which the petitioners are being required to respond is as follows: + +### I. + +Interrogatory 8: Please advise how long have you been engaged in prostitution.... + +### 11. + +Interrogatory 22: State with specificity the manner In which the acts as described in your Complaint have materially affected how you interact with your husband, boyfriend. fiancee' [sic) or any other individual of the opposite sex. + +### In. + +Request for Production 30: A copy of any photographs, movies or videotapes in which you performed sexual acts and/or simulated sexual acts in exchange for money or other consideration. + +### IV. + +Interrogatory 16: Please list the names, addresses, telephone numbers and rates of pay for all employers for which you worked, including the 703 So.2d 1076 + +703Sold 1076,22 Fla L Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 + +(Cite as: 703 Sold 1076) + +nature of the work, during the five years immediately preceding the date of employment with the Boardroom and from the date of your termination with the Boardroom to the present, providing the names of your immediate supervisors at each place of employment and the reason for your leaving each place of employment. + +V. + +Interrogatory 26: Please state your total income while employed at the Boardroom, and state the source of that income including any income from other employment or \*1078 income earned from prostitution other than at the Boardroom. + +VI. + +Request for Production 34: Business records from any selfernployment or owned business ventures in the last 5 years, including any records or list of customers, "special customer lists" or "sugar daddy's list" + +(1)I2) Discovery in civil cases must be relevant to the subject matter of the case and must be admissible or reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. See Agitate Insurance Co non, 655Sold 91 (Fla.1995)ate v. 653 Sold 1030 (Fla.1995); I= v. Stardust Cruisers, Inc., 690 Sold 743 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). The concept of relevancy Is broader in the discovery context than in the trial context and a party may be permitted to discover evidence that would be inadmissible at trial, if it would lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Allstate; Amente. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(1) delineates the proper scope of discovery: + +In General. Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the subject matter of the pending action, whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or the claim or defense of any other party, Including the existence, description. nature, custody, condition, and location of any books, documents, or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons having knowledge of any discoverable matter. It is not ground for objection that the information sought will be inadmissible at the trial if the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +Nonetheless, the discovery of certain kinds of information may cause material injury ,of an irreparable nature, This Includes the "cat-out-of-the-bag" material that could be used to injure another person or party outside the context of the litigation, material protected by privilege, trade secrets or work product Discovery was never intended to be used as a tactical tool to harass, embarrass or annoy one's adversary. Rather, pretrial discovery was implemented to simplify the issues in a case, to eliminate the elements of surprise, to encourage the settlement of cases, to avoid the cost of litigation, and to achieve a balanced search for the truth to ensure afair trial. Elkins v. Sy.ken, 672 Sold 517 (Fla.1996). + +Here the petitioners argue that the information sought to be discovered regarding prostitution and their sexual activities was propounded solely to embarrass them and to invade their right to privacy. The petitioners also claim that this information is privileged under section 796.09 and is not calculated to lead to evidence which would be admissible at trial. + +Section 796.09 provides a person with a civil cause of action for compensatory and punitive damages against anyone who coerces that person into prostitution, who coerces that person to remain in prostitution, or who uses coercion to collect or receive any pan of that person's earnings derived from prostitution. In the course of litigation under this section, any transaction about which a plaintiff testifies or produces evidence does not subject the plaintiff to criminal prosecution or to any penalty or forfeiture. In addition, any testimony or evidence or any information produced by the plaintiff or wit703 So.2d 1076 + +703So.2d 1076, 22 Pb. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Dl69 + +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +ness for the plaintiffs cannot be used against the plaintiffs or witness in any other investigation or proceeding, except one for perjury. + +Section 796.09(5) specifically provides that it is not adefense that the plaintiff was paid or otherwise compensated for prostitution, that the plaintiff had engaged in prostitution prior to any involvement with the defendant or that the plaintiff made no attempt to escape from the defendant. Section 796.09(6) provides that convictions for prostitution or prostitution-related offenses are inadmissible for the purpose of attacking the plaintiffs' credibility. + +This legislation was the result of the Florida Supreme Court Gender Bias Study Commission, which conducted an extensive investigation of prostitution in this state. The Commission's activities included interviews with law enforcement and corrections personnel,\*1079 judges, public defenders, prosecutors, drug rehabilitation counselors, social workers, medical personnel, prostitutes, clients and pimps. The Commission found prostitution to be prevalent and uniform throughout the state and law enforcement largely unable to deter it under prevailing social attitudes and judicial practices. The Commission further found that prostitutes am often victims of economic, physical, and psychological coercion, that most persons do not chose to become prostitutes, but do so to survive, and that ninety percent of street prostitutes, both adult and children, are controlled by pimps who use avariety of coercive methods to maintain this control. The Commission determined that clients and pimps are rarely prosecuted and, when prosecuted, receive light sentences; whereas prostitutes, who are mainly females, are frequently prosecuted and receive harsher treatment in die courts. The Commission recommended changes in the methods of intervention in prostitution from punitive to therapeutic, changes in the law to require more equal treatment by the courts of the prostitute in relation to the client and the pimp and to lessen the incentive to traffic in human flesh by giving the prostitute access to the judicial system without first having to be arrested. + +Under section 796.09, the petitioners' prior involvement in prostitution and their earnings from prostitution would be irrelevant. Hence discovery should not be permitted because such Information would not be admissible at trial nor would It be reasonably calculated to lead to evidence ultimately admissible at Vial. Even though the scope of discoverV is generally quite broad, section 796.09 is designed to encourage prostitutes to sue their pimps. Thus the usually broad scope of discovery may be constricted so that prostitutes will not be embarrassed, harassed or hindered in their actions. + +13] Had the petitioners brought their lawsuit against Russo and The Boardroom only under section 796.09, evidence of petitioners' past prostitution, including with the Boardroom, and their earnings relating to such activities, may not have been discoverable. However, the petitioners filed a multicount complaint for compensatory and punitive damages, alleging numerous causes of action against the respondents. These other causes carry no such protection from discovery. Since the information sought by discovery may be relevant or may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in one or more of these other causes of action or to determination of damages, we cannot, conclude that the trial court departed from the essential ulremama of law in granting this discovery. See v. 778 Bank of the Keys, 687 So.2d 895 (F a. DCA 1997) (by alleging fraud as well as breach of contract, purchaser placed at issue her reliance on venders assertions, the veracity of financial documents she submitted to the vender, and the state of her mental health, including memory problems she was experiencing at the time of the alleged tortious conduct, thus deposition questions concerning her state of mind were relevant). + +Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. + +THOMPSON, J.. concurs. + +HARMS, l., concurs specially with opinion.HARRIS, Judge, concurring specially: + +Them is a temptation in cases such as this to inquire which, the pot or the kettle, is imbued with the darker hue. Indeed that may ultimately be the question uppermost in the jurors' minds. But the issue presently before us is simply whether the pot, in order to establish the parties' comparative complexion, may discover the historical condition and the inherent characteristics of the kettle. + +We are here involved with parties that the limited record before us indicates were co-conspirators in a joint effort to violate Florida's laws against prostitution. The defendants are the owner/operators of a "social club" whose primary service is prostitution; the plaintiffs are employees of the club who provide such services. The employees are suing the owner/operators for, among other counts, taking advantage of their vulnerabilities ("coercing" them to be prostitutes) through manipulation and exploitation. In order to prepare a defense to the action, defendants have filed certain interrogatories for the employees to answer. These interrogatoriess10110 request such information as how long the employees have been engaged in prostitution; how the employees have been affected by the defendants' conduct; copies of photographs, movies, and videotapes in which the employees have performed sexual acts or simulated sexual acts; the names of previous employers and previous rates of pay; and a statement of income received from defendants. These interrogatories survived the employees' objections. ] agree certiorari should be denied. + +The employees' primary cause of action is based on section 796.09(1), Florida Statutes, which provides: + +- (1) A person has a cause of action for compensatory and punitive damages against: Aperson who coerces that person into prostitution; ',b) A person who coerces that person to remain in prostitution, or ec) A person who uses coercion to collect or receive + +any part of that person's comings derived from prostitution. + +The employees resist discovery of their past prostitution or their past or present earning experience on the basis of subparagraph 5 of section 796.09: + +- '5) It does not constitute a defense to a complaint under this section that: +- a) The plaintiff was paid or otherwise compensated for acts of prostitution; +- b) The plaintiff engaged in acts of prostitution prior to any involvement with the defendant ... + +But the question before us is not whether prior acts of prostitution (or the receipts of earnings therefrom) which might be revealed by answering the interrogatories could be used as a defense to the complaint, but rather whether evidence of such conduct or such earnings would be relevant in determining whether the employees were, in fact, "coerced" into prostitution, into remaining prostitutes, or into sharing the proceeds of their services with defendants. The relevancy of this information depends, of course, on what constitutes coercion. + +If we apply the definition of "coercion" which is commonly accepted, then the relevancy of the requested information is apparent and this appeal has no merit at all. Webster defines "coercion" as: (1) to restrain or dominate by force, (2) to compel an act or choice, or (3) to enforce or bring about by force or threat. In sexual battery cases, the legislature has adopted the common meaning of the word "coercion" and has even placed limits on it. It has provided that consent will not be recognized if submission is coerced by threats of force or violence ff the victim reasonably believes the perpetrator has the present ability to execute the threano Consent also will not be recognized if submission is coerced by athreat of retaliation against the victim or another If the victim reasonably believes that the perpetrator has the ability to execute the threat in the future.nn And in sexual battery cases the legislature has vitiated what might otherwise be con703 So.2d 1076 703 So.2d 1076,22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly 1)169 (ate am 703 So.2d 1076) + +sidered as consensual if one exploits a known physical or mental weakness of the victim to achieve his or her goal or takes advantage of one who Is physically helpless or involuntarily intoxicataLm Therefore, even in sexual battery cases, before coercion or exploitation will vitiate consent, the free will of the victim must be overcome by force or threat or some unfortunate circumstance suffered by the victim. + +> F141. Section 794.011(4)(b), Florida Statutes. + +> FN2. Section 794.011(4)(c), Florida Statutes. + +P143. Section 794.011(4)(a),(d),(e), and (f), Florida Statutes. + +But then we get to the definition of "coercion" contained in section 796.09(3): + +,3) 1 As used In this section, the term "coercion" means any practice of dominion, restraint, or inducement for the purpose of or with the reasonably foreseeable effect of causing another person to engage In or remain in prostitution or to relinquish earnings derived from prostitution, and includes, but is not limited to: + +ta) Physical force or threats of physical force. 1,b) Physical or mental torture. ,c) 1 Kidnapping. + +\*1081 (d) Blackmail. + +',e) Extortion or claims of indebtedness. ',1) Threats of legal complaint or report of delinquency. :g) Threat to interfere with parental rights or responsibilities. whether by judicial or administrative action or otherwise. + +:h) Promise of legal benefit. + +Page 6 + +',1) Promise of greater financial rewards. + +- 3) Promise of marriage. + +3c) Restraint of Speech or communications with others. + +) Exploitation of a condition of developmental disability, cognitive limitation, affective disorder, or substance dependency. + +;m) Exploitation of victimization by sexual abuse. + +1,n) Exploitation of pornographic performance. + +;t2) Exploitation of human needs for food, shelter, safety, or affection. + +The definition urged by the employees herein is the "promise of a greater financial reward." Whether the requested information is relevant to the issue of coercion in this case will depend on what the legislature intended by subsection (I) in the meaning of "coercion." + +1 agree with Judge Altenbernd's thoughtful analysis in State v. Brigham, 694 So.2d 793 (1997): + +There can be no dispute that the legislature's unusual definition of "percent" is not a common dictionary definition. This Is perhaps an appropriate case in which to remind ourselves of Learned Hand's famous observation that a "mature and developed jurisprudence" does not "make a fortress out of the dictionary." + +But even so, one would expect some nexus between the commonly accepted meaning of a word and the definition of that word ascribed by the legislature. If, for example, the legislature defined "canine" as including cats, although one might, jurisprudentially speaking, expect to hear a meow emanate from a Great Dane, the courts should nevertheless closely examine the legislative history to see if that is really what the legislature intended. The court In Young v. O'Keefe, 246 Iowa 1182, 69 N.W.2d 534/. 537 (1955), stated this principle as follows: 'But + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 7 + +before a definition is construed so as to expand the meaning of a well-known word to include its antonym ..., the intention of the legislature to that effect must be clear." As Judge [REDACTED] observed in *Catron v. Roger Bohn, D.C., P.A.*, 580 So.2d 814, 818 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991): + +It is our primary duty to give effect to legislative intent and, if a literal interpretation of a statute leads to unreasonable results, then we should exercise our power to interpret reason and logic to it. + +\* \* \* \* \* + +Unfortunately, it is apparent that in enacting this legislation, the legislature has, without redefining the terms for the purposes of this legislation, often used terms with commonly accepted meanings for purposes at great variance from those commonly accepted meanings. + +In our case, the legislature did define the term for the purpose of the act. But because the term (coercion) as so defined can be interpreted two ways-one consistent with the commonly accepted meaning and one at variance-we should not accept the "antonym" unless such legislative intent is clear. A free will decision, even if based on a hope of financial gain, is the opposite of a coerced decision. + +The employees urge that the mere promise of a greater reward brings them within the act. But if the mere promise of a greater reward is sufficient to establish coercion, then anyone who makes a voluntary and reasoned exercise of free will motivated by the hope of economic gain has been coerced. This definition removes the element of compulsion implicit in the commonly accepted meaning of coercion and substitutes therefor the mere desire for financial gain. The employees herein assert that since they were offered "a greater financial reward" for providing the services performed by them through defendants' establishment, they were coerced into their prostitution activities. This equates the giving + +of an opportunity to make a decision with the coercion of that decision. But subsection (I) can also mean \*1082 that the promise of a greater reward is coercion only if such promised reward is sufficient to overcome one's natural revulsion to selling one's body for money. If there is no such revulsion, there can be no coercion. Becoming a prostitute only because one likes the hours and wages or "because it beats the heck out of working for a living" simply should not meet the test of section 796.09(1). + +At oral argument herein, it was suggested without contradiction, that at least one of the employees has a college degree and gave up a well-paying, legitimate job in order to engage in this profession for the greater reward. Section 796.09 does not appear to be a general prostitute's relief act. It is based on a report by the Gender Bias Study Commission which recommended the equalization of treatment in relation to the prostitute, the client and the "pimp." It is based on the premise that prostitutes are generally victims of economic, physical, and psychological coercion and choose prostitution in order to survive. Further, the Commission was concerned that 90 percent of the street prostitutes are controlled by "pimps" who use a variety of coercive methods to maintain control. It seems clear that the legislature was not intending to depart from the precepts of the commonly understood meaning of "coercion" and to redefine it to include both free will decisions and compelled decisions.. The interpretation urged by the employees seems at variance with the stated goal of the legislature and the Gender Bias Commission. + +Since there is no cause of action provided for one who makes a reasoned and voluntary exercise of their free will to enter or continue in the profession solely for financial rewards (assuming "coercion" is given the definition more consistent with its commonly accepted meaning and assuming that my interpretation of legislative intent is correct), coercion becomes the critical issue in the trial of such action. The interrogatories propounded by defendants appear relevant to the issue of coercion. + +© 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. + +703 So.2d 1076 + +703Sold 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L Weekly 13169 + +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +This is a case of first impression based on a relatively new statute. As indicated, the legislative history of the new law suggests that the statute is designed to assist those who were forced to enter prostitution in order to keep aroof over their heads or food on their table. It does not appear to be intended to aid those who voluntarily enter the profession in order to drive a Mercedes instead of a The limited record before us indicates that even beginning employees of the defendants (those who do not have an established clientele) bring in 5700a day and can keep 50% of their earrings. Based on afive-day work week, this would reflect an income of \$87,500 a year even with a two week vacation. And the employees herein are not beginners. + +There is no indication that the legislature intended to legalize prostitution or to make it arespectable profession. It merely intended to place the prostitute on the same footing with the client and the "pimp." If aprostitute voluntarily makes the decision to participate, free from force, intimidation, or disadvantageous circumstance, then he or she is on the same footing as the other participants and should be treated the same. + +Although it might well serve alegitimate public purpose to permit the cannibalistic demise of such enterprises (and I am not unsympathetic with this view), that does not appear to be the policy behind the current statute. Therefore, in cases where coercion is not present (and this may or may not be one), the court should continue its tradition of not interceding in civil conflicts involving transactions that are either illegal or are against public policy. See Wechsler v. Novak 157 Fla. 703, 26 Sold 884 (1946); Ur v. Rattner, 462 Sold 1157, 1160 (Fla. 3d 984), rev. denied. 472 50.2d 1182 (Fla.1985) ("An action may lie for interference with an unenforceable contract and even perhaps a voidable contract. No such cause of action lies for interference with a contract void as against public policy (another's representation of a client obtained by a doctor/lawyer's illegal personal injury solicitation in the hospital] and which makes one who is a party thereto, as the appellant in the instant case, guilty of acriminal act for entering into such an agree- went.") + +We are not asked in this proceeding to rule on the admissibility of the discovered information as evidence at the trial of this cause. We are to determine only if the information might lead to admissible evidence. Even \*1083 though we deny the Writ I suggest we certify the following question: + +DOES ONE, FREE FROM FORCE, INTIMIDA-TION, OR DISADVANTAGEOUS CIRCUM-STANCE, WHO MAKES A REASONED DE-CISION TO BECOME OR REMAIN A PROSTInrrs OR TO SHARE THE PROCEEDS THEREOF BECAUSE OF A PROMISE OP A GREATER FINANCIAL REWARD HAVE A CAUSE OF ACTION UNDER SECTION 796.09(1), FLORIDA STATUTES? + +ON MOTIONS FOR REHE4RING, FOR CLARI-FICATION, FOR CERTIFICATION, AND FOR RE-HEARING EN BANC + +W. SHARP, Judge. + +Petitioners Bales and Shumate have filed motions for rehearing, clarification and certification. We deny the motions in full except for one regard. We delete the sentence in the last full paragraph of the opinion which reads: "These other causes of action carry no such protection from discovery." + +Motion for Clarification GRANTED as stated above; Motion for Rehearing and Certification DENIED. + +HARRIS and THOMPSON, II, concur. + +Fla-App. 5 Dist.,1997. + +Bales v. Ruzzo 703 Sold 1076, 22 Fla. L Weekly D2375. 23 Fla L Weekly D169 + +END OF DOCUMENT + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129XXXXMB Al + +v. + +Plaintiff, + +E. EPSTEIN, and + +Defendants. + +### ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO PLAINTIFF AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFFS OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES; INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion To Compel Responses To First Request To Produce To Plaintiff And To Overrule Plaintiff's Objections, & For Defendant's Expenses, Including Attorneys' Fees and the Court having heard argument of counsel and being fully advised in these premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion is hereby granted/ denied eta z 4i /7 4 411g atA,t chANA\_\_Lif ao- ±.0 9 22 ado-, od }t froto tap cElgt. AtAm.sa.. 1,14\_ 10dave• + +DONE AND ORDERED at PairryBeach Coypty Cyurthouse, West Palm Beach, Florida, this 73 day of MD + +Copies furnished: ROBERT D. CROTON, JR., ESO., and MICHAEL J. PIKE, 15 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400. West Palm Beach, FL 33401; JACK SCAROLA, ESQ., AND JACK P., ESQ., Seamy Denney Scarola Bamhart & Shipley, PA, 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., West Palm Beech, FL 33409, and JACK A. GOLDBERGEFt, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, PA, One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, Ft. 33401 ly-i ft ACP °' EXHIBIT (-- Ae N + +Aeel 0, t) A ' + +A. Garrison Circuit Judge + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH +JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM +BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +A.C., + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129XXXXMB AI + +Plaintiff; + +v. + +JEFFERY E. EPSTEIN, and [REDACTED] + +Defendants. + +ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO +INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR +DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion To +Compel Answers To Interrogatories And To Overrule Plaintiff's Objections, & For +Defendant's Expenses, Including Attorneys' Fees, and the Court having heard +argument of counsel and being fully advised in these premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion is hereby granted/ +~~done~~ as to #5, 12 #18, denied as +to #2. Response to be severe w/in +10 days. + +DONE AND ORDERED at Palm Beach County Courthouse, West Palm +Beach, Florida, this 23 day of Feb 2009 + +![]()Copies furnished: +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ., and MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ., 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, +FL 33401; JACK SCAROLA, ESQ., AND JACK P. [REDACTED], ESQ., Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A., 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., West Palm Beach, FL 33409, and JACK A. +GOLDBERGER, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A., One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 +Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +cc: JENGR DE +cal: fig bond +in Oct 10 +2 at 10 +3/04 + +• IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 50 200BCA020614XXXXMB AF + +JANE DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and + +Defendants. + +COURT REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS HAD BEFORE THE HONORABLE DIANA + +DATE: March 3, 2009 + +PLACE: Palm Beach County Courthouse 205 N. Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 EXHIBIT + +1/ + +- + +APPEARANCES: + +LAW FIRM, P.A. Datura Avenue Suite 900 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Counsel for Plaintiff BY: /SIDRO M. , ESQUIRE + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN N. Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Counsel for Defendant BY: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +la + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +that but I'd just like to do that. + +THE COURT: Right. And if you want to contact the other individuals saying, you know, I'm the one that's questioning whether or not these need to be before one judge You may have a different perspective than your colleagues who are prosecuting some of the cases. + +I understand the damages. I'm not saying consolidate. I'm saying transfer. It's not a consolidation issue. Everybody gets that confused for some reason. The words are very different out of my mouth, your mouth and how they're written. + +So let me go ahead and take a gander at this. I did read it last night. I'm not sure that we need to get -- we need names? + +MR. CRITTON: Right. Well, here's what some of the issues are is that, as an example -- if I could approach the bench. + +THE COURT: Sure. + +MR. CRITTON: This is some of the information that we've obtained through discovery from some of the -- from at least in this instance, it would be this particular Jane Doe. + +THE COURT: You know who Jane Doe is I take + +1 it? + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +MR. CRITTON: Right. + +THE COURT: You know who the Jane Doe is? + +MR. CRITTON: Yes, correct. And so this particular lady has kept in part a diary and she -- which appears to have started some time this is not in any way significant -- but some time after she learned that she could file a lawsuit. I think she's also been to Oakwood Center some time after she learned she could file alawsuit and seek damages from Mr. Epstein. + +There's no history of this lady beforehand other than. in some of the Oakwood records where she. was -Baker Acted, she started drinking beeret'16, she started Xanax at 16, started marijuSna at 15, that she's sexually active. + +So how she has interacted -- she has a claim. for emotional damages, mental pain and anguish, psychiatric-type damages. How she's interacted with friends, with family, the events 'in her life, school, work, her interpersonal relationships both with men and let's -- we'll use an'example men here, but other individuals. She's saying that this event with Mr. Epstein, + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +this sexual assault and whatever occurred during these events is that -- has caused her damage. + +And therefore damages in the case such as the emotional, mental, psychiatric-type damages are completely subjective, I mean separate and apart from any medical bills that may be -- which are clearly intangible. So these are intangible damages. And the jury is instructed, you know, you advise the greater weight of the evidence, what's fair and reasonable under the circumstances. + +So what we would have is basically this young lady's testimony as to what she claims her damages are and what the circumstances are with her situation with Mr. Epstein. She claims on page 13, you know, I love this guy, I'm dating this guy Chris. On page 15 -- + +THE COURT: Is this part of adiary for treatment? + +MR. CRITTON: I have no idea what it is. It was just produced in response to discovery. And she apparently started in, I think this is December of '08. You know I took Jay Lyntenis' girl to the zoo, had an amazing day, I love her, i.e., the girl. We have so much fun. I want a + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +\$ + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +baby especially with him. Okay. So I know who this person is. We are all so open together, I love him and Jay andillig, what do I do with Chris, who is another guy in her life. + +All right. This is circumstances where this young lady is saying, look, Jeffrey Epstein has ruined my life from a damage standpoint, okay. Let me depose other individuals with whom you've had a relationship. And what if it turns out -- as with some of these girls did -- is they had relationships or had escapades or circumstances with individuals, older men similar to Mr. Epstein well before Mr. Epstein. + +And this girl, I don't know one way or the other, but let's assume she had asituation where she was assaulted or molested or raped, ' that all is going to affect her emotional and her mental pain and anguish and it will all factor into evaluating damages. + +You know, it's not something that I'm going to spread around. I'm happy to keep it, you know, within the confines of the discovery of this case. But if she says every other relationship in my life has been perfect but Jeff Epstein has done this to me and it has affected + +1 2 3 4 my ability to trust men and my sexual relationships with other men, which is part of her interpersonal relationships, okay, let's talk tO IS Mi. + +5 6 7 THE COURT: When does your client allege that she had her first encounter with Mr. Epstein? + +8 MR. MB: At what age? + +9 THE COURT: Well, what year? + +10 MR. CRITTON: June of '03. + +11 MR. =II: June of '03, Judge. + +12 13 'MR. CRITTON: She claims from June of '03 through November of '04. + +14 15 16 MR. She was I believe 16 at the beginning and ended at 17. She was aminor during all this time. + +17 THE COURT: June of '03 to now is six years. + +18 Let me hear from Mr. + +19 20 21 22 MR. : Judge, in the criminal case that was filed against Mr. Epstein, he would not have had a right to do this type of discovery and I -- if I could hand up -- + +23 24 THE COURT: They wouldn't care about the women. + +25 MR. Right. Well, I mean -- + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +THE COURT: This is damages. There's no - they weren't seeking damages at the time. + +MR. : Right. And we have not alleged in the complaint or in the answers to interrogatories that her ability to have a relationship with a man has been affected by Mr. Epstein's conduct. + +We have alleged that she has been hospitalized for depression, anxiety but we have not alleged any damages concerning -- the, only reason this would be relevant is if we were making a claim at her ability to have either sexual relations or to have emotional relations with men was effected by her experience with Mr. Epstein. + +So this damages' claim is just a smoke screen to attempt to get evidence to show the jury that this woman has had other consensual relationships with young men that are approximately her age what I would characterize as a slut defense. She had it coming to her because she engaged in other voluntarily consensual -- + +THE COURT: Mr. Critton wouldn't try the slut defense in my courtroom, I'm sure. + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11. + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +MR. : Maybe not, but certainly that's the way this discovery is going. And, Judge, what + +THE COURT: What are the damages you think your client is seeking? + +MR. : She is seeking emotional distress damages for depression and anxiety and she has been hospitalized at the Oakwood Center. Her friend -- she was on the phone to a friend who called the sheriff's office because she thought she was suicidal. The sheriffs responded. They Baker Acted her that day and they took her eventually to the Oakwood Center. + +THE COURT: How do we know it's not intertwined with her rejection by three other men since Mr. Epstein? + +MR. : Well, even if it was related to her rejection by three other men -- you mean other men's rejection of her? + +THE COURT: Yeah. that? I mean you can't discovery. Has anybody records from Oakwood to Well, how do you not know do it until you do attempted to review the find out what's going on? + +MR. CRITTON: It's like a one-time visit when she was Baker Acted and then there's some + +1 other -- + +2 THE COURT: She didn't receive treatment? + +3 4 5 6 MR. CRITTON: She received treatment for that day and she's been back a couple of times. She's on medication. Again, I don't know what or the extent but she's got -- her medical bills are de minimis. + +8 9 10 11 12 13 Again as an example, Judge, did the Court have an opportunity to look at the case that I also attached to the motion? Because there's a case that's almost on all fours with this which I attached to our motion which is called Belles versus Russo. + +14 THE COURT: Right. + +15 16 17 18 19 20 23. MR. CRITTON: It was a case where the plaintiff was sued -- the plaintiff sued the former owners of a house of prostitution. So that part is different, but within it there were a number of claims including a sexual assault claim and they sought emotional pain, humiliation and emotional distress. + +22 23 24 25 Within the complaint that was filed in this particular case, she is seeking severe emotional distress, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, past and future, compensatory + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +humiliation, loss of reputation, mental anguish, pain and suffering, the same type of damages. And what the Court said -- + +THE COURT: How old is she now? + +MR. la She's 21 no\*. + +MR. CRITTON: She's 21 now. What the Court said is, you know, if you'd only brought this claim under 796 evidence of past issues, it's not an issue. You can't use this defense for anything, but because you brought these other claims which include, you know, sexual assault and you're seeking damages for other causes of action since the information sought by discovery may be relevant or may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in one or more of the other causes of action or determination of damages, we cannot conclude the trial court parted from essential requirements of law in granting -- + +THE COURT: So in other words, she's not only seeking -- she's seeking current emotional damage as a result of this relationship and you're trying to find out if she had prior relationships. that perhaps could be intertwined with it so that it's not just Mr. Epstein's -- + +MR. CRITTON: Right. A perfect example is + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +a + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +one of the cases that I have is there's a young lady who claims that she was molested in the past and raped, pretty significant issues, well in advance of her even meeting with Mr. Epstein. And they seem to play a large role in her psychiatric and psychological evaluation. + +We're going to come to the Court in this case as we have others and ask for a psychological evaluation of this lady, and if she was raped or if she was molested or just she had a bad experience or some -- whether it was a young or old man assaulted her in some fashion, that may play a role in her damages and what -- + +THE COURT: What I'm going to allow for discovery purposes only not necessarily getting it in at the time trial are two years before her first encounter with Mr. Epstein and anything subsequent. + +MR. 'I'll': Judge, I just wanted to say on the record because I forgot to mention it, there's also -- I did state an objection to the identity of people that are unrepresented in this courtroom. They have rights too. So what I + +THE COURT: Well, my suggestion is that you send those people a letter and tell them that + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +you're going to disclose them and if they have a problem with it that they come to see me before you disclose it. + +So I'm going to give you 20 days to respond to this rather than the usual five and that will give you time to put these people on notice and if they want to come visit with me and have a John Doe, i'll have a John Doe hearing but, you know, this is her case. She's doing it. She's the one seeking damages, and he is entitled to be able to confront other individuals to find out information that may be relevant to the damages she's seeking or she can drop the damages. That's her choice. If you seek damages, you've got to do it -- if you could put that in an order so that we have a time for him to do this. + +Just fill out an order, hand it back up to me and I'll deal with it. + +(The proceedings were concluded.) + +# REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE + +THE STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PALM BEACH. + +I, Teresa Bell, Court Reporter, certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings and that the transcript is a true and complete record of my stenographic notes. + +I further certify that the proceedings were taken at the time and place shown herein and that all counsel and persons as hereinabove shown were present. + +I further certify that I am not a relative, employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor am I a relative or employee of any of the parties' attorney or counsel connected with the action, nor am I financially interested in the action. + +Dated this 11th day + +TERESA BELL, Court Reporter + +JANE DOE NO. 6 CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRAIIIM + +Plaintiff, VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A. + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRAMIMI + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARK + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARK + +![](_page_33_Picture_26.jpeg) + +DOE II CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRAi l + +# PLAINTIFF, C.M.A.'S, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING TREATMENT RECORDS FROM PARENT-CHILD CENTER, INC, DR. SERGE THYS, DOMINIQUE HYPPOLITE/SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL, ST. MARY'S HOSPITAL, FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY AND GLORIA C. HAKKARAINEN, M.D. AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through her undersigned attorneys, hereby files her Motion For Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, and in support there of states as follows: + +1. This is an action to recover money damages against Defendant, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, for acts of sexual abuse and prostitution committed upon the thenminor, C.M.A. + +2. Plaintiff has plead thirty separate counts against EPSTEIN for separate incidences of abuse committed by EPSTEIN against Plaintiff pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255. 18 U.S.C. §2255, entitled "Civil remedy for personal injuries", creates a private right of action for minor children who were the victims of certain enumerated sex offenses. 18 U.S.C. §2255 also creates a statutory floor for the amount of damages a victim can recover for a violation of same. Plaintiff has also alleged a single count of Sexual Battery against EPSTEIN. + +3. There presently exists between the Plaintiff and EPSTEIN a disagreement as to whether the statutory damage floor established in 18 U.S.C. §2255 is recoverable for each commission of an enumerated sex offenses listed in 18 U.S.C. §2255, or whether the statutory damage floor can only be enforced once, regardless of how many times a defendant perpetrates an enumerated sex offense against a minor victim. + +4. This disagreement between the parties is properly the subject of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint For Failure to State a Cause of Action, and Motion For More Definite Statement; Motion to Strike, and Supporting Memorandum of Law (Attached hereto as Exhibit "A") which is currently pending before this Court. + +5. In the event that the Court rules that Plaintiff can recover the statutory damage floor established in 18 U.S.C. §2255 for each proven incident of abuse committed by EPSTEIN upon her, Plaintiff intends to rely exclusively on the statutory damages, rather than those damages which are available at common law. (See Plaintiff, C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255 attached hereto as Exhibit "B"). If however, the Court rules that the statutory floor applies only one time, regardless of the number of times EPSTEIN committed an enumerated sexual offense against her, Plaintiff will be pursuing all damages available to her at both common law and by statute. + +6. Given Plaintiff's intent to rely exclusively on the statutory damages available to her under 18 U.S.C. §2255 as outline above, Plaintiff will not be presenting any evidence of the extent of her physical, emotional, or pecuniary injuries, beyond evidence that she was the victim of sexual contact to which she was legally incapable of consenting by virtue of her age (including, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, and loss of the capacity to enjoy life). Accordingly, any testimony and/or discovery regarding those types of damages would not be relevant to any material issue pending in this case. + +7. Presently pending before the Court is Defendant EPSTEIN's Motion to Compel Plaintiff C.M.A. to Respond to Defendant's First Request to Produce and Answer Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories, and to Overrule Objections, and For an Award of Defendant's Reasonable Expenses (Attached hereto as Exhibit "C"). + +EPSTEIN is seeking from Plaintiff the production of certain treatment records of hers from the Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, a psychiatrist, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. + +8. None of the treatment records from the Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. will have any relevance whatsoever in the event that Plaintiff pursues only those statutory damages available to her under 18 U.S.C. §2255. To the contrary, the production of these confidential and private treatment records would only serve to further humiliate, embarrass, and victimize C.M.A. + +9. Furthermore, C.M.A.'s treatment records from the Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. are protected by the psychotherapist-patient privilege pursuant to the Supreme Court's decision in Jaffee v. Redmond, 518U.S. 1, 116 S.Ct. 1923 (1996)("AII agree that a psychotherapist privilege covers confidential communications made to licensed psychiatrists and psychologists. We have no hesitation in concluding in this case that the federal privilege should also extend to confidential communications made to licensed social workers in the course of psychotherapy.") Ordinarily, a plaintiff does not place her mental condition in controversy merely by requesting damages for mental anguish or "garden variety" emotional distress. In order to place a party's mental condition in controversy the party must allege a specific mental or psychiatric disorder or intend to offer expert testimony to support their claim of emotional distress. Turner v Imperial Stores, 161 F.R.D. 89 (S.D.Cal. 1995). The evidence sought is also protected under the substantive privacy rights recognized in Florida Statute §§90.503 and 90.5035. + +10. Accordingly, Plaintiff respectfully moves for the entry of a protective order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 26(c) regarding Plaintiffs treatment records from the Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. More particularly, Plaintiff requests the entry of an order precluding the discovery of those records until such time as the Court rules on the issue regarding whether the statutory damage floor as contained in 18 U.S.C. §2255 applies to each proven commission of an enumerated sexual offense by EPSTEIN against CMA. Should the Court rule that 18 U.S.C. §2255 provides a per incident damage floor, the treatment records would have absolutely no relevance whatsoever. In the event that the Court rules that the damage floor applies only once, the parties can then further brief the Court as to whether C.M.A has placed her mental condition "in controversy" such that it operates as a waiver of the psychotherapist-patient privilege. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, C.M.A., respectfully requests that this Court enter a protective order preventing the discovery of Plaintiff's treatment records from the Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT sniITHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80811-MARRA/ + +C.M. A., + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +Y + +EPSTEIN and + +Defendants, + +### DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF C.M.A. TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE AND ANSWER DEFENDANT'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, AND TO OVERRULE OBJECTIONS, AND FOR AN AWARD OF DEFENDANT'S REASONABLE EXPENSES + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, moves this Court for an order compelling Plaintiff, C.M.A. to respond to Defendant's First Request To Produce and to answer Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories, and to overrule her objections asserted in Plaintiffs Response To Defendant's First Request To Produce, dated February 13, 2009, and In Plaintiffs Notice of Serving Answers To Interrogatories, dated February 18, 2009. Defendant further seeks an award of his reasonable expenses, Including expenses, associated with the making of this motion. Rule 37, Fed.R.CIv.P. (2008); Local Gen. Rules 7.1 and 26.1 H (S.D. Fla. 2008). In support of his motion, Defendant states: + +Prior to the filing of this motion, on April 1, 2009, Defendant's counsel communicated by telephone with Plaintiffs counsel In a good faith effort to resolve the discovery Issues herein. This motion addresses those discovery items which remain at + +![](_page_39_Picture_14.jpeg) + +issue. Also, rather than We 2 separate motions to compel, Defendant filed one addressing the production requests and interrogatories because the discovery Issues overlap. + +## Motion To Compel Responses to Production Requests Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, and 19, and Answers to Interrogatories Nos. 2, 18, and 23. + +# Production Request No. 1 + +1. Individual and/or Joint Income tax returns and supporting documentation Including W-2 and 1099 forms for 2002-2007 and, as well as all records or documentation relative to the Plaintiffs earnings for the current year. + +# Response: + +Objection. Irrelevant, Immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible Information. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Plaintiff's tax returns and supporting documentation are relevant to Plaintiff's damages claims and, thus, discoverable. Plaintiff's complaint alleges in part that "beginning in approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003, the Defendant coerced and enticed the Impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct." 1't Am. Complaint, ¶13. (Plaintiff also refused to answer Interrogatory no. 2 which sought her employment history for the past ten years asserting the same general objection). + +Such information Is both relevant and reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. It is well settled that relevant information is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P.; + +Donahav v. Palm Beach Tours & trans., Inc., 242 F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). + +Discoverability of such Information Is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery Is broad. Donahav supra, at 686, and cases cited therein. "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claims or defense of any party Involved in the pending action? Id. + +Plaintiff's tax returns, along with the requested supporting documentation, for the six year period, and documents relevant to her current earnings, are relevant to Plaintiff's damages claims detailed below herein. Such information would show Plaintiff's employment and earning history, as \veil as provide evidence as to how Plaintiff has been able to function in her daily life before, during and after the alleged incidents. Was she self-sufficient? Was she able to get out of bed each morning and support herself? What type of Job did she hold? Ono's ability to earn a living and be self-supporting has not only a financial component, but also an emotional/psychological/mental component. + +C.M.A.'s First Amended Complaint' attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through )00( are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2256 — CM/Remedies for Personal Injuries; Count XXXI is entitled "Sexual Battery," and Count XXXII is entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortious Assault only against Defendant, Sarah Kellen." + +In her answers to interrogatory nos. 9 and 10, which seek Information about C.M.A.'s damages claims, Plaintiff answered that: + +Defandant's Motion To Dismiss directed to Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint is pending. + +> I have bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Maim/up:nit injuries are psychological. (Interrog. No. 9). + +> I am claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a jury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. §2255. (Interrog. No. 10). + +In her 1" Amended Complaint, relevant to her damages claims, Plaintiff alleges: + +C.MA, has in the past suffered, and will in the future suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy and other damages ... . The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses ... and will in the future suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. The Plaintiff C.M.A. has suffered loss of Income, a loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of capacity td enjoy life. These Injuries are permanent in nature and the Plaintiff, C.M.A., will continue to suffer these losses in the future. + +(1`t Am. Complaint, Counts I — XX( (18 U.S.C. §2255), 11¶25, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193; Count ;OW (Sexual Battery), 1199.) + +In each of her "Wherefore" clauses, Plaintiff seeks "compensatory darniages of at least the minimum provided by law? 18 U.S.C. §2255, pursuant to which Plaintiff attempts to bring certain of her claims, allows for recovery of "actual damages." See fn. 2 herein for applicable statutory text.2 + +As discussed above, the tax returns, and supporting documentation, will provide direct evidence as to Plaintiffs claimed damages. Such information does not only go to + +(a) 2 Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal Injury as a result of such violation may sue In any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, Including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described In the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than \$50,000 In value. [Emphasis added.) + +compensatory or actual damages or loss of income/loss of capacity to earn income type + +damages, but also her emotional/psychological/mental health type damages. In the telephone communication between counsel for the respective parties, Plaintiffs counsel indicated that Plaintiff was not seeking loss of income/earning capacity type damages; (Defendant is not aware that there has been any formal withdrawal of such damages claimed); notwithstanding, the information sought Is still relevant and discoverable based on the additional damages claimed by Plaintiff. The time period will allow Defendant to compare how Plaintiff was doing In her life prior to, during, and after the alleged incident. Again, the type of jobs Plaintiff has been able to hold and her earnings and ability to support herself clearly have not only a financial component, but an emotionaUpsychologicallmental health component as well. Accordingly, Plaintiffs objection is required to be overruled, and Defendant is entitled to the documents requested. + +# Production Request No. 2 + +2. All bills/expenses from any medical doctor, chiropractor, psychologists, psychic mental health counselors (Including any members of the healing arts and related i.e. drugs, prescriptions, etc.) you claim you incurred as a result of the Injuries w c i are or may be the subject matter of this lawsuit + +Response: + +None in our possession. These will be provided upon receipt. Discovery is ongoing. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Plaintiff makes no objection to the documents requested, but has failed to produce any documents responsive to this request. Clearly, the documents are relevant and discoverable as they go to proof of Plaintiffs claimed Injuries. In the April 1, 2009, + +telephone communication Plaintiff's counsel indicated that Plaintiff was still not In + +possession of such documents. The First Request for Production was served on Plaintiff on January 16, 2009. In her answer to interrogatory no. 11, (Noticecf Serving Answers, dated February 18, 2009, Identifies a psychiatrist and a counselorAherapist from whom she claims she is receiving "treatment or examination for the Injuries for which [she] seeks damages° See Exhibit A hereto for copy C.MA's answer to interrogatory no. 11. Regarding the date of treatment from the psychiatrist — she asserts "I would defer to the Doctors records." She claims the treatment from the counselor/therapist has been "since high school' and "ongoing .° Defendant is entitled to the documents sought and Plaintiff is in control of and has the ability to obtain the requested medical bills and expenses she claims were incurred as result of her injuries claimed in this action. Plaintiff should be required to Immediately produce the requested documents to Defendant. + +# production Request No, 4 + +4. All reports, evaluations, recommendations and/or analysis submitted by any expert which relate to or cover the incident which Is the subject matter of this lawsuit and/or any injuries, damages or losses you allege were caused by the incident + +# Response: + +Any reports generated by any retained experts not yet disclosed are protected by the work product privilege. Notwithstanding same, none. + +# Legal Argument Sum:lofting Entitlement to Discovery + +Plaintiff, through counsel, in the April 1, 2009, telephone communication, indicated that she does not have any responsive documents and stands by her objection. Rule 26 provides In relevant part— + +# 2) Disclosure of Expert Testimony. + +(A) In General. In addition to the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1), a party must disclose to the other parties the Identity of any witness it may use at trial to present evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, 703, or 705. + +(B) Written Report. Unless otherwise stipulated or ordered by the court, this disclosure must be accompanied by a written report—prepared and signed by the witness—if the witness is one retained or specially employed to provide expert testimony In the case or one whose duties as the partys employee regularly Involve giving expert testimony. The report must contain: + +(i) a complete statement of all opinions the witness will express and the basis and reasons for them; + +(If) the data or other Information considered by the witness In forming them; + +(Iii) any exhibits that will be used to summarize or support them; + +(Iv) the witness's qualifications, Including a list of all publications authored in the previous 10 years; + +(v) a list of all other cases In which, during the previous four years, the witness testified as an expert at trial or by deposition; and + +(vi) a statement of the compensation to be paid for the study and testimony in the case. + +(C) Time to Disclose Expert Testimony. A party must make these disclosures at the times and in the sequence that the court orders. Absent a stipulation or a court order, the disclosures must be made: + +(I) at least 90 days before the date set for trial or for the case to be ready for trial; or + +(II) if the evidence is Intended solely to contradict or rebut evidence on the same subject matter Identified by another party under Rule 26(aX2)(B), within 30 days after the other party's disclosure. + +• • • • + +# (e) Supplementing Disclosures and Responses. + +(1) In General. A party who has made a disclosure under Rule 26(a)—or who has responded to an Interrogatory, request for production, or request for admission--must supplement or correct Its disclosure or response: + +(A) In a timely manner if the party learns that in some material respect the disclosure or response is Incomplete or incorrect, and if the additional or corrective + +> information has not otherwise been made known to the other parties ,during the bLuvciy pi° ui . wi ItII + +(B) as ordered by the court. + +(2) Expert Witness. For an expert whose report must be disclosed under Rule 26(a)(2)(B), the party's duty to supplement extends both to information Ihcludecl in the report and to Information given during the expert's deposition. Any additions or changes to this Information must be disclosed by the time the party's pretrial disclosures under Rule 26(a)(3) are due. + +Accordingly, Defendant requests that should Plaintiff be in possession of any such reports, evaluations, recommendations and/or analysis prepared by an expert expected to testify at trial or deposition, or to be used by an expert expected to testify at trial or deposition, that such documents be produced as required by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P. quoted above. + +# Production Request No. 5 + +5. All medical reports and/or records from doctors, physicians, (Including psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors), hospitals, drug or alcohol facilities or any other person or entity who has rendered treatment to or examined you for any reason after the Incldent(s) which is the subject matter of this lawsuit. + +# Response: + +None in our possession. Discovery is ongoing. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Once again, Plaintiff should be required to immediately produce the requested documents. In support of ordering immediate production, Defendant realleges and incorporates his 'Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement To Discovery" to request no. 5 above herein. + +## Interrogatory No. 2 + +2. List the names, business addresses, telephone and cell phone numbers, dates of employment, Immediate supervisor (name and address) and rates of pay regarding all employers, Including self-employment, for whom you have worked In the past 10 years; this Includes listing all sources of income you have received. Answer this question by year, i.e. 1996 - 2009. + +### Answer: + +Objection. Irrelevant, Immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Such Information is clearly relevant to the damages and injuries claimed by Plaintiff in this action. Plaintiff's complaint alleges in part that "beginning In approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003, the Defendant coerced and enticed the impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct." 1s' Am. Complaint, ¶13. (See discussion of Production Request no. 1 above herein). + +Such Information is both relevant and reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. It Is well settled that relevant Information is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P.; Donahav v, Palm Beach Tours & trans., Inc, 242F.R.D. 665 (S.D. Fla. 2007). DIscoverabillty of such information is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery is broad. Donahay, supra, at 686, and cases cited therein. "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which Is relevant to the claims or defense of any party involved in the pending action? Id. + +C.M.A. v. Epstein, of el. Patio 10 + +Plaintiffs employment and earnings history prior to and after the alleged + +Incidents are relevant to her claimed damages and Injuries. Such Information would not only evidence Plaintiffs employment and earning history, but also provide evidence as to how Plaintiff has been able to function in her daily life before, during and after the alleged incidents. Was she self-sufficient? Was she able to get out of bed each morning and support herself? What type of job did she hold? One's ability to earn a living and be self-supporting has not only a financial component, but also an emotional/psychological/mental component. + +C.M.A.'s First Amended Complaint attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through XXX are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 — Remedies for Personal Injuries; Count XXXI is entitled "Sexual Battery," and Count XXXII is entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortlous Assault only against Defendant, + +In her answers to interrogatory nos. 9 and 10, which seek Information about C.M.A.'s damages claims, Plaintiff answered that: + +I have bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent Injuries are psychological. (Interrog. No. 9). + +I am claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a jury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. §2255. (Interrog. No. 10). + +In her 1°` Amended Complaint, relevant to her damages claims, Plaintiff alleges: + +C.M.A., has In the past suffered, and will In the future suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy and other damages . The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses and will in the future suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. The Plaintiff C.M.A. has suffered loss of income, a + +> loss of the capacity o earn income In the future, and a loss of capacity to enjoy life. These injuries are permanen n na ure an continue to suffer these losses In the future. + +> (151Am. Complaint, Counts I — XXX (18 U.S.C. §2265), ¶¶25, 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 167, 193; Count XXXI (Sexual Battery), ¶199.) + +In each of her 'Wherefore" clauses, Plaintiff seeks "compensatory damages of at least the minimum provided by law? 18 U.S.C. §2255, pursuant to which Plaintiff attempts to bring certain of her claims, allows for recovery of "actual damages." See fn. 2 herein for applicable statutory text. + +As discussed above, C.M.A.'s employment and earnings history will provide direct evidence as to Plaintiffs claimed damages. Such information does not only go to compensatory or actual damages or loss of income/loss of capacity to earn income type damages, but also her emotional/psychological/mental health type damages. In the telephone communication between counsel for the respective parties, Plaintiff's counsel indicated that Plaintiff was not seeking loss of income/earning capacity type damages; (Defendant is not aware that there has been any formal withdrawal of such damages claimed); notwithstanding, tho Information sought Is still relevant and discoverable based on the additional damages claimed by Plaintiff. The time period will allow Defendant to compare how Plaintiff was doing In her life prior to, during, and after the alleged Incident. Again, the typo of jobs Plaintiff has been able to hold and her earnings and ability to support herself clearly have not only a financial component, but an emotional/psychological/mental health component as well. Accordingly, Plaintiffs \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745664/EFTA02745664.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745664/EFTA02745664.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..03a9dac472c068ef4d5293cd9390b73aaf75c596 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745664/EFTA02745664.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,2917 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745664.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 50, + "chars": 90544, + "elapsed_seconds": 22.31, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_33_Picture_26.jpeg", + "_page_39_Picture_14.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Interrogatory No. 18", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 257.685, + 191.16 + ], + [ + 358.399658203125, + 191.16 + ], + [ + 358.399658203125, + 206.18701171875 + ], + [ + 257.685, + 206.18701171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 182.04, + 324.0 + ], + [ + 437.3107604980469, + 324.0 + ], + [ + 437.3107604980469, + 340.0570373535156 + ], + [ + 182.04, + 340.0570373535156 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Interrogatory No. 23", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.375, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 358.0556945800781, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 358.0556945800781, + 375.6698913574219 + ], + [ + 261.375, + 375.6698913574219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 99.63, + 451.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 147.02841186523438, + 451.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 147.02841186523438, + 462.51 + ], + [ + 99.63, + 462.51 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 185.73, + 521.64 + ], + [ + 439.2369689941406, + 521.64 + ], + [ + 439.2369689941406, + 536.7343597412109 + ], + [ + 185.73, + 536.7343597412109 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 259.53, + 413.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 362.55120849609375, + 413.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 362.55120849609375, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 259.53, + 426.06000000000006 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.29, + 584.8199999999999 + ], + [ + 386.5213928222656, + 584.8199999999999 + ], + [ + 386.5213928222656, + 596.97 + ], + [ + 274.29, + 596.97 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "School behavioral problems, received counseling prior to the incident.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 122.385, + 154.71 + ], + [ + 489.109375, + 154.71 + ], + [ + 489.109375, + 171.46392822265625 + ], + [ + 122.385, + 171.46392822265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 124.23000000000002, + 244.61999999999998 + ], + [ + 178.3289337158203, + 244.61999999999998 + ], + [ + 178.3289337158203, + 256.36114501953125 + ], + [ + 124.23000000000002, + 256.36114501953125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 126.69, + 379.08000000000004 + ], + [ + 180.4252471923828, + 379.08000000000004 + ], + [ + 180.4252471923828, + 390.9836730957031 + ], + [ + 126.69, + 390.9836730957031 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 128.535, + 513.54 + ], + [ + 182.5214385986328, + 513.54 + ], + [ + 182.5214385986328, + 525.5961608886719 + ], + [ + 128.535, + 525.5961608886719 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 122.385, + 218.70000000000002 + ], + [ + 179.59869384765625, + 218.70000000000002 + ], + [ + 179.59869384765625, + 230.833740234375 + ], + [ + 122.385, + 230.833740234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 126.69, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 183.17990112304688, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 183.17990112304688, + 438.938720703125 + ], + [ + 126.69, + 438.938720703125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "[33 Pretrial Procedure 307A C:=36.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 323.49, + 228.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 473.1811828613281, + 228.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 473.1811828613281, + 242.6478271484375 + ], + [ + 323.49, + 242.6478271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 323.49, + 249.48 + ], + [ + 414.51000000000005, + 249.48 + ], + [ + 414.51000000000005, + 260.01 + ], + [ + 323.49, + 260.01 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "[I) Pretrial Procedure 307A IC=1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 102.705, + 430.9200000000001 + ], + [ + 245.50375366210938, + 430.9200000000001 + ], + [ + 245.50375366210938, + 444.7911376953125 + ], + [ + 102.705, + 444.7911376953125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307A Pretrial Procedure", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 102.705, + 451.9800000000001 + ], + [ + 193.9392547607422, + 451.9800000000001 + ], + [ + 193.9392547607422, + 462.59619140625 + ], + [ + 102.705, + 462.59619140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "[2) Pretrial Procedure 307A C=.31", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 102.705, + 551.61 + ], + [ + 246.42103576660156, + 551.61 + ], + [ + 246.42103576660156, + 564.0358581542969 + ], + [ + 102.705, + 564.0358581542969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307A Pretrial Procedure", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 102.705, + 571.8599999999999 + ], + [ + 195.8806610107422, + 571.8599999999999 + ], + [ + 195.8806610107422, + 582.5849456787109 + ], + [ + 102.705, + 582.5849456787109 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Cases", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 323.49, + 298.89 + ], + [ + 349.8905029296875, + 298.89 + ], + [ + 349.8905029296875, + 310.3616638183594 + ], + [ + 323.49, + 310.3616638183594 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 416.355, + 335.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 430.1967468261719, + 335.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 430.1967468261719, + 346.0281982421875 + ], + [ + 416.355, + 346.0281982421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "11.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 416.355, + 395.28 + ], + [ + 432.9361267089844, + 395.28 + ], + [ + 432.9361267089844, + 405.986328125 + ], + [ + 416.355, + 405.986328125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "In.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 416.355, + 484.37999999999994 + ], + [ + 437.7355041503906, + 484.37999999999994 + ], + [ + 437.7355041503906, + 494.8824157714844 + ], + [ + 416.355, + 494.8824157714844 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IV.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 418.20000000000005, + 563.76 + ], + [ + 437.74041748046875, + 563.76 + ], + [ + 437.74041748046875, + 574.7547912597656 + ], + [ + 418.20000000000005, + 574.7547912597656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO \nFIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO PLAINTIFF AND TO OVERRULE \nPLAINTIFFS OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES;\nINCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 126.07499999999999, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 485.235, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 485.235, + 342.63 + ], + [ + 126.07499999999999, + 342.63 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 116.85000000000001, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 485.85, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 485.85, + 336.15 + ], + [ + 116.85000000000001, + 336.15 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 32, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.765, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 413.7015380859375, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 413.7015380859375, + 123.33416748046875 + ], + [ + 252.765, + 123.33416748046875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF, C.M.A.'S, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING \nTREATMENT RECORDS FROM PARENT-CHILD CENTER, INC, DR. SERGE THYS, \nDOMINIQUE HYPPOLITE/SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, GOOD \nSAMARITAN HOSPITAL, ST. MARY'S HOSPITAL, FLORIDA ATLANTIC \nUNIVERSITY AND GLORIA C. HAKKARAINEN, M.D. AND INCORPORATED \nMEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 34, + "polygon": [ + [ + 87.945, + 495.72 + ], + [ + 532.35400390625, + 495.72 + ], + [ + 532.35400390625, + 578.3035125732422 + ], + [ + 87.945, + 578.3035125732422 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nsniITHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 39, + "polygon": [ + [ + 212.78999999999996, + 151.47 + ], + [ + 389.4520568847656, + 151.47 + ], + [ + 389.4520568847656, + 176.83056640625 + ], + [ + 212.78999999999996, + 176.83056640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF C.M.A. TO RESPOND TO \nDEFENDANT'S FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE AND ANSWER DEFENDANT'S \nFIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, AND TO OVERRULE OBJECTIONS, AND FOR \nAN AWARD OF DEFENDANT'S REASONABLE EXPENSES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 39, + "polygon": [ + [ + 116.85000000000001, + 336.15 + ], + [ + 490.1285095214844, + 336.15 + ], + [ + 490.1285095214844, + 382.33056640625 + ], + [ + 116.85000000000001, + 382.33056640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Motion To Compel Responses to Production Requests Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, and 19, \nand Answers to Interrogatories Nos. 2, 18, and 23.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 40, + "polygon": [ + [ + 128.535, + 224.37 + ], + [ + 476.58489990234375, + 224.37 + ], + [ + 476.58489990234375, + 251.01556396484375 + ], + [ + 128.535, + 251.01556396484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No. 1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 40, + "polygon": [ + [ + 242.925, + 256.77 + ], + [ + 364.9057312011719, + 256.77 + ], + [ + 364.9057312011719, + 271.7081298828125 + ], + [ + 242.925, + 271.7081298828125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 40, + "polygon": [ + [ + 103.32000000000002, + 328.86 + ], + [ + 161.65713500976562, + 328.86 + ], + [ + 161.65713500976562, + 343.6802673339844 + ], + [ + 103.32000000000002, + 343.6802673339844 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 40, + "polygon": [ + [ + 185.73, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 426.48919677734375, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 426.48919677734375, + 399.8184814453125 + ], + [ + 185.73, + 399.8184814453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No. 2", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 43, + "polygon": [ + [ + 242.925, + 458.46 + ], + [ + 363.09759521484375, + 458.46 + ], + [ + 363.09759521484375, + 474.2005615234375 + ], + [ + 242.925, + 474.2005615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 43, + "polygon": [ + [ + 184.5, + 591.3 + ], + [ + 425.53082275390625, + 591.3 + ], + [ + 425.53082275390625, + 608.070556640625 + ], + [ + 184.5, + 608.070556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "production Request No, 4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 44, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.46000000000004, + 460.0799999999999 + ], + [ + 367.5301513671875, + 460.0799999999999 + ], + [ + 367.5301513671875, + 473.7344665527344 + ], + [ + 248.46000000000004, + 473.7344665527344 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 44, + "polygon": [ + [ + 108.85499999999999, + 529.74 + ], + [ + 165.5931396484375, + 529.74 + ], + [ + 165.5931396484375, + 543.9459838867188 + ], + [ + 108.85499999999999, + 543.9459838867188 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Sum:lofting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 44, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.64999999999998, + 586.4399999999999 + ], + [ + 430.5, + 586.4399999999999 + ], + [ + 430.5, + 601.4680023193359 + ], + [ + 190.64999999999998, + 601.4680023193359 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "2) Disclosure of Expert Testimony.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 45, + "polygon": [ + [ + 119.92500000000001, + 157.95 + ], + [ + 281.8857116699219, + 157.95 + ], + [ + 281.8857116699219, + 171.70758056640625 + ], + [ + 119.92500000000001, + 171.70758056640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(e) Supplementing Disclosures and Responses.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 45, + "polygon": [ + [ + 126.07499999999999, + 572.67 + ], + [ + 343.8291320800781, + 572.67 + ], + [ + 343.8291320800781, + 587.5876007080078 + ], + [ + 126.07499999999999, + 587.5876007080078 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No. 5", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 46, + "polygon": [ + [ + 242.925, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 362.3266296386719, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 362.3266296386719, + 403.33056640625 + ], + [ + 242.925, + 403.33056640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 46, + "polygon": [ + [ + 102.09, + 469.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 160.160400390625, + 469.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 160.160400390625, + 483.570556640625 + ], + [ + 102.09, + 483.570556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 46, + "polygon": [ + [ + 183.26999999999998, + 515.7817077636719 + ], + [ + 424.02972412109375, + 515.7817077636719 + ], + [ + 424.02972412109375, + 530.070556640625 + ], + [ + 183.26999999999998, + 530.070556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Interrogatory No. 2", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 47, + "polygon": [ + [ + 256.455, + 157.95 + ], + [ + 343.1700000000001, + 157.95 + ], + [ + 343.1700000000001, + 170.1 + ], + [ + 256.455, + 170.1 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 47, + "polygon": [ + [ + 101.47500000000001, + 250.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 146.37, + 250.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 146.37, + 261.63 + ], + [ + 101.47500000000001, + 261.63 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 47, + "polygon": [ + [ + 183.885, + 306.18 + ], + [ + 422.505, + 306.18 + ], + [ + 422.505, + 320.2647705078125 + ], + [ + 183.885, + 320.2647705078125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 362 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 338 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 312 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 252 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 378 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 300 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 591 + ], + [ + "Line", + 86 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 711 + ], + [ + "Line", + 89 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 763 + ], + [ + "Line", + 92 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 785 + ], + [ + "Line", + 96 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 774 + ], + [ + "Line", + 91 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 149 + ], + [ + "Line", + 82 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 739 + ], + [ + "Line", + 90 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 315 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 148 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 114 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 34 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 293 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 303 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 324 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 271 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 111 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 124 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 112 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 115 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 113 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 102 + ], + [ + "Line", + 51 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 97 + ], + [ + "Line", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 314 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 38, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 39, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 40, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 325 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 41, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 42, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 88 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 43, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 44, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 345 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 45, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 46, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 47, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 353 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 48, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 49, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745664" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745664/_page_33_Picture_26.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745664/_page_33_Picture_26.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4db191411e959ff8fd1242fd0db658c9d2f505f5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745664/_page_33_Picture_26.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f378f684f94e9d79f158161589b048db5307309c820b2c61faa07b3ea2e797c2 +size 7562 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745664/_page_39_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745664/_page_39_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..30a2356e15b9ef6e2e421428a0502d0a73e6286a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745664/_page_39_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:de9d1a22ac6a8414512607acb18bffb24a0b4a0db6114fbffb2ebb4a0eb1e798 +size 13928 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745714/EFTA02745714.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745714/EFTA02745714.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8c02bc6f7041994f6477edfea907e970e61be5c3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745714/EFTA02745714.md @@ -0,0 +1,1305 @@ +objection is required to be overruled, and Defendant is entitled to the Information sought in the Interrogatory. + +# Interrogatory No. 18 + +18. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding Mr. Epstein, with whom you have had sexual activity since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual activity, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. + +Answer: + +Objection. Relevance and overbroad. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Plaintiffs only objection is relevancy and overbroad, without any factyal support or showing as required by Rule 26(c) and Local Gen. Rule 26.1 H (S.D. Fla. 2008). Nowhere does C.M.A. explain how such interrogatory is overbroad. + +It is well settled that relevant information Is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery Is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P.; Donahay v. Palm Beach Tours & trans., Inc., 242 F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). Discoverability of an alleged victim's/plaintiffs sexual conduct or activity in civil cases is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery is broad. Donahav supra, at 886, and cases cited therein. "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claims or defense of any party Involved in the pending action." Id. + +In accordance with Rule 26, the discovery sought regarding Plaintiffs sexual activity with males and the nature thereof, Including whether she received any + +compensation or consideration therefore, In interrogatory no. 18, are all relevant to + +Plaintiffs damages claims and the type of injury she claims she has suffered. Defendant has no other means of obtaining such information and obtaining such information through Plaintiff will better protect the confidentiality until the Court can make a determination in accordance with the procedures under Rule 412(c) whether such information will be admissible at trial. See Rule 412(c), Fed.R.Civ.P. Defendant will agree to an order keeping the confidentiality of the Information obtained through discovery. + +The evidence sought is relevant based on the facts and theories of this action. C.M.A.'s First Amended Complaint attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through XXX are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 - Civil Remedies ter Personal Injuries; Count XXXI- is-entitled "Sexual Battery, and CountilO0(ii is entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortlous Assault only against Defendant, MOW + +In her answers to interrogatory nos. 9 and 10, which seek information about C.M.A.'s damages claims, Plaintiff answered that + +Ihave bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I` began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent injuries are psychological. (Interrog. No. 9). + +Iam claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a Jury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.CA. §2255. (Interrog. No. 10). + +In her l at Amended Complaint, relevant to her damages claims, Plaintiff alleges: + +C.M.A., has in the past suffered, and will In the future suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, Invasion of her + +> privacy and other damages ... . The then minor Plaintiff Incurred medical and psychorogfcat expenses ... arid will in the future suffer additional psychological expenses. The Plaintiff C.M.A. has suffered loss of Income, a loss of the capacity to earn income In the future, and a loss of capacity to enjoy life. Those Injuries are permanent in nature and the Plaintiff, C.M.A., will continue to suffer these losses in the future. + +> (tat Am. Complaint, Counts I — XXX (18 U.S.C. §2255),111125, 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193; Count XXXI (Sexual Battery), ¶199.) + +In each of her "Wherefore" clauses, Plaintiff seeks "compensatory damages of at least the minimum provided by law." 18 U.S.C. §2255, pursuant to which Plaintiff attempts to bring certain of her claims, allows for recovery of "actual damages." See fn. 2 herein for applicable statutory text. + +C.M.A. also alleges that Defendant's conduct was "sexual assault and child abuse of a then minor." ¶2. She alleges that "beginning in approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003, the Defendant coerced and enticed the Impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct." ¶13. + +... These acts Included, but were not limited to, fondling and inappropriate and illegal sexual touching of the then minor Plaintiff, sexual misconduct and masturbation of the Defendant in the presence of the then minor Plaintiff, soliciting and enticing the then minor Plaintiff to engage in sexual acts with another female in EPSTEIN's presence, and encouraging the then minor Plaintiff to become involved In prostitution; Defendant committed numerous criminal sexual offenses against the then minor Plaintiff including, but not limited to, sexual battery, solicitation or prostitution, procurement of a minor for the purpose of prostitution, and lewd and lascivious assaults upon the person of the then minor plaintiff. (10t Am. Complaint ¶13). + +The information sought Is clearly relevant to the injuries and damages claimed by Plaintiff. The nature of her claimed Injuries and damages are such that Defendant Is + +entitled to evidence which would show the nature of her relationship with males, whether she has suffered or engaged in other acts of sexual misconduct or activity as alleged In her complaint, and whether she suffered Injury and damages as a result of the other claimed sexual misconduct or activity. See United States v. Bear Stops, 997 F.2d 451 (8th Cir. 1993)(Defendant charged with sexual abuse of six year old boy was entitled to admission of evidence relating to victim's sexual assault by 3 older boys to establish alternative explanation for why victim exhibited behavioral manifestations of sexually abused child.). + +In further support of Defendant's motion, a copy of Bales v. Ruzzo 703 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1998), is attached hereto as Exhibit B as it is on point to the discovery issues In this action, and the relevancy and discoverability of Plaintiff's history of sexual activity and any payment, therefore. See interrogatories 8, 22 and 30 propounded in the Batas case and footnote 1 herein. 3 Additionally and significantly, in other pending state court civil actions against Defendant EPSTEIN attempting to assert similar claims and damages, the Circuit Court Judges have already ruled that such information is discoverable as it is relevant to the damages claims of Plaintiff. See Composite Exhibits C and D hereto. Composite Exhibit C are the Orders, dated February 23, 2009, entered In the case of A.C. v. Epstein, and , Case No. 502008CA025129 MB Al, 15th Judicial Circuit, In and For Palm Beach County, State of Florida, which granted Defendant's motion to compel therein directed + +3 In .las v. Ruzzo, supra, the Plaintiffs alleged a multicount complaint Including claims for 'coercion of prostitution" pursuant to §786.09, Fla. Stat.; for battery for the unwanted and offensive touching of petitioners' bodies; false imprisonment for physically confining the petitioners against their will; invasion of privacy and Intentional infliction of emotional distress. + +to discovery identical to interrogatory no. 18 above. (In the A.C. case, the Plaintiff + +answered without objection Interrogatories identical to nos. 19, 20, and 21 herein.) + +Composite Exhibit D is a portion the transcript from a March 3, 2009 hearing on + +Defendant's motion to compel discovery in the case of Jane Doe II v. Epstein, and Case No. 502008CA020614 MB AF, 15th Judicial Circuit Court, In and For Palm Beach County, State of Florida. Again, the Circuit Court Judge determined that the Information sought is relevant to the Issue of damages and, thus, discoverable. + +Accordingly, Plaintiffs objections are required to be overruled and Defendant is entitled to the discovery sought. + +# Interrogatory No. 23 + +23. State the names, addresses, ages, phone numbers and dates of all females whom you claim were brought by you to Mr. Epstein's home to give him a massage or for any other reason. As to each female, state the amount of money you claim you were paid to bring each female. + +Answer: + +A.L. Age: 22 West Palm Beach, FL I was paid \$100.00 + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Counsel for the respective parties also discussed this interrogatory in an effort to come to a resolution. Plaintiff does not object to the discovery requested. Plaintiffs counsel Indicated that he had a "problem" disclosing the Identity of A.L. to the extent she was a minor at the time. Defendant would agree to an order protecting public disclosure of the true identity of A.L. If she were indeed a minor at the time; however, as part of the order, Plaintiff should also be required to provide Defendant with the full + +name of A.L. so that Defendant may conduct meaningful discovery. It is Plaintiff who claims she brought A.L. to Epstein's home as part of the alleged "scheme." In addition, Plaintiff failed to provide any date or dates as to when she brought A.L. to Epstein's home. Plaintiff's counsel indicated they would attempt to provide this information. + +Accordingly, in granting Defendant's motion to compel discovery, with respect t this Interrogatory, Plaintiff should be required to provide the full name of A.L. (which Defendant agrees to keep confidential at this time), the date or dates which she brought A.L. or any female to Epstein's home, and how much she was allegedly paid each time. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court grant Defendant's motion to compel and award Defendant's reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, associated with this motion. + +# Rule 7.1 CertificatIon + +I hereby certify that counsel for the respective parties communicated by telephone in a good faith effort to resolve the discovery issues prior to the filing of this motion to compel. Some of the issues were resolved or in the process of being resolved. + +> Robert D. C Attorney for °fondant Epstein ryi n, Jr. + +# Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document Is being served this day on all counsel of re c1j1entitled on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on thi •• ay of April, 2009 + +C.M.A. v. Epstein, et S. Pepe 18 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Itichara H. mins, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33481 561-582-7600 Fax 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +reehtvahotmailecorn + +Jack Sit, Esq. Jack P. Esq. Seamy nney Scarola Barnhart Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Ft 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561483-9424 Jsxasearcvlaw.com loiOsearcvlaw,com Co-Counsel for Plaintiff + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Akimbo\* y KIWIger & Welas, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561.659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 JaciestObellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. & Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax 561-828-0983 ecfnbrucerelnharUaw. Counsel for Defendant... + +Respectfully sub + +By: ROBERT D. 117ON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar o. 224162 bcicla om MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #817296 friolkeebolclaw,com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, eta Case No.: 08-CV-8081 1-CIV• Plato:if? s Aoswers to Defendant's First s + +# School behavioral problems, received counseling prat to the bIoidnnt + +- 8. Did you consume any alcoholic beverages or take any drugs or medications within 12 hours before the time of each Incident(s) described In the complaint? If so, state the type and amount of alcoholic beverages, drugs, or mediCation which were consumed, and when (dates) and where you consumed them. + +# ANSWER + +- 1. On one occasion I had taken "Morning Glory" and "Angel TruMpets". I do not recall the date. +- 2. On another occasion I used cocaine powder. I do not recall theidate. +- 9. Describe each injury (physical, emotional, mental) for which you are claiming damages In This case, specifying the part of your body that was injured, the nature of the injury and as to any Injuries you contend are permanent, the effects on you that you claim are permanent. + +# ANSWER + +Ihave bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug pioblems. Permanent Injuries are psychological. + +- 10. Please state each Item of damage that you claim, and Include in your answer: the count to which the item of damages relates; the factual basis for each item of damages; and an explanation of how you computed each Item of damages, Including any mathematical formula used. + +# ANSWER + +Iam claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by aJury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. § 2255: + +Discovery is ongoing. + +- 11. List the names and business addresses of each physician (including psychiatrist, psychologist, chiropractor or medical provider) who has treated or examined you, + +EXHIBIT A + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et el. Case No.: 08-CV-808114CIV-MAREUVJOHNSON Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories + +> and each medical facility where you have received any b for the Injuries for which you seek damages in this case; and state as to each the date of treatment or examination and the injury or condition for which you were examined or treated. + +### ANSWER + +Dr. Serge Thys (Psychiatrist) Date: I do not recall the date. I would defer 215145m Street to the Doctors records. West Palm Beach, FL 33407 + +Susan Pope (Counselor/Therapist) Date: Since high school. Ongoing. Parent Child Center 2001 W. Blue Heron Boulevard + +- 12. List the names and business addresses of all other physicians, medical facilities, rehab facilities (drug, alcohol or psychiatric) or other health care' providers including psychiatrist, psychologist, mental health counselor and chiropractors by whom or at which you have been examined or treated in the past 10 years; and state as to each the dates of examination or treatment and the condition or Injury for which you were examined or treated. + +### ANSWER + +Good Samaritan Hospital (3112/04, 3/26/06) Child Birth 1309 N Flagier Dr West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +St. Mary's Hospital (4/07) DNC 901 46m Street West Palm Beach, FL 33407 + +Gloria C. Hakkaralnen, MD Ob/Gyn 292510'" Avenue North, Suite 306 Palm Springs, FL. 33461 + +Theodore Ritota, DDS Dentist + +W4i Van + +703 So.2d 1076 703So.2d 1076,22 Ha. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 (Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 1 + +District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth Dishict Kimberly BALAS and Teresa Shumate, Petitioners, v. Marjorie A. RUZZO, and Exec., Inc., etc., Respondents. No. 97-82. + +Oct. 10,1997. As MoOfled on Grant of Clarification Jan. 2,1998. 307A Arctic.! Procedure Jett; eCI 5 c>12-ci k %lc` • 307ATI Depositions and Discovery Plaintiffs brought action against alleged house of \ COI ) • MAMA Discovery 01 General prostitution for, inter alit, coercion of =ion. 307Ak36 Particular Subjects of Disclos- ore The Circuit Court, Brevard County, Pound, J., granted in part defendants' motion to compel discovery. Plaintiffs filed petition for writ of certiorari. The District Court of Appeal, W. Sharp, J., held that evidence of plaintiff& past prostitution and their revenues relating to such activities was discoverable. + +307A1c31 k. Relevancy and Materiality. Most ated Cases Party may be permitted to discover evidence that would be inadmissible at trial, if it would load to discovery of relevant evidence. West's P.S.A. RCP Rule 1.280(bX". + +## (3) Pretrial Procedure 307A e=s36.1 + +Petition denied. + +Harris, J., concurred specially end filed opinion. + +West Headno tea + +### (1) Pretrial Procedure 307A €:=>31 + +#### 307A Pretrial Procedure + +307AII Depositions and Discovery 307A11(A) Discovery In General 307Ak31 lc. Relevancy and Materiality. + +Most Cited Cases Discovery in civil cases must be relevant to subject matter of case and must bo admissible or reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. Wears P.SA. RCP Rule 1.280(b)(1). + +### [2) Pretrial Procedure 307A e=31 + +#### 307A Pretrial Procedure + +307A11 Depositions and Discovery 307A11(A) Discovery in General 307Ak36.1 k. In General. Most Cited + +#### Cases + +Evidence of plaindffir past prostitution and their revenues relating to such activities, including \*divides with alleged house of prostitution against which they had filed suit, was discoverable, where plaintiffs brought action not only fag coercion of prostitution, but also for battery, false imprisonment. invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, violation of their civil rights, and racketeering. Violent Crime astarol and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, ij 40302,42 US.C.A. 6 13981; West's P.S.A. U 772.014, 79609: West's F.S.A. RCP Rule 1 b 1). \*1076 Richard E. Heather Fisher Lindsay, of Spriggs Tallahassee, for Pal-HOW'S. + +Mark S. Peters of Anted, Theriac & Eiseranenger, P.A., Cocoa, for Respondents. + +W. SHARP, Judge. + +Batas end Shumate petition this court for awrit of certiorari to review certain portions of the lower court's order which granted, in park, amotion to compel discovery filed by respondents Rump and Exec., Inc. Petitioners argue that thote portions depart from the essential requirements 9f law and will cause them irreparable harm because they will be + + II EkH IBIT p + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 2 + +compelled to disclose intimate details of their sexual history. We decline to issue the writ of certificari. + +Balas and Shumate filed suit against Ruzzo and Exec, Inc., doing business as "The Boardroom." According to Balas and Shumate, The Boardroom operates ostensibly as \*1077 a leisure spa but actually is a house of prostitution. Balas worked at The Boardroom from December 1993 until February 1996; Shumate worked there from October 1992 until March 1996. Ruzzo, the sole officer and shareholder of Exec, Inc., collected about fifty to sixty percent of each employees' earnings from performing sexual acts. + +According to Balas and Shumate, Ruzzo exerted mental and emotional control over her employees and thus she was able to exploit them as prostitutes. Ruzzo required her employees to pay her substantial sums of money to attend "metaphysical workshops" conducted by Ruzzo or persons associated with her. At the work place, the employees were required to participate in religious and quasi-religious "circles," rituals and incantations. These practices were allegedly designed to break down the personalities of the women who worked for Ruzzo and to dependency and loyalty to herself. At one time when the earnings of a new employee were missing and believed to be stolen, Ruzzo required that the petitioners be strip searched and body cavity searched. Ruzzo caused the petitioners to believe their continued employment was dependent on their submission to these searches and that they might be arrested on felony charges if they refused to submit to the searches. + +Balas and Shumate's second amended complaint against Ruzzo contains seven counts. Count I is an action for coercion of prostitution pursuant to section 796.09, Florida Statutes. Petitioners allege the requirement that they perform sexual acts to retain their employment constitutes inducement and coercion to engage in prostitution. Count II is a claim for battery for the unwanted and offensive touching of the petitioners' bodies. Count III is a claim for false imprisonment for physically confining the pe- + +titioners against their will. Count IV alleges that respondents' actions constituted an invasion of petitioners' privacy. Count V is a claim for the intentional infliction of emotional distress. Count VI alleges a civil rights action that respondents have violated petitioners' right to be free from crimes of violence motivated by gender within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. section 13981. Finally, count VII seeks civil remedies for criminal practices or racketeering pursuant to section 772.104, Florida Statutes. The petitioners claim that they suffered emotional pain, anguish, humiliation, insult, indignity, loss of self-esteem, inconvenience, hurt and emotional distress. They seek an award of general and punitive damages, among other relief. + +The discovery to which the petitioners are being required to respond is as follows: + +I. + +Interrogatory 8: Please advise how long have you been engaged in prostitution.... + +II. + +Interrogatory 22: State with specificity the manner in which the acts as described in your Complaint have materially affected how you interact with your husband, boyfriend, fiancée [sic] or any other individual of the opposite sex. + +III. + +Request for Production 30: A copy of any photographs, movies or videotapes in which you performed sexual acts and/or simulated sexual acts in exchange for money or other consideration. + +IV. + +Interrogatory 16: Please list the names, addresses, telephone numbers and rates of pay for all employers for which you worked, including the + +703 So.2d 1076 + +703So.2d 1076, 72 Pls. L Weekly 1)2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 + +(ate ast 703 So.2d 1076) + +nature of the work, during the five years irnmedi-Boardroom and from the date of your termination with the Boardroom to the present, providing the names of your immediate supervisors at each place of employment and the reason for your leaving each place of employment + +V. + +Page 3 + +nature, custody, condition, and location of any documents.or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons:having nowledge of any discoverable matter. It. is not ground for objection that the information sought will be Inadmissible at the trial If the Information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +Interrogatory 26: Please state your total income while employed at the Boardroom, and state the source of that income including any income from other employment or \*1078 income earned from prostitution other than at the Boardroom. + +VI. + +Request for Production 34: Business records from any aelfemployment or owned business ventures in the last 5 years, including any records or list of customers, "special customer lists" or "sugar daddy's list." + +[1823 Discovery in civil cases must be relevant to the subject matter of the case and must be admissible or reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. See Allstate Insurance Co. \* v. La son, 655So.2d 91 (F/a.1995)Ore v. 653 Sold 1030 (Pla.1995): v. Star ust misers, Inc., 690 Sold 743 a. th DCA 1997). The concept of relevancy Is broader in the discovery context than In the trial context and a party may be permitted to discover evidence that would be Inadmissible at trial, If It would lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Allstate; Amente. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(1) delineates the proper scope of discovery: + +In General. Parties may obtain discovery regard. tag any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the subject matter of the pending action. whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or the claim or defense of any other party, including the existence, description, Nonetheless, the discovery of certain kinds of information may cause material Injtuy:of an Inverable nature. This includes the "cat-out-of-the-bag" material that could be used to Injure another person or party outside the context of the litigation, material protected by privilege, trade secrets or work product. Discovery was never intended to be used es a tactical tool to harass, embarrass or annoy one's adversary. Rather, pretrial discovery was implemented to simplify the issues in case, to eliminate the elements of surprise, to encourage the settlement of cases, to avoid the cost of litigation, and to achieve abalanced search for the iruth to ensure afair trial. Elkins v. Sykes, 672 Sold 517 (Pla.1996). + +Here the petitioners argue that the information sought to be discovered regarding prostitution and their sexual activities was propounded solely to embarrass them and to invade their right to privacy. The petitioners also claim that this information is privileged under section 796.09 and Is not calculated to lead to evidence which would be admissible at trial. + +Section 796.09 provides a person with a civil cause of action for compensatory and punitive damages against anyone who coerces that paean into prostitution, who coerces that person to remain in prostitution, or who uses coercion to collect or receive any part of that person's earnings' derived from prostitution. In the come of litigation under this section, any transaction about which e plaintiff testifies or produces evidence does not subject the plaintiff to criminal prosecution or to any penalty or forfeiture. In addition, any testimony or evidence or any information produced by the plaintiff or wit- + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Clte as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 4 + +ness for the plaintiffs cannot be used against the plaintiffs or witness in any other ~~estigation~~ or proceeding, except one for perjury. + +Section 796.09(5) specifically provides that it is not a defense that the plaintiff was paid or otherwise compensated for prostitution, that the plaintiff had engaged in prostitution prior to any involvement with the defendant or that the plaintiff made no attempt to escape from the defendant. Section 796.09(6) provides that convictions for prostitution or prostitution-related offenses are *inadmissible* for the purpose of attacking the plaintiffs' credibility. + +This legislation was the result of the Florida Supreme Court Gender Bias Study Commission, which conducted an extensive investigation of prostitution in this state. The Commission's activities included interviews with law enforcement and corrections personnel, \*1079 judges, public defenders, prosecutors, drug rehabilitation counselors, social workers, medical personnel, prostitutes, clients and pimps. The Commission found prostitution to be prevalent and uniform throughout the state and law enforcement largely unable to deter it under prevailing social attitudes and judicial practices. The Commission further found that prostitutes are often victims of economic, physical, and psychological coercion, that most persons do not choose to become prostitutes, but do so to survive, and that ninety percent of street prostitutes, both adult and children, are controlled by pimps who use a variety of coercive methods to maintain this control. The Commission determined that clients and pimps are rarely prosecuted and, when prosecuted, receive light sentences; whereas prostitutes, who are mainly females, are frequently prosecuted and receive harsher treatment in the courts. The Commission recommended changes in the methods of intervention in prostitution from punitive to therapeutic, changes in the law to require more equal treatment by the courts of the prostitute in relation to the client and the pimp and to lessen the incentive to traffic in human flesh by giving the prostitute access to the judicial system without first having to be + +arrested. + +Under section 796.09, the petitioners' prior involvement in prostitution and their earnings from prostitution would be irrelevant. Hence discovery should not be permitted because such information would not be admissible at trial nor would it be reasonably calculated to lead to evidence ultimately admissible at trial. Even though the scope of discovery is generally quite broad, section 796.09 is designed to encourage prostitutes to sue their pimps. Thus the usually broad scope of discovery may be constricted so that prostitutes will not be embarrassed, harassed or hindered in their actions. + +[3] Had the petitioners brought their lawsuit against Ruzzo and The Boardroom only under section 796.09, evidence of petitioners' past prostitution, including with the Boardroom, and their earnings relating to such activities, may not have been discoverable. However, the petitioners filed a multi-count complaint for compensatory and punitive damages, alleging numerous causes of action against the respondents. These other causes carry no such protection from discovery. Since the information sought by discovery may be relevant or may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in one or more of these other causes of action or to determination of damages, we cannot conclude that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law in granting this discovery. See [REDACTED] v. TIB Bank of the Keys, 687 So.2d 895 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (by alleging fraud as well as breach of contract, purchaser placed at issue her reliance on venders' assertions, the veracity of financial documents she submitted to the vender, and the state of her mental health, including memory problems she was experiencing at the time of the alleged tortious conduct, thus deposition questions concerning her state of mind were relevant). + +Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. + +THOMPSON, J., concurs. +HARRIS, J., concurs specially with opinion. HARRIS, Judge, concurring specially: + +© 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 5 + +There is a temptation in cases such as this to inquire which, the pot or the kettle, is imbued with the darker hue. Indeed that may ultimately be the question uppermost in the jurors' minds. But the issue presently before us is simply whether the pot, in order to establish the parties' comparative complexion, may discover the historical condition and the inherent characteristics of the kettle. + +any part of that person's earnings derived from prostitution. + +The employees resist discovery of their past prostitution or their past or present earning experience on the basis of subparagraph 5 of section 796.09: + +(5) It does not constitute a defense to a complaint under this section that: + +- a) The plaintiff was paid or otherwise compensated for acts of prostitution; +- b) The plaintiff engaged in acts of prostitution prior to any involvement with the defendant ... + +But the question before us is not whether prior acts of prostitution (or the receipts of earnings therefrom) which might be revealed by answering the interrogatories could be used as a defense to the complaint, but rather whether evidence of such conduct or such earnings would be relevant in determining whether the employees were, in fact, "coerced" into prostitution, into remaining prostitutes, or into sharing the proceeds of their services with defendants. The relevancy of this information depends, of course, on what constitutes coercion. + +If we apply the definition of "coercion" which is commonly accepted, then the relevancy of the requested information is apparent and this appeal has no merit at all. Webster defines "coercion" as: (1) to restrain or dominate by force, (2) to compel an act or choice, or (3) to enforce or bring about by force or threat. In sexual battery cases, the legislature has adopted the common meaning of the word "coercion" and has even placed limits on it. It has provided that consent will not be recognized if submission is coerced by threats of force or violence if the victim reasonably believes the perpetrator or has the present ability to execute the threat.[m] Consent also will not be recognized if submission is coerced by a threat of retaliation against the victim or another if the victim reasonably believes that the perpetrator has the ability to execute the threat in the future.[m] And in sexual battery cases, the legislature has vitiated what might otherwise be con- + +The employees' primary cause of action is based on section 796.09(1), Florida Statutes, which provides: + +(1) A person has a cause of action for compensatory and punitive damages against: + +(a) A person who coerces that person into prostitution; + +(b) A person who coerces that person to remain in prostitution, or + +(c) A person who uses coercion to collect or receive + +© 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. + +703 So.2d 1076 703So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 (ate as: 703 Bold 1076) + +Metered as consensual If one exploits a known physical ce ar..1.mes. of the violin' to achieve his or her goal or takes advantage of one who is physically helpless or involuntarily intoxleated.no 'therefore, even in sexual battery cases, before coercion or exploitation will vitiate consent, the free will of the victim must be overcome by force or threat or some unfortunate circumstance suffered by the victim. + +> Flit Section 794.011(4)(b), Florida Star ate'. + +> P142. Section 794.011(4)(c), Florida Statutes. + +P143. Section 794.011(4)(a),(d),(e), and (0, Florida Statutes. + +But then we get to the definition of "coercion" contained In section 796.09(3): + +1,3) As used in tide section, the term "coercion" means any practice of dominion, restraint, or inducement for the purpose of or with the reasonably foreseeable effect of causing another person to engage in or remain in prostitution or to relinquish earnings derived from prostitution, and inchides, but is not limited to: 1,a) Physical force or threats of physical force. 3i) Physical or mental torture. ) Kidnapping. 91081(d) Blackmail. ) Extortion or claims of indebtedness. :0 Threats of legal complaint or report of delinquency. :g) Threat to interfere with parental rights or responsibilities, whether by judicial or administrative action or otherwise. t,h) Promise of legal benefit + +3) Promise of greater financial rewards! + +3) Promise of marriage. + +30Restraint of Speech or communications with others. + +) Exploitation of a condition of developmental disability, cognitive limitation. affective disorder, or substance dependency. + +em) Exploitation of victimization by sexual abuse. + +',n) Exploitation of pornographic performance. + +",e) Exploitation of human needs for food, shelter, safety, or affection + +The definition urged by the employees heroin Is the "promise of a greater financial reward." Whether the requested information is relevant to the issue of coercion in this case will depend on ivhat the legislature intended by subsection (1) in the meaning of "coercion." + +Iagree with Judge Altenbemd's thoughtful analysis In State v. Brigham, 694 Sold 793 (1997): + +there can be no dispute that the legislature's unusual definition of "percent" is not a common dictionary definition. This is perhaps an appropriate case in which to remind ourselves of Learned Hand's famous observation that a "mature and developed jurisprudence" does not "make a fortress out of the dictionary." + +But even so, one would expect some nexus between the commonly accepted meaning of i word and the definition of that word ascribed by the legislature. lf, for example, the legislature defined "canine" as including cats, although one might, Jurisprudentially speaking, expect to hear a meow emanate from a Great Dane, the courts should nevertheless closely examine the legislative history to see if that is really what the legislature Intended. The court in Young v. O'Keefe, 246 Iowa 1182, 69 N.W.26 534, 537(1955), stated this principle as follows: 'But + +703 So.2d 1076 + +703So.2d 1076,22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Pla. L. Weekly D169 + +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +before adefinition is construed so as to expand the meaning of e wal-knywn fluid tu uat onym the intention of the e to that effect must be clear." As Judge observed in Canon v. Roger Bohn, D.C., S 0 So.2d 914, SIB (Fla. 241 DCA 1991): + +It Is our primary duty to give effect to legislative intent and, if aliteral interpretation of a statute leads to unreasonable results, then wo should exercise our power to interpret reason and logic to it. + +Unfortunately, it is apparent that in enacting this legislation, the legislature has, without redefining the terms for the purposes of this legislation, often used terms with commonly accepted meanings for purposes at great variance from those commonly accepted meanings. + +In our case, the legislature did define the term for the purpose of the act. But because the term (coercion) as so defined can be interpreted two waycone consistent with the commonly accepted meaning and one at variance-we should not accept the "antonym" unless such legislative intent is clear. A free will decision, even if based on ahope of financial gain, is the opposite of a coerced decision. + +The employees urge that the mete promise of a greater reward brings them within the act. But if the mere promise of a greater reward is sufficient to establish coercion, then anyone who makes a voluntary and reasoned exercise of free will motivated by the hope of economic gain has been coerced. This definition removes the element of compulsion implicit in the commonly accepted meaning of coercion and substitutes therefor the mere desire for financial gain. The employees herein assert that since they were offered "a greater financial reward" for providing the services performed by them through defendants' establishment, they were coerced into their prostitution activities. This equates the giving of en opportunity to make adecision with the coercion of ova A•r;dren Rut eulnernnn m can clan mean \*1082 that the promise of 'a greater reward is coercion only if such promised reward is sufficient to overcome one's natural revulsion to selling one's body for money. If there Ls no such revulsion, there can be no coercion. Becoming a prostitute only because one likes the hours and wages or "because it beats the heck out of working fora living" simply should not meet the test of section 796.09(I). + +At oral argument herein, it was suggested without contradiction, that at least one of the employees has acollege degree and gave up awell-paying, legitimate Job in order to engage in this profession for the greater reward. Section 796.09 does not appear to be a general prostitute's relief act. It Is based on a reportby the Gender Bias Study Commission which recommended the equalization of treatment in relation to the prostitute, the client and the "pimp." It is based on the premise that prostitutes are generally victims of economic, physical, and psychological coercion and choose prostitution in order to survive. Punher, the Commission was concerned that 90percent of the street prostitutes are controlled by "pimps" who use avariety of coercive methods to maintain control. It seems clear that the legislature was not Intending to depart from the precepts of the commonly understood meaning of "coercion" and to redefine it to include both free will decisions and compelled decisions.. The interpretation urged by the employees seems at variance with the stated goal of the legislature and the Gender Bias Commission. + +Since there is no cause of action prOvided for one who makes areasoned and voluntary exercise of their free will to enter or continue late profession solely for financial rewards (assuming "coercion" Is given the definition more consistent with its commonly accepted meaning and assuming that my interpretation of legislative intent is =Yea), coercion becomes the critical issue In the trial of such action. The Interrogatories propounded by defendants am pear relevant to the issue of coercion. + +Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM + +e8 of 8\_ + +Document 54-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/02/2009 Pag Page a ot 8 + +703 So.2d 1076 + +703 Sold 1076,22 Fla. L. Weekly 1)2375, 23 Ma. L Weekly O169 + +case as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +This is acase of first impression based on arelatively new statute. as ultimata!, do.. h.610lativo hb tory of the new law suggests that the statute is designed to assist those who were forced to enter prostitution in order to keep aroof over their heads or food on their table. It does not appear to be Intended to aid those who voluntarily enter the pro- =on in order to drive aMercedes instead of a MI. The limited record before us indicates that even beginning employees of the defendants (those who do not have an established clientele) bring in \$700 a day and can keep 50% of their earnings. Based on afive-day work week, this would reflect an Income of 687,500 a year even with atwo week vacation. And the employees herein are not beginners. + +There is no indication that the legislature intended to legalize prostitution or to make it a respectable profession. It merely intended to place the prostitute on the same footing with the client and the "pimp." If a prostitute voluntarily makes the decision to participate, free from force, Intimidation, or disadvantageous circumstance, then he or she is on the same footing as the other participants and should be treated the same. + +Although it might well serve alegitimate public purpose to permit the cannibalistic demise of such enterprises (and I am not unsympathetic with this view), that does not appear to be the policy behind the current statute. Therefore, in cases where coercion is not present(and this may or may not be one), the court should continue its tradition of not interceding in civil conflicts involving transactions that are either Illegal or are against public policy. See War Novak IS? Fla. 703, 26 So.2d 884 (1946); v. Rainer. 462 So.2d 1157, 1160 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), rev. denied, 472 So.2d 1182 (Fla.1985) ("An action may lie for interference with an unenforceable contract and even perhaps a voidable contract No such cause of action lies for interference with acontract void as against public policy [another's representation of aclient obtained by a doctor/lawyer's illegal personal injury solicitation Page 8 + +in the hospital] and which makes one who is aparty theca as the .preirrni in du. instant ream MAN of acriminal act for entering into such an agree- meet") + +We are not asked in this proceeding to rule on the admissibility of the discovered information as evidence at the trial of this cause. We are to determine only if the information might lead to admissible evidence. Even \*1083 though we deny the Writ I suggest we certify the following question: + +Doss ONE, FREE PROM FORC8, DITEKDA-TION, OR DISADVANTAGEOUS CIRCUM-STANCE, WHO MAKES A REASONED DE-CISION TO BECOME OR REMAIN A PROSTI-TUTE OR TO SHARE 17333 PROCEEDS THEREOF BECAUSE OF A PROMISE OP A GRIMM FINANCIAL REWARD HAVE A CAUSE OP ACTION UNDER SECTION 796.09(1), FLORIDA STATUTES? • + +ON MOVOWS FOR REHEARING, FOR CLAW' PICA770N, FOR CERTIFICATION, AND FOR RE-HEARING EN BANC + +W. SHARP, Judge. Petitioners Batas and Shumate have! filed motions for rehearing, clarification and ratification. We deny the motions In Ml except for one regard. We delete the sentence In the last MI paragraph of the opinion which reads: 'These other causes of action carry no such protection from discovery." + +Motion for Clarification GRANTED as stated above Motion fur Rehearing and Certification DENIED. + +HARRIS and THOMPSON, IL, concur. + +Fla.App.5 Dist,1997. + +Bales v. Rutz\* 703So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Di69 + +END OF DOCUMENT + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM DCACI I COUNTY, FLORIDA + +A.C., + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129)0000,4B AI + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +1111 E. EPSTEIN, and + +Defendants. + +1 + +#### ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION To COMPEL RESPONSES'TO FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO PLAINTIFF AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS. & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES,: INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES + +THIS CAUSE carne before the Court on Defendant Epsteln's Motion To Compel Responses To First Request To Produce To Plaintiff And To Overrule Plaintiffs Objections, & For Defendants Expenses, Including Attorneys Fees and the Court having heard argument of counsel and being fully advised In these premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion Is hereby granted/ dented trea z4 /7 d 4/g -, &ALL, atOnn.1-2-04 Go. l learsoso,a sd:Z:/ ..to 4 2 2, AA.) 11114/1404 la\* tam .Atoiwack- \*i S., ick 0 afre • + +DONE AND ORDERED at Pa Beach Co rthouse, West Palm Beach, Florida, this day of + +A. arrlson udge + +1 + +Copies furnished: + +ROBERT D. CFUTTON, \* JR.. Era, and MICHAEL J. PIKE, 616 Not Rader Prts, Sults 400. West Palm Bosch, Ft 33401; JACK SCAROLA, ESQ., AND JACK P. ESQ., Seamy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, PA, 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., eat Palm Beech, FL 33409, end JACK A. GOtDBERGER, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, PA, One Cleadake Comm. Suite 1400, 250 Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beath, FL 33401 . %Sr) If + +105 \_12/6N o ee\ t)e l, \• + +21C EXHIBIT 1:- + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH +JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM +BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +A.C., + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129XXXXMB AI + +Plaintiff; + +v. + +JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, and [REDACTED] + +Defendants. + +ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO +INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR +DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion To +Compel Answers To Interrogatories And To Overrule Plaintiff's Objections, & For +Defendant's Expenses, Including Attorneys' Fees, and the Court having heard +argument of counsel and being fully advised in these premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion is hereby granted/ +~~denied~~ as to #5, 12 #18, denied as +to #2. Response to be severe w/in +10 days. + +DONE AND ORDERED at Palm Beach County Courthouse, West Palm +Beach, Florida, this 73 day of Feb 2009 + +![]()Copies furnished: +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ., and MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ., 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, +FL 33401; JACK SCAROLA, ESQ., AND JACK P. [REDACTED] ESQ., Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A., 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., West Palm Beach, FL 33409, and JACK A. +GOLDBERGER, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Wels, P.A., One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 +Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +CC: JEN6, DF +CC: Jeff Epstein +my file in +3/26/10 + +• + +No. + +# IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 50 2008CA020614XXXEMB AF; + +JANE DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and + +Defendants. + +©91;DY + +COURT REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS HAD BEFORE THE HONORABLE DIANA + +DATE: March 3, 2009 + +PLACE: Palm Beach County Courthouse 205 N. Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +> U.S. Legal'Support (561) 835-0220 EXHIBIT + +// + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +#### APPEARANCES: + +IIIIII LAW FIRM, P.A. 224 Datura Avenue Suite 900 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Counsel for Plaintiff BY: TSIDRO M. IIIIII, ESQUIRE + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Counsel for Defendant BY: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +2 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +3.7 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +that but I'd just like to do that. + +THE COURT: Right. And if you want to + +rtin Imon.mr ...... + +I'm the one that's questioning whether or not these need to be before one judge. You may have adifferent perspective than your colleagues who are prosecuting some of the cases. + +I understand the damages. I'm not saying consolidate. I'm saying transfer. It's not aconsolidation issue. Everybody gets that confused for some reason. The words are very different out of my mouth, your mouth and how they're written. + +So let me go ahead and take a gander at this. I did read it last night. I'm not sure that we need to get -- we need names? + +MR. CRITTON: Right. Well, here's what some of the issues are is that, as an example if / could approach the bench. + +THE COURT: Sure. + +MR. CRITTON: This is some of the information that we've obtained through discovery from some of the -- from at least in this instance, it would be this particular Jane Doe. + +THE COURT: You know who Jane Doe is I take + +U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +it? + +MR. CRITTON: Right. + +snm %..vun.u; IOU ALLOW wily way + +MR. CRITTON: Yes, correct. And so this particular lady has kept in part a diary• dnd she -- which appears to have started some time - this is not in any way significant -- but some time after she learned that she could file a lawsuit. I think she's also been to Oakwood Center some time after she learned she could file alawsuit and seek damages from Mr. Epstein. + +There's no history of this lady. beforehand other than. in some of the Oakwood records where she: was Baker Acted, she stkrted drinking beerat.16, she started Xanix at'16, started marijulna at 15, that she's sexually active: + +So how she has interacted -- she has a claim. for emotional damages, mental pain and anguish, psychiatric-type damages. How she's interacted with friends, with family, the events 'in her life, school, work, her interpersonal relationships both with men and let's -- we'll use an'example men here, but other individuals. She's saying that this event with Mr. Epstein, + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +2 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +this sexual assault and whatever occurred during these events is that -- has caused her damage. + +as the emotional, mental, psychiatric-type damages are completely subjective, I mean' separate and apart from any medical bills !that may be -- which are clearly intangible. So these are intangible damages. And the jury is instructed, you know, you advise the greater weight of the evidence, what's fair and reasonable under the circumstances. + +So what we would have is basically this young lady's testimony as to what she claims her damages are and what the circumstances are with her situation with Mr. Epstein. She claims on page 13, you know, I love this guy, I'm dating this guy Chris. On page 15 -- + +THE COURT: Is this part of a diary for treatment? + +MR. CRITTON: I have no idea what it is. It was just produced in response to discovery. And she apparently started in, I think this is December of '08. You know I took Jay Lyntenis' girl to the zoo, had an amazing day, I love her, i.e., the girl. We have so much fun. I want a + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +2 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +7.4 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +10 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +baby especially with him. Okay. So I know who this person is. We are all so open together, I + +LUVe anu uay anu nynn, weal tau a au ni Chris, who is another guy in her life. + +All right. This is circumstances where this young lady is saying, look, Jeffrey Epstein has ruined my life from a damage standpoint, okay. Let me depose other individuals with whom you've had a relationship. And what if it turns out -- as with some of these girls did -- is they had relationships or had escapades or circumstances with individuals, older men:similar to Mr. Epstein well before Mr. Epstein. + +And this girl, I don't know one way or the other, but let's assume she had a situation where she was assaulted or molested or raped, ' that all is going to affect her emotional and her mental pain and anguish and it will all factor into evaluating damages. + +You know, it's not something that I'm going to spread around. I'm happy to keep it, you know, within the confines of the discOvery of this case. But if she says every other relationship in my life has been perfect but Jeff Epstein has done this to me and it has affected + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +my ability to trust men and my sexual relationships with other men, which is pact of her interpersonal relate to 1M + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +THE COURT: When does your client allege that she had her first encounter with Mr. Epstein? + +At what age? + +THE COURT: Well, what year? + +MR. CRITTON: June of '03. + +MR. Mg June of '03, Judge. + +'MR. CRITTON: She claims from June of '03 through November of '04. + +MR. MEI She was I believe 16 at the beginning and ended at 17. She was aminor during all this time. + +THE COURT: June of '03 to now is six years. + +Let me hear from Mr. + +MR. : Judge, in the criminal case that was filed against Mr. Epstein, he would not have had a right to do this type of discoVery and I-- if I could hand up -- + +THE COURT: They wouldn't care about the women. + +MR. Right. Well, I mean - + +2 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +THE COURT: This is damages. There's no - they weren't seeking damages at the time. ; + +MD . fl{VA44•0 rvau WV WAVG •ave,a+.aayev in the complaint or in the answers to interrogatories that her ability to have a relationship with aman has been affected.by Mr. Epstein's conduct. + +We have alleged that she has been hospitalized for depression, anxiety but we have not alleged any damages concerning -- the,only reason this would be relevant is if we were making aclaim at her ability to have either sexual relations or to have emotional relations with men was effected by her experience with Mr. Epstein. + +So this damages' claim is just asmoke screen to attempt to get evidence to show the jury that this woman has had other consensual relationships with young men that are approximately her age what I would characterize as a slut defense. She had it coming to her because she engaged in other voluntarily consensual -- + +THE COURT: Mr. Critton wouldn't try the slut defense in my courtroom, I'm sure. + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +MR. 'I'll' Maybe not, but certainly that's the way this discovery is going. And, Judge, what + +THE COURT: What are the damages you think your client is seeking? + +MR. She is seeking emotional distress damages for depression and anxiety and she has been hospitalized at the Oakwood Center. Her friend -- she was on the phone to a friend who called the sheriff's office because she thought she was suicidal. The sheriffs responded. They Baker Acted her that day.and they took her eventually to the Oakwood Center. + +THE COURT: How do we know it's not intertwined with her rejection by three other men since Mr. Epstein? + +MR. : Well, even if it was related to her rejection by three other men -- you mean other men's rejection of her? + +THE COURT: Yeah. Well, how do you not know that? I mean you'can't do it until you do discovery. Has anybody attempted to review the records from Oakwood to find out what's going on? + +MR. CRITTON: It's like a one-time visit when she was Baker Acted and then there's some + +2 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +2D + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +other -- + +THE COURT: She didn't receive treatment? + +win nnymmr.m. nu- ..... + +that day and she's been back a couple of times. She's on medication. Again, I don't know:what or the extent but she's got -- her medical bills are de minimis. + +Again as an example, Judge, did 'the Court have an opportunity to look at the case that I also attached to the motion? Because there's a case that's almost on all fours with this which I attached to our motion which is called Belles versus Russo. + +THE COURT: Right. + +MR. CRITTON: It was a case where the plaintiff was sued -- the plaintiff sued ihe former owners of a house of prostitution. So that part is different, but within it there were a number of claims including a sexual assault claim and they sought emotional pain, humiliation and emotional distress. + +Within the complaint that was filed in this particular case, she is seeking severe emotional distress, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, past and future, compensatory + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +1 2 humiliation, loss of reputation, mental anguish, pain and suffering, the same type of damages. nabY irmnYY ..... kOS.AaW, + +4 THE COURT: How old is she now? + +5 MR. : She's 21 no\*. + +6 7 8 10 11. 12 13 3.4 15 16 17 18 MR. CRITTON: She's 21 now. What the Court said is, you know, if you'd only brought this claim under 796 evidence of past issues, it's not an issue. You can't use this defense for anything, but because you brought these other claims which include, you know, sexual assault and you're seeking damages for other causes of action since the information sought by discovery may be relevant or may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in one or more of the other causes of action or determination of damages, we cannot conclude the trial court parted from essential requirements of law in granting -- + +19 20 21 22 23 24 THE COURT: So in other words, she's not only seeking -- she's seeking current emotional damage as aresult of this relationship and you're trying to find out if she had prior relationships, that perhaps could be intertwined with it so that it's not just Mr. Epstein's -- + +25 MR. CRITTON: Right. A perfect example is + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +1 2 one of the cases that I have is there's a young lady who claims that she was molested in the past + +4 5 6 ana rapea, pretty significant issues, well in advance of her even meeting with Mr. Epstein. And they seem to play a large role in her psychiatric and psychological evaluation. + +7 8 9 10 11 12 13 We're going to come to the Court in this case as we have others and ask for a: psychological evaluation of this lady, and if she was raped or if she was molested or just she had a bad experience or some -- whether it was a young or old man assaulted her in some fashion, that may play a role in her damages and what -- + +14 15 16 17 18 THE COURT: What I'm going to allow for discovery purposes only not necessarily getting it in at the time trial are two years before her first encounter with Mr. Epstein and anything subsequent. + +19 20 21 22 23 MR. : Judge, I just wanted to say on the record because I forgot to mention it, there's also -- I did state an objection to the identity of people that are unrepresented' in this courtroom. They have rights too. So what I -- + +24 25 THE COURT: Well, my suggestion is that you send those people a letter and tell them that + +> U.B. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +2 + +you're going to disclose them and if they have a problem with it that they come to see me before you us:sca:se 1C. + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +10 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +So I'm going to give you 20 days to respond to this rather than the usual five and that will give you time to put these people on notice and if they want to come visit with me and have aJohn Doe, I'll have aJohn Doe heaking but, you know, this is her case. She's doing it. She's the one seeking damages, and he is entitled to be able to confront other individuals to find out information that may be relevant to the damages she's seeking or she can drop the' damages. That's her choice. If you seek. damages, you've got to do it -- if you could put that in an order so that we have atime for him to do this. + +Just fill out an order, hand it back up to me and I'll deal with it. + +(The proceedings were concluded;) + +U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +2 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH. + +I, Teresa Bell, Court Reporter, certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings and that the transcript is a true and complete record of my stenographic notes. + +I further certify that the proceedings were taken at the time and place shown herein and that all counsel and persons as hereinabove shown were present. + +I further certify that I am not a relative, employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor am I a relative or employee of any of the parties! attorney or counsel connected with the action, nor am I financially interested in the action. + +Dated this 11th day + +TERES BELL, Court Reporter + +and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. until such time as the Court decides whether the statutory damages pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 are available to a victim of an enumerated sexual offense on a per incident basis. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1 + +Counsel for the movant conferred via telephone with counsel for the Defendant and counsel for the Defendant is not in agreement with Plaintiff's Motion For Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From the Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. and Incorporated Memorandum of Law. + +/s/ Jack P. + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 20th day of July, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of electronic filing to all counsel of record on the attached service list. + +/..c/Jack P ■ + +**Jack Scarola** + +**Florida if:g No.: 169440** + +**Jack P.** + +**Florida Bar No.: 0547808** + +**Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A.** + +**2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard** + +**West Palm Beach, Florida 33409** + +**Phone: (561) 686-6300** + +**Fax: (561) 383-9424** + +**Attorneys for Plaintiff** + +# COUNSEL LIST + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 Phone: (561) 582-7600 Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Robert Critton, Esquire Burman Critton Luther & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33414 Phone: (561) 842-2820 Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 South Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 202-6360 Fax: (561) 828-0983 + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 013-CV-80/311-MARRA/JOHNSON + +C.M. A., + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +aillY EPSTEIN and 1= + +Defendants, + +# DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION, AND MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT; MOTION TO STRIKE, AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, ("EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned counsel, moves to dismiss Count I through XXXI of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint for failure to state a cause of action, and for more definite statement, or to strike, as specified herein. Rule 12(b)(6), (e) and (f), Fed.R.Civ.P. (2008); Local Gen. Rule 7.1 (S.D. Fla. 2008). In support of dismissal, Defendant states: + +The First Amended Complaint attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through XXX are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 — Civil Remedies for Personal Injuries; Count XXXI is entitled "Sexual Battery," and Count XXXII Is entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortious Assault only against Defendant, " Under the heading "Factual Allegations" of the First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff also references numerous federal and state criminal statutes, but fails to allege whether or not she is attempting to assert claims based on these statutes. (¶15, 1st Am. Comp.). + +![](_page_35_Picture_14.jpeg) + +Dismissal is required on the following grounds: (1) A review of the complaint allegations establishes that Plaintiff has failed to state the 30 causes of action under 18 U.S.C.A. 2255. As discussed more fully below herein, this statute does not allow for the Plaintiff to allege 30 separate causes of action; rather, the statute allows for the Plaintiff to attempt to assert one claim. In addition, Plaintiff has failed to allege a violation of the requisite predicate act as identified in 18 U.S.C. §2255 in order to state a cause of action. Thus, Counts I through XXX against EPSTEIN are required to be dismissed. Rule 12(b)(6), Fla.R.Civ.P. + +(2) Count XXXI — Sexual Battery is also required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action as Plaintiff has failed to allege the requisite elements of such claim. The count fails to sufficiently allege whether it is being brought pursuant to common or statutory law. Further, in Count XXXI, Plaintiff reincorporates in their entirety Counts I through XXX; such pleading is improper and requires dismissal under the applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +## Supporting Memorandum of Law I. Motion To Dismiss Standard + +As established by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. V. Twombly 127 S.Ct. 1955 (2007), a motion to dismiss should be granted if the plaintiff does not plead "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Id, at 1974. Although the complaint need not provide detailed factual allegations, the basis for relief in the complaint must state "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id. at 1965. Further, "Wactual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level ... on the + +assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact)." Id. + +On a motion to dismiss, the well pleaded allegations of plaintiff's complaint are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. M.T.V. v. DeKalb County Sch. Dist.. 446 F.3d 1153. 1156 (11th Cir.2006). + +Significantly, the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. V. Twomblv abrogated the often cited observation that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief." Id, (abrogating and quoting Conley v. 355 U.S. 41. 45-46. 78 S.Ct. 99, 102, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957)). The Supreme Court rejected the notion that "a wholly conclusory statement of claim (can] survive a motion to dismiss whenever the pleadings le[ave] open the possibility that a plaintiff might later establish some 'set of [undisclosed] facts' to support recovery." Id. As explained by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. supra at 1664-65: + +While a complaint attacked by a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations, ibid.\* Sanivan v. American Bd. of Psychiatry and Neurolooy, Inc., 40 F.3d 247, 251 (C.A.7 1994) a plaintiffs obligation to provide the "grounds" of his "entitle[ment] to relief" requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do, see Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265. 286, 106 S.Ct. 2932. 92 L.Ed.2d 209 (1986) (on a motion to dismiss, courts "are not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation"). Factual allegations musLIUmenoug1212, raise a right to relief above the speculative level, see 5 C. & A. ]=1, Fethalar'acti d Procedure § 1216, pp. 235-236 (3d ed.2004) (hereinafter &S) ("[T]he pleading must contain something more ... than ... a statement of facts that merely creates a suspicion [of] a legally cognizable right of action"), on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact), see, e.g., Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N U.S. 506, 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992. 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002); Neitzke v. 490 U.S. 319 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827. 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (" Rule 12(b)(6) does not countenance ... dismissals based on a judge's disbelief of a complaint's + +> factual allegations"); Scheuer v.—, 416 U.S. 232, 238. 94 S.Ct. 1683, 40L.Ed.2d 90 (1974) (a well-pleaded complaint may proceed even if it appears "that a recovery is very remote and unlikely"). + +In discussing Twombly, the Eleventh Circuit in v. Fla. International Univ. 495F.3d 1289, 1295 (11th Cir. 2007), noted - "The Supreme Court's most recent formulation of the pleading specificity standard is that 'stating such a claim requires a complaint with enough factual matter (taken as true) to suggest' the required element." In order to sufficiently allege the claim, the complaint is required to identify "facts that are suggestive enough to render [the element) plausible." MB 495 F.3d at 1296 (quoting Twombly, 127S.Ct. at 1965). + +# II. Standard for More Definite Statement Pleading, & Motion to Strike + +Pursuant to Rule 12(e), a party may move for more definite statement of a pleading to which a responsive pleading is allowed where the pleading "is so vague or ambiguous that the party cannot reasonably frame a response." The motion is required to point out the defects and the desired details. Id. As to the general rules and form of pleading, Rules 8 and 10, aclaim for relief must contain "a short plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief;" Rule 8(a)(3); and may contain alternative claims within a count or as many separate claims. Rule 10(d)(2) and (3). Pursuant to Rule 12(f) - Motion to Strike, "the court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter." + +# Counts I through XXX. 18 U.S.C. 42255, are required to be dismissed. + +A. 18 U.S.C. 62255 creates a single civil remedy or cause of action on behalf of a minor plaintiff against adefendant The civil remedy afforded is not on a"per violation" basis. + +Page 5 + +Contrary to Plaintiff's attempted assertion of 30 separate counts pursuant to 18 + +U.S.C.A. §2255 - Civil Remedy for Personal lnjunes, tins statute creates a single tederal cause of action or "civil remedy" for a minor victim of sexual, abuse, molestation and exploitation. Under the plain meaning of the statutory text, §2255 does not create separate causes of action on behalf of a minor against a defendant on a "per violation" basis. No where in the statutory text is there any reference to the civil remedy afforded by this statute as being on a "per violation" basis. 18 U.S.C. 2255(a) creates a civil remedy for "a minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation ... ." See v. Husband, 428 F.Supp.2d 432 (E.D. Va. 2006); v Husband 376 F.Supp.2d 603 (E.D. Va. 2006); Doe v. Liberatore, 478 F.Supp.2d 742, 754 (M.D. Pa. 2007); and the recent cases in front of this court on Defendant's Motions to Dismiss and For More Definite Statement — Doe No. 2 v. Epstein 2009 WL 383332 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009); Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 2009 WL 383330 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009); Doe No. 4 v. Epstein, 2009 WL 383286 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009); and Doe No. 5 v. Epstein, 2009 WL 383383 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009). + +There is no reported case supporting Plaintiff's tortured and nonsensical interpretation of §2255. In all of these cases (cited above), each of the Plaintiffs brought a single count or cause of action attempting to allege numerous violations of the "predicate acts" specifically identified in §2255. "18 U.S.C. §2255 gives victims of sexual conduct who are minors a private right of action." v. 492 + +F.Supp.2d 1186, 1188 (N.D. Cal. 2007), (emphasis added). 18 U.S.C.A. §2255 "merely + +provides a cause or action tor aamages in any appropriate united Mates uistrict Court.' Id, at 1189. See also Tilton v. Playboy Entertainment Group. Inc. 554 F.3d 1371 (11th Cir. Jan. 15, 2009)(District Court granted plaintiff "the minimum 'actual damages' prescribed by §2255(a)," wherein plaintiff alleged that defendants had violated three of the statutory predicate acts). + +In improperly attempting to bring 30 separate counts pursuant to §2255, Plaintiffs complaint alleges in part that "beginning in approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003, the Defendant coerced and enticed the impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct. These acts occurred, on average, one to three times per week from late may or early June of 2002 until August 2003. At a bare minimum these acts occurred twice a month from June 2002 until August of 2003." Am. Complaint, ¶13. Plaintiff then claims the identical damages in each of the 30 §2255 counts. See ¶¶25, 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193, and 199. As well, in Count XXXI, entitled "Sexual Battery," Plaintiff claims the identical "actual damages" in that she realleges and incorporates each and every of the 199 allegations in the 30 prior counts. + +It is well settled that in interpreting a statute, the court's inquiry begins with the plain and unambiguous language of the statutory text. CBS. Inc. v. Prime Time 24 Venture, 245 F.3d 1217 (11th Cir. 2001); U.S. v. Castroneves 2009 WL 528251, \*3 (S.D. Fla. 2009), citing Reeves v. Astrue 526 F.3d 732, 734 (11th Cir. 2008); and + +v. Husband, 378 F.Supp.2d at 610 ("When interpreting a statute, [a court's] inquiry begins with the text."). "The Court must first look to the plain meaning of the words, and scrutinize the statute's 'language, structure, and purpose.'" Id. In addition, in construing a statute, a court is to presume that the legislature said what it means and means what it said, and not add language or give some absurd or strained interpretation. As stated in CBS. Inc., supra at 1228 — "Those who ask courts to give effect to perceived legislative intent by interpreting statutory language contrary to its plain and unambiguous meaning are in effect asking courts to alter that language, and Ic]ourts have no authority to alter statutory language.... We cannot add to the terms of [the] provision what Congress left out.' Meat, 120 F.3d at 1187? See also Dodd v. U.S. 125 S.Ct. 2478 (2005); 73 Am.Jur.2d Statutes §124. + +Title 18 of the U.S.C. is entitled "Crimes and Criminal Procedure." §2255 is contained in "Part I. Crimes, Chap. 110. Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children." 18 U.S.C. §2255 (2003), is entitled ChM remedy for personal injuries, and provides: + +- (a) Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, Including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than \$50,000 in value. +- (b) Any action commenced under this section shall be barred unless the complaint Is filed within six years after the right of action first accrues or In the case of a person under a legal disability, not later than three years after the disability. + +Reading the entire statute in context, no where is there any language indicating that a minor plaintiff has a private right of action against a defendant "per violation? + +Under the statutory rules of construction, had the legislature intended to give a plaintiff + +multiple causes of action against a defendant on a per violation basis, the statute would have included such language. Had Congress wanted to create such a remedy as Plaintiff attempts to bring, it could have easily included language of "per violation" after the presumptive damages amount in subsection (a). By its own terms, the statute provides for the recovery of "actual damages the minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including attorney's fees? There is absolutely no language that allows for a plaintiff to multiply the specified or presumptive damages recoverable on a "per violation" basis. The Plaintiffs position on §2255 puts a strained interpretation with an absurd result. The absurdity of Plaintiffs position is further evidenced by Count )O00 - "Sexual Battery" where Plaintiff reincorporates each of the 30 counts and seeks the identical "actual damages." + +In supra, the defendants sought to dismiss plaintiffs' 18 U.S.C. §2255 action based on forum non conveniens. The Northern District of California Court, relying on the rules of statutory construction, rejected plaintiffs' argument that Congress had intended to abrogate the forum non conveniens doctrine in a §2255 action; the District Court noted that the statute does not contain a mandatory venue provision. Had Congress wanted to get rid of the forum non-conveniens doctrine, it would have said so in the statute. Also, in v. Husband, 428 F.Supp. 432; and 376 F.Supp.2d 603, the plaintiff invoked "the accompanying civil remedy for these criminal violations, stating that she has sustained and continues to sustain physical and mental damages, humiliation, and embarrassment as a result of Defendant's criminal acts? In other words, she + +brought a single cause of action, based on allegations of multiple violations of the §2255 predicate acts. Furthermore, the court retused to add a venue interpretation mat simply was not written into the statutory text. See other §2255 cases cited herein. + +For an example of a statute wherein the legislature included the language "for each violation" in assessing a "civil penalty,' see 18 U.S.C. §216, entitled "Penalties and injunctions," of Chapter 11 — "Bribery, Graft, and Conflict of Interests," also contained in Title 18 — "Crimes and Criminal Procedure." Subsection (b) of §216 gives the United States Attorney General the power to bring a "civil action ... against any person who engages in conduct constituting an offense under specified sections of the bribery, graft, and conflicts of interest statutes. The statute further provides in relevant part that "upon proof of such conduct by a preponderance of the evidence, such person shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than \$50,000 for each violation or the amount of compensation which the person received or offered for the prohibited conduct, which ever amount is greater." As noted, 18 U.S.C. §2255 does not include such language. + +Accordingly, Plaintiffs multiple counts brought pursuant to §2255 are required to be dismissed for failure to state multiple causes of action. + +# B. Also requiring dismissal Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege the reaulsite 4225\$ predicate acts. + +Also requiring dismissal of Plaintiffs purported §2255 claim(s) is Plaintiff's failure to sufficiently allege any violation of a requisite predicate act as specifically identified in subsection (a) of the statute quoted above. Relevant to Plaintiffs complaint, 18 U.S.C. 2255(a) creates a civil remedy for "a minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title + +and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation ... ." See cases cited above herein. Plaintiff has failed to plead any factual allegations whatsoever pertaining to violations of the specified 'predicate acts? In paragraph 15, Plaintiff makes reference by citation only to the following federal statutes — "18 U.S.C. §§2241, 2242, 2243, 2421, and 2423." See endnote following the Certificate of Service herein for the complete statutory text.' + +First, Plaintiff's reliance on 18 U.S.C. §2241 in its entirety as a predicate act is improper; it is a violation of subsection §2241(c) that is a designated predicate act. A reading of the text of the other referenced federal statutes shows that no where in Plaintiff's Amended Complaint are there any allegations setting forth the requisite elements of the cited predicate act. Further, any attempted reliance by Plaintiff on other federal or state statutes not specifically identified in 18 U.S.C. §2255 is improper and fails to state a cause of action. See ¶15 of Am. Complaint wherein Plaintiff references by citation additional Florida State statutes and thereafter incorporates such reference into her §2255 claim(s). See v. Husband, 376 F.Supp.2d, and 428 Supp.2d, supra, requiring allegations/evidence to establish predicate act under 18 U.S.C. §2255 in order to be afforded civil remedy. + +Plaintiff appears to be relying solely on an "agreement with the Federal Government" as a basis for imposing liability under 18 U.S.C. §2255. See ¶¶17, 18, and 19 of 1st Am. Complaint. There is nothing in Plaintiffs allegations that would allow for a §2255 claim to go forward without specifying the statutory predicate act and factual allegations pertaining to a violation of the requisite predicate act(s). Accordingly, under + +Page 11 + +the standard of pleading as established in Twombly, supra, Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege the requisite elements of a §2255 claim, thus requiring dismissal; tor failure to state a cause of action. + +## C. 18 U.S.C. 42265 does not allow for the recovery of punitive damages. Thus. Plaintiff's request for punitive damages under 42255 is required to be dismissed or stricken. + +In each of the improperly asserted Counts I through XXX, Plaintiff also seeks punitive damages. A plain reading of 18 U.S.C. §2255, quoted above herein, establishes that the statute does not allow for the recovery of punitive damages. Had Congress wanted to allow for such a recovery, it could have easily written such language into the damages provision of the statute. The legislative body chose not to write a punitive damages component into §2255 as it has done in other statutes affording civil remedies. In relevant part, §2255 reads - Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section ... of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than \$50,000 in value.° See discussion of rules of statutory construction in part III.A. herein. See subsection (f)(2) of 18 U.S.C. §2252A, entitled Certain activities relating to material constituting or containing child pornography, also contained in Chapter 110, Part I, Crimes, within which specific reference is made to 'compensatory and punitive damages" in setting forth the relief which may be afforded to a plaintiff in bringing a civil action under §2252A(f). + +Page 12 + +Accordingly, Plaintiffs claims for punitive damages are required to be dismissed with prejudice or stncken. + +D. In the alternative, pursuant to constitutional law principles of statutory interpretation. 18 U.S.C. 42255 Is required to be Interpreted as creating a single "civil remedy" or cause of action on behalf of a minor plaintiff against a defendant. The "civil remedy" afforded is not on a "per violation" basis. + +As set forth above, it is Defendant's position that the text of 18 U.S.C. §2255 does not allow a Plaintiff, such as C.M.A., to pursue the civil remedy and the damages afforded under the statute on a "per violation" basis. See part III.A. above. In the alternative, simply for the sake of argument, if one were to assume that the language of §2255 were vague or ambiguous, under the constitutional based protections of due process, judicial restraint, and the rule of lenity applied in construing a statute, Defendant's position as to the meaning of the statute would prevail over Plaintiffs view. See United States v. , 128 S.Ct. 2020, 2025 (2008). As summarized by the United States Supreme Court in.., supra, at 2025: + +... The rule of lenity requires ambiguous criminal laws to be interpreted in favor of the defendants subjected to them. See United States v. Gradwell, 243 U.S. 476, 485, 37 S.Ct. 407, 61 L.Ed. 857 (1917); McBoyle v. United States, 283 U.S. 25, 27, 51 S.Ct. 340, 75 L.Ed. 816 (1931); United States v. Bass, 404 U.S. 336, 347-349, 92 S.Ct. 515, 30 L.Ed.2d 488 (1971). This venerable rule not only vindicates the fundamental principle that no citizen should be held accountable for a violation of a statute whose commands are uncertain, or subjected to punishment that is not clearly prescribed. It also places the weight of inertia upon the party that can best induce Congress to speak more clearly and keeps courts from making criminal law in Congress's stead. ... + +In the Court was faced with the interpretation of the term "proceeds° in the federal money laundering statute, 18 U.S.C. §1956. "The federal money-laundering + +statute prohibits a number of activities involving criminal 'proceeds.'" Id, at 2023. Noting + +that the term "proceeds" was not defined in the statute, the Supreme Court stated the well settled principle that "when a term is undefined, we give it its ordinary meaning? at 2024. Under the ordinary meaning principle, the governments position was that proceeds meant "receipts," while the defendant's position was that proceeds meant "profits." The Supreme Court recognized that under either of the proffered "ordinary meanings," the provisions of the federal money-laundering statute were still coherent, not redundant, and the statute was not rendered "utterly absurd." Under such a situation, citing to a long line of cases and the established rule of lenity, "the tie must go to the defendant." Id, at 2025. See portion of Court's opinion quoted above. "Because the 'profits' definition of 'proceeds' is always more defendant friendly that the 'receipts' definition, the rule of lenity dictates that it should be adopted." Id. + +Plaintiff's position would subject Defendant EPSTEIN to a punishment that is not clearly prescribed — an unwritten multiplier of the "actual damages" or the presumptive damages. The rule of lenity requires that Defendant's interpretation of the remedy afforded under §2255 be adopted. + +In addition, under the Due Process Clause's basic principle of fair warning - + +... a criminal statute must give fair warning of the conduct that it makes a crime ... . As was said in United States v. Harriss 347 U.S. 612, 617, 74 S.Ct. 808, 812, 98 L.Ed. 989, + +The constitutional requirement of definiteness is violated by a criminal statute that fails to give a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that his contemplated conduct is forbidden by the statute. The underlying principle is that no man shall be held criminally responsible for conduct which he could not reasonably understand to be proscribed.' + +> Thus we have struck down a [state] criminal statute under the Due Process Clause where it was not 'sufficiently explicit to inform those who are subject to R what Lonouct on Uleir part will ten er them Raole lu ab permaitres. Connally v. General Const. Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391, 46 S.Ct. 128, 127, 70 L.Ed. 322. We have recognized in such cases that 'a statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application violates the first essential of due process of law,' ibid., and that 'No one may be required at peril of life, liberty or property to speculate as to the meaning of penal statutes. All are entitled to be informed as to what the State commands or forbids.' Lanzetta v. New Jersey, 306 U.S. 451, 453, 59 S.Ct. 618, 619, 83 L.Ed. 888. + +Thus, applying these well-entrenched constitutional principles of statutory interpretation and application, Plaintiffs 30 separate counts brought under 18 U.S.C. §2255 are required to be dismissed. + +IV. Count XXXI — "Sexual Battery" Is required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. In the alternative, Plaintiff should be required to more definitely state whether she Is attempting to allege a claim under Florida common or statutory law, or some federal law, and further allege the required elements and factual allegations. + +In Count XXXI, although entitled "Sexual Battery," Plaintiff improperly realleges and incorporates each and every allegation and each and every count (30) which she previously attempted to allege, resulting in a count that is 204 paragraphs long and includes reference to Federal and Florida statutory law, while also including language sounding in common law. The count is such a hodgepodge of legal allegations that Plaintiff fails to state a legally recognizable or viable cause of action. + +In ¶15, Plaintiff alleges that She acts referenced in paragraphs 9 through 14, committed by Defendant against the then minor Plaintiff, C.M.A., were committed in violation of numerous criminal State and Federal statutes ... , including but not limited to, those crimes designated in 18 U.S.C. §§2241, 2242, 2243, 2421, and 2423, criminal + +offenses outlined in Chapter 800 of the Federal Codes, as well as those designated in Plaintiff also alleges that Defendants "tortious commission of sexual battery upon C.M.A. were (sic) done willfully and maliciously? + +Supporting Defendant's position that Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action in Count XXXI, 18 U.S.C. §§2241(c), not §2241 in its entirety, as discussed above, is one of the predicate acts, along with 2242, 2243, 2421, and 2423, designated in the federal civil remedy statute — 18 U.S.C. §2255. Plaintiff attempted and failed to allege such a claim in the previous counts. Defendant can find no criminal offenses in any "Chapter 800 of the Federal Codes" which give rise to a civil cause of action. + +The same is true for Plaintiffs reference to the Florida Statutes. Not one of the statutes referenced creates a private cause of action or affords a civil remedy on behalf of the alleged victim of the criminal offense.' (Except for Florida Statute §39.01, all of the statutes referenced by Plaintiff are contained Title XLVI. Crimes of the Florida Statutes). The referenced criminal statutes set forth acts subject to criminal prosecution and the criminal penalties therefor, if proven. See generally Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Plaza Materials Corp. 908 So.2d 360, 374 (Fla. 2005)("not every statutory violation carries a civil remedy"). Miami Herald Pub. Co. v. Ferre, 636 F.Supp. 970 (S.D. Fla. 1985)(violation of Florida's criminal extortion statute does not give rise to civil cause of + +1 Florida Statutes §§796.03 — Procuring person under age 18 for prostitution; 796.04 — Forcing, compelling, or coercing another to become a prostitute; 796.045 (which did not become effective until Oct. 1, 2004) - Sex trafficking; penalties; 796.07 — Prohibiting prostitution, etc.; evidence; penalties; definitions; and §39.01, entitled "Definitions," is contained in Title V — Judicial Branch, Chapter 39 - "Proceedings relating to Children." \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745714/EFTA02745714.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745714/EFTA02745714.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d337249f206b863a7c6208421a4d707986a8f53d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745714/EFTA02745714.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,2689 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745714.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 50, + "chars": 92151, + "elapsed_seconds": 31.81, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_35_Picture_14.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Interrogatory No. 18", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 256.455, + 203.31 + ], + [ + 352.2234191894531, + 203.31 + ], + [ + 352.2234191894531, + 218.070556640625 + ], + [ + 256.455, + 218.070556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 185.115, + 328.05 + ], + [ + 427.41082763671875, + 328.05 + ], + [ + 427.41082763671875, + 344.4405822753906 + ], + [ + 185.115, + 344.4405822753906 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Interrogatory No. 23", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 257.07, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 350.6267395019531, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 350.6267395019531, + 378.8340759277344 + ], + [ + 257.07, + 378.8340759277344 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 185.115, + 515.16 + ], + [ + 425.7612609863281, + 515.16 + ], + [ + 425.7612609863281, + 529.2140808105469 + ], + [ + 185.115, + 529.2140808105469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 CertificatIon", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 257.07, + 414.72 + ], + [ + 355.3598327636719, + 414.72 + ], + [ + 355.3598327636719, + 428.3340759277344 + ], + [ + 257.07, + 428.3340759277344 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 269.985, + 575.91 + ], + [ + 376.21270751953125, + 575.91 + ], + [ + 376.21270751953125, + 589.9540710449219 + ], + [ + 269.985, + 589.9540710449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "School behavioral problems, received counseling prat to the bIoidnnt", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.765, + 170.1 + ], + [ + 475.395, + 170.1 + ], + [ + 475.395, + 187.7869873046875 + ], + [ + 129.765, + 187.7869873046875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 130.995, + 254.34 + ], + [ + 185.41717529296875, + 254.34 + ], + [ + 185.41717529296875, + 267.8704833984375 + ], + [ + 130.995, + 267.8704833984375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 134.685, + 382.32 + ], + [ + 188.19149780273438, + 382.32 + ], + [ + 188.19149780273438, + 395.3580322265625 + ], + [ + 134.685, + 395.3580322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 137.145, + 508.68 + ], + [ + 190.2102508544922, + 508.68 + ], + [ + 190.2102508544922, + 522.0854187011719 + ], + [ + 137.145, + 522.0854187011719 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.765, + 230.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 181.01336669921875, + 230.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 181.01336669921875, + 242.0567626953125 + ], + [ + 129.765, + 242.0567626953125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 132.84, + 426.87000000000006 + ], + [ + 184.85769653320312, + 426.87000000000006 + ], + [ + 184.85769653320312, + 438.54052734375 + ], + [ + 132.84, + 438.54052734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(3) Pretrial Procedure 307A e=s36.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 319.8, + 242.18999999999997 + ], + [ + 460.3714599609375, + 242.18999999999997 + ], + [ + 460.3714599609375, + 254.78765869140625 + ], + [ + 319.8, + 254.78765869140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 319.8, + 261.63 + ], + [ + 404.6700000000001, + 261.63 + ], + [ + 404.6700000000001, + 272.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 319.8, + 272.15999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(1) Pretrial Procedure 307A \u20ac:=>31", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.93, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 245.78907775878906, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 245.78907775878906, + 445.8951721191406 + ], + [ + 111.93, + 445.8951721191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307A Pretrial Procedure", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 112.545, + 453.6 + ], + [ + 197.86065673828125, + 453.6 + ], + [ + 197.86065673828125, + 463.32 + ], + [ + 112.545, + 463.32 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "[2) Pretrial Procedure 307A e=31", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 113.77499999999999, + 546.75 + ], + [ + 247.46115112304688, + 546.75 + ], + [ + 247.46115112304688, + 558.3161468505859 + ], + [ + 113.77499999999999, + 558.3161468505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307A Pretrial Procedure", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 114.39000000000001, + 566.1899999999999 + ], + [ + 200.1094512939453, + 566.1899999999999 + ], + [ + 200.1094512939453, + 576.7199999999999 + ], + [ + 114.39000000000001, + 576.7199999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Cases", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 319.8, + 311.04 + ], + [ + 344.7287902832031, + 311.04 + ], + [ + 344.7287902832031, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 319.8, + 319.95000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 407.13, + 342.63 + ], + [ + 416.97, + 342.63 + ], + [ + 416.97, + 352.35 + ], + [ + 407.13, + 352.35 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 407.13, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 420.0450000000001, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 420.0450000000001, + 409.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 407.13, + 409.04999999999995 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 407.13, + 482.76 + ], + [ + 424.96500000000003, + 482.76 + ], + [ + 424.96500000000003, + 492.48 + ], + [ + 407.13, + 492.48 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IV.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 407.13, + 557.28 + ], + [ + 426.195, + 557.28 + ], + [ + 426.195, + 567.81 + ], + [ + 407.13, + 567.81 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION To COMPEL RESPONSES'TO \nFIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO PLAINTIFF AND TO OVERRULE \nPLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS. & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES,: \nINCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.14999999999998, + 304.56 + ], + [ + 471.555419921875, + 304.56 + ], + [ + 471.555419921875, + 350.73 + ], + [ + 129.14999999999998, + 350.73 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 126.07499999999999, + 307.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 470.47499999999997, + 307.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 470.47499999999997, + 344.25 + ], + [ + 126.07499999999999, + 344.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT \nIN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.035, + 137.70000000000002 + ], + [ + 476.9251708984375, + 137.70000000000002 + ], + [ + 476.9251708984375, + 173.34 + ], + [ + 190.035, + 173.34 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "APPEARANCES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 142.68, + 160.38 + ], + [ + 232.46999999999997, + 160.38 + ], + [ + 232.46999999999997, + 171.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 142.68, + 171.71999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 32, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.46000000000004, + 132.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 396.06000000000006, + 132.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 396.06000000000006, + 143.37 + ], + [ + 248.46000000000004, + 143.37 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 33, + "polygon": [ + [ + 151.905, + 184.68 + ], + [ + 457.4502868652344, + 184.68 + ], + [ + 457.4502868652344, + 199.93359375 + ], + [ + 151.905, + 199.93359375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 33, + "polygon": [ + [ + 228.78000000000003, + 420.29888916015625 + ], + [ + 380.4582824707031, + 420.29888916015625 + ], + [ + 380.4582824707031, + 434.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 228.78000000000003, + 434.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 34, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.145, + 106.11000000000001 + ], + [ + 347.47499999999997, + 106.11000000000001 + ], + [ + 347.47499999999997, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 260.145, + 119.07 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 35, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.02499999999998, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 392.9794616699219, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 392.9794616699219, + 141.68701171875 + ], + [ + 206.02499999999998, + 141.68701171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST \nAMENDED COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION, \nAND MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT; MOTION TO STRIKE, \nAND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 35, + "polygon": [ + [ + 114.39000000000001, + 323.19 + ], + [ + 489.0281066894531, + 323.19 + ], + [ + 489.0281066894531, + 376.05706787109375 + ], + [ + 114.39000000000001, + 376.05706787109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Supporting Memorandum of Law \nI. Motion To Dismiss Standard", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 36, + "polygon": [ + [ + 220.17000000000002, + 490.540283203125 + ], + [ + 377.96087646484375, + 490.540283203125 + ], + [ + 377.96087646484375, + 515.9370422363281 + ], + [ + 220.17000000000002, + 515.9370422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Standard for More Definite Statement Pleading, & Motion to Strike", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 38, + "polygon": [ + [ + 138.375, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 466.0546875, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 466.0546875, + 382.32 + ], + [ + 138.375, + 382.32 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Counts I through XXX. 18 U.S.C. 42255, are required to be dismissed.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 38, + "polygon": [ + [ + 135.3, + 613.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 477.9696350097656, + 613.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 477.9696350097656, + 628.0336151123047 + ], + [ + 135.3, + 628.0336151123047 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Also requiring dismissal Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege \nthe reaulsite 4225$ predicate acts.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 43, + "polygon": [ + [ + 142.065, + 539.46 + ], + [ + 463.0202331542969, + 539.46 + ], + [ + 463.0202331542969, + 565.8170471191406 + ], + [ + 142.065, + 565.8170471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "C. 18 U.S.C. 42265 does not allow for the recovery of punitive damages. \nThus. Plaintiff's request for punitive damages under 42255 is required to be \ndismissed or stricken.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 45, + "polygon": [ + [ + 117.465, + 218.70000000000002 + ], + [ + 477.3429870605469, + 218.70000000000002 + ], + [ + 477.3429870605469, + 256.447021484375 + ], + [ + 117.465, + 256.447021484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 379 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 440 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 274 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 407 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 307 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 631 + ], + [ + "Line", + 87 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 784 + ], + [ + "Line", + 96 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 12 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 626 + ], + [ + "Line", + 83 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 896 + ], + [ + "Line", + 93 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 809 + ], + [ + "Line", + 94 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 363 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 135 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 160 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 312 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 35 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 312 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 109 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 115 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 280 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 299 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 111 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 115 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 316 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 115 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 292 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 92 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 155 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 101 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 38, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 390 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 39, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 40, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 41, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 42, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 43, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 44, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 45, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 46, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 47, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 48, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 76 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 49, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745714" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745714/_page_35_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745714/_page_35_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..962b66b02c34d63a1b27d4d66914e65ca846c5ec --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745714/_page_35_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:40ba4ffe5685799c19a2cd2cfc075dfd75f06d2b1150e9d559dc29b8e1510d75 +size 10892 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745764/EFTA02745764.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745764/EFTA02745764.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2d5468a782e98431659c6f5f455b4515efa49209 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745764/EFTA02745764.md @@ -0,0 +1,1665 @@ +action for damages); Mantooth v. Richards 557 So.2d 646 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), per cunam, (Dismissal of plaintiffs civil complaint affirmed where parental kidnapping statutes concerned only criminal violations and did not create a civil remedy). + +As well, the Count XXXI allegations make absolutely no reference to any viable common law cause of action; Defendant should not be required to guess or speculate as to the nature of Plaintiffs cause of action. Even if Defendant were to speculate as to the supposed cause of action, these causes of action (common law or otherwise) have not been sufficiently alleged. On its face, in accordance with the pleading requirements annunciated in Twombly, supra, Count XXXI is completely lacking as to any common law elements or the underlying factual allegations to support each element, and thus, Count )0O(1 is required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. + +In the alternative, Plaintiff should be required to more definitely state whether her claim is being brought pursuant to federal or Florida statutory law, specifically identify the statute it is being brought under, or whether her claim is being asserted under common law. Once Plaintiff identifies the nature of her claim, she is required to sufficiently allege in accordance with Twomblv, the requisite elements of the identified claim, along with sufficient factual allegations supporting the elements. + +### Conclusion + +Pursuant to applicable law, Counts I through XXXI of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint are required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. 18 U.S.C. does not allow for the Plaintiff C.M.A. to allege separate causes of action against + +Defendant EPSTEIN, but rather allows Plaintiff to attempt to assert a single civil remedy + +--- + +if she can prove a violation of any of the statutory enumerated predicate acts. Further, Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege a requisite predicate act under §2255. In addition, §2255 does not allow for recovery of punitive damages. Count XXXI is also subject to dismissal with prejudice for failure to state a cause of action, as Plaintiff has failed to allege a legally viable or recognizable cause of action. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court grant his motion to dismiss Counts I through XXXI, or alternative motion for more definite statement, and motion to strike. + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 2nd day of March, 2009: + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +Counsel for Defendants Jeffrey Epstein +and [REDACTED] + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +jsxasearcvlaw.com jphAsearcvlaw.com + +Co-Counsel for Plaintiff + +# ENDNOTE: + +ecf brucereinhartlaw. + +Counsel for Defendan + +Respectfully su tted, + +By: + +ROBERT D CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar o. 224162 + +rcritebcIcl w.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpikeAbciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +U.S.C.A. - Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure, Chapter 109A. Sexual Abuse + +# §2241. Aggravated Sexual Abuse. + +(c) With children.—Whoever crosses a State line with intent to engage in a sexual act with a person who has not attained the age of 12 years, or in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly engages In a sexual act with another person who has not attained the age of 12 years, or knowingly engages in a sexual act under the circumstances described in subsections (a) and (b) with another person who has attained the age of 12 years but has not + +attained the age of 16 years (and is at least 4 years younger than the person so engaging), or attempts to do so, shall be tined under tnis true and imprisoned tor not less than 30 years or for life. If the defendant has previously been convicted of another Federal offense under this subsection, or of a State offense that would have been an offense under either such provision had the offense occurred in a Federal prison, unless the death penalty is imposed, the defendant shall be sentenced to life in prison. + +# § 2242. Sexual abuse + +Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly— + +- (1) causes another person to engage in a sexual act by threatening or placing that other person in fear (other than by threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person will be subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping); or + - (2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is— + - (A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or +- (B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act; + +or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life. + +# § 2243. Sexual abuse of a minor orj♦ + +**(a) Of a minor.—Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly engages in a sexual act with another person who—** + +- **(1) has attained the age of 12 years but has not attained the age of 16 years; and** +- **(2) is at least four years younger than the person so engaging;** + +**or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both.** + +**(b) Of a .--Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly engages in a sexual act with another person who is--** + +(1) in official detention; and + +(2) under the custodial, supervisory, or disciplinary aumonty of me person so engaging; + +or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both. + +(c) Defenses.—(1) In a prosecution under subsection (a) of this section, it is a defense, which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant reasonably believed that the other person had attained the age of 16 years. + +(2) In a prosecution under this section, it is a defense, which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence, that the persons engaging in the sexual act were at that time married to each other. + +(d) State of mind proof requirement—In a prosecution under subsection (a) of this section, the Government need not prove that the defendant knew— + +- (1) the age of the other person engaging in the sexual act; or +- (2) that the requisite age difference existed between the persons so engaging. + +### Chapter 117 Transportation for Illegal Sexual Activity and Related Crimes § 2421. Transportation generally + +Whoever knowingly transports any individual in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, with intent that such individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. + +# § 2423. Transportation of minors + +(a) Transportation with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity: -A person who knowingly transports an individual who has not attained the age of 18 years in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any commonwealth, territory or possession of the United States, with intent that the individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 10 years or for life. + +(b) Travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct.—A person who travels in interstate commerce or travels into the United States, or a United States citizen or an alien admitted for permanent residence in the United States who travels in foreign commerce, for the purpose of engaging in any illicit sexual conduct with another person shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. + +(c) Engaging In illicit sexual conduct in foreign places.—Any United States citizen or alien admitted tor permanent residence who travels in toreign commerce, and engages in any illicit sexual conduct with another person shall be fined under this title or Imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. + +(d) Ancillary offenses.—Whoever, for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain, arranges, induces, procures, or facilitates the travel of a person knowing that such a person is traveling in interstate commerce or foreign commerce for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual conduct shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. + +(e) Attempt and conspiracy.—Whoever attempts or conspires to violate subsection (a), (b), (c), or (d) shall be punishable in the same manner as a completed violation of that subsection. + +(f) Definition.—As used in this section, the term "illicit sexual conduce means (1) a sexual act (as defined in section 2246) with a person under 18 years of age that would be in violation of chapter 109A if the sexual act occurred in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States; or (2) any commercial sex act (as defined in section 1591) with a person under 18 years of age. + +(g) Defense.—In a prosecution under this section based on illicit sexual conduct as defined in subsection (0(2), it is a defense, which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant reasonably believed that the person with whom the defendant engaged in the commercial sex act had attained the age of 18 years. + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO • 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRA/•tfHNRON + +C.MA., + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +f EPSTEIN and + +Defendants. + +### PLAINTIFF. C.M.A.'S. CONDITIONAL NOTICE OF INTENT TO EXCLUSIVELY RELY ON STATUTORY DAMAGES PROVIDED SY 18 U.S.C. §2255 + +C.MA., by and through her undersigned counsel, hereby files her Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255, and in support thereof states as follows: + +1. This Is an action to recover money damages against Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, for acts of sexual abuse and prostitution committed upon the thenminor, C.MA + +2. Plaintiff has plead thirty separate counts against EPSTEIN for separate Incidences of abuse committed by EPSTEIN against Plaintiff pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2265. 18 U.S.C. §2266, entitled "Civil remedy for personal Injuries", creates a private right of action for minor children who were the victim of certain enumerated sex offenses. 18 U.S.C. §2265 also creates a statutory floor for the amount of damages a + +![](_page_6_Picture_14.jpeg) + +victim can recover for a violation of same. Plaintiff has also alleged a single count of Sexual Battery against EPSTEIN as well. + +3. There presently exists between the Plaintiff and EPSTEIN a disagreement as to whether the statutory damage floor established in 18 U.S.C. §2255 is recoverable for each commission of an enumerated sex offense listed In 18 U.S.C. §2255, or whether the statutory damage floor can only be enforced once, regardless of how many times a defendant perpetrates an enumerated sex offense against a minor victim. + +4. This disagreement between the parties is properly the subject of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint For Failure to State a Cause of Action, and Motion For More Definite Statement; Motion to Strike, and Supporting Memorandum of Law (D.E. 47) which is currently pending before this Court. + +5. In the event that the Court rules that the Plaintiff is entitled to recover the statutory damages created by 18 U.S.C. §2255 for each violationl, Plaintiff will be pursuing only those statutory damages, and will not pursue damages available at common law. + +6. Should the Court rule however, that the statutory damage floor can only be applied once, Plaintiff will be pursuing any and all damages available to her, whether they be pursuant to statute or by common law. + +I The parties also disagree about the amount the statutory damage floor should be for this case. 18 U.S.C. §2265 was amended In 2006 to increase the floor from \$50,000 to \$160,000. The parties essentially disagree about which version of 18 U.S.C. §2265 should apply in this case. + +Respectfully submitted, + +Ls/.lark P + +JACK SCA LA + +Florida Bar No. 169440 + +JACK P. + +Florida Bat: 0547808 + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +Phone: (561) 686-6300 + +Fax: (501) 383-9456 + +Attorneys for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 5th, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document Is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached counsel list via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. + +/Wm\* P + +JACK SCA LA + +Florida Bar No. 169440 + +JACK P. + +Florida Bar 0547808 + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +Phone: (561) 686-6300 + +Fax: (561) 363-9456 + +Attorneys for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire +Atterbury, Goldberger & Welse, P.A. + +--- + +250 Australian Avenue S. +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 South Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561)-202-6360 +Fax: (561)-828-0983 + +Robert Critton, Esquire +Burman Critton Luttler & Coleman LLP +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 +Phone: (561)-842-2820 +Fax: (561)-844-6929 + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +Phone: (561)-582-7600 +Fax: (561)-588-8819 + +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80811-MARRall + +C.M. A., + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +Y EPSTEIN and + +Defendants, + +#### DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF C.M.A. TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE AND ANSWER DEFENDANT'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, AND TO OVERRULE OBJECTIONS, AND FOR AN AWARD OF DEFENDANT'S REASONABLE EXPENSES + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, moves this Court for an order compelling Plaintiff, C.M.A. to respond to Defendant's First Request To Produce and to answer Defendant's First Sot of Interrogatories, and to overrule her objections asserted in Plaintiffs Response To Defendant's First Request To Produce, dated February 13, 2009, and in Plaintiffs Notice of Serving Answers To Interrogatories, dated February 18, 2009. Defendant further seeks an award of his reasonable expenses, including expenses, associated with the making of this motion. Rule 37, Fed.R.CIv.P. (2008); Local Gen. Rules 7.1 and 26.1 H (S.D. Fla. 2008). In support of his motion, Defendant states: + +Prior to the filing of this motion, on April 1, 2009, Defendant's counsel communicated by telephone with Plaintiffs counsel In agood faith effort to resolve the discovery issues herein. This motion addresses those discovery Items which remain at + +![](_page_10_Picture_14.jpeg) + +issue. Also, rather than tile 2 separate motions to compel, Defendant filed one addressing the production requests and Interrogatories because the discovery Issues overlap. + +### Motion To Compel Responses to Production Requests Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, and 19, and Answers to Interrogatories Nos. 2, 18, arid 23. + +# Production Request No. 1 + +1. Individual and/or joint income tax returns and supporting documentation Including W-2 and 1099 forms for 2002-2007 and, as well as all records or documentation relative to the Plaintiffs earnings for the current year. + +# Response: + +Objection. Irrelevant, Immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible Information. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Plaintiffs tax returns and supporting documentation are relevant to Plaintiffs damages claims and, thus, discoverable. Plaintiff's complaint alleges in part that "beginning in approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003, the Defendant coerced and enticed the impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct." lot Am. Complaint, ¶13. (Plaintiff also refused to answer Interrogatory no. 2 which sought her employment history for the past ten years asserting the same general objection). + +Such information is both relevant and reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. It Is well settled that relevant Information is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(1), Fed.R.Clv.P.; + +Donahay v. Palm Beach Tours & trans., Inc., 242F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). + +Discoverability of such Information Is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery is broad. Conahav supra, at 686, and cases cited therein. "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which Is relevant to the claims or defense of any party involved in the pending action." Id. + +Plaintiff's tax returns, along with the requested supporting documentation, for the six year period, and documents relevant to her current earnings, aro relevant to Plaintiff's damages claims detailed below herein. Such information would show Plaintiff's employment and earning history, as well as provide evidence as to how Plaintiff has been able to function in her daily life before, during and after the alleged incidents. Was she self-sufficient? Was she able to get out of bed each morning and support herself? What type of Job did she hold? One's ability to earn aliving and be self-supporting has not only afinancial component, but also an emotional/psychological/mental component. + +C.M.A.'s First Amended Complaint.' attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through XXX are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 — Civil Remedies for Personal Injuries; Count XXXI Is entitled "Sexual Battery," and Count XXXII is entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortious Assault only against Defendant, + +In her answers to Interrogatory nos. 9 and 10, which seek information about C.M.A.'s damages claims, Plaintiff answered that: + +&#x27;Defendant's Motion To Dismiss directed to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint is pending. + +> I have bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and aevetopea arug problbms. Permanent injuries are psychological. (Interrog. No. 9). + +> I am claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a jury who will provide their own methods of computation In an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. §2255. (Interrog. No. 10). + +In her 1° Amended Complaint, relevant to her damages claims, Plaintiff alleges: + +C.MA., has in the past suffered, and will In the future suffer, physical Injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion .of her privacy and other damages ... . The then minor Plaintiff Incurred medical and psychological expanses ... and will in the future suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. The Plaintiff C.M.A. has suffered loss of income, a loss of the capacity to earn Income in the future, and a loss of capacity td enjoy life. These injuries are permanent In nature and the Plaintiff, C.M.A., will continue to suffer these losses in the future. + +(1° Am. Complaint, Counts I — XXX (18 U.S.C. §2255), ¶¶25, 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193; Count XXXI (Sexual Battery), ¶199.) + +In each of her "Wherefore" clauses, Plaintiff seeks 'compensatory damages of at least the minimum provided by law." 18 U.S.C. §2255, pursuant to which Plaintiff attempts to bring certain of her claims, allows for recovery of 'actual damages." See fn. 2 herein for applicable statutory text.2 + +As discussed above, the tax returns, and supporting documentation, will provide direct evidence as to Plaintiffs claimed damages. Such Information does not only go to + +(a) 2 Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2262A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue In any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the silt, Including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than \$50,000 in value. [Emphasis added.] + +C.M.A. v. Epstein, et el. + +Page 5 + +compensatory or actual damages or loss of Income/loss of capacity to earn Income type + +damages, but also her emotIonaUpsychological/mental health type damages. In the telephone communication between counsel for the respective parties, Plaintiffs counsel indicated that Plaintiff was not seeking loss of income/earning capacity type damages; (Defendant is not aware that there has been any formal withdrawal of such damages claimed); notwithstanding, the information sought Is still relevant and discoverable based on the additional damages claimed by Plaintiff. The time period will allow Defendant to compare how Plaintiff was doing in her life prior to, during, and after the alleged incident. Again, the type of jobs Plaintiff has been able to hold and her earnings and ability to support herself clearly have not only afinancial component, but an emotional/psychological/mental health component as well. Accordingly, Plaintiffs objection is required to be overruled, and Defendant Is entitled to the documents requested. + +# Production Request No, 2 + +2. All bills/expenses from any medical doctor, chiropractor, psychologists, psych' \* . mental health counselors (Including any members of the healing arts and related , i.e. drugs, prescriptions, etc.) you claim you Incurred as a result of the injuries wc are or may be the subject matter of this lawsuit + +### Response: + +None in our possession. These will be provided upon receipt. Discovery is ongoing. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Plaintiff makes no objection to the documents requested, but has failed to produce any documents responsive to this request Clearly, the documents are relevant and discoverable as they go to proof of Plaintiffs claimed injuries. In the April 1, 2009, + +telephone communication Plaintiff's counsel Indicated that Plaintiff was still not in + +possession of such documents. The First Request for Production was served on Plaintiff on January 16, 2009. In her answer to interrogatory no. 11, (Notice of Serving Answers, dated February 18, 2009, identifies a psychiatrist and a counselor/therapist from whom she claims she is receiving "treatment or examination for the injuries for which (she] seeks damages." See Exhibit A hereto for copy C.MA.'s answer to Interrogatory no. 11. Regarding the date of treatment from the psychiatrist — she asserts "I would defer to the Doctor's records." She claims the treatment from the counselor/therapist has been "since high school" and "ongoing." Defendant is entitled to the documents sought and Plaintiff is in control of and has the ability to obtain the requested medical bills and expenses she claims were incurred as result of her Injuries claimed in this action. Plaintiff should be required to immediately produce the requested documents to Defendant. + +### Production Request No. 4 + +4. All reports, evaluations, recommendations and/or analysis submitted by any expert which relate to or cover the incident which Is the subject matter of this lawsuit and/or any Injuries, damages or losses you allege wore caused by the incident. + +### Response: + +Any reports generated by any retained experts not yet disclosed are protected by the work product privilege. Notwithstanding same, none. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Plaintiff, through counsel, in the April 1, 2009, telephone communication, indicated that she does not have any responsive documents and stands by her objection. Rule 26 provides In relevant part — + +# 2) Disclosure of Expert Testimony. + +(A) In General. In addition to the disclosures required by Rule 26(aX1), a party must disclose to the other parties the identity of any witness It may use at trial. to present evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, 703, or 705. + +(B) Written Report. Unless otherwise stipulated or ordered by the court, this disclosure must be accompanied by a written report—prepared and signed by the witness-If the witness is one retained or specially employed to provide expert testimony In the case or one whose duties as the party's employee regularly Involve gMng expert testimony. The report must contain: + +(i) a complete statement of all opinions the witness will express and the basis and reasons for them; + +(II) the data or other Information considered by the witness In forming them; + +(ill) any exhibits that will be used to summarize or support them; + +(iv) the witness's qualifications, Including a list of all publications authored In the previous 10 years; + +(v) a list of all other cases in which, during the previous four years, the witness testified as an expert at trial or by deposition; and + +(vi) a statement of the compensation to be paid for the study and testimony In the case. + +(C) Time fo Disclose Expert Testimony. A party must make these disclosures at the times and In the sequence that the court orders. Absent a stipulation or a court order, the disclosures must be made: + +(I) at least 90 days before the date set for trial or for the case to be ready for trial; or + +(II) if the evidence is Intended solely to contradict or rebut evidence on the same subject matter Identified by another party under Rule 26(aX2XB), within 30 days after the other party's disclosure. + +• • • + +(e) Supplementing Disclosures and Responses. + +(1) In General. A party who has made a disclosure under Rule 26(a)—or who has responded to an Interrogatory, request for production, or request for admission—must supplement or correct its disclosure or response: + +(A) In a timely manner If the party learns that in some material respect the disclosure or response is Incomplete or incorrect, and if the additional or corrective + +> Information has not otherwise been made known to the other parties during the dtscuveiypu 14, + +(B) as ordered by the court + +(2) Expert Witness. For an expert whose report must be disclosed under Rule 26(a)(2)(B), the party's duty to supplement extends both to Information Included In the report and to Information given during the expert's deposition. Any additions or changes to this information must be disclosed by the time the party's pretrial disclosures under Rule 26(a)(3) are due. + +Accordingly, Defendant requests that should Plaintiff be in possession of any such reports, evaluations, recommendations and/or analysis prepared by an expert expected to testify at trial or deposition, or to be used by an expert expected to testify at trial or deposition, that such documents be produced as required by Rule 26, Fed.R.CIv.P. quoted above. + +### Production Request No. 5 + +5. All medical reports and/or records from doctors, physicians, (Including psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors), hospitals, drug or alcohol facilities or any other person or entity who has rendered treatment to or examined you for any reason after the Incident(s) which is the subject matter of this lawsuit. + +### Response: + +None in our possession. Discovery is ongoing. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Once again, Plaintiff should be required to immediately produce the requested documents. In support of ordering immediate production, Defendant reaileges and incorporates his 'Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement To Discovery" to request no. 5 above herein. + +## Interrogatory No. 2 + +2. List the names, business addresses, telephone and coil phone numbers, dates of employment, Immediate supervisor (name and address) and rates of pay regarding all employers, Including self-employment, for whom you have worked In the past 10 years; this Includes listing all sources of income you have received. Answer this question by year, I.e. 1998 - 2009. + +### Answer: + +Objection. Irrelevant, Immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence. + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Such Information is clearly relevant to the damages and injuries claimed by Plaintiff in this action. Plaintiffs complaint alleges in part that "beginning in approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003, the Defendant coerced and enticed the impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct." 1" Am. Complaint, 1113. (See discussion of Production Request no. 1 above herein). + +Such information is both relevant and reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. It Is well settled that relevant information is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery Is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(1), Fed.R.Clv.P.; Donahay v. Palm Beach Tours & trans.. Inc" 242F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Ha. 2007). Discoverability of such information is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Clv.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery is broad. Donahay, supra, at 686, and cases cited therein. Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claims or defense of any party involved In the pending action." Id. + +# Plaintiff's employment and earnings history prior to and after the alleged + +Incidents are relevant to her claimed damages and Injuries. Such Information would not only evidence Plaintiffs employment and earning history, but also provide evidence as to how Plaintiff has been able to function in her daily life before, during and after the alleged incidents. Was she self-sufficient? Was she able to get out of bed each morning and support herself? What type of Job did she hold? One's ability to earn a living and be self-supporting has not only afinancial component, but also an emotional/psychological/mental component. + +C.M.A.'s First Amended Complaint attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through XXX are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 - Civil Remedies for Personal injuries; Count XXXI is entitled "Sexual Battery," and Count XXXII is entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortlous Assault only against Defendant, + +in her answers to interrogatory nos. 9 and 10, which seek Information about C.M.A.'s damages claims, Plaintiff answered that: + +Ihave bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent Injuries are psychological. (Interrog. No. 9). + +Iam claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a Jury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. §2255. (Interrog. No. 10). + +In her 1si Amended Complaint, relevant to her damages claims, Plaintiff alleges: + +C.M.A., has in the past suffered, and will In the future suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy and other damages ... . The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses ... and will in the future suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. The Plaintiff C.M.A. has suffered loss of income, a + +> loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of capacity to enjoy life. These Injuries are permanent in nature and the Plaintiff, G.M.A., will continue to suffer these losses In the future. + +> (1st Am. Complaint, Counts I - XXX (18 U.S.C. §2255), 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193; Count XXXI (Sexual Battery), ¶199.) + +In each of her "Wherefore" clauses, Plaintiff seeks 'compensatory damages of at least the minimum provided by law." 18 U.S.C. §2255, pursuant to which Plaintiff attempts to bring certain of her claims, allows for recovery of "actual damages." See fn. 2 herein for applicable statutory text. + +As discussed above, C.M.A.'s employment and earnings history will provide direct evidence as to Plaintiffs claimed damages. Such Information does not only go to compensatory or actual damages or loss of income/loss of capacity to earn income type damages, but also her omotional/psychological/mental health type damages. In the telephone communication between counsel for the respective parties, Plaintiff's counsel indicated that Plaintiff was not seeking loss of income/earning capacity type damages; (Defendant Is not aware that there has been any formal withdrawal of such damages claimed); notwithstanding, the Information sought Is still relevant and discoverable based on the additional damages claimed by Plaintiff. The time period will allow Defendant to compare how Plaintiff was doing In her life prior to, during, and after the alleged Incident. Again, the type of jobs Plaintiff has been able to hold and her earnings and ability to support herself clearly have not only afinancial component, but an emotionallpsychological/mental health component as well. Accordingly, Plaintiff's + +objection is required to be overruled, and Defendant is entitled to the Informs(ion sought In the Interrogatory. + +# Interrogatory No. 18 + +18. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of anmates, excluding Mr. Epstein, with whom you have had sexual activity since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual activity, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. + +### Answer. + +Objection. Relevance and overbroad. + +# Lanai Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Plaintiffs only objection is relevancy and overbroad, without any factqal support or showing as required by Rule 26(c) and Local Gen. Rule 26.1 H (S.D. Fla. 2008). Nowhere does C.M.A. explain how such interrogatory is overbroad. + +It is well settled that relevant information Is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery Is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P.; Donahav v. Palm Beach Tours & trans.. Inc. 242 F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). Discoverability of en alleged victim's/plaintiff's sexual conduct or activity In civil cases is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery is broad. Donahav, supra, at 886, and cases cited therein. Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claims or defense of any party Involved in the pending action .° Id. + +In accordance with Rule 26, the discovery sought regarding Plaintiffs sexual activity with males and the nature thereof, including whether she received any + +compensation or consideration therefore, In Interrogatory no. 18, are all relevant to + +Plaintiffs damages claims and the type of Injury she claims she has, suffered. Defendant has no other means of obtaining such information and obtal,ning such Information through Plaintiff will better protect the confidentiality until the Court can make a determination in accordance with the procedures under Rule 412(c) whether such information will be admissible at trial. See Rule 412(c), Fed.R.Civ.P. Defendant will agree to an order keeping the confidentiality of the information obtained through discovery. + +The evidence sought is relevant based on the facts and theories of this action. C.M.A.'s First Amended Complaint attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through XXX are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 — Civil Remedies for Personal Injuries; Count XXXI is entitled "Sexual Battery," and\_ Count XXX1LIs entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortious Assault only against Defendant, + +In her answers to interrogatory nos. 9 and 10, which seek Information about C.M.A.'s damages claims, Plaintiff answered that: + +Ihave bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent Injuries are psychological. (Interrog. No. 9). + +Iam claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of fife. These damages will be evaluated by a jury who will provide their own methods of computation In an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. §2255. (Interrog. No. 10). + +In her lot Amended Complaint, relevant to her damages claims, Plaintiff alleges: + +C.M.A., has In the past suffered, and will in the future suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her + +> privacy and other damages ... . The then minor Plaintiff Incurred medical and tai medical and psychological expenses. The Plaintiff C.M.A. has suffered loss of Income, a loss of the capacity to earn income In the future, and a loss of capacity to enjoy life. Those injuries are permanent in nature and the Plaintiff, C.M.A., will continue to suffer these losses in the future. + +> (13` Am. Complaint, Counts I — XXX (18 U.S.C. §2255), ¶¶25, 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193; Count XXXI (Sexual Battery), ¶199.) + +In each of her 'Wherefore" clauses, Plaintiff seeks "compensatory damages of at least the minimum provided by law." 18 U.S.C. §2255, pursuant to which Plaintiff attempts to bring certain of her claims, allows for recovery of "actual damages? See fn. 2 herein for applicable statutory text. + +C.M.A. also alleges that Defendant's conduct was 'sexual assault and child abuse of a then minor." ¶2. She alleges that "beginning in approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003. the. Defendant coerced and enticed the Impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct" ii13. + +These acts included, but were not limited to, fondling and inappropriate and Illegal sexual touching of the then minor Plaintiff, sexual misconduct and masturbation of the Defendant In the presence of the then minor Plaintiff, soliciting and enticing the then minor Plaintiff to engage In sexual acts with another female in EPSTEIN's presence, and encouraging the then minor Plaintiff to become involved In prostitution; Defendant committed numerous criminal sexual offenses against the then minor Plaintiff including, but not limited to, sexual battery, solicitation or prostitution, procurement of a minor for the purpose of prostitution, and lewd and lascivious assaults upon the person of the then minor plaintiff. (1st Am. Complaint ¶13). + +The Information sought Is clearly relevant to the Injuries and damages claimed by Plaintiff. Tho nature of her claimed Injuries and damages are such that Defendant is + +Page 15 + +entitled to evidence which would show the nature of her relationship with males, + +whether she has suffered or engaged In other acts of sexual misconduct or activity as alleged In her complaint, and whether she suffered injury and damages as a result of the other claimed sexual misconduct or activity. See United States v. Bear Stops, 997 F.2d 451 (81h Cir. 1993)(Defendant charged with sexual abuse of six year old boy was entitled to admission of evidence relating to victim's sexual assault by 3 older boys to establish alternative explanation for why victim exhibited behavioral manifestations of sexually abused child.). + +In further support of Defendant's motion, a copy of Balas v. Ruzzo 703 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 5fh DCA 1997), rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1998), is attached hereto as Exhibit B as it is on point to the discovery Issues in this action, and the relevancy and discoverability of Plaintiffs history of sexual activity and any payment, therefore. See interrogatories 8, 22 and 30 propounded In the Bales case and footnote 1 herein. 3 Additionally and significantly, in other pending state court civil actions against Defendant EPSTEIN attempting to assert similar claims and damages, the Circuit Court Judges have already ruled that such information is discoverable as it Is relevant to the damages claims of Plaintiff. See Composite Exhibits C and D hereto. Composite Exhibit C are the Orders, dated February 23, 2009, entered in the case of A.C. v. Epstein, and , Case No. 5020080A025129 MB AI, 15th Judicial Circuit, In and For Palm Beach County, State of Florida, which granted Defendant's motion to compel therein directed + +3 In Bales v. Ruzzo supra, the Plaintiffs alleged a multicount complaint including claims for "coercion of prostitution" pursuant to §796.09, Ha. Stat.; for battery for the unwanted and offensive touching of petitioners' bodies; false imprisonment for physically confining the petitioners against their will; invasion of privacy; and intentional infliction of emotional distress. + +to discovery identical to Interrogatory no. 18 above. (In the A.C. case, the Plaintiff + +answered without objection Interrogatories identical to nos. 19, 20, and 21 herein.) + +Composite Exhibit D is a portion the transcript from a March 3, 2009 hearing on + +Defendant's motion to compel discovery in the case of Jane Doe ii v. Epstein, and , Case No. 502008CA020614 MB AF, 15th Judicial Circuit Court, In and For Palm Beach County, Stato of Florida. Again, the Circuit Court Judge determined that the information sought is relevant to the Issue of damages and, thus, discoverable. + +Accordingly, Plaintiffs objections are required to be overruled and Defendant is entitled to the discovery sought. + +### Interrogatory No. 23 + +23. State the names, addresses, ages, phone numbers and dates of all females whom you claim were brought by you to Mr. Epstein's home to give him a massage or for any other reason. As to each female, state the amount of money you claim you were paid to bring each female. + +Answer: + +A.L. Age: 22 West Palm Beach, FL I was paid \$100.00 + +# Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery + +Counsel for the respective parties also discussed this interrogatory In an effort to come to a resolution. Plaintiff does not object to the discovery requested. Plaintiffs counsel indicated that he had a "problem" disclosing the Identity of A.L. to the extent she was a minor at the time. Defendant would agree to an order protecting public disclosure of the true Identity of A.L. If she were Indeed a minor at the time; however, as part of the order, Plaintiff should also be required to provide Defendant with the full + +name of A.L. so that Defendant may conduct meaningful discovery. It is Plaintiff who claims she brought A.L. to Epstein's home as part of the alleged "scheme: In addition, Plaintiff failed to provide any date or dates as to when she brought A.L. to Epstein's home. Plaintiff's counsel indicated they would attempt to provide this Information. + +Accordingly, in granting Defendant's motion to compel discovery, with respect t this interrogatory, Plaintiff should be required to provide the full name of A.L. (which Defendant agrees to keep confidential at this time), the date or dates which she brought A.L. or any female to Epstein's home, and how much she was allegedly paid each time. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court grant Defendant's motion to compel and award Defendant's reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, associated with this motion. + +# Rule 7.1 Certification + +I hereby certify that counsel for the respective parties communicated by telephone in a good faith effort to resolve the discovery issues prior to the filing of this motion to compel. Some of the issues were resolved or in the prooess of being resolved. + +> Robert D. C Attornoy for °fondant Epstein riii n, Jr. + +# Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document Is being served this day on all counsel of re entitled on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on thi ay of April 2009 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. WiMIS, Y.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +yeelrhw4hotmail,corn + +Jack Scalgla, Esq. Jack Pat Esq. Seamy Denney Scarola Barnhart Shipley, PA. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 661-383-9424 ISxasearcvlaw.corn Iphasearcvlaw.com Co-Counsel for Plaintiff + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atteibtai y Gukiberger & Webs, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South , Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 5614594300 Fax: 561-835-8891 bgesodthellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. & Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf(5).brucerelnhartlaw Counsel for Defenda + +Respectfully subd , + +By: ROBERT D. ITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar •. 224162 corn MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #817296 molketalbciciaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Fiagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: OS.CV-SOSli-CrV-sfAR.RAIMM Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Intarogatories + +# School behavioral problems, received counseling prior to the In~IJunt + +- 8. Did you consume any alcoholic beverages or take any drugs or medications within 12 hours before the time of each incident(s) described in the complaidt? If so, state the type and amount of alcoholic beverages, drugs, or mediCation which were consumed, and when (dates) and where you consumed them. + - • + +### ANSWER + +- 1. On one occasion I had taken "Morning Glory" and "Angel Trurripets". I do not recall the date. +- 2. On another occasion I used cocaine powder. I do not recall the:date. +- 9. Describe each Injury (physical, emotional, mental) for which you are claiming damages in this case, specifying the part of your body that was injured, the nature of the Injury and as to any Injuries you contend are permanent, the effects on you that you claim are permanent. + +### ANSWER + +Ihave bipolar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent Injuries are psychological. + +- 10. Please state each item of damage that you claim, and include in your answer the count to which the Item of damages relates; the factual basis for each Item of damages; and an explanation of how you computed each item of damages, Including any mathematical formula used. + +### ANSWER + +Iam claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by ajury who will provide their own methods of computation In an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. § 2255; + +Discovery Is ongoing. + +- 11. List the names and business addresses of each physician (Including psychiatrist, psychologist, chiropractor or medical provider) who has treated or examined you, + +13 IA /r EXHIBIT n C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et al. Case No.: 08-CV-S01311-CIV-Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's F'vst + +> and each medical facility where you have receNed any tieuhnent or exann for the Injuries for which you seek damages In this case; and state as to each the date of treatment or examination and the injury or condition for which you were examined or treated. + +#### ANSWER + +Dr. Serge Thys (Psychiatrist) Date: I do not recall the date. I would defer 2151451h Street to the Doctor's records. West Palm Beach, FL 33407 + +Susan Pope (Counselor/Therapist) Date: Since high school. Ongoing. Parent Child Center 2001 W. Blue Heron Boulevard + +- 12. List the names and business addresses of all other physicians, medical facilities, rehab facilities (drug, alcohol or psychiatric) or other health care' providers including psychiatrist, psychologist, mental health counselor and chiropractors by whom or at which you have been examined or treated In the past 10 years; and state as to each the dates of examination or treatment and the condition or injury for which you were examined or treated. + +#### ANSWER + +Good Samaritan Hospital (3/12/04, 3125/08) Child Birth 1309 N Flagier Dr West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +St. Mary's Hospital (4/07) DNC 901 45th Street West Palm Beach, FL 33407 + +Gloria C. Hakkarainen, MD Ob/Gyn 2925 10th Avenue North, Suite 306 Palm Springs, FL. 33461 + +Theodore Ritota, DDS Dentist + +Pa 1 of B ' + +Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 54-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/02/2009 PDuge 1 of 8 + +Wax + +703 So.2d 1076 + +703So.2d 1076,22 Fla L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla L. Weekly D169 + +(Cite ass 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 1 + +District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District Kimberly GALAS and Teresa Shumate, Petitioners, v. Marjorie A. RUZZO, and Exec, Inc., etc., Respondents. No. 97-82. + +Oct. 10, 1997. + +As Modified on Grant of Clarification Jan. 2, 1998., rev . dev,ted ;no t %.,-z ek 2516 t. . + +Plaintiffs brought action against alleged house of Wea prostitution for, inter ells, coercion ormiastitution. The Circuit Court, BrOVard County, NM Pound, granted in part defendants' motion to compel discovery. Plaintiffs filed petition for writ of certiorari. The District Court of Appeal, W. Sharp, J., held that evidence of plaintiffs' past prostitution and their revenues relating to such activities was discoverable. + +Petition denied. + +Harris, J., concurred specially and filed opinion. + +West Headnotes + +# U) Pretrial Procedure 307A e=i.31. + +#### MA Pretrial Procedure + +### 307A11 Depositions and Discovery + +#### 307AII(A) Discovery In General + +307Ak31 k. Relevancy and Materiality. + +Most Cited Cases Discovery in civil cases must be relevant to subject matter of case and must be admissible or reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. West's F.S.A. RCP Rule 1.280(b)(1). + +### (2) Pretrial Procedure 307A aZ=i31 + +#### 307A Pretrial Procedure + +### 307A11 Depositions and Discovery + +#### 307A11(A) Discovery in General + +### 307Ak31 k. Relevancy and Materiality. + +Most Cited Cases Party may be permitted to discover:evidence that would be inadmissible at trial, if It Would lead to discovery of relevant evidence. Weals F.S.A. RCP Rule 1.280(bX1). + +### (3] Pretrial Procedure 307A €36..1. + +#### 307A Pretrial Procedure + +#### 307AII Depositions and Discovery + +#### 307AII(A) Discovery in General + +307A\$36 Particular Subjects of Disclos - tine + +307Ak36.1 k. In General. Most Cited + +Cates Evidence of plaintiffs' past prostitution and their revenues relating to such activities, including activities with alleged house of prostitution against which they had filed suit, was discoverable, where plaintiffs brought action not only for coercion of prostitution, but also for battery, false imprisonment, invasion of privacy, intentional Infliction of emotional distress, violation of their civil rights, and racketeering. Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, § 40302, 142 U.S.C.A. § 13981; West's P.S.A. ¢{ 772.014, 796.09: West's P.S.A. RCP Rule 1). \*1076 Richard E. Heather Fisher USsay, of Spriggs & Tallahassee, for Petitioners. + +Mark S. Peters of Arnari, Thedac & Eisenmenger, P.A., Cocoa, for Respondents. + +W. SHARP, Judge. + +Bales and Shumate petition this court for awrit of certiorari to review certain portions of the lower court's order which granted, in park, amotion to compel discovery filed by respondents Rurzo and Exec, Inc. Petitioners argue that those portions depart from the essential requirements of law and will cause them irreparable harm because they will be + +EXHIBIT It compelled to disclose intimate details of their sexual history. We.A—alizia 'o is m, tie" ' ,all nfr.ekrnxd + +Bales and Shumate filed suit against Ruuo and Exec, Inc., doing business as "The Boardroom." According to Batas and Shumate, The Boardroom operates ostensibly as "1077 aleisure spa but actually Is ahouse of prostitution. Bales worked at The Boardroom from December 1993 until February 1996; Shumate worked there from October 1992 until March 1996. Runts, the sole officer and shareholder of Exec, Inc., collected about fifty to sixty percent of each employees earnings from performing sexual acts. + +According to Bales and Shumate, Ruzzo exerted mental and emotional control over her employees and thus she was able to exploit them as prostitutes. Ruzzo required her employees to pay her substantial sums of money to attend "metaphysical workshops" conducted by Russo or persons associated with her. At the work place, the employees were required to participate in religious and quasi-religious "circles," rituals and incantations. These practices were allegedly designed to break down the personof the women who worked for Ruzzo and to dependency and loyalty to herself. At one time when the earnings of anew employee were missing and believed to be stolen, Russo required that the petitioners be strip searched and body cavity searched. Ruzzo caused the petitioners to believe their continued employment was dependent on their submission to these searches and that they might be arrested on felony charges If they refused to submit to the searches. + +Bales and Shumate% second amended complaint against Russo contains seven counts. Count I is an action for coercion of prostitution pursuant to section 796.09, Florida Statutes. Petitioners allege the requirement that they perform sexual acts to retain their employment constitutes inducement end coercion to engage in prostitution. Count II is aclaim for battery for the unwanted and offensive touching of the petitioners' bodies. Count 111 Is aclaim for false imprisonment for physically confining the petitioners against their will. Count IV alleges that respondent? actions constituted an invasion of petitioners' privacy. Count V Is a claim ror the intentional infliction of emotional distress.,Count VI alleges acivil rights action-that respondents have violated petitioners' right to be free from crimes of violence motivated by gender within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. section 13981. Finally, count VII seeks civil remedies for criminal practices rir racketeering pursuant to section 772.104, Florida:Statutes. The petitioners claim that they suffered emotional pain, anguish, humiliation. Insult, Indignity, loss of selfesteem, inconvenience. hurt and emotional distress. They seek an award of general and punitive damages, among other relief. + +The discovery to which the petitioners are being required to respond Is as follows: + +I. + +Interrogatory Sr. Please advise how long have you been engaged in prostitution.... + +rt. + +Interrogatory 22: State with specificity the manner in which the acts as desoribed In your Complaint have materially affected hoW you Interact with your husband, boyfriend. fiancee' [sic) or any other individual of the opposite sex. + +Request for Production 30: A copy of any photographs, movies or videotapes in which you performed sexual acts and/or simulated sexual acts in exchange for money or other consideration. + +IV. + +Interrogatory 16: Please list the names, addresses, telephone numbers and rates of pay for all employers for which you worked including the + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 3 + +nature of the work, during the five years immediately preceding the date of employment with the Boardroom and from the date of your termination with the Boardroom to the present, providing the names of your immediate supervisors at each place of employment and the reason for your leaving each place of employment. + +V. + +**Interrogatory 26:** Please state your total income while employed at the Boardroom, and state the source of that income including any income from other employment or \*1078 income earned from prostitution other than at the Boardroom. + +VI. + +**Request for Production 34:** Business records from any selfemployment or owned business ventures in the last 5 years, including any records or list of customers, "special customer lists" or "sugar daddy's list." + +[1][2] Discovery in civil cases must be relevant to the subject matter of the case and must be admissible or reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. *See Allstate Insurance Co. v. Langston*, 653 So.2d 91 (Fla.1995); *Amente v. ██████*, 653 So.2d 1030 (Fla.1995); ██████ v. *Stardust Cruisers, Inc.*, 690 So.2d 743 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). The concept of relevancy is broader in the discovery context than in the trial context and a party may be permitted to discover evidence that would be inadmissible at trial, if it would lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. *Allstate; Amente*. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(1) delineates the proper scope of discovery: + +*In General.* Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the subject matter of the pending action, whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or the claim or defense of any other party, including the existence, description, + +nature, custody, condition, and location of any hooks, documents, or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons having knowledge of any discoverable matter. It is not ground for objection that the information sought will be inadmissible at the trial if the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +Nonetheless, the discovery of certain kinds of information may cause material injury of an irreparable nature. This includes the "cat-out-of-the-bag" material that could be used to injure another person or party outside the context of the litigation, material protected by privilege, trade secrets or work product. Discovery was never intended to be used as a tactical tool to harass, embarrass or annoy one's adversary. Rather, pretrial discovery was implemented to simplify the issues in a case, to eliminate the elements of surprise, to encourage the settlement of cases, to avoid the cost of litigation, and to achieve a balanced search for the truth to ensure a fair trial. *Elkins v. Syker*, 672 So.2d 517 (Fla.1996). + +Here the petitioners argue that the information sought to be discovered regarding prostitution and their sexual activities was propounded solely to embarrass them and to invade their right to privacy. The petitioners also claim that this information is privileged under section 796.09 and is not calculated to lead to evidence which would be admissible at trial. + +Section 796.09 provides a person with a civil cause of action for compensatory and punitive damages against anyone who coerces that person into prostitution, who coerces that person to remain in prostitution, or who uses coercion to collect or receive any part of that person's earnings derived from prostitution. In the course of litigation under this section, any transaction about which a plaintiff testifies or produces evidence does *not* subject the plaintiff to criminal prosecution or to any penalty or forfeiture. In addition, any testimony or evidence or any information produced by the plaintiff or wit- + +© 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. + +703 So.2d 1076 + +703So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly 1)2375. 23 Fla. L. Weekly DI69 + +(Cite tit 703 So.2d 1076) + +ness for the plaintiffs cannot be used against the plenums or witness hi any ud proceeding, except one for perjury. + +Section 796.09(5) specifically provides that it is not adefense that the plaintiff was paid or otherwise compensated for prostitution, that the plaintiff had engaged in prostitution prior to any involvement with the defendant or that the plaintiff made no attempt to escape from the defendant. Section 796.09(6) provides that convictions for prostitution or prostitution-related offenses are Unwind:y:61e for the purpose of attacking the plaintiffs' credibility. + +This legislation was the result of the Florida Supreme Court Gender Bias Study Commission, which conducted an extensive investigation of pros-Utation in this state. The Commission's activities included Interviews with law enforcement and corrections personnel,\*1079 judges, public defenders, prosecutors, drug rehabilitation counselors, social workers, medical personnel, prostitutes, clients and pimps. The Commission found prostitution to be prevalent and uniform throughout the state and law enforcement largely unable to deter it under prevailing social attitudes and judicial practices. The Commission further found that prostitutes are often victims of economic, physical, and psychological coercion, that roost persons do not chose to become prostitutes, but do so to survive, and that ninety percent of street prostitutes, both adult and children, are controlled by pimps who use avariety of coercive methods to maintain this control. The Commission determined that clients and pimps are rarely prosecuted and, when prosecuted, receive light sentences; whereas prostitutes, who are mainly females, arc frequently prosecuted and receive harsher treatment in the courts. The Commission recommended changes in the methods of intervention in prostitution from punitive to therapeutic, changes In the law to require more equal treatment by the courts of the prostitute in relation to the client and the pimp and to lessen the incentive to traffic in human flesh by giving the prostitute access to the judicial system without first having to be arrested. + +Under section 796.09, the petitioners' Prior involvement in prostitution and their eandngs Gorr prostitution would be Irrelevant. Hence discovery should not be permitted because such infortnatIon would not be admissible at trial nor would it be reasonably calculated to lead to evidence ultimately admissible at trial. Even though the scope of dis9overV is gem tally quite broad, section 796.09 is designed to encourage prostitutes to sue their pimps. Thus the usually broad scope of discovery may be constricted so that prostitutes will not be embarrassed, harassed or hindered in their actions. • + +(3) Had the petitioners brought their lawsuit against Ruzzo and The Boardroom only under section 796.09, evidence of petitioners' past prostitution, including with the Boardroom, and their earnings relating to such activities, may not have been discoverable. However, the petitioners filed a multicount complaint for compensatory and punitive damages, alleging numerous causes of action against the respondents These other causes carry no such protection from discovery. Since the information sought by discovery may be relevant or may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence In one or more of these other causes of action or to determination of damages, we cannon conclude that the trial court departed from the essential r uirements of law in granting this discovery. See v. 778 Bank of the Keys, 687 Sold 895 . DCA 1997) (by alleging fraud as well as breach of contract, purchaser placed at issue her reliance on venders' assertions, the veracity of financial documents she submitted to the vender, and the state of her mental health, including memo& problems she was experiencing at the time of the alleged tortious conduct, thus deposition questions concerning her state of mind were relevant). + +Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. + +THOhfPSON, 1., concurs. HARRIS, 3., concurs specially with opinion.HARRIS, Judge, concurring specially: + +703 So.2d 1076 + +703Sold 1076, 22 Fla. L Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L Weekly 13169 + +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Them is a temptation in cases such as this to inquire which, the poi or the imam, IS Imbued vetch dre darker hue. Indeed that may ultimately be the ques tion uppermost in the Jurors' minds. But the issue presently before us is simply whether the pot, in order to establish the parties' comparative complexion, may discover the historical condition and the inherent characteristics of the kettle. + +We are hare involved with parties that the limited record before us indicates were co-conspirators in a joint effort to violate Florida's laws against prostitudon. The defendants are the owner/operators of a "social club" whose primary service is prostitution; the plaintiffs am employees of the club who provide such services. The employees are suing the owner/operators for, among other counts, taking advantage of their vulnerabilides ("coercing' them to be prostitutes) through manipulation and exploitation. In order to prepare a defense to the action, defendants have filed certain interrogatories for the employees to answer. These interrogatories\*1080 request such information as how long the employees have been engaged in prostitution; how the employees have been affected by the defendants' conduct; copies of photographs, movies, and videotapes in which the employees have performed sexual acts or simulated sexual acts; the names of previous employers and previous rates of pay; and a statement of income received from defendants. These interrogatories survived the employees' S jections. I agree certiorari should be denied. + +The employees' primary cause of action is based on section 796.090). Florida Statutes, which provides: + +- (1) A person has a cause of action for compensatory and punitive damages against Aperson who coerces that person into prostitution; 1,1s) A person who coerces that person to remain in prostitution, or ep) A person who uses coercion to collect or receive + +any part of that person's earnings derived from + +The employees resist discovery of their past prostitution or their past or present earning experience on the basis of subparagraph 5 of section 796.091 + +- 5) It does not constitute a defense IO a complaint under this section that + +- a) The plaintiff was paid or otherwise compensated for acts of prostitution; + +- b) The plaintiff engaged in acts of prostitution prior to any involvement with the defendant + +But the question before us is not whther prior acts of prostitution (or the receipts of earnings therefrom) which might be revealed by answering the interrogatories could be used as a defense to the complaint, but rather whether evidence of such conduct or such earnings would be relevant in determining whether the employees were, in fact, "coerced" Into prostitution, into remaining prostitutes, or into sharing the proceeds of their services with defendants. The relevancy of this infommtiod depends, of course, on what constitutes coercion. + +If we apply the definition of "coercion" which is commonly accepted, then the relevancy of the requested information is apparent and this appeal has no merit at all. Webster defines "coercion" as: (1) to restrain or dominate by force, (2). to compel an act or choice, or (3) to enforce or bring about by force or threat. in sexual battery cases, the legislature has adopted the common meaning of the word "coercion" and has even placed limits on it. It has provided that consent will not be recognized if submission is coerced by threats of : force or violence 1f the victim reasonably believes the perpetrator has the present ability to execute the threat.'" Consent also will not be recognized if submission is coerced by athreat of retaliation against. the victim or another ff the victim reasonably believes that the perpetrator has the ability to execute the threat in the futures', And in sexual battery cases, the legislature hos vitiated what might otherwise be con703 So.2d 1076 703Sold 1076, 22 Flo. I. Weekly O2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly 13169 (Cite es:70330as 1076) + +sidered as consensual if one exploits a known physkel in mental acalento of thw victim to ashiew his or her goal or takes advantage of one who is physically helpless or involuntarily Intoxicated/ma Therefore, oven in sexual battery cases, before coercion or exploitation will vitiate consent, the free will of the victim must be overcome by force or threat or some unfortunate circumstance suffered by the victim. + +> FNI. Section 794.011(4)(b), Florida Statutes. + +> Mt Section 794.011(4)(c), Florida Statutes. + +> Ple. Section 794.011(4)(a),(d),(e), and (I), Florida Statutes. + +But then we get to the definition of "coercion" contained in section 796.09(3): + +;3) As used in this section, the term "coercion" means any practice of dominion, restraint, or inducement for the purpose of or with the mason• ably foreseeable effect of causing another person to engage in or remain in prostitution or to relinquish earnings derived from prostitution, end includes, but is not limited to: + +la) Physical force or threats of physical force. + +lb) Physical or mental torture. + +:c) Kidnapping. + +nom. (d) Blackmail. + +1,e) Extortion or claims of indebtedness. + +1)Threats of legal complaint or report of delinquency. + +lg) Threat to interfere with parental rights or responsibilities. whether by Judicial or administrative action or otherwise. + +30Promise of legal benefit. + +:1) Promise of greater financial rewards! + +3) Promise of marriage. + +:k) Restraint of Speech or communication with others. + +) Exploitation of a condition of 'developmental disability, cognitive limitation, affective disorder, or substance dependency. + +;m) Exploitation of victimization by sexual abuse. + +:n) Exploitation of pornographic performance. + +'A Exploitation of human needs for food, shelter, safety, or affection. + +The definition urged by the employees heroin is the "promise of a greater financial reward." Whether the requested information Is relevant to the issue of coercion In this case will depend on what the legislature intended by subsection (I) In the meaning of "coercion." + +Iagree with Judge Ahenbemd's thoughtful analysis in Slate v. Brigham, 694 So.2d 793 (1997): + +there can be no dispute that the legislature's tmusual definition of "percent" is not th common dictionary definition. This Is perhaps ni appropriate case in which to remind ourselves of Learned Hand's famous observation that a "mature and developed Jurisprudence" does not "make a fortress out of the dictionary." + +But even so. one would expect some nexus between the commonly accepted meaning of i word and the definition of that word ascribed by the legislature. If, for example, the legislature defined "canine" as including cats, although one might, Jurisprudentially speaking, expect to bear a meow emanate from a Great Dane, the courts should nevertheless closely examine the legislative history to see if that is really what the legislature intended. The court in Young v. O'Keefe, 246 Iowa 1182, 69 N.W.2d 534, 537(1955), stated this principle as. follows: "But + +703 So.2d 1076 +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +Page 7 + +before a definition is construed so as to expand the meaning of a well-known word to include its antonym ..., the intention of the legislature to that effect must be clear." As Judge [REDACTED] observed in *Catron v. Roger Bohn*, D.C., P.A., 580 So.2d 814, 818 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991): + +It is our primary duty to give effect to legislative intent and, if a literal interpretation of a statute leads to unreasonable results, then we should exercise our power to interpret reason and logic to it. + +\*\*\*\*\* + +Unfortunately, it is apparent that in enacting this legislation, the legislature has, without redefining the terms for the purposes of this legislation, often used terms with commonly accepted meanings for purposes at great variance from those commonly accepted meanings. + +In our case, the legislature did define the term for the purpose of the act. But because the term (coercion) as so defined can be interpreted two ways-one consistent with the commonly accepted meaning and one at variance-we should not accept the "antonym" unless such legislative intent is clear. A free will decision, even if based on a hope of financial gain, is the opposite of a coerced decision. + +The employees urge that the mere promise of a greater reward brings them within the act. But if the mere promise of a greater reward is sufficient to establish coercion, then anyone who makes a voluntary and reasoned exercise of free will motivated by the hope of economic gain has been coerced. This definition removes the element of compulsion implicit in the commonly accepted meaning of coercion and substitutes therefor the mere desire for financial gain. The employees herein assert that since they were offered "a greater financial reward" for providing the services performed by them through defendants' establishment, they were coerced into their prostitution activities. This equates the giving + +of an opportunity to make a decision with the coercion of that decision. But subsection (I) can also mean \*1082 that the promise of a greater reward is coercion only if such promised reward is sufficient to overcome one's natural revulsion to selling one's body for money. If there is no such revulsion, there can be no coercion. Becoming a prostitute only because one likes the hours and wages or "because it beats the heck out of working for a living" simply should not meet the test of section 796.09(1). + +At oral argument herein, it was suggested without contradiction, that at least one of the employees has a college degree and gave up a well-paying, legitimate job in order to engage in this profession for the greater reward. Section 796.09 does not appear to be a general prostitute's relief act. It is based on a report by the Gender Bias Study Commission which recommended the equalization of treatment in relation to the prostitute, the client and the "pimp." It is based on the premise that prostitutes are generally victims of economic, physical, and psychological coercion and choose prostitution in order to survive. Further, the Commission was concerned that 90 percent of the street prostitutes are controlled by "pimps" who use a variety of coercive methods to maintain control. It seems clear that the legislature was not intending to depart from the precepts of the commonly understood meaning of "coercion" and to redefine it to include both free will decisions and compelled decisions.. The interpretation urged by the employees seems at variance with the stated goal of the legislature and the Gender Bias Commission. + +Since there is no cause of action provided for one who makes a reasoned and voluntary exercise of their free will to enter or continue in the profession solely for financial rewards (assuming "coercion" is given the definition more consistent with its commonly accepted meaning and assuming that my interpretation of legislative intent is correct), coercion becomes the critical issue in the trial of such action. The interrogatories propounded by defendants appear relevant to the issue of coercion. + +© 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. + +703 So.2d 1076 + +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 + +(Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) + +This is a case of first impression based on a relatively new statute. As indicated, the legislative history of the new law suggests that the statute is designed to assist those who were forced to enter prostitution in order to keep a roof over their heads or food on their table. It does not appear to be intended to aid those who voluntarily enter the profession in order to drive a Mercedes instead of a ██████████. The limited record before us indicates that even beginning employees of the defendants (those who do not have an established clientele) bring in \$700 a day and can keep 50% of their earnings. Based on a five-day work week, this would reflect an income of \$87,500 a year even with a two week vacation. And the employees herein are not beginners. + +There is no indication that the legislature intended to legalize prostitution or to make it a respectable profession. It merely intended to place the prostitute on the same footing with the client and the "pimp." If a prostitute voluntarily makes the decision to participate, free from force, intimidation, or disadvantageous circumstance, then he or she is on the same footing as the other participants and should be treated the same. + +Although it might well serve a legitimate public purpose to permit the cannibalistic demise of such enterprises (and I am not unsympathetic with this view), that does not appear to be the policy behind the current statute. Therefore, in cases where coercion is not present (and this may or may not be one), the court should continue its tradition of not interceding in civil conflicts involving transactions that are either illegal or are against public policy. See *Wechsler v. Novak*, 157 Fla. 703, 26 So.2d 884 (1946); ██████████ v. *Ratiner*, 462 So.2d 1157, 1160 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), rev. denied, 472 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 1985) ("An action may lie for interference with an unenforceable contract and even perhaps a voidable contract. No such cause of action lies for interference with a contract void as against public policy [another's representation of a client obtained by a doctor/lawyer's illegal personal injury solicitation + +in the hospital] and which makes one who is a party thereto, as the appellant in the instant case, guilty of a criminal act for entering into such an agreement.") + +We are not asked in this proceeding to rule on the admissibility of the discovered information as evidence at the trial of this cause. We are to determine only if the information might lead to admissible evidence. Even \*1083 though we deny the Writ I suggest we certify the following question: + +DOES ONE, FREE FROM FORCE, INTIMIDATION, OR DISADVANTAGEOUS CIRCUMSTANCE, WHO MAKES A REASONED DECISION TO BECOME OR REMAIN A PROSTITUTE OR TO SHARE THE PROCEEDS THEREOF BECAUSE OF A PROMISE OF A GREATER FINANCIAL REWARD HAVE A CAUSE OF ACTION UNDER SECTION 796.09(1), FLORIDA STATUTES? + +ON MOTIONS FOR REHEARING, FOR CLARIFICATION, FOR CERTIFICATION, AND FOR REHEARING EN BANC + +W. SHARP, Judge. + +Petitioners Balas and Shumate have filed motions for rehearing, clarification and certification. We deny the motions in full except for one regard. We delete the sentence in the last full paragraph of the opinion which reads: "These other causes of action carry no such protection from discovery." + +Motion for Clarification GRANTED as stated above; Motion for Rehearing and Certification DENIED. + +HARRIS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. + +Fla.App. 5 Dist., 1997. + +Balas v. Ruzzo + +703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D169 + +END OF DOCUMENT + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM DCACI I COUNTY,FLORIDA + +A.C., + +CASE NO. 502008CA026129\*00(MB Al + +Plaintiff, + +V. + +E. EPSTEIN, and + +Defendants. + +### ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION To COMPEL RESPONSES TO FIRST REQUEST TO\_FRODUCE TO PLAINTIFF AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS. & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant Epsteln's Motjon To Compel Responses To First Request To Produce To Plaintiff And To Overrule Plaintiffs Objections, & For Defendants Expenses, Including Attomeys' Fees and the Court having heard argument of counsel and being fully advised in these premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendants Motion Is hereby granted/ dented .41 7 4 41IR j obt.\_#\_• clowai-me 22. w filretod "Pacr er,40.4. atb tzli. Q1320 Ara.u.sck\_ JD sap , + +DONE AND ORDERED at Palnj Beach Co urthouse, West Palm Beach, Florida, this 7 3 day of + +> Edward A. Garrison Circuit Judge + +Copies furnished: \* ROBERT II =rum aESQ., , . ESQ., and MICHAEL J. PIKE, ES 616 North FlapIer DIM., suss 400, Weal Palm Bora FL 33401; JACK SCAROLA, ESQ., AND JACK P. ESQ., Seamy Denney Scarole Barnhart & :tea sPA, 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., eat Palm Beach, FL 33409, and JACK A. GEFt, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, PA, One Cleedulte Centre, Suite 1400, 250 Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 : %In 0lc( EXHIBIT t; \_12/6% 09- At.,. + +'05 + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +A.C., + +CASE NO. 502008CA025129XXXXMB AI + +Plaintiff; + +v. + +JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, and [REDACTED] + +Defendants. + +ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES + +THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion To Compel Answers To Interrogatories And To Overrule Plaintiff's Objections, & For Defendant's Expenses, Including Attorneys' Fees, and the Court having heard argument of counsel and being fully advised in these premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion is hereby granted/ + +defendant as to #5, 12 #18, daniel as to #2. Response to be served w/in 10 days. + +DONE AND ORDERED at Palm Beach County Courthouse, West Palm Beach, Florida, this 23 day of 2009 + +[Signature] +Edward A. Garrison +Circuit Judge + +Copies furnished: +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ., and MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ., 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401; JACK SCAROLA, ESQ., AND JACK P. [REDACTED] ESQ., Searoy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A., 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., West Palm Beach, FL 33409, and JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQ., Atterbury Goldberger & Wolse, P.A., One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400, 250 Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +cc: JEN6, DE +CA: [illegible] +in [illegible] 4/2/09 +3/06 + +IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 50 2008CA020614XXXXMB AF' + +JANE DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. cgpy + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and + +Defendants. + +COURT REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS HAD BEFORE THE HONORABLE DIANA + +DATE: March 3, 2009 + +PLACE: Palm Beach County Courthouse 205 N. Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +> U.S. Lagar Support (561) 835-0220 EXHIBIT + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +\$ + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +### APPEARANCES: + +IIIIII LAW FIRM, P.A. 224 Datura Avenue Suite 900 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Counsel for Plaintiff BY: /SIDRO M. MEI, ESQUIRE + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515N. Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Counsel for Defendant BY: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 635-0220 + +2 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +that but I'd just like to do that. + +THE COURT: Right. And if you want to CI ',VI , 40Ca low 4G Y..G.. .•••..."11. • ..... GP 6.7441 am. IL , I I'm the one that's questioning whether or hot these need to be before one judge. You may have adifferent perspective than your colleagues who are prosecuting some of the cases. + +Iunderstand the damages. I'm not saying consolidate. I'm saying transfer. It's not aconsolidation issue. Everybody getd that confused for some reason. The words are very different out of my mouth, your mouth and how they're written. + +So let me go ahead and take a gander at this. I did read it last night. I'm not sure that we need to get -- we need names? + +MR. CRITTON: Right. Well, here's what some of the issues are is that, as an example -- if I could approach the bench. + +THE COURT: Sure. + +MR. CRITTON: This is some of the information that we've obtained through discovery from some of the -- from at least in this instance, it would be this particular Jane Doe. + +THE COURT: You know who Jane Doe is I take + +2 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 15 + +16 17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +it? + +MR. CRITTON: Right. + +MM AMC/ /14oVU.n..L. IVY IuMVW I.LAW VQIIO &WC SO -L + +MR. CRITTON: Yes, correct. And so this particular lady has kept in part a diary. and she -- which appears to have started some time this is not in any way significant -- but some time after she learned that she could file a lawsuit. I think she's also been to Oakwood Center some time after she learned she could file alawsuit and seek damages from Mr. Epstein. + +There's no history of this lady. beforehand other than. in some of the Oakwood records where she. was Baker Acted, she started drinking beerat.16, she started XanaX at 16, started marijuana at 15, that she's sexually active: + +So how she has interacted -- she has a claim for emotional damages, mental pain and anguish, psychiatric-type damages. How she's interacted with friends, with family, the events 'in her life, school, work, her interpersonal relationships both with men and let's -- we'll use an'example men here, but other individuals. She's saying that this event with Mr. Epstein, + +> U. S . Legal Support' (561) 835-0220 + +2 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +this sexual assault and whatever occurred during these events is that -- has caused her damage. + +as the emotional, mental, psychiatric-type damages are completely subjective, I mean separate and apart from any medical bills that may be -- which are clearly intangible. So these are intangible damages. And the jury is instructed, you know, you advise the greater weight of the evidence, what's fair and reasonable under the circumstances. + +So what we would have is basically this young lady's testimony as to what she claims her damages are and what the circumstances are with her situation with Mr. Epstein. She claims on page 13, you know, I love this guy, I'm dating this guy Chris. On page 15 -- + +THE COURT: Is this part of a diary for treatment? + +MR. CRITTON: I have no idea what it is. It was just produced in response to discovery. And she apparently started in, I think this is December of '08. You know I took Jay Lyntenis' girl to the zoo, had an amazing day, I love her, i.e., the girl. We have so much fun. I want a + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +1. + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +baby especially with him. Okay. So I know who this person is. We are all so open together, I atau. uay 011Y LIVUll "Mal. UV 1 tAV W#1.41 Chris, who is another guy in her life. + +All right. This is circumstances where this young lady is saying, look, Jeffrey Epstein has ruined my life from a damage standpoint, okay. Let me depose other individuals with whom you've had arelationship. And what if it turns out -- as with some of these girls did -- is they had relationships or had escapades or circumstances with individuals, older men.similar to Mr. Epstein well before Mr. Epstein. + +And this girl, Idon't know one way or the other, but let's assume she had asituation where she was assaulted or molested or raped, ' that all is going to affect her emotionaland her mental pain and anguish and it will all factor into evaluating damages. + +You know, it's not something that I'm going to spread around. I'm happy to keep it, you know, within the confines of the discovery of this case. But if she says every other • relationship in my life has been perfect but Jeff Epstein has done this to me and it has affected + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +• + +1 2 3 4 my ability to trust men and my sexual relationships with other men, which is petit of lk her interpersonal relationships, ukdy, lct,5 to to III + +5 6 7 THE COURT: When does your client allege that she had her first encounter with Mr. Epstein? + +8 MR% : At what age? + +9 THE COURT: Well, what year? + +10 MR. CRITTON: June of '03. + +11 MR. : June of '03, Judge. + +12 13 •MR. CRITTON: She claims from June of '03 through November of '04. + +14 15 16 MR. She was I believe 16 at the beginning and ended at 17. She was aminor during all this time. + +17 18 THE COURT: June of '03 to now is six years. Let me hear from Mr. + +19 20 21. 22 MR. : Judge, in the criminal case that was filed against Mr. Epstein, he would not .have had a right to do this type of discoVery and I-- if I could hand up -- + +23 24 THE COURT: They wouldn't care about the women. + +25 MR. : Right. Well, I mean - + +2 + +4 + +6 + +7 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +3.2 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +THE COURT: This is damages. There's no they weren't seeking damages at the time.! + +M±c. UHRL.Sa: signt. arm we nave not allege° in the complaint or in the answers to interrogatories that her ability to have a relationship with a man has been affected by Mr. Epstein's conduct. + +We have alleged that she has been hospitalized for depression, anxiety but we have not alleged any damages concerning -- the ionly reason this would be relevant is if we were making a claim at her ability to have either sexual relations or to have emotional relations with men was effected by her experience with Mr. Epstein. + +So this damages' claim is just a smoke screen to attempt to get evidence to show the jury that this woman has had other consensual relationships with young men that are approximately her age what I would characterize as a slut defense. She had it coming to her because she engaged in other voluntarily consensual -- + +THE COURT: Mr. Critton wouldn't try the slut defense in my courtroom, I'm sure. + +> U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +6 + +7 + +e + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +7.3 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +10 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +MR. Maybe not, but certainlg that's the way this discovery is going. And, Judge, what + +THE COURT: What are the damages you think your client is seeking? + +MR. She is seeking emotional distress damages for depression and anxiety and she has been hospitalized at the Oakwood Center. Her friend -- she was on the phone to afriend , . who called the sheriff's office because she thought she was suicidal. The sheriffs responded. They Baker Acted her that day and they took her eventually to the Oakwood Center. + +THE COURT: How do we know it's not intertwined with her rejection by three other men since Mr. Epstein? + +MR. IIIIII: Well, even if it was related to her rejection by three other men -- you mean other men's rejection of her? + +THE COURT: Yeah. Well, how do you not know that? I mean you can't do it until you do discovery. Has anybody attempted to review the records from Oakwood to find out what's going on? + +MR. CRITTON: It's like aone-time visit when she was Baker Acted and then there's some + +9 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +other -- + +THE COURT: She didn't receive treatment? + +mm nnymmnm. + +that day and she's been back a couple of times. She's on medication. Again, I don't know;what or the extent but she's got -- her medical bills are de minimis. + +Again as an example, Judge, did the Court have an opportunity to look at the case that I also attached to the motion? Because there's a case that's almost on all fours with . this which I attached to our motion which is called Belles versus Russo. + +THE COURT: Right. + +MR. CRITTON: It was a case where the plaintiff was sued -- the plaintiff sued the former owners of a house of prostitution. So that part is different, but within it there were anumber of claims including asexual assault claim and they sought emotional pain, humiliation and emotional distress. + +Within the complaint that was filed in this particular case, she is seeking severe emotional distress, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, past and future, compensatory + +2 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +B + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +16 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +humiliation, loss of reputation, mental anguish, pain and suffering, the same type of damages. + +THE COURT: How old is she now? + +MR' CEll. She's 21 no\*. + +MR. CRITTON: She's 21 now. What the Court said is, you know, if you'd only brought this claim under 796 evidence of past issues, it's not an issue. You can't use this defense for anything, but because you brought these other claims which include, you know, sexual assault and you're seeking damages for other causes of action since the information sought by discovery may be relevant or may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in one or more of the other causes of action or determination of damages, we cannot conclude the trial court parted from essential requirements of law in granting -- + +THE COURT: So in other words, she's not only seeking -- she's seeking current emotional damage as aresult of this relationship and you're trying to find out if she had prior relationships, that perhaps could be intertwined with it so that it's not just Mr. Epstein's -- + +MR. CRITTON: Right. A perfect example is + +U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +1 2 4 0 5 6 one of the cases that I have is there's a. young lady who claims that she was molested in the past auu Lapeuf pLeu'y asyuiLLuani. issues, WC12. SU advance of her even meeting with Mr. Epstein. And they seem to play a large role in her psychiatric and psychological evaluation. + +7 B 9 10 11. 12 13 We're going to come to the Court in this case as we have others and ask for a. psychological evaluation of this lady, and if she was raped or if she was molested or just she had abad experience or some -- whether it wail a young or old man assaulted her in some fashion, that may play arole in her damages and what -- + +19 15 16 17 18 THE COURT: What I'm going to allow for discovery purposes only not necessarily getting it in at the time trial are two years before her first encounter with Mr. Epstein and anything subsequent. + +19 20 21 22 23 MR. IIIIII: Judge, I just wanted to say on the record because I forgot to mention it, there's also -- I did state an objection to the identity of people that are unrepresented` in this courtroom. They have rights too. So what I -- + +20 25 THE COURT: Well, my suggestion is that you send those people aletter and tell them that + +2 + +you're going to disclose them and if they have a problem with it that they come to see me before you oisciose + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +So I'm going to give you 20 days to respond to this rather than the usual five and that will give you time to put these people on notice and if they want to come visit with me and have a John Doe, I'll have a John Doe heai.ing but, you know, this is her case. She's doing it. She's the one seeking damages, and he is entitled to be able to confront other individuals to find out information that may be relevant to the damages she's seeking or she can drop the. damages. That's her choice. If you seek, damages, you've got to do it -- if you could put that in an order so that we have a time for him to do this. + +Just fill out an order, hand it back up to me and I'll deal with it. + +(The proceedings were concluded:) + +U.S. Legal Support (561) 835-0220 + +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH. + +I, Teresa Bell, Court Reporter, certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings and that the transcript is a true and complete record of my stenographic notes. + +I further certify that the proceedings were taken at the time and place shown herein and that all counsel and persons as hereinabove shown were present. + +I further certify that I am not a relative, employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor am I a relative or employee of any of the parties! attorney or counsel connected with the action, nor am I financially interested in the action. + +Dated this 11th day + +TERESIK BELL, Court Reporter Kikka M. Claudio + +From: cmecfautosendenpsd.uscourts.gov Sent: Apt 02, 2009 1:54 PM To: flsd\_cmecf\_noticeeftsd.uscourts.gov Subject Activity In Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM C.M.A. v. Epstein et al Motion to Compel + +This is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system. Please DO NOT RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended. + +\*\*\*NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS\*\*\* Judicial Conference of the United States: policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free'electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not apply. + +U.S. District Court + +Southern District of Florida + +# Notice of Electronic Filing + +The following transaction was entered by Critton, Robert on 4/2/2009 at 1:53 PM EDT and filed on 4/2/2009 + +Case Name: C.M.A. v. Epstein et al + +Case Number: 9:08-cv-80811 + +Filer: Jeffrey Epstein + +Document Number: 54 + +### Docket Text: + +Defendant's MOTION to Compel Response to 1st RTP and 1st Interrogs by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 4/20/2009 (Attachments: #(1) Exhibit A, # (2) Exhibit B, # (3) Exhibit C, # (4) Exhibit D)(Critton, Robert) + +9:08-cv-80811 Notice has been electronically mailed to: + +Bruce Reinhart ecf®brucereinhartlaw.com + +Guy Alan + +Jack Alan Goldberger iageso(gbellsouth.net, nalanis®agwpa.com + +Jack iph@asearcvlaw.com,clw@asearcvlaw.com lanc@searcvlaw.com,s.slater@searcylaw.com pasgsearcylaw.corn, vats searcvlaw.com + +Michael James Pike MPEce(gbelelaw.com + +Michael-Tein tein@lewistein.com, lcmcvers@lewistein.com mcaroteigiewistein.com + +Richard Horace Willits reekbw@hotmail.com lawverwillits@aol.com + +Robert Deweese Critton , Jr rcrit@bc1claw.com bobbie@bciclaw.com + +9:08-cv-80811 Notice has not been delivered electronically to those listed below and will be provided by other means. For further assistance, please contact our Help Desk at 1-888-318-2260.: + +The following document(s) are associated with this transaction: + +Document description:Main Document + +Original filename:n/a + +Electronic document Stamp: + +[STAMP deecfStampiD=1105629215 [Date=4/2/2009] [FileNumber=6195964-0) [49fOc2d75486f6d6a6101a08c395b2c7992778ee9920e8793e30a05701c38a82a7cd 000704948284cbee2a315cedf37038a790bd53308696a153cec35dd4a2eb]i + +Document description:Exhibit A + +Original filename:nla + +Electronic document Stamp: + +[STAMP dcecfStampiD=1105629215 [Date-4/2/2009] [FileNumber..6195964-1] [5442dd228617016a18a93a482a085529427a840328a0e54754cdf751967853bb92be ecb01757337952c95593597ccfc9a41571176b352bb55db83a21a343d276]] + +Document description:Exhibit B + +Original filename:n/a + +Electronic document Stamp: + +[STAMP dcecfStampiD-1105629215 [Date=4/2/2009] [FileNumbet=6195964-2] [25cedd880cca3d8978be178b71f1defe7a045549a477d2d9547032020ef01488969e bad8c2e920f70317610d9120ceca0890948393f1 d74268del8e9ff88192d]] + +Document description:Exhibit C + +Original filename:n/a + +Electronic document Stamp: + +[STAMP dcecfStampiD=1105629215 [Datc=4/2/2009] [FileNumbet=6195964-3] [37892711faff5e10f7c7b9b1c0cad10ac25f111cfa940376210a3a511f5b8fc66e25 7a72e8a82aclf8d04c63aa2721bce8e1445577efdde123db7e50acecc99a)) + +Document description:Exhibit D + +Original filename:n/a + +Electronic document Stamp: + +[STAMP dceefStamp\_TD=1105629215 [Datca4/2/2009] [FileNumber=6195964-4] [30891fd9cd081f85da5c8b8446571f54389e681aa2a51b1899667fcfbca8f86fccf8 b5cc59c87a711c75abbeaaf0e49106318132669f8731cecdd18b8714e895]] \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745764/EFTA02745764.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745764/EFTA02745764.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1f1561526dbf8da6307a16083162de82fae35c64 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745764/EFTA02745764.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,3590 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745764.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 56, + "chars": 102272, + "elapsed_seconds": 30.93, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_6_Picture_14.jpeg", + "_page_10_Picture_14.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 266.90999999999997, + 589.5402984619141 + ], + [ + 330.75616455078125, + 589.5402984619141 + ], + [ + 330.75616455078125, + 602.9370422363281 + ], + [ + 266.90999999999997, + 602.9370422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.375, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 371.46, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 371.46, + 381.51 + ], + [ + 261.375, + 381.51 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ENDNOTE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.095, + 503.82 + ], + [ + 159.9082794189453, + 503.82 + ], + [ + 159.9082794189453, + 519.6870422363281 + ], + [ + 94.095, + 519.6870422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a72241. Aggravated Sexual Abuse.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 92.25, + 566.1899999999999 + ], + [ + 271.2874450683594, + 566.1899999999999 + ], + [ + 271.2874450683594, + 582.3170471191406 + ], + [ + 92.25, + 582.3170471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a7 2242. Sexual abuse", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 86.71499999999999, + 243.81 + ], + [ + 204.3843231201172, + 243.81 + ], + [ + 204.3843231201172, + 260.5570068359375 + ], + [ + 86.71499999999999, + 260.5570068359375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a7 2243. Sexual abuse of a minor orj\u2666", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 86.71499999999999, + 451.9800000000001 + ], + [ + 295.2, + 451.9800000000001 + ], + [ + 295.2, + 468.809814453125 + ], + [ + 86.71499999999999, + 468.809814453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Chapter 117 Transportation for Illegal Sexual Activity and Related Crimes \n\u00a7 2421. Transportation generally", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 87.32999999999998, + 413.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 466.44873046875, + 413.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 466.44873046875, + 441.3170471191406 + ], + [ + 87.32999999999998, + 441.3170471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a7 2423. Transportation of minors", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 87.32999999999998, + 510.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 261.1451721191406, + 510.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 261.1451721191406, + 526.0670471191406 + ], + [ + 87.32999999999998, + 526.0670471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 214.635, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 389.58502197265625, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 389.58502197265625, + 155.18701171875 + ], + [ + 214.635, + 155.18701171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF. C.M.A.'S. CONDITIONAL NOTICE OF INTENT TO EXCLUSIVELY RELY \nON STATUTORY DAMAGES PROVIDED SY 18 U.S.C. \u00a72255", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 103.935, + 372.6 + ], + [ + 503.8815612792969, + 372.6 + ], + [ + 503.8815612792969, + 399.3170471191406 + ], + [ + 103.935, + 399.3170471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.46000000000004, + 300.51 + ], + [ + 386.3363342285156, + 300.51 + ], + [ + 386.3363342285156, + 315.0740661621094 + ], + [ + 248.46000000000004, + 315.0740661621094 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.145, + 127.98000000000002 + ], + [ + 339.48, + 127.98000000000002 + ], + [ + 339.48, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 260.145, + 141.75 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 212.17499999999998, + 152.28 + ], + [ + 387.29638671875, + 152.28 + ], + [ + 387.29638671875, + 175.76999999999998 + ], + [ + 212.17499999999998, + 175.76999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF C.M.A. TO RESPOND TO \nDEFENDANT'S FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE AND ANSWER DEFENDANT'S \nFIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, AND TO OVERRULE OBJECTIONS, AND FOR \nAN AWARD OF DEFENDANT'S REASONABLE EXPENSES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 116.85000000000001, + 335.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 489.54, + 335.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 489.54, + 382.32 + ], + [ + 116.85000000000001, + 382.32 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Motion To Compel Responses to Production Requests Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, and 19, \nand Answers to Interrogatories Nos. 2, 18, arid 23.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.30499999999998, + 225.18 + ], + [ + 474.878662109375, + 225.18 + ], + [ + 474.878662109375, + 251.32415771484375 + ], + [ + 127.30499999999998, + 251.32415771484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No. 1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.695, + 257.58 + ], + [ + 363.342041015625, + 257.58 + ], + [ + 363.342041015625, + 272.7041015625 + ], + [ + 241.695, + 272.7041015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 100.86000000000001, + 327.24 + ], + [ + 159.392822265625, + 327.24 + ], + [ + 159.392822265625, + 342.0840759277344 + ], + [ + 100.86000000000001, + 342.0840759277344 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 182.655, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 423.5212707519531, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 423.5212707519531, + 399.0840759277344 + ], + [ + 182.655, + 399.0840759277344 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No, 2", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.23000000000002, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 366.1499938964844, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 366.1499938964844, + 472.23 + ], + [ + 247.23000000000002, + 472.23 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 109.46999999999998, + 553.23 + ], + [ + 162.70169067382812, + 553.23 + ], + [ + 162.70169067382812, + 565.8372802734375 + ], + [ + 109.46999999999998, + 565.8372802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.88, + 589.6800000000001 + ], + [ + 431.25323486328125, + 589.6800000000001 + ], + [ + 431.25323486328125, + 608.3351593017578 + ], + [ + 191.88, + 608.3351593017578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No. 4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.385, + 460.0799999999999 + ], + [ + 364.3717346191406, + 460.0799999999999 + ], + [ + 364.3717346191406, + 473.48187255859375 + ], + [ + 245.385, + 473.48187255859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.16499999999999, + 530.55 + ], + [ + 163.32366943359375, + 530.55 + ], + [ + 163.32366943359375, + 544.7136688232422 + ], + [ + 105.16499999999999, + 544.7136688232422 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 188.19, + 586.4399999999999 + ], + [ + 427.73077392578125, + 586.4399999999999 + ], + [ + 427.73077392578125, + 601.4897766113281 + ], + [ + 188.19, + 601.4897766113281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "2) Disclosure of Expert Testimony.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 115.005, + 156.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 276.3985900878906, + 156.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 276.3985900878906, + 171.0740966796875 + ], + [ + 115.005, + 171.0740966796875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No. 5", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 242.925, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 361.0293273925781, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 361.0293273925781, + 403.3856506347656 + ], + [ + 242.925, + 403.3856506347656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 103.32000000000002, + 473.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 160.45919799804688, + 473.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 160.45919799804688, + 486.2338562011719 + ], + [ + 103.32000000000002, + 486.2338562011719 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 185.115, + 515.97 + ], + [ + 424.4033203125, + 515.97 + ], + [ + 424.4033203125, + 530.6405334472656 + ], + [ + 185.115, + 530.6405334472656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Interrogatory No. 2", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.38, + 157.14000000000001 + ], + [ + 341.9311218261719, + 157.14000000000001 + ], + [ + 341.9311218261719, + 171.5975341796875 + ], + [ + 253.38, + 171.5975341796875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 99.01500000000001, + 250.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 145.24705505371094, + 250.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 145.24705505371094, + 262.56494140625 + ], + [ + 99.01500000000001, + 262.56494140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 180.81, + 305.37 + ], + [ + 420.8157958984375, + 305.37 + ], + [ + 420.8157958984375, + 321.7647705078125 + ], + [ + 180.81, + 321.7647705078125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Plaintiff's employment and earnings history prior to and after the alleged", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.92, + 157.14000000000001 + ], + [ + 497.53499999999997, + 157.14000000000001 + ], + [ + 497.53499999999997, + 172.68109130859375 + ], + [ + 127.92, + 172.68109130859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Interrogatory No. 18", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.765, + 204.93 + ], + [ + 348.62890625, + 204.93 + ], + [ + 348.62890625, + 219.68701171875 + ], + [ + 252.765, + 219.68701171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 99.63, + 285.92999999999995 + ], + [ + 148.57489013671875, + 285.92999999999995 + ], + [ + 148.57489013671875, + 300.3170471191406 + ], + [ + 99.63, + 300.3170471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Lanai Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 181.42499999999998, + 329.66999999999996 + ], + [ + 424.18212890625, + 329.66999999999996 + ], + [ + 424.18212890625, + 345.6870422363281 + ], + [ + 181.42499999999998, + 345.6870422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Interrogatory No. 23", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 25, + "polygon": [ + [ + 254.60999999999996, + 366.12 + ], + [ + 347.00482177734375, + 366.12 + ], + [ + 347.00482177734375, + 379.08000000000004 + ], + [ + 254.60999999999996, + 379.08000000000004 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 25, + "polygon": [ + [ + 183.885, + 515.97 + ], + [ + 423.6507568359375, + 515.97 + ], + [ + 423.6507568359375, + 530.758056640625 + ], + [ + 183.885, + 530.758056640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 26, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.99499999999998, + 414.72 + ], + [ + 353.6474914550781, + 414.72 + ], + [ + 353.6474914550781, + 429.570556640625 + ], + [ + 253.99499999999998, + 429.570556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 26, + "polygon": [ + [ + 268.14, + 575.91 + ], + [ + 374.3925476074219, + 575.91 + ], + [ + 374.3925476074219, + 590.820556640625 + ], + [ + 268.14, + 590.820556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "School behavioral problems, received counseling prior to the In~IJunt", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 28, + "polygon": [ + [ + 125.46000000000001, + 169.29 + ], + [ + 469.86, + 169.29 + ], + [ + 469.86, + 187.17913818359375 + ], + [ + 125.46000000000001, + 187.17913818359375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 28, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.30499999999998, + 255.14999999999998 + ], + [ + 178.85903930664062, + 255.14999999999998 + ], + [ + 178.85903930664062, + 267.58746337890625 + ], + [ + 127.30499999999998, + 267.58746337890625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 28, + "polygon": [ + [ + 131.60999999999999, + 383.13 + ], + [ + 182.90036010742188, + 383.13 + ], + [ + 182.90036010742188, + 395.4299011230469 + ], + [ + 131.60999999999999, + 395.4299011230469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 28, + "polygon": [ + [ + 134.685, + 510.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 186.7857666015625, + 510.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 186.7857666015625, + 522.1556091308594 + ], + [ + 134.685, + 522.1556091308594 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 29, + "polygon": [ + [ + 124.23000000000002, + 229.23 + ], + [ + 175.67388916015625, + 229.23 + ], + [ + 175.67388916015625, + 240.599853515625 + ], + [ + 124.23000000000002, + 240.599853515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANSWER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 29, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.92, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 179.522705078125, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 179.522705078125, + 437.46112060546875 + ], + [ + 127.92, + 437.46112060546875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "U) Pretrial Procedure 307A e=i.31.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 107.625, + 433.35 + ], + [ + 240.17529296875, + 433.35 + ], + [ + 240.17529296875, + 448.00616455078125 + ], + [ + 107.625, + 448.00616455078125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MA Pretrial Procedure", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 107.625, + 452.79 + ], + [ + 194.95499999999998, + 452.79 + ], + [ + 194.95499999999998, + 463.83428955078125 + ], + [ + 107.625, + 463.83428955078125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307A11 Depositions and Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 119.90420532226562, + 461.69999999999993 + ], + [ + 242.31000000000003, + 461.69999999999993 + ], + [ + 242.31000000000003, + 473.8097839355469 + ], + [ + 119.90420532226562, + 473.8097839355469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307AII(A) Discovery In General", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.765, + 471.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 244.07383728027344, + 471.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 244.07383728027344, + 483.2174377441406 + ], + [ + 129.765, + 483.2174377441406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Pretrial Procedure 307A aZ=i31", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.69999999999999, + 545.94 + ], + [ + 243.92764282226562, + 545.94 + ], + [ + 243.92764282226562, + 559.4877777099609 + ], + [ + 110.69999999999999, + 559.4877777099609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307A Pretrial Procedure", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.69999999999999, + 566.1899999999999 + ], + [ + 197.24325561523438, + 566.1899999999999 + ], + [ + 197.24325561523438, + 577.1751861572266 + ], + [ + 110.69999999999999, + 577.1751861572266 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307A11 Depositions and Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.69999999999999, + 575.0999999999999 + ], + [ + 244.15500000000003, + 575.0999999999999 + ], + [ + 244.15500000000003, + 587.0390167236328 + ], + [ + 110.69999999999999, + 587.0390167236328 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307A11(A) Discovery in General", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.765, + 584.8199999999999 + ], + [ + 247.23000000000002, + 584.8199999999999 + ], + [ + 247.23000000000002, + 596.0514678955078 + ], + [ + 129.765, + 596.0514678955078 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307Ak31 k. Relevancy and Materiality.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 327.795, + 174.14999999999998 + ], + [ + 499.995, + 174.14999999999998 + ], + [ + 499.995, + 186.3 + ], + [ + 327.795, + 186.3 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(3] Pretrial Procedure 307A \u20ac36..1.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 315.8124084472656, + 241.38 + ], + [ + 457.8270568847656, + 241.38 + ], + [ + 457.8270568847656, + 253.42529296875 + ], + [ + 315.8124084472656, + 253.42529296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307A Pretrial Procedure", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 316.56304931640625, + 260.01 + ], + [ + 402.21, + 260.01 + ], + [ + 402.21, + 270.7252197265625 + ], + [ + 316.56304931640625, + 270.7252197265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307AII Depositions and Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 321.645, + 269.73 + ], + [ + 450.79499999999996, + 269.73 + ], + [ + 450.79499999999996, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 321.645, + 281.07 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "307AII(A) Discovery in General", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 321.645, + 280.26 + ], + [ + 502.4549999999999, + 280.26 + ], + [ + 502.4549999999999, + 291.6 + ], + [ + 321.645, + 291.6 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "V.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 32, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.26500000000001, + 243.0 + ], + [ + 202.95000000000002, + 243.0 + ], + [ + 202.95000000000002, + 252.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 191.26500000000001, + 252.71999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VI.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 32, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.26500000000001, + 327.24 + ], + [ + 206.64000000000004, + 327.24 + ], + [ + 206.64000000000004, + 336.96 + ], + [ + 191.26500000000001, + 336.96 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION To COMPEL RESPONSES TO \nFIRST REQUEST TO_FRODUCE TO PLAINTIFF AND TO OVERRULE \nPLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS. & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, \nINCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 38, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.30499999999998, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 470.8102722167969, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 470.8102722167969, + 351.5796813964844 + ], + [ + 127.30499999999998, + 351.5796813964844 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND TO OVERRULE PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS, & FOR DEFENDANT'S EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 39, + "polygon": [ + [ + 119.92500000000001, + 307.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 467.40000000000003, + 307.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 467.40000000000003, + 344.25 + ], + [ + 119.92500000000001, + 344.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "APPEARANCES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 41, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.45, + 160.38 + ], + [ + 239.66546630859375, + 160.38 + ], + [ + 239.66546630859375, + 173.57952880859375 + ], + [ + 141.45, + 173.57952880859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 53, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.07500000000002, + 130.41 + ], + [ + 395.445, + 130.41 + ], + [ + 395.445, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 249.07500000000002, + 141.75 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Notice of Electronic Filing", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 54, + "polygon": [ + [ + 60.269999999999996, + 336.15 + ], + [ + 201.9354705810547, + 336.15 + ], + [ + 201.9354705810547, + 352.320556640625 + ], + [ + 60.269999999999996, + 352.320556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Docket Text:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 54, + "polygon": [ + [ + 62.11500000000001, + 442.26000000000005 + ], + [ + 129.29150390625, + 442.26000000000005 + ], + [ + 129.29150390625, + 456.47406005859375 + ], + [ + 62.11500000000001, + 456.47406005859375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 82 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 275 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 330 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 88 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 365 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 344 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 316 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 362 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 411 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 360 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 377 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 435 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 356 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 277 + ], + [ + "Line", + 59 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 403 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 311 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 644 + ], + [ + "Line", + 89 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 793 + ], + [ + "Line", + 89 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 800 + ], + [ + "Line", + 100 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 802 + ], + [ + "Line", + 92 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 639 + ], + [ + "Line", + 83 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 38, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 335 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 39, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 294 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 40, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 132 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 41, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 160 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 42, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 331 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 43, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 315 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 44, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 107 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 45, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 338 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 46, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 294 + ], + [ + "Line", + 60 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 47, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 112 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 48, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 310 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 49, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 288 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 50, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 313 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 51, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 343 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 52, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 108 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 53, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 95 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 54, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 55, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745764" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745764/_page_10_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745764/_page_10_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8a229e871276bb5d81b54cc77c41f1a44b57e399 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745764/_page_10_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:02bc2f63c21eab4c2bf8fab3d181feb9994b4123662c4ccd3455a8551b1c4a5f +size 10937 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745764/_page_6_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745764/_page_6_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8bd75f05d665b853013f73b79350dd862038aace --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745764/_page_6_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:132b6dd53aa7837cbbd5bf9620aec4fab6a3930e50b5751a2d1f614d37a95c13 +size 11261 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/EFTA02745820.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/EFTA02745820.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a2de3395234767925453fd06dca7ecc9fba95d8a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/EFTA02745820.md @@ -0,0 +1,714 @@ +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MAR + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MAR + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +![](_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg) + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA=.1 + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA I + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRAi + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRAi + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRAa + +# PLAINTIFF, C.M.A.'S, EMERGENCY MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING THE DEPOSITIONS OF SUSAN POPE AND DR. SERGE THYS AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through her undersigned attorneys, hereby files her Emergency Motion for Protective Order Regarding the Depositions of Susan Pope and Dr. Serge Thys and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, and in support there of states as follows: + +1. This is an action to recover money damages against Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, for acts of sexual abuse and prostitution committed upon the thenminor, C.M.A. + +2. On Friday, July 31, 2009, Defendant unilaterally scheduled the deposition of Susan Pope for Thursday, August 6, 2009, at 10:00 a.m., and the deposition of Dr. Serge Thys on August 31, 2009, at 3:15 p.m. (Attached hereto as Exhibits "A" and "la Pope is a mental health therapist and Dr. Thys is apsychiatrist. + +3. Plaintiff has plead thirty separate counts against EPSTEIN for separate incidences of abuse committed by EPSTEIN against Plaintiff pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255. 18 U.S.C. §2255, entitled "Civil remedy for personal injuries", creates aprivate right of action for minor children who were the victims of certain enumerated sex offenses. 18 U.S.C. §2255 also creates astatutory floor for the amount of damages a victim can recover for a violation of same. Plaintiff has also alleged a single count of Sexual Battery against EPSTEIN. + +4. There presently exists between the Plaintiff and EPSTEIN adisagreement as to whether the statutory damage floor established in 18 U.S.C. §2255 is recoverable for each commission of an enumerated sex offenses listed in 18 U.S.C. §2255, or whether the statutory damage floor can only be enforced once, regardless of how many times a defendant perpetrates an enumerated sex offense against a minor victim. + +5. This disagreement between the parties is properly the subject of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint For Failure to State a Cause + +I Although Defendant's Certificate of Service states that the Notices were sent via email and U.S. Mail on July 30, they were not c-mailed to undersigned until the following day, July 31m. + +of Action, and Motion For More Definite Statement; Motion to Strike, and Supporting Memorandum of Law (Attached hereto as Exhibit "C") which is currently pending before this Court. + +6. In the event that the Court rules that Plaintiff can recover the statutory damage floor established in 18 U.S.C. §2255 for each proven incident of abuse committed by EPSTEIN upon her, Plaintiff intends to rely exclusively on the statutory damages, rather than those damages which are available at common law. (See Plaintiff, C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255 attached hereto as Exhibit "D"). If however, the Court rules that the statutory floor applies only one time, regardless of the number of times EPSTEIN committed an enumerated sexual offense against her, Plaintiff will be pursuing all damages available to her at both common law and by statute. + +7. Given Plaintiff's intent to rely exclusively on the statutory damages available to her under 18 U.S.C. §2255 as outline above, Plaintiff will not be presenting any evidence of the extent of her physical, emotional, or pecuniary injuries, beyond evidence that she was the victim of sexual contact to which she was legally incapable of consenting by virtue of her age (including, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, and loss of the capacity to enjoy life). Accordingly, any testimony and/or discovery regarding those types of damages would not be relevant to any material issue pending in this case. + +8. Presently pending before the Court is Defendant EPSTEIN's Motion to Compel Plaintiff C.M.A. to Respond to Defendant's First Request to Produce and Answer Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories, and to Overrule Objections, and For an Award of Defendant's Reasonable Expenses (Attached hereto as Exhibit "E"). EPSTEIN is seeking from Plaintiff the production of certain treatment records of hers from the Susan Pope/Parent-Child Center, Inc., Dr. Serge Thys, a psychiatrist, Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkarainen, M.D. + +9. Also pending before the Court is Plaintiff, Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc. (Susan Pope), Dr. Serge Thys, Records of Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkareinen, M.D., With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 207) (Attached hereto as Exhibit "F"). + +10. Rather than allow the Court to rule on the pending motions regarding whether C.M.A, as a victim of repeated sexual offenses at the hands of EPSTEIN, should be subjected to further humiliation, embarrassment, and victimization, EPSTEIN has apparently decided to forge ahead without waiting for the Court's rulings regarding the scope of permissible discovery in this case. + +11. Neither the testimony of Susan Pope/Parent-Child Center, Inc. or Dr. Serge Thys will have any relevance whatsoever in the event that Plaintiff pursues only those statutory damages available to her under 18 U.S.C. §2255. To the contrary, the testimony from these providers regarding the confidential and private treatment would only serve to further humiliate, embarrass, and victimize C.M.A. + +12. Furthermore, C.M.A., the information sought by the Defendant is protected by the psychotherapist-patient privilege pursuant to the Supreme Court's decision in Jaffee v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1, 116 S.Ct. 1923 (1996)("All agree that a psychotherapist privilege covers confidential communications made to licensed psychiatrists and psychologists. We have no hesitation in concluding in this case that the federal privilege should also extend to confidential communications made to licensed social workers in the course of psychotherapy.") Ordinarily, a plaintiff does not place her mental condition in controversy merely by requesting damages for mental anguish or "garden variety" emotional distress. In order to place a party's mental condition in controversy the party must allege a specific mental or psychiatric disorder or intend to offer expert testimony to support their claim of emotional distress. Turner v Imperial Stores 161 F.R.D. 89 (S.D.Cal. 1995). The evidence sought is also protected under the substantive privacy rights recognized in Florida Statute §§90.503. + +13. Accordingly, Plaintiff respectfully moves for the entry of a protective order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 26(c) preventing the depositions of Susan Pope and Dr. Serge Thys. More particularly, Plaintiff requests the entry of an order precluding the depositions of Susan Pope and Dr. Serge Thys until such time as the Court rules on the issue regarding whether the statutory damage floor as contained in 18 U.S.C. §2255 applies to each proven commission of an enumerated sexual offense by EPSTEIN against CMA. Should the Court rule that 18 U.S.C. §2255 provides a per incident + +damage floor, the testimony would have absolutely no relevance whatsoever. In the event that the Court rules that the damage floor applies only once, the parties can then further brief the Court as to whether C.M.A has placed her mental condition "in controversy" such that it operates as a waiver of the psychotherapist-patient privilege. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, C.M.A., respectfully requests that this Court enter a protective order preventing the depositions of Susan Pope and Dr. Serge until such time as the Court decides whether the statutory damages pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 are available to a victim of an enumerated sexual offense on a per incident basis. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1 + +Counsel for the movant has conferred via e-mail with counsel for the Defendant regarding his position on Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for Protective Order Regarding the Depositions of Susan Pope and Dr. Serge and Incorporated Memorandum of Law and has advised the undersigned that he objects to the relief requested herein. + +/s/ Jack P. + +**CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 4rd day of August, 2009, I filed the foregoing +with the Clerk of the Court and send copies to all counsel of record via e-mail. + +![]() + +--- + +Jack Scarola + +Florida Bar No.: 169440 + +Jack P. [REDACTED] + +Florida Bar No.: 0547808 + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +Phone: (561) 686-6300 + +Fax: (561) 383-9424 + +Attorneys for Plaintiff + +# COUNSEL LIST + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Phone: (561) 582-7600 + +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Robert Critton, Esquire + +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP + +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 + +Phone: (561) 842-2820 + +Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire + +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 South Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Phone: (561) 202-6360 + +Fax: (561) 828-0983 + +**UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA** + +**CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80811-MARRA/ [REDACTED]** + +[REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and [REDACTED] + +[REDACTED], + +Defendants, + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +**NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION** + +**PLEASE TAKE NOTICE** that the undersigned attorney will take the deposition duces tecum of: + +**DEPONENT** + +Susan Pope +2001 W. Blue Heron Blvd. +Riviera Beach, FL 33401 + +**DATE & TIME      LOCATION OF DEPOSITION** + +Thursday      Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP +August 6, 2009      515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +10:00 a.m.      West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +upon oral examination, before U.S. Legal Support, a Notary Public, or any other officer authorized by law to take depositions in the State of Florida. The oral examination is being taken for the purpose of discovery, for use at trial, or for such other purposes as are permitted under the applicable Statutes of Rules of Court. + +![]()Robert D. Critton, Jr. +Attorney for Defendant Epstein + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List via email and U.S. Mail on this 30th day of July, 2009 + +![](_page_10_Picture_133.jpeg) + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +jagesq@bellsouth.net +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +jsx@searcylaw.com +jph@searcylaw.com +Co-Counsel for Plaintiff + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com +Counsel for Defendant [REDACTED] + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()![]()**UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA** + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80811-MARRA/[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and [REDACTED] + +[REDACTED], + +Defendants, + +\_\_\_\_\_/\_\_\_\_\_ + +**NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION** + +**PLEASE TAKE NOTICE** that the undersigned attorney will take the deposition dues tecum of: + +**DEPONENT** + +Dr. Serge Thys +2151 45th Street +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +**DATE & TIME      LOCATION OF DEPOSITION** + +Monday      Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP +August 31, 2009      303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 +3:15 p.m.      West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +upon oral examination, before U.S. Legal Support, a Notary Public, or any other officer authorized by law to take depositions in the State of Florida. The oral examination is being taken for the purpose of discovery, for use at trial, or for such other purposes as are permitted under the applicable Statutes of Rules of Court. + +![]()\_\_\_\_\_ +Robert D. Critton, Jr. +Attorney for Defendant Epstein + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List via email and U.S. Mail on this 30th day of July, 2009 + +![](_page_12_Picture_142.jpeg) + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A.* +*reelrhw@hotmail.com* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +*[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net)* +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +*[isx@searcylaw.com](mailto:isx@searcylaw.com)* +*[iph@searcylaw.com](mailto:iph@searcylaw.com)* +*Co-Counsel for Plaintiff* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +*[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com)* +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]() + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/JOHNSON + +C.M. A., + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +Y EPSTEIN and + +Defendants, + +#### DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION, AND MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT; MOTION TO STRIKE, AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, ("EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned counsel, moves to dismiss Count I through XXXI of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint for failure to state a cause of action, and for more definite statement, or to strike, as specified herein. Rule 12(b)(6), (e) and (f), Fed.R.Civ.P. (2008); Local Gen. Rule 7.1 (S.D. Fla. 2008). In support of dismissal, Defendant states: + +The First Amended Complaint attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through XXX are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 - Civil Remedies for Personal Injuries; Count XXXI is entitled "Sexual Battery," and Count XXXII is entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortious Assault only against Defendant, " Under the heading "Factual Allegations" of the First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff also references numerous federal and state criminal statutes, but fails to allege whether or not she is attempting to assert claims based on these statutes. (¶15, 1st Am. Comp.). + +![](_page_14_Picture_12.jpeg) + +Dismissal is required on the following grounds: (1) A review of the complaint allegations establishes that Plaintiff has failed to state the 30 causes of action under 18 U.S.C.A. 2255. As discussed more fully below herein, this statute does not allow for the Plaintiff to allege 30 separate causes of action; rather, the statute allows for the Plaintiff to attempt to assert one claim. In addition, Plaintiff has failed to allege a violation of the requisite predicate act as identified in 18 U.S.C. §2255 in order to state a cause of action. Thus, Counts I through XXX against EPSTEIN are required to be dismissed. Rule 12(b)(6), Fla.R.Civ.P. + +(2) Count )OO(l - Sexual Battery is also required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action as Plaintiff has failed to allege the requisite elements of such claim. The count fails to sufficiently allege whether it is being brought pursuant to common or statutory law. Further, in Count XXXI, Plaintiff reincorporates in their entirety Counts I through XXX; such pleading is improper and requires dismissal under the applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +### Supporting Memorandum of Law I. Motion To Dismiss Standard + +As established by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. V. Twomblv 127 S.Ct. 1955 (2007), a motion to dismiss should be granted if the plaintiff does not plead "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Id, at 1974. Although the complaint need not provide detailed factual allegations, the basis for relief in the complaint must state "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id at 1965. Further, Iflactual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level ... on the + +assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact)." Id. + +On a motion to dismiss, the well pleaded allegations of plaintiffs complaint are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. M.T.V. v. DeKalb County Sch. Dist., 446 F.3d 1153, 1156 (11th Cir.2006). + +Significantly, the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. V. Twombly abrogated the often cited observation that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief." Id, (abrogating and quoting Conley v. 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 102, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957)). The Supreme Court rejected the notion that "a wholly conclusory statement of claim [can) survive a motion to dismiss whenever the pleadings le[ave] open the possibility that a plaintiff might later establish some 'set of [undisclosed] facts' to support recovery." Id. As explained by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp., supra at 1664-65: + +While a complaint attacked by a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations ibid.- Sanivan v. American Bd. of Psychiatry and Neurology, Inc., 40 F.3d 247, 251 (C.A.7 1994) a plaintiffs obligation to provide the "grounds" of his "entitle[ment] to relief" requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do, see Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265, 286, 106 S.Ct. 2932, 92 L.Ed.2d 209 (1986) (on a motion to dismiss, courts "are not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation"). Factual allegations mu noug raise a right to relief above the speculative level, see 5 C. & A Federal ct Procedure & 1216. on. 235-236 (3d ed.2004) (hereinafter ("[T]he pleading must contain something more ... than ... a statement of acts that merely creates a suspicion [of] a legally cognizable right of action"), on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact), see, e.g., Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A. 534 U.S. 506. 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002); Neitzke v. 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (" Rule 12(bM6) does not countenance ... dismissals based on a judge's disbelief of a complaint's + +> factual allegations"); Scheuer v. , 416 U.S. 232, 236, 94 S.Ct. 1683 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (19741 (a well-pleaded complaint may proceed even if it appears "that a recovery is very remote and unlikely"). + +In discussing Twomblv the Eleventh Circuit in v. Fla. International Univ. 495 F.3d 1289, 1295 (11th Cir. 2007), noted - "The Supreme Court's most recent formulation of the pleading specificity standard is that 'stating such a claim requires a complaint with enough factual matter (taken as true) to suggest' the required element." In order to sufficiently allege the claim, the complaint is required to identify "facts that are suggestive enough to render [the element] plausible." M, 495 F.3d at 1296 (quoting Twomblv, 127 S.Ct. at 1965). + +# II. Standard for More Definite Statement, Pleading, & Motion to Strike + +Pursuant to Rule 12(e), a party may move for more definite statement of a pleading to which a responsive pleading is allowed where the pleading "is so vague or ambiguous that the party cannot reasonably frame a response." The motion is required to point out the defects and the desired details. Id. As to the general rules and form of pleading, Rules 8 and 10, a claim for relief must contain "a short plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief," Rule 8(a)(3); and may contain alternative claims within a count or as many separate claims. Rule 10(d)(2) and (3). Pursuant to Rule 12(f) - Motion to Strike, "the court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter." + +# III. Counts I through XXX, 18 U.S.C. 42255, are required to be dismissed. + +A. 18 U.S.C. 62255 creates a single civil remedy or cause of action on behalf of a minor plaintiff against a defendant. The civil remedy afforded is not on a "per violation" basis. + +Contrary to Plaintiffs attempted assertion of 30 separate counts pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. §2255 - Civil Remedy for Personal Injuries, this statute creates asingle federal cause of action or "civil remedy" for a minor victim of sexual, abuse, molestation and exploitation. Under the plain meaning of the statutory text, §2255 does not create separate causes of action on behalf of a minor against a defendant on a"per violation" basis. No where in the statutory text is there any reference to the civil remedy afforded by this statute as being on a"per violation" basis. 18 U.S.C. 2255(a) creates a civil remedy for "a minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation ... ." See v. Husband, 428 F.Supp.2d 432 (E.D. Va. 2006); v. Husband, 376 F.Supp.2d 603 (E.D. Va. 2006) Doe v. Liberatore, 478F.Supp.2d 742, 754 (M.D. Pa. 2007); and the recent cases in front of this court on Defendant's Motions to Dismiss and For More Definite Statement — Doe No. 2 v. Epstein 2009WL 383332 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009); Doe No. 3 v. Epstein, 2009WL 383330 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009); Doe No. 4 v. Epstein 2009WL 383286 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009); and Doe No. 5 v. Epstein 2009WL 383383 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009). + +There is no reported case supporting Plaintiff's tortured and nonsensical interpretation of §2255. In all of these cases (cited above), each of the Plaintiffs brought asingle count or cause of action attempting to allege numerous violations of the "predicate acts" specifically identified in §2255. "18 U.S.C. §2255 gives victims of sexual conduct who are minors aprivate right of action." v. . 492 + +F.Supp.2d 1186, 1188 (N.D. Cal. 2007), (emphasis added). 18 U.S.C.A. §2255 "merely provides a cause of action for damages in 'any appropriate United States District Court.'" Id, at 1189. See also Tilton v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc. 554 F.3d 1371 (11th Cir. Jan. 15, 2009)(District Court granted plaintiff "the minimum 'actual damages' prescribed by §2255(a)," wherein plaintiff alleged that defendants had violated three of the statutory predicate acts). + +In improperly attempting to bring 30 separate counts pursuant to §2255, Plaintiffs complaint alleges in part that "beginning in approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003, the Defendant coerced and enticed the impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct. These acts occurred, on average, one to three times per week from late may or early June of 2002 until August 2003. At a bare minimum these acts occurred twice a month from June 2002 until August of 2003." Am. Complaint, ¶13. Plaintiff then claims the identical damages in each of the 30 §2255 counts. See 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193, and 199. As well, in Count XXXI, entitled "Sexual Battery," Plaintiff claims the identical "actual damages" in that she realleges and incorporates each and every of the 199 allegations in the 30 prior counts. + +It is well settled that in interpreting a statute, the court's inquiry begins with the plain and unambiguous language of the statutory text. CBS, Inc. v. Prime Time 24 Venture, 245 F.3d 1217 (11th Cir. 2001); U.S. v. Castroneves 2009 WL 528251, \*3 (S.D. Fla. 2009), citing Reeves v. Astrue, 526 F.3d 732, 734 (11th Cir. 2008); and + +v. Husband, 376 F.Supp.2d at 610 ("When interpreting a statute, [a court's] inquiry begins with the text."). "The Court must first look to the plain meaning of the words, and scrutinize the statute's 'language, structure, and purpose.' Id. In addition, in construing a statute, a court is to presume that the legislature said what it means and means what it said, and not add language or give some absurd or strained interpretation. As stated in CBS. Inc. supra at 1228 — "Those who ask courts to give effect to perceived legislative intent by interpreting statutory language contrary to its plain and unambiguous meaning are in effect asking courts to alter that language, and '[clouds have no authority to alter statutory language.... We cannot add to the terms of [the] provision what Congress left out.' Merritt, 120 F.3d at 1187." See also Dodd v. U.S., 125 S.Ct. 2478 (2005); 73 Am.Jur.2d Statutes §124. + +Title 18 of the U.S.C. is entitled "Crimes and Criminal Procedure." §2255 is contained in "Part I. Crimes, Chap. 110. Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children." 18 U.S.C. §2255 (2003), is entitled Civil remedy for personal injuries, and provides: + +- (a) Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than \$50,000 in value. +- (b) Any action commenced under this section shall be barred unless the complaint is filed within six years after the right of action first accrues or in the case of a person under a legal disability, not later than three years after the disability. + +Reading the entire statute in context, no where is there any language indicating that a minor plaintiff has a private right of action against a defendant "per violation." + +Under the statutory rules of construction, had the legislature intended to give a plaintiff multiple causes of action against a defendant on a per violation basis, the statute would have included such language. Had Congress wanted to create such a remedy as Plaintiff attempts to bring, it could have easily included language of "per violation" after the presumptive damages amount in subsection (a). By its own terms, the statute provides for the recovery of "actual damages the minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including attorney's fees." There is absolutely no language that allows for a plaintiff to multiply the specified or presumptive damages recoverable on a "per violation" basis. The Plaintiffs position on §2255 puts a strained interpretation with an absurd result. The absurdity of Plaintiffs position is further evidenced by Count XXXI — "Sexual Battery" where Plaintiff reincorporates each of the 30 counts and seeks the identical "actual damages." + +In v. , supra, the defendants sought to dismiss plaintiffs' 18 U.S.C. §2255 action based on forum non conveniens. The Northern District of California Court, relying on the rules of statutory construction, rejected plaintiffs' argument that Congress had intended to abrogate the forum non conveniens doctrine in a §2255 action; the District Court noted that the statute does not contain a mandatory venue provision. Had Congress wanted to get rid of the forum non-conveniens doctrine, it would have said so in the statute. Also, in v. Husband, 428 F.Supp. 432; and 376 F.Supp.2d 603, the plaintiff invoked "the accompanying civil remedy for these criminal violations, stating that she has sustained and continues to sustain physical and mental damages, humiliation, and embarrassment as a result of Defendant's criminal acts." In other words, she + +brought a single cause of action, based on allegations of multiple violations of the §2255 predicate acts. Furthermore, the court refused to add a venue interpretation that simply was not written into the statutory text. See other §2255 cases cited herein. + +For an example of a statute wherein the legislature included the language "for each violation" in assessing a "civil penalty," see 18 U.S.C. §216, entitled "Penalties and injunctions," of Chapter 11 — "Bribery, Graft, and Conflict of Interests," also contained in Title 18 - "Crimes and Criminal Procedure." Subsection (b) of §216 gives the United States Attorney General the power to bring a "civil action ... against any person who engages in conduct constituting an offense under" specified sections of the bribery, graft, and conflicts of interest statutes. The statute further provides in relevant part that "upon proof of such conduct by a preponderance of the evidence, such person shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than \$50,000 for each violation or the amount of compensation which the person received or offered for the prohibited conduct, which ever amount is greater." As noted, 18 U.S.C. §2255 does not include such language. + +Accordingly, Plaintiffs multiple counts brought pursuant to §2255 are required to be dismissed for failure to state multiple causes of action. + +#### B. Also requiring dismissal Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege the requisite §2255 predicate acts. + +Also requiring dismissal of Plaintiffs purported §2255 claim(s) is Plaintiffs failure to sufficiently allege any violation of a requisite predicate act as specifically identified in subsection (a) of the statute quoted above. Relevant to Plaintiffs complaint, 18 U.S.C. 2255(a) creates a civil remedy for "a minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title + +and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation ... ." See cases cited above herein. Plaintiff has failed to plead any factual allegations whatsoever pertaining to violations of the specified "predicate acts." In paragraph 15, Plaintiff makes reference by citation only to the following federal statutes — "18 U.S.C. §§2241, 2242, 2243, 2421, and 2423." See endnote following the Certificate of Service herein for the complete statutory text.' + +First, Plaintiff's reliance on 18 U.S.C. §2241 in its entirety as a predicate act is improper; it is a violation of subsection §2241(c) that is a designated predicate act. A reading of the text of the other referenced federal statutes shows that no where in Plaintiffs Amended Complaint are there any allegations setting forth the requisite elements of the cited predicate act. Further, any attempted reliance by Plaintiff on other federal or state statutes not specifically identified in 18 U.S.C. §2255 is improper and fails to state a cause of action. See ¶15 of Am. Complaint wherein Plaintiff references by citation additional Florida State statutes and thereafter incorporates such reference into her §2255 claim(s). See v. Husband 376 F.Supp.2d, and 428 Supp.2d, supra, requiring allegations/evidence to establish predicate act under 18 U.S.C. §2255 in order to be afforded civil remedy. + +Plaintiff appears to be relying solely on an "agreement with the Federal Government" as a basis for imposing liability under 18 U.S.C. §2255. See ¶¶17, 18, and 19 of 181 Am. Complaint. There is nothing in Plaintiff's allegations that would allow for a §2255 claim to go forward without specifying the statutory predicate act and factual allegations pertaining to a violation of the requisite predicate act(s). Accordingly, under + +the standard of pleading as established in Twombly, supra, Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege the requisite elements of a §2255 claim, thus requiring dismissal; for failure to state a cause of action. + +C. 18 U.S.C. 42255 does not allow for the recovery of punitive damages. Thus, Plaintiff's request for punitive damages under 42255 is required to be dismissed or stricken. + +In each of the improperly asserted Counts I through XXX, Plaintiff also seeks punitive damages. A plain reading of 18 U.S.C. §2255, quoted above herein, establishes that the statute does not allow for the recovery of punitive damages. Had Congress wanted to allow for such a recovery, it could have easily written such language into the damages provision of the statute. The legislative body chose not to write a punitive damages component into §2255 as it has done in other statutes affording civil remedies. In relevant part, §2255 reads - Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section ... of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than \$50,000 in value." See discussion of rules of statutory construction in part III.A. herein. See subsection (f)(2) of 18 U.S.C. §2252A, entitled Certain activities relating to material constituting or containing child pornography, also contained in Chapter 110, Part I, Crimes, within which specific reference is made to "compensatory and punitive damages" in setting forth the relief which may be afforded to a plaintiff in bringing a civil action under §2252A(f). + +Accordingly, Plaintiff's claims for punitive damages are required to be dismissed with prejudice or stricken. + +D. In the alternative, pursuant to constitutional law principles of statutory interpretation, 18 U.S.C. 42255 is required to be interpreted as creating a single "civil remedy" or cause of action on behalf of a minor plaintiff against a defendant The "civil remedy" afforded is not on a "per violation" basis. + +As set forth above, it is Defendant's position that the text of 18 U.S.C. §2255 does not allow a Plaintiff, such as C.M.A., to pursue the civil remedy and the damages afforded under the statute on a "per violation" basis. See part III.A. above. In the alternative, simply for the sake of argument, if one were to assume that the language of §2255 were vague or ambiguous, under the constitutional based protections of due process, judicial restraint, and the rule of lenity applied in construing a statute, Defendant's position as to the meaning of the statute would prevail over Plaintiffs view. See United States v. , 128 S.Ct. 2020, 2025 (2008). As summarized by the United States Supreme Court in=, supra, at 2025: + +... The rule of lenity requires ambiguous criminal laws to be interpreted in favor of the defendants subjected to them. See United States v. Gradwell, 243 U.S. 476, 485, 37 S.Ct. 407, 61 L.Ed. 857 (1917); McBoyle v. United States, 283 U.S. 25, 27, 51 S.Ct. 340, 75 L.Ed. 816 (1931); United States v. Bass, 404 U.S. 336, 347-349, 92 S.Ct. 515, 30 L.Ed.2d 488 (1971). This venerable rule not only vindicates the fundamental principle that no citizen should be held accountable for a violation of a statute whose commands are uncertain, or subjected to punishment that is not clearly prescribed. It also places the weight of inertia upon the party that can best induce Congress to speak more clearly and keeps courts from making criminal law in Congress's stead. ... + +In , the Court was faced with the interpretation of the term "proceeds" in the federal money laundering statute, 18 U.S.C. §1956. "The federal money-laundering + +statute prohibits a number of activities involving criminal 'proceeds.'" Id, at 2023. Noting that the term "proceeds" was not defined in the statute, the Supreme Court stated the well settled principle that "when a term is undefined, we give it its ordinary meaning." Id, at 2024. Under the ordinary meaning principle, the government's position was that proceeds meant "receipts," while the defendant's position was that proceeds meant "profits." The Supreme Court recognized that under either of the proffered "ordinary meanings," the provisions of the federal money-laundering statute were still coherent, not redundant, and the statute was not rendered "utterly absurd." Under such a situation, citing to a long line of cases and the established rule of lenity, "the tie must go to the defendant." Id, at 2025. See portion of Court's opinion quoted above. "Because the 'profits' definition of 'proceeds' is always more defendant friendly that the 'receipts' definition, the rule of lenity dictates that it should be adopted." Id. + +Plaintiffs position would subject Defendant EPSTEIN to a punishment that is not clearly prescribed — an unwritten multiplier of the "actual damages" or the presumptive damages. The rule of lenity requires that Defendant's interpretation of the remedy afforded under §2255 be adopted. + +In addition, under the Due Process Clause's basic principle of fair warning - + +... a criminal statute must give fair warning of the conduct that it makes a crime ... . As was said in United States v. Harriss 347 U.S. 612, 617, 74 S.Ct. 808, 812, 98 L.Ed. 989, + +'The constitutional requirement of definiteness is violated by a criminal statute that fails to give a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that his contemplated conduct is forbidden by the statute. The underlying principle is that no man shall be held criminally responsible for conduct which he could not reasonably understand to be proscribed.' + +> Thus we have struck down a [state] criminal statute under the Due Process Clause where it was not 'sufficiently explicit to inform those who are subject to it what conduct on their part will render them liable to its penalties.' Connally v. General Const. Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391, 46 S.Ct. 126, 127, 70 L.Ed. 322. We have recognized in such cases that 'a statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application violates the first essential of due process of law,' ibid., and that 'No one may be required at peril of life, liberty or property to speculate as to the meaning of penal statutes. All are entitled to be informed as to what the State commands or forbids.' Lanzetta v. New Jersey, 306 U.S. 451, 453, 59 S.Ct. 618, 619, 83 L.Ed. 888. + +Thus, applying these well-entrenched constitutional principles of statutory interpretation and application, Plaintiffs 30 separate counts brought under 18 U.S.C. §2255 are required to be dismissed. + +IV. Count XXXI — "Sexual Battery" is required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. In the alternative, Plaintiff should be required to more definitely state whether she is attempting to allege a claim under Florida common or statutory law, or some federal law, and further allege the required elements and factual allegations. + +In Count XXXI, although entitled "Sexual Battery," Plaintiff improperly realleges and incorporates each and every allegation and each and every count (30) which she previously attempted to allege, resulting in a count that is 204 paragraphs long and includes reference to Federal and Florida statutory law, while also including language sounding in common law. The count is such a hodgepodge of legal allegations that Plaintiff fails to state a legally recognizable or viable cause of action. + +In ¶15, Plaintiff alleges that "the acts referenced in paragraphs 9 through 14, committed by Defendant against the then minor Plaintiff, C.M.A., were committed in violation of numerous criminal State and Federal statutes ... , including but not limited to, those crimes designated in 18 U.S.C. §§2241, 2242, 2243, 2421, and 2423, criminal + +offenses outlined in Chapter 800 of the Federal Codes, as well as those designated in Florida Statutes §796.03, §796.07, §796.045, §796.04, §39.01; and §827.04." In ¶203 Plaintiff also alleges that Defendant's "tortious commission of sexual battery upon C.M.A. were (sic) done willfully and maliciously." + +Supporting Defendant's position that Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action in Count XXXI, 18 U.S.C. O2241(c), not §2241 in its entirety, as discussed above, is one of the predicate acts, along with 2242, 2243, 2421, and 2423, designated in the federal civil remedy statute — 18 U.S.C. §2255. Plaintiff attempted and failed to allege such a claim in the previous counts. Defendant can find no criminal offenses in any "Chapter 800 of the Federal Codes" which give rise to a civil cause of action. + +The same is true for Plaintiffs reference to the Florida Statutes. Not one of the statutes referenced creates a private cause of action or affords a civil remedy on behalf of the alleged victim of the criminal offense.' (Except for Florida Statute §39.01, all of the statutes referenced by Plaintiff are contained Title XLVI. Crimes of the Florida Statutes). The referenced criminal statutes set forth acts subject to criminal prosecution and the criminal penalties therefor, if proven. See generally Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Plaza Materials Corp. 908 So.2d 360, 374 (Fla. 2005)("not every statutory violation carries a civil remedy")• Miami Herald Pub. Co. v. Ferre, 636 F.Supp. 970 (S.D. Fla. 1985)(violation of Florida's criminal extortion statute does not give rise to civil cause of + +&#x27; Florida Statutes O796.03 — Procuring person under age 18 for prostitution; 796.04 — Forcing, compelling, or coercing another to become a prostitute; 796.045 (which did not become effective until Oct. 1, 2004) - Sex trafficking; penalties; 796.07 — Prohibiting prostitution, etc.; evidence; penalties; definitions; and §39.01, entitled "Definitions," is contained in Title V — Judicial Branch, Chapter 39 - "Proceedings relating to Children." + +action for damages); Mantooth v. Richards 557 So.2d 646 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), per curiam, (Dismissal of plaintiffs civil complaint affirmed where parental kidnapping statutes concerned only criminal violations and did not create a civil remedy). + +As well, the Count XXXI allegations make absolutely no reference to any viable common law cause of action; Defendant should not be required to guess or speculate as to the nature of Plaintiffs cause of action. Even if Defendant were to speculate as to the supposed cause of action, these causes of action (common law or otherwise) have not been sufficiently alleged. On its face, in accordance with the pleading requirements annunciated in Twombly, supra, Count XXXI is completely lacking as to any common law elements or the underlying factual allegations to support each element, and thus, Count XXXI is required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. + +In the alternative, Plaintiff should be required to more definitely state whether her claim is being brought pursuant to federal or Florida statutory law, specifically identify the statute it is being brought under, or whether her claim is being asserted under common law. Once Plaintiff identifies the nature of her claim, she is required to sufficiently allege in accordance with Twomblv the requisite elements of the identified claim, along with sufficient factual allegations supporting the elements. + +# Conclusion + +Pursuant to applicable law, Counts I through XXXI of Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint are required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. 18 U.S.C. does not allow for the Plaintiff C.M.A. to allege separate causes of action against + +Defendant EPSTEIN, but rather allows Plaintiff to attempt to assert a single civil remedy if she can prove a violation of any of the statutory enumerated predicate acts. Further, Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege a requisite predicate act under §2255. In addition, §2255 does not allow for recovery of punitive damages. Count XXXI is also subject to dismissal with prejudice for failure to state a cause of action, as Plaintiff has failed to allege a legally viable or recognizable cause of action. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court grant his motion to dismiss Counts I through XXXI, or alternative motion for more definite statement, and motion to strike. + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 12th day of March, 2009: + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +iagesq@bellsouth.net +Counsel for Defendants Jeffrey Epstein +and [REDACTED] + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +jsxAsearcvlaw.com joh(d!searcvlaw.com Co-Counsel for Plaintiff + +# ' ENDNOTE: + +ecf brucereinhartlaw.c Counsel for Defendant + +Respectfully su tted, + +By: ROBERT D CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar o. 224162 rcrit©bcIcl w.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +U.S.C.A. - Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure, Chapter 109A. Sexual Abuse + +# §2241. Aggravated Sexual Abuse. + +(c) With children.--Whoever crosses a State line with intent to engage in a sexual act with a person who has not attained the age of 12 years, or in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly engages in a sexual act with another person who has not attained the age of 12 years, or knowingly engages in a sexual act under the circumstances described in subsections (a) and (b) with another person who has attained the age of 12 years but has not + +attained the age of 16 years (and is at least 4 years younger than the person so engaging), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for not less than 30 years or for life. If the defendant has previously been convicted of another Federal offense under this subsection, or of a State offense that would have been an offense under either such provision had the offense occurred in a Federal prison, unless the death penalty is imposed, the defendant shall be sentenced to life in prison. + +# § 2242. Sexual abuse + +Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly-- + +- (1) causes another person to engage in a sexual act by threatening or placing that other person in fear (other than by threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person will be subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping); or + - (2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is-- + - (A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or +- (B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act; + +or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life. + +# § 2243. Sexual abuse of a minor or + +(a) Of a minor.--Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly engages in a sexual act with another person who-- + +- (1) has attained the age of 12 years but has not attained the age of 16 years; and +- (2) is at least four years younger than the person so engaging; + +or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both. + +(b) Of a --Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly engages in a sexual act with another person who is-- + +- (1) in official detention; and +- (2) under the custodial, supervisory, or disciplinary authority of the person so engaging; + +or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both. + +(c) Defenses.—(1) In a prosecution under subsection (a) of this section, it is a defense, which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant reasonably believed that the other person had attained the age of 16 years. + +(2) In a prosecution under this section, it is a defense, which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence, that the persons engaging in the sexual act were at that time married to each other. + +(d) State of mind proof requirement--In a prosecution under subsection (a) of this section, the Government need not prove that the defendant knew-- + +- (1) the age of the other person engaging in the sexual act; or +- (2) that the requisite age difference existed between the persons so engaging. + +## Chapter 117 Transportation for Illegal Sexual Activity and Related Crimes § 2421. Transportation generally + +Whoever knowingly transports any individual in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, with intent that such individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. + +# § 2423. Transportation of minors + +(a) Transportation with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity.--A person who knowingly transports an individual who has not attained the age of 18 years in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any commonwealth, territory or possession of the United States, with intent that the individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 10 years or for life. + +(b) Travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct.—A person who travels in interstate commerce or travels into the United States, or a United States citizen or an alien admitted for permanent residence in the United States who travels in foreign commerce, for the purpose of engaging in any illicit sexual conduct with another person shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. + +(c) Engaging in illicit sexual conduct in foreign places.--Any United States citizen or alien admitted for permanent residence who travels in foreign commerce, and engages in any illicit sexual conduct with another person shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. + +(d) Ancillary offenses.--Whoever, for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain, arranges, induces, procures, or facilitates the travel of a person knowing that such a person is traveling in interstate commerce or foreign commerce for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual conduct shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. + +(e) Attempt and conspiracy.--Whoever attempts or conspires to violate subsection (a), (b), (c), or (d) shall be punishable in the same manner as a completed violation of that subsection. + +(f) Definition.--As used in this section, the term "illicit sexual conduct" means (1) a sexual act (as defined in section 2246) with a person under 18 years of age that would be in violation of chapter 109A if the sexual act occurred in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States; or (2) any commercial sex act (as defined in section 1591) with a person under 18 years of age. + +(g) Defense.—In a prosecution under this section based on illicit sexual conduct as defined in subsection (f)(2), it is a defense, which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant reasonably believed that the person with whom the defendant engaged in the commercial sex act had attained the age of 18 years. + +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRNJOHNSON + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and + +Defendants. + +# PLAINTIFF, C.M.A.'S, CONDITIONAL NOTICE OF INTENT TO EXCLUSIVELY RELY ON STATUTORY DAMAGES PROVIDED BY 18 U.S.C. §2255 + +Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through her undersigned counsel, hereby files her Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255, and in support thereof states as follows: + +1. This is an action to recover money damages against Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, for acts of sexual abuse and prostitution committed upon the thenminor, C.M.A. + +2. Plaintiff has plead thirty separate counts against EPSTEIN for separate incidences of abuse committed by EPSTEIN against Plaintiff pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255. 18 U.S.C. §2255, entitled "Civil remedy for personal injuries", creates a private right of action for minor children who were the victim of certain enumerated sex offenses. 18 U.S.C. §2255 also creates a statutory floor for the amount of damages a + +![](_page_35_Picture_13.jpeg) + +victim can recover for a violation of same. Plaintiff has also alleged a single count of Sexual Battery against EPSTEIN as well. + +3. There presently exists between the Plaintiff and EPSTEIN a disagreement as to whether the statutory damage floor established in 18 U.S.C. §2255 is recoverable for each commission of an enumerated sex offense listed in 18 U.S.C. §2255, or whether the statutory damage floor can only be enforced once, regardless of how many times a defendant perpetrates an enumerated sex offense against a minor victim. + +4. This disagreement between the parties is properly the subject of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint For Failure to State a Cause of Action, and Motion For More Definite Statement; Motion to Strike, and Supporting Memorandum of Law (D.E. 47) which is currently pending before this Court. + +5. In the event that the Court rules that the Plaintiff is entitled to recover the statutory damages created by 18 U.S.C. §2255 for each violation', Plaintiff will be pursuing only those statutory damages, and will not pursue damages available at common law. + +6. Should the Court rule however, that the statutory damage floor can only be applied once, Plaintiff will be pursuing any and all damages available to her, whether they be pursuant to statute or by common law. + +&#x27; The parties also disagree about the amount the statutory damage floor should be for this case. 18 U.S.C. §2255 was amended in 2005 to increase the floor from \$50,000 to \$150,000. The parties essentially disagree about which version of 18 U.S.C. §2255 should apply In this case.

Respectfully submitted,

Is/Jack P. [REDACTED]

JACK SCAROLA

Florida Bar No. 169440

JACK P. [REDACTED]

Florida Bar No.: 0547808

Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A.

2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard

West Palm Beach, Florida 33409

Phone: (561) 686-6300

Fax: (561) 383-9456

Attorneys for Plaintiff, C.M.A.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 5th, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached counsel list via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF.

Is/Jack P. [REDACTED]

JACK SCAROLA

Florida Bar No. 169440

JACK P. [REDACTED]

Florida Bar No.: 0547808

Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A.

2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard

West Palm Beach, Florida 33409

Phone: (561) 686-6300

Fax: (561) 383-9456

Attorneys for Plaintiff, C.M.A.

COUNSEL LIST

Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire
Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.
250 Australian Avenue S.
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Phone: (561) 863-9100

Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire
Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A.
250 South Australian Avenue
Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Phone: (561)-202-6360
Fax: (561)-828-0983

Robert Critton, Esquire
Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP
515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400
West Palm Beach, FL 33414
Phone: (561)-842-2820
Fax: (561)-844-6929

Richard H. Willits, Esquire
Richard H. Willits, P.A.
2290 10th Avenue North
Suite 404
Lake Worth, FL 33461
Phone: (561)-582-7600
Fax: (561)-588-8819

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80811-MARRAMa

C.M. A.,

Plaintiff,

v.

Y EPSTEIN and

Defendants,

DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF C.M.A. TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST REQUEST TO PRODUCE AND ANSWER DEFENDANTS FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES. AND TO OVERRULE OBJECTIONS. AND FOR AN AWARD OF DEFENDANT'S REASONABLE EXPENSES

Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, moves this Court for an order compelling Plaintiff, C.M.A. to respond to Defendant's First Request To Produce and to answer Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories, and to overrule her objections asserted in Plaintiffs Response To Defendant's First Request To Produce, dated February 13, 2009, and in Plaintiff's Notice of Serving Answers To Interrogatories, dated February 18, 2009. Defendant further seeks an award of his • reasonable expenses, including expenses, associated with the making of this motion. Rule 37, Fed.R.Civ.P. (2008); Local Gen. Rules 7.1 and 26.1 H (S.D. Fla. 2008). In support of his motion, Defendant states:

Prior to the filing of this motion, on April 1, 2009, Defendant's counsel communicated by telephone with Plaintiffs counsel In agood faith effort to resolve the discovery Issues herein. This motion addresses those discovery Items which remain at

issue. Also, rather than file 2 separate motions to compel, Defendant filed one addressing the production requests and Interrogatories because the discovery issues overlap.

Motion To Compel Responses to Production Reauests Nos. 1, 2, 4. 5. and 19, and Answers to Interrogatories Nos. 2, 18. and 23.

Production Request No. 1

1. Individual and/or joint income tax returns and supporting documentation including W-2 and 1099 forms for 2002-2007 and, as well as all records or documentation relative to the Plaintiffs earnings for the current year.

Response:

Objection. Irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible information.

Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery

Plaintiffs tax returns and supporting documentation are relevant to Plaintiffs damages claims and, thus, discoverable. Plaintiffs complaint alleges in part that "beginning in approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003, the Defendant coerced and enticed the impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct." 1St Am. Complaint, ¶13. (Plaintiff also refused to answer Interrogatory no. 2 which sought her employment history for the past ten years asserting the same general objection).

Such information is both relevant and reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. It Is well settled that relevant Information is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P.;

Donahav v. Palm Beach Tours & trans.. Inc. 242 F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). Discoverability of such Information is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery Is broad. Ponahav supra, at 686, and cases cited therein. Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claims or defense of any party involved in the pending action." Id.

Plaintiffs tax returns, along with the requested supporting documentation, for the six year period, and documents relevant to her current earnings, are relevant to Plaintiff's damages claims detailed below herein. Such information would show Plaintiff's employment and earning history, as well as provide evidence as to how Plaintiff has been able to function in her daily life before, during and after the alleged incidents. Was she self-sufficient? Was she able to get out of bed each morning and support herself? What type of Job did she hold? One's ability to earn a living and be self-supporting has not only a financial component, but also an emotional/psychological/mental component.

C.MA.'s First Amended Complaint.' attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through XXX are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 — Civil Remedies for Personal Injuries; Count XXXI is entitled "Sexual Battery," and Count )O00i is entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortious Assault only against Defendant,

in her answers to Interrogatory nos. 9 and 10, which seek Information about C.M.A.'s damages claims, Plaintiff answered that:

&#x27; Defendant's Motion To Dismiss directed to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint is pending.

Ihave bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent injuries are psychological. (Interrog. No. 9).

Iam claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a jury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minknum established by 18 U.S.CA. §2255. (Interrog. No. 10).

In her 1st Amended Complaint, relevant to her damages claims, Plaintiff alleges:

C.M.A., has in the past suffered, and will in the future suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy and other damages ... . The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses and will in the future suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. The Plaintiff C.MA. has suffered loss of income, a loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of capacity to enjoy life. These injuries are permanent in nature and the Plaintiff, C.M.A., will continue to suffer these losses in the future.

(1st Am. Complaint, Counts I - XXX (18 U.S.C. §2255), ¶¶25, 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193; Count )OO(l (Sexual Battery), ¶199.)

In each of her "Wherefore" clauses, Plaintiff seeks "compensatory damages of at least the minimum provided by law." 18 U.S.C. §2255, pursuant to which Plaintiff attempts to bring certain of her claims, allows for recovery of "actual damages." See fn. 2herein for applicable statutory text.2

As discussed above, the tax returns, and supporting documentation, will provide direct evidence as to Plaintiffs claimed damages. Such Information does not only go to

(a) 2 Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue In any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including areasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than \$50,000 in value. [Emphasis added.]

C.MA. v. Epstein, et al.

Page 5

compensatory or actual damages or loss of income/loss of capacity to earn income type damages, but also her emotionaUpsychological/mental health type damages. In the telephone communication between counsel for the respective parties, Plaintiffs counsel indicated that Plaintiff was not seeking loss of income/eaming capacity type damages; (Defendant is not aware that there has been any formal withdrawal of such damages claimed); notwithstanding, the information sought Is still relevant and discoverable based on the additional damages claimed by Plaintiff. The time period will allow Defendant to compare how Plaintiff was doing in her life prior to, during, and after the alleged incident. Again, the type of jobs Plaintiff has been able to hold and her earnings and ability to support herself clearly have not only afinancial component, but an emotional/psychological/mental health component as well. Accordingly, Plaintiffs objection is required to be overruled, and Defendant is entitled to the documents requested.

Production Request No. 2

2. All bills/expenses from any medical doctor, chiropractor, psychologists, psychiatrists mental health counselors (including any members of the healing arts and related i.e. drugs, prescriptions, etc.) you claim you Incurred as a result of the injuries wc are or may be the subject matter of this lawsuit

Response:

None in our possession. These will be provided upon receipt. Discovery is ongoing.

Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery

Plaintiff makes no objection to the documents requested, but has failed to produce any documents responsive to this request. Clearly, the documents are relevant and discoverable as they go to proof of Plaintiff's claimed injuries. in the April 1, 2009,

telephone communication Plaintiff's counsel indicated that Plaintiff was still not in possession of such documents. The First Request for Production was served on Plaintiff on January 16, 2009. In her answer to interrogatory no. 11, (Notice of Serving Answers, dated February 18, 2009, identifies a psychiatrist and a counselorltherapist from whom she claims she is receiving "treatment or examination for the injuries for which [she] seeks damages." See Exhibit A hereto for copy C.M.A.'s answer to interrogatory no. 11. Regarding the date of treatment from the psychiatrist — she asserts "I would defer to the Doctor's records." She claims the treatment from the counselor/therapist has been "since high school" and "ongoing.° Defendant is entitled to the documents sought and Plaintiff is in control of and has the ability to obtain the requested medical bills and expenses she claims were incurred as result of her injuries claimed in this action. Plaintiff should be required to immediately produce the requested documents to Defendant.

production Request No. 4

4. All reports, evaluations, recommendations and/or analysis submitted by any expert which relate to or cover the Incident which is the subject matter of this lawsuit and/or any Injuries, damages or losses you allege were caused by the incident.

Response:

Any reports generated by any retained experts not yet disclosed are protected by the work product privilege. Notwithstanding same, none.

Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery

Plaintiff, through counsel, in the April 1, 2009, telephone communication, indicated that she does not have any responsive documents and stands by her objection. Rule 26 provides in relevant part —

2) Disclosure of Expert Testimony.

(A) In General. In addition to the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1), a party must disclose to the other parties the Identity of any witness it may use at trial to present evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, 703, or 705.

(B) Written Report. Unless otherwise stipulated or ordered by the court, this disclosure must be accompanied by a written report--prepared and signed by the witness—if the witness is one retained or specially employed to provide expert testimony in the case or one whose duties as the party's employee regularly involve giving expert testimony. The report must contain:

(i) a complete statement of all opinions the witness will express and the basis and reasons for them;

(II) the data or other information considered by the witness in forming them;

(iii) any exhibits that will be used to summarize or support them;

(iv) the witness's qualifications, Including a list of all publications authored In the previous 10 years;

(v) a list of all other cases in which, during the previous four years, the witness testified as an expert at trial or by deposition; and

(vi) a statement of the compensation to be paid for the study and testimony in the case.

(C) Time to Disclose Expert Testimony. A party must make these disclosures at the times and in the sequence that the court orders. Absent a stipulation or a court order, the disclosures must be made:

(I) at least 90 days before the date set for trial or for the case to be ready for trial; or

(ii) if the evidence is intended solely to contradict or rebut evidence on the same subject matter identified by another party under Rule 26(a)(2)(B), within 30 days after the other party's disclosure.

• • • •

(e) Supplementing Disclosures and Responses.

(1) In General. A party who has made a disclosure under Rule 26(a)--or who has responded to an interrogatory, request for production, or request for admission--must supplement or correct its disclosure or response:

(A) in a timely manner if the party learns that in some material respect the disclosure or response is incomplete or incorrect, and If the additional or corrective

Information has not otherwise been made known to the other parties during the discovery process or in writing; or

(B) as ordered by the court

(2) Expert Witness. For an expert whose report must be disclosed under Rule 26(a)(2)(B), the party's duty to supplement extends both to information included in the report and to Information given during the expert's deposition. Any additions or changes to this information must be disclosed by the time the party's pretrial disclosures under Rule 28(a)(3) are due.

Accordingly, Defendant requests that should Plaintiff be in possession of any such reports, evaluations, recommendations and/or analysis prepared by an expert expected to testify at trial or deposition, or to be used by an expert expected to testify at trial or deposition, that such documents be produced as required by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P. quoted above.

Production Request No. 5

5. All medical reports and/or records from doctors, physicians, (including psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors), hospitals, drug or alcohol facilities or any other person or entity who has rendered treatment to or examined you for any reason after the Incident(s) which is the subject matter of this lawsuit.

Response:

None in our possession. Discovery is ongoing.

Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery

Once again, Plaintiff should be required to immediately produce the requested documents. In support of ordering immediate production, Defendant realleges and Incorporates his "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement To Discovery" to request no. 5 above herein.

Interrogatory No. 2

2. List the names, business addresses, telephone and cell phone numbers, dates of employment, immediate supervisor (name and address) and rates of pay regarding all employers, including self-employment, for whom you have worked in the past 10 years; this includes listing all sources of income you have received. Answer this question by year, i.e. 1998 - 2009.

Answer:

Objection. Irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence.

Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery

Such information is dearly relevant to the damages and injuries claimed by Plaintiff in this action. Plaintiffs complaint alleges in part that "beginning in approximately late May or early June of 2002, and continuing until approximately August of 2003, the Defendant coerced and enticed the impressionable, vulnerable, and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct." m Am. Complaint, ¶13. (See discussion of Production Request no. 1 above herein).

Such Information is both relevant and reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. It is well settled that relevant information is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery Is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P.; Donahav v. Palm Beach Tours & trans.. Inc., 242F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). Discoverability of such information is govemed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery is broad. Donahav, supra, at 686, and cases cited therein. "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claims or defense of any party involved in the pending action." Id.

Plaintiffs employment and earnings history prior to and after the alleged Incidents are relevant to her claimed damages and Injuries. Such Information would not only evidence Plaintiffs employment and earning history, but also provide evidence as to how Plaintiff has been able to function in her daily life before, during and after the alleged incidents. Was she self-sufficient? Was she able to get out of bed each morning and support herself? What type of job did she hold? One's ability to earn a living and be self-supporting has not only afinancial component, but also an emotional/psychological/mental component.

C.M.A.'s First Amended Complaint attempts to allege 32 counts. Counts I through XXX are purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 — Civil Remedies for Personal Injuries; Count )0Oa is entitled "Sexual Battery," and Count XXXII is entitled "Conspiracy to Commit Tortious Assault only against Defendant,

In her answers to interrogatory nos. 9 and 10, which seek Information about C.M.A.'s damages claims, Plaintiff answered that:

Ihave bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent injuries are psychological. (Interrog. No. 9).

Iam claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a Jury who will provide their own methods of computation In an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. §2255. (Interrog. No. 10).

In her l itAmended Complaint, relevant to her damages claims, Plaintiff alleges:

C.M.A., has in the past suffered, and will in the future suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, Invasion of her privacy and other damages ... . The then minor Plaintiff Incurred medical and psychological expenses ... and will in the future suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. The Plaintiff C.MA has suffered loss of income, a

loss of the capacity to earn Income in the future, and a loss of capacity to enjoy life. These injuries are permanent in nature and the Plaintiff, C.M.A., will continue to suffer these losses in the future.

(1`t Am. Complaint, Counts I — XXX (18 U.S.C. §2255), 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193; Count )00(l (Sexual Battery), ¶199.)

In each of her 'Wherefore" clauses, Plaintiff seeks 'compensatory damages of at least the minimum provided by law." 18 U.S.C. §2255, pursuant to which Plaintiff attempts to bring certain of her claims, allows for recovery of "actual damages! See fn. 2 herein for applicable statutory text.

As discussed above, C.M.A.'s employment and earnings history will provide direct evidence as to Plaintiffs claimed damages. Such Information does not only go to compensatory or actual damages or loss of income/loss of capacity to earn income type damages, but also her emotional/psychological/mental health type damages. In the telephone communication between counsel for the respective parties, Plaintiff's counsel indicated that Plaintiff was not seeking loss of income/Gaming capacity type damages; (Defendant is not aware that there has been any formal withdrawal of such damages claimed); notwithstanding, the information sought Is still relevant and discoverable based on the additional damages claimed by Plaintiff. The time period will allow Defendant to compare how Plaintiff was doing In her life prior to, during, and after the alleged Incident. Again, the type of Jobs Plaintiff has been able to hold and her earnings and ability to support herself clearly have not only afinancial component, but an emotional/psychological/mental health component as well. Accordingly, Plaintiffs

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/EFTA02745820.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/EFTA02745820.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d9baca7758f8c5b70a67e8c5df34b05b99131312 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/EFTA02745820.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,3045 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 50, + "chars": 82645, + "elapsed_seconds": 57.1, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_10_Picture_133.jpeg", + "_page_12_Picture_142.jpeg", + "_page_14_Picture_12.jpeg", + "_page_35_Picture_13.jpeg", + "_page_39_Picture_12.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.18, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 412.0168151855469, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 412.0168151855469, + 102.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 204.18, + 102.91998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF, C.M.A.'S, EMERGENCY MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER \nREGARDING THE DEPOSITIONS OF SUSAN POPE AND DR. SERGE THYS AND \nINCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.18, + 500.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 539.275146484375, + 500.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 539.275146484375, + 544.6800079345703 + ], + [ + 81.18, + 544.6800079345703 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 147.6, + 306.18 + ], + [ + 473.91656494140625, + 306.18 + ], + [ + 473.91656494140625, + 323.19 + ], + [ + 147.6, + 323.19 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 230.625, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 389.90999999999997, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 389.90999999999997, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 230.625, + 104.49 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.835, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 359.38018798828125, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 359.38018798828125, + 101.5032958984375 + ], + [ + 263.835, + 101.5032958984375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 217.70999999999998, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.665, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.665, + 152.28 + ], + [ + 217.70999999999998, + 152.28 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.63, + 334.53 + ], + [ + 408.36, + 334.53 + ], + [ + 408.36, + 349.11 + ], + [ + 222.63, + 349.11 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEPONENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 86.71499999999999, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 154.365, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 154.365, + 413.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 86.71499999999999, + 413.09999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DATE & TIME LOCATION OF DEPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 277.365, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 520.905, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 520.905, + 413.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 277.365, + 413.90999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.29, + 641.52 + ], + [ + 391.755, + 641.52 + ], + [ + 391.755, + 655.29 + ], + [ + 274.29, + 655.29 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 219.555, + 122.30999999999999 + ], + [ + 415.74, + 122.30999999999999 + ], + [ + 415.74, + 149.04 + ], + [ + 219.555, + 149.04 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 224.47500000000002, + 330.48 + ], + [ + 410.20500000000004, + 330.48 + ], + [ + 410.20500000000004, + 344.25 + ], + [ + 224.47500000000002, + 344.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEPONENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.55999999999999, + 396.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 156.21, + 396.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 156.21, + 409.86 + ], + [ + 88.55999999999999, + 409.86 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DATE & TIME LOCATION OF DEPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 279.82500000000005, + 396.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 524.595, + 396.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 524.595, + 410.6700000000001 + ], + [ + 279.82500000000005, + 410.6700000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 276.135, + 637.47 + ], + [ + 393.59999999999997, + 637.47 + ], + [ + 393.59999999999997, + 651.24 + ], + [ + 276.135, + 651.24 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.18, + 95.9288330078125 + ], + [ + 400.61297607421875, + 95.9288330078125 + ], + [ + 400.61297607421875, + 123.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 204.18, + 123.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST \nAMENDED COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION, \nAND MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT; MOTION TO STRIKE, \nAND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 107.00999999999999, + 317.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 501.58795166015625, + 317.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 501.58795166015625, + 371.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 107.00999999999999, + 371.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Supporting Memorandum of Law \nI. Motion To Dismiss Standard", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 220.17000000000002, + 493.29 + ], + [ + 388.4711608886719, + 493.29 + ], + [ + 388.4711608886719, + 520.4470520019531 + ], + [ + 220.17000000000002, + 520.4470520019531 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Standard for More Definite Statement, Pleading, & Motion to Strike", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 131.60999999999999, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 478.469970703125, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 478.469970703125, + 377.5670471191406 + ], + [ + 131.60999999999999, + 377.5670471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. Counts I through XXX, 18 U.S.C. 42255, are required to be dismissed.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 124.23000000000002, + 622.08 + ], + [ + 487.1759033203125, + 622.08 + ], + [ + 487.1759033203125, + 636.6870422363281 + ], + [ + 124.23000000000002, + 636.6870422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. Also requiring dismissal Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege \nthe requisite \u00a72255 predicate acts.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 22, + "polygon": [ + [ + 132.84, + 544.1502990722656 + ], + [ + 469.86, + 544.1502990722656 + ], + [ + 469.86, + 569.9270477294922 + ], + [ + 132.84, + 569.9270477294922 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 29, + "polygon": [ + [ + 267.525, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 333.97216796875, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 333.97216796875, + 612.4235229492188 + ], + [ + 267.525, + 612.4235229492188 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 258.91499999999996, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 375.15, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 375.15, + 376.65000000000003 + ], + [ + 258.91499999999996, + 376.65000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "' ENDNOTE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 31, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.795, + 505.43999999999994 + ], + [ + 150.57041931152344, + 505.43999999999994 + ], + [ + 150.57041931152344, + 520.0670471191406 + ], + [ + 81.795, + 520.0670471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a72241. Aggravated Sexual Abuse.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 31, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.795, + 571.05 + ], + [ + 268.4578857421875, + 571.05 + ], + [ + 268.4578857421875, + 586.0670471191406 + ], + [ + 81.795, + 586.0670471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a7 2242. Sexual abuse", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 32, + "polygon": [ + [ + 79.95, + 232.46999999999997 + ], + [ + 200.47731018066406, + 232.46999999999997 + ], + [ + 200.47731018066406, + 246.68701171875 + ], + [ + 79.95, + 246.68701171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a7 2243. Sexual abuse of a minor or", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 32, + "polygon": [ + [ + 79.95, + 451.9800000000001 + ], + [ + 298.89, + 451.9800000000001 + ], + [ + 298.89, + 467.1870422363281 + ], + [ + 79.95, + 467.1870422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Chapter 117 Transportation for Illegal Sexual Activity and Related Crimes \n\u00a7 2421. Transportation generally", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 33, + "polygon": [ + [ + 79.33500000000001, + 412.29 + ], + [ + 480.9267883300781, + 412.29 + ], + [ + 480.9267883300781, + 440.1870422363281 + ], + [ + 79.33500000000001, + 440.1870422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "\u00a7 2423. Transportation of minors", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 33, + "polygon": [ + [ + 79.33500000000001, + 515.97 + ], + [ + 263.6014099121094, + 515.97 + ], + [ + 263.6014099121094, + 530.5670471191406 + ], + [ + 79.33500000000001, + 530.5670471191406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 35, + "polygon": [ + [ + 210.94500000000005, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 398.45831298828125, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 398.45831298828125, + 139.320556640625 + ], + [ + 210.94500000000005, + 139.320556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF, C.M.A.'S, CONDITIONAL NOTICE OF INTENT TO EXCLUSIVELY RELY \nON STATUTORY DAMAGES PROVIDED BY 18 U.S.C. \u00a72255", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 35, + "polygon": [ + [ + 95.32499999999999, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 517.6194458007812, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 517.6194458007812, + 397.320556640625 + ], + [ + 95.32499999999999, + 397.320556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 37, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.615, + 294.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 389.90999999999997, + 294.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 389.90999999999997, + 308.61 + ], + [ + 246.615, + 308.61 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 38, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.375, + 110.97 + ], + [ + 345.01500000000004, + 110.97 + ], + [ + 345.01500000000004, + 123.93 + ], + [ + 261.375, + 123.93 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 39, + "polygon": [ + [ + 212.17499999999998, + 136.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 397.1543884277344, + 136.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 397.1543884277344, + 160.38 + ], + [ + 212.17499999999998, + 160.38 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Motion To Compel Responses to Production Reauests Nos. 1, 2, 4. 5. and 19, \nand Answers to Interrogatories Nos. 2, 18. and 23.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 40, + "polygon": [ + [ + 124.23000000000002, + 213.84 + ], + [ + 488.2520751953125, + 213.84 + ], + [ + 488.2520751953125, + 239.13592529296875 + ], + [ + 124.23000000000002, + 239.13592529296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No. 1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 40, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.15500000000003, + 248.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 367.77, + 248.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 367.77, + 260.93505859375 + ], + [ + 244.15500000000003, + 260.93505859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 40, + "polygon": [ + [ + 95.94, + 322.38 + ], + [ + 154.98000000000002, + 322.38 + ], + [ + 154.98000000000002, + 336.39715576171875 + ], + [ + 95.94, + 336.39715576171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 40, + "polygon": [ + [ + 182.655, + 382.32 + ], + [ + 434.8346862792969, + 382.32 + ], + [ + 434.8346862792969, + 396.8924560546875 + ], + [ + 182.655, + 396.8924560546875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No. 2", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 43, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.615, + 459.2699999999999 + ], + [ + 374.0397644042969, + 459.2699999999999 + ], + [ + 374.0397644042969, + 474.6364440917969 + ], + [ + 246.615, + 474.6364440917969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 43, + "polygon": [ + [ + 99.63, + 557.28 + ], + [ + 157.3126220703125, + 557.28 + ], + [ + 157.3126220703125, + 571.4801635742188 + ], + [ + 99.63, + 571.4801635742188 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 43, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.34499999999997, + 600.21 + ], + [ + 440.8219909667969, + 600.21 + ], + [ + 440.8219909667969, + 618.0874786376953 + ], + [ + 186.34499999999997, + 618.0874786376953 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "production Request No. 4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 44, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.84500000000003, + 461.69999999999993 + ], + [ + 375.84222412109375, + 461.69999999999993 + ], + [ + 375.84222412109375, + 478.0570373535156 + ], + [ + 247.84500000000003, + 478.0570373535156 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 44, + "polygon": [ + [ + 98.39999999999999, + 535.41 + ], + [ + 161.5349578857422, + 535.41 + ], + [ + 161.5349578857422, + 550.4370422363281 + ], + [ + 98.39999999999999, + 550.4370422363281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 44, + "polygon": [ + [ + 185.73, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 441.0607604980469, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 441.0607604980469, + 611.5570373535156 + ], + [ + 185.73, + 611.5570373535156 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "2) Disclosure of Expert Testimony.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 45, + "polygon": [ + [ + 115.005, + 142.52447509765625 + ], + [ + 282.8309020996094, + 142.52447509765625 + ], + [ + 282.8309020996094, + 154.83758544921875 + ], + [ + 115.005, + 154.83758544921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(e) Supplementing Disclosures and Responses.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 45, + "polygon": [ + [ + 118.08, + 581.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 347.36322021484375, + 581.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 347.36322021484375, + 594.3376007080078 + ], + [ + 118.08, + 594.3376007080078 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Request No. 5", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 46, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.385, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 371.1267395019531, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 371.1267395019531, + 403.4470520019531 + ], + [ + 245.385, + 403.4470520019531 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 46, + "polygon": [ + [ + 95.94, + 474.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 158.21807861328125, + 474.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 158.21807861328125, + 488.8535461425781 + ], + [ + 95.94, + 488.8535461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 46, + "polygon": [ + [ + 182.655, + 522.45 + ], + [ + 436.5585021972656, + 522.45 + ], + [ + 436.5585021972656, + 536.9470520019531 + ], + [ + 182.655, + 536.9470520019531 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Interrogatory No. 2", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 47, + "polygon": [ + [ + 259.53, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 351.4282531738281, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 351.4282531738281, + 154.4141845703125 + ], + [ + 259.53, + 154.4141845703125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Legal Argument Supporting Entitlement to Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 47, + "polygon": [ + [ + 182.655, + 298.89 + ], + [ + 434.805, + 298.89 + ], + [ + 434.805, + 313.6386413574219 + ], + [ + 182.655, + 313.6386413574219 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 330 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 297 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 199 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 103 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 139 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 99 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 369 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 38, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 39, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 256 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 40, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 312 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 41, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 42, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 479 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 43, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 324 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 44, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 45, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 78 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 46, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 47, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 342 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 48, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 397 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 49, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 340 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745820" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a2c6ff0923ba8cac93ea276b2b767a2595c94df4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:cc8080f7b917061b67a8778f8c78e05eca2ff893a4c1dca9551c8cc5e57c2106 +size 9346 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_10_Picture_133.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_10_Picture_133.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3a0febe1518e7b624fcdb9c27602fb1fb6bfe921 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_10_Picture_133.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:abf055bdf403fd7a8c1bfbbde103f3ec5d357a0335710ec5ef8cc4ee03d9fc18 +size 6699 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_12_Picture_142.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_12_Picture_142.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fdc17daff2425c7896e1a452553844c78b9a5812 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_12_Picture_142.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4df1b59524d085446182d7045b1ec555a7a3d93c36e1db0f75564fec0540f2ff +size 7181 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_14_Picture_12.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_14_Picture_12.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6ed0fcf3909f6275d5c06c6df073444151fc501d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_14_Picture_12.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a7cec1ec71a0873fda9d84b892c060b4df055aef398781e5d9d424ce5f0d1388 +size 7757 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_35_Picture_13.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_35_Picture_13.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7092ce0226e42ca379027c1d5dd30ffeec319132 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_35_Picture_13.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:19259eeaa24a91aad6d9e6fb720d7eb63c12f6fa6cc1b664206d00e0fae0a0f1 +size 7534 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_39_Picture_12.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_39_Picture_12.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..51236cf9304c9b3157f1d015278bf6a81f26863a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745820/_page_39_Picture_12.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:06e15e49b3bc540a9301ca2b2c359667816299066d07b082addc6bd2ffb5d09b +size 7850 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745870/EFTA02745870.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745870/EFTA02745870.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c8ed4a813a916c08afc54b9035aa0fba70d7509b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745870/EFTA02745870.md @@ -0,0 +1,153 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 013-CV-80232-MARRA + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/M. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-8081 I-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CTV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF C M A 'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING THE DEPOSITIONS OF SUSAN POPE AND DR. SERGE THYS + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff C.M.A.'s Emergency Motion for + +Protective Order Regarding the Depositions of Susan Pope and Dr. Serge Thys, filed August 4, 2009. The Court has carefully considered the motion, the record, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +On Friday, July 31, Defendant unilaterally scheduled the deposition of Susan Pope, a mental health therapist, for Thursday, August 6, 2009 at 10:00 a.m.. and the deposition of Dr. Serge Thys, a psychiatrist, for August 31, 2009 at 3:15 p.m. The Coup will construe Plaintiff's motion as as emergency only asas to to the deposition of Susan Pope. + +On August 4, 2009, Plaintiff timely moved for a protective order as to the deposition of Susan Pope. By the instant motion, Plaintiff seeks a protective order to prevent the deposition of Pope, a mental health therapist, based on (1) Plaintiff's Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. § 2255 (DE 113 in case no. 08- 80811) and (2) the psychotherapist-patient privilege pursuant to Jaffee v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1 (1996). + +First, the Court rejects Plaintiff's contention that her notice of conditional intent can be used as a shield against discovery that is relevant to the claims in Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (DE 40). Absent an amended pleading or stipulation of the parties, Plaintiffs unilateral non-binding notice of intent cannot be used to preclude discovery in this case. In the absence of a stipulation or court order, Plaintiff's notice can be withdrawn at any time. + +Plaintiff also claims that the Pope deposition should not be allowed to proceed because the information sought by Defendant is protected by the psychotherapist-patient privilege. See + +Jaffee 518 U.S. 1; Fla. Stat. § 90.503. Blanket assertions of privilege are largely regarded as improper. See U.S. v. Finley, 434 F.2d 596, 597 (5ih Cir. 1970)' (blanket refusal to testify is "unacceptable and improper" utilization of vehicle to invoke attorney-client privilege)• Wells v. Xpedx, 2007 WL 1200955, \*4 (M.D. Fla. 2007) ("Blanket assertions of privilege [are] usually insufficient .. . During [the] deposition, Defendant may assert attorney-client privilege and work priduct privilege, if appropriate, as to any questions or requests for documents."); U.S. v. Kowalik, 809 F.Supp. 1571, 1577 (S.D. Fla. 1992) (blanket refusal to produce records or to testify is insufficient to support a Fifth Amendment claim of privilege against self-incrimination). Rather, claims of privilege should be made on a question-by-question basis. See Anglada v. Sprague, 822 F.2d 1035, 1037 (11' Cir. 1987) (Fifth Amendement privilege against compulsory self-incrimination must be claimed "with respect to particular questions"); Atlantic Sounding Co., Inc. v. Townsend, 2006 WL 4702150, \*1 (M.D. Fla. 2006) (claims of work product privilege must be made on question-by-question basis); Kowalik. 809 F.Supp. at 1577. See also L.R. Appx A. Sec. V.A (explaining the procedure for invocation of privilege during deposition). Accordingly, Plaintiff's emergency motion for a protective order to prevent the deposition of Susan Pope is denied. During the deposition, Plaintiff may assert psychotherapistpatient privilege, if appropriate, on a question-by-question basis. It is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff C.M.A.'s August 4, 2009 Emergency + +&#x27;In Bonner v. City of Pritchard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1207 & 1209 (I I\*Cir. 1981) (en bane), the Eleventh Circuit adopted as binding precedent the decisions of the Fifth Circuit rendered prior to October I, 1981. + +Motion for Protective Order Regarding the Deposition of Susan Pope is DENIED. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, + +Florida, this 5th day of August, 2009 + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745870/EFTA02745870.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745870/EFTA02745870.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bc2abe24858fa5dcd1362fceaa15c277fe3d39a8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745870/EFTA02745870.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,291 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745870.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 5117, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.52, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF C M A 'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR \nPROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING THE DEPOSITIONS OF SUSAN POPE \nAND DR. SERGE THYS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 95.47200000000001, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 514.1888427734375, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 514.1888427734375, + 638.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 95.47200000000001, + 638.9830169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745870" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745876/EFTA02745876.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745876/EFTA02745876.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..49bdcdbb3ff74c90e3f5e74fa62a0a130527761f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745876/EFTA02745876.md @@ -0,0 +1,187 @@ +1 + +2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION CASE NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA + +4 + +JANE DOE, et al., + +5 + +Plaintiffs, + +6 + +vs. + +7 + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +8 + +Defendant. + +9 10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +. 15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 20 + +21 + +22 23 + +24 + +## APPEARANCES: + +WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA + +JUNE 12, 2009 + +TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE + +FOR THE PLAINTIFFS: ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQ. Mermelstein & Horowitz 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Miami, FL 33160 305.931.2200 For Jane Doe + +> J. , ESQ. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Jane Doe 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 954.522.3456 + +> ISIDRO M. , ESQ. Elkins Boehringer 224 Datura Avenue West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Jane DOE II 561.832.8033 RICHARD H. WILLITS, ESQ. 2290 10th Avenue North Lake Worth, FL 33461 For C.M.A. 561.582.7600 + +THE COURT: That's not my concern. So, again, I just want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend a case that's being prosecuted against him or her, that that in and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to criminal prosecution. + +MR. JOSEFSBERG: I agree, Your Honor. + +THE COURT: Any other plaintiff's counsel want to chime in? + +MR. WILLITS: Richard Willits on behalf of C.M.A.. I would join, to weigh in on what Mr. Josefsberg said. + +MR. JOSEFSBERG: Your Honor, I could not hear. + +THE COURT: We'll get him to a microphone. Mr. Willits is speaking. + +MR. WILLITS: On behalf of my client, C.M.A., we join in what Mr. Josefsberg said, and we also want to point out something to the Court. + +First, we want to make a representation to the Court, we have no intention of complaining to the U.S. Attorney's Office, never had that intention, don't have that intention in the future, but, of course, subject to what occurs in the future. + +I want to point out to the Court that Mr. Epstein went into this situation with his eyes wide open, represented by counsel, knowing that civil suits had to be coming. If he + +didn't know it, his lawyers knew it. + +He appears to be having second thoughts now about he could have negotiated this way or he could have negotiated that way with the U.S. Attorney's Office. And they want to impose their second thoughts on the innocent plaintiffs. We don't think that's fair. We think it's in the nature of invited error, if there was any error whatsoever. + +Thank you. + +THE COURT: You agree he should be able to take the ordinary steps that adefendant in acivil action can take and not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? + +MR. WILLITS: Of course. And we say the same thing Mr. Josefsberg said. It's all subject to your rulings and the direction of this Court as to what is proper and what is not proper. And we're prepared to abide by the rulings of this Court, and we have no intention of running to the State's Attorney. + +THE COURT: The U.S. Attorney? + +MR. WILLITS: I'm sorry. The U.S. Attorney. + +THE COURT: Mr. + +MR. : Thank you, Your Honor. + +If I may briefly, I think perhaps defense counsel forgot about this, but on pages 17 and 19 of my memorandum of law in opposition to the motion to dismiss, I did make reference to the non-prosecution agreement, and I did say that + +the contesting of the jurisdiction of this Court was a potential breach of the non-prosecution agreement. + +So my client happens to have, and they have filed with the Court a copy of her state court complaint, given the fact that the non-prosecution agreement limits the non-contesting of jurisdiction to claims exclusively brought under the federal statute. + +I'm going to go ahead and withdraw those contentions on pages 17 and 19 of my memo of law because it doesn't apply to my case. So to the extent that I raised this issue with defense counsel and the Court, I'm going to withdraw that aspect of it. + +THE COURT: Can you file something in writing on that point with the Court? + +MR. : Yes. + +THE COURT: What do you say about this issue that we're here on today? + +MR. I think that the problem that I have with it is that this non-prosecution agreement is being used by defense counsel for the exact opposite purpose that it was intended. My perception of this thing, and I wasn't around, is that Mr. Epstein essentially bought his way out of acriminal prosecution, which is wonderful for the victims in a way, and wonderful for him, too. + +as ashield against the plaintiffs that he was supposed to make restitution for. + +And, certainly, he can take my client's depo. He's done extensive discovery in the state court case -- very intrusive, I might add. And we don't care, because we can win this case with the prosecution agreement or without the prosecution agreement. We are ready to go forward. + +THE COURT: You're not going to assert to the United States Government that what he's doing in defending the case is aviolation for which he should be further prosecuted? + +MR. Ma Absolutely not. + +THE COURT: Anyone else for the plaintiffs? + +MR. HOROWITZ: Judge, Adam Horowitz, counsel for plaintiffs Jane Doe 2 through 7. + +Ijust wanted to address a point that I think you've articulated it. I just want to make sure it's crystal clear, which is that we can't paint abroad brush for all of the cases. + +The provision relating to Mr. Epstein being unable to contest liability pertains only to those plaintiffs who have chosen as their sole remedy the federal statute. My clients, Jane Doe 2 through 7, have elected to bring additional causes of action, and it's for that reason we were silent when you said does anyone here find Mr. Epstein to be in breach of the non-prosecution agreement. That provision, as we understand + +it, it doesn't relate to our clients. + +THE COURT: Okay. But, again, you're in agreement with everyone else so far that's spoken on behalf of a plaintiff that defending the case in the normal course of conducting discovery and filing motions would not be abreach? + +MR. HOROWITZ: Subject to your rulings, of course, yes. + +THE COURT: Thank you. + +Anyone else have anything to say from the plaintiffs? + +Ms. Villafana, if you would be so kind as to maybe help us out. I appreciate the fact that you're here, and I. know you're not a party to these cases and under no obligation to respond to my inquiries. But as I indicated, it would be helpful for me to understand the Government's position. + +MS. VILLAFANA: Thank you, Your Honor. And we, of course, are always happy to try to help the Court as much as possible. But we are not a party to any of these lawsuits, and in some ways we are at adisadvantage because we don't have access. My access is limited to what's on Pacer. So I don't really know what positions Mr. Epstein may have taken either in correspondence or in discovery responses that aren't filed in the case file. + +But your first order was really just what do you think about a stay, and then the second order related to this hearing and asked amuch more specific question, which is whether we + +believe that Mr. Epstein's defense was abreach of the agreement. + +And I've tried to review as many of the pleadings as possible. As you know, they're extremely voluminous. And I haven't been through all of them. But we do believe that there has been abreach in the filing that Mr. Josefsberg referred to, and contrary to Mr. Critton, we do understand that we have an obligation to provide notice, and we are providing notice to Mr. Epstein today. + +The pleading that we found to be in breach -- the non-prosecution agreement, sought to do one thing, which was to place the victims in the same position they would have been if Mr. Epstein had been convicted of the federal offenses for which he was investigated. + +And that if he had been federally prosecuted and convicted, the victims would have been entitled to restitution, regardless of how long ago the crimes were committed, regardless of how old they were at the time, and how old they are today, or at the time of the conviction. + +And it also would have made them eligible for damages under 2255. + +And so our idea was, our hope was that we could set up a system that would allow these victims to get that restitution without having to go through what civil litigation will expose them to. + +You have anumber of girls who were very hesitant about even speaking to authorities about this because of the trauma that they have suffered and about the embarrassment that they were afraid would be brought upon themselves and upon their families. + +So we did through the non-prosecution agreement tried to protect their rights while also protecting their privacy. So, pursuant to the non-prosecution agreement -- on the other hand, we weren't trying to hand them a jackpot or akey to a bank. It was solely to sort of put them in that same position. + +So we developed this language that said if -- that provided for an attorney to represent them. Most of the victims, as you know from the pleadings, come from not wealthy circumstances, may not have known any attorneys who would be in a position to help them. + +So we went through the Special procedure that resulted in the appointment of Mr. Josefsberg, and the goal was that they would be able to try to negotiate with Mr. Epstein for afair amount of restitution/damages. And if Mr. Epstein took the position, which apparently he has, which is that the S50,000 or \$150,000 floor under 2255 also would be a cap. That if they were to proceed to file suit in Federal Court to get fair damages under 2255, Mr. Epstein would admit liability, but he, of course, could fight the damages portion, which means that, of course, he would be entitled to depositions; of + +course, he would be entitled to take discovery, and we don't believe that any of that violates the non-prosecution agreement. + +The issue with the pleading that he filed, the motion to dismiss the case, I believe it's Jane Doe 101, represented by Mr. Josefsberg, is that that is acase that was filed exclusively under 18 U.S.C., Section 2255. She met that requirement. Mr. Epstein is moving to dismiss it, not on the basis of damages, he is saying that he cannot be held liable under 2255 because he was not convicted of an offense. + +The reason why he was not convicted of an offense is because he entered into the non-prosecution agreement. So that we do believe is abreach. + +The issue really that was raised in the motion to stay and that I addressed in our response to the motion to stay is that Mr. Epstein's -- Mr. Epstein wants to stay the litigation in order to leave, in order to sort of attack the cases of the victims whether they are fully within the non-prosecution or not, non-prosecution agreement or not, and leave the Government without a remedy if he does, in fact, breach those terms. And that is why we opposed the stay. + +THE COURT: I'm not sure what you mean by that last statement. + +MS. VILLAFANA: Well, because this issue related to the motion to dismiss on Mr. Josefsberg's client came up after + +1 we had filed that response. And what we said in the response 2 to the motion to stay is that the reason why he wants to stay 3 the litigation is so that the non-prosecution agreement 4 terminates based on a period of time, as he puts it. And then 5 afterwards he would be able to come in here and make all of 6 these arguments that clearly violate the non-prosecution 7 agreement but we would be without remedy. + +8 THE COURT: But you're not taking the position that 9 other than possibly doing something in litigation which is a 10 violation of an express provision of the non-prosecution 11 agreement, any other discovery, motion practice, investigations 12 that someone would ordinarily do in the course of defending a 13 civil case would constitute a violation of the agreement? + +14 MS. VILLAFANA: No, Your Honor. I mean, civil 15 litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take 16 discovery is part of what civil litigation is about. And while 17 there may be, for example, if someone were to try to subpoena 18 the Government, we would obviously resist under statutory 19 reasons, all that sort of stuff. But, no, Mr. Epstein is 20 entitled to take the deposition of a plaintiff and to subpoena 21 records, etc. + +22 THE COURT: And even if he seeks discovery from a 23 Government agency, you have the right to resist it under the 24 rules of procedure but that would not constitute a violation, 25 again unless there's a provision in the prosecution agreement \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745876/EFTA02745876.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745876/EFTA02745876.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..61a578d810e858d7fddfa2d15c178e3c4203efbb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745876/EFTA02745876.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,392 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745876.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 12540, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.93, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "APPEARANCES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 125.46000000000001, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 218.097900390625, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 218.097900390625, + 395.28 + ], + [ + 125.46000000000001, + 395.28 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 230 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 37 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 297 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 304 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 303 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 310 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 330 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 307 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 338 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 316 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745876" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745886/EFTA02745886.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745886/EFTA02745886.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4310cc79289d54d6c3702b1737b11138a2a4e2ed --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745886/EFTA02745886.md @@ -0,0 +1,152 @@ +Jane Doe #2 + +ea v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. ME M.D. + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W. gig M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W. s M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. +- 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe #2 against Jeffrey Epstein makes sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe #2 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiff's counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventative Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kliman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. !Oman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #2. + +14. The records available in this case at this time show that during the winter of 2003, plaintiff spent approximately one hour in defendant's house and 30-45 minutes alone with the defendant (Page 11, interrogatories). She denied that she was suffering from any physical infirmity, disability, disease, sickness, or psychiatric/psychological condition at the time of the incident (Answers to defendant's first interrogatories, page 7). + +15. Plaintiff reports that she moved repetitively during her childhood. She reports she was born in Buffalo, New York; lived there until one year, family then moved + +to Florida, a long process of moving back and forth twice to Virginia, twice to Florida, once to Tennessee (Page 1, transcript 12/4/08). "I was moving from Buffalo to Florida, then seven years in Florida til fourth grade til seventh grade in Virginia, then eighth to graduate high school, I was back in Florida, West Palm Beach, Palm Beach High School. Then after high school, I moved back to Virginia myself because I knew my parents were moving to Tennessee and I didn't want to. My friends were in Virginia. Virginia for two years, then Midlothian, Virginia for two years. . ." (Page 2, transcript 12/4/08). + +16. Plaintiff reports that she currently has a good relationship with her boyfriend and that she is living with two other couples in ahouse in Richmond. "I am hanging out and having fun . . .." "Now I am having more fun, bike riding with boyfriend and roommates and half pipe skateyard ramp in back yard, not just staying in the house, which Ido if I am not working." (Page 2, transcript) + +17. Plaintiff reports that her mom and dad were always talking about her, putting pressure on her, "so I shut myself away from the world." "I asked them if they want me to fail in Virginia and come home...I don't want to give them the satisfaction." "My family argues too much. It gives me headaches. (Page 2, transcript) + +18. Prior to her meeting Mr. Epstein, she reports, "My family made me the person I am, not being paid attention to. .." (Page 2, transcript). + +19. Plaintiff reports that prior to seeing Mr. Epstein,fillib the friend who took + +her, told her that she would be giving massages for money, didn't need experience, and told her to lieabout her age. She reports that she was 17+ at the time, but it was clear that she had to be 18. "She said if anybody asks, you have to be 18." (Page 4, transcript) "I'll vouch for you that you are 18" (Page 4, transcript). + +20. She reports she didn't advise her mother or her boyfriend of any distress (Pages 4 and 5, transcript). She notes that her parents divorced when she was three years of age. "1 didn't have afather figure and this guy comes into my life and is totally weird and I had nobody to tell that to." (Page 6, transcript) + +21. She reports that her father struck her little brothers and that her father had assaulted her mother and her stepfather then assaulted her father (Page 6, transcript). She notes that her stepfather was "a little violent with my mom. He had three kids of his own and mom had four and our whole life was whose kids did what, which were good and which were bad. It was so annoying ... and he would get mad at me for random things, like if I told my sister something, he told me not to. He would spank me... and smack me across the face and kicked me out of the house when I was 17. This was before the Epstein thing, when I was about 16, almost 17, and then Epstein, when I was about to be 18" (Page 6, transcript 1). + +22. Plaintiff reports that she is afraid of flying, that hurricanes scare her, and that her "property was torn up during ahurricane" (page 1, transcript 2, 12/4/08). + +23. (Part 1, question 5 of Dr. Kliman's interrogatory and Page 1, transcript 2) Plaintiff reports that she was sexually harassed by her stepbrother. "My stepbrother wanted me to sit on his lap when his friend left us alone. I'm not going to do anything. I said 'no, that's weird.' I had grown up with him and I think of him as abrother. That night, Iforgot to lock one of my doors, which was achain lock to the bathroom.. . I was about 16." (Prior to Epstein) "I was sleeping and felt something at the end of my bed, shins, grazing my leg, cracked my eyes open and I freaked out and he pretended to be confused 'where am I.' Then he walked between two doors and I had aweird feeling he didn't leave. .. I guess he ducked down and crawled around... I heard someone breathing and he tried to do it again. . . I said 'get out, get out of my room please.' I told my parents and they kicked him out for a day. He snuck back in the house and wasn't punished. . . Once I found him in my room naked under the covers... I had a feeling someone was in my room. .. I ran in and he was trying to get out of my bed to my closet... and he was naked. . . My pink sandals were out of place and my see-through underwear was missing for months.. . I told my parents and they kicked him out for a couple of days. I was distressed, scared of him. He was always running after me and no one could stop him.. . He is three years older than me, taller than me, and he has cerebral palsy, which they blame it on, that he doesn't know what he is doing." (Page 1, transcript 2) "He did something to my sister, touching her neck and hair when she was on the computer. She told me, which this was after he did that to me." "He is a big part of why I am the way I am, too. He has beat up my mom and my sister and me. He has been in jail for hitting my mom. He threw her on the ground and kicked her in the face. The police got him. I was 16." (Pre-Epstein) (Page 2, transcript 2) + +24. "I am so overprotective of everything and freaked out all the time. Always looking behind me. Someone will steal me. I am always paranoid now." (Page 2, transcript 2) + +25. "I have been thinking of hurting myself three or four years, feeling like I was nobody and getting angry." (Page 2, transcript 2) "A good thing I started doing was writing poems. I was 15. It was about my family problems. I want to lock people out and have them come and fmd me." (Page 3, transcript 2) + +26. Plaintiff reports she saw acounselor, Cathy Sloan, who was aprivate counselor that her mother had seen. "She talked to my mother about her problems because my stepdad was not as nice and mellow as he is now. He used to be angry and when he came home you would know you had to go in your room or go with your friends." Plaintiff reports that afemale psychiatrist wished to prescribed medications for her, but that medicines made her face break out and that she didn't wish to take them. (Page 3, transcript 2) "Beginning when I first went to Cathy Sloan at age 18, they said I was bipolar. They said I have BPD (bipolar disorder) or oal" (Page 3, transcript 2) + +27. Plaintiff reports that before meeting Epstein, "I had two boyfriends that I had + +sex with." (Page 4, transcript 2) + +28. Plaintiff reports that she tried marijuana in the 12th grade and that it calms her down. (Page 5, transcript 2) + +29. She notes that her mother would give her Xanax to calm her down and that a friend gave her amphetamines (Adderall) and that she could concentrate more and get things done easier. "I lived life more and had more energy." (Page 5, transcript 2) Dr. Kliman notes she has had no evaluation for attention deficit disorder, acondition that would have existed pre-Epstein. The plaintiff had to read things several times while in school to comprehend. (Page 5, transcript 2) + +30. (Page 9, Tape 1, Dr. Kliman, 12/4/08) Plaintiff currently reports "I'm just hanging out right now, I'm having fun and I kind of like it" ... "I feel free." + +31. Plaintiff reports, "I just let people do whatever. I don't know what going through my mind actually at the time. So much is going through my mind. I'm not even thinking about what I should be doing." (Page 18, Tape 1) + +32. Plaintiff reports that she had some understanding of what would happen when she saw Mr. Epstein. She notes that aschool friend told her 'I go to this place and I give people massages for money; and you don't have to have any experience. I was like 'wow... that sounds really weird. That sounds awesome, you know? What do you have to do?' And she basically told me in anote... She was like 'well if you show anybody this or if + +you tell anybody... I'll beat your ass' and I was like thinking to myself; why would she get that mad about me telling somebody? What's wrong with what I'm going to do if she wants to beat me up if I say something to somebody?. . . So she wrote me that note and then she's like 'yea... the only thing is that everybody makes fun of me for it is that, it's like older guys.' I was like t . . that's not a problem. It's just an older person that you give a massage to;' and she was like 'yea, that's it' and then she picked me up from work one day and that's when I was working at Publix and she took me in her car down to Palm Beach City and we're; and she slowly started unraveling everything Lilac everything that was supposed to happen,she started actually kind of telling me alittle bit as soon as we got to his house or alittle bit before it and she told me, you know," (at this point, plaintiff was interrupted by Dr. Kliman, who changed the subject). (Page 21, Tape 1) + +33. Plaintiff reports that she knew that Mr. Epstein did not want anyone younger than 18. "She was like ...'all right, well if anybody asks you're 18 because you have to be 18to be here; and they are going to ask probably for like name and your number or whatever just give that to them; but I'll vouch for you and say that you're 18." (Page 22, Tape 1) + +34. (Tape 2, Dr. Kliman) Question, Dr. Kliman: "And did you tell her that you were 18?" Plaintiff" "I don't . I don't remember if I told her I was 18 or if she already assumed because that's what the age of the girls that had been brought there are always that age. Have to be that certain age, so I think Yolanda told her that I was 18 cause like I said I'm not really a good liar." (Page 1) + +35. Plaintiff reported that her parents divorced when she was three. She reports that she could remember what was happening around the time of the divorce. "Just like all the violence kind of going on all around and my dad like running away from us and just moving to another state and not seeing him for a long period of time. So it's ... it's already that I didn't have like afather figure. . ." (Page 9, tape 2) Dr. Kliman: "You did have a stepfather?" Plaintiff: "Yea, but he was more of always just yelling at me so I always in my room by myself or I was hanging out with my friends." (Page 9, tape 2) + +36. Plaintiff reports that her father would hit her two brothers and that after the mother had found that he had significantly beaten one of the brothers on "his back and butt," the mother got angry. Her father hit her mother and the stepdad then hit her father. (Page 10, tape 2) She reports that her stepfather was also violent with her mother and that she grew up in a family of seven children (three of the stepfather's and four of her mother's). (Page 10, tape 2) She reports that the stepfather would spank her or hit her or send her to her room without dinner to punish her. On one occasion, she remembers, "he just came at me and smacked me across the face and then kicked me out of the house." [16+1(Page 11, tape 2) She believes this was about a year before the Epstein incident, when she was "almost 18." (Page 11, tape 2) + +37. Plaintiff reports that while living in Loxahatchee, Florida, she was frightened during Hurricane Katrina and then another hurricane when she was approximately 18 or 19. She notes it was "a frightening, crazy time apparently." She reports that the hurricane scared her and that it was "really scary because our property was torn up. . . Huge tree that landed on our house, that broke our screen enclosure to our pool." (Pages 13 & 14, Tape 2) + +38. Plaintiff reported (Part 1, question 5, Dr. Kliman's interrogatory) that she had asexual assault by a family member or someone she knew. (Page 14, tape 2) She reported that "my stepbrother Cody, he wanted me to sit on his ldp like when his friend, which was my boyfriend, had left us alone and we were like outside some kid's house waiting in the van, and I was outside on the ground and my stepbrother was sitting in the passenger's side with the door wide open talking to me and he was like 'why are you sitting on the floor, why don't you come sit on my lap?' and I was like 'because I'm fine right here; and he was like. . . '■. **I'm not going to do anything, it's okay, you can sit on my lap.' I was like 'no, that's weird cause you're my brother' and I've grown up with these boy since I was three. Since my dad left, so it's pretty much like they are my brothers and I think of them as that; and then it was the same night that he asked me to sit on his lap. That it was like 3:00 or 4:00 in the morning and I was sleeping and I forgot to lock one of my doors. I have two doors, one door that goes to the bathroom of my room and one that goes to the** hallway where everyone else's rooms are; and I always have like achain lock on my bathroom door and I forgotten to lock that one because I always lock my room, everywhere lam always lock everything for some reason. I think because I'm scared that somebody is going to get to me while I'm asleep." (Fear of assault preceded encounter with Epstein) Plaintiff reported that she was 16 at this time. (Page 15, tape 2) She again describes the episode reported earlier about her brother being in her bedroom and notes that she did tell her parents and they put him out of the house. Subsequently, he was again found in her room, as noted earlier, naked under her covers and she believes that he was using her clothing. (Page 16, tape 2) Dr. Kliman asked if she experienced emotional distress that lasted more than that day and her reply was "yea, of course, I was scared of him." (Page 17, tape 2) "He was always like running after me and like he was always like the terror of my house and nobody could everstop him, nobody could ever do anything. He pretty much just got fucked up all the time. Excuse me." She noted that her stepbrother is three years older than her, making him 19 at the time of these episodes. Plaintiff reports, "He did something to my sister. I guess he like I don't think he did anything sexual to her, but he was like touching her. . . she freaked out. .." (Page 17, tape 2) + +39. Plaintiff expressed her dissatisfaction at not being listened to by the sister, but after the stepbrother touched the sister she felt the sister paid attention. "Now you actually pay attention because it happens to you; but when I said something happened to me, you know, nothing right? So I think thaahis part, why Iam the way I=sometimestoo, just because they're ... he's always been like that and he's always beat up my ... he's like beat up my mom before a couple of times; he's beat up my sister; he's beatap me; he's been to jail a couple of times." (Again demonstrating plaintiff's fear of physical harm and inappropriate sexual contact prior to meeting Epstein.) Plaintiff reports that he was sent to jail for "hitting my mom; he like threw her on the ground and started kicking her in the face and stuff and then she called the cops on him and the police came and got him and then I think . . ." She reports she was around 16 at that time. (Prior to meeting Epstein) (Page 18, tape 2) + +40. Dr. Kliman inquired that since the stepbrother seemed to have asexual interest in her and that he was found naked, did she think that had something to do with the way she was now. Her response was "a little bit of it." (Page 18, tape 2) + +41. Dr. Kliman inquired about "why alittle bit?" and her response was "well, just because aM 21 things have happened too that have made mg who Iam, not necessarily just that one person. It just might be everything that has happened to me and I'm just so overprotective of everything and I'm just really freaked out most of the time... Like I am always looking behind me just because nobody ever looks behind them." (Page 18, tape 2) + +42. Plaintiff reported that she does not have bad dreams or nightmares of the traumatic event with Epstein. (Page 20, tape 2) She reports that her bad dreams are what is going on in her life at the moment. (Page 20, tape 2) In her dreams, she sees herself as angry at somebody and her beating them up in her dreams and that alot of her dreams are about the boys that she is with. (Page 20, tape 2) In her dreams, she reports that she always beats up the girls who may be having a relationship with her boyfriend as well. (Page 21, tape 2) She reports that most of the dreams that she remembers are good dreams. (Page 1, Tape 3) + +43. When questioned by Dr. Kliman about feeling that she is ahorrible person and asked how long she had had those feelings, plaintiff's response was "when I started to get them... I don't ... like I didn't really notice it at first until you started like reminding me of all these things and that everything that put into place . . ." [Indicating she is suggestible.] (Page 1, Tape 3) + +44. In a response to a question about how long she had had trouble thinking about hurting herself, plaintiff responded "for three or four years probably." (Age 16 or 17) At that time, she felt she was anobody and when she would get angry she would write poems. She notes that she began doing that when she was in the ninth grade at about age 15, that she would write about her family problems, and she would lock her doors and lock everyone out. She felt like she wanted someone to talk to her, but that nobody really would. . . "Nobody really ever wanted to because I had brothers and stuff and my mom was always too busy." "So I never really had anybody to talk to besides my friends.. . I can't talk to my family when I'm mad because they don't understand because they don't even know me." (Page 2, tape 3) + +45. She notes that when she saw atherapist, Cathy Sloan, who was seeing her mother because of problems with the stepfather, that they wanted her to confront the issues with the stepfather's anger. "... when he would come home from work, you would just; you know that you'd have to go to your room; like everybody would just disburse, leave and go and hide. . ." "They wanted her to talk to me because of the Epstein thing and because of my stepbrother and so I talked to her about all that .. Then she wanted to go and get me on medication, and then . . . I'm not really about medications so I ug 't never took the medication that they would prescribe to me. .." "I've never reallygotten help, but I've always wanted to gethelp. But I've just never fully gone 100% through with it I guess you could say." (Page 3, tape 3) + +46. Dr. Kliman asked plaintiff, "All right, and you have thoughts of killing yourself?" Plaintiff: "I used to and that is why I started to write poems, cause I would just feel like there was nothing else that I do; and I would just feel like it is better if I wasn't around, then I wouldn't be causing anybody any problems. . ." "It's hard to be who everybody wants you to be all the time .. " (Page 6, tape 3)(The poem writing began prior to Epstein, at approximately age 15.) + +47. Plaintiff reports that she had had sex with two boyfriends prior to Epstein. + +(Page 9, tape 3) Plaintiff is easily influenced. ... "I just have so much going on I just can't putthings together unless people start talking to me and then I'm like... 'yea." (Page 10, tape 3) + +48. Plaintiff reports that she is currently happy with her life and has met someone who she loves and whom she feels loves her. "I finally found somebody; now I'm kind of .. . really happy." "I met him in Virginia. His name is Josh.. . Like love at first sight kind of thing." "He's so adorable, he's like ... he talks to me and he looks at me different; and he looks at me like he cares about what I'm saying and he is listening and he really likes me. And that's the thing that I've never gotten out of any boyfriend is that they liked me for the way I am and the way that I will always be cause I'm always going to be the same person.. . I think I love him too. .." (Pages 11 & 12, tape 3) + +49. Question: "When you have sex with Jot do you have any interference from thoughts about Epstein." Reply: "No, no." (Pages 11 and 12, tape 3) + +50. Plaintiff notes that she drank prior to the episode with Epstein. (Page 14, tape 3) She continued to drink afterward and increased her drinking. She reported that she blacked out a couple of times. She notes at times that her amnesia was not simply due to alcohol, but that she didn't remember some parts of what she did because "I didn't want to remember some of it." [Volitional.] (Page 14, tape 3) + +51. Plaintiff reports that she has used cocaine and marijuana, with her first + +marijuana use at age 18 or 19. (Page 16, tape 3) She notes that her mother had given her Xanax, afriend gave her Adderall, and her mother gave her Strattera. (Pages 18 and 19, tape 3) + +52. She noted that she had difficulty in school. "I can't read something and actually understand it." "I actually have to like read it like at least twice." (Page 20, tape 3) She notes that she had difficulty in math and had to repeatalgebra H while in the 12th grade. (Page 20, tape 3) + +53. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +54. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, alist of all medical clinical,school and work records known to the attorney in the case. + +55. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "available important and relevant documentswhich are lag deliberately withheld from gs." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, which ,we have requested gr thatwg have stated would ordinarily bk part of medical opinion formation gn the topics concerning, which our input is requested." We request the same. + +56. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are a number of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +57. It is also essential to understand the plaintiff's level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +58. Knowledge of plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +59. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. These, in essence, are the same and similar records that plaintiff's expert witness (Dr. Kliman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and such other similar information be made available to us to conduct our examination. + +e, (..) Respectfully submi t + +Richard C. W.I., MD + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine + +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida + +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida + +College of Medicine \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745886/EFTA02745886.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745886/EFTA02745886.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cdd1972f1ad934c4276f9e646ec4331eecb2ec71 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745886/EFTA02745886.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,740 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745886.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 20, + "chars": 29927, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.78, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. ME M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 155.52 + ], + [ + 450.7222900390625, + 155.52 + ], + [ + 450.7222900390625, + 172.53 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 172.53 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 209 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 277 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 270 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 335 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 345 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 402 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 350 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 320 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 388 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 358 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 369 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 373 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 377 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 352 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 355 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 352 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 319 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 320 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 285 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 30 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745886" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745906/EFTA02745906.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745906/EFTA02745906.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b855afe5036e87f32f010c8fca7854bf0d750100 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745906/EFTA02745906.md @@ -0,0 +1,110 @@ +Jane Doe t3 + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. not + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W. Is M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W. Mg M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. lam aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe tt3 against Jeffrey Epstein make + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe #3 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiffs counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Klirnan of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventative Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kliman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kliman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #3. + +14. Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories note that she had seen atherapist in Palm Beach County at age 11. She believes that she had previously been diagnosed with depression following her parents' divorce. (Page 7) She reports that she has suffered from anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, guilt self-blame, feelings of being degraded, feeling unattractive, adiminished sense of femininity, fluctuations in weight and appetite, sexual intimacy problems, flashbacks, disturbing memories, stress, irritability, feelings of being isolated and trapped, diminished trust, social problems, problems in personal relationships, indecisiveness, low energy, lower ambition and initiative, headaches, back pain, feels stress (particularly around men), obsessive thoughts, problems concentrating, alcohol abuse, corruption of morals and values, loss of innocence, and cries a lot. (Page 8) + +15. She reported that she had seen Mr. Epstein four times from the fall of her sophomore year in high school through her senior year, but had only had physical contact with him once, had voluntarily returned on three other occasions with other girls, and spent 30-45 minutes alone with the defendant, but remained on the premises of the estate for four or five hours. (Page 11, interrogatories) + +16. Plaintiff notes that she has recently married and is "very happy about that." She met her husband on Myspace.com. She reported that they dated for 2 12/ years, that it was a good relationship, that they click, and feel that they can spend the rest of their life with each other. (Page 1, Dr. Kliman's contemporaneous notes). + +17. Plaintiff reports that she had a deep depression that lasted for a year and that she shut people out since the time of her parents' divorce at age 11. (Page 1, Dr. Kliman's contemp notes) + +18. She reports that she attempted suicide five times, beginning at age 11, after her parents got a divorce, and attempted suicide at age 15 by running acar in aclosed garage. She reports she would have died if her sister and nephew hadn't walked in. On subsequent attempts, she swallowed "a whole bunch of pills" and afriend made her throw up. This was at age 18 or 19. She reports she took "a huge handful." (Page 1, Dr. Kliman's contemp notes) + +19. Plaintiff reports that she had seen many psychologists and finally found one that she liked, Rhonda Perdue. (Page 1, contemp notes) + +20. She notes that she has been taking 25 mg of Lexapro prescribed by Dr. Nabel Karrum, MD, for the last year. (Page 2, contemp notes) + +21. She notes that her father was verbally abusive to her and physically abusive with her sister and her mother. On one occasion, she reports, her father took all of her mother's clothes and threw them in the front yard of her house while she (the mother) was taking ashower and that she and her sister had to leave the house with her mother. She reports that between ages 9 and 11 her father was "heavy in drinking and had a gun in the house." She reports that her mother "didn't want us tbere."(Page 2, contemp notes) + +22. Plaintiff reports that she was the individual who found out that the father was cheating on her mother with awoman who lived around the corner. The divorce was final when she was 13 years of age. They lived in the parental home for two years, until she was 15, and then moved. The father was in the picture "here and there." He remarried, divorced, had a girlfriend, went to AA to gethelp, and was sober for four years. She wondered if he was doing pills or marijuana. Her parents are back together and she reports they have been living together for the pasteight months. She reports her father suffers from depression and that while depressed he is distant, has angry spells, and she "worrieswhat he will ds≥ **... he snapswmuch."(Suggesting very unstable home, fear and apprehension, concern for mother's safety.) She reports that she deals with this by "I try to keep all this out of my mind, try not to think about it..." The most distressing event was when she was awakened and had to leave the house with her mother and sister because of the father's threatening behavior. (Page 2, contemp note) She reports that in school "I was mean" and that she would "not put up with crap or teasing." She notes that "I got teased about wearing the same jeans or shoes" and she was teased about her weight. "I was a little chunky." (Pages 2 and 3, contemp notes)** + +**23. Plaintiff notes that two of her friends had seen Mr. Epstein previously. andalhad done it and said it went smoothly and I didn't have to worry about anything. Don't ask, don't tell. So I felt comfortable with \$200 for ahalf hour." (Page 1, interview part 2)** + +**24. She reports that she lied about her age. "I was told to tell him I was 19, which is said we had to lie about our age." Plaintiff reportsthat afterhcr initial contact with Mr. Epsteinshe wentback bring otherpeople there. "Not to do anything. I went back three times with two different girls and all (Page 3, interview part 2)** + +25. Plaintiff reports that she had told anotheriv rsimalik "he might si touch you, but jug move away and wear whatever." (Page 5, interview part 2) Although plaintiff reports she had no further physical contact with Mr. Epstein, she did voluntarily return to his estate on three separate occasions with other girls. + +26. Plaintiff reports that she is taking phentermine 5 mg, an agent that can cause anxiety. (Page 1, part 3) + +27. She began drinking at age12. (Page Z part 3) She i elsorts that she has driven while intoxicated. (Page 2, part 3) She reports that she has had blackouts "1 quite afew times have been unable to remember things others say I did... that I peed on the floor in the middle of the night, that I passed out in the club, my friend's cousin drove us home, which I don't remember, and I got into an argument with somebody and I don't remember that I had an argument at the dub or that we stopped and ate on the way home and I don't remember, or falling down stairs, ripping my pants." (Page 2, part 3) + +28. The plaintiff reports that she was raped at age 15and never told anyone about it. It occurred at a graduation party. She was drinking. "I couldn't remember anything until the next day." "I saw marks on myself." "I thought I had locked the door where I was sleeping. Later I remembered I was unable to move, paralyzed, and he ripped my clothes off and raped me." "When I saw the marks and my mom took me to a doctor, who gave me a rape kit, found no semen, told me the scratch marks would go away, and tried to get me to write a report, but I wouldn't" (Page 3, part 3) + +29. Plaintiff reports she was also molestedat ng 12 ,12,y her bestfriend's brother who had just gotten out of jail. (Page 3, part 3) "He molested four children that night by playing with our bottoms, tops, face, and hair. We all woke up and never said anything until he raped his sister amonth later. He touched me just that one night on asleepover. One of the girls was up and pretended she was sleeping. I remember being touched, but thought I was dreaming until my friend told me the same thing and we found out he raped his own sister so then it was obvious." "That house was ahouse where there was drinking and potsmoking." lig gayg psat and made smart comments. He was in his mid 20's, about to turn 25." Plaintiff thus reports marijuana si cat age 12. She notes that in fourth grade she took her first pot when she was 10 years of age. She reports that they pressed charges concerning the molestation. (Page 3, part 3) + +30. She notes that Kevin..., the boy who molested her, subsequently raped his sister. "I consider what Kevin did to me was arape." (Page 3, part 3) + +31. In an interview with Dr. Kliman, plaintiff reported that she has been married for three months and that she is very happy about it and going to school part time. (Page 2, tape 1) + +32. Plaintiff reports that she was depressed over her parents' divorce, that she had attemptedauicideon five occasions,the rustat approximately11 when she tried to cut her wrists. At age 15, she tried to asphyxiate herself with a running automobile in a garage. The next attempt was with an overdose of pills at 18 or 19. (Page 5, tape 1) + +33. She reported that her father les very abusive her, (Page 6, tape 1) more verbal with her, but physical with her sister and her mother. (Page 6, tape 1) "They would argue about anything he wanted, anything that was on his mind. I remember one time she was in the shower and he took all her clothes and threw them in the front yard; and they were just having a screaming match and we were already in bed and I remember my mom had to wake us up and tell us to get dressed and put our shoes on; and we would have to walk all the way to alittle 7-11 in front of our development to get picked up because my &A, would jutbe outgj control, and we would have to stay at my aunt's house and sleep there and stay there until things got better. Thismust happened like }to many timesand . .." Plaintiff was ages 9 to 11 when this would happen. (Page 7, tape 1) + +34. She noted that her father cheated on her mother and that she was the one who found out about it and that after reporting it, the parents divorced when she was 13. She had aturbulentfamily lile. The thing that stands out as most distressing of the things that they had considered was being awakened and having to go to store. (Page 8, tape 1) + +35. She reports that she had afew core friends, but "I didn't have too many friends" (Page 10) and that as achild she was teased about her clothes (Page 10) and her weight. + +36. Plaintiff reports, "Rightwar an okay.Em contentwith what jhaaer slook forwardsright now, and that is trying to have a good life for me and my husband; trying to have asense of normalcy." (Page 2, tape 3) + +37. In her interview with Dr. Klirnan (as well as her sworn statement to the police on 11/07/2005), Plaintiff claims that she was told all she would have to do was to give a massage and that Epstein would ask her to get "comfortable", that's it. This conflicts with the Probable Cause Affidavit (page 9) and the Palm Beach Police Incident Report (page 37) where she indicates she was told that a massage would be expected, possibly naked and possibly some touching. In addition, Tape 2, page 6-14, she claims Epstein touched her breasts and fondled her nipples, and that he touched her vagina. However, this statement conflicts with what she told police in her sworn statement where she indicated Epstein never touched her breasts or her vagina. sworn statement at pp. 4, 7 and 8. The Plaintiff's medical records may show that the Plaintiff has a propensity to lie when it comes to explaining events allegedly involving Epstein and/or her past. + +38. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +39. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, A lig gf all medical, clinical,school, and work records known to the attorney in the case. + +40. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "available important nad relevant documentswhich being deliberatelywithheld from us." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, which we haverequested gx Thatwe have stated would ordinarily be part of medical opinion formation, cm 1,13g topics concerning, which our inputis requested." We request the same. + +41. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, plaintiff's knowledge or risk, and key alleged victim's variables such as demographics; psychological reactions at the time of the trauma; reactions post event; previous psychiatric or psychological history; previous history of victimization; current or previous psychological difficulties; general personality dynamics and coping style; sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +42. It is also essential to understand the plaintiffs level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc + +43. Knowledge of plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also criticaL + +44. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to + +him afull and complete record that includes plaintiff's medical, legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. These, in essence, are the same or similar records that plaintiffs expert witness (Dr. !Oman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and such other similar information be made available to us so that we are able to conduct a proper and meaningful examination of the plaintiff and what, if any contribution the above alleged event may have on her current and/or future health and adjustment. + +Respectfully submitted, + +r\"fi a LJ Richard C. W. + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745906/EFTA02745906.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745906/EFTA02745906.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f90e49ae53547ff3d49a794ada5e68abe053b751 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745906/EFTA02745906.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,502 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745906.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 13, + "chars": 19322, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.68, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. not", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.66, + 178.2 + ], + [ + 457.3220520019531, + 178.2 + ], + [ + 457.3220520019531, + 198.45000000000002 + ], + [ + 186.66, + 198.45000000000002 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 195 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 276 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 282 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 304 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 336 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 357 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 374 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 355 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 378 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 345 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 336 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 290 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 257 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745906" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745919/EFTA02745919.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745919/EFTA02745919.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d21114d451688927974cb28499e3efbeb4d317ea --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745919/EFTA02745919.md @@ -0,0 +1,103 @@ +Jane Doe \$4 + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. a M.D. + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W. Hall, M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard CW.IM M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. +- 3. L also, currently serve as a Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns\_University and + +![](_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg) + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liais' on Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe #4 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe #4 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiffs counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kliman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kliman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #4. + +14. Plaintiff reports a history of alcohol use and an ex-boyfriend who drank alcohol and used pills that were "a form of oxycodine [sic) aform of heroine [sic]." (Page 18, tape 1) + +15. Plaintiff reports obtaining a restraining order against her ex-boyfriend, stating that he would spit in her face, push her, and was abusive. (Page 20, tape 1) + +16. Plaintiff reports talking with two psychiatrists at age 16 or 17 due to family + +issues and boyfriend issues. (Pages 2 and 3, tape 3). In the tapes, she makes no mention of telling the psychiatrists of her alleged encounters with Epstein. Moreover, while Plaintiff denies recruiting other girls, on page 24 of the Palm Beach Police Report, Plaintiff said she left anote for Epstein that indicated "for a good time call [Plaintiff] and [friend]" and left the girls' phone numbers. + +17. Plaintiff noted that while in high school a friend, Chris, died in amotor vehicle accident, that she was in shock from his death, and that she got over it after about l. 12/ to 2 years, but that it still bothers her. (Page 4, GK Contemp notes) + +18. Plaintiff noted that aclose friend, Jen, died in amotor vehicle accident and that she was in shock for two months. (Page 4, GK Contemp notes) + +19. Plaintiff reported, "I probably went there over 50 times." (Page 3, tape 4) + +20. Plaintiff was arrested at age 17 for DUI on 3/09/05. (Police Offense Report) + +21. On 10/31/04, fight occurred between plaintiff and Preston as in back of cab. Plaintiff (age 17) had been drinking. Police were called for theft of cab fare. Upon arriving at residence, police found plaintiff in home with no shirt on. Plaintiff refused to cooperate with police and threatened to kill herself.-was arrested for violation of protective order. (Police Offense Report) + +22. On 2/28/02, plaintiff was charged with shoplifting bras from Burdines and was issued a juvenile referral form. (Police Offense Report) + +23. On 9/21/04, a protective order was filed against Preston after an incident on 9/20/04 in which he accused her of cheating on him. He then began choking her, threw her against a wall, and yelled at plaintiff. He dumped beer on her, threw cigarettes in her face, and slammed her into the ground. On a previous incident in August 2004, plaintiff reported they agued and Mr. — grabbed her by her arms and threw her to the ground outside her house. Plaintiff noted she was in fear because he has a violent history and has verbally threatened her friends, family and herself. (Petition for Injunction for Protection) + +24. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +25. In Dr. Klimart's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, aHsi of a medical, clinical school, and work records known to the attorney in the case. + +26. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give zeports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "available important and relevant documentswhich arehelps deliberatelywithheld km us." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, which haverequested or thatwe 'lave stated would ordinarily be pig gf medical opinion formation %), the topics concerning, which our input requested." We request the same. + +27. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization; including the type and character of the alleged assault and key victim variables such as demographics; psychological reactions at the time of the trauma; previous psychiatric or psychological history, history of previous victimization; current or previous psychological difficulties; general personality dynamics and coping style; sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +28. It is also essential to understand the plaintiffs level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescrthed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +29. Knowledge of plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +30. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to hint afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. + +31. These, in essence, are the same or similar records that plaintiff's expert witness (Dr. Kliman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such + +identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and/or similar information be made available to us to conduct our examination. + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College of +Medicine + +STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared **RICHARD C.W.** +**[REDACTED]** M.D., who is ( ✓ ) personally known to me or ( ) who has produced +\_\_\_\_\_ as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that +the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this 4th day of August, 2009. + +![](_page_7_Picture_23.jpeg) + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745919/EFTA02745919.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745919/EFTA02745919.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..277aa05e18355b66a2d243c395a898ab5da36f5f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745919/EFTA02745919.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,339 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745919.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 11217, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.1, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg", + "_page_7_Picture_23.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. a M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 171.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 459.3489685058594, + 171.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 459.3489685058594, + 188.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 188.9730224609375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 276 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 276 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 312 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 327 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 329 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 270 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745919" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745919/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745919/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8baba346e06f58b36b834ade1fb5051dae541ce0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745919/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:26e80278147292f1e7bb499d2d0882a41ccd5e11e3d2c248e511cccb3189f664 +size 3967 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745919/_page_7_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745919/_page_7_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5e2bd0fc34efcdfb41b4bf34f465dbf83395ce2d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745919/_page_7_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:adc3eca4664dca94da53afa23cfe8e5cabbdec5f286d69a35e20a72ef62fa5a7 +size 12465 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745927/EFTA02745927.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745927/EFTA02745927.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..343680b3fef50be9872728adf3da82954963c9e6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745927/EFTA02745927.md @@ -0,0 +1,105 @@ +Jane Doe #5 + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. M.D. + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W. M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W. IS M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and + +111 C . + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. + +Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe #5 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe #5 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiff's counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kliman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kliman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #5. + +14. Plaintiff reports she went to three different schools in the eighth grade. (Page 3, GK Contemp note) + +15. Plaintiff reports "I have had girls be mean to me and even rumor that they would slice my throat when I was younger." (Page 4, GK Contemp note) + +16. Plaintiff noted that she had caught her mother and stepfather having sex. (Page 7, GK Contemp note) + +- 17. "I got kicked out when I was 18 (by both parents). (Page 7, GK Contemp note) +- 18. Plaintiff noted that her mother suffers from depression/stress. (Page 7, GK + +Contemp note) + +- 19. Plaintiff noted that during her sophomore and junior years of high school she + +drank every weekend and started trying drugs. (Page 7, GK Contemp note) + +- 20. "Her problems began during adolescence." (Page 7, GK Contemp note) + +- 21. Family psychiatric history includes: a history of ablood relative having been sexually abused, plaintiff's mother was physically abused by sisters, and plaintiff's father "was very irresponsible as afather figure when I was growing up" and used drugs. (Pages 7 and 8, GK Contemp note) + +- 22. Plaintiff noted "My stepfather hit me on afew occasions. But on one occasion, I lost hearing in my ear for two weeks." (Page 8, GK Contemp note) + +- 23. Plaintiff reported that she has been sexually active since age 13 and had 8-10 partners. (Page 8, GK Contemp note) + +- 24. Plaintiff reported that she had been raised by her father between ages 12 to 18 and that she found her childhood hard to remember, unhappy and painful. (Page 8, GK Contemp note) + +- 25. Plaintiff reports that her drug use has included marijuana and pain pills without prescription and that on several occasions she has drunk too much alcohol. (Page + +9, GK Contemp note) + +26. Plaintiff reported that her mother's sisters had paid amale to rape her (the mother) in acloset at school. She had been raped three times, twice in childhood and once on adate. Also, an uncle raped the mother. (Page 1, GK Follow-up note) + +27. Plaintiff reported having suicidal thoughts in the 9th or 10th grade. (Page 4, GK Follow-up note) (Pre-Epstein) + +28. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +29. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, 2 lisp of all medical, clinical,school, and work records known to the attorney in the case. + +30. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "available important and relevant documentswhich ffi•gbeingdeliberately withheld from us." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, whichwe have requested Qr that we have stated would ordinarily be part of medical opinion formation al the topics concerning, which our input is requested." We request the same. + +31. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +32. It is also essential to understand the plaintiff's level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +33. Knowledge of plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +34. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. These, in essence, are the same and similar records that plaintiff's expert witness (Dr. Kliman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and such other similar information be made available to us to conduct our examination. + +Respectfully submitted, + +Aa.vd s ze t-O Richar C. W. , D + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine + +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South + +Florida + +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida + +College of Medicine \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745927/EFTA02745927.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745927/EFTA02745927.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0cc5750adf8f16959f2bd39deb45914b189ed57c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745927/EFTA02745927.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,340 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745927.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 10375, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.19, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 171.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 451.9923400878906, + 171.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 451.9923400878906, + 187.92000000000002 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 187.92000000000002 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 195 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 274 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 257 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 279 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 300 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 336 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 283 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745927" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745935/EFTA02745935.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745935/EFTA02745935.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9752ec2254069e5bab256211c59196c0b639583e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745935/EFTA02745935.md @@ -0,0 +1,124 @@ +Jane Doe 1/6 + +v . + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W. M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W. M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as a Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. + +Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. 1, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe #6 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe #6 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiff's counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Klixnan, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kiln-Ian's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #6. + +14. Plaintiff's interrogatories note a diagnosis of P1SD following an auto accident in 2003. (Pre-Epstein) (Page 5, Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories) + +15. Plaintiff noted "nervous about driving here. Hit by asemi June 2003.1 wasn't hurt but Mom was." (Page 1, GK Contemp notes, Interview Part 1) + +16. "Seroquel. . . for bad dreams after the car accident.. . longest therapy six months court ordered. I am on probation for stupid stuff I did 2-3 years ago. . . really dumb, I got in trouble, arrested." (Page 2, GK Contemp notes) + +17. A Petition for Involuntary Assessment for Substance Abuse, dated July 19, 2006, noted a domestic disturbance at plaintiff's home with "threats to several family members as well as threats of suicide... appeared to be under the influence of Zanax [sic] bars... She found her grandmother dead three weeks ago, may have pushed her over the edge." (Page 1, Petition for Involuntary Assessment for Substance Abuse, Circuit Court of the 19" Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida). On January 31, 2007, Plaintiff pled guilty to grand theft and burglary, and was sentenced to a30-day substance abuse program, 9 months community control, and 2 years probation. On February 25, 2007, Plaintiff cutoff her monitoring bracelet and fled her residence violating probation. She was arrested on March 9, 2007 and April 2, 2007 and was ordered to undergo amental health evaluation. On August 8, 2007, she was arrested for possession of drug paraphernalia and violated her probation again. She was in jail for a period of 30 days until September 6, 2007 when she was found guilty of the violation of probation and sentenced to remain in jail for evaluation and treatment and then outpatient treatment as well as parenting elacses. + +18. A Notice of Related Case reports an incident of the plaintiff being charged with possession of a weapon on school property in November 2004. (Page 2, Notice of Related Case, Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida) + +19. On 4/13/06, in response to acall of child abuse, an officer received a report from DCF noting that "since the age of 13, Plaintiff has been smoking marijuana with her father every other day. .. Mom is aware of (blacked out) smoking marijuana with dad. .. She placed her daughter in Growing Together Treatment Center on 3/10/06. Then Baker Acted her on 4/ 7/06 to (blacked out)." (Police Offense Report) + +20. On 4/12/05, police responded to adomestic violence call, which involved plaintiff and her brother kicking and hitting each other at their residence. (Police Offense Report) + +21. A police report of 5/24/04 notes that police responded to a delayed battery charge, in which the plaintiff was involved in averbal argument with afriend who then punched the plaintiff with aclosed fist to the forehead area. (Police Offense Report) + +22. A police report of 11/22/03 noted a physical altercation involving the plaintiff and another individual, which resulted in the plaintiff being struck in her left eye with a closed fist. (Police Offense Report) + +23. On 3/02/03, police responded to acall of a suspicious person at the plaintiffs residence. The plaintiff reported that when she entered her shed to do her laundry, she came in contact with an unknown male, who had some of her underwear inside his mouth. She reported that the male took the underwear out of his mouth, put them in the dryer, and + +then ran away. (Police Offense Report) + +24. A police report notes an incident of 8/27/02 in which plaintiff was followed home from school by four girls and allegedly battered by two of the girls subsequent to a verbal conflict at school. (Police Offense Report) + +25. "I met Mr. Jeffrey August 2004.. . I was between repeating sixth grade. . ..I was not yet 14. Illi came to my house to get me to go and we called acab to go to Jeffrey's. She told me I had to tell him adifferent age, 16 or over because I wouldn't get paid." (Page 1, GK notes) + +26. Plaintiff reported, "I wasn't a virgin. I might have had sex with one person. I was around 13 or 14 that I lost my virginity with alittle kid, achildhood friend." (Page 2, GK notes) + +27. "I smoked some weed during the Xanax... drank alittle but not into it"(Page 2, V IllMwi GK III, 12/6/08) + +28. Plaintiff reported "Cause I don't like the way it made me feel and I'd fall asleep on it and yea . . . that's alittle bit after I got into that car accident, that's 2006. I started getting bad dreams and they started taking me to therapists and I started getting like anxiety attacks in the car .. It was bad... that's the longest therapist I've ever seen and that was because it was court ordered." "I went to her like six months." (Page 9, Tape 1) + +29. Question: "Have you been more irritable since this happened to you?" + +Plaintiff response, "I don't know."(Page 12, Tape 3). + +30. Plaintiff failed to report to Dr. Kliman that on Apri110, 2005 she witnessed a friend getelectrocuted. On December 22, 2006, Plaintiff got into a fight with her thenboyfriend, who had been out all night, and the boyfriend went out in the street in front of their house and put a gun to his head and killed himself. + +31. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +32. In Dr. Klirnan's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the c se, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, aWI of lla medical, clinical, school,and musk rscords known to the attorney in the case. + +33. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not + +form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "availableimportant and relevant documents which are heist deliberatelywithheld from us." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, whichwe have requestedor thatwe have stated would ordinarily be part of medical opinion formation on thg topics concerning, which ing input Li requested." We request the same. + +34. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug + +use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +35. It is also essential to understand the plaintiff's level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +Respectfully submitted, + +*Richard C. W. Hall* +Richard C. W. ██████████, MD + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South +Florida + +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida +College of Medicine + +STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared **RICHARD C.W.** +██████████, M.D., who is ( ) personally known to me or ( ) who has produced +\_\_\_\_\_ as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that +the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this 4th day of August, +2009. + +![](_page_9_Picture_20.jpeg) + +Marcia J. Chapman +Notary Public +Printed Name: MARCIA CHAPMAN +My Commission Expires: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745935/EFTA02745935.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745935/EFTA02745935.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3f40864996de2dba31d5a68acd4c1a91fcec9ea0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745935/EFTA02745935.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,390 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745935.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 12951, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.64, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_9_Picture_20.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 187.272, + 191.96999999999997 + ], + [ + 450.432, + 191.96999999999997 + ], + [ + 450.432, + 207.7230224609375 + ], + [ + 187.272, + 207.7230224609375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 282 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 282 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 323 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 306 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 327 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 322 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 329 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745935" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745935/_page_9_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745935/_page_9_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cc54185a5a976f22a15516980aa466cff8f2c574 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745935/_page_9_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:10c2cd3909967061a43dfbc3ab50c388682692f7a7c8d1fef68c97f13f9bd41e +size 12307 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745945/EFTA02745945.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745945/EFTA02745945.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dcf4a21b6f56465329662a16d7a685c04dbf3c8d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745945/EFTA02745945.md @@ -0,0 +1,81 @@ +Jane Doe #7 + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. M.D. + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W. a M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +1. My name is Richard C.W. IS M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. + +2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. + +3. I, also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + +4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and + +tr + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe #7 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe #7 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiff's counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. 'Gilman, MD, is the medical director. + +14. While all pertinent medical history has been withheld, on October 4, 2005, Plaintiff did provide astatement to the police, which directly conflicts with the allegations in her complaint. Medical records would assist with the veracity (or lack thereof) of her statements and the allegations in the complaint. Plaintiff told the police on October 4, 2005 that she was introduced to Epstein by when she was approximately 17. (Police Statement, page 1) aps allegedly told her that the first time you go it's just like a massage and she said "well, like, well the more you go supposedly, the more like, he expects, and like flirting with girls and that's what kind of scared her." (Police Statement, page 2) She also states that the second time she went to Epstein's, she gave him amassage and that she had her clothes on. (Police Report, pages 2 & 4) Plaintiff claims she thought Epstein might be leaning towards wanting her to take her clothes off, or touching her but Epstein never did because she was so shy. (Police Statement, pages 2 & 3) She also told police that when she massaged Epstein, he was not naked (Police Statement, page 3), he never removed his towel (Police Statement, page 3), she did not take her clothes off (Police Statement, page 4), Epstein did not touch her inappropriately (Police Statement, page 3), he did not masturbate (Police Statement, page 5), and they did not touch each other's private areas (Police Statement, page 3). Further, she claims in the report not to have returned to Epstein's home after the second visit. (Police Report, page 3) + +15. Her allegations in the complaint are in complete opposite when compared to the police report. For instance, the complaint alleges: (a) during the first massage, Epstein sexually assaulted her and masturbated (Complaint, Paragraph 13); and (b) Plaintiff returned on many occasions to the Palm Beach mansion to provide Epstein with massages for money. On those occasions, Epstein engaged in sexual contact and activity with Plaintiff, which included, among other things, Epstein touching Jane's breasts, placing a vibrator on her vagina and masturbating himself. This sexual abuse continued over a period of approximately 18 to 24 months (Complaint, Paragraph 14). In stark contrast to the statement she gave to the police, she now claims in her answers to interrogatories that she went to Epstein's home between 8-10 times (Interrogatory, \*15) and that she brought friends on two separate occasions and was paid \$200 per friend (Interrogatory, #17). In fad, she denies in her answers to interrogatories that she even provided arecorded statement to the police (Interrogatory, #22). In addition, on Tape 2, pages 11,12 &20, she claims that Epstein was aggressive, grabbed her butt, tried to feel parts of her, masturbated under the towel and pulled her bra and exposed her nipples and touched her breasts, which is totally inconsistent with her statement to the police. + +16. For further elaboration of Jane Doe #7's history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +17. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, Lag of all medical clinical,school and work records known to the attorney in the case. + +18. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "available important And relevant documentswhicharebei\_r tgo deliberately withheld from, us." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, which we haverequested orthatwe have stated would ordinarily ;Dart of medical opinion formation on be topics concerning, which our input LI requested." We request the same. + +19. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +20. It is also essential to understand the plaintiffs level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illneootos were present whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +21. Knowledge of plaintiffs relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +22. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. These, in essence, are the same and similar records that plaintiff's expert witness (Dr. Kfirnart) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and such other similar information be made available to us to conduct our examination. + +Respectfully submitted, + +C If d C. W. Ha + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida + +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College of Medicine + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared RICHARD C.W. =, M.D., who is (V) personally known to me or ( ) who has produced as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this 4 kr" day of A.,s, 2009. + +CA% Not ry Publi Prided Name: ivtgrAtc was 1 Cl4W-Prtbfh My Commission Expires: + +![](_page_7_Picture_9.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745945/EFTA02745945.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745945/EFTA02745945.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b50e7b73557a21586467dacd5ba2d6eaff9c606f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745945/EFTA02745945.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,330 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745945.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 11423, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.58, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_7_Picture_9.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.66, + 193.59 + ], + [ + 455.0113525390625, + 193.59 + ], + [ + 455.0113525390625, + 213.84 + ], + [ + 186.66, + 213.84 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 200 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 274 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 270 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 333 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 328 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 320 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 286 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745945" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745945/_page_7_Picture_9.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745945/_page_7_Picture_9.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5bb05f320be4f93640d4620cc83c0351c1ee15fa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745945/_page_7_Picture_9.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:deaee76ff9a96b977c9ab6768c086e425464fc3558010b678eb2533b041e2072 +size 11768 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745953/EFTA02745953.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745953/EFTA02745953.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7b2a9afbb0f842c86fd14a8ab82ddca3c1e08611 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745953/EFTA02745953.md @@ -0,0 +1,379 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEH'REY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +J + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Reply To Plaintiffs', Jane Does 2-7, Response In Opposition To Epstein's Motion To Compel And/Or Identify Jane Does In The Style Of This Case And Motion To Identify Jane Doe In Third-Party Subpoenas For Purposes Of Discovery, Or Alternatively, Motion To Dismiss Sua Sponte, With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein" or "Defendant"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Reply to Plaintiffs', Jane Does 2-7, Response in Opposition to Epstein's Reply To Plaintiffs', Jane Does 2-7, Response In Opposition To Epstein's Motion To Compel And/Or Identify Jane Doe In The Style Of This Case And Motion To Identify Jane Doe In Third-Party Subpoenas For Purposes Of Discovery, Or Alternatively, Motion To Dismiss Sue Sponte, With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law (the "Motion to Identify"). In support, Mr. Epstein states as follows: + +### I. Introduction + +1. Prior to these cases being consolidated, Epstein filed separate Motions to Identify in each of the cases filed by Jane Does 2-7. (DE 91 - Jane Doe 2, DE 84 - Jane Doe 3, DE 101- Jane Doe 4, DE 86 - Jane Doe 5, DE 41 - Jane Doe 6, and DE 52 - Jane Doe 7 ). Plaintiff filed their collective or omnibus response to the above matters in the Case No.: 80119, which can be found at DE 114. + +2. Epstein filed his Motion to Identify for the sole purpose of obtaining discovery related to the allegations in Plaintiffs' respective complaints and to properly defend and investigate the matters that have been filed against him as would ANY Defendant. However, Plaintiffs gather together in a continued effort to stonewall and prevent discovery of their past medical, psychological and employment histories, and for good reason — Plaintiffs' damages will be substantially reduced due to several preexisting and diagnosed conditions for which they now attempt to pawn off on Epstein in an effort to increase their damages. Appalling incidents took place in each of the Plaintiffs' lives prior to any of their alleged encounters with Epstein including, but not limited to, rape, sexual abuse, molestation, witnessing close friends or family members committing suicide, certain Plaintiffs having suicidal thoughts, or attempting to commit suicide, physical and verbal abuse by family members etc... Those incidents (described below) led to each of the Plaintiffs' respective preexisting conditions and were not highlighted for the court in Plaintiffs' expert's affidavit attached to Plaintiffs' Opposition Motion (i.e., the Affidavit of Gilbert W. Kliman, M.D.). Instead of addressing each Jane Doe individually and highlighting their past experiences prior to Epstein (which are obviously relevant to damages), Plaintiffs' expertsimply touts his credentials in his generalized affidavit and lists various tests he either performed or intends to perform on Plaintiffs, thereby joining in on this organized and calculated effort to preventdiscovery. In fact, it appears Dr. Kliman had each Plaintiff complete a questionnaire. Is it Plaintiffs' position as well the Defendant is not entitled to that information? + +3. In fact, it appears Dr. Kliman had each Plaintiff complete a questionnaire However, Epstein's expert, Dr. Richard C.W. 111 has addressed the medical/psychological histories, criminal histories, family histories and the past life experiences of each Jane Doe by way of separate affidavit and has provided this court with sufficient reason to grantEpstein's Motion to Identify.' Each of the Plaintiffs histories is outlined in Dr. Affidavits attached hereto and will be discussed in great detail below. + +4. Next, Plaintiffs make much of the fact that Epstein is attempting to harm them by way of identifying each of them in the style of their respective cases. While the undersigned's experience is that once identified in a public pleading drones of individuals + +In making his Affidavits, Dr. hall reviewed voluminous documents (i.e., boxes full of documents including criminal histories and Dr. Kliman's report/interview). The undersigned is prepared to provide those documents to the court for in camera inspection should the court require same. However, in light of the number of documents reviewed by Dr. in making his Affidavits, the undersigned did not file those documents with the clerk so as no require the clerk additional and unnecessary work. + +come forward with information refuting the Plaintiffs' allegations, Epstein will withdraw that particular relief if Epstein is permitted to conduct the necessary and regular discovery related to Plaintiffs' allegations in their complaint (i.e., to identify each Jane Doe in third-party subpoenas and to issue those subpoenas to third-party treaters and current and former employers and others such that Epstein can obtain records related directly to Plaintiffs' claims and damages for severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages, etc...). Cherenfant v. Nationwide Credit, Inc. 2004 WL 5315889 (S.D. Fla. 2004)(order allowing discovery of medical records consistent with Plaintiff's allegations in complaint). Failure to allow Epstein discovery is severely prejudicing Epstein and, therefore, should be considered on an emergency basis by this court. If regular discovery is not permitted, how can any defendant be expected to defend the allegations made against him by any Plaintiff, Jane Doe or otherwise? Without the healthcare provider information and employment history, it will be impossible to conduct both thorough depositions of the Plaintiffs and a meaningful independent medical/psychological examination by Epstein's defense expert, Dr. This case should be treated no differently than any other case in which a Plaintiff seeks personal injury damages. + +5. Once again, this court has already ruled that Plaintiffs can only be deposed once (Case #80119, DE 98 at 15 — "Defendant is limited to a single deposition of each Plaintiff, during which defendant may depose the Plaintiff as both a party and a witness."). However, it appears that Epstein is being compelled to take Plaintiffs' depositions and independent medical evaluations without ANY medical or employment histories. As such, the undersigned will not be able to cross-examine Plaintiffs about their past medical and employment histories and, as a result, Epstein's expert physician will not have the benefit of that type of questioning and answers thereto before the compulsory psychological/psychiatric examination of the Plaintiffs. This is not only unheard-of, but it is inherently unfair, nonsensical, flies directly in the face of the liberal discovery rules and directly violates Epstein's due process rights. This court has ordered that we move these cases forward. However, Plaintiffs' strategy is to delay or prevent the very discovery this court said Defendant should undertake! + +6. Moreover, Plaintiffs agreed at the June 12, 2009 hearing on Defendant's Motion to Stay that regular discovery could proceed. See Composite Exhibit "A" at pages 26-30 & 33-34. For instance, the court asked Plaintiffs' attorneys the following questions: + +The Court: [] So again, I just want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend a case being prosecuted against him or her, that that in and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to criminal prosecution? (Ex. "A," p.26). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: You agree he should be able to take the ordinary steps that a defendant in a civil action can take and not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? (Ex. "A," p.27). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: Okay. But again, you're in agreement with everyone else so far that's spoken on behalf of a plaintiff that defending the case in the normal course of conducting discovery and filing motions would not be a breach? (Ex. "A," p30). + +Mr. Horowitz — counsel for Jane Does 2-7: Subject to your rulings, of course, yes. (Ex. "A," p.30). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: But you're not taking the position that other than possibly doing something in litigation which is any other discovery, motion practice, investigations that someone would ordinarily do in the course of defending a civil case would constitute a violation of the agreement? (Ex. "A," p.34). + +Ms. Villafana: No, your honor. I mean, civil litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take discovery is part of what civil litigation is all about.... But.. . , Mr. Epstein is entitled to take the deposition of a Plaintiff and to subpoena records, etc. (Ex. "A," p.34) + +7. It is clear from the transcript attached as Exhibit "A" that each of the Plaintiffs' attorneys, including Mr. Horowitz for Jane Does 2-7, expected and conceded that regular discovery would take place (i.e., discovery, motion practice, depositions, requests for records, and investigations). Despite the foregoing, Plaintiffs now argue that they should not be subject to regular discovery procedures by serving subpoenas on various third-parties which identify each Jane Doe by name for the purpose of obtaining relevant information related to claims that each of the Plaintiffs have made against Epstein. The truth is that this is just a front to cover-up each of the Plaintiffs' disturbed pasts and their preexisting conditions, which will arguably reduce their damages. Plaintiffs cannot expect this court to limit discovery directed at them simply because of the allegations they assert in the complaints (i.e., sexual battery). Sexual Battery is a tort, and discovery has always been permitted on such a cause of action despite the alleged facts surrounding such a claim. Plaintiffs must keep in mind that as pled, these cases are personal injury cases seeking personal injury damages. Plaintiffs cannot expect any special treatment from this court based on their self-serving allegations which merely seek to limit discovery. + +8. Surprisingly, Plaintiffs' counsel requests that this court substantially limit the rules of discovery by allowing Plaintiffs to provide Defendant with the requested information only after same has been in Plaintiff's possession. No authority is provided + +by Plaintiffs allowing for such a procedure. The undersigned finds it hard to believe that any firm would ever allow an opposing party to request records for it and mail those records to the requesting firm only after the opposing firm had an opportunity to review and filter through same. No valid discovery objections or exemptions exist preventing necessary and reasonable discovery. To hold otherwise prevents Mr. Epstein from preparing and defending this matter. Plaintiffs' requests in this regard should be flat-out denied. + +9. For the courts ease of reference, the transcripts, tapes and pages referenced in Dr. Affidavits and referenced throughout this motion are generated from the interview Dr. Kliman, the Plaintiffs" expert, conducted on each of said Plaintiffs. Should the court wish to review those transcripts, tapes and interviews, same will be provided upon request. + +# H. Reply and Memorandum of Law + +# a. The Allegations in the Amended Complaints As to Jane Does 2-7 + +10. The amended complaints filed by Jane Does 2-7 against Jeffrey Epstein make allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon a minor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Does 2-7 allege confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that they suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. Plaintiffs allege intentional infliction of emotional distress, severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. They further allege that they suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. Dr. ■ **Affidavit of Jane Does 2-4, Exhibits "B-G," respectively.** + +# b. Jane Doe Number 2 + +11. Plaintiff, Jane Doe 2, reported to Dr. Kliman that as a result of her relationship with her parents, she "shut herself out to the world". Ex. "B" at 117. She reports that her parents did not pay attention to her, that her father struck her and her brothers, that her father assaulted her mother and struck Plaintiff across the face, and that she was sexually assaulted by her step brother when she forgot to lock her door before bed and he snuck back into the bed naked and got under the covers; and she also claims that the incident with her stepbrother is". . . a big part of why [she is the way she is.)" Ex. "B" at \$119, 21, 22. 35, 36, 38 & 39. Plaintiff also reports that when she was 16, her stepbrother beat her mom, sister and the Plaintiff, and that her stepfather was always yelling at her, was violent with her mother and would send Plaintiff to bed without dinner after smacking her across the face. Ex. "B" at 1122, 35 and 36. Plaintiff has been thinking of hurting herself for three or four years, and she reports seeing a counselor with her mother relative to the above incidents and her counselor said she was bipolar or had obsessive compulsive disorder.Ex. "B" at 1125, 26 & 45. Plaintiff reports drug use at the age of 12, including marijuana and Xanax, and cocaine use at 18 or 19 years of age. Ex. "B" at 1128-29 &51. Plaintiff also claims to have been sexually assaulted by her 19 year-old step brother or someone she knew, and she states she was scared of her stepbrother because nobody could ever "stop him." Ex. "B" at1138 and 39. + +### c. Jane Doe Number 3 + +12. Plaintiff, Jane Doe 3, reports seeing a therapist in Palm Beach County at age 11, and believes that she had previously been diagnosed with depression following her parents' divorce at age 11." Ex. "C" at nia and 17. Plaintiff attempted suicide five + +times, beginning at age II, after her parents divorced. She attempted suicide on several occasions by running a car in a closed garage, by swallowing "a whole bunch of pills" and by cutting her wrists. Ex. "C" at 118 & 32. Between the ages of 9 and 11, Plaintiff's father was a heavy drinker, was verbally and physically abusive to her and physically abusive with her sister and her mother causing them to leave the house with their mother. Ex. "C" at 1121 & 33. Plaintiff claims her father suffers from depression and that while depressed he is distant, has angry spells, and she "worries what he will do .. . he snaps so much." Ex. "C" at 122. Plaintiff was teased excessively at school, and began drinking at age 13 to the point of having blackouts. Ex. "C" at 1122, 27 & 35. At the age of 12, Plaintiff, and four other children, were given "pot" and molested all in one night by her best friend's brother, who had just gotten out of jail. Ex. "C" at 129. Then at the age 15, plaintiff was raped at a graduation party but never told anyone about it. Ex. "C" at 128. Plaintiff claims that Kevin Hoebee, who molested her, subsequently raped his own sister. Ex. "C" at 130. Plaintiff clearly had a turbulent family life. Ex. "C" at 134. As a result, Plaintiff notes she has seen many psychologists. Ex. "C" at ¶119-20. + +13. Dr.. also notes in paragraph 37 of his Affidavit that Jane Doe 3 gave information to Dr. Kliman relative to her alleged encounters with Epstein which directly conflict with her probable cause affidavit and the Palm Beach Police Incident Report. Ex. "C" at 137. + +### d. Jane Doe Number 4 + +14. Plaintiff, Jane Doe 4, reports to Dr. Kliman a history of alcohol use and an ex-boyfriend who drank alcohol and used pills that were "a form of oxycodine [sic] a form of heroine [sic]." Ex. "D" at 114. Plaintiff obtained a restraining order against her + +ex-boyfriend for, among other things, spitting in her face, pushing her and being abusive. Ex. "D" at 115. While in high school, Plaintiff's friend, Chris, died in a motor vehicle accident, and she was in shock from his death for approximately 1 12/ to 2 years. It still bothers her today. Ex. "D" at 117. Another close friend of Plaintiff, Jen, died in a motor vehicle accident which caused Plaintiff shock for approximately 2 months. Ex. "D" at 9117 & 19. On 10/31/04, Plaintiff, while intoxicated, had an altercation with her then boyfriend, Preston Vinyard. Ex. "D" at 121. When the Police arrived, they found Plaintiff in her home with no shirt on; and Plaintiff refused to cooperate with the police and threatened to kill herself. Ex. "D" at 121. Plaintiff's boyfriend, Preston Vinyard, has choked her, thrown her against a wall and onto the ground, dumped beer on her, threw cigarettes in her face, and has verbally abused her and threatened her friends and family. Ex. "D" at 123. Plaintiff has a record of DUI and shop lifting. Ex. "D" at 120 & 22. Finally, Plaintiff reports talking with two psychiatrists at age 16 or 17 due to family issues and boyfriend issues, but makes no mention to Dr. Kliman of telling the psychiatrists of her alleged encounters with Epstein. Ex. "D" at 116. Moreover, while Plaintiff denies recruiting other girls relative to her alleged encounters with Epstein, on page 24 of the Palm Beach Police Report, Plaintiff said she left a note for Epstein that indicated "for a good time call [Plaintiff] and [friend)" and left the girls' phone numbers. Ex. "D" at 116. + +#### e. Jane Doe Number 5 + +15. Plaintiff, Jane Doe 5, reported to Dr. Kliman that her mother's sisters paid a male to rape her (the mother) in a closet at school, that her mother had been raped three times, twice in childhood (which included the mother's uncle) and once on a date. Ex. + +"E" at 126. Plaintiff reports having suicidal thoughts in the 9'h or 10'h grade. Ex. "F" at 127. During Plaintiff's sophomore and junior years of high school she drank every weekend and started trying drugs. Plaintiffs family psychiatric history includes: a history of a blood relative having been sexually abused, plaintiff's mother was physically abused by sisters, and plaintiff's father "was very irresponsible as a father figure when [she] was growing up" and she used drugs. Ex. "E" at 121. Her drug use includes marijuana and pain pills without prescription. Ex. "E" at 125. Plaintiff's stepfather hit her and, on one occasion, she even lost her hearing for two weeks. Ex. "E" at 1122 & 24. Plaintiff finds her childhood hard to remember, unhappy and painful. Ex. "E" at 124. In addition, Plaintiff claims ". . .girls [were] mean to [her] and even rumored] that they would slice [her] throat when [she] was younger." Ex. "E" at 115. Plaintiff's parents eventually kicked her out of the family home when she was 18-years-old. + +### f. Jane Doe Number 6 + +16. Plaintiff, Jane Doe Number 6's interrogatories note a diagnosis of PTSD following an auto accident in 2003. Ex. "F" at 114. A Petition for Involuntary Assessment for Substance Abuse, dated July 19, 2006, noted a domestic disturbance at Plaintiffs home with "threats to several family members as well as threats of suicide. . . appeared to be under the influence of Zanax [sic] bars. . . She found her grandmother dead three weeks ago, may have pushed her over the edge." On January 31, 2007, Plaintiff pled guilty to grand theft and burglary, and was sentenced to a 30 day substance abuse program, 9 months community control, and 2 years probation. Ex. "F" at 117 On February 25, 2007, Plaintiff cutoff her monitoring bracelet and fled her residence violating probation, and she was arrested on March 9, 2007 and April 2, 2007 and was + +ordered to undergo a mental health evaluation. Ex. "F' at 117. On August 8, 2007, she was arrested for possession of drug paraphernalia and violated her probation again. Id. She was in jail for a period of 30 days until September 6, 2007 when she was found guilty of the violation of probation and sentenced to remain in jail for evaluation and treatment and then outpatient treatment as well as parenting classes. Id. Plaintiff was also charged with possession of a weapon on school property in November 2004. Ex. "F' at118. + +17. Plaintiff is also noted to have smoked marijuana with her father since the age 13 and also did Xanax Ex. "F' at 1119 7 27. Plaintiff was placed in Growing Together Treatment Center on 3/10/06 and Baker Acted her on 4/7/06. Id. Plaintiff has also been in several physical alternations with family and friends. Ex. "F' at 20-22. In particular, back on 8/27/02, Plaintiff was followed home from school by four girls and allegedly battered by two of the girls. Ex. "F' at 124. + +18. Plaintiff, however, failed to report to Dr. Kliman that she witnessed a friend get electrocuted, and that her boyfriend shot and killed himself in front of her after they got into a fight. Ex. "F' at 130. Plaintiff also saw court ordered therapists. Ex. "E" at128. + +# g. Jane Doe Number 7 + +19. Jane Doe 7 has withheld all pertinent records from discovery. While various conflicting statements are noted in Dr. affidavit, Ex. "G", the Defendant is unable to determine what prior existing conditions Jane Doe 7 had before her alleged encounters with Epstein. This is a direct result of Plaintiffs' collective efforts to prevent discovery all together. However, it is clear from Dr. Affidavit that Jane Doe 7 does have the propensity to lie in an attempt to further her case. + +## III. Conclusion and Requested Relief + +20. For further elaboration of Plaintiff's history and background, access to all available records is crucial to understand the impact of any of these events on Plaintiff's. See Exhibits "B-G." It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. See Exhibits "B-G." There are a number of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. See Exhibits "B-G." It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. See Exhibits "B-G." It is also essential to understand the Plaintiffs' level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. See Exhibits "B- + +G." Knowledge of Plaintiffs' relationships with their families and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. See Exhibits "B-G." It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him a full and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. See Exhibits "B-G." These, in essence, are the same and similar records that plaintiff's expert witness (Dr. Kliman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. See Exhibits 'B-G.' To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. See Exhibits "B-G." Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. See Exhibits "B-G." + +21. Cherenfant v. Nationwide Credit, Inc. 2004 WL 5315889 (S.D. Fla. 2004) allows for the discovery sought in Sections II. a-g above and in Defendant's Motion to Identify. See also Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 26; Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders 437 U.S. 340, 352 (1978); Dunbar v. U.S., 502 F.2d 206 (5th Cir. 1974); Rossbach v. Rundle, 128 F.Supp.2d 1348, 1354 (S.D. Fla. 200); Fed.R.Civ.Pro 33(b)(4)(Plaintiffs must show that the requests are unreasonable or burdensome, which they have failed to do in the instant matter); Panola Land Buyers Ass'n v. Shuman 762 F.2d 1550, 1559 (11'h Cir. 1985); v. Estaleiro It S/A, 541 F.Supp.2d 1344, 1353-54 (S.D. Fla. 2008) (discussing the rules' intended limited court involvement in discovery). + +22. It is clear that the requested relief/discovery goes to the heart of the + +Plaintiffs' allegations. Therefore, to prevent meaningful and regular discovery is in direct contradiction of the Rules allowing for a liberal and broad discovery. In addition, allowing Plaintiffs' counsel to obtain and produce Defendant's discovery for him is not only absurd but not contemplated by the law or the Federal Rules. + +Wherefore, Epstein requests that he be granted leave to identify Plaintiffs by their legal names in Third-Party Subpoenas (but not file them in Court or, if required, in a redacted form), that Plaintiffs' requests to obtain discovery and then provide it to Defendant through their counsel be denied, or in the alternative, that this court dismiss these actions Sue Sponte and for such other and further relief as this cgpt1.em just and proper. + +> J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this j day of at/6- , 2009 + +Respectf Ily submitted, + +R V. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. orida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Hagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +### Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/. + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomev.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381. 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. a Esq. + +Seamy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcylaw.com + +iph@searcvlaw.com + +Brad Esq. + +RothsOiTFutnfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. IR Esq. + +illLaw inn, P.A. atura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Defendan + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold-Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 skuvin@riccilaw.com deopold@riccilaw.com + +Fax: 305 358-2382 dosefsberg@oodhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745953/EFTA02745953.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745953/EFTA02745953.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..52c2c5b0b5b68026125cf934e6f614e2c39374e3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745953/EFTA02745953.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1018 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745953.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 19, + "chars": 29958, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.72, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 411.7103576660156, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 411.7103576660156, + 106.10302734375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 106.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 269.73 + ], + [ + 360.4078674316406, + 269.73 + ], + [ + 360.4078674316406, + 284.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 284.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "H. Reply and Memorandum of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 412.29 + ], + [ + 413.361083984375, + 412.29 + ], + [ + 413.361083984375, + 428.60302734375 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 428.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. The Allegations in the Amended Complaints As to Jane Does 2-7", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 122.4, + 439.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 494.96038818359375, + 439.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 494.96038818359375, + 456.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 122.4, + 456.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "b. Jane Doe Number 2", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 236.232, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 399.3209228515625, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 399.3209228515625, + 97.17352294921875 + ], + [ + 236.232, + 97.17352294921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "c. Jane Doe Number 3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 238.68, + 605.88 + ], + [ + 382.1568298339844, + 605.88 + ], + [ + 382.1568298339844, + 621.4335174560547 + ], + [ + 238.68, + 621.4335174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "d. Jane Doe Number 4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 236.84400000000002, + 605.0699999999999 + ], + [ + 380.50286865234375, + 605.0699999999999 + ], + [ + 380.50286865234375, + 620.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 236.84400000000002, + 620.9830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "e. Jane Doe Number 5", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 236.232, + 605.0699999999999 + ], + [ + 380.0660400390625, + 605.0699999999999 + ], + [ + 380.0660400390625, + 619.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 236.232, + 619.4830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "f. Jane Doe Number 6", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 236.232, + 413.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 381.3467712402344, + 413.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 381.3467712402344, + 429.05352783203125 + ], + [ + 236.232, + 429.05352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "g. Jane Doe Number 7", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 238.68, + 553.23 + ], + [ + 382.9700012207031, + 553.23 + ], + [ + 382.9700012207031, + 570.3530120849609 + ], + [ + 238.68, + 570.3530120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. Conclusion and Requested Relief", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 110.97 + ], + [ + 412.7279052734375, + 110.97 + ], + [ + 412.7279052734375, + 127.10302734375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 127.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 400.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 365.70050048828125, + 400.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 365.70050048828125, + 416.60302734375 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 416.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 138.51 + ], + [ + 364.6269836425781, + 138.51 + ], + [ + 364.6269836425781, + 154.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 154.4730224609375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 408 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 154 + ], + [ + "Line", + 75 + ], + [ + "Text", + 70 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745953" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745972/EFTA02745972.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745972/EFTA02745972.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..939197eb90125170cc7db7a7c8a3806fe5791ea9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745972/EFTA02745972.md @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, Motion For Extension of Time in which to Respond to Plaintiff, Jane Does's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall Respond to Plaintiffs Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. + +on or before August 21, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745972/EFTA02745972.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745972/EFTA02745972.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..12275720719586268ffa0c00992f8fec9ea6f559 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745972/EFTA02745972.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745972.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1803, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.43, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 411.73565673828125, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 411.73565673828125, + 102.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 102.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.744, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 332.2633361816406, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 332.2633361816406, + 641.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 282.744, + 641.2330169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745972" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745976/EFTA02745976.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745976/EFTA02745976.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d4a8c37d3aae236d4c29fec2a0c16ebc315c5c6d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745976/EFTA02745976.md @@ -0,0 +1,324 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3. + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA4M. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/.=M + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CAROLYN MARGARET CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRAJ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRAJJOHNSON + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REOUEST TO PRODUCE, ANSWERS TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS, AND ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves this Court for an extension of time until August 21, 2009, to file Responses to Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 A.1(j) (S.D. Fla. 2008). As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +Counsel for Defendant communicated with Counsel for the Plaintiff, and Plaintiffs Counsel agrees to the requested extension of August 21, 2009, to file Responses to Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff's counsel, by telephone, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested extension. + +> Robert D. ritton, Esq. Attorney or Defendant + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 6th day of August, 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: \_\_\_\_\_ + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. ■ **Esq.** + +**Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A.** + +**2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard** + +**West Palm Beach, FL 33409** + +**561-686-6300** + +**Fax: 561-383-9424** + +**isx@searcvlaw.com** + +**iph@searcylaw.com** + +**Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A.** + +**Bruce Reinhart, Esq.** + +**Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A.** + +**250 S. Australian Avenue** + +**Suite 1400** + +**West Palm Beach, FL 33401** + +**561-202-6360** + +**Fax: 561-828-0983** + +**ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com** + +**Counsel for Defendant** + +**Theodore J. Leopold, Esq.** + +**Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq.** + +**Leopold-Kuvin, P.A.** + +**2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200** + +**Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410** + +**561-684-6500** + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +tleopold@riccilaw.com + +Isidro M. Esq. + +=Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datum Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL. 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iagesq@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745976/EFTA02745976.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745976/EFTA02745976.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bd42c2b2bb1d8ddd6cea7aa1b7bf1dacdd36b28d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745976/EFTA02745976.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,325 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745976.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 5849, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.93, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 412.8503723144531, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 412.8503723144531, + 107.60302734375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 107.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 170.74800000000002, + 350.73 + ], + [ + 443.73529052734375, + 350.73 + ], + [ + 443.73529052734375, + 366.363037109375 + ], + [ + 170.74800000000002, + 366.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 558.9 + ], + [ + 364.95050048828125, + 558.9 + ], + [ + 364.95050048828125, + 573.7330169677734 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 573.7330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.108, + 334.53 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 334.53 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 376.65000000000003 + ], + [ + 189.108, + 376.65000000000003 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 42 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 133 + ], + [ + "Line", + 66 + ], + [ + "Text", + 62 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745976" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745982/EFTA02745982.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745982/EFTA02745982.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6010cc3ba0a0a99f5a425d04664f8c0b5254d3d2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745982/EFTA02745982.md @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/JOHN + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +![](_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg) + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +![](_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg) + +CASE NO.: 013-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381.-MARRAJ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MAIRRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRAJ + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, Motion Por Extension of Time in which to Respond to Plaintiff, Jane Does's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall Respond to Plaintiff's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. + +on or before August 21, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this 6day of 4OII, (7 2009. + +f'""" ""14: pite"A;v6.4 United States Distnet-Judge 41&/(?1,17e----• + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745982/EFTA02745982.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745982/EFTA02745982.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..615ad129d6bb239f0c4bcb9febf683ed9ef78f32 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745982/EFTA02745982.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,222 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745982.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 1901, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.44, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.645, + 91.53 + ], + [ + 398.8055419921875, + 91.53 + ], + [ + 398.8055419921875, + 118.7335205078125 + ], + [ + 198.645, + 118.7335205078125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 276.135, + 611.55 + ], + [ + 323.818359375, + 611.55 + ], + [ + 323.818359375, + 626.8535461425781 + ], + [ + 276.135, + 626.8535461425781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745982" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745982/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745982/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b9c2c3c3651abeb0bc3c019f27a935f5f73146aa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745982/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e8b6eaf70d09497b33d6b9327a94b1e8b90d5271a65d5fc5f0a3e9cdcbe562c5 +size 1242 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745982/_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745982/_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..737678c6b6abb0af8b43d89dd2e9da11c5381eb0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745982/_page_0_Picture_9.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7cc7378f5fcd1f0a7f3344b3edb0d6c005c09d36e11d1906e85aee0434ff3770 +size 10065 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745986/EFTA02745986.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745986/EFTA02745986.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b9113cd724b9b078bec024cef8efc3ad7a219731 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745986/EFTA02745986.md @@ -0,0 +1,156 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +I + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARR A4! + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80993-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08- CV-8081I -MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80893-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendant. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 08-CV- 80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al., + +Defendant. / + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80591-MARRA/1=. + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80656-MARRA, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES' 2- 7 REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY HEARING ON PLAINTIFFS' PENDING MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-7, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby file this Request for Emergency Hearing on Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order, pursuant to S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1(E), and state as follows: + +- I. Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 filed a Motion for Protective Order on July 29, 2009 (DE 226). That Motion concerns the acts and conduct of Defendant Epstein's investigators in interviewing nonparties. +- 2. Since the filing of Plaintiffs' Motion, Defendant's investigators have continued aggressively to contact nonparties seeking extensive personal information about the Plaintiffs. In + +doing so, the Plaintiffs' anonymity is being seriously and unnecessarily compromised. The acts and conduct of the investigators are intimidating the Plaintiffs. Filed simultaneously herewith is the Declaration of Jane Doe No. 7 in further support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order, which specifically describes the conduct of one of Defendant's investigators. + +3. Under the circumstances, immediate relief is necessary to protect the Plaintiffs' anonymity. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the time requirements of S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1 be waived and that an immediate hearing be scheduled on Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order. + +Dated: August 7, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) + +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com + +MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on August 7, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mennelstein + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@vodhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawverwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745986/EFTA02745986.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745986/EFTA02745986.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b33e005f161375e3351a60f1100f2403a00696f9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745986/EFTA02745986.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,345 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745986.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 3855, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.74, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES' 2- 7 REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY HEARING \nON PLAINTIFFS' PENDING MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 102.20400000000001, + 456.8399999999999 + ], + [ + 509.6538391113281, + 456.8399999999999 + ], + [ + 509.6538391113281, + 486.363037109375 + ], + [ + 102.20400000000001, + 486.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 71.17889404296875 + ], + [ + 386.0939636230469, + 71.17889404296875 + ], + [ + 386.0939636230469, + 85.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745986" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745992/EFTA02745992.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745992/EFTA02745992.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..68fe3a8f318c9cd322b2a884ae40c62fc98f29aa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745992/EFTA02745992.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +## DECLARATION OF JANE. DOE NO. 7 + +INNINIaidepose and state as follows: + +- 1. I am the Plaintiff identified as Jane Doe No. 7 in this lawsuit. +- 2. 1 received messages from three different friends/acquaintances whom I knew in high school within the past week, advising me that they had been contacted by a private investigator. I received these messages on July 30, July 31, and August 4, 2009. +- 3. I spoke to one of the persons who was contacted regarding questions asked and information provided by the investigator. She advised me that the investigator asked her the following: + - Was i promiscuous in high school? + - What was my reputation in high school? + - How many guys have 1 been with? + - Did I date older, rich guys? + - Did I give massages for money? + - Who were my friends in high school and what is their contact information? +- 4. In the course of asking questions, the investigator mentioned the name of The references by the investigator to and massages, for all intents and purposes, disclosed to this person that J am a Plaintiff in a lawsuit involving sexual abuse against Jeffrey Epstein. +- 5. I am worried that Jeffrey Epstein will continue to send investigators to speak with other people in my community who arc unaware that I am a Plaintiff in this lawsuit I am concerned and fearful that the types of questions referenced above to these people will disclose + +that I am a Plaintiff in a sexual abuse lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein, and will ruin my reputation either directly or by inference and innuendo. + +I declare under penalties of perjury the foregoing to be true and correct. + +Dated this 5 day of August, 2009 + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745992/EFTA02745992.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745992/EFTA02745992.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8233053303fbffca959d3aa4fe396a727b0125fd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745992/EFTA02745992.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,128 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745992.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1652, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.05, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "DECLARATION OF JANE. DOE NO. 7", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.869, + 115.973 + ], + [ + 407.44708251953125, + 115.973 + ], + [ + 407.44708251953125, + 131.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 191.869, + 131.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745992" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745994/EFTA02745994.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745994/EFTA02745994.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..def0107bf2c92fb749f33b9d40627ba77b14bb6c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745994/EFTA02745994.md @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-M ARR A/ + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +I + +JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA=M + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80993-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08- CV-80811 -MARRA I + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80893-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., + +Defendant. + +/ + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 08-CV- 80469-MARRA + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al., + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80591-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 08- CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## NOTICE OF FILING DECLARATION OF JANE DOE NO. 7 IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOES 2-7 MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-7, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby file the attached Declaration of Jane Doe No. 7 in further support of Plaintiffs' Jane Does 2-7 Motion for Protective Order (DE 226). + +Dated: August 7, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattornev.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on August 7, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who arc not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawverwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745994/EFTA02745994.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745994/EFTA02745994.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..29ebd414c33666a6af3250432819ab80d1dfea69 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745994/EFTA02745994.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,303 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745994.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 2823, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.46, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF FILING DECLARATION OF JANE DOE NO. 7 IN FURTHER \nSUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOES 2-7 MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.5, + 456.8399999999999 + ], + [ + 536.2379150390625, + 456.8399999999999 + ], + [ + 536.2379150390625, + 486.363037109375 + ], + [ + 76.5, + 486.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.44, + 192.77999999999997 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 192.77999999999997 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 207.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 226.44, + 207.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 454.7248229980469, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 454.7248229980469, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745994" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745999/EFTA02745999.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745999/EFTA02745999.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6aa05a509b030c53f99c55281675a4909034248d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745999/EFTA02745999.md @@ -0,0 +1,153 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 013-CV-80232-MARRA + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-8081 I-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +/ + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Defendant" or "Epstein")'s Motions to Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe in the Style of this Case and Motion to + +Identify Doe in Third-Party Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively Motion to Dismiss (DE 65 in 08-80119). The Court has reviewed the motions, responses, and replies, and is otherwise fully advised in the premesis. + +Plaintiffs filed their respective suits under a pseudonym (although Defendant and his counsel are aware of Plaintiffs' legal names) to prevent public disclosure of private, intimate facts pertaining to their alleged sexual abuse and exploitation by Defendant when they were minors. Plaintiffs claim that public disclosure of their legal names would create a substantial risk to them of further psychological harm. + +Defendant argues that the purpose of his motion to identify is to obtain discovery related to the allegations in Plaintiffs' respective complaints and to properly defend and investigate the matters that have been filed against him. Defendant claims that Plaintiffs "gather together in a continued effort to stonewall and prevent discovery of their past medical, psychological and employment histories." (DE 247 at 4). + +Defendant states that he will withdraw his request for Plaintiffs to be identified in the styles of their respective cases if he is permitted to conduct the necessary and regular discovery related to Plaintiffs' allegations in their complaints. (DE 247 at 5-6). Defendant argues that failure to allow him discovery is severely prejudicing him. + +The Court agrees that Defendant is entitled to discovery relating to the allegations in Plaintiffs' complaints. However, it also acknowleges Plaintiffs concerns regarding public disclosure of their legal names. Accordingly, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Motions to Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe in the Style of this Case and Motion to Identify Doe in Third-Party Subpoenas for Purposes of + +Discovery, or Alternatively Motion to Dismiss (DE 65 in 08-80119) are GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: Based upon Defendant's agreement, the plaintiffs need not be identified by their legal names in the styles of these cases. As to third party discovery, Defendant shall style any subpoenas to third parties for documents or depositions with the case number and style "In Re [plaintiff's legal name]." Further, the subpoenas to third parties shall not make reference to or identify Defendant by name. Defendant's alternative motion to dismiss sua spouse is denied. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this r day of August, 2009 + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745999/EFTA02745999.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745999/EFTA02745999.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..00074707b0b66c71ce556aabe58c980dec0a9590 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745999/EFTA02745999.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,253 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02745999.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 3868, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.45, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 330.7379150390625, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 330.7379150390625, + 610.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 610.4830169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 34 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02745999" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/EFTA02746004.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/EFTA02746004.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0769fcc8c4b31c3977ec350092bcb5a3e72a4957 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/EFTA02746004.md @@ -0,0 +1,837 @@ +![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg) + +I. MICHAEL BURMAN, PA., GREGORY W. COLEMAN, PA. ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., PA.' BERNARD LEBEDEKER MARK T. LUITIElt PA. JEFFREY C. PEPIN MICHAEL J. PIKE HEATHER McNAMARA RUDA + +I FLORIDA bonito asTinzo CIVIL TRIAL LAWYER + +# BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN LLP + +A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP + +July 31, 2009 + +Jack., Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +Re: CMA v. Epstein + +Dear Jack: + +ADEL-QUI1. BENAVEJTE + +PAPAIEnid INVES110ATOR + +BARBARA M. McKENNA MUMS 670)03N-BARING BETTY STOKES mstAthoms + +RITA IL BUDNYK OF COUNSEL + +Please find enclosed questionnaires for your client to fill out in advance of the IMURpointment set for August 20, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. at my firm. My expert, Ryan C. W. MI, M.D., respectfully requests that your client fill these out and send them back to me within one week. + +I look forward to your cooperation in this matter. + +Very truly yours, / 4 ./1" + +Michael J. Pike + +cc: Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. Robert D. Critton, Jr. + +![](_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg) + +# LIFE HISTORY QUESTIONNAIRE RELEASE OF INFORMATION + +I hereby give permission to Dr. Richard C. W. r. Ryan C. W. to use the information I gay the Life History Questionnaire. I understand thallsDcznsent is revoca le upon written notice to Dr. , except to the extent that action by him has been taken in reliance on this authorization. + +NAME Date + +WITNESS Date + +Name + +The purpose of this questionnaire is to help us to better understand you and the problems which brought you to our office. Since some of the information you will be giving us in this questionnaire is of a personal nature, we want to assure you that all case records are held in strict confidence. Unless required by law, your case record will not be released without your permission. Findings from this questionnaire may be used in compiling group data and will never be released In any way that could identify you. + +Please read the questions carefully and answer as accurately as you can. The questionnaire will probably take about fifteen minutes to complete, but feel comfortable working at your own pace. + +## EARLY DEVELOPMENT + +Dale of birth Age + +1. As a child did you have any of the following? + +Serious Accidents ❑ No ❑ Yes, please specify + +Serious Illnesses ❑ No ❑ Yes, please specify + +Surgeries ❑ No ❑ Yes, please SPdcifY + +2. Did either parent die during your childhood or adolescence? + +No + +❑ Yes, my mother, when I was years old. + +❑ Yes, my father, when I was years old. + +❑ Unknown + +3. Check the persons with whom you lived most of the time while growing up. + +❑ Both my natural parents + +❑ One parent and ❑ stepmother or ❑ stepfather + +❑ One parent, ❑ mother or ❑ father + +❑ Other relative (explain) + +• parent(s) + +❑ Adoptive parent(s) + +An Institution + +❑ Other (explain) + +4. Were you able to confide in your parents? + +❑ Yes, usually ❑ No, not usually ❑ Not applicable + +5. How well did your parents get along with each other? + +❑ Very well ❑ Not very well ❑ Don't know + +❑ Fairly well ❑ Very poorly ❑ Not applicable + +- ivitvrviiiy tiwi you Know nave applied to your parents or brothers or sisters. Specify family member below O Hospitalization for mental Illness O Drinking problem O Drug abuse • OAttempted or committed suicide O Donl know + +7. How many schools did you attend from grades 1 through 12? + +1• 3 O 4 - 7 O More than 7 O Dont know + +9. Did + +8. + +What kind of grades did you make in school? O Excellent ❑ Good O Fair O Poor O Failing you participate in school activities? fp No E/es, some O Yes, many 10. When you were growing up, did you belong to church(es), club(s) or other organized group(s)? O Yes, many Et Yes, a lew ONone + +11. Did you have dose friends around your own age?ct? oMany O Few O One O None 12. Check any of the following that applied to you as a child. + +Onightmares O steaNng ❑ fire setting Onail biting O running away ij accident prone tj speech problems ❑ bullying O lyIng ID daydreaming O sleepwalking Et temper. tantrums ❑ cruelty to animals O O loneliness bed wetting ❑ scapegoat (picked on) O thumb sucking Oinsomnia O head banging + +13. How would you describe your physical health at present? + +OExcellent O Good O Fair O Poor + +14. Have you ever had any of the following? + +| Do you still have a problem with this? | | +|----------------------------------------------|--------------------------| +| Yes | Yes | +| heart trouble | | +| nervous breakdown | | +| epilepsy | | +| tuberculosis | | +| diabetes | | +| teeth trouble | | +| eye trouble | | +| nose trouble | | +| bladder trouble | | +| kidney trouble | | +| bowel trouble | | +| stomach trouble | | +| chest trouble | | +| Do you still have a problem with this? | | +| Yes | Yes | +| backache | | +| hernia | | +| dizziness | | +| blackout | | +| rheumatism | | +| chronic [REDACTED] | | +| shortness of breath | | +| fits or convulsions | | +| cancer | | +| asthma | | +| arthritis | | +| high blood pressure | | +| low blood pressure | | +| Do you still have a problem with this? | | +| Yes | Yes | +| hemorrhoids (piles) | | +| laundice | | +| [REDACTED] fever | | +| other allergy | | +| venereal disease | | +| ulcers | | +| blood in urine | | +| sugar in urine | | +| varicose veins | | +| underweight problem | | +| overweight problem | | +| injury to limb(s) | | +| injury to back | | +| injury to neck | | + +LIFE HiS (GAY 0UESTi0NNAtrui PAGE 2 + +Pep pills, diet pile 0 Alcohol Tranquilizers, sedatives 0 LSD, or other hallucinogen (exclude marijuana) Marijuana 0 Other, please specify Narcotics ID No + +16. Wdh whom are you living at present? + +❑ Spouse, or spouse and child(ren) 0 Other relative(s) ❑ Parent(s) 0 Friend(s) ❑ Minor child(ren) 0 Alone ❑ Grown child(ren) ❑ Other, explain + +17. Check the statement which most closely describes how you are getting along with each of the following persons. + +| | fairly | +|------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------| +| | not very very | +| pnrsnn Mnthor Father SigterN | poorly uncertain not very well applicable well wefl Jamther(a) | +| Spruce | / Partner | +| Female | ChIld(ren) | +| Male | Illillti(ma) | + +18. What Is your present marital status? + +0 Single 0 Separated ID Living together, how long? 0 Divorced 0 Manied, how long? 0 Widowed + +| 19 | | | | | | None' OR a Some of Good part of Most OR ALL ' | +|--------|---------------|---------------------|-----------------|-------------------|--------------|--------------------------------------------------| +| | | | | | | little of the time the time the time of the time | +| | I | feel more | | nervous | and | anxious than usual | +| I | | feel afraid | for | no | reason | at all | +| I | gel | upset | easily | or | feel | panicky | +| I I | feel nc t h | lice v ig aig | I 'm id ev v rt | falling h it t we | apart n all | and going 10 pieces right and | +| | My | arms | and | leas | shake | and tremble | +| | am | | bothered | by | headaches | neck and back pain | +| I | feel | weak | and | get | tired | sea ` , | +| I | feel | calm | and | can | sit still | easily | +| I | can | feel | my | heart | beating | fast | +| I | am | | bothered | by dizzy | | spells | +| I | have | | fainting | spells | or feel | Ike It | +| I I fi | can get ngers | breath feelings arw | in of toes | and | out numbness | easily and tingling in my | +| I | am | bothered | | by | stomachaches | or indiciestkm | +| I | have | to | empty | my | bladder | often | +| | My | hands | are | usually | dry | and warm | +| | My | face | gets hot | and | blushes | | +| I | fall | asleep | | easily | and Pet | a good night's rest | +| I | have | | nightmares | | | | + +20. Check any of the following that apply to you at the present time + +Ohallucinating O talented O too ambitious O daydreamer O generous O nightmares O tense O insomnia O horrible thoughts O helpful O bed wetting El tack of confidence O capable O unable to concentrate ❑ trusting O thoughtful O lonely O open O bored ID easily hurt O aggressive O evil O guilty O restless ❑ vacations or weekends O dizzy ❑ bad temper O stable ID Inferior O easily influenced El unable to have O lovable O regretful Oaffectionate O forgetful agood time ❑ panicky O timid O unloved O respected O enthusiastic ❑ soft-hearted O headaches O modest O confused ❑ SPY O ugly O calm ❑ well mannered O need help O shy O agitated O depressed O rigid O loyal O fire setter O cowardly O Ono appetite O suicidal O tired O indecisive ❑ sell-confident O fainting spells O rejected O unattractive O Inadequate O angry friendly O flexible O cruel to animals O stupid O full of hate O in conflict O misunderstood ❑ unhappy O worthless O "caret do anything right- + +❑ Not applicable ❑ Stormy ❑ Happy ❑ Insecure 0 Average ❑ Romantic ❑ Exciting ❑ Frienity 0 Lack of communication ❑ Good sexual adjustment ❑ Indifferent ❑ Mistake ❑ Good communication ❑ Lack of common interests ❑ Poor sexual adjustment ❑ Mutual respect and love ❑ Perfect ❑ Boring ❑ Secure ❑ Sharing of Interest + +22. How long did you know you present spouse before marriage? D Not married Year(s) + +23. How many times have you been married? + +24. How many close friends do you have. ❑ Many p Few ❑ One 0 None + +25. Are you able to confide in these friends? ❑ No 0 Yes ['Not applicable + +26. How comfortable are you with: + +| | very comfortable | moderately comfortable | moderately uncomfortable | very uncomfortable | +|---------------------------------|------------------|------------------------|--------------------------|--------------------| +| Joining a group | | | | | +| Meeting people | | | | | +| With persons of same sex | | | | | +| With persons of opposite sex | | | | | +| Being a leader | | | | | +| Being a follower | | | | | +| Expressing an unpopular opinion | | | | | +| Being disliked | | | | | +| Asking for help | | | | | +| Taking advice | | | | | +| Accepting criticism | | | | | +| Competitive situations | | | | | +| Taking initiative | | | | | + +27. Does your present work satisfy you? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Unemployed + +28. Check any of the following which have been aproblem for you. + +- ❑ Gambling ❑ Trouble with police ❑ Men ❑ Women ❑ Parents ❑ Temper ❑ Violence ❑ Friends ❑ Sex + - **Marriage** ❑ Children ❑ Finances ❑ Drinking ❑ Drugs ❑ Religion oJob• + +- 29. Here is a picture of a ladder. Suppose the top of the ladder represents the best possible life for you. Where on the ladder do you feel you stand at the present time? (Circle the correct number.) + +![](_page_7_Picture_2.jpeg) + +- 30. Where on the ladder would you say you stood Live years ago? (Circle number.) + +![](_page_7_Picture_4.jpeg) + +- 31. Where on the ladder would you say you will stand five years from now? (Circle number.) + +![](_page_7_Picture_6.jpeg) + +| | Most or all Good part Some None or a little of the time of the time of the time of the time 1. I feel down-hearted and blue | +|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| 2. | Momino is when I feel the best 3. I have crvino spells or feel like it 4. I have trouble sleepina at nioht | +| 5. | I eat as much as I used to 6. I still enlov sex 7. I notice that I am losing waloht | +| 8. | I have trouble with constipation | +| 9. | My heart beats faster than usual 10. I oet tired for no reason 11. My mind is as clear as h used to be 12. I find It easy to do the things I used to | +| 13. | 1 am restless and can't keep still 14. I feel hopeful about the future | +| 15. | 1 am more irritable than usual 16. I find it easy to make decisions 17. I feel that I am useful and needed 18. My life is pretty full 19. I feel that others would be better ott if I were dead 20. I still enlov the thinas I used to do | + +33. Do you know anyone who has been treated by Dr.S? + +❑ No ❑ Yes + +34. If so, in your opinion, was the person(s) helped? (Check more than one, if applicable.) + +❑ Yes, greatly ❑ No, not at all + +❑ Yes, moderately ❑ No, became worse + +❑ Only a little ❑ Not applicable + +35. Do you think you need help? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know + +36. Do others think you need help? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know + +37. How long do you think you should be In treatment? + +❑ Less than 1 month ❑ More than 1 year + +❑ More than 1 month, less than 6 months ❑ Don't know + +❑ More than 6 months, less than 1 year + +NAME + +AGE DATE: + +PREVIOUS PHYSICIAN (NAME AND ADDRESS): + +# PAST MEDICAL HISTORY (PLEASE CHECK ALL ITEMS TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE): + +Yes No + +0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O ❑ 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hypertension Arthritis Diabetes Tuberculosis Pneumonia Venereal Disease Thyroid Disease, Goiter High Chtgarerol or Triglycerldes Asthma, Fever Emphysema Bronchitis Recurrent Sinusitis Skin Disease Psoriasis, Cancer, etc.) (Eczema, Heart Attack Abnormal Heart Beat Heart Failure Rheumatic Fever Heart Murmur Congenital Heart Disease Breast Lumps Blood Disorders Leukemia Lymphoma Anemia Peptic Ulcer Gall Bladder problems Bowel Disorders (Colitis, Spastic Colon, etc.) Hernia Hemorrhoids Liver Disease (Cirrhosis, Hepatitis, etc.) Kidney Disease (Cysts, Stones, Infection, etc.) Bladder Infections Prostate Disorders (Males only) Female Organ Disorders Stroke Paralysis Cancer Epilepsy Serious Injuries Meningitis Encephalitis Polio Sickle Cell Disease + +• • Radiation treatments to head or neck 2Emotional problems o Phlebitis Glaucoma o Cataract c • Gout oOther (Please list) + +Last Hospitalization (date and diagnosis) + +Previous Procedures (approximate date): Chest X-ray EKG Flu Vaccine Pneumococcal Vaccine Tetanus Shot Tuberculosis Skin Test Stomach X-ray (UGI) Colon X-ray (BE) Kidney X-ray (IVP) Complete Medical Examination Sigmoidoscopic / Proctoscopic Exam Pelvic Exam and Pap Smear (females only) + +PAST SURGICAL HISTORY (List operations, dates and where performed): 1. 4. 2. 5. 3. 6. + +CURRENT MEDICATIONS (Name and dosage): 1. 4. 2. 5. 3. 6. + +OVER-THE-COUNTER MEDICATIONS/HERBALSNITAMINS: 1. 4. 2. 5. 36. + +ALLERGIES (to drugs). Please give reaction (i.e. shock, hives, chest pain, etc.): 1. 3. 2. 4. + +SOCIAL HISTORY: Do you smoke cigarettes? oYes 0 No If no, have you ever smoked? 0Yes 0No How many packs per day? For how many years have you smoked? When did you quit? Do you drink alcohol? °Yes o No How much? + +How much coffeeltea/caffeinated drinks do you drink? + +Vt 1411110CY 04.641PONIUJII PAGE 9 FAMILY HISTORY: (Please list age and any medical problems: + +Father, age Mother, age + +How many brothers? How many sisters? + +Any with medical problems? + +DO ANY OF THE DISEASES RUN IN YOUR FAMILY? + +YES NO YES NO OCancer o 0 Tuberculosis 0a Heart disease 0 0 Strokes 0 High blood pressure a a Diabetes 0Sickle cell anemia 0 Epilepsy 0c Thyroid disease 0 0 Suicide oKidney disease - stones o 0 Colitis + +Richard C. W. pi, MD, PA 2500 W. Lake ary Blvd; Ste. 219 Lake Mary, FL 32746 + +# PATIENT QUESTIONNAIRE (for Forensic Examination) + +ALL QUESTIONS MUST BE ANSWERED + +WARNING: Because you are being examined for purposes of legal action (workers' compensation, social security, civil rights, civil or criminal, etc.), please be aware that the information you supply in this questionnaire, or tell the doctor, is not confidential. + +## GENERAL INFORMATION + +Name: Today's date. + +Address' City. + +State, ZIP: Date of Birth: Age. + +Phone. Social Security Number + +Which is your dominant hand? (right, left, both). + +Can you read a newspaper? Yes— No— Your present weight. + +Current employment + +Education (highest grade completed). + +Physician, lawyer or person who referred you to this office. + +If you are being examined for Workers' Compensation, Social Security, a lawsuit, or criminal charges, who is your lawyer? + +Did you drive yourself here today? Yes No If no, who brought you? + +What is the driver's relationship to you (friend, relative, hired by your lawyer etc ) + +Who do you live with at this time? + +# HISTORY OF PRESENTING PROBLEM + +Have you been experiencing any mental or nervous problems in the last month? Yes No + +If yes, describe. + +When did your mental problem first begin? + +Have you been experiencing any physical problems in the last month? Yes No If yes, describe. + +When did your physical problems first begin? + +### ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING + +What time do you get up in the morning? What time do you go to bed at night? + +Who fixes your breakfast? Do you drive a car or truck? Do you use a checkbook? Who pays your bills? Who cleans your home? + +Who fixes your meals? Do you attend church? How often? + +What hobbies do you now have? + +What do you read? + +What TV shows are presently your favorite(s)? + +What do you do with your children? + +What was your last overnight trip? + +Who mows your yard? What work do you do around your home or farm? + +How many movies do you rent per month? How many times do you go to + +the movie theater a year? How many times do you sleep away from home in a year? How many ball games do you attend in a year> + +How many times do you hunt in a year? How many times do you fish per year? How many times do you eat out in a month? + +How many times a month do friends or family visit in your home? How + +many times a week do you call someone on your phone? What plants do you grow? Can you dress yourself? + +Can you bathe yourself or shower yourself? Can you have + +sex? + +### PAST MEDICAL HISTORY + +List any serious childhood illnesses you had. + +Were you born prematurely? Yes No What did you weigh at birth' + +Did you have growth problems? Yes No Were you sad or happy or depressed as a child? Sad Happy Depressed List any permanent physical or mental problems from childhood• + +As a child, did you have trouble sitting still in school? Yes No Did you have trouble + +learning in school? Yes No\_ Did you have trouble keeping your mind on things as a child? Yes No\_ Did you have trouble learning to read? Yes No Did teachers + +Check any serious illnesses you have now or have been treated for in the past: + +Seizures Cancer Diabetes Thyroid Disease Anemia (low blood) High blood pressure Heart disease Lung or breathing problems Joint or back disease Stomach or bowel disease Female problems Pregnancy problems Urinary tract problems Sexual problems Prostate problems Sleep problems Depression Panic disorder Nerves Alcoholism Drug abuse Overdoses Suicide attempts Violence towards others Attention deficit disorder Manic depressive Schizophrenia Eating disorders Neurological disease Spouse abuse Child abuse or neglect + +If you were hospitalized for these illnesses, list the hospitails)• + +Have you had any motor vehicle accidents? Yes No If yes, list them: + +| Date | Your age at the time | Type of injury | Treatment/by whom | +|------|----------------------|----------------|-------------------| +| | | | | + +Have you ever been knocked out, lost consciousness or had a brain injury? Yes No, • If yes, describe what happened• + +Have you ever broken any bones? Yes right or left side• No If yes, describe which bones were broken, + +For women: How many pregnancies have you had? children have you had? Could you be pregnant? Yes How many living How many miscarriages have you had? No When was your last menstrual period? + +Have you had any surgeries or operations? Yes No If yes, list below: + +| Date | Your age at the time | Hospital where performed | Type of surgery | +|------|----------------------|--------------------------|-----------------| +| | | | | + +Are you now taking any medications? Yes No Please list the milligrams and how often you take your medicine. + +| Medication | Milligrams | Times per day | +|------------|------------|---------------| +| | | | + +Who keeps track of your medications? You Your spouse ^ Someone else + +Do you have any drug allergies or reactions? Yes No If yes, list below: + +| Drugs | Allergic Reaction | +|-------|-----------------------------| +| | (Rash, nausea, hives, etc.) | + +Do you use tobacco now? Yes No Not now but previously If yes or have used tobacco in the past, please describe how much and how long used• + +Do you use alcohol now? Yes No Not now but in the past If yes to any use of alcohol, describe: + +Type of alcohol (whiskey, beer, wine, etc )• + +Number of alcoholic drinks you have per day. + +How long alcohol was used before you stopped• + +Describe any medical treatment for alcohol problems• + +Describe any present alcohol problems in your life• + +Have you ever taken a medication or drug that you received from friends or family or bought off the street? Yes No If yes, describe• + +Have you ever used illegal drugs, (Le. Marijuana, cocaine, uppers, downers, crack, etc.)? Yes No + +Have you ever sniffed paint, solvents or gasoline to get high? Yes No If yes, what did you sniff and how long? + +Have you ever used illegal intravenous drugs (IV drugs)? Yes No\_ + +Have you ever received treatment for drug/substance abuse? Yes No If yes, what hospital, what year? + +Using the chart below, list what type of illegal drugs you have used: + +| Drug/Substance | Age at use | How long used | Last date used | +|----------------|------------|---------------|----------------| +| | | | | + +Do you drink coffee or tea? Yes No How many cups per day? caffeinated soft drinks? Yes No What soft drinks? How many per day? Do you drink + +| Psychiatric hospital admission | Year hospitalized | Hospital name | Treating physician or psychiatrist | Diagnosis or reason for admission | Type of treatment received | +|--------------------------------|-------------------|---------------|------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|----------------------------| +| 1st admission | | | | | | +| 2nd admission | | | | | | +| 3rd admission | | | | | | +| 4th admission | | | | | | + +Have you ever been discharged from any hospital Against Medical Advise (AMA)? Yes No If yes, describe? + +Have you ever stopped taking nerve pills without asking the doctor? Yes No\_ + +Have you ever been prescribed any form of nerve medicines, antidepressants, or other psychiatric medications? Yes\_\_ No If yes, describe• + +When is the first time you ever took nerve medicines or antidepressants? + +Have you ever had shock treatments (ECT)? Yes No If yes describe when and where: + +Have you ever been advised by any doctor or health practitioner to get mental or psychological treatment? Yes No If yes, describe - + +Have you ever been committed to a mental hospital or psychiatric unit? Yes No If yes, describe: + +Have you ever refused mental treatment: Yes No If yes, describe: + +Have you ever received any type of office treatment by your family doctor, psychiatrist, psychologist or therapist (medication, counseling, therapy) for any nervous condition, psychological, psychiatric, family or marital problems? Yes No If yes, describe: + +| Date | Your age at the time | Type of injury | Treatment/by whom | +|------|----------------------|----------------|-------------------| +| | | | | + +Have you ever intentionally overdosed yourself on drugs or medicines? Yes No + +If yes, describe• + +Have you ever attempted to take your life? Yes No + +If yes, describe• + +Have you ever cut, burned or disfigured yourself? Yes No + +## FAMILY HISTORY + +Please check if any of these illnesses have occurred in any of your parents, grandparents, brothers, sisters or children: + +diabetes high blood pressure cancer thyroid illnesses heart disease alcohol/drug problem lung disease eating disorders mental illness/nerve problems suicide violence towards others killing another person spouse abuse child abuse + +If you checked any of the above, please explain which relative had the illness: + +Father's age if living: Mother's age if living: If father, mother, brothers, sisters or child has died, list the cause of death and age at death• + +# SOCIAL HISTORY + +Where were you born? + +Date of birth• How many children were in your family? + +Of your siblings, how many sisters? How many brothers? Where do you come in the family (first child, last child etc + +What did your father do for a living? + +What did your mother do for a living? + +Did your family have enough money? Not enough money? Live in poverty? + +Is your father living? Year he died: Your mother? Year she died: + +Are (were) your parents divorced? If yes, when? How old were you at the time? Who raised you? Did your parent(s) own + +your home? Yes No\_ Was your home happy? Yes No\_ Abusive? Yes + +No\_ Threatening? Yes No\_ Hard on you? Yes No\_ Make you feet + +depressed? Yes No + +Did your father abuse your mother? Yes No\_ + +Have you ever been sexually abused? Yes No\_ + +Have you ever been physically abused? Yes No\_ + +Have you ever been violent to or harmed a person, animal or property? Yes No + +Have you ever shot, stabbed, or beaten another person? Yes No\_ + +Have you ever threatened to kill another person? Yes No\_ + +Have you ever killed another person, even if by accident? Yes No + +Describe your abuse or violence of others, if it occurred + +Have you ever been in trouble for your sexual behavior? Yes No\_ + +Have you ever sexually abused or harassed a child or adult? Yes No + +Highest grade you cumniatedin school? + +If you did not finish high school, what was the reason you quit? + +What were your grades in high school? Were you in special + +education classes? Yes No In school, did the teachers think you were hard to control or was it hard to get your attention? Yes No + +If you attended any college, list college/university, degree, and date of graduation: + +| College/University | Degree | Date of graduation | +|--------------------|--------|--------------------| +| | | | + +Are you never married, married, or divorced? + +How long have you been divorced or married? + +| | Any natural children and | +|--------|--------------------------| +| | their ages | +| | Reason for | +| First | marriage | +| Second | marriage | +| Third | marriage | +| Fourth | marriage | + +How many natural children do you have? How many step-children? + +How would you describe your marriage if you are married? Good relationship relationship Bad relationship Terrible or abusive relationship Fair If you are not married and have a lover, describe your relationship: Good Fair Bad Terrible or abusive + +Describe your relationship with your children. Close Could be better Distant Poor + +If you do not have a relationship, how do you feel about this? Satisfied Lonely but OK Not satisfied and want a relationship Very sad and lonely + +### LEGAL HISTORY + +Have you had any criminal convictions, drug arrests, DUls or public intoxication arrests? Yes No If yes, till in below: + +| Arrest date | Charge(s) | Where (City or State) | Were you convicted? | Length of time in prison/jail | +|-------------|-----------|-----------------------|---------------------|-------------------------------| +| | | | | | +| | | | | | +| | | | | | +| | | | | | +| | | | | | +| | | | | | + +Have you been Involved in any civil law suits as either the plaintiff or defendant? Yes No + +If yes, describe• + +If you received a monetary award, how much was it? + +Has your spouse, or any one else, ever gotten a restraining order or emergency protective order against you? Yes No If yes, describe: + +Have you ever gotten a restraining order or emergency protective order against your spouse, or anyone else? Yes No If yes describe• + +Have you ever filed a Workers' Compensation claim: Yes No\_ If yes, how many? + +Describe each injury and the year it occurred• + +Give the amount of your award or the monthly benefit + +Have you ever been charged with spouse abuse, child abuse or neglect, or terroristic threatening? + +Yes No\_ If yes, describe• + +**EMPLOYMENT/VOCATIONAL HISTORY** + +Employment status: (check one) Full time \_\_\_ Part time \_\_\_ Not employed \_\_\_ Student \_\_\_ + +If not employed, reason you are not employed: \_\_\_\_\_ + \_\_\_\_\_ + \_\_\_\_\_ + \_\_\_\_\_ + +If employed, who is your present employer? \_\_\_\_\_ + +Employer's address: \_\_\_\_\_ + \_\_\_\_\_ + +Length of time on your last permanent job: \_\_\_\_\_ + +Job Title/Position of that job: \_\_\_\_\_ + +If you are disabled, year of and reason for your disability: Year \_\_\_\_\_ Reason \_\_\_\_\_ + \_\_\_\_\_ + +What are your present sources of all monthly income? \_\_\_\_\_ + \_\_\_\_\_ + +Were you ever fired or asked to resign from a job? Yes \_\_\_ No \_\_\_ If yes, reason: \_\_\_\_\_ + \_\_\_\_\_ + +Have you ever threatened your employer or a coworker? Yes \_\_\_ No \_\_\_ + +Where is your spouse employed? \_\_\_\_\_ + \_\_\_\_\_ + +Do you plan to return to work at any time in the future? Yes \_\_\_ No \_\_\_ + +List past employment (beginning with your most recent job): + +| Employer | Job Title | Start date | Finish date | Reason for leaving | Other | +|----------|-----------|------------|-------------|--------------------|-------| +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | + +Employment history (Cent ) + +| Employer | Job Title | Start date | Finish date | Reason for leaving | Other | +|----------|-----------|------------|-------------|--------------------|-------| +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | + +## MILITARY HISTORY + +fyes, list below: + +| Branch of Service | Years served | Rank at time of discharge | Type of discharge | Job duties | +|-------------------|--------------|---------------------------|-------------------|------------| +| | | | | | +| | | | | | + +Where was your basic training? + +Where was your advanced training? + +If you ever served in a combat zone, list dates and area• + +If wounded in military service, describe• + +List any promotions/advancements and dates• + +List any medals/commendations and dates awarded: \_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + +Were there any disciplinary actions against you? Yes \_\_\_ No \_\_\_ If yes, describe: \_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + +Were you ever in the brig or stockade? Yes \_\_\_ No \_\_\_ +Describe any military pension or disability: \_\_\_\_\_ + +**REVIEW OF SYSTEMS** + +*(Circle those symptoms present)* + +**GENERAL** Fever, shaking, chills, change in appetite, loss in weight, change in weight, fatigue, change in sleeping patterns, soaking night sweats. + +Explain any circled items. If you have lost or gained weight, how many pounds in the last 3 months? +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + +**HEAD, EYES, EARS, NOSE, THROAT** Headache, changes in vision, double vision, blurred vision, eye pain, excessive tearing, discharge from the eyes, changes in hearing, ringing in ears, ear pain, discharge from ears, nosebleeds, odd odors, hoarseness, dental pain, sore tongue, sore throat, mouth sores. + +Explain any circled items: \_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + +**CHEST** Cough, sputum production, shortness of breath, wheezing, blood in sputum, abnormal chest x-ray, positive TB test, lump(s) in breast, nipple discharge, nipple bleeding, breast pain. + +Explain any circled items: \_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + +**HEART** Chest pain, shortness of breath walking, shortness of breath upon lying down, heart murmur, rheumatic fever, shortness of breath that wakes you up at night, swelling in legs, fainting. + +Explain any circled items: \_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + +STOMACH. Change in appetite, nausea, vomiting, blood in vomit, dark vomit, diarrhea, BOWEL constipation, change in stool size, blood in stool, dark black tarry-colored stool, food intolerance, trouble swallowing, heartburn, indigestion, laxative use, excessive gas, abdomen pain, weight loss, weight gain. + +Explain any circled items• + +URINARY, Trouble starting urination, excessive urination, dribbling of urine, pain upon GENITAL urination, blood in urine, excessive urination after going to bed, unable to hold urine, bed wetting, sores on genitals. + +Explain any circled items• + +FEMALE Menstrual irregularity, premenstrual distress, menopause symptoms, excessive female bleeding. + +Explain any circled items• + +MENTAL Depression, nervousness, panic, thoughts of suicide, poor concentration, loss of memory, too happy, word-finding difficulty, confusion, inability to know month/year, hearing voices, seeing things, paranoid thoughts, irritability, arguing, crying for no reason, trouble thinking, flashbacks, thoughts of killing another person, counting things, checking things, afraid of germs, afraid to touch doorknobs, wash hands more than 10 times daily, take more than 2 baths or showers daily. Do you have a present plan to kill yourself? Yes No\_ Do you have a plan to kill someone else? Yes No + +Explain any circled items• + +NEUROLOGIC Blackouts, seizures, double vision, partial blindness, headaches, numbness, tingling, weakness, poor balance, shaking or tremors, abnormal movements of face or body, poor coordination, paralysis, loss of reflexes, pain. + +MUSCLES, Muscle spasms, joint pain, bone disorders, difficulty walking, difficulty sitting, SKELETAL difficulty using hands, difficulty bending, difficulty lifting. + +Explain any circled items. + +SLEEP Cannot fall asleep, cannot stay asleep, wake up too early, fall asleep any time, night terrors, nightmares, sleep walking, restless legs before sleep, cannot stay awake during or while sitting, severe snoring that bothers others, choking during sleep, cannot stay awake to drive, others have observed you to stop breathing during sleep. + +Explain any circled items• + +SEXUAL Men: Cannot get erection, cannot ejaculate, ejaculate too soon, no sexual desire, partner does not meet your needs. + +Women: Cannot lubricate, cannot have orgasm, no sexual desire, partner does not meet your needs. + +How many times per month do you engage in sexual activity with another person or aspouse? + +Explain any circled items• + +HIV Could you be HIV positive? Yes No + +# AUTHORIZATION INFORMATION + +Iauthorize Richard C. W. le M.D., to examine and test me. (If you are under 18 years of age, your parent or guardian must sign this form.) + +Signature + +Date + +Iauthorize this office to send a copy of this evaluation to the person or agency who requested me to be examined or to those parties involved in my care. + +Signature + +Date + +By my signature, I certify all statements I answered on this Questionnaire are true and accurate. + +Signature + +Date + +If this form was tilled out by someone other than the patient, please give name and relationship to patient (spouse, friend, parent, guardian, etc.) + +Name: Relationship: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/EFTA02746004.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/EFTA02746004.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a9555159f2bfddee84921c7647e72702064536e5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/EFTA02746004.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1696 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 27, + "chars": 43679, + "elapsed_seconds": 15.88, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_7_Picture_2.jpeg", + "_page_7_Picture_4.jpeg", + "_page_7_Picture_6.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER \n& COLEMAN LLP", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 185.43599999999998, + 99.24542236328125 + ], + [ + 407.0640869140625, + 99.24542236328125 + ], + [ + 407.0640869140625, + 136.2205810546875 + ], + [ + 185.43599999999998, + 136.2205810546875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "LIFE HISTORY QUESTIONNAIRE \nRELEASE OF INFORMATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.99200000000002, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 405.1921081542969, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 405.1921081542969, + 113.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 223.99200000000002, + 113.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "LIFE HISTORY QUESTIONNAIRE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 213.89999389648438, + 45.80609130859375 + ], + [ + 405.75600000000003, + 45.80609130859375 + ], + [ + 405.75600000000003, + 61.0264892578125 + ], + [ + 213.89999389648438, + 61.0264892578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EARLY DEVELOPMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 254.50001525878906, + 184.7630615234375 + ], + [ + 365.7177429199219, + 184.7630615234375 + ], + [ + 365.7177429199219, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 254.50001525878906, + 197.64 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UFE HISTORY QUESTIONNAIRE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.03999999999999, + 717.66 + ], + [ + 259.567138671875, + 717.66 + ], + [ + 259.567138671875, + 731.314079284668 + ], + [ + 104.03999999999999, + 731.314079284668 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "LIFE HISTORY QUESTIONNAIRE \nPAGE 3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 714.4200000000001 + ], + [ + 266.2192077636719, + 714.4200000000001 + ], + [ + 266.2192077636719, + 739.5030899047852 + ], + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 739.5030899047852 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "LIFE HISTORY QUESTIONNAIRE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.33600000000001, + 716.8499999999999 + ], + [ + 237.192138671875, + 716.8499999999999 + ], + [ + 237.192138671875, + 732.6083374023438 + ], + [ + 78.33600000000001, + 732.6083374023438 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "LIFE HISTORY QUESTIONNAIRE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 119.952, + 718.47 + ], + [ + 277.0396423339844, + 718.47 + ], + [ + 277.0396423339844, + 732.8891677856445 + ], + [ + 119.952, + 732.8891677856445 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "LIFE HISTORY QUESTIONNAIRE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.456, + 719.28 + ], + [ + 244.18588256835938, + 719.28 + ], + [ + 244.18588256835938, + 735.48 + ], + [ + 84.456, + 735.48 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "LIFE HISTORY QUESTIONNAIRE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 122.4, + 717.66 + ], + [ + 278.68756103515625, + 717.66 + ], + [ + 278.68756103515625, + 731.314079284668 + ], + [ + 122.4, + 731.314079284668 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PATIENT INFORMATION DATA BASE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 45.36 + ], + [ + 386.1481628417969, + 45.36 + ], + [ + 386.1481628417969, + 57.79071044921875 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 57.79071044921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PAST MEDICAL HISTORY (PLEASE CHECK ALL ITEMS TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE):", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 62.424, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 529.329833984375, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 529.329833984375, + 145.47906494140625 + ], + [ + 62.424, + 145.47906494140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "LIFE HISTORY QUESTIONNAIRE \nPAGE 8", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.33600000000001, + 723.33 + ], + [ + 235.23870849609375, + 723.33 + ], + [ + 235.23870849609375, + 747.6660385131836 + ], + [ + 78.33600000000001, + 747.6660385131836 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PATIENT QUESTIONNAIRE (for Forensic Examination)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 178.704, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 437.7323303222656, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 437.7323303222656, + 136.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 178.704, + 136.07999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "GENERAL INFORMATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 218.70000000000002 + ], + [ + 372.78790283203125, + 218.70000000000002 + ], + [ + 372.78790283203125, + 232.46999999999997 + ], + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 232.46999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "HISTORY OF PRESENTING PROBLEM", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 229.5, + 545.13 + ], + [ + 411.76275634765625, + 545.13 + ], + [ + 411.76275634765625, + 559.71 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 559.71 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 237.55885314941406, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 383.11199999999997, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 383.11199999999997, + 106.11000000000001 + ], + [ + 237.55885314941406, + 106.11000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PAST MEDICAL HISTORY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 544.3199999999999 + ], + [ + 380.3719787597656, + 544.3199999999999 + ], + [ + 380.3719787597656, + 555.6600000000001 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 555.6600000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "FAMILY HISTORY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 96.38999999999999 + ], + [ + 361.010009765625, + 96.38999999999999 + ], + [ + 361.010009765625, + 109.46759033203125 + ], + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 109.46759033203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SOCIAL HISTORY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 271.728, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 363.6400146484375, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 363.6400146484375, + 402.70758056640625 + ], + [ + 271.728, + 402.70758056640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "LEGAL HISTORY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 276.624, + 225.99000000000004 + ], + [ + 359.92138671875, + 225.99000000000004 + ], + [ + 359.92138671875, + 237.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 276.624, + 237.32999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EMPLOYMENT/VOCATIONAL HISTORY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.99200000000002, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 414.324, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 414.324, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 223.99200000000002, + 104.49 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MILITARY HISTORY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 22, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.788, + 413.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 376.1112060546875, + 413.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 376.1112060546875, + 426.87000000000006 + ], + [ + 274.788, + 426.87000000000006 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REVIEW OF SYSTEMS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 23, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.1, + 251.10000000000002 + ], + [ + 369.64799999999997, + 251.10000000000002 + ], + [ + 369.64799999999997, + 263.25 + ], + [ + 260.1, + 263.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AUTHORIZATION INFORMATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 26, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 408.2439880371094, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 408.2439880371094, + 109.3189697265625 + ], + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 109.3189697265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 103 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 128 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 540 + ], + [ + "Line", + 108 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Form", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 200 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 471 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 328 + ], + [ + "Line", + 71 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 128 + ], + [ + "Line", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 364 + ], + [ + "Line", + 136 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 225 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 285 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 381 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 256 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 203 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "Table", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 250 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 249 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 281 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 271 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 185 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 109 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 237 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 273 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 180 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 143 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746004" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2a9434ae2625b6dd8cf5645c244ae4cfe1bf6eb7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:28b2cb4b44168e41e35e87a6df3f839a9eb60371de51b553727db05050a31c27 +size 8073 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d41f0db2ab0b536c7324c164572bec5eae2c6074 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:920c07dcf291a07baeb8a6bce1df20f373d5059b7e52e50f2f99dc1e7e1a337e +size 11746 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_7_Picture_2.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_7_Picture_2.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e861ae9741e5e4054135fbdd57664fc6610fd37a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_7_Picture_2.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b75f3fd4ec457a364e4bf3ad0054ce0630514514044af433373b1891509adb0a +size 19775 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_7_Picture_4.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_7_Picture_4.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..003c4401c63726dab4bf8010aa43c95441103813 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_7_Picture_4.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e0d4692eee35512047058af9a1ad0b6b05aeec8078f05d9495d04470ab6ca7d6 +size 19740 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_7_Picture_6.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_7_Picture_6.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0aa4b4b194afd88b601683b96ac81c82a4138f1d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746004/_page_7_Picture_6.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ced51846863421c2ae033ac4a06d1e22dc0016dcf6c18427f82034c66f12da85 +size 20017 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746031/EFTA02746031.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746031/EFTA02746031.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c5df4d97106afe66a408cf3666f4bf24242c1e3f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746031/EFTA02746031.md @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARIRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARR + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARR + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MAR + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRA I + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +## ORDER ON PLAINTIFF, C.M.A.'S, RESPONSE AND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR INDEPENDENT EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW (DE 2281 + +This matter came before the Court upon Plaintiff, C.M.A.'s Response and Incorporated Motion for Protective Order Regarding Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN's, Emergency Motion for Independent Examination of Plaintiff with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 228). Having considered the motion, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Plaintiffs motion is hereby granted. Defendant's examination of Plaintiff by Dr. ■ **shall be postponed until Plaintiff is discharged from the hospital. The examination and testing by Dr.. shall be limited to a maximum of six (6) hours. Plaintiff will not be required to answer questions regarding the same subject matter or topic during both her deposition and examination by Dr. M. Defendant can elect to make inquiries into a particular subject matter either during deposition or at the examination, but not both. Plaintiff shall also be permitted to have present with her in the examination room a representative from her lawyer's office.** + +**DONE AND ORDERED this day of , 2009.** + +**KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge** + +**Copies to all Counsel of Record** \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746031/EFTA02746031.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746031/EFTA02746031.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fea81aca6e624ac4fceb687fe9ce7a9eceadf787 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746031/EFTA02746031.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746031.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 2383, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.35, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.5168151855469, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.5168151855469, + 100.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 100.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON PLAINTIFF, C.M.A.'S, RESPONSE AND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE \nORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN'S EMERGENCY \nMOTION FOR INDEPENDENT EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF WITH \nINCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW (DE 2281", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 75.888, + 483.57 + ], + [ + 530.604, + 483.57 + ], + [ + 530.604, + 540.5500183105469 + ], + [ + 75.888, + 540.5500183105469 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 28 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746031" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746035/EFTA02746035.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746035/EFTA02746035.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..070d56d6c711ba9c2eec3eec8752f6267b379e61 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746035/EFTA02746035.md @@ -0,0 +1,192 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/l + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRAi l + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRA, + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRN + +#### PLAINTIFF, C.M.A.'S, RESPONSE AND INCORPORATED MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR INDEPENDENT EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW (DE 228) + +Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through her undersigned attorneys, hereby files her Response and Incorporated Motion For Protective Order Regarding Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN's, Emergency Motion For Independent Examination of Plaintiff With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 228), and in support there of states as follows: + +1. Defendant, JEFFERY E. EPSTEIN, filed on July 29, 2009 his Emergency Motion for Independent Examination of Plaintiff with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 228). + +2. After several pages of leveling inaccurate and irrelevant arguments regarding Plaintiffs alleged strategy to stall discovery in this case, the Defendant's requested relief finally materializes late in his "emergency"' motion in that he seeks to have Plaintiff submit to a 6-8 hour compulsory examination with his retained psychiatrist, Ryan M, M.D. + +3. Defendant has unilaterally selected August 20, 2009 for this examination. + +4. Plaintiff has been hospitalized for the last two weeks suffering from serious illnesses, including undergoing extensive thoracic surgery. It is not expected that Plaintiff will be released from the hospital before August 24, 2009, and potentially later. There is also the possibility that Plaintiff will need to be admitted to an in-patient nursing home/rehabilitation hospital following her discharge from the acute care setting in which she is currently residing to convalesce from her illnesses and resulting surgery. + +5. Needless to say, it is not expected that Plaintiff will be out of the hospital by August 20, let alone be in any condition that would permit the type of examination requested by Defendant. Accordingly, Plaintiff seeks the entry of a protective order preventing the examination with Dr. ■ **from going forward until after Plaintiff is discharged from the hospital and/or any nursing home/rehabilitation hospital. The** + +**Although styled as an \*emergency- motion, there is no indication whatsoever as to how or why Defendant's request for an examination of Plaintiff is an emergency.** + +undersigned will keep counsel for EPSTEIN informed as to Plaintiff's expected discharge date in order to facilitate rescheduling the examination. + +6. Ominously, Defendant seeks to first take the deposition of Plaintiff so that his examiner can have the benefit of Plaintiff's answers before the examination takes place. (DE 228, paragraph 5). Plaintiff, the victim of repeated sexual offenses at the hands of the Defendant over a prolonged period of time while she was a minor, would then again be subjected to a "full medical and psychiatric history, including chief complaint, history of present illness, specific complaints of symptoms or injury, medical history, past psychiatric history, family history, abuse history, birth history, childhood history, school history, occupational history, violence history, legal history, relationship history, substance abuse history, sexual history, review of symptoms, activities of daily living, mental status examination, diagnosis using DSM-IV axes" during Defendant's proposed examination by Dr. (DE 228, Exhibit "D", paragraph 10). + +7. As if that were not overkill enough, it has also requested, apparently by Dr. ■ **himself, that Plaintiff fill out certain questionnaires in advance of her proposed examination. (See letter from Michael Pike dated July 31, attached as Exhibit "1"). Dr. is requesting that Plaintiff fill out a 10 page "Life History Questionnaire" (apparently for use with his patients as it references the confidential nature of the personal data requested therein) and a 14 page "Patient Questionnaire (for Forensic Examination)." Both questionnaires request information regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, etc.** + +8. Defendant cannot seriously be suggesting that he anticipates having Plaintiff answer the same questions about the same subject matter three separate times (first in a deposition, then in Dr. questionnaires, then in Dr. examination). Such a procedure would only serve to embarrass, humiliate, intimidate, and further victimize Plaintiff. Additionally, Defendant no doubt hopes to create inconsistent statements by the Plaintiff in having her answer the same questions multiple times. The desire to create inconsistent statements is, of course, not an appropriate goal for a mental examination. + +9. When the Defendant's proposed examination goes forward at some time to be determined later, Plaintiff moves for the entry of a protective order limiting the time permitted for the examination and any testing to 6 hours. Trenary v. Busch Entertainment Corp. 2006 WL 3333621 (M.D. Fla.)(limiting a psychiatric evaluation to four (4) hours) and Tracey v. Sarasota County, 2006 WL 1678908 (M.D. Fla.)(limiting mental evaluation to (4) hours). + +10. Plaintiff also requests the entry of an order limiting the scope of the examination. Plaintiff should be required to answer sensitive and highly personal questions, if at all, only one time. Defendant can choose to delve into Plaintiffs medical, psychiatric, sexual and sexual abuse history and the like either in his deposition of Plaintiff or through Dr. examination, but certainly not both. Accordingly, Plaintiff requests the entry of an order preventing duplicative questioning during same regarding personal and highly sensitive topics such as medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history, substance abuse history, etc. + +11. Lastly, Dr.. proposes that only he and Plaintiff be in the examination room. (DE 228, Exhibit "D", paragraph 9). Given the nature of Plaintiffs allegations and the proposed scope of the examination, Plaintiff is entitled to have in the room present with her a representative from the undersigned's office to ensure that Plaintiffs rights are appropriately safeguarded. The mere presence of a representative from the undersigned's office would in no way interfere with Dr. ability to conduct his examination. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, C.M.A., respectfully requests that this Court enter an order: + +- 1) Prohibiting the proposed examination from going forward until after Plaintiff is discharged from the hospital and/or any nursing home/rehabilitation hospital; +- 2) Limiting the time for conducting the examination, including any testing, to a maximum of 6 hours; +- 3) Limiting the scope of same to preclude Plaintiff from being subjected to repeated questioning on multiple occasions regarding personal and highly sensitive areas of inquiry including Plaintiffs medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history, substance abuse history, etc.; and +- 4) Authorizing the presence of a representative from the undersigned's office to with Plaintiff in the examination room. + +## CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1 + +Counsel for the movant has conferred via e-mail with counsel for the Defendant regarding his position on the instant motion and has been informed that counsel for Defendant is not in agreement with any of the relief requested herein. + +/s/ Jack P. + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on August 7, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified below via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. + +/s/lack P ■ + +**Jack Scarola Florida B r No.: 169440 Jack P. Florida Bar No.: 0547808 Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9424 Attorneys for Plaintiff** + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +Phone: (561) 582-7600 +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Robert Critton, Esquire +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 +Phone: (561) 842-2820 +Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 South Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 202-6360 +Fax: (561) 828-0983 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746035/EFTA02746035.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746035/EFTA02746035.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..56d77588465fe068ef2feb9a047766574241ffb2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746035/EFTA02746035.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,466 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746035.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 9661, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.4, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 407.1368103027344, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 407.1368103027344, + 99.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 99.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF, C.M.A.'S, RESPONSE AND INCORPORATED MOTION FOR \nPROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN'S \nEMERGENCY MOTION FOR INDEPENDENT EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF WITH \nINCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW (DE 228)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 498.96 + ], + [ + 534.3038940429688, + 498.96 + ], + [ + 534.3038940429688, + 555.9199981689453 + ], + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 555.9199981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 180.54, + 112.3074951171875 + ], + [ + 479.20733642578125, + 112.3074951171875 + ], + [ + 479.20733642578125, + 127.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 180.54, + 127.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 276.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 383.621337890625, + 276.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 383.621337890625, + 291.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 291.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.204, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 348.84, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 348.84, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 255.204, + 101.25 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746035" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746044/EFTA02746044.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746044/EFTA02746044.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4b5a2d751a341da32a33b0c0386cd57294957747 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746044/EFTA02746044.md @@ -0,0 +1,224 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +1 + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARI + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRN + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRN + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MAR + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA I + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA + +PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT JUFF (EIDS l)NSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING TREATMENT RECORDS FROM PARENT-CHILD CENTER, INC., DR. SERGE THYS, RECORDS OF DOMINIQUE HYPPOLITE/SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL, ST. MARY'S HOSPITAL, FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY AND GLORIA C. HAKKARAINEN, M.D., WITH INCORPORTATED MEMO OF LAW (DE 207) + +The Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel, files this Reply to D.E. 216, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Response in + +Opposition to Plaintiff, Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc. Dr. Serge Thys, Records of Dominique Hyppolite/School District of Palm Beach County, Good Samaritan Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, Florida Atlantic University and Gloria C. Hakkareinen, M.D., With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 207), and further states as follows: + +Plaintiff withdraws her previously filed Motion For Protective Order (DE 207). The records identified above will be produced to the Defendant upon prepayment of the costs associated with copying same. + +Respectfully submitted, + +/s/.lack P ■ + +**JACK SCAROLA** + +**Florida Bar No. 169440** + +**JACK P.** + +**Florida Bar No.: 0547808** + +**Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A.** + +**2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard** + +**West Palm Beach, Florida 33409** + +**Phone: (561) 686-6300** + +**Fax: (561) 383-9456** + +**Attorneys for Plaintiff** + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on August 7, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified above via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. + +/s/Jack P ■ + +JACK SCAROLA + +Florida 169440 + +JACK P. + +Florida Bar No.: 0547808 + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +Phone: (561) 686-6300 + +Fax: (561) 383-9456 + +Attorneys for Plaintiff + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Robert Critton, Esquire +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 +Phone: (561) 842-2820 +Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue S. +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +Phone: (561) 582-7600 +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 South Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561)-202-6360 +Fax: (561)-828-0983 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746044/EFTA02746044.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746044/EFTA02746044.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cdaa107cf9ec51aa7b2357e8fc08cedf76518350 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746044/EFTA02746044.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,302 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746044.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 3780, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.09, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.1414489746094, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.1414489746094, + 101.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 101.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 240.516, + 82.6875 + ], + [ + 401.621337890625, + 82.6875 + ], + [ + 401.621337890625, + 97.300048828125 + ], + [ + 240.516, + 97.300048828125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.204, + 81.81 + ], + [ + 347.616, + 81.81 + ], + [ + 347.616, + 96.38999999999999 + ], + [ + 255.204, + 96.38999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 36 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746044" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746050/EFTA02746050.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746050/EFTA02746050.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c5c8a5b354293d83e87e43e18efdcd5eb6f97573 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746050/EFTA02746050.md @@ -0,0 +1,122 @@ +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA + +## PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO STRIKE C.M.A.'S CONDITIONAL NOTICE OF INTENT TO EXCLUSIVELY RELY ON STATUTORY DAMAGES PROVIDED BY 18 U.S.C. 82255 (DE 113), WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +The Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel, files this Response to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely On Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255 (DE 113), With Incorporated Memorandum of Law, and further states as follows: + +In light of the Court's Order Denying Plaintiff, C.M.A.'s Emergency Motion For Protective Order Regarding the Depositions of Susan Pope and Dr. Serge Thys (D.E. 246)("Absent an amended pleading or stipulation of the parties, Plaintiffs unilateral non-binding notice of intent cannot be used to preclude discovery in this case."), Plaintiff submits that EPSTEIN'S Motion to Strike is ripe for ruling by the Court without further argument from Plaintiff. + +Respectfully submitted, + +/War\* P ■ + +**JACK SCAROLA** + +**Florida Ba • . 169440** + +**JACK P.** + +**Florida Bar No.: 0547808** + +**Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A.** + +**2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard** + +**West Palm Beach, Florida 33409** + +**Phone: (561) 686-6300** + +**Fax: (561) 383-9456** + +**Attorneys for Plaintiff** + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on August 7th, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified above via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. + +Maack P ■ + +**JACK SCAROLA** + +**Florida Bar No. 169440** + +**JACK P.** + +**Florida Bar No.: 0547808** + +**Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A.** + +**2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard** + +**West Palm Beach, Florida 33409** + +**Phone: (561) 686-6300** + +**Fax: (561) 383-9456** + +**Attorneys for Plaintiff** + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Robert Critton, Esquire +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 +Phone: (561) 842-2820 +Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue S. +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +Phone: (561) 582-7600 +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 South Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561)-202-6360 +Fax: (561)-828-0983 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746050/EFTA02746050.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746050/EFTA02746050.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7a40fc8b80c3a6c51392bce83c9c7c8008407983 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746050/EFTA02746050.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,234 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746050.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 2924, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.68, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO \nSTRIKE C.M.A.'S CONDITIONAL NOTICE OF INTENT TO EXCLUSIVELY RELY ON \nSTATUTORY DAMAGES PROVIDED BY 18 U.S.C. 82255 (DE 113), WITH \nINCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.768, + 538.6500000000001 + ], + [ + 539.4376220703125, + 538.6500000000001 + ], + [ + 539.4376220703125, + 594.8035125732422 + ], + [ + 69.768, + 594.8035125732422 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 239.904, + 82.62 + ], + [ + 401.2513122558594, + 82.62 + ], + [ + 401.2513122558594, + 97.300048828125 + ], + [ + 239.904, + 97.300048828125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.204, + 82.62 + ], + [ + 348.22799999999995, + 82.62 + ], + [ + 348.22799999999995, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 255.204, + 97.19999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 36 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746050" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746054/EFTA02746054.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746054/EFTA02746054.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5b1cc27884732ac9ad41a2a15224c631a96f84aa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746054/EFTA02746054.md @@ -0,0 +1,135 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- + +80656-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## AMENDED ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records and Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Rely Exclusively on Statutory Damages (D.E. #216 in Case No. 08-80119). For the following reasons that portion of the Motion which seeks an order striking C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Rely Exclusively on Statutory Damages is deferred to the United States District Court, as the undersigned is without authority to grant the relief sought. The Response in Opposition, filed as part of the Motion, shall be considered by the undersigned when addressing Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order. + +By this Motion Defendant seeks two distinct forms of relief each of which, due to the nature of the relief sought, requires a ruling and/or consideration by two different judges, the District Judge (regarding Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Rely Exclusively on Statutory Damages) and the Magistrate Judge (regarding Defendant's Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records ). This fact was brought to the attention of Defendant's counsel's office prior to the filing of the instant motion, and for purposes of judicial efficiency and docket control, it was requested that instead of filing one motion seeking the dual relief sought here, Defendant instead file two separate motions. + +Rather than heed the Court's suggestion, however, Defendant's counsel has filed one motion seeking the dual relief described above, stating in a footnote "[title Response in Opposition to the Motions for Protective Order and the Motion to Strike are inextricably woven together in that each deal with critical discovery issues. Thus the Response and the Motion to Strike must be handled simultaneously by the Court." Defs Resp. and Mtn. (DE. #216), p.4 (emphasis added). Obviously what the Court "must" do is for the Court, and not for any particular party, to decide. Decision-making is and always has been the exclusive province of a judge, while a party's role is limited to that of requesting relief. This is a fact all parties would do well to remember. Having reviewed the pleadings filed incident to this matter, and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the portion of Defendant's Motion seeking to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Rely Exclusively on Statutory Damages is DEFERRED TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, as the undersigned is without authority to grant the relief sought. That portion of Defendant's Motion containing a Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records shall be considered by the undersigned when addressing Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order. + +DONE AND ORDERED this August 10, 2009, in Florida. at West Palm Beach, + +> LINNEA R. JO ON UNITED STAT S MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746054/EFTA02746054.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746054/EFTA02746054.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..73f7faecf6bb76a84e5ed3950a164fa707ee71ca --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746054/EFTA02746054.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,249 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746054.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 4142, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.72, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AMENDED ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 362.7234191894531, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 362.7234191894531, + 624.4335174560547 + ], + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 624.4335174560547 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746054" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746059/EFTA02746059.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746059/EFTA02746059.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..935d11291b88abea1c5b6cd62d4033ddb1b8fea2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746059/EFTA02746059.md @@ -0,0 +1,161 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +1 + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- + +80656-CIV-MAR + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## AMENDED ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiff's Agreed Motion for Extension of Time in Which to File a Reply to Epstein's Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order Re: Treatment Records and Agreed Motion for Extension of Time to File a Response to Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Rely Exclusively on Statutory Damages (D.E. #234 in 08-80119). For the following reasons said Motion is granted in part and deferred in part as follows. + +By this Motion Plaintiff seeks two distinct forms of relief each of which, due to the nature of the relief sought, requires a ruling by two different judges, the District Judge (regarding extension of time relative to filing response to Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Rely) and the Magistrate Judge (regarding extension of time relative to filing reply in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order). + +The consolidation of several motions into one pleading is an accepted practice in this district. However, where the relief sought in the motions requires rulings by two different judges assigned to the case, in this instance a district judge and a magistrate judge, the practice is frowned upon as it results in a waste of judicial resources and creates general confusion in the court file. + +The Court recognizes that in this instance, where Plaintiff has simply reacted to a pleading filed by Defendant, Plaintiff had no choice but to frame the Motion as she did. This is why the practice of lumping together motions which require rulings by more than one judge must be avoided at the outset. To avoid the situation encountered here, all parties are hereby put on notice that in the future the Court will strike any motion which groups together motions that require disposition and/or consideration by more than one judge. Having reviewed the pleadings filed incident to this Motion, and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Agreed Motion for Extension of Time + +for Motion Plaintiffs to Opposition in Response Epstein's to Reply a File to Which in + +File to Time of Extension for Motion Agreed and Records Treatment Re: Order Protective + +Rely to Intent of Notice Conditional C.M.A.'s Strike to Motion Epstein's to Response a + +DEFERRED AND PART IN GRANTED is #234) (D.E. Damages Statutory on Exclusively + +until time of extension an seeks it extent the to Motion, Plaintiffs FOLLOWS: AS PART IN + +is Order Protective for Motion Plaintiff's of support in reply a file to 2009, 7, August + +time of extension an seeks it extent the to Motion, Plaintiff's tunc. pro nunc GRANTED + +Conditional C.M.A.'s Strike to Motion Epstein's to response a file to 2009, 7, August until + +as COURT, DISTRICT STATES UNITED THE TO DEFERRED is Rely to Intent of Notice same. on rule to authority without is undersigned the + +Beach, Palm West at , in 2009, 10, August this ORDERED AND DONE + +Florida. + +ro/inS091...-- -nn e + +N N JO R. LINNEA JUDGE MAGISTRATE STAT UNITED + +Marra A. Kenneth Honorable The CC: Record of Counsel All \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746059/EFTA02746059.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746059/EFTA02746059.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3aa0e39c80c63336267a57489397c7a4d85fe9f3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746059/EFTA02746059.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,249 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746059.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 4198, + "elapsed_seconds": 15.88, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AMENDED ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 609.9300000000001 + ], + [ + 362.7234191894531, + 609.9300000000001 + ], + [ + 362.7234191894531, + 624.4335174560547 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 624.4335174560547 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746059" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746064/EFTA02746064.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746064/EFTA02746064.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..02e755ce597ed7fe58b024beb5f284d1818db2da --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746064/EFTA02746064.md @@ -0,0 +1,620 @@ +/.1113 1 0 201:9 + +# S7F Vkti aFr&FORt UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT L cluvws. Di:,T C7 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE.NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/IM + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/IM + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/M. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +et al vs. Jeffre Epstein Case No.:08-CV-80119-MARRA/ Emergency Motion for Protective r er egarding the Taking of Her Deposition on August 14, 2009 Page 2 + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRa + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRNIMII + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARa + +, et al v ffr Epstein Case No.:08-CV-80119-MAR Emergency Motion for Protective Order Regarding the Taking of Her Deposition on August 14, 2009 Page 3 + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRa + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRa + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRAi + +# PLAINTIFF, EMERGENCY MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING THE TAKING OF HER DEPOSITION ON AUGUST 14, 2009 + +Plaintiff, by and through her undersigned attorneys, hereby files her Emergency Motion for Protective Order Regarding the Taking of Her Deposition on August 14, 2009, and in support there of states as follows: + +et al vs. Jeffrey Epstein Case No.:08-CV-80119-MARRA/ Emergency Motion for Protective r er egarding the Taking of Her Deposition on August 14, 2009 Page 4 + +1. On August 5, 2009, Defendant, JEFFERY E. EPSTEIN, unilaterally scheduled the deposition of Plaintiff, for August 14, 2009, at 10:00 a.m. (Attached hereto as Exhibit "1"). + +2. Plaintiff has been hospitalized for the last two weeks suffering from serious illnesses, including undergoing extensive thoracic surgery. It is not expected that Plaintiff will be released from the hospital before August 24, 2009, and potentially later. There is also the possibility that Plaintiff will need to be admitted to an in-patient nursing home/rehabilitation hospital following her discharge from the acute care setting in which she is currently residing to convalesce from her illnesses and resulting surgery. + +3. Needless to say, it is not expected that Plaintiff will be out of the hospital by August 14, let alone be in any condition that would permit the taking of her deposition. Accordingly, Plaintiff seeks the entry of a protective order preventing her deposition from going forward until after Plaintiff is discharged from the hospital and/or any nursing home/rehabilitation hospital. The undersigned will keep counsel for EPSTEIN informed as to Plaintiffs expected discharge date in order to facilitate rescheduling her deposition. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, respectfully requests that this Court enter a protective order preventing the taking of her deposition until after she is discharged from the hospital and/or any nursing home/rehabilitation hospital. + +[REDACTED], et al vs. Jeffrey Epstein +Case No.:08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED] +Emergency Motion for Protective Order Regarding the +Taking of Her Deposition on August 14, 2009 +Page 5 + +**CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1** + +Counsel for the movant has conferred via e-mail with counsel for the Defendant regarding his position on the instant motion and has been informed that counsel for Defendant is not in agreement with any of the relief requested herein. + +/s/ Jack P. [REDACTED] + +**CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 10th day of August, 2009, I filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court and send copies to all counsel of record via e-mail. + +![]() + +--- + +Jack Scarola +Florida Bar No.: 169440 +Jack P. [REDACTED] +Florida Bar No.: 0547808 +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 +Phone: (561) 686-6300 +Fax: (561) 383-9424 +Attorneys for Plaintiff + +[REDACTED] et al vs. Jeffrey Epstein +Case No.:08-CV-80119-MARRA [REDACTED] +Emergency Motion for Protective Order Regarding the +Taking of Her Deposition on August 14, 2009 +Page 6 + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +Phone: (561) 582-7600 +Fax: (561) 588-8819 + +Robert Critton, Esquire +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 +Phone: (561) 842-2820 +Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 863-9100 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 South Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 202-6360 +Fax: (561) 828-0983 + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON + +vs. + +JbFPREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSIbiN + +Defendant. + +![](_page_6_Picture_22.jpeg) + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA I + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA I + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CAROLYN MARGARET CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRAMIM + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-C1V-MARRA-BEIN + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA-.M. + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +I + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/IM + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +I + +# NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION + +PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the undersigned attorney will take the videotaped deposition of: + +#### DEPONENT + +do earcylmey ar o a Barnhart & Shipley P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +### DATE & TIME + +August 14, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. + +### LOCATION OF DEPOSITION + +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LW 515 North Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL, 33401 + +upon oral examination, before U.S. Legal Support, a Notary Public, or any other officer authorized by law to take depositions in the State of Florida. The oral examination is being taken for the purpose of discovery, for use at trial, or for s other purposes as are permitted under the applicable Statutes of Rules of Court. + +bert D. Critton, Jr. Attorney for Defendant Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List via e-mail and U.S. Mail on this may of August, 2009. + +Respectfjs,J fitted, + +D. CR1TTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bcIclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +### Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseauomev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willis, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsx@searcvlaw.com jph @searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Brae. Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp@law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.nea Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsbenz@Dodhurst.com + +2290 101h Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL, 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +No. Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-6864300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isx@searcylaw.com + +inh@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brucereinhartlaw.c + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold-Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +tleopold@riccilaw.com + +Isidro M. Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iagesq@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/EM + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRPJ + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRN + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRAi + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRAOM + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/EM + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/NM + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA/ + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80469-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/ + +CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/ + +# ORDER ON PLAINTIFF, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER RE POSITION ON AUGUST 14, 2009 + +This matter came before the Court upon Plaintiff, Motion for Protective Order Regarding the Taking of Her Deposition on August 14, 2009. Having considered the motion, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Plaintiffs motion is hereby granted. Defendant's deposition of Plaintiff shall be postponed until Plaintiff is discharged from the hospital. + +DONE AND ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Copies to all Counsel of Record + +LINNEA R. United States Magistrate Judge \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746064/EFTA02746064.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746064/EFTA02746064.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0f9f659b4cffe767b170c0329077152acabc0274 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746064/EFTA02746064.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,929 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746064.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 16, + "chars": 12624, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.78, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_6_Picture_22.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "S7F Vkti aFr&FORt UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT L cluvws. Di:,T C7 \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.05999755859375, + 66.40655517578125 + ], + [ + 557.66748046875, + 66.40655517578125 + ], + [ + 557.66748046875, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 209.05999755859375, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF, EMERGENCY MOTION FOR \nPROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING THE TAKING OF HER DEPOSITION ON \nAUGUST 14, 2009", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 87.945, + 568.62 + ], + [ + 536.3966064453125, + 568.62 + ], + [ + 536.3966064453125, + 612.0635223388672 + ], + [ + 87.945, + 612.0635223388672 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 172.815, + 157.95 + ], + [ + 495.69000000000005, + 157.95 + ], + [ + 495.69000000000005, + 172.53 + ], + [ + 172.815, + 172.53 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.935, + 294.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 386.835, + 294.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 386.835, + 310.23 + ], + [ + 226.935, + 310.23 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.375, + 157.14000000000001 + ], + [ + 353.62499999999994, + 157.14000000000001 + ], + [ + 353.62499999999994, + 171.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 261.375, + 171.71999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 211.56, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 411.9255676269531, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 411.9255676269531, + 126.603515625 + ], + [ + 211.56, + 126.603515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 172.815, + 632.61 + ], + [ + 444.57550048828125, + 632.61 + ], + [ + 444.57550048828125, + 648.8100000000001 + ], + [ + 172.815, + 648.8100000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEPONENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 101.77000427246094, + 100.1781005859375 + ], + [ + 170.35500000000002, + 100.1781005859375 + ], + [ + 170.35500000000002, + 113.093505859375 + ], + [ + 101.77000427246094, + 113.093505859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DATE & \nTIME", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 269.0400085449219, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 328.41, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 328.41, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 269.0400085449219, + 126.35999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "LOCATION OF \nDEPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 356.7, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 442.79999999999995, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 442.79999999999995, + 126.593505859375 + ], + [ + 356.7, + 126.593505859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.22500000000002, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 361.41937255859375, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 361.41937255859375, + 418.77 + ], + [ + 255.22500000000002, + 418.77 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.26, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 416.355, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 416.355, + 166.353515625 + ], + [ + 199.26, + 166.353515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.02499999999998, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 415.94561767578125, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 415.94561767578125, + 102.33892822265625 + ], + [ + 206.02499999999998, + 102.33892822265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON PLAINTIFF, MOTION FOR \nPROTECTIVE ORDER RE POSITION ON \nAUGUST 14, 2009", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 92.865, + 486.80999999999995 + ], + [ + 530.8316650390625, + 486.80999999999995 + ], + [ + 530.8316650390625, + 530.6835327148438 + ], + [ + 92.865, + 530.6835327148438 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 113 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 100 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 151 + ], + [ + "Line", + 75 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 321 + ], + [ + "Line", + 76 + ], + [ + "Text", + 73 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 97 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 13 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746064" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746064/_page_6_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746064/_page_6_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9fd101d73778136598223c53a3960cbd37878e12 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746064/_page_6_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:eae8239c8117dd12f73816528b1a436ce299f2f6f6191e444302ad886668fe4f +size 7925 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746080/EFTA02746080.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746080/EFTA02746080.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c75023f9ac84d94b2a344486ded680dec2575919 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746080/EFTA02746080.md @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA I + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- + +80656-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## OMNIBUS ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the following motions: Plaintiff CMA's Motion for Protective Order Re Treatment Records (D.E. #207); Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Affidavit of Plaintiff (D.E. #213); Plaintiff CMA's Emergency Motion for Protective Order Regarding the Deposition of Serge Thys (D.E. #245); and, Plaintiffs Request for Emergency Hearing on Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order (D.E. #250). Having reviewed the pleadings filed incident to these matters, and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is hereby + +## ORDERED AND ADJUDGED AS FOLLOWS: + +(1) Plaintiff CMA's Motion for Protective Order Re Treatment Records (D.E. #207) is STRICKEN AS MOOT in that Plaintiff has notified the Court in her Reply (D.E. #255) of her withdrawal of the motion; + +(2) Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Affidavit of Plaintiff (D.E. #213) is GRANTED; + +(3) Plaintiff CMA's Emergency Motion for Protective Order Regarding the Deposition of Serge Thys (D.E. #245) is DENIED. By this Motion Plaintiff seeks a protective order to prevent the deposition of Dr. Serge Thys, presently scheduled for August 31, 2009, from going forward. For the reasons stated in Judge Marra's Order of August 5, 2009, dealing with the nearly identical issue, said motion as it relates to Dr. Thys, is denied. + +In the same Motion at issue here, styled as an emergency, Plaintiff sought to protect the taking of Dr. Susan Pope's deposition which was then scheduled for the following day, August 6, 2009. As Dr. Pope's deposition was scheduled to take place the day after the filing of the Motion, Judge Marra handled that portion of the Motion on an emergency basis. Plaintiffs asserted basis for protecting the deposition of Dr. Pope, is the same basis Plaintiff raises here to protect the deposition of Dr. Thys, namely, Plaintiffs Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. §2255 (D.E. #113 in Case No. 08-80811), and the psychotherapist-patient privilege. Neither of these arguments withstand scrutiny. + +In his August 5, 2009 Order, Judge Marra rejected Plaintiffs contention that her notice of conditional intent could be used as a shield to prevent the deposition of Dr. Pope from going forward, cogently noting that "[a]bsent an amended pleading or stipulation of the parties, Plaintiff's unilateral non-binding notice of intent cannot be used to preclude discovery in this case." (D.E. #246, p.4). In the Order Judge Marra also rejected Plaintiffs contention that Dr. Pope's deposition should be protected on the basis of the psychotherapist-patient privilege, noting that blanket assertions of the privilege of the sort Plaintiff raised there, constitute improper utilizations of the privilege. Instead, Plaintiff was instructed to assert any psychotherapist-patient privilege she may have during the deposition "on a question-by-question basis." Id. at 5. The above reasoning equally applies to the deposition of Dr. Thys. Like Plaintiff was instructed to do during the Dr. Pope deposition, Plaintiff may assert any psychotherapist-patient privilege she fairly and reasonably believes she has during the deposition of Dr. Thys, on a question-by-question basis. Accordingly, Plaintiff CMA's Emergency Motion for Protective Order as it relates to the Deposition of Dr. Thys is denied; and, + +(4) Plaintiff's Request for Emergency Hearing on Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order (D.E. #250) is DENIED. The Court sees no benefit to entertaining oral argument on the issue and elects to proceed exclusively upon the pleadings once the motion has been fully briefed. + +Beach, Palm West at , in 2009, 11, August this ORDERED AND DONE + +Florida. + +o 26 c + +N JOHNS R. EA LINN JUDGE MAGISTRATE STATES UNITED + +Marra A. Kenneth Honorable The CC: Record of Counsel All \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746080/EFTA02746080.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746080/EFTA02746080.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7520d8300f9480fdbf604d4c78eacea95ea524c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746080/EFTA02746080.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,310 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746080.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 4908, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.75, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OMNIBUS ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 360.8534240722656, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 360.8534240722656, + 624.4335174560547 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 624.4335174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDERED AND ADJUDGED AS FOLLOWS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 209.79000000000002 + ], + [ + 357.4979248046875, + 209.79000000000002 + ], + [ + 357.4979248046875, + 224.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 224.30352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746080" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746086/EFTA02746086.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746086/EFTA02746086.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ac3d9fcc592c03230e84dca6a67538575ff19cb7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746086/EFTA02746086.md @@ -0,0 +1,161 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA I + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- + +80656-CIV-MARRAi + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiff, + +Emergency Motion for Protective Order Regarding the Taking of her Deposition (D.E. + +#259). Due to the emergency nature of the motion, and believing there is no argument that can be raised by opposing counsel to justify denying the relief requested, the undersigned has elected to rule on the motion before waiting for a response. For the following reasons, Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order is granted. + +By this Motion Plaintiff, (' "), seeks an order delaying the taking of her deposition until such time as she is released from the hospital, where she is presently recovering from, among other illnesses, thoracic surgery, and discharged from any hospital and/or nursing home she may be admitted to for post-surgery recovery. According to , the subject deposition was unilaterally scheduled by Defendant's counsel to take place at 10:00 a.m. on August 14, 2009. meanwhile, is reportedly in the hospital at the present time recovering from serious illnesses, including thoracic surgery, and is not due to be released from the hospital until at least August 24, 2009. Counsel for has represented that once released, there is a possibility that will be admitted to a rehabilitative hospital or nursing home to convalesce from her illnesses and resulting surgery. Obviously, appearing for her deposition unilaterally scheduled by Defendant to take place August 14, 2009 is, for a near impossibility. + +For "good cause" shown the Court may issue a protective order preventing or delaying a deposition. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c); see McCarthy v. Bamett Bank of Poly County, 876 F.2d 89, 91 (11th Cir. 1989). For the reasons listed above, the Court finds good cause shown to postpone the subject deposition until such time as is discharged from the hospital and/or any nursing home/rehabilitation hospital she may be admitted to. In this regard, the Court holds Plaintiff's attorney to the assertion made in the Motion that he will keep counsel for Defendant informed as to Plaintiff's expected discharge date in order to facilitate the rescheduling of her deposition. + +On the subject of deposition scheduling, the Court frowns on the unilateral scheduling of depositions and asks that, before any depositions are unilaterally set, attempts first be made to reach agreement with opposing counsel on deposition dates and times. Based on the Motion filed, it appears the dispute herein could have been amicably resolved between the parties by a simple phone call and without the need for court intervention. This said, the Court recognizes that a ruling has been made on the subject Motion without the benefit of a response by Defendant and allows that there may be, and often is, another side of the story. Suffice it to say that in this case, with its multitude of Plaintiffs and numerous claims, it is as important as ever that all counsel conduct themselves in a responsible and professional manner, mindful of the ethical obligations imposed upon all members of the Bar and attempt, wherever possible, to cooperate on matters of procedure and scheduling. + +In summary, all counsel are hereby put on notice that the Court can ill afford to waste its resources supervising the discovery process, a process that is intended to operate without judicial intervention. Hunter's Ridge Golf Co. v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., 233 F.R.D. 678, 680 (M.D. Fla. 2006)("Discovery is intended to operate with minimal judicial supervision unless a dispute arises and one of the parties files a motion requiring judicial intervention"); Nevin v. CSX Transp., 2003 WL 22005030, \*2 (M.D. Fla. 2003) ("discovery is intended to operate with minimal judicial supervision... ."): U.S. v. Pepper's Steel & Alloys, Inc., 132 F.R.D. 695, 696 (S.D. + +extrajudicially"); Knight v. Docu-Fax, Inc., 838 F. Supp. 1579, 1581 (N.D. Ga. + +1993)("the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] contemplate that discovery be + +conducted with a minimum of judicial intervention"). The Court will, of course, issue + +appropriate rulings with regard to discovery disputes that cannot, after ardent good + +### ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for Protective + +Order Regarding the Taking of the Deposition (D.E.#259) is **GRANTED** in accordance with + +the terms hereof. + +**DONE AND ORDERED** this August 11, 2009, in [REDACTED], at West Palm Beach, + +Florida. + +LINNEA R. JOHNSON +UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +![]()CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marza +All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746086/EFTA02746086.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746086/EFTA02746086.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2fee36fae3c78cdb3e76bedc5de7e060ede80639 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746086/EFTA02746086.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,310 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746086.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 5581, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.41, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 624.4335174560547 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 624.4335174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for Protective", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.38, + 453.6 + ], + [ + 506.124, + 453.6 + ], + [ + 506.124, + 467.37 + ], + [ + 70.38, + 467.37 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746086" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746092/EFTA02746092.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746092/EFTA02746092.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c2196375aed4bb9706930ab0ffda29f37b24ed4d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746092/EFTA02746092.md @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +## IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 502008CA006596XXXXIVIB + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +and + +Defendants. + +AFFIDAVIT OF + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared ElII , who after being first duly sworn, deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is +- 2. 1 am and have been represented by McIntosh, Sawran, Peltz & Cartaya, P.A. +- 3. I was a Defendant in the case styled, Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein. nd , Case No. 502008CA006596XXXXMB AB. +- 4. I have read the document entitled " Plaintiffs Jane Does' 2-7 Notice ofJoinder in Plaintiffs' Jane Does 101 and 102's Motion for No-Contact Order." +- 5. I am writing this affidavit in response to the statements within the motion that refer to me. +- 6. I have not had any contact with Jeffrey Epstein since he was arrested. +- 7. I have not been asked by Mr. Epstein or his attorneys to gather information about Jane Doe 4 and Jane Doe 7. + +'A / / + +![](_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg) + +1. 8. I am not being supported by Mr. Epstein nor did I say that to Jane Doe 4 and 7. +2. 9. Based on the statements within the motion, I can identify Jane Doe 7 and only spoke to her when she and her boyfriend approached and confronted me at Dr. Feelgood's. +3. 10. When Jane Doe 7 and her boyfriend confronted me, I told her that I could not believe she was bringing a lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein, as I know that she has taken money from a number of older men and even traveled to Chicago with one of them. +4. 11. I also told Jane Doe 7 and her boyfriend that I intended to tell the truth about everything I know about her and what she has done with other men. +5. 12. I will tell the truth about Mr. Epstein, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 7 or anyone else that I am asked about. I resent any suggestion that I would lie to assist Mr. Epstein. + +FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +![]()SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 2nd day of JUNE, 2009, by Haley Robson (name of person), who is personally known to me or who has produced FL Driver's License (type of identification) as identification. + +![]()PRINTED NAME OF NOTARY + +![](_page_1_Picture_350.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746092/EFTA02746092.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746092/EFTA02746092.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5cb0b4280815c45abc7b322ca3760d96cfc6122e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746092/EFTA02746092.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746092.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2190, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.98, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_350.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR \nPALM BEACH COUNTY FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.456, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 520.6276245117188, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 520.6276245117188, + 117.99200439453125 + ], + [ + 84.456, + 117.99200439453125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 304 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746092" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746092/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746092/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3089d652038783d165aebba6b56513c3f968c5a6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746092/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:64c6c20f0f36e682ea90189d310450c4e7e10018b065cf40351fe81c9b92aa1e +size 12667 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746092/_page_1_Picture_350.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746092/_page_1_Picture_350.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f132b8246a24e39929c9ae7502a7ed4fdf7ab52f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746092/_page_1_Picture_350.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:55474cf33fd0dc0248c150bab33eceebc8e9a67ac6dce457801509932df20e47 +size 9744 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746094/EFTA02746094.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746094/EFTA02746094.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fd3462445077ef30292bdf6e9f4abda661727ec4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746094/EFTA02746094.md @@ -0,0 +1,159 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION CASE NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE, et al., + +Plaintiffs, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## APPEARANCES: + +WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA + +JUNE 12, 2009 + +## TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE + +FOR THE PLAINTIFFS: ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQ. Mermelstein & Horowitz 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Miami, FL 33160 305.931.2200 For Jane Doe + +J. , ESQ. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Jane Doe 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 + +954.522.3456 + +ISIDRO M. , ESQ. + +Elkins Boehringer + +224 Datura Avenue West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Jane DOE II 561.832.8033 RICHARD H. WILLITS, ESQ. 2290 10th Avenue North Lake Worth, FL 33461 For C.M.A. 561.582.7500 + +![](_page_0_Picture_22.jpeg) + + THE COURT: That's not my concern. So, again, I just want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend a case that's being prosecuted against him or her, that that in and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to criminal prosecution. + +MR. J0SEFSBERG: I agree, Your Honor. + +THE COURT: Any other plaintiff's counsel want to chime in? + +MR. WILLITS: Richard Willits on behalf of C.M.A.. I would join, to weigh in on what Mr. Josefsberg said. + +MR. JOSEFSBERG: Your Honor, I could not hear. + +THE COURT: We'll get him to a microphone. Mr. Willits is speaking. + +MR. WILLITS: On behalf of my client, C.M.A., we join in what Mr. Josefsberg said, and we also want to point out something to the Court. + +First, we want to make a representation to the Court, we have no intention of complaining to the U.S. Attorney's Office, never had that intention, don't have that intention in the future, but, of course, subject to what occurs in the future. + +I want to point out to the Court that Mr. Epstein went into this situation with his eyes wide open, represented by counsel, knowing that civil suits had to be coming. If he + + didn't know it, his lawyers knew it. + + He appears to be having second thoughts now about he could have negotiated this way or he could have negotiated that way with the U.S. Attorney's Office. And they want to impose their second thoughts on the innocent plaintiffs. We don't think that's fair. We think it's in the nature of invited error, if there was any error whatsoever. + +Thank you. + +THE COURT: You agree he should be able to take the ordinary steps that adefendant in acivil action can take and not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? + +MR. WILLITS: Of course. And we say the same thing Mr. Josefsberg said. It's all subject to your rulings and the direction of this Court as to what is proper and what is not proper. And we're prepared to abide by the rulings of this Court, and we have no intention of running to the State's Attorney. + +THE COURT: The U.S. Attorney? + +MR. WILLITS: I'm sorry. The U.S. Attorney. + +THE COURT: Mr. + +MR. : Thank you, Your Honor. + +If I may briefly, I think perhaps defense counsel forgot about this, but on pages 17 and 19 of my memorandum of law in opposition to the motion to dismiss, I did make reference to the non-prosecution agreement, and I did say that 1fl the contesting of the jurisdiction of this Court was a potential breach of the non-prosecution agreement. + +So my client happens to have, and they have filed with the Court a copy of her state court complaint, given the fact that the non-prosecution agreement limits the non-contesting of jurisdiction to claims exclusively brought under the federal statute. + +I'm going to go ahead and withdraw those contentions on pages 17 and 19 of my memo of law because it doesn't apply to my case. So to the extent that I raised this issue with defense counsel and the Court, I'm going to withdraw that aspect of it. + +THE COURT: Can you file something in writing on that point with the Court? + +MR. : Yes. + +THE COURT: What do you say about this issue that we're here on today? + +MR. I think that the problem that I have with it is that this non-prosecution agreement is being used by defense counsel for the exact opposite purpose that it was intended. My perception of this thing, and I wasn't around, is that Mr. Epstein essentially bought his way out of acriminal prosecution, which is wonderful for the victims in a way, and wonderful for him, too. + +Now he's trying to use the non-prosecution agreement + + as ashield against the plaintiffs that he was supposed to make restitution for. + + And, certainly, he can take my client's depo. He's done extensive discovery in the state court case -- very intrusive, I might add. And we don't care, because we can win this case with the prosecution agreement or without the prosecution agreement. We are ready to go forward. + +THE COURT: You're not going to assert to the United States Government that what he's doing in defending the case is aviolation for which he should be further prosecuted? + +MR. Absolutely not. + +THE COURT: Anyone else for the plaintiffs? + +MR. HOROWITZ: Judge, Adam Horowitz, counsel for plaintiffs Jane Doe 2 through 7. + +Ijust wanted to address a point that I think you've articulated it. Ijust want to make sure it's crystal clear, which is that we can't paint abroad brush for all of the cases. + +The provision relating to Mr. Epstein being unable to contest liability pertains only to those plaintiffs who have chosen as their sole remedy the federal statute. My clients, Jane Doe 2 through 7, have elected to bring additional causes of action, and it's for that reason we were silent when you said does anyone here find Mr. Epstein to be in breach of the non-prosecution agreement. That provision, as we understand + + it, it doesn't relate to our clients. + + THE COURT: Okay. But, again, you're in agreement with everyone else so far that's spoken on behalf of a plaintiff that defending the case in the normal course of conducting discovery and filing motions would not be abreach? + +MR. HOROWITZ: Subject to your rulings, of course, yes. + +THE COURT: Thank you. + +Anyone else have anything to say from the plaintiffs? + +Ms. Villafana, if you would be so kind as to maybe help us out. I appreciate the fact that you're here, and I. know you're not a party to these cases and under no obligation to respond to my inquiries. But as I indicated, it would be helpful for me to understand the Government's position. + +MS. VILLAFANA: Thank you, Your Honor. And we, of course, are always happy to try to help the Court as much as possible. But we are not a party to any of these lawsuits, and in some ways we are at adisadvantage because we don't have access. My access is limited to what's on Pacer. So I don't really know what positions Mr. Epstein may have taken either in correspondence or in discovery responses that aren't filed in the case file. + +But your first order was really just what do you think about a stay, and then the second order related to this hearing and asked amuch more specific question, which is whether we + + believe that Mr. Epstein's defense was abreach of the agreement. + + And I've tried to review as many of the pleadings as possible. As you know, they're extremely voluminous. And I haven't been through all of them. But we do believe that there has been abreach in the filing that Mr. Josefsberg referred to, and contrary to Mr. Critton, we do understand that we have an obligation to provide notice, and we are providing notice to Mr. Epstein today. + +The pleading that we found to be in breach -- the non-prosecution agreement, sought to do one thing, which was to place the victims in the same position they would have been if Mr. Epstein had been convicted of the federal offenses for which he was investigated. + +And that if he had been federally prosecuted and convicted, the victims would have been entitled to restitution, regardless of how long ago the crimes were committed, regardless of how old they were at the time, and how old they are today, or at the time of the conviction. + +And it also would have made them eligible for damages under 2255. + +And so our idea was, our hope was that we could set up a system that would allow these victims to get that restitution without having to go through what civil litigation will expose them to. + + You have anumber of girls who were very hesitant about even speaking to authorities about this because of the trauma that they have suffered and about the embarrassment that they were afraid would be brought upon themselves and upon their families. + + B So we did through the non-prosecution agreement tried to protect their rights while also protecting their privacy. So, pursuant to the non-prosecution agreement -- on the other hand, we weren't trying to hand them a jackpot or akey to a bank. It was solely to sort of put them in that same position. + +So we developed this language that said if -- that provided for an attorney to represent them. Most of the victims, as you know from the pleadings, come from not wealthy circumstances, may not have known any attorneys who would be in a position to help them. + +So we went through the Special procedure that resulted in the appointment of Mr. Josefsberg, and the goal was that they would be able to try to negotiate with Mr. Epstein for afair amount of restitution/damages. And if Mr. Epstein took the position, which apparently he has, which is that the \$50,000 or \$150,000 floor under 2255 also would be a cap. That if they were to proceed to file suit in Federal Court to get fair damages under 2255, Mr. Epstein would admit liability, but he, of course, could fight the damages portion, which means that, of course, he would be entitled to depositions; of + + course, he would be entitled to take discovery, and we don't believe that any of that violates the non-prosecution agreement. + +The issue with the pleading that he filed, the motion to dismiss the case, I believe it's Jane Doe 101, represented by Mr. Josefsberg, is that that is a case that was filed exclusively under 18 U.S.C., Section 2255. She met that requirement. Mr. Epstein is moving to dismiss it, not on the basis of damages, he is saying that he cannot be held liable under 2255 because he was not convicted of an offense. + +The reason why he was not convicted of an offense is because he entered into the non-prosecution agreement. So that we do believe is abreach. + +The issue really that was raised in the motion to stay and that I addressed in our response to the motion to stay is that Mr. Epstein's -- Mr. Epstein wants to stay the litigation in order to leave, in order to sort of attack the cases of the victims whether they are fully within the non-prosecution or not, non-prosecution agreement or not, and leave the Government without a remedy if he does, in fact, breach those terms. And that is why we opposed the stay. + +THE COURT: I'm not sure what you mean by that last statement. + +MS. VILLAFANA: Well, because this issue related to the motion to dismiss on Mr. Josefsberg's client came up after + +1 2 3 we had filed that response. And what we said in the response to the motion to stay is that the reason why he wants to stay the litigation is so that the non-prosecution agreement 4 terminates based on a period of time, as he puts it. And then 5 afterwards he would be able to come in here and make all of 6 these arguments that clearly violate the non-prosecution 7 agreement but we would be without remedy. + +8 THE COURT: But you're not taking the position that 9 other than possibly doing something in litigation which is a 10 violation of an express provision of the non-prosecution 11 agreement, any other discovery, motion practice, investigations 12 that someone would ordinarily do in the course of defending a 13 civil case would constitute a violation of the agreement? + +14 MS. VILLAFANA: No, Your Honor. I mean, civil 15 litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take 16 discovery is part of what civil litigation is about. And while 17 there may be, for example, if someone were to try to subpoena 18 the Government, we would obviously resist under statutory 19 reasons, all that sort of stuff. But, no, Mr. Epstein is 20 entitled to take the deposition of a plaintiff and to subpoena 21 records, etc. + +22 THE COURT: And even if he seeks discovery from a 23 Government agency, you have the right to resist it under the 24 rules of procedure but that would not constitute a violation, 25 again unless there's a provision in the prosecution agreement \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746094/EFTA02746094.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746094/EFTA02746094.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b612ef4f3df26182fb7f3dc906a0dec72d1f167f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746094/EFTA02746094.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,444 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746094.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 12583, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.23, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_22.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA \nWEST PALM BEACH DIVISION \nCASE NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 237.45600000000002, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 432.3537292480469, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 432.3537292480469, + 149.04 + ], + [ + 237.45600000000002, + 149.04 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "APPEARANCES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 130.356, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 219.11648559570312, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 219.11648559570312, + 400.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 130.356, + 400.95000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING \nBEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, \nUNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 331.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 483.82733154296875, + 331.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 483.82733154296875, + 371.79 + ], + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 371.79 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 230 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 299 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 307 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 311 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 321 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 334 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 315 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 358 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 328 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746094" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746094/_page_0_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746094/_page_0_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..09bc40b453760b4e0198fcc68f7a563c67d6524b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746094/_page_0_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:017e29dc6682c6db0aa057d7365e6820a4952e764e1c13874aacf47790784853 +size 13691 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746104/EFTA02746104.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746104/EFTA02746104.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1a44b8545fdfb5c5a700d2533f04e12bbfadbb44 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746104/EFTA02746104.md @@ -0,0 +1,105 @@ +Jane Doe #4 + +a + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W.M., M.D. + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W. MI, M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W. M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and + +![](_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg) + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe #4 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe #4 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiff's counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kliman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kliman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #4. + +14. Plaintiff reports a history of alcohol use and an ex-boyfriend who drank alcohol and used pills that were "a form of oxycodine [sic] aform of heroine [sic]." (Page 18, tape 1) + +15. Plaintiff reports obtaining a restraining order against her ex-boyfriend, stating that he would spit in her face, push her, and was abusive. (Page 20, tape 1) + +16. Plaintiff reports talking with two psychiatrists at age 16 or 17 due to family + +issues and boyfriend issues. (Pages 2 and 3, tape 3). In the tapes, she makes no mention of telling the psychiatrists of her alleged encounters with Epstein. Moreover, while Plaintiff denies recruiting other girls, on page 24 of the Palm Beach Police Report, Plaintiff said she left anote for Epstein that indicated "for a good time call [Plaintiff] and [friend]" and left the girls' phone numbers. + +17. Plaintiff noted that while in high school a friend, Chris, died in amotor vehicle accident, that she was in shock from his death, and that she got over it after about 1 lh to 2 years, but that it still bothers her. (Page 4, GK Contemp notes) + +18. Plaintiff noted that aclose friend, Jen, died in amotor vehicle accident and that she was in shock for two months. (Page 4, GK Contemp notes) + +19. Plaintiff reported, "I probably went there over 50 times." (Page 3, tape 4) + +20. Plaintiff was arrested at age 17 for DUI on 3/09/05. (Police Offense Report) + +21. On 10/31/04, fight occurred between plaintiff and Preston Vinyard in back of cab. Plaintiff (age 17) had been drinking. Police were called for theft of cab fare. Upon arriving at residence, police found plaintiff in home with no shirt on. Plaintiff refused to cooperate with police and threatened to kill herself. Vinyard was arrested for violation of protective order. (Police Offense Report) + +22. On 2/28/02, plaintiff was charged with shoplifting bras from Burdines and was issued a juvenile referral form. (Police Offense Report) + +23. On 9/21/04, a protective order was filed against Preston Vinyard after an incident on 9/20/04 in which he accused her of cheating on him. He then began choking her, threw her against a wall, and yelled at plaintiff. He dumped beer on her, threw cigarettes in her face, and slammed her into the ground. On a previous incident in August 2004, plaintiff reported they agued and Mr. Vinyard grabbed her by her arms and threw her to the ground outside her house. Plaintiff noted she was in fear because he has a violent history and has verbally threatened her friends, family and herself. (Petition for Injunction for Protection) + +24. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +25. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, a A; tof all medical, clinical,school, and work records known to the attorney in the case. + +26. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "available important and relevantdocuments whichsa deliberately withheld from us." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, whichwe have requesteda thatwe have stated would ordinarily kg part of medical opinion formation nthe topics concerning, which our input is requested." We request the same. + +27. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are a number of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization; including the type and character of the alleged assault; and key victim variables such as demographics; psychological reactions at the time of the trauma; previous psychiatric or psychological history, history of previous victimization; current or previous psychological difficulties; general personality dynamics and coping style; sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +28. It is also essential to understand the plaintiff's level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +29. Knowledge of plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +30. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. + +31. These, in essence, are the same or similar records that plaintiff's expert witness (Dr. Kliman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such + +identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and/or similar information be made available to us to conduct our examination. + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College of +Medicine + +STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared **RICHARD C.W.** +**M.D.**, who is ( ) personally known to me or ( ) who has produced +\_\_\_\_\_ as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that +the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this 4th day of August, 2009. + +![](_page_7_Picture_309.jpeg) + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746104/EFTA02746104.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746104/EFTA02746104.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..113f7c74b132863b93fd22a8812ba17a6b5362a6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746104/EFTA02746104.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,347 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746104.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 11264, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.58, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg", + "_page_7_Picture_309.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W.M., M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.168, + 164.43 + ], + [ + 450.4753723144531, + 164.43 + ], + [ + 450.4753723144531, + 180.63 + ], + [ + 192.168, + 180.63 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 194 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 275 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 273 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 307 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 323 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 323 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 268 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 255 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746104" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746104/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746104/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2309f207d2b96110e893d9396b6027e66c107656 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746104/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4d6991725d1bb9ba495c028db1e3df437d94ada15ab5475d0e3d51f5dd7dac71 +size 13037 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746104/_page_7_Picture_309.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746104/_page_7_Picture_309.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b2def68a04208d04bd8e139653e09d4545434e2f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746104/_page_7_Picture_309.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1d7fde7d1d80688441968aff73934a3c671a12fe9d69b846a594a781beac810f +size 12007 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746112/EFTA02746112.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746112/EFTA02746112.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ec1bf08aa67629c2ca8d50493a5af1d3ba603d2f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746112/EFTA02746112.md @@ -0,0 +1,118 @@ +Jane Doe #6 + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD M.D. + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W.MI, M.D. I am over the age of majority, arid make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and + +![](_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg) + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe #6 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe #6 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiff's counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kliman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kliman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #6. + +14. Plaintiff's interrogatories note a diagnosis of PTSD following an auto accident in 2003. (Pre-Epstein) (Page 5, Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories) + +15. Plaintiff noted "nervous about driving here. Hit by asemi June 2003.1 wasn't hurt but Mom was." (Page 1, GK Contemp notes, Interview Part 1) + +16. "Seroquel. . . for bad dreams after the car accident. . . longest therapy six months court ordered. I am on probation for stupid stuff I did 2-3 years ago. . . really dumb, I got in trouble, arrested." (Page 2, GK Contemp notes) + +17. A Petition for Involuntary Assessment for Substance Abuse, dated July 19, 2006, noted adomestic disturbance at plaintiffs home with "threats to several family members as well as threats of suicide... appeared to be under the influence of Zanax [sic] bars... She found her grandmother dead three weeks ago, may have pushed her over the edge." (Page 1, Petition for Involuntary Assessment for Substance Abuse, Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida). On January 31, 2007, Plaintiff pled guilty to grand theft and burglary, and was sentenced to a30-day substance abuse program, 9 months community control, and 2 years probation. On February 25, 2007, Plaintiff cutoff her monitoring bracelet and fled her residence violating probation. She was arrested on March 9, 2007 and April 2, 2007 and was ordered to undergo amental health evaluation. On August 8, 2007, she was arrested for possession of drug paraphernalia and violated her probation again. She was in jail for a period of 30 days until September 6, 2007 when she was found guilty of the violation of probation and sentenced to remain in jail for evaluation and treatment and then outpatient treatment as well as parenting classes. + +18. A Notice of Related Case reports an incident of the plaintiff being charged with possession of a weapon on school property in November 2004. (Page 2, Notice of Related Case, Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida) + +19. On 4/13/06, in response to a call of child abuse, an officer received a report from DCF noting that "since the age of 13,MMINhas been smoking marijuana with her father every other day... Mom is aware of (blacked out) smoking marijuana with dad... She placed her daughter in Growing Together Treatment Center on 3/10/06. Then Baker Acted her on 4/ 7/06 to (blacked out)." (Police Offense Report) + +20. On 4/12/05, police responded to a domestic violence call, which involved plaintiff and her brother kicking and hitting each other at their residence. (Police Offense Report) + +21. A police report of 5/24/04 notes that police responded to a delayed battery charge, in which the plaintiff was involved in a verbal argument with a friend who then punched the plaintiff with a closed fist to the forehead area. (Police Offense Report) + +22. A police report of 11/22/03 noted a physical altercation involving the plaintiff and another individual, which resulted in the plaintiff being struck in her left eye with a closed fist. (Police Offense Report) + +23. On 3/02/03, police responded to a call of a suspicious person at the plaintiff's residence. The plaintiff reported that when she entered her shed to do her laundry, she came in contact with an unknown male, who had some of her underwear inside his mouth. She reported that the male took the underwear out of his mouth, put them in the dryer, and then ran away. (Police Offense Report) + +24. A police report notes an incident of 8/27/02 in which plaintiff was followed home from school by four girls and allegedly battered by two of the girls subsequent to a verbal conflict at school. (Police Offense Report) + +25. "I met Mr. Jeffrey August 2004... I was between repeating sixth grade. . . was not yet 14. Same to my house to get me to go and we called acab to go to Jeffrey's. She told me I had to tell him adifferent age, 16 or over because I wouldn't get paid." (Page 1, GK notes) + +26. Plaintiff reported, "I wasn't a virgin. I might have had sex with one person. I was around 13 or 14 that I lost my virginity with alittle kid, achildhood friend." (Page 2, GK notes) + +27. "I smoked some weed during the Xanax... drank alittle but not into it."(Page 2, V wi GK III, 12/6/08) + +28. Plaintiff reported "Cause I don't like the way it made me feel and I'd fall asleep on it and yea . . . that's alittle bit after I got into that car accident, that's 2006. I started getting bad dreams and they started taking me to therapists and I started getting like anxiety attacks in the car .. It was bad... that's the longest therapist I've ever seen and that was because it was court ordered." "I went to her like six months." (Page 9, Tape 1) + +29. Question: "Have you been more irritable since this happened to you?" + +Plaintiff response, "I don't know."(Page 12, Tape 3). + +30. Plaintiff failed to report to Dr. Kliman that on April 10, 2005 she witnessed a friend get electrocuted. On December 22, 2006, Plaintiff got into a fight with her thenboyfriend, who had been out all night, and the boyfriend went out in the street in front of their house and put a gun to his head and killed himself. + +31. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +32. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, a lig of all medical, clinical,school, and work records known to the attorney in the case. + +33. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not + +form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "available important and relevant documentswhich are tering deliberatelywithheld fromus." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, whichwe have requestedor thatwe have stated would grdinarily be part 41medical opinion formation gn the topics concerning, which our input is requested." We request the same. + +34. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent ascpcsment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are a number of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +35. It is also essential to understand the plaintiff's level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +36. Knowledge of plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +37. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. These, in essence, are the same and similar records that plaintiff's expert witness (Dr. Kliman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and such other similar information be made available to us to conduct our examination. + +Respectfully submitted, + +/Lai( C.A, k`o° Richard C. W. + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine + +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South + +Florida + +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida + +College of Medicine + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +BEFORE ME, the un ersigned authority, personally appeared RICHARD C.W. MI M.D., who is ) personally known to me or ( ) who has produced as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +2009. SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this Li 'IA day of Ay loss+- , + +![](_page_9_Picture_11.jpeg) + +c.A0. Cikyr\O-in Not ry Public Printed Name: MIKC 0kM V\ 1\ ti My Commission Expires: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746112/EFTA02746112.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746112/EFTA02746112.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..49c7c780e7a64c2cd79f4582e9ca424aed7e7fd6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746112/EFTA02746112.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,411 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746112.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 13999, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.78, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg", + "_page_9_Picture_11.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 448.74658203125, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 448.74658203125, + 196.82999999999998 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 196.82999999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 200 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 273 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 270 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 319 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 318 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 315 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 331 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 277 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 197 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746112" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746112/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746112/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5ce68b0b909d44497b79598e9b48fb879218809c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746112/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:716b17d9d496282b851fcf374f37922fd6645655c1ab7b072560fb993226f555 +size 11871 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746112/_page_9_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746112/_page_9_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..842412caf6e067b4ab0ddaefbbed886dc59c7526 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746112/_page_9_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:74191270bc5834b2fd3ac1fedaaf265ccb5e482e9a6e6441375bf7f104e6dc42 +size 12663 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746122/EFTA02746122.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746122/EFTA02746122.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c1cc97c0c7d9cd3821ef51af2c3290c96d7a907c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746122/EFTA02746122.md @@ -0,0 +1,302 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/1 + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA + +DOE H, + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591.-CIV-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARla + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### Response To Plaintiffs', Jane Does 2-7, Motion for Protective Order (DE 223), With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein" or "Defendant"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Response In Opposition to Plaintiffs', Jane Does + +2-7, Motion for Protective Order (DE 223), With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law (the "Motion for Protective Order"). In support, Mr. Epstein states as follows: + +## I. Introduction & Argument + +1. Plaintiffs' have joined in a collective effort to prevent discovery relating to their medical, psychological, criminal and employment histories, as well as their general backgrounds. Thus, Plaintiffs have unreasonably delayed discovery directed to them. Now, Plaintiffs go even further and request that this court preclude Epstein from investigating these matters through one of the most traditional methods available in the justice system, private investigators. Importantly, Plaintiffs' allegations do not state that Epstein's investigators have contacted them directly or indirectly — because they have not. Instead, Plaintiffs allege that Epstein's private investigators have contacted third parties, that is, Plaintiffs' "ex-boyfriends, former employers, and others who know nothing of the underlying facts of the case." The law does not forbid such an investigation. + +2. Plaintiff, Jane Doe 7, filed a self-serving hearsay declaration (DE 251-2) wherein she claims she spoke to only one of the individuals apparently interviewed by Epstein's investigators; however, Plaintiff does not state that the investigators have identified Jane Doe 7 as a Plaintiff in this lawsuit. Defendant expects that in light of this court's recent order (DE 253) that Plaintiff will speciously amend her declaration. Nonetheless, Plaintiff cannot expect this court to limit Defendant's investigation efforts when Plaintiff, Jane Doe 7, has stated that investigators have NOT identified her as a Plaintiff in this lawsuit. (Declaration, DE 251-2, 15). Moreover, affidavit tells a different story; that is, Jane Doe 7 approached her at a local bar and + +discussed Jeffrey Epstein with her in a public forum, 1.e., Jane Doe 7 discussed her lawsuit with in public, with others. See Exhibit "A". Even so, an elementary review of the alleged questioning by the investigators as set forth in Jane Doe 7's declaration shows that same is relevant (e.g., what was her reputation, did she date older rich guys, did she give massages for money etc...). Surely, Jane Doe 7 is not being heard to argue that her providing massages to "older-rich guys" is not relevant to this action. + +3. Despite this court requiring that we proceed with discovery, Plaintiffs continue to make allegations in which they believe this court will allow them to dictate: (a) what is and what is not relevant to the defense of Epstein's case; (b) who has knowledge of the underlying facts of the case for investigation purposes; and (c) what is and what is not discoverable. Under this scenario, Epstein might as well terminate his attorneys and allow the Plaintiffs' attorneys to represent him. + +4. Epstein has been faced with several motions seeking to prevent or limit discovery with the primary goal being to send Epstein to trial without little or no discovery. Plaintiffs continue to avert discovery, and now they wish to shelter their pasts by requesting that this court enter an order broadly limiting the rules of discovery and thus preventing Epstein from investigating this matter and the claims Plaintiffs have alleged against him. This would undoubtedly result in reversible error. + +5. As set forth in Epstein's Reply to Jane Doe 2-7 Response in Opposition to Epstein's Motion to Identify (the "Reply")(DE 247), Plaintiffs' have several preexisting and diagnosed conditions for which they now attempt to pawn off on Epstein in an effort to increase their damages. For instance, prior to any of their alleged encounters with + +Epstein, certain Plaintiffs have been raped, sexually abused, molested and physically and verbally abused. Some of them have been diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder or obsessive compulsive disorder, and some have suicidal thoughts and/or have attempted suicide on more than one occasion. Moreover, some of the Plaintiffs have witnessed close friends or family members commit suicide. While the above incidents are nothing less than tragic, the impact of those incidents on each of the Plaintiffs must be taken into consideration with the claims they make and the damages they seek against from Epstein. Plaintiffs have objected to all meaningful discovery, and now they seek to halt all traditional investigatory methods which may lead to evidence that may diminish or disprove their claims and/or evidence that may prove that Plaintffs have made inconsistent statements relative to their allegations. + +6. As this court is well aware, utilizing investigators prior to and during a lawsuit is a common well-accepted method by which parties seek to obtain information not easily or otherwise obtainable about the claims asserted by them or against them in a lawsuit. Investigators are employed not only by individuals involved in lawsuits but also by insurance companies, small businesses, the State Attorneys' Office, the Public Defenders' Office, and the Federal Government. If this court's precludes Epstein's private investigators from seeking information from third parties about the claims asserted against him by Jane Does 2-7, it will undoubtedly violate Epstein's due process rights by preventing him from defending the allegations made against him and it will further open the floodgates to additional challenges from others who are the subject of an investigation commenced by insurance companies, small businesses, the State Attorneys' Office, the Public Defenders' Office and the Federal Government. + +7. Plaintiffs claim in their Motion for Protective Order that retaining investigators in a case such as this one is not "customary." Such an assertion is not only nonsensical, but Plaintiffs also fail to cite one case or rule supporting their overbroad and self-serving theory. In fact, Plaintffs' theory would result in rewriting the rules of discovery, and the intended purpose of the rules would largely be disregarded (i.e., to obtain all information necessary to prosecute and/or defend claims such that the element of unfair surprise is diminished). + +8. Despite this court ordering that we move these cases forward, Plaintiffs' strategy is to delay or prevent the very discovery this court said Defendant should undertake! Once again, this court has already ruled that Plaintiffs can only be deposed once (Case #80I19, DE 98 at 15 — "Defendant is limited to a single deposition of each Plaintiff, during which defendant may depose the Plaintiff as both a party and a witness."). Plaintiffs, however, refused for several months to allow third-party subpoenas to be served to obtain among other things, medical, psychological, criminal and employment histories. The court recently entered an order allowing for Defendant to serve the third-party subpoenas. Even so, Plaintiffs now wish to halt any outside investigation of the claims they have asserted against Epstein. It appears Plaintiffs wish for this court to force Epstein to take their depositions without any relevant information in hand, and with the ultimate goal of sending Epstein to trial without any legitimate information and discovery that will reduce Plaintiffs' damages or contradict their claims. + +9. Plaintiffs universally agreed at the June 12, 2009 hearing on Defendant's Motion to Stay that regular discovery could proceed. See Composite Exhibit "B" at pages 26-30 & 33-34. For instance, the court asked Plaintiffs' attorneys the following questions: + +The Court: [J So again, I just want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend a case being prosecuted against him or her, that that in and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to criminal prosecution? (Ex. "A," p.26). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: You agree he should be able to take the ordinary steps that a defendant in a civil action can take and not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? (Ex. "A," p.27). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: Okay. But again, you're in agreement with everyone else so far that's spoken on behalf of a plaintiff that defending the case in the normal course of conducting discovery and filing motions would not be a breach? (Ex. "A," p.30). + +Mr. Horowitz — counsel for Jane Does 2-7: Subject to your rulings, of course, yes. (Ex. "A," p.30). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: But you're not taking the position that other than possibly doing something in litigation which is any other discovery, motion practice, investigations that someone would ordinarily do in the course of defending a civil case would constitute a violation of the agreement? (Ex. "A," p.34). + +Ms. Villafana: No, your honor. I mean, civil litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take discovery is part of what civil litigation is all about.... But. .., Mr. Epstein is entitled to take the deposition of a Plaintiff and to subpoena records, etc. (Ex. "A," p.34) + +10. It is clear from the transcript attached as Exhibit "B" that each of the Plaintiffs' attorneys, including Mr. Horowitz for Jane Does 2-7, expected and conceded that regular/traditional discovery would take place (i.e., discovery, motion practice, depositions, requests for records, and investigations). + +11. Investigating any claims made against any Defendant is reasonable and should not be limited. For instance, assume an investigator contacts a third-party who + +knew or dated one of the Jane Does before and/or after the Plaintiffs' alleged encounters with Epstein. Is it Plaintiffs' contention that an investigator cannot ask the ex-boyfriend or the friend: (a) whether Plaintiff ever mentioned Epstein; (b) whether Plaintiff gave Epstein massages; (c) whether Plaintiff ever complained about her alleged experiences with Epstein; and/or (d) whether Plaintiff ever seemed disturbed or traumatized about her alleged experiences with Epstein. If this court grants Plaintffs' request, it will result in Plaintiffs being afforded the opportunity to make sexual assault and battery allegations without affording Epstein the opportunity to defend those specific allegations. This is not the same as identifying each Jane Doe by name in a public proceeding accessible by all it is basic behind the scenes discovery which seeks to investigate and question others on an individual basis. Plaintiffs' request, if granted, would violate Epstein's constitutional and due process rights to defend himself, and would further not allow Epstein a full opportunity to confront the Plaintffs that have made allegations against him with the necessary material to properly cross-examine them at trial. As such, this would violate Epstein's 6th Amendment Right to confront witnesses, and the due process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. + +12. It is simply not fair to allow the Plaintiffs to file lawsuits containing sexual-abuse allegations and then attempt to use the rules of discovery and those same sexual-abuse allegations as a sword to cut-out the heart of Defendant's case (and the defenses thereto) while simultaneously brandishing their allegations as a shield from disclosure of any Achilles heel. + +# II. Memorandum of Law + +# a. The Allegations in the Amended Complaints As to Jane Does 2-7 + +13. The amended complaints filed by Jane Does 2-7 against Jeffrey Epstein make allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon a minor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Does 2-7 allege confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that they suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. Plaintiffs allege intentional infliction of emotional distress, severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. They further allege that they suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +14. It is the Defendant's job to obtain information to disprove and/or find information that diminishes Plaintiffs' damage claims. The rules of discovery contemplate same. + +## b. The Rules of Discovery Contemplate the Hiring of Investigators + +15. The rules of discovery contemplate the hiring of investigators, and also protect the information obtained by an investigator as the work-product of the hiring attorney because the materials are obtained or created in anticipation of litigation or for trial. ate Alachua General Hospital, Inc. v. Zimmer USA, Inc., 403 So.2d 1087 (Fla. 15t DCA 1981); Fed.R. Civ.Pro. 26(b)(3)(B); Fla.R.Civ.Pro. 1.280• In re Faro Technologies Securities Litigation, 2008 WL 205318 (M.D. Fla. 2008); Lake Shore Radiator, Inc. v. Radiator Express Warehouse, 2008 WL 842989 (M.D. Fla. 2007)(protecting investigative materials as work-product); and Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 508, 67 S.Ct. 385, 91 L.Ed. 451 (1947)(noting, among other things and subject to exception, that work-product includes information which an attorney secures from a witness while acting for his client in anticipation of litigation or for trial). Florida even has its own investigative privilege codified in Fla. Stat. §493.6119, which also seeks to promote the rules of discovery and protect any investigators file. Accordingly, it is clear that the overall purpose of discovery under the Federal Rules is to obtain afull and accurate understanding of the true facts in order to obtain afair and just result. United States v. Proctor & Gamble Co., 356 U.S. 677, 682, 78 S.Ct. 983 (1958). + +16. Defendant should not have to rely on only those "handpicked" witnesses disclosed by Plaintiff at depositions, through interrogatories or by way of Rule 26 disclosures who Plaintiffs and their lawyers have identified to: + +- (a) test the Plaintiffs' credibility as to their alleged involvement with Epstein; +- (b) determine the alleged effects on Plaintiffs as aresult of any involvement with Epstein; +- (c) identify other females whom Plaintiffs took or might have met at Epstein's home; +- (d) support Plaintiffs' claims that she sustained damages as aresult of their alleged involvement with Epstein; and +- (e) determine what Plaintiffs may have said to others regarding the alleged incidents. + +17. Many of the Plaintiffs are claiming that Epstein is the sole or substantial contributing cause of their physical, psychological and emotional damages. However, as this court is aware, Plaintiffs have experienced several incidents in their lives which affected them emotionally and psychologically. See es., Exhibits "C" and "D", Affidavits of Richard C.W. outlining the psychological issues experienced by Jane Does 4 and 6 as aresult of incidents in their lives prior to Epstein, which cannot be discounted. For additional affidavits of the remaining Jane Does, see DE 247 and the Affidavits attached thereto. As such, Plaintiffs should not be able to "handpick" who Defendant utilizes to refute their allegations. + +18. Accordingly, Plaintiffs cannot expect this court to limit Epstein's investigation of the claims they assert against him. To hold otherwise will negatively effect information sought by way of depositions, independent medical evaluations, regular discovery and the like, thereby prejudicing Epstein and impacting the one day he will have in court to defend these allegations. + +# III. Conclusion and Requested Relief + +19. It is critical for this entire case that Epstein be able to conduct regular discovery, which includes investigating the claims Plaintiffs make against him by using an investigator. As Dr. stated in his affidavits attached to DE 247, "there are a number of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history . . . , general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. . . ." Id. It is also important to know about Plaintffs' ". previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. . .whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were + +present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. . . ., and whether . . . Plaintiffs' relationships with their families and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties [were present]" Id. It is therefore critical for Epstein to conduct a thorough investigation, which will confirm or rebut Plaintiffs" allegations in their respective complaints. To hold otherwise would cause this court to accept Plaintiffs' allegations as true without allowing Epstein to retain information to refute same. + +Wherefore, Epstein requests that this court deny Plaintffs' otion for Protective Order, and for such other and further relief as this cou nd proper. + +> By: MIC A J. P t E, ESQ. Florida Bar 461 + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of mead identif d n to following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this rit day of , 2009 + +Respectfully s + +By: ROBE D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bc1claw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/J** [REDACTED] + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED] Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 + +inh@searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaint& C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecfabrucereinhartlawilim Counsel for Defendan + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold-Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 skuvin@riccilaw.com tleopold@riccilaw.com + +305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 rjosefsberg®nodhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746122/EFTA02746122.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746122/EFTA02746122.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ce0ebe195eecff4d396a08b5238a82f5220495ea --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746122/EFTA02746122.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,774 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746122.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 15, + "chars": 22468, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.57, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 412.10565185546875, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 412.10565185546875, + 99.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 99.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response To Plaintiffs', Jane Does 2-7, Motion for Protective Order (DE 223), With \nIncorporated Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 90.576, + 624.51 + ], + [ + 524.5473022460938, + 624.51 + ], + [ + 524.5473022460938, + 654.3630218505859 + ], + [ + 90.576, + 654.3630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction & Argument", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 217.26, + 130.41 + ], + [ + 394.7419128417969, + 130.41 + ], + [ + 394.7419128417969, + 146.60302734375 + ], + [ + 217.26, + 146.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Memorandum of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 232.56, + 656.9100000000001 + ], + [ + 386.7411193847656, + 656.9100000000001 + ], + [ + 386.7411193847656, + 674.233024597168 + ], + [ + 232.56, + 674.233024597168 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. The Allegations in the Amended Complaints As to Jane Does 2-7", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 124.848, + 684.45 + ], + [ + 496.1744689941406, + 684.45 + ], + [ + 496.1744689941406, + 701.6030197143555 + ], + [ + 124.848, + 701.6030197143555 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "b. The Rules of Discovery Contemplate the Hiring of Investigators", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 124.848, + 408.24 + ], + [ + 493.51654052734375, + 408.24 + ], + [ + 493.51654052734375, + 424.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 124.848, + 424.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. Conclusion and Requested Relief", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 266.49 + ], + [ + 413.4879150390625, + 266.49 + ], + [ + 413.4879150390625, + 284.60302734375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 284.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 406.62 + ], + [ + 364.58050537109375, + 406.62 + ], + [ + 364.58050537109375, + 421.85302734375 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 421.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/J [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 187.88400000000001, + 145.8 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 145.8 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 186.3 + ], + [ + 187.88400000000001, + 186.3 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 76 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 334 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746122" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746137/EFTA02746137.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746137/EFTA02746137.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..20d6e4f461912a965c3b442709fa3326fae98a02 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746137/EFTA02746137.md @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-801 I9-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## NOTICE TO PARTIES + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court sua spank. In the interests of judicial and clerical efficiency, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: + +The above-styled cases have previously been consolidated for purposes of discovery and for procedural motions that relate to multiple cases. + +Hereinafter, all motions and other court filings that relate to discovery and all procedural motions that relate to multiple cases shall be styled consistent with the styling of this Order, and shall be FILED ONLY in Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein, case no. 08-80119, which is the lowest-numbered pending case. Any motions styled incorrectly or filed in multiple cases will be stricken from the docket for failure to follow the Court's Order. + +The parties may continue to file separate motions to dismiss, answers to the complaint, + +summary judgment motions, motions in limine and other substantive motions that pertain to their individual cases and their individual trials under their individual case styles. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, + +Florida, this I I th day of August, 2009. + +K ur z + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record Magistrate Judge Linnea R. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746137/EFTA02746137.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746137/EFTA02746137.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7b71d9915b9410baa0eca7560a29053fb7b0b1c9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746137/EFTA02746137.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746137.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1533, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.82, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE TO PARTIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.74, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 371.19378662109375, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 371.19378662109375, + 383.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 241.74, + 383.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746137" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746139/EFTA02746139.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746139/EFTA02746139.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..50b33046edf5be37958c2f41cbf0e51826414a9c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746139/EFTA02746139.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED TO THE COURT PURSUANT TO RULE 4, REVIEW AND APPEAL-SOUTHERN DISTRICT, IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COURT'S ORDER DATED AUGUST 4, 2009 IDE 2421 + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion For Extension Directed to the Court Pursuant to Rule 4, Review and Appeal-Southern District, In Connection With This Court's Order [DE 242] Dated August 4, 2009. Having considered Defendant's motion it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the motion is GRANTED as follows: + +1. The Defendant shall file with the clerk of Court, and serve on all parties, written objections which shall specifically set forth the order, or part thereof, appealed from an a concise statement of the alleged error in ruling, along with statutory, rule or case authority in support of his position, on or before August 31, 2009. + +08-C1V-80119-Marra/MI + +Related cases 08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +Page 2 + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746139/EFTA02746139.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746139/EFTA02746139.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..462197fa99375d3a94a352ea21fe3b48352f7aa5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746139/EFTA02746139.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746139.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1450, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.69, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 73.1015625 + ], + [ + 411.3403625488281, + 73.1015625 + ], + [ + 411.3403625488281, + 100.863037109375 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 100.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED \nTO THE COURT PURSUANT TO RULE 4, REVIEW AND APPEAL-\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT, IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COURT'S ORDER \nDATED AUGUST 4, 2009 IDE 2421", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 100.98000000000002, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 512.6178588867188, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 512.6178588867188, + 418.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 100.98000000000002, + 418.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746139" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746141/EFTA02746141.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746141/EFTA02746141.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9fd5c54d3a5211b92c9f179d5e3d9bc2966856b1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746141/EFTA02746141.md @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### DEFENDANT'S, UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED TO THE COURT PURSUANT TO RULE 4, REVIEW AND APPEAL-SOUTHERN DISTRICT. IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COURT'S ORDER DATED AUGUST 4. 2009 (DE 242) + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, and Pursuant to Rule 4, Review and Appeal — Southern District, and other applicable rules as well as this court's discretion, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which to ". . . file with the Clerk of the Court, and serve of all parties written objections which shall specifically set forth the order, or part thereof, appealed from [and] a concise statement of the alleged error in the [] ruling, and statutory, rule, or case authority, in support of defendant's position." As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: + +- 1. This court entered an order (DE 242) stating that Epstein must provide responses to interrogatory numbers 7, 8 and 12 (sic 11) within 10 days from the date of + +said order. The same ruling was made as to request for production numbers 7 and 23. See DE 242. Accordingly, the answers and responses are due August 14, 2009. + +2. Defendant seeks to appeal, pursuant to Rule 4, those portions of the order which specifically address the above interrogatories and requests for production. Given the breadth of the 5th Amendment addressing the above requests, the Defendant respectfully requests an additional 15 days within which to "file with the Clerk of the Court, and serve of all parties written objections which shall specifically set forth the order, or part thereof, appealed from [and] a concise statement of the alleged error in the [] ruling, and statutory, rule, or case authority, in support of defendant's position." As such, Defendant requests that the due date effectively be moved to August 31, 2009. + +3. The undersigned, Michael J. Pike, has a status conference in front of the Honorable Judge Huck in Miami, Florida on August 14, 2009. In addition, the undersigned, Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esq., is out-of-town. Moreover, the undersigned attorneys are moving their entire office and staff to a new location/address. + +4. This request is not made to delay and will not prejudice any of the parties. + +5. While this request is within the sound discretion of the court pursuant to Rule 4, the undersigned has consulted with opposing counsel and he has agreed. + +Wherefore, the undersigned respectfully requests the relief sought herein, and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +# Local Rule 7.1 Statement + +Counsel for the movant conferred by telephone with counsel for the Plaintiff and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested extension. + +By: MICHAEL 11. PEE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also c •'fy that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identi on th ollowing Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of , 2009. + +Respectfully sub itted, + +By: ROBE4 ON, JR., ESQ. Florida/1B No. 224162 rcritQbelclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bcIclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@,sexabuseattomey.com + +Brad Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwardsarra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. ahorowitz®sexabuseattornev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10i° Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. M, Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isx@searcvlaw.com + +ivh@searcylaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brucerdrtha n + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. =, Esq. + +Law Finn, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia®bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesqabellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746141/EFTA02746141.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746141/EFTA02746141.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1498c0c29740387253ae55b9508be761404bec1b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746141/EFTA02746141.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,330 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746141.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 6156, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.55, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.48565673828125, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.48565673828125, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S, UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED TO THE \nCOURT PURSUANT TO RULE 4, REVIEW AND APPEAL-SOUTHERN DISTRICT. IN \nCONNECTION WITH THIS COURT'S ORDER DATED AUGUST 4. 2009 (DE 242)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 91.18799999999999, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 523.6416015625, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 523.6416015625, + 400.863037109375 + ], + [ + 91.18799999999999, + 400.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Local Rule 7.1 Statement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.74, + 596.16 + ], + [ + 377.15557861328125, + 596.16 + ], + [ + 377.15557861328125, + 611.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 241.74, + 611.9830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 142.56 + ], + [ + 362.70050048828125, + 142.56 + ], + [ + 362.70050048828125, + 156.363037109375 + ], + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 156.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.308, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 364.54791259765625, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 364.54791259765625, + 528.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 250.308, + 528.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 163 + ], + [ + "Line", + 80 + ], + [ + "Text", + 74 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746141" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746146/EFTA02746146.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746146/EFTA02746146.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dbab7101751aca89c1e60170db5925bbcceb397a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746146/EFTA02746146.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED TO THE COURT IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COURT'S ORDER DATED AUGUST 4, 2009 IDE 2421 + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion For Extension Directed to the Court In Connection With This Court's Order [DE 242) Dated August 4, 2009, stating that the Defendant may provide a Supplementary Response Brief relative to production requests numbers 10, 11, 18, 19 and 21. Having considered Defendant's motion it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the motion is GRANTED as follows: + +1. The Defendant shall file with the clerk of Court his supplementary response brief relative to production requests numbers 10, 11, 18, 19 and 21 on or before August 31, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Matra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746146/EFTA02746146.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746146/EFTA02746146.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4f7fd854c813da8f962fc96ce39fffdb12847896 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746146/EFTA02746146.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746146.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1155, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.73, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 62.37 + ], + [ + 413.23565673828125, + 62.37 + ], + [ + 413.23565673828125, + 92.2230224609375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 92.2230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED \nTO THE COURT IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COURT'S ORDER DATED \nAUGUST 4, 2009 IDE 2421", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 98.53200000000001, + 338.58 + ], + [ + 516.8796997070312, + 338.58 + ], + [ + 516.8796997070312, + 382.10302734375 + ], + [ + 98.53200000000001, + 382.10302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746146" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746147/EFTA02746147.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746147/EFTA02746147.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c40464a093688097711fccff447ad31acda277bb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746147/EFTA02746147.md @@ -0,0 +1,281 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +/ + +### DEFENDANT'S, UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED TO THE COURT IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COURT'S ORDER DATED AUGUST 4, 2009 (DE 2421 + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, and pursuant to the applicable rules as well as this court's discretion, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which to serve his Supplementary Response Brief in connection with this Court's Order (DE 242) and production requests 10, 11, 18, 19, and 21. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: + +1. This court entered an order (DE 242) stating that Epstein may provide a Supplementary Response Brief relative to production requests numbers 10, 11, 18, 19, and 21. See DE 242. Accordingly, the Supplementary Response Brief is due August 19, 2009. + +2. Defendant will be providing such a supplementary response brief. However, given the breadth of the 5th Amendment addressing the above requests, the Defendant respectfully requests an additional 12 days within which to file same. As such, Defendant requests that the due date effectively be moved to August 31, 2009. + +3. The undersigned, Michael J. Pike, has a status conference in front of the Honorable Judge Huck in Miami, Florida on August 14, 2009. In addition, the undersigned, Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esq., is out-of-town. Moreover, the undersigned attorneys are moving their entire office and staff to a new location/address. + +4. This request is not made to delay and will not prejudice any of the parties. + +5. While this request is within the sound discretion of the court pursuant to Rule 4, the undersigned has consulted with opposing counsel and he has agreed. + +Wherefore, the undersigned respectfully requests the relief sought herein, and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +## Local Rule 7.1 Statement + +Counsel for the movant conferred by telephone wit sel for the Plaintiff and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the request' sion. + +By: + +MIC J. E, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also ce Ty that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of recrd identi the manner specified by CM/ECF on this' day of ollowing Service List in 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: + +ROBERT D JR., ESQ. + +Florida B o. 224 62 + +Fen bele aw.com + +MICH L J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida ar #617296 + +mpike@bc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +# Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10'h Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards®rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp®law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. =, Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotrnail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P.. Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isxesearcylaw.com + +inh@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia®bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberg@oodhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jazesqAbellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746147/EFTA02746147.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746147/EFTA02746147.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d3c1927f2e622ec0770fedb4432bbf122f3fa435 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746147/EFTA02746147.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,288 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746147.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5435, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.82, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 412.48565673828125, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 412.48565673828125, + 101.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 101.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S, UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED TO THE \nCOURT IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COURT'S ORDER DATED AUGUST 4, 2009 \n(DE 2421", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 95.47200000000001, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 519.8241577148438, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 519.8241577148438, + 402.35302734375 + ], + [ + 95.47200000000001, + 402.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Local Rule 7.1 Statement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 239.904, + 431.73 + ], + [ + 374.11114501953125, + 431.73 + ], + [ + 374.11114501953125, + 446.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 239.904, + 446.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 584.8199999999999 + ], + [ + 364.58050537109375, + 584.8199999999999 + ], + [ + 364.58050537109375, + 598.8630218505859 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 598.8630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 363.79791259765625, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 363.79791259765625, + 336.363037109375 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 336.363037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 123 + ], + [ + "Line", + 61 + ], + [ + "Text", + 58 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 120 + ], + [ + "Line", + 60 + ], + [ + "Text", + 57 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746147" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746151/EFTA02746151.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746151/EFTA02746151.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f6e76124e8bca7364512381ee7832892fb8b9dce --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746151/EFTA02746151.md @@ -0,0 +1,107 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +### PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOES 2-7 REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER + +# Summary of Argument in Reply + +Through hyperbole and grandiose statements, Defendant Epstein seeks to mask the true purpose and motive of his private "investigation" into the Plaintiffs' claims. The private investigators' activities, some of which have been documented through the Declarations of Jane Doe No. 4, r Jane Doe No. 6, Jane Doe No. 7 and Jane Doe No. 4's sister, Y.B., are not intended to receive information from relevant witnesses, but rather to give information about the Plaintiff to persons who are generally within the Plaintiff's circle of friends, family and community, but who are unaware that she is a civil Plaintiff making claims of child sex abuse against Jeffrey Epstein. While the investigators may not be stating to these persons directly that the Plaintiff is + +Jane Doe No. 4 has submitted two Declarations, dated July 17, 2009 and August 14, 2009, respectively. + +a "Jane Doe" who has brought a civil case against Jeffrey Epstein alleging particular facts of child sexual abuse, they are in a calculated manner through their questions offering information that makes these facts very clear to the persons contacted. They are doing so in an aggressive and obnoxious manner, harassing the persons contacted. These persons are otherwise marginal or peripheral as witnesses, whom one would not expect an investigator to personally contact in a typical case. + +The Plaintiffs have great fear and concern of their identities being disclosed as Epstein's victims, and the resulting damage to their reputations. As set forth in the report of Gilbert Kliman, M.D., the release of this information "will an exacerbation and magnification of symptoms leading to increased risk of revictimization and retraumatization." (Exh. A to Motion for Protective Order, DE 226, 1 21). By means of his investigators, Defendant Epstein seeks to release this information not publicly through court filings, but person-by-person to the individuals who are either close to Plaintiff or in a position to damage her reputation and who are otherwise unaware of the Plaintiff's involvement with Epstein. In this manner, it is Defendant's intent not to defend these cases on their merits, but to intimidate and shame the Plaintiffs into either dismissing their cases or settling them for a nominal sum. This illegitimate strategy can only be thwarted through an appropriate protective order under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c). + +### Plaintiffs Have Not Delayed or Stonewalled Defendant in His Nonparty Discovery + +In support of his use of private investigators in these cases, Defendant falsely accuses Plaintiffs of unreasonably delaying discovery, particularly relating to "the Plaintiffs" medical, psychological, criminal and employment histories, as well as their general backgrounds." The absurdity of this accusation is reflected in the Court's recent Order dated August 7, 2009, on the Defendant's Motion to Compel and/or Identify Jane Doe a at (DE 253). The Defendant's + +Motion sought to disclose the Plaintiff's names in the style of the case or, alternatively, in discovery subpoenas containing the captions of these cases. If the Defendant were allowed to proceed in this manner, anyone receiving a subpoena would readily discover that Plaintiff is a Jane Doe bringing a civil suit against Defendant Epstein. The Court struck a balance between the Plaintiffs' concerns regarding such disclosure of their identities and the Defendant's interest in obtaining nonparty discovery, holding that the Plaintiffs shall remain anonymous in the style of the cases and that any nonparty subpoenas must use the caption "In re [plaintiff's legal name"), and not reference or identify Defendant by name. Accordingly, it was only Defendant's insistence that standard nonparty subpoenas be issued in these cases without regard to the Plaintiffs' anonymity that caused Defendant any delay in discovery. Defendant is now free to serve nonparty subpoenas in compliance with the Court's Order. Plaintiffs have otherwise worked cooperatively with Defendant in providing relevant discovery. Plaintiffs' counsel initiated a draft of a HIPAA compliant protective order, which was stipulated by the parties and entered by the Court on July 2, 2009. Additionally, Plaintiffs have provided Defendant with extensive discovery from Plaintiff's forensic psychiatric expert, Dr. Kliman, including videotaped interviews of Plaintiffs, which have been provided to and used by the Defendant's expert, Richard C.W. M.D.2 + +Defendant therefore is not by any stretch being unreasonably delayed or thwarted in obtaining nonparty discovery through the rules of civil procedure on the Plaintiffs' medical, psychological, criminal and employment histories. The notion that information from private investigators is critical because Plaintiffs are otherwise preventing Defendant from obtaining + +2 Plaintiffs have also provided Epstein's counsel with signed authorizations for school records and Epstein's counsel is currently requesting them. + +non party discovery is false and misleading.' + +#### Defendant is Not Using Investigators for Legitimate Purposes in Good Faith + +Defendant asserts that private investigators are "one of the most traditional methods [for discovery) in the justice system", and a "common and well accepted method by which parties seek to obtain information not easily or otherwise obtainable about the claims asserted". (Defendant's Response, pp. 4, 6, DE 262). Plaintiffs do not contend that Defendant should be prohibited from using private investigators in good faith, as a defendant might ordinarily do in a case of this nature. The problem and concern raised by Plaintiffs in their Motion for Protective Order is that Defendant is not using private investigators in a good faith effort to obtain relevant evidence, but rather for the ulterior motive of intimidating and harassing the Plaintiffs. The Declarations filed in support of the Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order demonstrate the following: + +- The private investigators are casting a wide net, making personal contacts with friends, acquaintances, employers, and even immediate family members of the Plaintiffs. (See Decls. of Jane Doe No. 7, Jane Doe No. 4 (dated 8-14-09), Jane Doe No. 4's sister, Y.B.). +- The private investigators are making personal contacts with employers, asking questions that extend beyond the scope of the Plaintiffs' employment to the Plaintiffs' personal and intimate lives, including identities of their current and former boyfriends. (See Decls. of Jane Doe No. 4 (dated 7-17-09) and Jane Doe No. 6). + +Defendant within the same paragraph of his Response duplicitously discusses the detailed psychological information on Plaintiffs that Defendant has received in discovery, and then asserts that "Plaintiffs have objected to all meaningful discovery." (Defendant's Response, pp. 5-6, 15, DE 262). + +- The private investigators are seeking out the Plaintiffs' boyfriends apparently to ask intimate questions regarding the Plaintiffs' sexual histories. (See Decls. of Jane Doe No. 7 and No. 4 (dated 7-17-09 and 8-14-09)). +- The private investigators are aggressive and harassing to the persons they contact, including making multiple contacts with a person after being advised that he does not wish to talk to them. (Decl. of Jane Doe No. 4 (dated 8-14-09)). +- The private investigators are asking questions of friends and acquaintances transparently designed not to obtain information but to destroy the Plaintiffs' anonymity. (See Decl. of Jane Doe No. 7) (e& also discussion below). + +Questions asked by one of Epstein's investigators about Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 7, as set forth in her Declaration, demonstrate the private investigators' ulterior motive. These questions were as follows: + +- Was [she] promiscuous in high school? +- What was [her] reputation in high school? +- How many guys [has she] been with? +- Did [she] date older, rich guys? +- Did [she] give massages for money? +- Who were [her] friends in high school and what is their contact information? + +(DE 251). The activities of billionaire Epstein with underage girls which have resulted in a criminal conviction, jail sentence and require him to register as a sex offender, have been heavily publicized and are well known. References to "massages" and "older, rich guys" in the questions asked by the investigator effectively inform the person contacted that Jane Doe No. 7 alleges that she is a victim of Defendant Epstein. The investigator is at the same time informing the person contacted that the Plaintiff has brought a civil suit. (See Declaration of Y.B.). + +The questions asked by the investigator are notable for the information they provide to the contact person. Any information that these individuals would provide in response to the investigator's questions would be of little if any relevance. For instance, there is no legitimate purpose in asking a friend or acquaintance of the Plaintiff whether the Plaintiff dates "older, rich guys" or gives "massages" for money. Epstein's plan and scheme of luring underage girls for "massages" was unique, the product of his apparent ingenious creativity in satisfying his perverse desires. No one can seriously contend in these cases that the high school girls who came to Epstein's mansion were professional or even amateur masseuses who gave massages for money to anyone other than Jeffrey Epstein. Accordingly, the investigator's questions about whether the Plaintiff provided "massages" to "older, rich guys" is disingenuous, and only serves to link the Plaintiff with Epstein in the mind of the person being questioned. + +The other questions asked about Jane Doe No. 7 — her reputation in high school, promiscuity, etc. — pertain to the Plaintiff's sexual contacts with other men, which under Fed.R.Evid. 412 would not be admissible. Rule 412 has served as a basis for the courts to limit discovery of a sexual abuse victim's sexual history for cogent policy reasons. (See Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Opposition to Epstein's Motion to Compel Answers to First Set of Interrogatories, pp. 3-6, DE 93, and cases cited therein).4 It recognizes that the rules of liberal, broad discovery must yield to protect victims of sexual misconduct from unnecessary embarrassment and intrusion into their private lives. A defendant's investigators should not be allowed to ask a Plaintiff's friends, acquaintances and family about the Plaintiff's sexual + +4 Epstein's Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories et at, which raises issues concerning discovery of Plaintiffs' sexual histories, has been briefed and is pending before the Court. + +history, thereby evading the limitations on discovery and admissibility found in Rule 412 for the only conceivable purpose of harassing the Plaintiff. + +Defendant asserts that he seeks to use investigators to ask ex-boyfriends and friends of the Plaintiff specific questions concerning the Plaintiff's massages and contacts with Epstein, and "whether Plaintiff ever seemed disturbed or traumatized about her alleged experiences with Epstein." (Defendants' Response, p. 9, DE 262). Such questions are not reasonably calculated to lead to discoverable information, yet fully identify the Plaintiff to the purported witness as an alleged victim of Epstein bringing a civil case and inform that person of the specific allegations being made by the Plaintiff. Of course, a person who was previously unaware of a Plaintiff's alleged experiences with Epstein would not be able to meaningfully comment on whether the Plaintiff ever seemed disturbed or traumatized about those experiences. Such questions of nonparties by investigators will, on the other hand, render the Plaintiffs' anonymity as Jane Does' meaningless, defeat the Court's intent to strike an appropriate balance between the Defendant's discovery and the Plaintiffs' psychological well being, and otherwise cause the revictimization and retraumatization of the Plaintiffs. + +#### Conclusion + +Plaintiffs respectfully request that an order be entered imposing appropriate restrictions on the activities of the Defendants' investigators, including without limitation, preventing ex pane contacts with persons not disclosed in Plaintiffs' discovery responses as having been informed of the allegations made by Plaintiffs. + +Dated: August 14, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on August 14, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +### SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746151/EFTA02746151.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746151/EFTA02746151.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..09e51ad0bc47d24b486a69173010f84f9b937807 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746151/EFTA02746151.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,571 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746151.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 14101, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.55, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOES 2-7 REPLY MEMORANDUM \nIN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 153.0, + 374.22 + ], + [ + 463.8382263183594, + 374.22 + ], + [ + 463.8382263183594, + 403.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 153.0, + 403.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Summary of Argument in Reply", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 416.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 394.1976318359375, + 416.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 394.1976318359375, + 431.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 431.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Plaintiffs Have Not Delayed or Stonewalled \nDefendant in His Nonparty Discovery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 194.00400000000002, + 540.27 + ], + [ + 421.7737731933594, + 540.27 + ], + [ + 421.7737731933594, + 569.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 194.00400000000002, + 569.9830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant is Not Using Investigators \nfor Legitimate Purposes in Good Faith", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 410.49017333984375, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 410.49017333984375, + 126.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 126.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 277.236, + 485.18999999999994 + ], + [ + 340.5173645019531, + 485.18999999999994 + ], + [ + 340.5173645019531, + 499.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 277.236, + 499.56353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.44, + 289.17 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 289.17 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 304.8630676269531 + ], + [ + 226.44, + 304.8630676269531 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746151" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746160/EFTA02746160.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746160/EFTA02746160.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..819c39addf9be9c0ec575c03a76cbbf898dd9fb5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746160/EFTA02746160.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +## DECLARATION OF JANE DOE NO, 4 + +S state as follows: + +1. I am the plaintiff identified as Jane Doe No. 4 in this lawsuit. + +2. Approximately 1month ago, I was contacted by my ex-boyfriend,' T. who informed me that private investigators had repeatedly contacted him and asked personal questions about me. + +3. Approximately Imonth ago,\_ told me that he told the investigator to stop calling him and that he did not want to speak with the investigators. + +4. On Monday, August 10, 2009, I received atext message from...that read as follows: "Hey just wanted to tell uthat detec just called me again and yesterday. Y do they keep calling I thought it was all over!" + +5. To my knowledge, II. has been contacted multiple times by the investigator and always refuses to talk to him. He says they continue to call despite the fact that he has repeated told the investigator to leave him alone. + +6. lam very upset that my ex-boyfriend is being contacted by these investigators and Ifeel that he is being harassed by the investigator, especially since gin repeatedly told them to stop calling. + +7. I am worried that Jeffrey Epstein will continue to send investigators to speak with people I know who do not know that I am aPlaintiff in this lawsuit I am concerned that the investigators will continue to ask these people very personal questions about my life and disclose that I am a Plaintiff in asexual abuse lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein. + +Ideclare under penalty of perjury the foregoing to be true and correct + +Dated this day ofik9kti)±\_, 2009 + +![](_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746160/EFTA02746160.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746160/EFTA02746160.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d1c83ad0abb2cce4525c745cc7c075b1ddd6ebca --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746160/EFTA02746160.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,126 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746160.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1635, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.67, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "DECLARATION OF JANE DOE NO, 4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.64600000000002, + 96.50899999999999 + ], + [ + 423.3533630371094, + 96.50899999999999 + ], + [ + 423.3533630371094, + 114.5482177734375 + ], + [ + 209.64600000000002, + 114.5482177734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 309 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 10 + ], + [ + "Line", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746160" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746160/_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746160/_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..afbd6f9e92c8556b26d1668e1a4c4bbff3e97991 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746160/_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d4054dc39bca2c3a11c907e72fa30e9f694d9ebdb88a47727fe40ccd6a6e40f7 +size 7695 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746162/EFTA02746162.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746162/EFTA02746162.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..93bbaec606794aa435469956eb6acd1ba5fe3906 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746162/EFTA02746162.md @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ +## Rgatrnlas + +I, X.B., state as follows: + +- I. My initials are X.B. I am the sister of Jane Doc No. 4. +- 2. On August 8, 2009, two investigators, one of them whose business card identified him as S. Kevin Black, came to my residence in Port St. Luck, Florida. I answered the door. He said he was there to speak with me about my sister, and had some questions for me. +- 3. The investigator first asked me if I knew my sister had brought a civil lawsuit. I was unaware that she was involved in acivil lawsuit before Mr. Black so informed me. +- 4. My husband then came to the door, and asked the investigator how he found our address. We were both upset that he knew our address because we value privacy and keep our phone number and address unlisted. +- 5. Mr. Black then stated that he wanted to tell us "what was going on." I informed him that 1 wanted to speak with my sister first before he said anything further. Mr. Black then left the premises, asking me to call him. + +Ideclare under penalty of perjury the foregoing to be true and correct. + +Dated this day of Aar, tit: 4- , 2009 + +tB. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746162/EFTA02746162.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746162/EFTA02746162.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0ae2ce491af1fb3457ee383781d3c7b2cace5121 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746162/EFTA02746162.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746162.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1121, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.45, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Rgatrnlas", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.03900000000002, + 98.13099999999999 + ], + [ + 386.803, + 98.13099999999999 + ], + [ + 386.803, + 117.646728515625 + ], + [ + 247.03900000000002, + 117.646728515625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 240 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746162" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746163/EFTA02746163.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746163/EFTA02746163.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fd4867b8a709f9c754692495dbef3c617dbbdc17 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746163/EFTA02746163.md @@ -0,0 +1,73 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## NOTICE OF FILING DECLARATIONS OF JANE DOE NO. 4 AND Y.B. IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOES 2-7 MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-7, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby file the attached Declarations of Jane Doe No. 4 and Y.B. in further support of Plaintiffs' Jane Does 2-7 Motion for Protective Order (DE 226). + +Dated: August 14, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) + +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on August 14, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746163/EFTA02746163.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746163/EFTA02746163.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b7a015626f8db66c3c8f82f9eb5157161bd0eeae --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746163/EFTA02746163.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,231 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746163.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2057, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.26, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF FILING DECLARATIONS OF JANE DOE NO. 4 AND Y.B. IN FURTHER \nSUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOES 2-7 MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.216, + 374.22 + ], + [ + 540.2976684570312, + 374.22 + ], + [ + 540.2976684570312, + 403.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 72.216, + 403.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 386.0939636230469, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 386.0939636230469, + 112.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 112.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746163" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746166/EFTA02746166.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746166/EFTA02746166.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..55bf431d47e35290646b7ffc9a5505dc8a24b795 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746166/EFTA02746166.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, Motion For Extension of Time in which to Respond to Plaintiff, Jane Does' Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall Respond to Plaintiff's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. + +on or before August 31, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Main United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746166/EFTA02746166.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746166/EFTA02746166.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..db65fe3a98806cb28bcc2c4333899410d8425b45 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746166/EFTA02746166.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746166.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1050, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.75, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 72.7315673828125 + ], + [ + 413.23565673828125, + 72.7315673828125 + ], + [ + 413.23565673828125, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.744, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 333.0133361816406, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 333.0133361816406, + 403.863037109375 + ], + [ + 282.744, + 403.863037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 14 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746166" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746168/EFTA02746168.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746168/EFTA02746168.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ea784ec4e4ae27468d846803d4598559793bb018 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746168/EFTA02746168.md @@ -0,0 +1,99 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +### DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUEST TO PRODUCE, ANSWERS TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS, AND ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES + +Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel moves this Court for an Extension of Time until August 31, 2009, to file Responses to Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 A.1(j)(S.D. Fla. 2008). As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +Counsel for Defendant communicated with Counsel for the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff's Counsel agrees to the requested extension of August 31, 2009, to file Responses to Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. + +### Rule 7.1 A.3 Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff by telephone and/or electronic mail, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement with the requested extension. + +> By: MICHAEL J. PEKE, ESQ Florida Bar #617296 + +# Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identifie on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this \_a\_ day of L , 2009 + +Respectfully sub itted, + +By. + +R ERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bc1claw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike®bc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssmQsexabuseattomev.com ahorowitzasexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhwahotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsx(4searcylaw.com jnh®searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Brad M, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards®rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellpQlaw.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. =, Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidroaarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West 'lazier Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsbera(roodhurst.com kezellQpodhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746168/EFTA02746168.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746168/EFTA02746168.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dfa437a0938857e90c90b736485a92bf0ab42ace --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746168/EFTA02746168.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,288 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746168.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4543, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.1, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.85565185546875, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.85565185546875, + 99.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 99.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION \nOF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTIONS \nTO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUEST TO PRODUCE, ANSWERS TO \nREQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS, AND ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 526.0364379882812, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 526.0364379882812, + 417.363037109375 + ], + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 417.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A.3 Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 174.42, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 441.1152648925781, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 441.1152648925781, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 174.42, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 364.95050048828125, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 364.95050048828125, + 279.363037109375 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 279.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 113.60302734375 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 113.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 157 + ], + [ + "Line", + 78 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746168" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746172/EFTA02746172.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746172/EFTA02746172.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e776c118626ee0e4648b0969896f62a2be64447e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746172/EFTA02746172.md @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08.80232, 08.08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +![](_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg) + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED I O HE COURT PURSUANT TO RULE 4, REVIEW AND APPEAL-SOUTHERN DISTRICT, IN CONNECTION WITH. THIS COURT'S ORDER DATED AUGUST 4, 2009 IDE 2421 + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion For Extension Directed to the Court Pursuant to Rule 4, Review and Appeal-Southern District, In Connection With This Court's Order [DE 242] Dated August 4, 2009. CAC\* 364) Having considered Defendant's motion it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the motion is GRANTED as follows: + +1. The Defendant shall file with the clerk of Court, and serve on all parties, written objections which shall specifically set forth the order, or part thereof, appealed from an a concise statement of the alleged error in ruling, along with statutory, rule or case authority in support of his position, on or before August 31, 2009. + +08-CTV-80119-Marra/Johnson + +Related cases 08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, +09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +Page 2 + +DONE and ORDERED this 17 day of Aug, 2009. + +![]()~~Kounsel of Record~~ LINNEA R. Johnson + +United States District Judge + +MARIETATE + +Courtesy Copies: +Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746172/EFTA02746172.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746172/EFTA02746172.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6ec715ba923c2fb95ba27a20480490b60203ffda --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746172/EFTA02746172.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746172.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1555, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.78, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.25500000000002, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 408.5847473144531, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 408.5847473144531, + 117.2235107421875 + ], + [ + 207.25500000000002, + 117.2235107421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED \nI O HE COURT PURSUANT TO RULE 4, REVIEW AND APPEAL-\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT, IN CONNECTION WITH. THIS COURT'S ORDER \nDATED AUGUST 4, 2009 IDE 2421", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 115.005, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 503.8570861816406, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 503.8570861816406, + 419.1035461425781 + ], + [ + 115.005, + 419.1035461425781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746172" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746172/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746172/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..141efd45d5ff29e5049a746e821f79576728d5ef --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746172/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:9a9c239b33bb79ad3a02dd806acda1ba63108dc9418b0a3c3d00a0ec606986a2 +size 10742 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746174/EFTA02746174.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746174/EFTA02746174.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..357a98f6b6469783016f00de2dcb4f2277b2ef27 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746174/EFTA02746174.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRARMal + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +Related cases: 08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +I + +FILED by D.C. AUG 1 7 2009 STFV/ R M. I ARIM0RE CLERK U.S. DIST. CT nOT I IA . W.I'El. + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED TO THE COURT IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COURT'S ORDER DATED AUGUST 4, 2009 IDE 2421 + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion For Extension Directed to the Court In Connection With This Court's Order [DE 242] Dated August 4, 2009, stating that the Defendant may provide a Supplementary Response COfislIF Voss) Brief relative to production requests numbers 10, 11, 18, 19 and 21."Having considered Defendant's motion it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the motion is GRANTED as follows: + +1. The Defendant shall file with the clerk of Court his supplementary response brief relative to production requests numbers 10, 11, 18, 19 and 21 on or before August 31, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this i 7,day of , 2009. + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record + +----.. esymeerormarra nets R. saelAll Sb n United Statepietriet Judge tssAlf4. Watt W \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746174/EFTA02746174.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746174/EFTA02746174.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1641ed05d403bd74f6a97df224aa5ce95cf35c9e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746174/EFTA02746174.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746174.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1320, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.66, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.02499999999998, + 79.38 + ], + [ + 404.055, + 79.38 + ], + [ + 404.055, + 105.30000000000001 + ], + [ + 206.02499999999998, + 105.30000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED \nTO THE COURT IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COURT'S ORDER DATED \nAUGUST 4, 2009 IDE 2421", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 113.41937255859375, + 340.2 + ], + [ + 504.29999999999995, + 340.2 + ], + [ + 504.29999999999995, + 380.7 + ], + [ + 113.41937255859375, + 380.7 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 263 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746174" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746175/EFTA02746175.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746175/EFTA02746175.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e3c4b15a6e5f40ad0b14a60e932e897e90e232cf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746175/EFTA02746175.md @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, OR-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +/ + +## ORDER + +![](_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg) + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY F.PSTEIN'S, Motion For Extension of Time in which to Respond to Plaintiff, Jane Does' Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to at ws us" \ Interrogatories. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall Respond to Plaintiff's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. + +on or before August 31, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this 17 day of Aug 2009. + +![]()Kenneth A. Maria LINNEA R. Johnson +United States District Judge +**MAGISTRATE** + +Courtesy Copies: +Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746175/EFTA02746175.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746175/EFTA02746175.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..be884b6f6c8b378d1193aadb79588a542817aac6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746175/EFTA02746175.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746175.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1148, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.2, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.25500000000002, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 408.5555419921875, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 408.5555419921875, + 116.4735107421875 + ], + [ + 207.25500000000002, + 116.4735107421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 285.36, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 333.2170715332031, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 333.2170715332031, + 404.8535461425781 + ], + [ + 285.36, + 404.8535461425781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746175" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746175/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746175/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6c62c1e51f702b1093fead80731e6d4e0f1de127 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746175/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7fe5916f137b43384fcb84788b238d283f6a9a0bddfd630cbad1e8e908c0554c +size 10923 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746177/EFTA02746177.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746177/EFTA02746177.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6b1981bea612439919dd7545bdf5d293e64f4766 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746177/EFTA02746177.md @@ -0,0 +1,129 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE No.08-CIV-80811-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN and + +Defendants. + +## DEPOSITION OF SUSAN POPE + +Thursday, August 13th, 2009 10:10 - 12:50 p.m. + +515 North Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Reported By: Cynthia , RPR, FPR Notary Public, State of Florida + +"An + +(561) 832-7500 PROSE COURT REPORTING AGENCY, INC. (561) 832-7506 + +1 know the names of the individuals that arc keeping the 2 two children, that is kids in Texas? + +3 A. No. 4 MR. PIKE: I have no further questions. 5 MR. I have one. And it might end up 6 being two. + +7 CROSS (SUSAN POPE) 8 BY MR. + +9 Q. You were asked a very long while ago about 10 whether Carolyn was addicted to I think it was Xanax. 11 And you responded by saying she's used since she was in 12 the sixth grade. I just want to clarify, is it your 13 position that Carolyn has been addicted to Xanax since 14 she was in middle school? + +15 A. No, not, I mean, she, she has got a very 16 addictive personality. So whether it's drugs or 17 something else, I don't think she's totally been 18 addicted to one thing the whole time. + +19 MR. MI That's all I have. 20 MR. PIKE: The documents that you sent to me 21 today I am handing to you. These are the ones that 22 you have produced to Mr. Eland to me pursuant to 23 the subpoena, cot rerA? + +24 THE WITNESS: Correct. + +25 MR. PIKE: Let's mark these as Composite + +1 REDIRECT' (SUSAN POPE) + +2 BY MR. PIKE + +3 4 5 6 7 9 10 Q. Okay. One final question. With regard to the records that you have produced to me today, which I am going to hand to you, as well as the records that we have been discussing and which have been marked as an exhibit, can you identify for me anywhere in those records where indicated at one time or another that she had been sexually assaulted or battered by a gentleman by the name of Jeffrey Epstein? + +11 MR Object to the form. + +12 THE WITNESS: No. + +13 BY MR. PIKE + +14 15 Q. And that's because it doesn't exist in those records, correct? + +16 A. Correct. + +17 MR. PIKE: No further questions. + +18 (A discussion was held off the record.) + +19 THE COURT REPORTER: Are you ordering this? + +20 MR. PIKE: I am ordesing. + +21 22 THE COURT REPORTER: Since he is ordering, I am going to type this into a booklet. Would you + +23 like to read it or waive that right? + +24 THE WITNESS: I am going to waive that right. + +25 THE COURT REPORTER: Would you like a copy? + +1 Exhibit A-16. + +2 3 MR Were those records actually given to you — + +4 MR. PIKE: Stay on the record. + +5 6 MR. — by Parent Child? Did you send records -- + +7 MR. PIKE: She brought the set. + +B TIE WITNESS: I brought those today. + +10 MR. PIKE: And the ones that I have been + +11 12 13 questioning from are the ones that you have recently sent to me, Jack, from your office earlier this week. + +14 15 16 17 18 19 MR. IM Right. But, I don't, I think there was — I }mow there was that mircup and you guys got some records that you had sent to me and I sent back to you. But I don't think Parent Child was one of those sets. I think you just got them from me. + +20 MR. PIKE: Yes. + +21 22 MR. IM So, it didn't go from you to me back to you, which I think you said that earlier. + +23 24 MR. PIECE: I thought that they were part of those. + +25 MR. don't think so. + +MR. In Okay. + +1 MR. Yes. + +2 (Witness excused.) + +3 (Deposition was concluded.) + +4 5 (Exhibits retained by Mr. Pike.) + +6 7 CERTIFICATE OF OATH + +8 STATE OF FLORIDA + +9 COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +10 + +11 12 13 14 I, the undersigned authority, certify that SUSAN POPE personally appeared before me and was duty sworn. + +20 + +21 + +Dated this 14th day of August, 2009. + +Cr ikiz.n.7 440 .,As + +Cynthia IR RPR, FPR + +Notary Pu - tate of Florida + +My Commission Expires: February 25,2011 + +My Commission No.: DI) 643788 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746177/EFTA02746177.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746177/EFTA02746177.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7ca14d828213c74689b547552ac516cc2c0f650c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746177/EFTA02746177.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746177.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 3772, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.86, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA \nCASE No.08-CIV-80811-MARRA-", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 162.18, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 424.6041564941406, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 424.6041564941406, + 114.21209716796875 + ], + [ + 162.18, + 114.21209716796875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEPOSITION OF SUSAN POPE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.304, + 378.27 + ], + [ + 409.1322937011719, + 378.27 + ], + [ + 409.1322937011719, + 393.5820617675781 + ], + [ + 209.304, + 393.5820617675781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 356 + ], + [ + "Line", + 177 + ], + [ + "Text", + 57 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746177" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746179/EFTA02746179.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746179/EFTA02746179.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6dbac8a27efd3e07795e0d34eaba507e358eb37a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746179/EFTA02746179.md @@ -0,0 +1,322 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +### Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Reply to Plaintiffs Response In Opposition To Defendant's Emergency Motion For Independent Examination Of Plaintiff, With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Reply to Plaintiff's Response In Opposition To Defendant's Emergency Motion For Independent Examination Of Plaintiff, With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law (the "Emergency Motion"), and in support, states as follows: + +- 1. On July 29, 2009, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein filed the Emergency Motion. +- 2. Since the filing of the Emergency Motion, the undersigned has learned and this court has been informed that Plaintiff is in the hospital. +- 3. On August 11, 2009, this court entered an order granting Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order relative to her deposition based upon Plaintiff's medical status. Defendant understands that this court will make a similar ruling relative to + +Plaintiff's independent medical evaluation and, thus, will not allow same to go forward while Plaintiff is in the hospital. In that specific regard, Defendant does not seek an alternative ruling; however, Defendant must address other aspects of Plaintiff's Response. + +4. Plaintiff seems to forget that this court issued its trial order requiring various deadlines to be met. In fact, Plaintiff's counsel was in a three or four-week trial in County and, therefore, an agreement regarding dates of availability for Plaintiff's deposition and IME could not be reached. As such, the undersigned had no option but to unilaterally set same and file the Emergency Motions addressing those events. + +5. Up until May 20, 2009, Plaintiff refused to allow Defendant to identify her by name in various third-party subpoenas directed to Plaintiff's health care providers, past and current; basic personal injury discovery. If defendant could not use CMA's name, how could the provider have provided records from a "CMA" designation? Then, on May 20, 2009, C.M.A. capitulated and filed her Notice of Withdrawal of Previously Raised Objections to Epstein's Motion to Compel and/or Identify C.M.A. in the Style of this Case and Motion to Identify C.M.A. in Third-Party Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery, or Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sue Sponte (DE 23)(the "Notice of Withdrawal"). Subsequent thereto, Defendant sought records by way of subpoena. However, on June 5, 2009, Plaintiff then filed a Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Parent-Child Center, Inc. and Dr. Serge Thys (DE 114). On June 17, 2009, Plaintiff filed a subsequent Motion for Protective Order Regarding Treatment Records From Palm Beach County School District, Good Samaritan Hospital, + +St. Mary's Hospital Dr. Gloria C. Hakkarinen, and Florida Atlantic University (DE 121). + +Thus, while Plaintiff agreed to allow Defendant to identify her in various third-party subpoenas directed to her physicians, she utilized another delay tactic to prevent discovery of her past medical and psychological history from being discovered. After Plaintiff allowed Defendant to use her name in third party subpoenas, Defendant served subpoenas on: + +- a. Palm Beach County School District +- b. Dr. Serge Thys +- c. Parent/Child Center +- d. Good Samaritan Hospital +- e. St. Mary's Hospital +- f. Dr. Gloria C. Hakkarinen +- g. Florida Atlantic University + +CMA then filed two (2) protective orders, and all records that were obtained (or were to be obtained) went sent to her attorney, i.e. discovery was halted by CMA not the Defendant. Without the health care provider information, including psychological/ psychiatric records, Defendant contended that it would be impossible to have a meaningful compulsory psychological examination by a defense expert. For example, Defendant's attorneys recently took the deposition of Susan Pope, who counseled Plaintiff for the last 12 years. Significantly, Susan Pope could not identify anywhere in her records from 2003 through 2009 wherein Plaintiff ever mentioned Jeffrey Epstein. See Exhibit "A". Obviously, such information (or lack thereof) is telling and goes directly to the heart of Plaintiff's alleged damages claim and Defendant's defenses thereto. As such, Plaintiffs continued requests for this court to allow her to assert allegations against Defendant and subsequently limit the discovery he seeks to disprove those allegations should be denied. + +6. In furtherance of Plaintiff's continued efforts to delay and prevent discovery, Plaintiff now asks this court in her Response Motion to: + +- a. limit the time for conducting the examination, including any testing to six + - (6) hours; +- b. limit the scope of the examination to preclude Plaintiff from being subjected to repeated questioning on multiple occasions regarding personal and highly sensitive areas including Plaintiffs' medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history social history, sexual abuse history, substance abuse history, etc.. and +- c. authorizing the presence of a representative from Plaintiff's counsel's office to attend the examination. + +# Defendant Should Be Afforded Between 6-8 Hours To Conduct The IME And The Examination Proposed By Defendant's Expert Should Not Be Limited Since Such A Limitation Would Unduly Prejudice Defendant's Expert's Analysis Of Plaintiff + +7. Fed.R.Civ.P. 35(a). Rule 35(a) provides, in pertinent part: + +When the mental or physical condition (including the blood group) of a party or of a person in the custody or under the legal control of a party, is in controversy, the court in which the action is pending may order the party to submit to a physical or mental examination by a suitably licensed or certified examiner or to produce for examination the person in the party's custody or legal control. The order may be made only on motion for good cause shown and upon notice to the person to be examined and to all parties and shall specify the time, place, manner, condition, and scope of the examination and the person or persons by whom it is to be made. (emphasis added) + +8. A Cursory review of the Amended Complaint shows that Plaintiff has alleged 31 Counts against the Defendant. Limiting the IME to only 6 hours would allow for Defendant's expert to dedicate only 12 minutes of his time and evaluation to each count in Plaintiff's complaint. Accordingly, the full six to eight (8) hours is required, as + +requested by Dr. M. While different, Rule 30 governing depositions allows for seven (7) hours — this court has the discretion to enter an order allowing for 8 hours relative to an IME. See infra. Furthermore, Defendant's expert has provided an affidavit consistent with Rule 35 stating the scope of his examination and the time needed to complete same. See (DE 228) Dr.. has adequately set forth his need to conduct his evaluation, and his analysis would suffer should this court restrict same in time or scope. Lahr v. Fullbright & Jaworski, LLP., 164 F.R.D 196, 202-204 (N.D. Texas 1995)(refusing to limit examination); Morton v. ..So., No. 94-976-CIV-J-20, 1995 WL 819182, at \*3 (N.D.Fla. Sept.12, 1995) (declining to limit duration of examination); See also Affidavit of Dr. M, Exhibit "B". v. Newport Tankers Corp., 96 F.R.D. 31, 33 (S.D.N.Y. 1982)(requiring Plaintiff to submit to 2 day examination). + +9. As to the scope of the deposition, see supra, Plaintiff once again seeks to have this court enter an order protecting her from discovery (i.e., from filling out the applicable questionnaire required by Defendant's expert and from answering questions relative to her damages). This is simply specious. + +10. CMA is seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages. In fact, Plaintiff's allegations place her mental, emotional and psychological states at issue. For instance, in her answers to interrogatory nos. 9 and 10, which seek information about C.M.A.'s damage claims, Plaintiff answered that: + +I have bi-polar disorder and manic depression. I lost my self-esteem. I began cutting myself on my arms and legs and developed drug problems. Permanent injuries are psychological. (Interrog. No. 9). + +I am claiming compensation for mental anguish, mental pain, psychic trauma, and loss of enjoyment of life. These damages will be evaluated by a jury who will provide their own methods of computation in an amount of at least the statutory minimum established by 18 U.S.C.A. §2255. (Interrog. No. 10). + +11. In her Amended Complaint, relevant to her damages claims, Plaintiff alleges: + +C.M.A., has in the past suffered, and will in the future suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy and other damages ... . The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses ... and will in the future suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. The Plaintiff C.M.A. has suffered loss of income, a loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of capacity to enjoy life. These injuries are permanent in nature and the Plaintiff, C.M.A., will continue to suffer these losses in the future. + +(I" Am. Complaint, Counts I - XXX (18 U.S.C. §2255), ¶125, 31, 37, 43, 49, 55, 61, 67, 73, 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109, 115, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 151, 157, 163, 169, 175, 181, 187, 193; Count XXXI (Sexual Battery), 1199.) + +See Faiardo v. Pierce County, 2009 WL 1765756 (W.D. Wash. 2009)(allegations of specific disorders amount to more than garden variety disorders and thus Plaintiff waived physician-patient privilege as it involved a complex medical issue); Alexander v. City of Bellingham, 2008 WL 2077970 (W.D. Wash. 2008); Grit v. Target Corp., 2008 WL 1777744 (M.D. Fla. 2008); Trenary v. Bush Entertainment Corp., 2006 WL 3333621 (M.D. Fla. 2006)(responses to interrogatories placed plaintiff's mental condition at issue); Tracey P. v. Sarasota County, 2006 WL 1678908 (M.D. Fla. 2006)(responses to interrogatories delineating depression and bi-polar disorder are more than simple allegations of emotional distress thus placing plaintiff's mental condition at issue). + +12. Next, the following represents conduct and events that had to have had a substantial effect on CMA's life and emotional/psychological makeup. These are merely examples and just the tip of the iceberg, but are necessary for Defendant's expert to cover due to the damages Plaintiff seeks. + +- On March 27, 2000, in Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Case #00-54914, CMA threw a cinder block at her mother's boyfriend's car. +- On April 11, 2000, in Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Case #00-61772, officers responded th the house in reference to child abuse involving CMA, her brothers, and her mother. +- On June 29, 2000, in Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Case #00-95746, CMA's mother contacted the police after hearing CMA's friends threaten to kill her (CMA). +- On July 26, 2000, in Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office Case #00-106500, officers responded in reference to Criminal Mischief. CMA was a victim of having her window broken at her house by a Tonya stated she went to CMA's house to confront CMA about CMA having sexua re ations with her boyfriend. CMA would have been thirteen (13) years old at this time. +- On August 24, 2000, in Palm Beach County Sheriffs Office Case #00-118442, CMA was arrested for aggravated assault after chasing her brother around the house with a knife. +- On September 5, 2001, in Palm Beach County Sheriffs Office Case #01-119103, CMA's mother reported her missing. At the time CMA was on house detention for previous crimes and for being truant from school. A pick-up order was in effect and CMA was subsequently detained. +- On November 24, 2001, in Palm Beach County Sheriffs Office Case #01- 150237, officers responded in reference to a Battery. CMA and her brother witnessed their mother being beaten by her then boyfriend, Lance Bell. +- On March 26, 2002, in Palm Beach County Sheriffs Office Case #02-48096, officers responded to the house in reference to child abuse involving CMA, her brothers, and her mother. +- On April 6, 2002, in Palm Beach County Sheriffs Office Case #02-57I, CMA's mother was arrested for possession of crack cocaine and CMA and her brothers were removed from their home. +- On October 8, 2002, in Palm Beach County Case #02M1-11402, CMA's mother filed a Marchman Act Petition naming CMA after she told a judge that she was hospitalized for overdosing on Xanax and Marijuana, was truant from school, has anger issues, mental disabilities, and needs treatment for self inflicting wounds. The case was closed on October 31, 2002, because CMA was to be in court the following day for a probation violation. + +- On July 27, 2004, in Palm Beach County Case #04MH1530, CMA's mother filed a Marchman Act Petition naming CMA after she told a judge that she was constantly testing positive for cocaine and marijuana. +- On August 16, 2004, in Palm Beach County Case #04MH1676, CMA's mother filed a Marchman Act Petition naming CMA after she told a judge that treatment at home was not working and a residential facility would be needed. +- On August 22, 2004, in Palm Beach County Case #05MH1934, CMA's mother filed a case naming CMA for a Petition for Involuntary Assessment for Substance Abuse. CMA's mother stated that CMA was homeless, unclean, and prostituting herself. +- On August 22, 2005, in Palm Beach County Case #05MH1667, CMA's mother filed a case naming CMA for a Petition for Involuntary Assessment for Substance Abuse. CMA's mother claimed that CMA was homeless, unclean, has been prostitution herself for crack cocaine, is addicted to Xanax, is a cutter and self mutilator, living in a hotel, and has been diagnosed as Bipolar and Schizophrenic. + +13. Clearly, Plaintiff has alleged specific psychological disorders (bi-polar and manic depression), and seeks to recover medical expenses associated with those complex medical issues. Moreover, she has alleged and seeks to recover personal injury damages including, but not limited to, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy and other damages. As such, full knowledge of Plaintiff's past and present medical and psychological histories is not only permitted under the law, but is necessary to arrive at a full level of damages. To hold otherwise will result in reversible error, and will prevent Epstein from defending himself and this case, thereby violating his due process rights. Further, this court has already entered similar orders allowing for such discovery — this matter should not be treated any differently. Accordingly, Plaintiff's request to limit the time or scope of the IME should be denied. + +14. As for Plaintiff's request to have a representative in the room with her during the IME, same should be denied. See Affidavit of Dr. Ex. "B". First, consistent with the related cases, Plaintiff may have the IME videotaped. However, the operator of the video-camera may not be present. Second, the undersigned will agree that an agent may be present at the undersigned's firm during the IME; however, that person may not be present in the room where the examination is taking place. However, that person shall be permitted to sit right outside the office where the examination is taking place. Third, Plaintiff has failed to specify which representative she intends to be present at the IME. As the court is well aware, IMEs are adversarial in nature. Therefore, having an attorney and/or Plaintiff's expert in the room would create an adversarial forum that would undoubtedly interfere with the IME. Finally, Plaintiff has failed to cite any case law supporting her request to have someone present in the room with her during the IME. Accordingly, same should be denied. + +WHEREFORE, Epstein, through his counsel, requests that this court enter an Order: + +- a. requiring that Plaintiff's counsel keep the undersigned updated as to Plaintiff's medical condition and provide Plaintiff's counsel with a date to conduct the IME within 2 weeks after her release from the hospital; +- b. refusing to limit the time and scope of CMA's IME and requiring her to fill-out the necessary questionnaire provided to her counsel; and +- c. instructing Plaintiff that she may videotape the IME but she may not have someone present in the room with her, which includes an operator of the video camera; and +- d. for such other and further relief as this c• s just and proper. + +B + +MICH T L J , ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +# Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is + +being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 17 day of Aug, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: + +![]()Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bclclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bclclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, +08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +bedwards@rra-law.com +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. +08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. II Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isx@searcylaw.com + +jph@searcylaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecfbrucereinhar om + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. MN Esq. + +=Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia®bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsbenaodhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs- in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iazeso@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746179/EFTA02746179.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746179/EFTA02746179.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a393c379b4f392f8a1021add3c61de641d138e51 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746179/EFTA02746179.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,566 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746179.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 20133, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.09, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 72.7315673828125 + ], + [ + 410.6364440917969, + 72.7315673828125 + ], + [ + 410.6364440917969, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Reply to Plaintiffs Response In Opposition To \nDefendant's Emergency Motion For Independent Examination Of Plaintiff, With \nIncorporated Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 96.696, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 516.2972412109375, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 516.2972412109375, + 404.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 96.696, + 404.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant Should Be Afforded Between 6-8 Hours To Conduct The IME And The \nExamination Proposed By Defendant's Expert Should Not Be Limited Since Such A \nLimitation Would Unduly Prejudice Defendant's Expert's Analysis Of Plaintiff", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 89.964, + 378.27 + ], + [ + 523.6951904296875, + 378.27 + ], + [ + 523.6951904296875, + 423.35302734375 + ], + [ + 89.964, + 423.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 652.86 + ], + [ + 363.83050537109375, + 652.86 + ], + [ + 363.83050537109375, + 667.8630218505859 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 667.8630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 187.88400000000001, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 388.00800000000004, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 388.00800000000004, + 431.73 + ], + [ + 187.88400000000001, + 431.73 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 74 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 69 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 141 + ], + [ + "Line", + 69 + ], + [ + "Text", + 66 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746179" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746190/EFTA02746190.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746190/EFTA02746190.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..396a85460e82de6b745e9e3d850d6fcc8d577922 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746190/EFTA02746190.md @@ -0,0 +1,110 @@ +CMA + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RYAN C.W, + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Ryan C.W. + +MI M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Ryan C.W. M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- a. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 2008. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as an Affiliate Instructor of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine at the University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, and Assistant Professor of Psychiatry in the Department of Medical Education at the University of Central Florida College of Medicine. +- 4. I received my undergraduate degree from Johns University and medical degree from Georgetown University. +- 5. No opinion of mine has ever been disqualified in a legal proceeding. + +- 6. I was a Rappeport Fellow of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law in 2007. +- 7. I completed an additional year of training fellowship in Forensic Psychiatry at Case Western Reserve in 2007-2008. +- 8. I am Board Certified in Psychiatry by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, with additional qualifications in Forensic Psychiatry. +- 9. The amended complaint filed by CMA against Jeffrey Epstein makes sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$75,000. CMA has filed a31-count complaint in which she alleges confusion, loss of innocence, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. +- 10. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. +- 11. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. +- 12. Police records show that CMA came from an unstable and disturbed home. + +In 2001, prior to meeting Mr. Epstein, she was noted to be truant from school, was on probation for an incident of domestic violence, and was described by her mother as being completely out of control. She had been subject to previous physical abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had been sexually active prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, a thorough psychiatric interview/examination and access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +- 13. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any Plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate + +social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at irtcreacod risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +- 14. It is also essential to understand the Plaintiffs level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. +- 15. Knowledge of Plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, intrauterine exposure to toxic substances such as cocaine, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. +- 16. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records and that they + +have time to conduct afull and complete Independent Medical Examination. + +- 17. The Independent Medical Examination will cover Plaintiff's full medical and psychiatric history, including: chief complaint, history of present illness, specific complaints of symptoms or injury, medical history, past psychiatric history, family history, abuse history, birth history, childhood history, school history, occupational history, violence history, legal history, relationship history, substance use history, sexual history, review of systems, activities of daily living, mental status examination, diagnoses using DSM-IV axes, and discussion of case findings and opinions. + +- 18. Psychological tests and questionnaires: Zung Depression Scale, Zung Anxiety Scale, Mini Mental State Examination, MCMI-III, MMPI -2 with forensic implications, Life History Questionnaire, and Forensic Questionnaire. + +- 19. Because Plaintiff's emotional and mental states have been put at issue, the undersigned must ask question of Plaintiff regarding her physical, emotional and mental problems, in the past and in the present, in order to form an expert opinion. Such examination will require seven hours with the Plaintiff. The IME requires the presence of only the Plaintiff and the examiner. Other individuals present will invalidate the process. + +- 20. I have been retained as an expert in this matter and have been asked to + +perform an independent medical evaluation of Plaintiff [REDACTED] +[REDACTED]. + +1. 21. I strenuously object to allowing the presence of a videographer, court reporter and/or attorney being present in the room during my examination of Plaintiff [REDACTED]. +2. 22. The presence of a videographer, court reporter and/or attorney in the examination room during my performance of an independent medical examination would create an artificial environment, distractions, and would compromise the integrity of my psychiatric examination. A video camera in the room connected to a monitor by cable outside the room would be acceptable. +3. 23. Furthermore, enabling the presence of a videographer, court reporter and/or attorney in the examination room during my performance of an independent medical examination is a clear departure from the normal standards imposed within the psychiatric field for such an examination. +4. 24. As part of the performance of an independent medical examination, I require that examinees complete a "Patient Questionnaire" and a "Forensic Questionnaire" designed to elicit historical information about the examinee, which assists in my performance of the clinical examination and gives the + +examinee opportunity to review records obtained and obtain appropriate data prior to the examination. + +25. Requiring that a patient/examinee complete a questionnaire seeking the provision of historical information is a standard protocol of the clinical examination. + +26. My ability to provide a complete and thorough independent medical examination is compromised without the provision of the historical information sought in my "Patient Questionnaire" and "Forensic Questionnaire." + +27. Additionally, part of the independent medical examination consists of a consultation with the examinee, in which history and background information is obtained, and administration of various written standardized tests and scales. The administration of such tests and scales goes to the essence of such examinations. + +28. I have been asked to perform a psychiatric examination of Plaintiff [REDACTED] [REDACTED] pursuant to a request in the above-styled cause for an independent medical examination. + +29. I understand that Plaintiff's counsel has requested to videotape the examination and have counsel, a court reporter, or both present in the room + +during the examination. + +- 30. The presence of third-party observers, meaning persons other than the examiner and examinee, in the examining room is inconsistent with standardized administration of the tests and changes the testing environment considerably by introducing extraneous variables that may distract the examinee and alter the results of the me. + +- 31. A psychiatric examination, which consists of, but is not limited to, interview, mental status examination, and tests of intelligence, memory, attention, concentration, problem solving, sensory-perceptual functioning, motor functioning, psychomotor problem solving ability, is properly conducted in the absence of third parties from the examination site (i.e., court reporter, attorney, videographer). The presence of third parties often affects the examinee's responses to examination items and may alter or distract their stream of thought. + +- 32. For the above reasons, I oppose having third parties present in the examination room during an examination. I may choose not to perform the standard examination in the presence of third parties (court reporter, attorney, videographer) except under Court order and with the caveat that the test results may be invalid. + +33. The examination of Plaintiff will be conducted in compliance with the ethical principles and code to which I am bound as alicensed psychiatrist. Plaintiff will be allowed to take breaks, as she may need, to relax, eat, drink, and visit the restroom. + +34. In the event that I must conduct an examination with an attorney present, but outside the examination room, I request that there be no interruption in the examination. Interruptions will distract the Plaintiff, disrupt the examination and skew the validity of the examination. If present, the attorney should not coach the examinee during the examination or during breaks or otherwise. + +35. It is not possible to predict the exact amount of time that will be necessary for an appropriate psychiatric examination of Plaintiff because of unknown variables such as the amount of information that will be covered in the consultation segment and the pace at which Plaintiff will perform the standardized tests. Such examinations generally take approximately six to seven hours (excluding any break time), with approximately four to six hours used for the face-to-face consultation segment and approximately two to three hours used for the testing segment. However, in this case, I anticipate the IME of Plaintiff to take approximately between five and eight hours, excluding break time. Additional time may be necessary for to complete testing on her own, which most patients complete in 30 minutes to one hour. If has not completed the "Patient Questionnaire" and the "Forensic Questionnaire" before the examination, which was provided to her attorney prior to the examination, additional time will be needed to obtain pertinent historical information. + +Respectfully submitted, + +Gam'- cwctcu MD + +Ryan C W.I. MD + +Affiliate Instructor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida + +Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College of Medicine + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared RYAN C.W. M.D., who impersonally known to me or ( ) who has produced as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this 18th day of August +2009. + +Marcia J. Chapman + +Notary Public + +Printed Name: Marcia J. Chapman + +My Commission Expires: + +![](_page_10_Picture_22.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746190/EFTA02746190.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746190/EFTA02746190.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..06c0ae036ede1795f8377bc6552776f92383a047 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746190/EFTA02746190.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,460 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746190.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 12583, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.55, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_10_Picture_22.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RYAN C.W,", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 157.95 + ], + [ + 436.968, + 157.95 + ], + [ + 436.968, + 176.57999999999998 + ], + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 176.57999999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 210 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 235 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 280 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 252 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 269 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 247 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 279 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 198 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746190" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746190/_page_10_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746190/_page_10_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d9277aeb025de1268e640561cc8bca077551d7e9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746190/_page_10_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:16779719b691e9ca9da493be49bb79a3f2156fc53636f4eed0c0dded2ca505b6 +size 12607 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746201/EFTA02746201.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746201/EFTA02746201.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..093f26bc757bcdc58e236170c40c9f7b35080ba0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746201/EFTA02746201.md @@ -0,0 +1,241 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## NOTICE OF FILING AFFIDAVIT OF DR. CITED AS EXHIBIT "B" IN DE 273 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, hereby gives Notice of Filing Exhibit B, cited in Defendant's Reply to Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Defendant's Emergency Motion for Independent Examination of Plaintiff with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 273) and in support thereof : + +- 1. Affidavit of Ryan C.W. ■, **M.D. (Exhibit B** + +**MI ESQ. 96** + +## **Certificate of Service** + +**I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CWECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is** being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this iP day of , 2009 + +Respectfully s + +By: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelthw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. S Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & P.A. Shipley, 08-80469 + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isx@searcvlaw.com + +jph@searcylaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. + +=Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberg@uodhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iagesq@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746201/EFTA02746201.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746201/EFTA02746201.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1b4ff7738a1dd5889d8d84f601841e40279e6af1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746201/EFTA02746201.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,235 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746201.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3593, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.66, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 410.98565673828125, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 410.98565673828125, + 102.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 102.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF FILING AFFIDAVIT OF DR. CITED AS \nEXHIBIT \"B\" IN DE 273", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 142.596, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 471.4732666015625, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 471.4732666015625, + 392.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 142.596, + 392.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 640.71 + ], + [ + 365.2818908691406, + 640.71 + ], + [ + 365.2818908691406, + 655.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 655.4830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 420.39 + ], + [ + 364.20050048828125, + 420.39 + ], + [ + 364.20050048828125, + 434.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 434.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 103 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 46 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 133 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 61 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746201" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746204/EFTA02746204.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746204/EFTA02746204.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6296d248bb9de0c4b699eacac647f82594928d63 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746204/EFTA02746204.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa✓ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. § 2255, filed July 21, 2009. (DE 216). Plaintiff C.M.A. filed a response to the motion on August 7, 2009. (DE 256). No reply was filed and the deadline to file a response has passed. The Court has reviewed the motion, response, the Notice of Intent (DE 113 in 08-80811), and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +Defendant seeks an order striking C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. § 2255 (DE 113 in 08-80811) ("Notice of Intent"), filed June 5, 2009. Upon careful review, Defendant's Motion to Strike is GRANTED. The document has no legal meaning and only serves to add confusion to the ongoing discovery + +issues in C.M.A.'s case. The Court will rule on the issue of damages at an appropriate time. + +Accordingly, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: Defendant's Motion to Strike C.M.A.'s Conditional Notice of Intent to Exclusively Rely on Statutory Damages Provided by 18 U.S.C. § 2255 (DE 216) is GRANTED. C.M.A.'s Notice of Intent (DE 113 in 08-80811) is hereby STRICKEN from the record. This Order is without prejudice to Plaintiff pursuing her arguments regarding the amount of damages to which she may be entitled. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 19th day of August, 2009 + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746204/EFTA02746204.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746204/EFTA02746204.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..165641c63b69bc3bea639f8dba2f3b1490085741 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746204/EFTA02746204.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746204.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1879, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.76, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.5345153808594, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.5345153808594, + 100.22406005859375 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 100.22406005859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 330.772705078125, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 330.772705078125, + 397.97406005859375 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 397.97406005859375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746204" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746206/EFTA02746206.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746206/EFTA02746206.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8939ee0b8db817a2bbdab1d000a0dfb4507b1827 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746206/EFTA02746206.md @@ -0,0 +1,223 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/M= + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +# Defendant's Motion To Strike Declarations Attached And Cited In Plaintiffs' Reply In Support Of Their Motion For Protective Order (DE 266), And Incorporated Memorandum Of Law + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein" or Defendant), by and through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an order Striking The Declarations attached to and cited in Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of their Motion for Protective Order (DE 266). Local Rule 12 allows for this court to strike same. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: + +1. On July 29, 2009, Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Protective Order seeking to prevent any investigation of the Plaintiffs and/or the claims they assert against Jeffrey Epstein in their respective Complaints.(DE 226) Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order attached the Affidavits of Dr. Kliman - Ex. "A," the Declaration of Jane Doe 4 — Ex. "B," and the Declaration of Jane Doe 6 - Ex. "C". + +2. On August 11, 2009, Defendant filed his Response In Opposition to the above Motion for Protective Order. (DE 262) + +3. On August 14, 2009, Plaintiffs filed their Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion for Protective Order (DE 266), and attached and cited newly filed declarations for which Defendant does not have an opportunity to respond to under the rules. Therefore, the declarations delineated below are outside the scope of Plaintiffs' initial Motion for Protective Order and the Defendants' Response in Opposition. Moreover, the declarations are untimely. + +4. In particular, Plaintiffs attach to or cite in their Reply the declaration of Jane Doe 4 (dated August 14, 2009 — a newly filed declaration - DE 267-2), the declaration of Jane Doe 6 (a declaration not attached to the Reply or linked to any other motion by docket entry citation), the declaration of Jane Doe 7 (a declaration not attached to the Reply and referenced as a new August 14, 2009 declaration) and the declaration of Jane Doe 4's sister (Y.B.'s newly filed declaration dated August 18, 2009 - DE 267-3). + +5. Based upon the foregoing, the Defendant does not have an opportunity to respond to the newly filed declarations or those declarations cited in the Reply but not attached or linked to any other motion. To the extent Plaintiffs" intention was to link the missing declarations to another motion, response or reply previously filed by Plaintiffs, same has not been specified in their Reply. + +6. Note, Defendant is not moving to strike the declaration of Jane Doe 4 dated July 17, 2009 because that declaration is attached to Plaintiffs' initial motion. + +### Memorandum of Law + +7. Ivory v. Holme, 2009 WL 513720 (M.D. Fla. 2009)(striking affidavits as untimely). + +Wherefore, Defendant respectfully requests that this court enter an order: + +- a. striking the declaration of Jane Doe 4 (dated August 14, 2009 a newly filed declaration - DE 267-2); +- b. striking the declaration of Jane Doe 6 (a declaration not attached to the Reply or linked to any other motion by docket entry citation); +- c. striking the declaration of Jane Doe 7 (a declaration not attached to the Reply and referenced as a new August 14, 2009 declaration); +- d. the declaration of Jane Doe 4's sister (Y.B.'s newly filed declaration dated August 18, 2009 — DE 267-3); or, alternatively; +- e. require Plaintiffs to file the missing declarations and allow Defendant 10 days within which to file a Supplemental Brief addressing same; and +- f. for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +By: MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the follo ' g S ice List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 7& day of + +2009 + +Respectfully, ub tt By: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. +Florida Bar No. 224162 +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +(*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein*) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. █ Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) + +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* █ █ █ █ █ + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. +08-08804* + +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case +No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) + +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesg@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesg@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746206/EFTA02746206.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746206/EFTA02746206.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4cd60c6b5b011a2695b5615d3b09e76177825a98 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746206/EFTA02746206.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,314 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746206.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 7580, + "elapsed_seconds": 10.24, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 411.6553649902344, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 411.6553649902344, + 101.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 101.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant's Motion To Strike Declarations Attached And Cited In Plaintiffs' \nReply In Support Of Their Motion For Protective Order (DE 266), And \nIncorporated Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 90.576, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 526.5236206054688, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 526.5236206054688, + 404.78997802734375 + ], + [ + 90.576, + 404.78997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Memorandum of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 243.57600000000002, + 70.6875 + ], + [ + 370.21490478515625, + 70.6875 + ], + [ + 370.21490478515625, + 85.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 243.57600000000002, + 85.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.8, + 526.3074951171875 + ], + [ + 370.525390625, + 526.3074951171875 + ], + [ + 370.525390625, + 540.9200134277344 + ], + [ + 244.8, + 540.9200134277344 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 184.212, + 277.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 277.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 184.212, + 319.95000000000005 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 64 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 100 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746206" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746211/EFTA02746211.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746211/EFTA02746211.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f6a2729e3eb86c2b5b9a1ab3ac4ed03ab9b612ba --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746211/EFTA02746211.md @@ -0,0 +1,211 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases- + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein and Plaintiff, File This Notice of Agreement Relative to Defendant's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination Of Plaintiff, Plaintiffs Response In Opposition and Defendant's Reply Thereto + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN (hereinafter "EPSTEIN') and Plaintiff, ("Plaintiff" or "CMA"), File This Notice of Agreement Relative to Defendant's Emergency Motion For Independent Examination Of Plaintiff Plaintiff's Response In Opposition and Defendant's Reply Thereto: + +- 1. On July 29, 2009, Defendant filed the Emergency Motion for IME of Plaintiff (DE 245). +- 2. On August 7, 2009, Plaintiff filed her Response In Opposition and Incorporated Motion for Protective Order Regarding Defendant's Emergency Motion For IME (DE 254). + - 3. On August 17, 2009, Defendant filed his Reply thereto (DE 273). + +4. While several issues remain outstanding and require the court's attention relative to the above docket entries, the undersigned attorneys have reached an agreement relative to Plaintiff's specific request to have a third-party present at said IME. In particular, the undersigned attorneys have agreed that Plaintiff will be provided a television monitor in a separate room accompanied by a video feed, thereby allowing Plaintiff's agent to monitor the IME from a location separate and apart from where the IME is being performed. Such an agreement was reached as a result of Defendant's expert, Dr. offering same in his Affidavit and the undersigned attorneys' agreement to same. + +5. The Defendant will be responsible for the costs associated with providing the television monitor and the video feed. + +6. In light of the foregoing agreement, the court is now relieved from having to rule on those portions of the Emergency Motion, the Response in Opposition and Motion for Protective Order and Reply that specifically deal with Plaintiff's requ third-party be present in/at the IME of Plaintiff. That parti + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this je day of , 2009 + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. +Florida Bar No. 224162 +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/...** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Brad ... Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. ... Esq. +... Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +[jsx@scarcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@scarcylaw.com) + +[jph@scarcylaw.com](mailto:jph@scarcylaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-08804* + +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) + +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* + +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746211/EFTA02746211.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746211/EFTA02746211.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..44bd3ee74b4f19ebcb0802a5de5ff2a4f08d5dcb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746211/EFTA02746211.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,234 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746211.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5910, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.55, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.55, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 412.55804443359375, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 412.55804443359375, + 101.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 199.55, + 101.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.12599999999995, + 543.51 + ], + [ + 365.6979675292969, + 543.51 + ], + [ + 365.6979675292969, + 559.2324981689453 + ], + [ + 251.12599999999995, + 559.2324981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/...", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.726, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 422.43199999999996, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 422.43199999999996, + 322.38 + ], + [ + 189.726, + 322.38 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 104 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746211" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746215/EFTA02746215.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746215/EFTA02746215.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..83dcecf24b398f5fc378ad704110b94ba18b7881 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746215/EFTA02746215.md @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-CIV-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: 08-80232, 08-80380, 98-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## PLAINTIFF, C.M.A.'S, RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR INDEPENDENT EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW (DE 2731 + +Plaintiff, C.M.A., by and through her undersigned attorneys, hereby files her Response to Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S Reply to Plaintiffs Response in Opposition to Defendant's Emergency Motion For Independent Examination of Plaintiff With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 273), and in support there of states as follows: + +- 1. Defendant, EPSTEIN, filed on July 29, 2009 his Emergency Motion for Independent Exam and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 228). +- 2. Plaintiff, C.M.A., filed on August 8, 2009, her Response and Incorporated Motion for Protective Order Regarding, Defendant, EPSTEIN'S Emergency + +Motion for Independent Examination of Plaintiff with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 254). + +- 3. Defendant, EPSTEIN, filed on August 17, 2009 his Reply to Plaintiffs Response in Opposition to Defendant's Emergency Motion for Independent Examination of Plaintiff, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 273). +- 4. Plaintiff files the instant Response to address the arguments raised in Defendant's Reply to Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order regarding Defendant's proposed mental examination of Plaintiff by his retained psychiatrist, Ryan M, M.D. +- 5. One of the grounds originally cited in Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order which sought to prevent the mental examination of Plaintiff going forward was the fact that Plaintiff had been admitted to the hospital for treatment of a serious medical condition and resulting surgery. As Plaintiff is no longer in the hospital, Plaintiff's motion to prevent the examination from going forward until such time as she was discharged from the hospital is now moot. +- 6. Additionally, Plaintiff sought permission to have a representative from her legal team present at said examination. Counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant have resolved this issue by agreement whereby Defendant will provide, at his expense, a video feed and monitor in an adjacent room for Plaintiffs representative's use. Accordingly, the Court need not decide whether Plaintiff is entitled to have a representative present with her in the examination room. +- 7. Plaintiff has agreed to submit to a mental examination by Defendant's psychiatrist on September 8, 2009. Plaintiff is still in need of and is still + +seeking an order limiting the scope of the proposed examination and imposing reasonable time limits for its occurrence. + +- 8. Specifically, Plaintiff seeks an order: + - a. Limiting the time for conducting the examination, including any testing, to a maximum of 6 hours; and + - b. Limiting the scope of same to preclude Plaintiff from being subjected to repeated questioning on multiple occasions regarding personal and highly sensitive areas of inquiry including Plaintiffs medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history, substance abuse history, etc. +- 9. In his Reply to Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order, after several pages of the now ubiquitous leveling of both unfounded and irrelevant arguments regarding Plaintiffs alleged strategy to stall discovery in this case, mudslinging and character assassination attempts by Defendant, arguments germane to Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order finally materialize several pages into EPSTEIN'S Reply. +- 10. Unfortunately, Defendant mischaracterizes the relief sought by Plaintiff in her Motion for Protective Order. Plaintiff is not seeking to prevent the discovery of relevant areas of inquiry. Rather, Plaintiff is seeking to limit the number of times Defendant is entitled to delve into those areas of inquiry. +- 11. Exceptionally telling is EPSTEIN's utter failure to rebut or even address Plaintiffs concern that Defendant intends to subject her to multiple + +interrogations regarding the identical and highly personal and private subject matters. + +12. Rather, Defendant seems to be suggesting that he is entitled to delve into these areas of inquiry at Plaintiffs deposition, which is now scheduled for September 3, 2009, and then turn around a week later and have Dr. IN inquire at great lengths over the course of his highly intrusive examination into the exact same subject matter. Additionally, Dr. • has apparently requested that Plaintiff fill out 24 pages of questions regarding the exact same subject matters before his proposed 6 to 8 hour examination. + +13. It is Plaintiff's position that such an exercise can only serve to further victimize the victim of repeated sexual offenses at the hands of EPSTEIN in hopes of manufacturing inconsistencies in Plaintiffs claims in this case. Defendant's goal in this regard is highly improper and unjustifiable. + +14. In opposition to Plaintiff's motion to limit the examination to 6 hours, Defendant's citation to Lahr v. Fullbriqht & Jaworski, LLP 164 F.R.D. 196, 202-204 (N.D. Texas 1995), Morton v. Co., No. 94-976-Civ-J-20, 1995 WL 819182 (N.D. Fla. September 12, 1995) and v. Newport Tankers Corp. 96 F.R.D. 31 (S.D.N.Y. 1982) are both unpersuasive and easily distinguished. In Lahr, the court declined to limit a three hour clinical intake and evaluation by the defendant's psychologist. Lahr, 164 F.R.D. at 201. In Morton the court declined to limit a defense psychologist's evaluation to one hour and declined to limit the evaluation to cover only one specific year, but did allow the presence of one of plaintiff's treating physicians/psychologists/psychiatrists to be present in the examination room. Morton, 1995 WL 819182 at 3. Lastly, EPSTEIN cites as "requiring Plaintiff to submit to a 2 day examination." (DE 273, p. 5) actually required a plaintiff to "submit himself at least two days prior to trial" for a defense examination, not submit himself for a two day examination. 96 F.R.D. at 33. + +15. Furthermore, Plaintiff is not requesting a limitation of the examination to some arbitrary length. EPSTEIN'S own proposed examiner, Dr. ■, **in his initial affidavit stated that he anticipated the duration of his IME would be 6-8 hours (DE 228-5, p. 2). Now that Plaintiff seeks to limit the examination to the lower range of his request, Dr. • files a new affidavit stating that although examinations of this type usually take approximately six to seven hours, for reasons he does not disclose, the IME of Plaintiff will apparently take longer than normal. In fact, Dr.. now suggests the examination of Plaintiff could take up to 9 or more. (DE 274, 9-10).** + +**16. Plaintiff respectfully suggests that this Court should exercise its "discretionary authority to impose a variety of conditions, which, balancing the factors in each individual case, ensure that the interests of justice are obtained" by limiting the total number hours for Defendant's IME to 6 hours, including the administration of any standardized tests Dr.** ■ **wishes to have Plaintiff take. Morton, 1995 WL 819182 at 3, citing Tirado v. Erosa, 158 F.R.D. 294, 295-96 (S.D>N.Y. 1994). A limitation of 6 hours for the examination would allow even more time than the 4 hour limitation imposed in Trenary v. Busch** Entertainment Corp., 2006 WL 333621 (M.D. Fla) and Tracey v. Sarasota County, 2006 WL 1678908 (M.D. Fla.). + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, C.M.A., respectfully requests that this Court enter an order: + +- a. Limiting the time for conducting the examination, including any testing, to a maximum of 6 hours; and +- b. Limiting the scope of same to preclude Plaintiff from being subjected to repeated questioning on multiple occasions regarding personal and highly sensitive areas of inquiry including Plaintiff's medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history, substance abuse history, etc. + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on August 27, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified below via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. + +/s/Jack P • + +Jack Scarola + +Florida Bs' No.: 169440 + +Jack P. IN + +Florida Bar No.: 0547808 + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +Phone: (561) 686-6300 + +Fax: (561) 383-9424 + +Attorneys for Plaintiff + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +Phone: (561) 582-7600 +Fax: (561) 588-8819 +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Robert Critton, Esquire +Michael J. Pike, Esquire +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP +303 Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 842-2820 +Fax: (561) 844-6929 +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 863-9100 +Fax: (561) 835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 South Australian Ave., Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Phone: (561) 202-6360 +Fax: (561) 828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esquire +Adam D. Horowitz, Esquire +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +Phone: 305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +Brad [REDACTED], Esquire +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: (954) 522-3456 + +Fax: (954) 527-8663 bedwardsOrra-law.com + +Paul G. Cassell, Esquire Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Phone:(801) 585-5202 Fax: (801) 585-6833 cassellp@law.utah.edu + +, Esquire Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone:(561) 832-7732 Fax: (561) 832-7137 isidrooarcia@bellsouth.net + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esquire Katherine W. Ezell, Esquire Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 Tel: (305) 358-2800 Fax: (305) 358-2382 rjosefsberg@podhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746215/EFTA02746215.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746215/EFTA02746215.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f09ec9196080658335ca7a323483b38fe1c4887d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746215/EFTA02746215.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,425 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746215.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 10765, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.41, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 409.39215087890625, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 409.39215087890625, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF, C.M.A.'S, RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S REPLY \nTO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S EMERGENCY \nMOTION FOR INDEPENDENT EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF WITH \nINCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW (DE 2731", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 388.6875 + ], + [ + 537.9178466796875, + 388.6875 + ], + [ + 537.9178466796875, + 444.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 444.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 416.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 416.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 258.264, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 351.28799999999995, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 351.28799999999995, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 258.264, + 85.05 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 51 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746215" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746223/EFTA02746223.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746223/EFTA02746223.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..39d8853c0d9c52e802409dff0cc4e3c5f13d2257 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746223/EFTA02746223.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MAFtRAMOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, Motion For Extension of Time in which to Respond to Plaintiff, Jane Doe's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall Respond to Plaintiff's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for • Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. + +on or before September 7, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746223/EFTA02746223.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746223/EFTA02746223.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c6411808980023d021bc47a7742c737c36bcddac --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746223/EFTA02746223.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746223.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1063, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.73, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 415.86566162109375, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 415.86566162109375, + 102.35302734375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 102.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 283.968, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 335.6533508300781, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 335.6533508300781, + 420.35302734375 + ], + [ + 283.968, + 420.35302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 14 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746223" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746225/EFTA02746225.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746225/EFTA02746225.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..54e75b6286a07d982afa9b815a09b3ee1ea96e6d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746225/EFTA02746225.md @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAJ. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUEST TO PRODUCE, ANSWERS TO REOUEST FOR ADMISSIONS, AND ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES + +Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel moves this Court for an Extension of Time until September 7, 2009, to file Responses to PlaintiffJane Doe's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 A.1O)(S.D. Fla. 2008). As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +Counsel for Defendant communicated with Counsel for the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff's Counsel agrees to the requested extension of September 7, 2009, to file Responses to Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. + +## Rule 7.1 A.3 Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff by telephone and/or electronic mail, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreemen wi the requested extension. + +By: + +MI AEL J. IKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #61 296 + +# Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 28th day of August, 2009 + +Respect ff y s ff itted, + +By: + +ROBE ON, JR., ESQ. + +Flori a-Bar No. 224162 + +rcrita,bc1claw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CR1TTON, LUTT1ER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +#### Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhw@,hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. S Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 isx@searcvlaw.com iph@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein nfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp(iplaw.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. + +La.., P.A. Plum Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Hagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 gosefsbera@nodhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecfAbrucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 iarzesq®bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746225/EFTA02746225.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746225/EFTA02746225.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b8622ab5865ea1c9f9d380c310e763ce60005a98 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746225/EFTA02746225.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,288 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746225.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4537, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.32, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 415.8964538574219, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 415.8964538574219, + 103.10302734375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 103.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION \nOF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTIONS \nTO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUEST TO PRODUCE, ANSWERS TO \nREOUEST FOR ADMISSIONS, AND ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 90.576, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 528.2833251953125, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 528.2833251953125, + 421.10302734375 + ], + [ + 90.576, + 421.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A.3 Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 173.808, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 443.0110778808594, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 443.0110778808594, + 88.85302734375 + ], + [ + 173.808, + 88.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 266.49 + ], + [ + 366.83050537109375, + 266.49 + ], + [ + 366.83050537109375, + 281.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 281.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 426.27386474609375, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 426.27386474609375, + 116.2230224609375 + ], + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 116.2230224609375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 158 + ], + [ + "Line", + 78 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746225" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746229/EFTA02746229.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746229/EFTA02746229.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6a195433e4bacbd3a79ed6ccadf432b2ab0a4f75 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746229/EFTA02746229.md @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +Related Cases: 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, / + +## PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOES 2-7 MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE DECLARATIONS + +Plaintiffs' Jane Does 2-7 (hereafter "Plaintiffs") file this Memorandum in Opposition to Motion to Strike Declarations Attached and Cited in Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of their Motion for Protective Order (DE 266), as follows: + +### I. The Harassing Acts and Conduct of Defendant's Investigators Are Continuing, As Reflected in the Declarations Filed Subsequent to Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order + +Defendant moves to strike Declarations filed in support of Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order. That Motion is directed to the acts and conduct of Defendant's private investigators. (See DE 226). The original Motion, filed on July 29, 2009, was supported by two attached Declarations.' + +The two Declarations attached as Exhibits to the Motion for Protective Order were those of Jane Doe No. 4 and Jane Doe No. 6, dated July 17, 2009 and July 22, 2009, respectively. While + +Subsequently on August 7, 2009, Plaintiffs filed the Declaration of Jane Doe No. 7 dated August 5, 2009, in further support of their Motion for Protective Order. The reason it was not filed with the original Motion for Protective Order is because it concerns only events that occurred after that Motion was filed on July 29, 2009. (See Decl. of Jane Doe No. 7 (DE 251) (discussing information received by Jane Doe No. 7 on July 30, July 31 and August 4, 2009). The problem created by Defendant's investigators is a continuing one. These investigators are making ongoing and repeated contacts with nonparties for an ulterior motive, in a manner which is destroying the Plaintiffs' anonymity in an apparent effort to harass and intimidate the Plaintiffs. (See DE 266, Plaintiffs' Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion for Protective Order). + +Likewise, the Declarations of Y.B. and Jane Doe No. 4 filed on August 14, 2009, concern events occurring subsequent to the filing of the Motion for Protective Order. The Declaration of Jane Doe No. 4 concerns an incident that occurred on August 10, 2009. (DE 267-2). The Declaration of Y.B. addresses an incident that occurred on August 8, 2009. (DE 267-3). Accordingly, the need to file these Declarations subsequent to the filing of Plaintiffs' Motion is apparent, and serves to highlight the continuing nature of the wrongs being committed by Defendant's investigators from which Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 seek relief. + +# IL A Sur-Reply Would Be Unwarranted Under the Circumstances + +Defendant alternatively seeks leave to file a sur-reply memorandum, contending that he has not had an opportunity to respond to the newly filed Declarations. Notably, Defendant did + +acknowledging in his Motion to Strike that the Declaration of Jane Doe No. 6 was filed with the Plaintiffs' Motion, Defendant inexplicably in paragraph 4 and the "Wherefore" clause of the Motion to Strike asks that this same Declaration be stricken on the basis that it was "not attached to the Reply or linked to any other motion by docket entry citation." This is obviously incorrect, and would appear to be an inadvertent error on the part of Defendant's counsel. + +not file any evidence with his Response Memorandum refuting the facts set forth in the Declarations of Jane Doe No. 4 and Jane Doe No. 6 filed on July 29, 2009, nor the Declaration of Jane Doe No. 7 filed on August 7, 2009.2 + +Plaintiffs do not object to an additional factual submission by Defendant such as an affidavit or declaration which addresses the Declarations filed by Plaintiffs subsequent to the original Motion for Protective Order. The issues raised in Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order have otherwise been fully briefed by the parties. None of the Declarations filed by Plaintiffs subsequent to the Motion raise new legal issues which would require further briefing. Accordingly, leave to file a sur-reply memorandum is not warranted. + +### III. Conclusion + +Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 respectfully request that Defendant's Motion to Strike Declarations be denied. The alternative relief requested of leave to file a supplemental brief is unwarranted, although Plaintiffs do not object to a supplemental factual submission that is directed only to the Declarations filed by Plaintiffs after the filing of Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order. + +Dated: August 28, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz @sexabuseattorney.com + +Although the Declaration of Jane Doe No. 7 was filed subsequent to the filing of the Motion for Protective Order, it was filed before Defendant's Response to Motion for Protective Order on August 11, 2009, and any facts refuting that Declaration could have been brought forward at that time. Additionally, although Defendant filed Exhibits with his Response Memorandum, none of those Exhibits challenged the facts asserted in Plaintiffs' Declarations. In particular, there is no affidavit or declaration from any of Defendant's investigators. + +MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on August 28, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. ieoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746229/EFTA02746229.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746229/EFTA02746229.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f11983220da3e50561c08d9fca769499591bdc98 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746229/EFTA02746229.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,384 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746229.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 6584, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.26, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOES 2-7 MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION \nTO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE DECLARATIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.29599999999999, + 374.22 + ], + [ + 489.79901123046875, + 374.22 + ], + [ + 489.79901123046875, + 403.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 127.29599999999999, + 403.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. The Harassing Acts and Conduct of Defendant's Investigators \nAre Continuing, As Reflected in the Declarations Filed \nSubsequent to Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 126.68399999999998, + 498.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 485.9842529296875, + 498.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 485.9842529296875, + 541.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 126.68399999999998, + 541.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IL A Sur-Reply Would Be Unwarranted Under the Circumstances", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.90799999999999, + 539.46 + ], + [ + 489.4247741699219, + 539.46 + ], + [ + 489.4247741699219, + 555.363037109375 + ], + [ + 127.90799999999999, + 555.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.324, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 356.2673645019531, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 356.2673645019531, + 334.1835632324219 + ], + [ + 261.324, + 334.1835632324219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.44, + 192.77999999999997 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 192.77999999999997 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 208.10302734375 + ], + [ + 226.44, + 208.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 33 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746229" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746234/EFTA02746234.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746234/EFTA02746234.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f1cd82ab370d84eb512d06ff75c935899d9f8f49 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746234/EFTA02746234.md @@ -0,0 +1,138 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his responses and objections to Plaintiffs December 9, 2008 Amended First Set Of Interrogatories To Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, attached hereto. + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent by fax and U.S. Mail to the following addressees this 26th day of January, 2009: + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ahorowitzehermanlaw.com jherman4hermanlaw.com Irivera hermanlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jaciescObellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO +PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES** + +**Interrogatory No. 1.** Identify all employees who performed work of services inside the Palm Beach Residence. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2003 until present. Also, see "Employee" as defined in paragraph g of Plaintiff's interrogatories. + +**Interrogatory No. 2.** Identify all Employees not identified in response to interrogatory no. 1 who at any time came to Defendant's Palm Beach Residence. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for "all Employees" "who at any time" came to the residence. Also, see "Employee" as defined in paragraph g of Plaintiff's interrogatories. + +**Interrogatory No. 3.** Identify all persons who came to the Palm Beach Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +**Interrogatory No. 4.** Identify all persons who came to the New York Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +**Interrogatory No. 5.** Identify all persons who came to the New Mexico Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my + +federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +**Interrogatory No. 6.** Identify all persons who came to the St. [REDACTED] Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +**Interrogatory No. 7.** List all the time periods during which Jeffrey Epstein was present in the State of Florida, including for each the date he arrive and the date he departed. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the + +discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2003 until present. + +**Interrogatory No. 8.** Identify all of Jeffrey Epstein health care providers in the past (10) ten years, including without limitation, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, physicians, hospitals and treatment facilities. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. In addition, such information is privileged pursuant to Rule 501, Fed. Evid., and §90.503, Fla.Evid. Code. In addition, such information is protected by the provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). + +**Interrogatory No. 9.** List all items in Jeffrey Epstein's possession in Palm Beach, Florida, at any time during the period of these interrogatories, which were used or intended to be used as sexual aids, sex toys, massage aids, and/or vibrators, and for each, list the manufacturer, model number (if applicable), and its present location. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 – 2005," while Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information from + +January 1, 2003, until present. Further, the request is meant to embarrass and harass the Defendant. + +**Interrogatory No. 10.** Identify all persons who provide transportation services to Jeffrey Epstein, whether as employees or independent contractors, including without limitation, chauffeurs and aircraft crew. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff places no time limitation. + +**Interrogatory No. 11.** Identify all telephone numbers used by Epstein, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's allegations claim a time period of "in or about 2004-2005" and involve Defendant's Palm Beach residence. + +**Interrogatory No. 12.** Identify all telephone numbers of employees of Epstein, used in the course or scope of their employment, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's allegations claim a time period of "in or about 2004-2005" and involve Defendant's Palm Beach residence. + +**Interrogatory No. 13.** List the names and addresses of all persons who are believed or known by your, your agents, or your attorneys to have any knowledge concerning any of the issues in this lawsuit; and specify the subject matter about which the witness has knowledge. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the interrogatory seeks information that is attorney-client and work product privileged as it seeks information known by Defendant's attorneys. The interrogatory is so overbroad that Defendant cannot reasonably form a response, including the raising of additional privileges which may apply. Without waiving any objection, see Rule 26 disclosures made by Defendant's counsel in this case. + +**Interrogatory No. 14.** State the name and address of every person known to you, your agents, or your attorneys who has knowledge about, possession, or custody, or control of, any model, plat, map, drawing, motion picture, videotape or photograph pertaining to any fact or issue involved in this controversy; and describe as to each, what item such person has, the name and address of the person who took or prepared it, and the date it was taken or prepared. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the interrogatory seeks information that is attorney-client and work product privileged as it seeks information known by Defendant's attorneys. + +**Interrogatory No. 15.** Identify all persons who have made a claim, complaint, demand or threat against you relating to alleged sexual abuse or misconduct on a minor, and for each provide the following information: + +1. a. The person's full name, last known address and telephone number; +2. b. The person's attorney, if represented; +3. c. The date of the alleged incident(s); +4. d. If a civil case has been filed by or on behalf of the person, the case number and identifying information. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges and without waiving such objection, with regard to subparagraph (d), Defendant's counsel states that such information is public record and equally attainable by Plaintiff. + +**Interrogatory No. 16.** State the facts upon which you intend to rely for each denial of a pleading allegation and for each affirmative defense you intend to make in these cases. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk + +losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, no answer to the Amended Complaint has been filed by defense counsel in this case; however, Defendant does not intend to waive his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination. Defendant further objects in that Plaintiff's interrogatory attempts to obtain discovery in other cases filed by her undersigned counsel. + +**Interrogatory No. 17.** Identify all witnesses from whom you have obtained or requested a written, transcribed or recorded statement relating to any issue in these cases, and for each, in addition to the witness's identifying information, state the date of the statement and identify the person taking the statement. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects to this interrogatory in that it seeks information that is attorney-client and work product privileged. In addition, the request is overbroad in that it seeks information "relating to any issue." + +![]()STATE OF Florida ) +) +COUNTY OF Palm Beach ) + +I hereby certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Jeffrey Epstein, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Interrogatories who + +acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above-named person: personally known/identification and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this 2,6, day of \::),e''...ar 2009. + +(SEAL) + +![](_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg) + +PReitaZZ CaltrAn,C n- 12ikektn;s Notary Public/State of Florida Commission #: My Commission Expires: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746234/EFTA02746234.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746234/EFTA02746234.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..221db9d00947d3de96d3b0bb248bf2b16e096c51 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746234/EFTA02746234.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,437 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746234.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 26282, + "elapsed_seconds": 14.95, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.676, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 408.69287109375, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 408.69287109375, + 114.53997802734375 + ], + [ + 197.676, + 114.53997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS \nTO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 473.8662414550781, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 473.8662414550781, + 324.16998291015625 + ], + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 324.16998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.772, + 417.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 380.8663330078125, + 417.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 380.8663330078125, + 432.16998291015625 + ], + [ + 263.772, + 432.16998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 119.952, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 485.928, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 485.928, + 131.22 + ], + [ + 119.952, + 131.22 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746234" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746234/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746234/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b9db5273e9c641ce9d043a30f7b1ceda69c02fa2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746234/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:35e03ea4f978253574c2ee0fec3aeeadd911f4a89a207d56b66145716ae4d4bf +size 11969 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746245/EFTA02746245.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746245/EFTA02746245.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f6adfd13b2a64a5884fd8fbb448c3877a189da42 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746245/EFTA02746245.md @@ -0,0 +1,164 @@ +to) + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, serves his responses and objections to Plaintiffs Amended First Request For Production To Defendant, dated December 9, 2008. + +Request No. 1. The list provided to you by the U.S. Attorney of individuals whom the U.S. Attorney was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an offense by Mr. Epstein enumerated in 18 U.S.C. §2255. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference + +og + +under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 2. All documents referring or relating to the United States' agreement with Defendant to defer federal prosecution subject to certain conditions, including without limitation, the operative agreement between Defendant and the United States and all amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my + +constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 3. All documents referring or relating to Defendants agreement with the State of Florida on his plea of guilty to violations of Florida Criminal Statutes, including without limitation, the operative plea agreement and any amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Whatever public documents exist are in the State Court file and equally accessible to Plaintiff. + +Request No.4. All documents obtained in discovery or investigation relating to either the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal Case, including without limitation, documents obtained from any federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, the State Attorney's office and the United States Attorney's office. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Request No. 4 seeks documents that are attorney-client and work product privileged in that it seeks "all documents obtained in discovery or investigation relating either to the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal Case ... ." In addition, such documents are privileged and confidential as they are the subject of a pending investigation. + +Request No. 5. All telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone calls made by or to Defendant, including without limitation, telephone logs and message pads. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Defendant objects as the request is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding any and all telephone records and other documents reflecting any and all telephone calls made to or by Defendant. As phrased, the request includes attorney-client and work product privileged information, as well as records and documents of calls having absolutely no relationship to any of the allegations in this action. + +Request No. 6. All telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone calls made by or to Defendant, including without limitation, telephone logs and message pads, reflecting telephone calls made by or to employees. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, as defined by Plaintiff in paragraph g of her request, the term employee is overly broad and encompasses information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, the request seeks information pertaining to person who are not parties to this action and whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 7. All surveillance videos, slides, film. videotape, digital recording or other audio or video depiction or image of the Palm Beach Residence. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiff's complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding "all surveillance videos, etc., or image of the Palm Beach Residence." + +Request No. 8. All documents referring or relating to Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2, including without limitation, web pages, social networking site pages, correspondence, videotapes and audiotapes. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. + +Request No. 9. All statements taken, transcribed or recorded from any person referring or relating to Defendant's sexual conduct, massages given to Defendant or any issue in these cases. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. + +Request No. 10. All documents referring to or relating to air travel and aircraft used by Defendant, including without limitation, flight logs and flight manifests. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. Plaintiff's complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiff's request seeks documents for a + +time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding air travel and aircraft used by Defendant. + +Request No. 11. Any and all documents referring to or relating to modeling agencies, including but not limited to documents relating to or reflecting communications with female models. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 12. All photographs, videotapes, digital images and other documents depicting or showing females who, at the time thereof, were under the age of 21, which were taken or created by or for Defendant and not intended for sale commercially to the public. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 13. All photographs and painting of females which were displayed in any of Defendant's homes or residences in the time frame of these requests, including without limitation, photographs in standing or sitting frames or wall frames. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiff's complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 14. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 15. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and , including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 16. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein ands 1, including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiff's complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 17. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiff's request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 18. Any and all documents and photographs placed by Defendant at any time in the period of these requests on a social networking website, including without limitation, Facebook.com and MySpace.com. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request seeks documents and photographs for a time period of January 1, 2003 until present. + +Request No. 19. Any and all documents reflecting or consisting of communications between Jeffrey Epstein and MC2 Models or Jean-Luc Brunel, relating or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries to pursue a career in modeling, including, but not limited to, letters, notes and emails. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — + +2005." In addition, the request seeks documents pertaining to females who are not non-parties, and who possess privacy rights. + +Request No. 20. Any and all documents referring or relating to gifts or loans to females under the age of 21, including, but not limited to, notes, receipts and car rental agreements. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 21. Any and all personal calendars or schedules of or for Jeffrey Epstein from January 1, 2003 to the present. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 - 2005." In addition, the request encompasses attorney-client privileged material. + +Request No. 22. All documents written by Jeffrey Epstein consisting of personal thoughts, feelings or descriptions of events, incidents or occurrences in Defendant's life, including without limitation, any diaries of Jeffrey Epstein. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 - 2005." On its fact, the request goes beyond the scope of allowable discovery and is meant to harass, embarrass and overburden the Defendant. Further, the request is so overly broad that it includes attorney-client and work product privileged materials. + +Request No. 23. All documents referring to or relating to Jeffrey Epstein's purchase or consumption of prescription medicine. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Ha. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiff's complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Defendant's medical condition is not at issue in this action. Such a request is meant to harass and embarrass Defendant. Further, such information is privileged pursuant to Fed. Rule 501 and §90.503, Fla. Stat. In addition, such information is protected by the provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). + +**Certificate of Service** + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 26th day of January, 2009. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) +[jherman@hermanlaw.com](mailto:jherman@hermanlaw.com) +[lrivera@hermanlaw.com](mailto:lrivera@hermanlaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +![]()By: \_\_\_\_\_ +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. +Florida Bar No. 224162 +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-842-2820 +Fax: 561-515-3148 + +*(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746245/EFTA02746245.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746245/EFTA02746245.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c6bc8ca3a3e1f3e90a28d444457c5981c9cc96cd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746245/EFTA02746245.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,910 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746245.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 24, + "chars": 39979, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.75, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.78000000000003, + 68.03999999999999 + ], + [ + 403.4096984863281, + 68.03999999999999 + ], + [ + 403.4096984863281, + 97.17352294921875 + ], + [ + 192.78000000000003, + 97.17352294921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS \nTO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.384, + 273.78000000000003 + ], + [ + 487.702392578125, + 273.78000000000003 + ], + [ + 487.702392578125, + 303.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 111.384, + 303.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 23, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 65.61 + ], + [ + 364.75199999999995, + 65.61 + ], + [ + 364.75199999999995, + 80.19 + ], + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 80.19 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 288 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 298 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 312 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 299 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 295 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 315 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 297 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 296 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 290 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 284 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 287 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 288 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 294 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 296 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 302 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 310 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 299 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746245" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746269/EFTA02746269.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746269/EFTA02746269.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..738195aa09b6712bd753e5d502975e58da4454c9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746269/EFTA02746269.md @@ -0,0 +1,122 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MAR + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2 ("Jane" or "Jane Doe"), brings this Complaint against Jeffrey Epstein, as follows: + +# Parties. Jurisdiction and Venue + +- 1. Jane Doe No. 2 is a citizen and resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and is sui juris. +- 2. This Complaint is brought under a fictitious name to protect the identity of the Plaintiff because this Complaint makes sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon a minor. + - 3. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein is a citizen and resident of the State of New York. + - 4. This is an action for damages in excess of \$50 million. +- 5. This Court has jurisdiction of this action and the claims set forth herein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(a), as the matter in controversy (i) exceeds \$75,000, exclusive of interest and costs; and (ii) is between citizens of different states. +- 6. This Court has venue of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(a) as a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this District. + +# Factual Allegations + +7. At all relevant times, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") was an adult male, 52 years old. Epstein is a financier and money manager with a secret clientele limited exclusively to billionaires. He is himself a man of tremendous wealth, power and influence. He maintains his principal home in New York and also owns residences in New Mexico, St. and Palm Beach, FL. The allegations herein concern Epstein's conduct while at his lavish estate in Palm Beach. + +8. Upon information and belief, Epstein has a sexual preference and obsession for underage minor girls. He engaged in a plan and scheme in which he gained access to primarily economically disadvantaged minor girls in his home, sexually assaulted these girls, and then gave them money. In or about 2004-2005, Jane Doe, then approximately 16 years old, fell into Epstein's trap and became one of his victims. + +9. Upon information and belief, Jeffrey Epstein carried out his scheme and assaulted girls in Florida, New York and on his private island, known as Little St. James, in St. + +10. Epstein's scheme involved the use of young girls to recruit underage girls. (Upon information and belief, the young girl who brought Jane Doe to Epstein was herself a minor victim of Epstein, and will therefore not be named in this Complaint). Under Epstein's plan, underage girls were recruited ostensibly to give a wealthy man a massage for monetary compensation in his Palm Beach mansion. The recruiter would be contacted when Epstein was planning to be at his Palm Beach residence or soon after he had arrived there. Epstein or someone on his behalf would direct the recruiter to bring one or more underage girls to the residence. The recruiter, upon information and belief, generally sought out economically disadvantaged underage girls from western Palm Beach County who would be enticed by the money being offered - generally \$200 to \$300 per "massage" session - and who were perceived as less likely to complain to authorities or have credibility if allegations of improper conduct were made. This was an important element of Epstein's plan. + +11. Epstein's plan and scheme reflected a particular pattern and method. Upon arrival at Epstein's mansion, the underage victim would be introduced to Epstein's assistant, who gathered the girl's personal information, including her name and telephone number. would then bring the girl up a flight of stairs to a bedroom that contained a massage table in addition to other furnishings. There were photographs of nude women lining the stairway ■ **and in the bedroom. The girl would then find herself alone in the room with Epstein, who would be wearing only a towel. He would then remove his towel and lie naked on the massage table, and direct the girl to remove her clothes. Epstein would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, including masturbation and touching the girl's vagina.** + +**12. Consistent with the foregoing plan and scheme, Jane Doe was recruited to give Epstein a massage for monetary compensation. Jane was brought to Epstein's mansion in Palm Beach. Once at the mansion, Jane was introduced to , who led her up the flight of stairs to the room with the massage table. In this room, Epstein told Jane to take off her clothes and give him a massage. Jane kept her panties and bra on and complied with Epstein's instructions. Epstein wore only a towel around his waste. After a short period of time, Epstein removed the towel and rolled over exposing his penis. Epstein began to masturbate and he sexually assaulted Jane.** + +**13. After Epstein had completed the assault, Jane was then able to get dressed, leave the room and go back down the stairs. Jane was paid \$200 by Epstein. The young girl who recruited Jane was paid \$100 by Epstein for bringing Jane to him.** + +**14. As a result of this encounter with Epstein, Jane experienced confusion, shame, humiliation and embarrassment, and has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries.** + +## COUNT I Sexual Assault and Battery + +- 15. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs I through 14 above. +- 16. Epstein acted with intent to cause an offensive contact with Jane Doe, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and Jane Doe was thereby put in such imminent apprehension. +- 17. Epstein made an intentional, unlawful offer of offensive sexual contact toward Jane Doe, creating a reasonable fear of imminent peril. +- 18. Epstein intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Jane Doe, with the intent to cause such contact or the apprehension that such contact is imminent. +- 19. Epstein tortiously committed a sexual assault and battery on Jane Doe. Epstein's acts were intentional, unlawful, offensive and harmful. +- 20. Epstein's plan and scheme in which he committed such acts upon Jane Doe were done willfully and maliciously. +- 21. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, punitive damages, costs, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +#### COUNT H Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress + +- 22. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 above. +- 23. Epstein's conduct was intentional or reckless. +- 24. Epstein's conduct with a minor was extreme and outrageous, going beyond all bounds + +of decency. + +25. Epstein committed willful acts of child sexual abuse on Jane Doe. These acts resulted in mental or sexual injury to Jane Doe, that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. + +26. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. Epstein knew or had reason to know that his intentional and outrageous conduct would cause emotional distress and damage to Jane Doe, or Epstein acted with reckless disregard of the high probability of causing severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. + +27. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's intentional or reckless conduct, Jane Doe, has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, costs, punitive damages, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +## COUNT III Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. 42422 + +28. PlaintiffJane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 above. + +29. Epstein used a facility or means of interstate commerce to knowingly persuade, induce or entice Jane Doe, when she was under the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense. + +30. On June 30, 2008, Epstein entered a plea of guilty to violations of Florida §§ 796.07 and 796.03, in the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (Case nos. 2008-cf-009381/OOO(MB and 2006-cf-009454AXXXMB), for conduct involving the same plan and scheme as alleged herein. + +31. As to PlaintiffJane Doe, Epstein could have been charged with criminal violations of + +Florida Statute §796.07(2) (including subsections (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) thereof), and other criminal offenses including violations of Florida Statutes §§798.02 and 800.04 (including subsections (5), (6) and (7) thereof). + +32. Epstein's acts and conduct are in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422. + +33. As a result of Epstein's violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422, Plaintiff has suffered personal injury, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. + +34. Plaintiff hired Herman & Mermelstein, P.A., in this matter and agreed to pay them a reasonable attorneys' fee. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for all damages available under 18 U.S.C. §2255(a), including without limitation, actual and compensatory damages, costs of suit, and attorneys' fees, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +# JURY TRIAL DEMAND + +Plaintiff demands a jury trial in this action on all claims so triable. + +Dated: February 27, 2008 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssmQsexabuseattomey.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on February 27, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +**SERVICE LIST** +**DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN** +**CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/** [REDACTED] +**United States District Court, Southern District of Florida** + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +[jgoldberger@agwpa.com](mailto:jgoldberger@agwpa.com) + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. +[rcritton@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcritton@bclclaw.com) + +\_\_\_\_\_ +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746269/EFTA02746269.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746269/EFTA02746269.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ebfbc22d97a0cd2967311f24070937884827b91a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746269/EFTA02746269.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,563 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746269.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 10740, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.21, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.856, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 406.31707763671875, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 406.31707763671875, + 101.60302734375 + ], + [ + 206.856, + 101.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.304, + 282.68999999999994 + ], + [ + 406.95025634765625, + 282.68999999999994 + ], + [ + 406.95025634765625, + 297.3630676269531 + ], + [ + 209.304, + 297.3630676269531 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Parties. Jurisdiction and Venue", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 366.12 + ], + [ + 391.5993957519531, + 366.12 + ], + [ + 391.5993957519531, + 381.363037109375 + ], + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 381.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Factual Allegations", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 359.8920593261719, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 359.8920593261719, + 87.363037109375 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 87.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT I \nSexual Assault and Battery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 235.00799999999998, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 379.3255310058594, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 379.3255310058594, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 235.00799999999998, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT H \nIntentional Infliction of Emotional Distress", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 194.61599999999999, + 588.87 + ], + [ + 421.4753723144531, + 588.87 + ], + [ + 421.4753723144531, + 617.6030120849609 + ], + [ + 194.61599999999999, + 617.6030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT III \nCoercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. 42422", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.99600000000001, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 502.4144287109375, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 502.4144287109375, + 463.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 111.99600000000001, + 463.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JURY TRIAL DEMAND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 239.904, + 406.62 + ], + [ + 374.72454833984375, + 406.62 + ], + [ + 374.72454833984375, + 421.863037109375 + ], + [ + 239.904, + 421.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 228.276, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.7298278808594, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.7298278808594, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 228.276, + 85.85999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ [REDACTED] United States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 454.716, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 454.716, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 128.79 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746269" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746277/EFTA02746277.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746277/EFTA02746277.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fbadbadc01301ab90bc0fafa27a5927c58bf24ce --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746277/EFTA02746277.md @@ -0,0 +1,348 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MAIRRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### DEFENDANT'S, MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND/OR REQUEST FOR RULE 4 REVIEW AND APPEAL OF PORTIONS OF THE MAGISTRATE'S ORDER DATED AUGUST 4, 2009 (DE 242), WITH INCORPORATED OBJECTIONS AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Motion for Reconsideration and/or for Request Rule 4 Review and Appeal of Portions of the Magistrate's Order (DE 242) pursuant to Rule 60, Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 4, Rule 4(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(e). In support, Epstein states: + +#### I. Procedural Background + +1. This court entered an order (DE 242) stating that Epstein must provide responses to interrogatory numbers 7, 8 and 12 (sic 11) within 10 days from the date of said order. The same ruling was made as to request for production numbers 7 and 23. See DE 242. + +2. However, Epstein is submitting his motion for Reconsideration and/or Request for Rule 4 Appeal and specific objections with supporting case law only as to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and II. Responses will be provided as to Interrogatory Number 8 and Request for Production numbers 7 and 23. + +#### II. Rule 4 Appeal and Review + +3. Rule 4 provides, in pertinent part, that: + +Any party may appeal from a Magistrate Judge's Order. . .[and] [s)uch party shall file with the Clerk of Court, and serve on all parties, written objections which shall specifically set forth the order, or part thereof, appealed from a concise statement of the alleged error in the Magistrate Judge's ruling, and statutory, rule, or case authority in support of the moving party's position . . . . The District Judge shall consider the appeal and shall set aside any portion of the Magistrate Judge's order found to be clearly erroneous or contrary to law. The District Judge may also reconsider sua sponte any matter determined by a magistrate Judge under this Rule. + +# a. Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 + +4. Plaintiff served her Amended First Set of Interrogatories on Defendant and Request for Production, and Epstein served his responses thereto raising his constitutional privileges and guarantees and, in the alternative, raising specific other applicable objections. See Exhibits "A" and "B". Plaintiff filed her Motion to Compel (DE 57) Epstein filed his Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Responses to I g and 2nd Production of Documents, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law. (DE 63) The arguments set forth therein are incorporated herein by reference (the "Response Memorandum") such that a concise statement of the Magistrate's error(s) relative to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and II may be the focus of this Motion for Reconsideration and/or Rule 4 Appeal and Review. Plaintiff filed her Reply thereto at + +DE 81. Thereafter, the Magistrate-Judge entered an order on the above at DE 242 requiring, among other things, that Epstein respond to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11. + +5. Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 and the Responses thereto provide: + +**Interrogatory Number 7** - List all time periods during which Jeffrey Epstein was present in the State of Florida, including for each the date he arrived and the date he departed. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2003 until present. + +**Interrogatory Number 11** - Identify all telephone numbers used by Epstein, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider. + +**Response:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant + +also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's allegations claim a time period of "in or about 2004-2005" and involve Defendant's Palm Beach residence.1 + +(i). The Allegations In the Second Amended Complaint and The NPA2 + +--- + +1 The Court also considered various objections set forth in Defendant's Response Memorandum. See Order at [DE 242.] + +2 [REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[Redacted text block consisting of multiple horizontal lines of black bars, including a small redacted block at the bottom left.] + +11. The Magistrate Judge also denied interrogatory numbers 1, 2, and 10 because those interrogatories sought the names of Epstein's employees or their telephone numbers and thus "would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute Epstein of a crime." (DE 242, p.8-9). Additionally, this court denied interrogatory + +numbers 13, 14 and 17 because those asked Epstein to identify persons or witnesses that have knowledge of the events in question. Id. at p. 8. In making the decision, the court recognized, much like this Motion for Reconsideration and/or Appeal contends, that ". . . the facts alleged in the Complaints, the elements needed to convict Epstein of a crime, and . . . the Court's knowledge concerning the cases at issue" provide a basis for Epstein to raise the privilege based upon "genuinely threatening questions" which could furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to convict Epstein of a crime. (DE 242, p.18) United States v. Goodwin, 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5'h Cir. 1980). + +#### b. The District Court Judge Court Should Reverse or Modify The Magistrate Judge's Order (DE 242) Relative to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 Because The Specific Findings Therein Are Erroneous and Contrary to Law + +## (i) Specific Objections + +12. In his Response Memorandum, Epstein cites authority supporting his application of the 5'h Amendment Privileges and other constitutional privileges in which he relies upon in objecting to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11. In addition to those arguments and objections, this court should consider the arguments and objections set forth herein. + +13. In short, the Magistrate Judge's Order requires Epstein to answer Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 based upon the finding that his objections are ". . . so general and sweeping in nature [that they] amount[] to a blanket assertion of the [Fifth Amendment] privilege." (DE 242, p.11) Obviously, Epstein objects to such a ruling, and provides below detailed reasoning demonstrating the validity of Epstein's objections that answers to the subject interrogatories would realistically and necessarily furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against him and would require him to provide self-incriminating evidence relative to this case and to the other related cases that could result in a specific hazard of self-incrimination. For the reasons set forth below, Epstein's justified concern with regard to answering Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 and the resulting waiver of his Fifth Amendment Privilege in this regard and/or providing self-incriminating information is substantial, real and not merely imaginative. Accordingly, the District Court Judge should reverse and/or modify the Magistrate's Order relative to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11. + +# (ii) Argument and Memorandum of Law + +14. By answering Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11, Epstein is being compelled to testify as to the issues and facts not only asserted in Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, but also to facts which present a real and substantial danger of selfincrimination in this case, in other related cases and as well in areas that could result in criminal prosecution. Again, the information sought all relate to potential federal claims of violations of + +15. Here, Epstein's whereabouts and telephone numbers are central issues to this case and other related cases. Answers to the interrogatories will undoubtedly result in subsequent subpoenas requesting information regarding Epstein's whereabouts and his numbers for his cellular telephones and landlines in ANY of his residences, which will obviously reveal the individuals Epstein spoke to, and the time and place where the conversations occurred. If Epstein's travel to and from Florida is identified and he is compelled to provide his telephone information, that information coupled together could subsequently be used to incriminate him and it might be used to prosecute him for a criminal offense. aes infra. In fact, providing his telephone information would not only + +incriminate Epstein on the elements required to establish a criminal offense, but in this case it is asking Epstein to incriminate himself by providing information that could lead to the identification of potential witnesses against him. Epstein would also be providing information that would later result in documents being subpoenaed and possibly produced relative to his travel itinerary and his telephone records. As such, Epstein is now being asked to provide testimonial disclosures that would communicate statements of fact by admitting that he did travel to and from Florida on certain occasions and by admitting that he had certain telephone numbers and providers, thereby requiring him to admit the very facts upon which Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint is based i.e. presence in Florida at the time of an allegation of misconduct or control of a particular telephone at the time of a claim that the plaintiff was recruited and will inexorably result in leads to further documents such as travel records and/or telephone records that themselves can be predictably used to bolster the criminal-related allegations against Epstein. See generally Hoffman v United States 341 US 479, 486 (1951), U.S. v Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36 (2000). + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +18. [Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +[Redacted text block] + +Significantly, this Court sustained Epstein's objections to Interrogatory Number 12, which requested information similar to Interrogatory Number 11 (i.e., ". . .telephone numbers of employees of Epstein, used in the course or scope of their employment, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete + +telephone number and the name of the service provider.") (DE 242, p.10). In short, the Court considered "the nature of the allegations, to wit, a scheme and plan of sexual misconduct carried out at Epstein various residences. . . [finding it] entirely reasonable for Epstein to assert that forcing him to testify as to.. . his employee's telephone numbers [Interrogatory 12] may provide a lead or clue to evidence tending to incriminate him." The Magistrate Judge further reasoned that "[n]ot only would such compelled testimony self-incriminate him on the elements required to establish a criminal violation, and thus serve as a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute Epstein for a crime, but in some cases serve to incriminate him by asking Epstein to identify potential witnesses against him." (DE 242) That same reasoning and conclusion should have been reached with regard to Interrogatory Number 11. + +19. In addition, compelling Epstein to provide the requested information could also lead to or provide a link in the chain of evidence allowing Plaintiff or others to satisfy one or more of the elements + +Given the nature of the allegations, to wit, a scheme and plan of sexual misconduct, this court should find it entirely reasonable for Epstein to assert his Fifth Amendment privilege as to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11. For instance, Plaintiff alleges and the Magistrate Judge's Order acknowledges allegations of a scheme where Epstein, with the help of his assistant allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm Beach. New York and St with the promise of money in exchange for a massage. As this Court noted in its order, ". . . the fact there exists a Non-prosecution Agreement does not mean that Epstein is free from future criminal prosecution, and that in fact, `the threat of prosecution is real, substantial, and present.'" + +Accordingly, Epstein's travel to and from Florida and the telephone numbers to his cellular telephones and landlines would provide information which is protected by the privilege i.e., where "the responses would merely provide a `lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate." United States v., Neff, 615 17.2c1 1235, 1239 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 825 (1980). + +19. + +20. On their face, Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 may not seem to seek incriminating evidence. However, after review of the objections and analysis set forth herein, it is clear that responding to same would violate Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination. Accordingly, forcing Epstein to answer the interrogatories unconstitutionally places him in the position of being compelled to testify and provide information that support Plaintiff's version of the facts and which may lead to future criminal prosecution. + +21. The Fifth Amendment serves as a guarantee against testimonial compulsion and provides, in relevant part, that "[n]o person...shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against himself." (DE 242, p.5). In practice, the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination "permits a person not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings." Edwin v. Price 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985), citing Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973)). The privilege is accorded "liberal construction in favor of the right it was intended to secure," Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951), and extends not only to answers that would in themselves support a criminal conviction, but extends also to those answers which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a crime. Id.; Blau v. United States, 340 U.S. 159 (1950). Thus, information is protected by the privilege not only if it would support a criminal + +conviction, but also in those instances where "the responses would merely provide a `lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate." United States v., Neff, 615 F.2d 1235, 1239 (9ih Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 825 (1980). The Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination comes into play only in those instances where the witness has "reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer." Hoffman 341 U.S. at 486 (citing Manson v. United States, 244 U.S. 362, 365 (1917)). "The claimant must be 'confronted by substantial and `real,' and not merely trifling or imaginary, hazards of incrimination." United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 128 (1980). Accordingly, for these reasons, Epstein's objections to the Magistrate's Order should be sustained, and this Court should enter an order reversing and/or modifying the Order allowing Epstein to assert his Fifth Amendment privilege and not requiring Epstein to provide compelled testimony that might incriminate him. + +Based upon the underlying criminal elements of the targeted offenses , answers to Interrogatory Number 7 involving Epstein's travel to and from Florida and Interrogatory Number 11 involving Epstein's use of his telephones could provide a lead or clue to evidence of an alleged violation of any one of the above target offenses, which could result in criminal prosecution, a breach of the NPA and/or self-incriminating evidence relating to this case and/or to other cases that may result in criminal prosecution. + +Accordingly, any compelled testimony that provides a "lead or clue to a source of evidence of such [a] crime" is protected by Fifth Amendment. SEC v Leach, 156 F.Supp.2d 491, 494 (E.D. PA. 2001). Questions seeking "testimony" regarding names of witnesses, leads to phone or travel records, or financial records that would provide leads to tax or money laundering or unlicensed money transmittal investigations are protected. + +See also Hoffman v United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951)("the right against selfincrimination may be invoked if the answer would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute for a crime"). + +22. In this instance, the danger Epstein faces by being forced to testify in this case and on these subject matters is substantial and real, and not merely trifling or imaginary. Epstein has met his burden to sustain his 5th Amendment Privilege, and has further established that "[t]he danger [he] faces by being forced to testify in this case is substantial and real, and not merely trifling or imaginary as required." (DE 242) Accordingly, this Court should reverse and/or revise the Magistrate's Order as set forth below. + +Wherefore, Epstein respectfully requests that this Court issue and order: + +- a. finding that the danger Epstein faces by being forced to testify in this case relative to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 is substantial and real, and not merely trifling or imaginary; +- b. sustaining Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege as it relates to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 and denying Plaintiffs Motion in that regard; +- c. reversing and/or revising the Magistrate's Order (DE 242) relative to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 and entering an amended order sustaining Epstein's objections to the Magistrate's Order as to those specific interrogatories and not requiring him to testify as to same; and/or +- d. remanding this appeal to the Magistrate-Judge for her reconsideration of these portions of her order and +- e. for such other and further relief s this Court deems just and proper. + +By: MICHA J. PIK , ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identifi on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this t day of , 2009. + +Respectfu A 47itted, + +By: RO . CRM'ON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcritabcIclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 moikeciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +#### Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MAFtRA/JOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com ahorowitza,sexabuseattomey.com Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Brad la, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@sra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 +Fax: 561-515-2610 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-08804* + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746277/EFTA02746277.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746277/EFTA02746277.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7e164c4920f37f422d276a933a4b34ba07475728 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746277/EFTA02746277.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,974 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746277.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 20, + "chars": 24177, + "elapsed_seconds": 62.05, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 414.386474609375, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 414.386474609375, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S, MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND/OR REQUEST \nFOR RULE 4 REVIEW AND APPEAL OF PORTIONS OF THE \nMAGISTRATE'S ORDER DATED AUGUST 4, 2009 (DE 242), WITH \nINCORPORATED OBJECTIONS AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.652, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 514.9083251953125, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 514.9083251953125, + 417.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 104.652, + 417.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Procedural Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 568.62 + ], + [ + 392.23907470703125, + 568.62 + ], + [ + 392.23907470703125, + 583.1030120849609 + ], + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 583.1030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Rule 4 Appeal and Review", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 217.87199999999999, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 396.3868103027344, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 396.3868103027344, + 196.863037109375 + ], + [ + 217.87199999999999, + 196.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 395.35400390625, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 395.35400390625, + 404.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 404.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(i). The Allegations In the Second Amended Complaint and The NPA 2", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 98.53200000000001, + 153.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 481.032, + 153.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 481.032, + 170.91 + ], + [ + 98.53200000000001, + 170.91 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "b. The District Court Judge Court Should Reverse or Modify The Magistrate \nJudge's Order (DE 242) Relative to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 Because The \nSpecific Findings Therein Are Erroneous and Contrary to Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 95.47200000000001, + 293.21999999999997 + ], + [ + 520.3355102539062, + 293.21999999999997 + ], + [ + 520.3355102539062, + 336.363037109375 + ], + [ + 95.47200000000001, + 336.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(i) Specific Objections", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 349.11 + ], + [ + 367.091552734375, + 349.11 + ], + [ + 367.091552734375, + 364.10302734375 + ], + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 364.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(ii) Argument and Memorandum of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 265.68 + ], + [ + 416.42059326171875, + 265.68 + ], + [ + 416.42059326171875, + 281.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 281.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 691.74 + ], + [ + 364.9179382324219, + 691.74 + ], + [ + 364.9179382324219, + 706.8630142211914 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 706.8630142211914 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MAFtRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 423.98614501953125, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 423.98614501953125, + 471.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 471.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "Span", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Line", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "Span", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Line", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Line", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 13 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 40 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 13 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 38 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 103 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 80 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746277" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746297/EFTA02746297.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746297/EFTA02746297.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..709531107d401f8e073ee71249dd18a263664420 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746297/EFTA02746297.md @@ -0,0 +1,156 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, serves his responses and objections to Plaintiffs Amended First Request For Production To Defendant, dated December 9, 2008. + +Request No. 1. The list provided to you by the U.S. Attorney of individuals whom the U.S. Attorney was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an offense by Mr. Epstein enumerated in 18 U.S.C. §2255. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference + +under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 2. All documents referring or relating to the United States' agreement with Defendant to defer federal prosecution subject to certain conditions, including without limitation, the operative agreement between Defendant and the United States and all amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 3. All documents referring or relating to Defendant's agreement with the State of Florida on his plea of guilty to violations of Florida Criminal Statutes, including without limitation, the operative plea agreement and any amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Whatever public documents exist are in the State Court file and equally accessible to Plaintiff. + +Request No.4. All documents obtained in discovery or investigation relating to either the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal Case, including without limitation, documents obtained from any federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, the State Attorney's office and the United States Attorney's office. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the + +information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Request No. 4 seeks documents that are attorney-client and work product privileged in that it seeks "all documents obtained in discovery or investigation relating either to the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal Case ... ." In addition, such documents are privileged and confidential as they are the subject of a pending investigation. + +Request No. 5. All telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone calls made by or to Defendant, including without limitation, telephone logs and message pads. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Defendant objects as the request is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding any and all telephone records and other documents reflecting any and all telephone calls made to or by Defendant. As phrased, the request includes attorney-client and work product privileged information, as well as records and documents of calls having absolutely no relationship to any of the allegations in this action. + +Request No. 6. All telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone calls made by or to Defendant, including without limitation, telephone logs and message pads, reflecting telephone calls made by or to employees. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce + +documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, as defined by Plaintiff in paragraph g of her request, the term employee is overly broad and encompasses information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, the request seeks information pertaining to person who are not parties to this action and whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 7. All surveillance videos, slides, film, videotape, digital recording or other audio or video depiction or image of the Palm Beach Residence. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my + +Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 - 2005." Plaintiffs request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding "all surveillance videos, etc., or image of the Palm Beach Residence.' + +Request No. 8. All documents referring or relating to Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2, including without limitation, web pages, social networking site pages, correspondence, videotapes and audiotapes. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my + +Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. + +Request No. 9. All statements taken, transcribed or recorded from any person referring or relating to Defendant's sexual conduct, massages given to Defendant or any issue in these cases. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the + +Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. + +Request No. 10. All documents referring to or relating to air travel and aircraft used by Defendant, including without limitation, flight logs and flight manifests. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request seeks documents for a + +time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding air travel and aircraft used by Defendant. + +Request No. 11. Any and all documents referring to or relating to modeling agencies, including but not limited to documents relating to or reflecting communications with female models. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 12. All photographs, videotapes, digital images and other documents depicting or showing females who, at the time thereof, were under the age of 21, which were taken or created by or for Defendant and not intended for sale commercially to the public. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 13. All photographs and painting of females which were displayed in any of Defendant's homes or residences in the time frame of these requests, including without limitation, photographs in standing or sitting frames or wall frames. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiff's complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 14. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiff's request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 15. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiff's request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 16. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 17. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 18. Any and all documents and photographs placed by Defendant at any time in the period of these requests on a social networking website, including without limitation, Facebook.com and MySpace.com. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiff's complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request seeks documents and photographs for a time period of January 1, 2003 until present. + +Request No. 19. Any and all documents reflecting or consisting of communications between Jeffrey Epstein and MC2 Models or Jean-Luc Brunel, relating or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries to pursue a career in modeling, including, but not limited to, letters, notes and emails. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiff's complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — + +2005." In addition, the request seeks documents pertaining to females who are not non-parties, and who possess privacy rights. + +Request No. 20. Any and all documents referring or relating to gifts or loans to females under the age of 21, including, but not limited to, notes, receipts and car rental agreements. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiff's request has no time limitation. + +Request No. 21. Any and all personal calendars or schedules of or for Jeffrey Epstein from January 1, 2003 to the present. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." In addition, the request encompasses attorney-client privileged material. + +Request No. 22. All documents written by Jeffrey Epstein consisting of personal thoughts, feelings or descriptions of events, incidents or occurrences in Defendant's life, including without limitation, any diaries of Jeffrey Epstein. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 - 2005." On its fact, the request goes beyond the scope of allowable discovery and is meant to harass, embarrass and overburden the Defendant. Further, the request is so overly broad that it includes attorney-client and work product privileged materials. + +Request No. 23. All documents referring to or relating to Jeffrey Epstein's purchase or consumption of prescription medicine. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Defendant's medical condition is not at issue in this action. Such a request is meant to harass and embarrass Defendant. Further, such information is privileged pursuant to Fed. Rule 501 and §90.503, Fla. Stat. In addition, such information is protected by the provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). + +**Certificate of Service** + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 26th day of January, 2009. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) +[iherman@hermanlaw.com](mailto:iherman@hermanlaw.com) +[lrivera@hermanlaw.com](mailto:lrivera@hermanlaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()*(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746297/EFTA02746297.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746297/EFTA02746297.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..333a90a8157054a4418fc4f6bec24e9137208ad5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746297/EFTA02746297.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,910 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746297.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 24, + "chars": 39624, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.27, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 194.61599999999999, + 67.42889404296875 + ], + [ + 403.370849609375, + 67.42889404296875 + ], + [ + 403.370849609375, + 95.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 194.61599999999999, + 95.68353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS \nTO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 112.608, + 272.97 + ], + [ + 488.0723876953125, + 272.97 + ], + [ + 488.0723876953125, + 302.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 112.608, + 302.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 23, + "polygon": [ + [ + 239.904, + 65.61 + ], + [ + 362.916, + 65.61 + ], + [ + 362.916, + 80.19 + ], + [ + 239.904, + 80.19 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 287 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 298 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 301 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 314 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 297 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 298 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 295 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 290 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 287 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 287 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 288 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 294 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 296 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 305 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 299 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746297" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746321/EFTA02746321.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746321/EFTA02746321.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f1287ffe0ee4009f10c701e851acb6b4ea0ded83 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746321/EFTA02746321.md @@ -0,0 +1,134 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2 ("Jane" or "Jane Doe"), brings this Complaint against Jeffrey Epstein, as follows: + +# Parties. Jurisdiction and Venue + +- 1. Jane Doe No. 2 is a citizen and resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and is sui juris. +- 2. This Complaint is brought under a fictitious name to protect the identity of the Plaintiff because this Complaint makes sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon a minor. + - 3. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein is a citizen and resident of the State of New York. + - 4. This is an action for damages in excess of \$50 million. +- 5. This Court has jurisdiction of this action and the claims set forth herein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(a), as the matter in controversy (i) exceeds \$75,000, exclusive of interest and costs; and (ii) is between citizens of different states. +- 6. This Court has venue of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(a) as a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this District. + +## Factual Allegations + +7. At all relevant times, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") was an adult male, 52 years old. Epstein is a financier and money manager with a secret clientele limited exclusively to billionaires. lie is himself a man of tremendous wealth, power and influence. He maintains his principal home in New York and also owns residences in New Mexico, St. and Palm Beach, FL. The allegations herein concern Epstein's conduct while at his lavish estate in Palm Beach. + +8. Upon information and belief, Epstein has a sexual preference and obsession for underage minor girls. He engaged in a plan and scheme in which he gained access to primarily economically disadvantaged minor girls in his home, sexually assaulted these girls, and then gave them money. In or about 2004-2005, Jane Doe, then approximately 16 years old, fell into Epstein's trap and became one of his victims. + +9. Upon information and belief, Jeffrey Epstein carried out his scheme and assaulted girls in Florida, New York and on his private island, known as Little St. James, in St. M. + +10. Epstein's scheme involved the use of young girls to recruit underage girls. (Upon information and belief, the young girl who brought Jane Doe to Epstein was herself a minor victim of Epstein, and will therefore not be named in this Complaint). Under Epstein's plan, underage girls were recruited ostensibly to give a wealthy man a massage for monetary compensation in his Palm Beach mansion. The recruiter would be contacted when Epstein was planning to be at his Palm Beach residence or soon after he had arrived there. Epstein or someone on his behalf would direct the recruiter to bring one or more underage girls to the residence. The recruiter, upon information and belief, generally sought out economically disadvantaged underage girls from western Palm Beach County who would be enticed by the money being offered - generally \$200 to \$300 per "massage" session - and who were perceived as less likely to complain to authorities or have + +credibility if allegations of improper conduct were made. This was an important element of Epstein's plan. + +11. Epstein's plan and scheme reflected a particular pattern and method. Upon arrival at Epstein's mansion, the underage victim would be introduced to Epstein's assistant, who gathered the girl's personal information, including her name and telephone number. would then bring the girl up a flight of stairs to a bedroom that contained a massage table in addition to other furnishings. There were photographs of nude women lining the stairway ■ **and in the bedroom. The girl would then find herself alone in the room with Epstein, who would be wearing only a towel. He would then remove his towel and lie naked on the massage table, and direct the girl to remove her clothes. Epstein would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, including masturbation and touching the girl's vagina.** + +**12. Consistent with the foregoing plan and scheme, Jane Doe was recruited to give Epstein a massage for monetary compensation. Jane was brought to Epstein's mansion in Palm Beach. Once at the mansion, Jane was introduced to who led her up the flight of stairs to the room with the massage table. In this room, Epstein told Jane to take off her clothes and give him a massage. Jane kept her panties and bra on and complied with Epstein's instructions. Epstein wore only a towel around his waste. After a short period of time, Epstein removed the towel and rolled over exposing his penis. Epstein began to masturbate and he sexually assaulted Jane.** + +**13. After Epstein had completed the assault, Jane was then able to get dressed, leave the room and go back down the stairs. Jane was paid \$200 by Epstein. The young girl who recruited Jane was paid \$100 by Epstein for bringing Jane to him.** + +**14. As a result of this encounter with Epstein, Jane experienced confusion, shame, humiliation and embarrassment, and has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries.** + +### COUNT I Sexual Assault and Battery + +- 15. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs I through 14 above. +- 16. Epstein acted with intent to cause an offensive contact with Jane Doe, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and Jane Doe was thereby put in such imminent apprehension. +- 17. Epstein made an intentional, unlawful offer of offensive sexual contact toward Jane Doe, creating a reasonable fear of imminent peril. +- 18. Epstein intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Jane Doe, with the intent to cause such contact or the apprehension that such contact is imminent. +- 19. Epstein tortiously committed a sexual assault and battery on Jane Doe. Epstein's acts were intentional, unlawful, offensive and harmful. +- 20. Epstein's plan and scheme in which he committed such acts upon Jane Doe were done willfully and maliciously. +- 21. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, punitive damages, costs, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +### COUNT II Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress + +- 22. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 above. +- 23. Epstein's conduct was intentional or reckless. +- 24. Epstein's conduct with a minor was extreme and outrageous, going beyond all bounds + +of decency. + +25. Epstein committed willful acts of child sexual abuse on Jane Doe. These acts resulted in mental or sexual injury to Jane Doe, that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. + +26. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. Epstein knew or had reason to know that his intentional and outrageous conduct would cause emotional distress and damage to Jane Doe, or Epstein acted with reckless disregard of the high probability of causing severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. + +27. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's intentional or reckless conduct, Jane Doe, has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, costs, punitive damages, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +#### COUNT III Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. 42422 + +28. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 above. + +29. Epstein used a facility or means of interstate commerce to knowingly persuade, induce or entice Jane Doe, when she was under the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense. + +30. On June 30, 2008, Epstein entered a plea of guilty to violations of Florida §§ 796.07 and 796.03, in the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (Case nos. 2008-cf-00938 1 AXXXMB and 2006-cf-009454AXXXMB), for conduct involving the same plan and scheme as alleged herein. + +31. As to PlaintiffJane Doe, Epstein could have been charged with criminal violations of + +Florida Statute §796.07(2) (including subsections (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) thereof), and other criminal offenses including violations of Florida Statutes §§798.02 and 800.04 (including subsections (5), (6) and (7) thereof). + +32. Epstein's acts and conduct are in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422. + +33. As a result of Epstein's violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422, Plaintiff has suffered personal injury, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. + +34. Plaintiff hired Herman & Mermelstein, P.A., in this matter and agreed to pay them a reasonable attorneys' fee. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for all damages available under 18 U.S.C. §2255(a), including without limitation, actual and compensatory damages, costs of suit, and attorneys' fees, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +**JURY TRIAL DEMAND** + +Plaintiff demands a jury trial in this action on all claims so triable. + +Dated: February 27, 2008 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz +Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com +Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com +MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. +*Attorneys for Plaintiff* +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 +Miami, Florida 33160 +Tel: 305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on February 27, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +MI Adam D. Horowitz + +**SERVICE LIST** +**DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN** +**CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/** [REDACTED] +**United States District Court, Southern District of Florida** + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +[jgoldberger@agwpa.com](mailto:jgoldberger@agwpa.com) + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. +[rcritton@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcritton@bclclaw.com) + +\_\_\_\_\_ +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \_\_\_\_\_ \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746321/EFTA02746321.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746321/EFTA02746321.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..07be53fbea899ef21a113da85ebec0ffe3907cc5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746321/EFTA02746321.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,559 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746321.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 10784, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.5, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.46800000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 409.3210144042969, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 409.3210144042969, + 102.7230224609375 + ], + [ + 207.46800000000002, + 102.7230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 282.68999999999994 + ], + [ + 409.18670654296875, + 282.68999999999994 + ], + [ + 409.18670654296875, + 298.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 298.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Parties. Jurisdiction and Venue", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 366.93 + ], + [ + 393.8493957519531, + 366.93 + ], + [ + 393.8493957519531, + 382.85302734375 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 382.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Factual Allegations", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.204, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 359.8920593261719, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 359.8920593261719, + 86.60302734375 + ], + [ + 255.204, + 86.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT I \nSexual Assault and Battery", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 235.62, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 380.0755310058594, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 380.0755310058594, + 100.863037109375 + ], + [ + 235.62, + 100.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT II \nIntentional Infliction of Emotional Distress", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 194.61599999999999, + 588.87 + ], + [ + 422.193603515625, + 588.87 + ], + [ + 422.193603515625, + 618.7330169677734 + ], + [ + 194.61599999999999, + 618.7330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNT III \nCoercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. 42422", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.99600000000001, + 434.97 + ], + [ + 503.6910095214844, + 434.97 + ], + [ + 503.6910095214844, + 463.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 111.99600000000001, + 463.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JURY TRIAL DEMAND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 239.29200000000003, + 407.43 + ], + [ + 373.32, + 407.43 + ], + [ + 373.32, + 421.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 239.29200000000003, + 421.20000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 229.5, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 386.1220397949219, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 386.1220397949219, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ [REDACTED] United States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 455.32800000000003, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 455.32800000000003, + 129.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 129.60000000000002 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746321" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746329/EFTA02746329.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746329/EFTA02746329.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..00a5e4a6d654a56f84d4886776a4bb9d851b3407 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746329/EFTA02746329.md @@ -0,0 +1,457 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRJa + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### Defendant's Supplementary Brief Pursuant To The Magistrate's Order (DE 242) Requesting A More Particularized Showing Demonstrating How The Sth Amendment May Be Asserted To Plaintiff's Requests For Production, With Memorandum Of Law + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Supplementary Brief Pursuant to the Magistrate's Order (DE 242) relative to Plaintiff's Request for Production Numbers 10, 11, 19 and 21. In support, Epstein states: + +## I. Procedural Background + +1. Plaintiff served her First Request for Production, and Epstein served his responses and objections thereto. See Exhibit "A." Plaintiff filed her Motion to Compel (DE 57), and Epstein filed his Response thereto (the "Response Memorandum"). (DE 63) The objections and responses set forth in Epstein's initial response and the arguments set forth in his Response Memorandum are incorporated herein such that a concise statement and more particularized showing can be made herein as to why Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege as to Request for Production Numbers 10, 11, 19 and 21 should be sustained. + +2. This court entered an order (DE 242) stating that Epstein must supplement his Response Memorandum to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel as to request for production numbers 10, 11, 19 and 21 (collectively, the "Specified Requests"). (DE 242, p. 19). Defendant's time to respond and submit this supplementary brief was extended to August 31, 2009. + +3. Epstein is submitting this Supplementary Brief with supporting case law only as to the Specified Requests. An Amended Response will be provided as to Request to Produce Number 18. + +## H. Supplementary Brief, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law + +### The Magistrate's Order (DE 242) Correctly Sustained Epstein's 5th Amendment Privilege As To Several Requests And Interrogatories Seeking Testimonial And Incriminating Information Similar To The Specified Requests + +4. The Magistrate Judge found that several of the requests were ". . . testimonial in nature, in that by production, Epstein would be implicitly communicating `statements of fact' to which the Fifth Amendment privilege may be validly asserted." (DE 242, p. 10). On that basis, and as a limited example, this Court denied Plaintiff's motion relative to request number 5 (seeking telephone records of calls made by Epstein) and request number 6 (seeking telephone calls made by Epstein to his employees). Likewise, this Court denied Plaintiff's motion relative to interrogatory numbers 1, 2, 10 and 12 because those interrogatories sought the names of Epstein's employees or their telephone numbers and thus "would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute Epstein of a crime." (DE 242, p.8-9). Additionally, this Court denied Plaintiff's motion relative to interrogatory numbers 13, 14 and 17 because those asked Epstein to identify persons or witnesses that have knowledge of the events in question. Id. at p. 8. In making the decision, the court recognized, much like this Supplementary Brief contends infra, that ". . . the facts alleged in the Complaints, the elements needed to convict Epstein of a crime, and . . . the Court's knowledge concerning the cases at issue" provide a basis for Epstein to raise the privilege based upon "genuinely threatening questions" which could furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to convict Epstein of a crime. (DE 242, p.18) United States v. Goodwin, 625 F.2d 693, 701 (51h Cir. 1980). + +5. As detailed below, the Specified Requests seek similar information or will lead to the production of the same exact information that this court has already ruled is protected by Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege. + +#### Responding to the Specified Requests Would Violate Epstein's 514 Amendment Privilege And Would Expose Him to the Hazards of 18 U.S.C. 2422(6) And The 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) + +6. Request for Production Numbers 10, 11, 19 and 21 seek the following information: + +Request No. 10. All documents referring to or relating to air travel and aircraft used by Defendant, including without limitation, flight logs and flight manifests. + +Request No. 11. Any and all documents referring to or relating to modeling agencies, including but not limited to documents relating to or reflecting communications with female models. + +Request No. 19. Any and all documents reflecting or consisting of communications between Jeffrey Epstein and MC2 Models or Jean-Luc Brunel, relating or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries to pursue a career in modeling, including, but not limited to, letters, notes and e-mails. + +Request No. 21. Any and all personal calendars or schedules of or for Jeffrey Epstein from January 1, 2003 to the present. + +7. As discussed below, production of the specified information is tantamount to compelled testimonial authentication of the information, its existence, its authenticity, and as well Epstein's alleged possession, custody or control of same. Production may result in self incrimination and potential federal-criminal prosecution of Epstein. + +#### The Background Of This Case And Other Related Cases As Well As The Federal Statutory Claims And Elements Of Those Offenses Must Be Considered In Connection With Epstein's More Particularized Showing Demonstrating How The .514 Amendment Is Validly Applied To Plaintiff's Requests For Production + +8. The circumstances of this case (and in other related cases) are such that not only does Epstein face allegations of sexual misconduct with and abuse, exploitation, and sexual battery of alleged minors in this and other civil actions in the State of Florida, but he also faces the potential of further federal criminal investigations and the possibility of further criminal prosecutions based on the same factual allegations. The Plaintiff's attorney represents Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, in civil actions against Epstein filed in this Court. In this and the other civil actions, the Plaintiffs reference and in certain respects discussed herein rely on allegations of the commission of federal and state criminal statutes in an attempt to make claims against Epstein ranging from sexual battery to intentional infliction of emotional distress, including, as to Jane Doe 2 violations of 18 U.S.C. 2422, entitled "Coercion and enticement", contained in Chapter 117 of Title 18 — "Transportation for Illegal Sexual Activity and Related Crimes," and as to other Jane Does, violations of 18 U.S.C. 2423(6) which criminalizes interstate or foreign travel for the purpose of having illicit sexual activity. Both 18 U.S.C. 2422(b) and 2423(b) are alleged by Jane Doe 2 and other Jane Does as predicate criminal offenses for federal damages lawsuits pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 which creates a civil remedy for personal injuries when a plaintiff can first show a violation of specified federal statutory criminal statues. Most importantly for purposes of the Court's making a determination regarding whether Epstein has shown a specific risk of self-incrimination, or that production of a document would constitute a link in the chain of evidence, (see DE242, at pgs 8-9, 18), the lynchpin for the exercise of federal criminal jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. 2422(b) is "the use of "any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce" and the analogous essential element of 18 U.S.C. 2423(6) is "travel(s) in interstate commerce or travels into the United States or (as) to a United States citizen...travels in foreign commerce". Thus, facially, an essential proof of any allegation of 18 U.S.C. 2422(b) — the statutory precondition alleged by Jane Doe 2 for a 2255 civil damage recovery - includes telephone, cellular phone, e-mail records or other "communications" as a facility of interstate commerce during which use there was persuasion, inducement, enticing, or coercing of an underage person to engage in prostitution or sexual activity. Contested requests for production numbers 10, 11, 19 and 21 ask that Epstein produce information (e.g.. documents reflecting Epstein's air travel, aircraft used and flight manifests, all communications with female models, MC2 models or Jean Luc Brunel relating to or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries and his personal calendars and schedules) that could reveal the availability to him or use of such interstate facilities and thus would constitute a link in the chain of evidence that could potentially expose him to the hazards of selfincrimination as to 18 U.S.C. 2422(b) federal criminal violations. + +9. Likewise, other Jane Does such as Jane Doe 102 have contended that they are entitled to 18 U.S.C. 2255 damages based on Epstein's violation of 18 U.S.C. 2423(b), a separate federal criminal statute that prohibits "a person who travels in interstate commerce or travels into the United States...for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual activity". As more fully discussed, infra, contested request to produce + +numbers 10, 11, 19 and 21 ask Epstein to produce information that could provide a link in the chain of evidence regarding: (a) Epstein's air travel within the United States and Foreign Territories; (b) Epstein's communications with female models, MC2 models, or Jean Luc Brunel relating to or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries; and (c) Epstein's personal calendars and schedules. Given that the essential proof of an allegation of 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) would include travel records, schedules regarding trips and locations, flight records, and calendars evidencing Epstein's whereabouts, the requested information, if ordered produced by this Court, would furnish evidence that could potentially expose Epstein to the hazards of self-incrimination as to 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) violations. The is especially true given that, according to Jane Doe 2's complaint, he has residences and businesses in New York and the Virgin Islands as well as Florida. Responding to request numbers 10, 11, 19 and 21 may expose Epstein to the hazards of 18 U.S.C. 2423(b), which was a target offenses of the joint FBI-United States Attorney investigation discussed above, see par 12 and 13, infra + +*The NPA And The Underlying Criminal Investigation +That Led To The NPA Must Also Be Considered In Connection With +Epstein's More Particularized Showing Demonstrating How The 5th +Amendment Is Validly Applied To Plaintiff's Requests For Production1* + +10. 18 U.S.C. 2422(b) and 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) were offenses that were central to both the joint FBI-United States Attorney investigation, and the resulting Grand Jury + +![]()investigation, as well as the NPA itself, further demonstrating the extent to which Epstein's refusal to respond or produce information to each request is, as required, based on a specific apprehension of a compelled production and disclosure providing a link in the chain of evidence adverse to him. Blau v. United States, 340 U.S. 159 (1950). A more particularized showing will be filed in camera so that Epstein can more fully particularize the basis of his constitutional assertions. + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[Redacted text block] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +***Application Of The 5th Amendment*** + +19. In the instant case, it is evident from the requests themselves, the allegations in the various Complaints, and the facts and circumstances surrounding these cases, that to demand from Epstein a more particularized showing, requires Epstein to walk a thin line with regard to “surrender[ing] the very protection which the privilege is designed to guarantee.” Hoffman, 341 U.S. at 479. The United States Supreme Court has made clear that the scope of the Fifth Amendment Privilege also encompasses the circumstance where “the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena (or production request) has a compelled testimonial aspect.” United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. at 36; see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence, Title 6, Chap. 13. *The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination*, §138 (6th Ed.). The “implicit authentication” rationale appears to be the prevailing justification for the Fifth Amendment’s application to documentary subpoenas, which is no different from producing documents responsive to a request for production. See U.S. v Hubbell, 530 + +--- + +2 Paragraphs 11-18 of this Supplementary Brief are being provided to the court on an *in camera* basis as permitted by the Court’s Order. (DE 242, p.20.) + +U.S. 27, 36 (2000); Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S., 757, 763-764, (1966) ("the privilege reaches . . . the compulsion of responses which are also communications, for example, compliance with a subpoena to produce one's papers); v. United States 409 U.S. 322, 344-46 (1973) (the person complying with the subpoena "implicitly testifies that the evidence he brings forth is in fact the evidence demanded"); People v. Defore, 242 N.Y. 13, 27 (1926) ("A defendant is `protected from producing his documents in response to a Subpoena duces tecum, for his production of them in court would be his voucher of their genuineness.' There would then be `testimonial compulsion' "). + +20. As stated, in responding to each request, Epstein would be compelled to provide assertions of fact, thereby admitting that such documents existed and further admitting that the documents were in his possession or control, and were authentic. In other words, the very act of production of the category of documents requested would implicitly communicate "statements of fact." Hubbell, supra; Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 71 S.Ct. 814 (1951). As such, the act of production might not only provide evidence to support a conviction, but also a link in the chain of evidence for prosecution. Importantly, such compulsion to produce is the same as being compelled to testify. Thus, in those instances where the existence and/or location of the requested documents are unknown, or where the production would "implicitly authenticate" the requested documents, the act of producing responsive documents is considered "testimonial" and is protected by the Fifth Amendment. In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 1 F.3d 87, 93 (2' Cir. 1993); see also Fisher v. U.S., 425 U.S. 391, 410 (1976)(issue expressed as whether compliance with a document request or subpoena "tactically conceded" the items authenticity, existence or possession by defendant). Even more egregious is that fact that producing or responding to the Specified Requests could result in self-incrimination and potential prosecution. + +21. The United States Supreme Court has expressly encompassed the innocent citizen as well as the guilty within the ambit of Fifth Amendment protections (i.e., that Epstein may deny any allegation that he violated either of the above-described federal statutes is not in conflict with his constitutional right not to be compelled by requests to make disclosures that would further any investigation against him or incriminate him.) The Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination is accorded "liberal construction," Hoffman, 341 U.S. at 486, and extends not only to answers that would in themselves support a criminal conviction, but extends also to those answers (or responses as in the instant matter) that would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a crime. Id. The Fifth Amendment serves as a guarantee against testimonial compulsion and provides, in relevant part, that "[Ili° person...shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against himself." (DE 242, p.5). In practice, the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination "permits a person not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings." Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985), citing Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973)). Thus, information is protected by the privilege not only if it would support a criminal conviction, but also in those instances where "the responses would merely provide a `lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate." United States v.. Neff, 615 F.2d 1235, 1239 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 825 (1980). + +"The claimant must [also] be 'confronted by substantial and `real,' and not merely trifling or imaginary, hazards of incrimination." United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 128 (1980). Accordingly, responses to the requests propounded upon Epstein would provide information which is protected by the privilege i.e., "the responses [c]ould merely provide a 'lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate [Epstein]" United States v., Neff, 615 F.2d 1235, 1239 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 825 (1980). + +## Brief Conclusion + +For all of the foregoing reasons, this Court should sustain Epstein's objections to the Specified Requests and uphold Epstein's right to assert his 56 Amendment Privilege in connection with same. + +Wherefore, Epstein respectfully requests that this Court issue and order: + +- a. finding that the danger Epstein faces by being forced to respond and produce documents relative to request numbers 10, 11, 19 and 21 is substantial and real, and not merely trifling or imaginary; +- b. sustaining Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege as it relates to request numbers 10, 11, 19 and 21 and denying Plaintiff's Motion in that regard; and +- c. for such other and further reliefps this Court deems just and proper. + +AEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identifi n the lowing Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of 2009. + +Respectfully ubmitted, + +By: + +ROB ON, JR., ESQ. + +Flo ar No. 224162 + +rcrit@.ciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +moike@bc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTT1ER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +### Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomev.com + +ahorowitze,sexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10ih Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case + +08-80811 + +Brad M, Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul O. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellpAlaw.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintijpane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. + +No. Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcylaw.com + +jph@searcylaw.com + +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com + +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-08804* + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* + +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesq@bellsouth.net + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746329/EFTA02746329.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746329/EFTA02746329.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5fe2b7565f5affb8a26c4541e5f08a6b2f3cd8cf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746329/EFTA02746329.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,933 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746329.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 18, + "chars": 21803, + "elapsed_seconds": 181.15, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.48565673828125, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.48565673828125, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant's Supplementary Brief Pursuant To The Magistrate's Order (DE 242) \nRequesting A More Particularized Showing Demonstrating How The Sth Amendment May \nBe Asserted To Plaintiff's Requests For Production, With Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 319.42889404296875 + ], + [ + 522.5873413085938, + 319.42889404296875 + ], + [ + 522.5873413085938, + 359.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 359.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Procedural Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.99200000000002, + 481.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 389.965087890625, + 481.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 389.965087890625, + 497.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 223.99200000000002, + 497.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "H. Supplementary Brief, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.01200000000001, + 292.40999999999997 + ], + [ + 491.79058837890625, + 292.40999999999997 + ], + [ + 491.79058837890625, + 308.2330627441406 + ], + [ + 123.01200000000001, + 308.2330627441406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Magistrate's Order (DE 242) Correctly Sustained Epstein's 5th Amendment \nPrivilege As To Several Requests And Interrogatories Seeking Testimonial And \nIncriminating Information Similar To The Specified Requests", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.74, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 489.8539733886719, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 489.8539733886719, + 363.3630676269531 + ], + [ + 88.74, + 363.3630676269531 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Responding to the Specified Requests Would Violate Epstein's 514 Amendment Privilege And \nWould Expose Him to the Hazards of 18 U.S.C. 2422(6) And The 18 U.S.C. 2423(b)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.248, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 521.1785888671875, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 521.1785888671875, + 347.6835632324219 + ], + [ + 94.248, + 347.6835632324219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Background Of This Case And Other Related Cases As Well As The Federal \nStatutory Claims And Elements Of Those Offenses Must Be Considered In \nConnection With Epstein's More Particularized Showing Demonstrating How The .514\nAmendment Is Validly Applied To Plaintiff's Requests For Production", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 90.576, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 521.30419921875, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 521.30419921875, + 183.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 90.576, + 183.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The NPA And The Underlying Criminal Investigation That Led To The NPA Must Also Be Considered In Connection With Epstein's More Particularized Showing Demonstrating How The 5 th Amendment Is Validly Applied To Plaintiff's Requests For Production 1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.90799999999999, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 484.70400000000006, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 484.70400000000006, + 513.54 + ], + [ + 127.90799999999999, + 513.54 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Application Of The 5 th Amendment", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 216.036, + 293.21999999999997 + ], + [ + 394.12800000000004, + 293.21999999999997 + ], + [ + 394.12800000000004, + 309.42 + ], + [ + 216.036, + 309.42 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Brief Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.1, + 238.14 + ], + [ + 350.84466552734375, + 238.14 + ], + [ + 350.84466552734375, + 253.10302734375 + ], + [ + 260.1, + 253.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 596.97 + ], + [ + 364.16790771484375, + 596.97 + ], + [ + 364.16790771484375, + 611.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 611.9830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 305.37 + ], + [ + 422.1380920410156, + 305.37 + ], + [ + 422.1380920410156, + 348.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 348.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 34 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Line", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 46 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "Span", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Line", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Line", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Line", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 129 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 58 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 110 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746329" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746347/EFTA02746347.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746347/EFTA02746347.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7321104980cb050832c1a083a3d2daac3db95bb3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746347/EFTA02746347.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER ON PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 101 AND DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S JOINT MOTION TO MODIFY DISCOVERY DEADLINES + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 101 and Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Joint Motion to Modify Discovery Deadlines (DE ), entered The Court has carefully considered the motion, the proposed orders, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff and Defendant's Joint Motion (DE\_) is GRANTED as follows: The current order (DE 59) Setting Trial Date & Discovery Deadlines is hereby modified as follows, the discovery cut-off shall be January 22, 2010 from December 1, 2009; and the deadline for Substantive Pre-Trial Motions shall be February 1, 2010 instead of January 15, 2010. All other deadlines shall remain the same. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, + +Florida, this day of , 2009. + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Court Judge + +Copies to: + +All counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746347/EFTA02746347.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746347/EFTA02746347.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..73f21e9f9a016006295674594dcc4aabcae15953 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746347/EFTA02746347.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746347.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1282, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.7, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 85.6875 + ], + [ + 413.8999938964844, + 85.6875 + ], + [ + 413.8999938964844, + 114.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 114.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 101 AND DEFENDANT JEFFREY \nEPSTEIN'S JOINT MOTION TO MODIFY DISCOVERY DEADLINES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 103.428, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 516.5440063476562, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 516.5440063476562, + 404.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 103.428, + 404.41998291015625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746347" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746349/EFTA02746349.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746349/EFTA02746349.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5ffed487b585c7dda576fc24096bf612c937956e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746349/EFTA02746349.md @@ -0,0 +1,219 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 101 AND DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S JOINT MOTION TO MODIFY DISCOVERY DEADLINES + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, joined by agreement, JANE DOE NO. 101, by and through their counsel, hereby move this court for a modification of its order setting trial date and discovery deadlines and state: + +- 1. The parties have been engaged in settlement discussions. +- 2. Should these settlement discussions resolve the matter, obviously substantial attorney time and judicial resources will be avoided. +- 3. The current Order (DE 59) provides for calendar call on April 29, 2010 with the case being set on the two week calendar commencing May 3, 2010. +- 4. The current discovery deadline is December 1, 2009, subject to the restrictions set forth in docket entry (DE 98) in Case No. 08-80119-CIV-KAM. The deadline for Substantive Pre-Trial Motions is January 30, 2010. + +5. The parties are requesting only to modify the discovery cut-off from December 1, 2009 to January 22, 2010; and the Substantive Pre-Trial Motions to February 1, 2010 instead of January 15, 2010. All other deadlines would remain the same. + +6. The parties request that the court enter the proposed order setting forth these two modified deadlines. + +> By: ROBERT D. ITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar o. 224162 MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +By: ROBERT C JOSEFSBERG, ES Florida Ba No. 040856 KATHERINE W. EZELL, ESQ. Florida Bar No. 114771 Rag) + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 2 Yr day of , 2009 + +Respectfully subm + +By: ROBERT D CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Ba No. 224162 MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** + +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** + +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) + +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80811* + +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +*Pro Hac Vice* + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. + +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80469* + +Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 +Fax: 561-515-2610 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-08804* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746349/EFTA02746349.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746349/EFTA02746349.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b1d1ff56c745626082b003c046794dcd8a644234 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746349/EFTA02746349.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,257 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746349.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5373, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.96, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 71.8074951171875 + ], + [ + 413.5253601074219, + 71.8074951171875 + ], + [ + 413.5253601074219, + 100.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 100.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 101 AND DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S \nJOINT MOTION TO MODIFY DISCOVERY DEADLINES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 102.81600000000002, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 514.7977905273438, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 514.7977905273438, + 390.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 102.81600000000002, + 390.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.384, + 483.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 390.4054260253906, + 483.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 390.4054260253906, + 498.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 264.384, + 498.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.308, + 220.32000000000005 + ], + [ + 362.304, + 220.32000000000005 + ], + [ + 362.304, + 233.27999999999997 + ], + [ + 250.308, + 233.27999999999997 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 122 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746349" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746353/EFTA02746353.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746353/EFTA02746353.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d0557683d6624f42d42efd3a2b87c41b17d21433 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746353/EFTA02746353.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/ (consolidated for purposes of discovery) + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +![Stamp for Steven M. Larimore from the Dist. Ct. of Fla. S.D. of Fla. - WPR.]() + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant's Motion To Strike Declarations Attached and Cited in Plaintiffs Reply (D.E. #277). Having reviewed the pleadings filed incident to this matter and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that said Motion, (D.E. #277), is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS FOLLOWS. To the extent Defendant seeks an order striking the declarations said motion is denied. To the extent Defendant seeks an order requiring Plaintiffs to file the missing declarations and granting Defendant leave to file a sur-reply so as to allow Defendant an opportunity to address both the missing declarations and the newly filed declarations, said motion is granted. Defendant has five (5) days from the date of receipt of the missing declarations within which to file said sur-reply. + +DONE AND ORDERED this 2nd day of September, 2009, in at West Palm + +![]() + +--- + +LINNEA R. [REDACTED] +UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth M. Marra +All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746353/EFTA02746353.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746353/EFTA02746353.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ef8566ac05da530cbd3f549ebee35ace76408231 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746353/EFTA02746353.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746353.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1325, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.5, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.79500000000002, + 33.21 + ], + [ + 414.6453552246094, + 33.21 + ], + [ + 414.6453552246094, + 63.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 204.79500000000002, + 63.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 284.13, + 322.38 + ], + [ + 333.2442321777344, + 322.38 + ], + [ + 333.2442321777344, + 337.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 284.13, + 337.29998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Form", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746353" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746355/EFTA02746355.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746355/EFTA02746355.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6dce8497e1d8d18b48693f768931ed7e9d38c221 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746355/EFTA02746355.md @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +![](_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg) + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, Motion For Extension of Time in which to Respond to Plaintiff, Jane Doe's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to ( pes t.\$) Interrogatories.cHaving considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall Respond to Plaintiffs Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. + +on or before September 7, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this 2nd day of Sept., 2009. + +![]()Kenneth A. Marra LINNETA R. IOHNSON +United States District Judge +MAGISTRATE + +Courtesy Copies: +Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746355/EFTA02746355.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746355/EFTA02746355.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..93ebcaafb6e862ead3493a8b05445fd17ffe22de --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746355/EFTA02746355.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746355.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1148, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.24, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 208.485, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 409.7047119140625, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 409.7047119140625, + 117.9735107421875 + ], + [ + 208.485, + 117.9735107421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 285.975, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 333.1883544921875, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 333.1883544921875, + 420.2235412597656 + ], + [ + 285.975, + 420.2235412597656 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746355" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746355/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746355/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..830d601a39f3ddf102f4cc25fcc9d8679f14b7b8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746355/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:cef6c6bd9288a7cb24edd5b73d224764ff35e9ebf4b2beca110876ddf414f20a +size 11623 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746357/EFTA02746357.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746357/EFTA02746357.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d6b7d41536147f7ea2ad2759d02a52d14c51cf82 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746357/EFTA02746357.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRN + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER ON PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 101 AND DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S JOINT MOTION TO MODIFY DISCOVERY DEADLINES + +THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 101 and Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Joint Motion to Modify Discovery Deadlines (DEtaq), entered Avisknt6( The Court has carefully considered the motion, the proposed orders, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff and Defendant's Joint Motion (DE ) is GRANTED as follows: The current order (DE 59) Setting Trial Date & Discovery Deadlines is hereby modified as follows, the discovery cut-off shall be January 22, 2010 from December 1, 2009; and the deadline for Substantive Pre-Trial Motions shall be February 1, 2010 instead of January 15, 2010. All other deadlines shall remain the same. + +DONE AND ORDERED at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this :7( " day of \_Sepienlber , 2009. + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Court Judge + +Copies to: + +All counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746357/EFTA02746357.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746357/EFTA02746357.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b62885347552e221d8e239b90950b8fa168ccf64 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746357/EFTA02746357.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746357.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1302, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.73, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.53997802734375, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 406.7935485839844, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 406.7935485839844, + 116.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 198.53997802734375, + 116.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 101 AND DEFENDANT JEFFREY \nEPSTEIN'S JOINT MOTION TO MODIFY DISCOVERY DEADLINES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 95.94, + 379.89 + ], + [ + 509.8018493652344, + 379.89 + ], + [ + 509.8018493652344, + 408.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 95.94, + 408.91998291015625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746357" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746359/EFTA02746359.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746359/EFTA02746359.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6dfd622101d96439b1c4d0ffce24a77981971cac --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746359/EFTA02746359.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on a Joint Motion For Extension of Time in which to Respond to Plaintiff, Jane Does' Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall Respond to Plaintiff's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. + +on or before September 11, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746359/EFTA02746359.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746359/EFTA02746359.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a61a40bdf4fec3a2b5de6b3ccb257aa41d00e961 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746359/EFTA02746359.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746359.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1034, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.78, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 417.0164489746094, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 417.0164489746094, + 103.10302734375 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 103.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 286.41600000000005, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 336.3481140136719, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 336.3481140136719, + 406.85302734375 + ], + [ + 286.41600000000005, + 406.85302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 12 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746359" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746361/EFTA02746361.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746361/EFTA02746361.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c2daea839e3c7596e95d0d7a2e32cf1dbeb39ea5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746361/EFTA02746361.md @@ -0,0 +1,236 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/....= + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +### JOINT UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUEST TO PRODUCE, ANSWERS TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS, AND ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, and Plaintiff, JANE DOE, by and through their undersigned counsel move this Court for an Extension of Time until September II, 2009, to file Responses to Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 A.1(j)(S.D. Fla. 2008). As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +1. Brad a Counsel for the Plaintiff, is currently recovering from a surgical procedure. Mr. is scheduled to return to the office on Tuesday, September 8, 2009. + +2. Mr. and the undersigned have agreed to review the above Motions in an effort to determine whether any of the issues therein are covered by the Court's Order on other 5th Amendment Privilege issues (DE 242). + +3. The undersigned counsel has spoken with Brad M' law partner, William Berger, and each party has agreed to the extension of time until September 11, 2009. + +4. While the undersigned lawyers are attempting to resolve certain issues in the above motions to conserve on judicial resources, no admissions are being made in this Motion and no arguments are being abandoned. + +# Rule 7.1 A.3 Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff by telephone and/or electronic mail, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreementvpit equested extension. + +> By: MICHAEL J. IKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #6I 296 + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 3rd day of September, 2009 + +> Respectfully tted, By: ROBER 9i. CR ON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mnikeabcIclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +### Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@,sexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10ffi Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +Teelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. =, Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarciaa,bellsouth.net + +Jack P. [REDACTED] Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) + +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* + +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746361/EFTA02746361.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746361/EFTA02746361.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..37d1055c5f9c462b7a69bc59c13070210137ed23 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746361/EFTA02746361.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,280 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746361.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5077, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.74, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 415.1464538574219, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 415.1464538574219, + 102.35302734375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 102.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JOINT UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION \nOF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTIONS \nTO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUEST TO PRODUCE, ANSWERS TO \nREQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS, AND ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.92, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 523.3995361328125, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 523.3995361328125, + 419.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 97.92, + 419.9730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A.3 Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 175.64399999999998, + 319.14000000000004 + ], + [ + 442.2610778808594, + 319.14000000000004 + ], + [ + 442.2610778808594, + 334.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 175.64399999999998, + 334.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 485.18999999999994 + ], + [ + 365.6679382324219, + 485.18999999999994 + ], + [ + 365.6679382324219, + 499.863037109375 + ], + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 499.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 251.10000000000002 + ], + [ + 365.29791259765625, + 251.10000000000002 + ], + [ + 365.29791259765625, + 265.863037109375 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 265.863037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 129 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 60 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 46 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746361" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746365/EFTA02746365.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746365/EFTA02746365.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..65be379b6ad5f29ef63bbf3cd449a9011d8f0b02 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746365/EFTA02746365.md @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228). For the following reasons said Motion is granted. + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm beach, New York and St. with the promise of money in exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +By the instant Motion Epstein seeks an order compelling one of the Plaintiffs, in the case, to submit to an independent psychological/psychiatric medical examination by Ryan M, M.D., presently scheduled for September 8,2009. has agreed to submit to said exam, but requests the Court impose certain restrictions. Since the filing of the Motion the parties have managed to resolve some of the issues involved, such as the proposed examination's time and date and request to have a representative from her team present at said examination. As for the latter issue, Defendant has agreed to provide, at his expense, a video feed and monitor in an adjacent room for Plaintiff's representative's use. The remaining issues involve Plaintiff's request for a court order limiting the scope of the proposed examination by disallowing repeated questioning regarding "highly sensitive areas of inquiry including Plaintiffs medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history, substance abuse history, etc.,'and imposing certain time restraints on the examination itself. + +Plaintiff's request to limit the scope of the examination is denied. It is Dr. + +&#x27; See Pltff's Resp. to Rep.(D.E. #279), p.3. + +routine procedure when conducting psychological/psychiatric medical examinations of patients to require the patient to fill out a 10-page "Life History Questionnaire" and a 14-page "Patient Questionnaire." Both questionnaires request detailed background information regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like. Presumably Plaintiff will be asked these same questions two more times, first by defense counsel at deposition scheduled to take place shortly, and again by Dr. ■ **at the upcoming examination. Plaintiffs objection is that by having to answer these same questions about the same subject matter three separate times "would only serve to embarrass, humiliate, intimidate and further victimize Plaintiff." Pltff's Resp. (D.E. #254), p.6. Plaintiff's position is that she should only "be required to regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like, if at all, only one time," either during the "deposition of Plaintiff or through Dr. examination, but certainly not both." Id.** + +**Plaintiff cites no case law and independent research has uncovered none, to support her novel position that a Plaintiff who puts her mental, emotional and psychiatric state at issue can place a limitation on the number of times defense counsel or agents retained by him can inquire into areas relevant to these issues where the subject matter involved is "highly personal," "embarrassing," "sensitive," or otherwise "humiliating." Plaintiff is seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, "physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional** distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, [and] invasion of her privacy." 2 Based on the allegations made in Defendant's Reply,' Plaintiff's childhood was, to put it mildly, a difficult one, with numerous episodes of child abuse and sexual abuse, which in turn may of been the cause of Plaintiff's later engaging in numerous instances of substance abuse, self-mutilation, prostitution, aggravated assault, truancy, and the like. According to Defendant, in 2005 Plaintiff's mother filed a case committing for a Petition for Involuntary Assessment for substance abuse, stating in the accompanying file that has been diagnosed as "Bipoloar and Schizophrenic."' + +Under these circumstances, where Plaintiff is seeking to recover medical expenses associated with these complex medical issues, full knowledge of Plaintiff's past and present medical, psychological, familial and social histories is essential. And while neither duplication nor embarrassment is desired, under the circumstances presented, where the number and scope of damages claimed are vast and Plaintiff's past history eventful, it may nonetheless be unavoidable. This is not to say that restrictions on the scope of questioning may never be put into effect. If, as the case progresses, Plaintiff can show that Defendant's invasive questioning + +2 Plaintiff, First Am. Compl., Counts I-XXX. + +(D.E. #273), pp.7-8, + +As quoted in Defs Rep. (D.E. #273), p.8, from Palm Beach County Case #05MH1667. + +is being done in bad faith or for purposes of harassment, the Court may reconsider imposing limitations of the sort requested herein. At this point, however, the Court agrees with Defendant that to restrict the number of times defense counsel may ask Plaintiff personal and sensitive questions concerning some of the pivotal issues in this case, would work an injustice by preventing Defendant from being able to defend himself. + +The Court likewise rejects Plaintiff's request to limit the time for conducting the examination and any related testing to 6 hours. Dr.. has filed an affidavit stating that he needs 6-8 hours to conduct the examination and related testing, and that anything less than that might result in compromising the test results.` Considering the 31 counts alleged against Defendant, as well as Plaintiff's event-filled past, the amount of time sought does not appear unreasonable. Should the length of time prove draining, Plaintiff may take breaks as needed, of reasonable duration. Furthermore, Defense Counsel and Dr.. are hereby put on notice that while the Court has allowed the full 8 hours requested for the examination and related testing, should less time be needed, the Court expects less time will be taken, and in no event may the examination and related testing exceed a total of 8 hours. In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228) is GRANTED IN + +`Affidavit of Dr. ■, **attached as Ex. "B" to Defendant's Rep. (D.E. #273).** + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra +All Counsel of Record + +![]()Florida. + +**DONE AND ORDERED** this September 4, 2009, in [REDACTED], at West Palm Beach, + +**ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF.** \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746365/EFTA02746365.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746365/EFTA02746365.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..af35417b696313d8bb1a2b4d7c3967058ff1c3b5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746365/EFTA02746365.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,291 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746365.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 7636, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.68, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.5008544921875, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.5008544921875, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 383.13 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 383.13 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 397.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 397.56353759765625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746365" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746371/EFTA02746371.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746371/EFTA02746371.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..53da5de8c0e2f830a46c5b7deb5fe2304d5f265c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746371/EFTA02746371.md @@ -0,0 +1,66 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOES' 2-7 NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE WITH ORDER DATED SEPTEMBER 2, 2009 + +Plaintiffs' Jane Does 2-7, by and through undersigned counsel, file this Notice of Compliance with Order of United States Magistrate Judge Linnea R. M, dated September 2, 2009 (DE 285), and state as follows: + +- 1. All Declarations relied upon by Plaintiffs in support of their Motion for Protective Order have been previously filed with the Court. These Declarations were each e-filed in redacted form, and the originals were each filed in accordance with S.D.FIa.L.R. 5.4 for filings under seal. + - 2. The Declarations relied upon by Plaintiffs were filed as follows: + +| Date of Declaration | Name of Declarant | Date of Filing | | +|---------------------|-------------------|-----------------|----------------| +| July 17, 2009 | Jane Doe No. 4 | July 29, 2009 | 226, Exhibit B | +| July 22, 2009 | Jane Doe No. 6 | July 29, 2009 | 226, Exhibit C | +| August 5, 2009 | Jane Doe No. 7 | August 7, 2009 | 251 | +| August 13, 2009 | Y.B. | August 14, 2009 | 267-3 | +| August 14, 20090 | Jane Doe No. 4 | August 14, 2009 | 267-2 | + +3. All of the above listed Declarations were submitted in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order. Those Declarations filed after July 29, 2009 (the date of filing Jane Does' 2-7 Motion for Protective Order), were filed with a Notice stating that they were in further support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order. + +4. Plaintiffs' counsel further certifies that they have on this day served Defendant's counsel with copies of the original unredacted versions of the Declarations listed above. + +Dated: September 4, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on September 4, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits Iawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746371/EFTA02746371.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746371/EFTA02746371.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b339ece4de3ff563c39ac5b71d31cf413e8b897e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746371/EFTA02746371.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,243 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746371.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3414, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.96, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 99.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 99.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOES' 2-7 NOTICE OF \nCOMPLIANCE WITH ORDER DATED SEPTEMBER 2, 2009", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.372, + 346.68 + ], + [ + 475.7292785644531, + 346.68 + ], + [ + 475.7292785644531, + 375.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 141.372, + 375.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.44, + 468.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 468.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 484.10302734375 + ], + [ + 226.44, + 484.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746371" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746374/EFTA02746374.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746374/EFTA02746374.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3eb84412089ab1751d4a5fe60b9895fe0569341b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746374/EFTA02746374.md @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@ +## The Psychological Trauma Center + +a division of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc. + +Medical Director: Gilbert W. Minim, M. D. + +2105 Divisadeto St, San Racism, CA 94115 Phone(415)292-7119 Fax (41S) 749-2802 www.ecpe\_rideldpsy.hiatry.com + +Forensic Child Psychiatric Evaluations. Lift Care Plans & Testimony + +with Dr. Kliman 12/2/08 + +Transcription by: K. Rios + +00:00:05 Dr. Klimin: just turned on a video camera and I see that I have your written permission to make this videotape. Thank you and I trust that your attorney has explained to you that I'm a psychiatrist and that, he's asked me to give a preliminary opinion meeting with you today and that I may proceed possibly to be having some part in a legal case that you're involved in. In fact by out meeting I do have a part because I'll be consulting with your attorney. Do you have any questions about that? + +MEI [shaking her head] Uh-uh. + +Dr. Kliman: And you understand because this consultation is at the request of your attorney that it doesn't have the same confidentiality that it might if you were consulting me as a treating doctor. I'm gonna have to discuss this meeting with your attorney and he in turn might discuss it with another attorney or even in court. So your privacy is not as complete as you might wish it to be... + +00:01:42 + +So this tape will be; like given out or something? + +Dr. Kliman: Well...I don't think it will be given out but it could be shared by your attorney with the attorney for the other side of a case that I believe you're brining, you're suing somebody. Is that correct? + +Dr. Kliman: So it would be up to a judge to decide whether the tape will be seen by jury or in court. But it certainly will be seen by your attorney and it will be seen by the attorney for the other side; if your attorney chooses to do that. So how you proceed will be up to you and your attorney. That's the'first + +Uh huh. + +reversing; I was driving... there were cars parked all along the way...he like ran out in front of my car to try to stop me from leaving. + +00:41:06 + +Dr. Kliman: And you ran into a ditch? + +S Uh huh. + +Dr. Kliman: Were you hurt? + +S No. + +Dr. Kliman: Was the car badly injured? + +S Yeah well the airbags went off; and that was pretty much it and then we like drove down the road and then I drove down the road and like the car wouldn't start. I had like stopped because the airbags had released whatever, and wherever I stopped the car wouldn't start again. + +Dr. Kliman: Did your ex-boyfriend get hurt? + +Dr. Kliman: Was he drunk when he did that? + +S Yeah when he ran out in the car. + +Dr. Kliman: Were you drunk when this happened? + +S No. I had a few drinks but I wasn't like intoxicated. + +00:42:06 + +Dr. Kliman: Anything else that happened in college that is regrettable? + +S My relationship with my ex-boyfriend. + +Dr. Kliman: Okay and tell me about that? + +S Nothing, it was just my ex-boyfriend that I...I mean I dated him like for; he was like my first love growing up and it was always just on and off and I remember...like it was off when I went to college and I remember going to college and he moved up to Jacksonville and I like went up to Jacksonville to go see him; and it just kinda brought back an old flame; and I wish I would have never. Because we wasted a lot of my... wasted + +No. + +00:43:13 + +Dr. Kliman: He drank more than you drank at least on one occasion. + +S + +Dr. Kliman: And yourself? + +S + +00:44:03 + +Dr. Kliman: So was alcohol ever a problem for you? + +S + +Dr. Kliman: But it was for him? + +AMP + +Dr. Kliman: How about other drugs for either him or you? + +S + +two years of my college just on like on him, he didn't deserve my time really because he wasn't a good influence in my life. + +He drank...growing up he was like an alcoholic. He drank all the time. + +No, well for the most part I didn't really hang out with him that much because growing up I had soccer Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday from 7:30 to 9:30 at night and then the only days I had off was Monday and Friday and on the weekends I would be traveling playing soccer; so I didn't really hang out with him that much but whenever I did, I would have a few drink not as much as would; he was consuming. + +No. + +Yeah. + +I never touched any other drugs but for him that's one of the main reason why I ended it; its cause he started doing oxy...I don't ever know. He would always call them [not audible] but it was gonafea form of heroine; and I told him that he needed to stop. He lied...he would lie to me about them like doing drugs and stuff like that; and one day I caught him, he told me he quit and I told him I he had to stop drinking and that's when he started taking those oxycodines; because he said that he would...1 I stopped drinking cause he would drink all the time so... so he stopped drinking and like he kind of tricked me; ...well he stopped drinking and the reason he stopped drinking because he was taking this other pills. And whenever I found out he was taking those pills; I was like you need to stop taking them or whatever so then started sneaking it. Like one time I like heard him like snorting something in the back and I walked in on him; like what are you doing? And then I was kinda like what am I doing with myself? like I have my whole life ahead of me; like you know + +S + +Dr. Kliman: It was wasteful and distressing. + +Dr. Kliman: Why? + +00:49:17 + +Dr. Kliman: So your dad had a caring involvement in your love life and your sports life, your school life; now what other bad things if any have happened during your college days? + +00:49:47 + +S + +Dr. Kliman: You haven't flunked any courses? + +S + +Yeah. + +I got a restraining order on him once, it was bad. + +Because he used to like...he was just the type of guy...he was an alcoholic whenever he would drink like he would like spit in my face. Or like push me or like....he was like abusive. Like after like two years...afler like the first year and a half of being with him he was just like really nasty. Since he drank all the time and whenever he would drink we would break up or whatever; whenever he would drink like he was just so nasty towards me; and he would like unleash everything that was on his mind toward me and so finally my parents were just like you need to like break up; like I said I would break up with him I would get back together with him. So I broke up with him, my dad you just need to stay away from him because he would like come to my house and he would like follow me; me and friends if I would try to leave and go somewhere so my dad was like you need to get a restraining order on him. So I listened to my family, it was kind of a thing my dad at the same time, like because I would always go back together back and forth with; my dad was just like...its kinds like my dad punishing me because my dad would be like I don't want you going out because he would think that if I always went out that I would always hang out with my ex-boyfriend. So my dad didn't like that...and he knew that only way to do that was to get a restraining order. So that's what I did I got a restraining order and I stopped hanging out with him. + +Nothing. + +No I withdrew from two courses. One International Business, which I ended up taking last semester and I ended up getting an A in; the reason why it was hard for me to come back on that is because I missed so many classes through soccer, I took it in the fall, I think of my sophomore year \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746374/EFTA02746374.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746374/EFTA02746374.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a9996588f55f837934afba1b1ae2f75e8525f645 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746374/EFTA02746374.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,188 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746374.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 7401, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.28, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "The Psychological Trauma Center", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 214.2, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 395.54473876953125, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 395.54473876953125, + 97.10302734375 + ], + [ + 214.2, + 97.10302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746374" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746378/EFTA02746378.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746378/EFTA02746378.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8ad26daf1addf892dbe3910575fd1ddcfa763416 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746378/EFTA02746378.md @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ +Date: 6/16/09 Time: 13:00:34 PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Page: 1 Offense Report Program: CMS301L + +Day Of Week . : Occur From Date: Dept Class . . Street Number : City Zone/division : Location Type : Report Officer : Verif. Employee: Case Status Dt : Monday Report Date . : 9/20/04 22:31 9/20/04 21:30 Occur To Date : 9/20/04 22:31 BATTERY SIM LAMANCHA, 1 Zone One (1) (No of Okee) RES-SNGL FAMILY Case Status PIES, Supervisory /91, JR., JOHN 9/21/04 /04 Emp: Ni IVE9/21/04 + +Case Number Date Arrived ADDITIONAL TIMES . : 1-04-003966 Date . : 9/20/04 22:45 Date Dispatched: 9/20/04 22:37 Cleared . : 9/21/04 1:00 + +Case Number Case Status Investigator CASE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION . : 1-04-003966 Dept • : OPEN / NOT ACTIVE Case . : PIES, T. Class . . : BATTERY SIMPLE Status Dt : 9/20/04 + +## \*\*\*ASSIGNMENT HISTORY\*\*\* + +Case Number . : 1-04-003966 Dept Unit Investigator . : PIES, Supervisor Assignment Date: 9/22/04 • . : PATROL/Law Enforcement • . : ROBKIN, ROBERT + +State Class . Statute/Ordin State Dispo . OFFENSE REPORT # 1 : Battery Simple : 784.03(1)00 : Committed by Adult or Attmpt/Committ : Committed Weapon Type . : Hands/Fists/Feet Adult/Juv + +OFFS Offense #: 001 Name #...: Name #...: NS EPRIMARY RELATIONSHIPS\*\*\*\*\*\*\* \*\*\*\* Battery Simple / / 784.03(1)00 001 (SOSP) VINYARD, PRESTON 001 (VICT) + +## NAME PRIMARY RELATIONSHIPS + +Name #...: 001 (VICT)M.. Name 0...: 001 (S , STON / BOYFRIEND/GIRLFRIEND + +S U S Case Number . Street Number : City Birth Date . . : Oper Lic No. . Race Ethnic Origin : Maximum Height : PECT/AR e UNKNOWN / OTHER 510 RESTEE INFORMATION - Prompt valid in: VINYARD, PRESTON PALM BEACH, FL 33411 1980 24 Maximum Age . : 24 FL UNITED STATES Sex Male Minimum Height : 509 Juvenile . . . : ADULT # 1 \*\* + +VICTIM I N Case Number : - Street Number : City AL PAL BEACH, FORMATION - # 1 Prompt valid in: FL 33411 + +cheating on him. she tried to bite finger. I observed that to swell up, and her she did not wan to was given to is apparently Iwas dispatched to in reference to a battery. Upon arrival, I met wi , who stated that while she was with her boyfrien ara Ave., they began arguing. Her boyfriend, Mr. Preston Vinyard, grabbed her around her neck and began spitting on her, accusing her of stated that when she tried to leave, et away, but he bit her on the upper li was eginning finger was ruised. stated that rosecute Preston fo a erg. Information about seekin a restraining order. Preston at 147 Ave. at this time. He was not at the residence at t etime of this report. + +OTHER Home Phone No. : Oper Lic No. : Race Ethnic Origin Victim Type . Can Identify . Injury Extent Med Treatment 1 UNKNOWN / Juvenile Yes Minor Not Applicable + +Date: 6/16/09 Time: 13:00:34 PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Offense Report + +Page: 2 Program: CMS301L + +Original NARRATIVE Reported By: PIES, Entered By.: PIES, Reviewed By: # 1 OHN C. 9/20/04 9/20/04 9/21/04 + +1-04-003966 (Continued) Birth Date . . : 6/06/1987 17 + +FL UNITED STATES + +Sex • Female Juvenile . . . : JUVENILE File Charges . : No Victim Sobriety: UNKNOWN Injury Type 1 : Other + +END OF REPORT + +PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE +CENTRAL RECORDS +FSS EXEMPTIONS/CONFIDENTIAL + +- 119.071(2)(c) active criminal intelligence/active criminal investigative information +- 119.071(2)(d) Comprehensive policies or plans pertaining to the mobilization, deployment or tactical operations involved in responding to emergencies. (Deputies schedules) +- 119.071(2)(e) confessions +- 119.071(2)(f) confidential informants +- 119.071(5)(g)1, Biometric Identification Information (Fingerprints, palm prints, and footprints) +- 365.171(15) identity of 911 caller or person requesting emergency service +- 119.071(4)(d)(1) home address, telephone, soc. security #, photos of active/former LE personnel, spouses and children +- 316.066(5)(a) crash reports are confidential for period of 60 days after the report is filed +- 119.071(2)(h) (1) I'd. of victim of sexual battery, lewd and lascivious offense upon person less than 16 years old, child abuse, sexual offense +- 119.071(2)(l) assets of crime victim +- 985.04(1) juvenile offender records +- 119.071(5)(a)(5) social security numbers held by agency +- 119.0712(2) personal information contained in a motor vehicle record +- 119.071(5)(b) bank account #, debit, charge and credit card #s held by an agency +- 395.3025(7)(a) and/or 456.057(7)(a) medical information +- 394.4615(7) mental health information +- 119.071(2)(b) criminal intelligence/investigative information from a non-Florida criminal justice agency +- 943.053/943.0525 NCIC/FCIC/FBI and in-state FDLE/DOC +- 119.071(4)(c) undercover personnel +- 119.07(4)(d) extra fee if request is voluminous or requires extensive personnel, technology +- OTHER: \_\_\_\_\_ + +Royal Palm Both. + +Case number: + +04-3966 + +Clerk ID: 8463 + +Date: 6-16-09 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746378/EFTA02746378.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746378/EFTA02746378.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1cd5f261a28c13da9087e8648e9b3057cd03ba49 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746378/EFTA02746378.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,208 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746378.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 4823, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.34, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "***ASSIGNMENT HISTORY***", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 195.84, + 307.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 375.3703918457031, + 307.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 375.3703918457031, + 324.0 + ], + [ + 195.84, + 324.0 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NAME PRIMARY RELATIONSHIPS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 29.375999999999998, + 481.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 593.64, + 481.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 593.64, + 498.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 29.375999999999998, + 498.15000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE CENTRAL RECORDS FSS EXEMPTIONS/CONFIDENTIAL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 53.46 + ], + [ + 444.924, + 53.46 + ], + [ + 444.924, + 96.38999999999999 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 96.38999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 440 + ], + [ + "Line", + 99 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 304 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 310 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746378" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746381/EFTA02746381.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746381/EFTA02746381.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2c026a1b930ce0c38cb6362e08317b4729613439 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746381/EFTA02746381.md @@ -0,0 +1,308 @@ +## IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT. IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +Case No.: DA aZ) 2CPA oft (--) jad3S- XXX"kine, + +ion: + +Petitioner, + +and Pie ot t n \to rci Respondent. . + +nt 0(1 + +r.1 1 ry + +PETITION FOR INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST DATING VIOLENCE cr + +en I, (full legal name) , being sworn, certify that the following statements are true: + +# SECTION I. PETITIONER (This section is about you. It must be corn leted. + +dress cit .t + +Date of Birth of Petitioner: + +[1 if applies] + +1.7 Petitioner seeks an injunction for protection on halal ' Petitioner is the parent or legal guardian of (fill/ legal name a minor child who is living at home. + +# 2. Filing Fees + +[ d one only) + +- a. Petitioner is paying the filing fee and sheriffs (or other authorized law enforcement agency's) service fees. +- b. Petitioner does not have enough money to pay the filing fee or service fees and is filing an Affidavit and Motion for Waiver of Fees for Petition for Injunction for Protection, q'zCI Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.980(a), and a Family Law Financial Affidavit, Q.AO Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure Form 12.902(b) or (c). Petitioner asks that he/she not have to pay the fees necessary to process the petition and serve the injunction and any motions or orders needed to enforce the injunction, subject to later order(s) of the Court about the payment of such fees. + +3. Petitioner's attorney's name, address, and telephone number is: (If you do not have an attorney, write "none.") + +• • + +## IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +Case No.: DA .,020211 IaaSS- X X.Cktna + +w. aasig • • ion: FA, Petitioner, + +R/ and 4;1 pyc-31 on 8(O11 n Respondent. . + +### PETITION FOR INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST DATING VIOLENCE eft + +(full legal name)a, being sworn, certify that the following statements are true: + +# SECTION I. PETITIONER (This section is about you. It must be corn leted. + +1. ess ct + +Date of Birth of Petitioner: + +[4-if applies] + +t, Petitioner seeks an injunction for protection on beim Petitioner is the parent or legal guardian of (full legal name a minor child who is living at home. + +# 2. Filing Fees + +[ / one only] + +- a. Petitioner is paying the filing fee and sheriffs (or, other authorized law enforcement agency's) service fees. +- b. Petitioner does not have enough money to pay the filing fee or service fees and is filing an Affidavit and Motion for Waiver of Fees for Petition for Injunction for Protection, %O Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.980(a), and a Family Law Financial Affidavit, %O Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure Form 12.902(b) or (c). Petitioner asks that he/she not have to pay the fees necessary to process the petition and serve the injunction and any motions or orders needed to enforce the injunction, subject to later order(s) of the Court about the payment of such fees. + +3. Petitioner's attorney's name, address, and telephone number is: + +(If you do not have an attorney, write "none.") + +**SECTION II. RESPONDENT** (This section is about the person you want to be protected from. It must be completed.) + +1. 1. Respondent currently lives at: *(address, city, state, and zip code)* [REDACTED] + 15th Blvd Royal Palm Beach FL 33411 + Respondent's Driver's License number is: *(if known)* \_\_\_\_\_ +2. 2. Petitioner has known Respondent since *(date)* January 1, 2002. +3. 3. Respondent's last known place of employment: unknown + Employment address: N/A + Working hours: N/A +4. 4. Physical description of Respondent: + Race: W Sex: Male Female \_\_\_\_\_ Date of Birth: 4/105/1980 + Height: 5'6" Weight: 170 Eye Color: grey Hair Color: diverse blonde + Distinguishing marks and/or scars: 1 cut tool (cross, waved or back and arm) + Vehicle: (make/model) N/A Color: N/A Tag Number: \_\_\_\_\_ +5. 5. Other names Respondent goes by (aliases or nicknames): N/A +6. 6. Respondent's attorney's name, address, and telephone number is: None + (If you do not know whether Respondent has an attorney, write "unknown." If Respondent does not have an attorney, write "none.") +7. 7. If Respondent is a minor, the address of Respondent's parent or legal guardian is: None + +**SECTION III. CASE HISTORY AND REASON FOR SEEKING PETITION** (This section must be completed.) + +1. 1. Describe the nature of the relationship between the Petitioner and Respondent (include the length of time of the relationship, the romantic or intimate nature of the relationship, the frequency or type of interaction, and any other facts that characterize the relationship) + January 1, 2002 relationship began + July 15, 2002 relationship became intimate + May, 2004 verbally abusive relationship + July, 2004 physically abusive relationship + + Check here if you are attaching additional pages to continue these facts. + +1. 2. Have the Petitioner and Respondent been involved in a dating relationship within the past six months? Yes \_\_\_\_ No + +3. Has Petitioner ever received or tried to get an injunction for protection against domestic violence, dating violence or repeat violence against Respondent in this or any other court? +( ) Yes ( ) No If yes, what happened in that case? *{include case number, if known}* + +4. Has Respondent ever received or tried to get an injunction for protection against domestic violence, dating violence or repeat violence against Petitioner in this or any other court? +( ) Yes ( ) No If yes, what happened in that case? *{include case number, if known}* + +5. Describe any other court case that is either going on now or that happened in the past between Petitioner and Respondent (include case number, if known): NONE + +6. Respondent has directed an incident of "violence," meaning assault, aggravated assault, battery, aggravated battery, sexual assault, sexual battery, stalking, aggravated stalking, kidnaping, or false imprisonment, or any criminal offense resulting in physical injury or death against Petitioner or a member of Petitioner's immediate family. The incident (including date and location) is described below. + +On *(date)* 9/20/04, at *(location)* [REDACTED] + +Respondent and I were requiring in red when my qualy friend called my callphone prestion started I was a silt, whore. I whit that I was checking on him. Prestion started checking me into the hoatress and then when I went to get my pulse he threw me against the wall and started yelling at me. Then Prestion asked me out the door and when I asked for the rest of my bridgings he told me to wait. when he came back he spilled back all over me and threw clarett's in my face and he slamed me into the ground and I went to my car and he followed me + Check here if you are attaching additional pages to continue these facts. + +7. Other prior incidents (including dates and location) are described below: +On *(date)* AUGUST, 2004, at *(location)* [REDACTED] + +Respondent WE were arguing and Prestion argued me by my arms and threw me on the ground outside of my house. + +DATE 9/21/04 DA \_\_\_\_\_ + +PETITIONER'S NAME [REDACTED] + +**CONTINUATION SHEET** + +**Please DO NOT write on back or margins of petition or any papers.** + +continued from 9/20/04. I shut my car door +and he opened it and split in my face and +continued to call me a whore, slut and +kunt. I shut the door and he opened it +again and got in my face, grabbed my +arms very hard. to make him let go i bit his +arm and he bit me back on my finger and +cut it open he was biting so hard. te has +repeatively harrassed me since last night's +incodent. his morning when i work up +my hip was top swollen and my neck and +jaws were in pain + +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + + Check here if you are attaching additional pages to continue these facts. + +8. Petitioner genuinely fears dating violence by Respondent. Explain: + +! IM in fear because he has violent history and has verbally threaten my friends, ~~family~~ and I. + +9. Additional Information + +[✓ all that apply] + +a. Respondent owns, has, and/or is known to have guns or other weapons. Describe weapon(s): + +✓ b. This or prior acts of dating violence have been previously reported to: (person or agency) ROYAL PAUM BEACH P.D. and family and friends. + +SECTION IV. INJUNCTION (This section must be completed.) + +1. Petitioner asks the Court to enter an injunction prohibiting Respondent from committing any acts of violence against Petitioner and: + +a. prohibiting Respondent from going to or within 500 feet of any place Petitioner lives; +b. prohibiting Respondent from going to or within 500 feet of Petitioner's place(s) of employment or the school that Petitioner attends; the address of Petitioner's place(s) of employment and/or school is: [REDACTED]; + +c. prohibiting Respondent from contacting Petitioner by telephone, mail, by e-mail, in writing, through another person, or in any other manner; +d. ordering Respondent not to use or possess any guns or firearms; + +[✓ all that apply] + +✓ e. prohibiting Respondent from going to or within 500 feet of the following place(s) + +Petitioner or Petitioner's immediate family must go to often: ~~Seminal Park~~, ~~Seminal Park, Okeanville Park - Forest Hill Park~~, ~~Soccer Field (Practice)~~; + +✓ f. prohibiting Respondent from knowingly and intentionally going to or within 100 feet of Petitioner's motor vehicle; and any other terms the Court deems necessary for the safety of Petitioner and Petitioner's immediate family. + +I UNDERSTAND THAT BY FILING THIS PETITION, I AM ASKING THE COURT TO HOLD A HEARING ON THIS PETITION, THAT BOTH THE RESPONDENT AND I WILL BE NOTIFIED OF THE HEARING, AND THAT I MUST APPEAR AT THE HEARING. + +**I UNDERSTAND THAT I AM SWEARING OR AFFIRMING UNDER OATH TO THE TRUTHFULNESS OF THE CLAIMS MADE IN THIS PETITION AND THAT THE PUNISHMENT FOR KNOWINGLY MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT INCLUDES FINES AND/OR IMPRISONMENT.** + +Dated: 9-21-04 + +[REDACTED] + +Signature of Petitioner + +Printed Name: \_\_\_\_\_ + +Address: \_\_\_\_\_ + +City, State, Zip: \_\_\_\_\_ + +Telephone Number: \_\_\_\_\_ + +Fax Number: \_\_\_\_\_ + +STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +Sworn to or affirmed and signed before me on Sept. 21, 04 by [REDACTED] + +![](_page_6_Picture_26.jpeg) + +[Signature] +NOTARY PUBLIC or DEPUTY CLERK + +Belinda DaSilva + +[Print, type, or stamp commissioned name of notary or clerk.] + +- Personally known +- Produced identification +- Type of identification produced \_\_\_\_\_ + +# itONDENT DESCRIPTION SHEET. + +SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT Case No.: + +Division: FB 502004DR012235XXXXMB + +- DOMESTIC VIOLENCE F.S. 74130 I REPEAT VIOLENCE - F.S. 784.046 +- IX) DATING VIOLENCE F.S. 784.046 I SEXUAL VIOLENCE - F.S. 784.046 + +Respondent's Name: PRESTON SCOTT VINYARD Nickn e/Alias: Address. PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33411 Residence Telephone Number: 798-6685 + +Respondent's Other Address: + +Place of Employment: UNKNOWN + +Place of Employment Telephone Number: + +D.O.B.: APRIL 05, 1980 Hair: DIRTY BLOND Height: 5'6" + +Race: Eyes: GREY Weight: 176 LBS. + +Sex: MALE D.L. # + +Other: TATOO- CROSS, WARLOCK ON BACK AND ARM + +Service Preference: [ ] Work [X ) Home + +Best Time to Serve: EVENING + +[ ] Respondent has weapon Weapon Description: Weapon(s) Location: + +Respondent's vehicle: + +Make: + +Model: + +[ ] Respondent is currently in jail Date Arrested: + +Petitioner's Name: + +Petitioner's D.O.B.: Petitioner's Race: HISPANIC + +Petitioner's Sex: FEMALE Petitioner's Home Phone: (561) 798-3650 + +Color: + +Tag # + +Year: + +CASE NUMBER: 502004 DR 022 35XXXXXX PB DIVISION: PB + +PETITIONER NAME: [REDACTED] + +INTERPRETER NEEDED IN COURT? This information MUST be completed. +Respondent: Yes No Petitioner: Yes No What Language?                      + +**ADDITIONAL INFORMATION** + +The following information is necessary for service/enforcement of your injunction by law enforcement. Please answer all questions: + +Petitioner's Date of Birth: [REDACTED] \*\*\* Petitioner's Race: H + +Petitioner's Sex: Female ( ) Male \*\*\* Petitioner's Home Phone#: [REDACTED] + +Petitioner's Cell Phone#: [REDACTED] \*\*\* Petitioner's Work Phone #: [REDACTED] + +Petitioner's Driver's License #: [REDACTED] Petitioner's vehicle tag#:                      + +**RESPONDENT NAME:** Preston Scott Vinyard + +Does Respondent have children in his/her care? ( ) yes ( ) no. How many children?                      + +Is the Respondent wanted by the police? ( ) yes ( ) no. For what?                      + +If Respondent has weapons, where are weapons located? N/A + +Is Respondent in jail? ( ) yes ( ) no \*\*\* Date of arrest:                      + +Respondent's vehicle year: N/A \*\*\* Respondent's Phone #: 798-6685 + +Respondent resides in Palm Beach County Respondent's Other address?                      + +Respondent's Hangouts (name and/or address):                      + +Respondent's close relatives (names/addresses/phone #'s): Mother WayBridge GVCIC Royal Palm Beach + +Best place to serve respondent: ( ) home\* ( ) work\*\* (check only one, please) + +Best time to serve respondent: evening \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746381/EFTA02746381.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746381/EFTA02746381.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..604e2e61cf57fba2bc8564e449390eb870b0aacb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746381/EFTA02746381.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,664 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746381.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 12997, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.44, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_6_Picture_26.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT. \nIN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 124.848, + 78.4381103515625 + ], + [ + 478.5018310546875, + 78.4381103515625 + ], + [ + 478.5018310546875, + 106.7335205078125 + ], + [ + 124.848, + 106.7335205078125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SECTION I. PETITIONER (This section is about you. It must be corn leted.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.38, + 340.2 + ], + [ + 495.72, + 340.2 + ], + [ + 495.72, + 356.4 + ], + [ + 70.38, + 356.4 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "2. Filing Fees", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.38, + 490.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 165.24, + 490.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 165.24, + 506.8535461425781 + ], + [ + 70.38, + 506.8535461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, \nIN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 128.51999999999998, + 85.4815673828125 + ], + [ + 482.0649719238281, + 85.4815673828125 + ], + [ + 482.0649719238281, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 128.51999999999998, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PETITION FOR INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST DATING VIOLENCE \neft", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.62, + 278.928955078125 + ], + [ + 531.3577270507812, + 278.928955078125 + ], + [ + 531.3577270507812, + 300.2494201660156 + ], + [ + 82.62, + 300.2494201660156 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SECTION I. PETITIONER (This section is about you. It must be corn leted.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.44, + 347.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 498.78, + 347.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 498.78, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 73.44, + 364.5 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "2. Filing Fees", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.44, + 498.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 168.7539520263672, + 498.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 168.7539520263672, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 73.44, + 514.3499999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SECTION II. RESPONDENT (This section is about the person you want to be protected from. It must be completed.)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.44, + 92.34 + ], + [ + 536.1120000000001, + 92.34 + ], + [ + 536.1120000000001, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 73.44, + 119.07 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SECTION III. CASE HISTORY AND REASON FOR SEEKING PETITION (This section must be completed.)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.38, + 489.23999999999995 + ], + [ + 534.2760000000001, + 489.23999999999995 + ], + [ + 534.2760000000001, + 516.78 + ], + [ + 70.38, + 516.78 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONTINUATION SHEET", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.44, + 179.82 + ], + [ + 380.052, + 179.82 + ], + [ + 380.052, + 194.39999999999998 + ], + [ + 226.44, + 194.39999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SECTION IV. INJUNCTION (This section must be completed.)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.992, + 379.08000000000004 + ], + [ + 391.68, + 379.08000000000004 + ], + [ + 391.68, + 392.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 70.992, + 392.84999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "itONDENT DESCRIPTION SHEET.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 29.8580322265625 + ], + [ + 437.1031188964844, + 29.8580322265625 + ], + [ + 437.1031188964844, + 70.948486328125 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 70.948486328125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ADDITIONAL INFORMATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 174.14999999999998 + ], + [ + 397.79999999999995, + 174.14999999999998 + ], + [ + 397.79999999999995, + 190.35 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 190.35 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 98 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 104 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 80 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 279 + ], + [ + "Text", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746381" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746381/_page_6_Picture_26.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746381/_page_6_Picture_26.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8141f032a9cf33be599d0321142c4c6596a81290 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746381/_page_6_Picture_26.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8dffda357de93611c7ec0cc887f659fbf1e25e3b3fcb56696aaed44c387f548d +size 12243 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746390/EFTA02746390.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746390/EFTA02746390.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..14ad04e76e17973ae5f834d782ae0b1ab7b0676d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746390/EFTA02746390.md @@ -0,0 +1,70 @@ +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, +IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +Case No: **502004DR012235XXXXMB** +Division: **FB** + +**MEMO OF DISPOSITION** + +[REDACTED] + +Petitioner + +[ ] Present w/ Counsel: VS +[ ] Not Present [ ] Called/contacted clerk + +-VS- + +**PRESTON SCOTT VINYARD** + +Respondent + +[ ] Present w/ Counsel: \_\_\_\_\_ +[ ] Not Present [ ] Called/contacted clerk + +Type of Hearing: Jural judgment of drive + +Date of hearing: 10-6-04 Time 10:00am + +Heard by Judge: Kathleen J. Kurtl + +Service: [ ] Executed by: PBSO per return on 9-23-04 +[ ] Unexecuted by: \_\_\_\_\_ per \_\_\_\_\_ on \_\_\_\_\_ + +Court Extends Injunction For/Till 10-6-05 + +Court Appoints: + +[ ] BIP +[ ] Other \_\_\_\_\_ + +Case Disposition + +[ ] DA - Dismissed After hearing +[ ] DB - Dismissed Before hearing +[ ] DJ - Disposed by Judge + +Case Reopened: + +[ ] Yes +[ ] No + +Comments: + +Agreed final judgment ext for Lyon +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + +Petitioner's New Address +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + +Respondent's New Address: +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + +Sherrie Norton +Deputy Clerk + +"D" \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746390/EFTA02746390.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746390/EFTA02746390.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..480034775f079473bc5ecd1ca8043dfefbe1f297 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746390/EFTA02746390.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746390.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1098, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.23, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.89600000000002, + 50.22 + ], + [ + 481.644, + 50.22 + ], + [ + 481.644, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 157.89600000000002, + 77.76 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEMO OF DISPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 127.98000000000002 + ], + [ + 384.336, + 127.98000000000002 + ], + [ + 384.336, + 140.13 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 140.13 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 90 + ], + [ + "Text", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746390" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746391/EFTA02746391.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746391/EFTA02746391.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1162735ee6e468a9d0c68161201b44fe965b1eee --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746391/EFTA02746391.md @@ -0,0 +1,182 @@ +Date: 6/11/09 [REDACTED] PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Page: 1 +Time: 10:47:40 Offense Report Program: CMS301L + +Day Of Week : Wednesday Report Date : 12/24/03 3:39 +Occur From Date: 12/24/03 3:30 Occur To Date : 12/24/03 3:39 +Dept Class : TRAFFIC - HIT AND RUN +Street Number : LA MANCHA, [REDACTED] +City : [REDACTED] PALM BEACH, FL 33411 +Zone/division : Zone One (1) (No of Okee) +Location Type : HIGHWAY/ROADWAY Case Status : OPEN / NOT ACTIVE +Report Officer : [REDACTED], GUILLERMINA +Supervisory Emp: [REDACTED], 12/26/03 +Verif. Employee: [REDACTED], 12/26/03 +Case Status Dt : 12/24/03 + +\*\*\*\*\* A D D I T I O N A L T I M E S \*\*\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-03-005472 Date Dispatched: 12/24/03 3:39 +Date Arrived : 12/24/03 3:44 Date Cleared : 12/24/03 5:10 + +\*\*\*\*\* C A S E M A N A G E M E N T I N F O R M A T I O N \*\*\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-03-005472 Dept Class : TRAFFIC - HIT AND RUN +Case Status : OPEN / NOT ACTIVE Case Status Dt : 12/24/03 +Investigator : [REDACTED], G. + +\*\*\*ASSIGNMENT HISTORY\*\*\* + +Case Number : 1-03-005472 Dept Unit : PATROL/Law Enforcement +Investigator : [REDACTED], GUILLERMINA Supervisor : PERVENECKI, DAVID +Assignment Date: 12/30/03 + +\*\*\*\*\* O F F E N S E R E P O R T # 1 \*\*\*\*\* +State Class : Other criminal offense Attmpt/Committ : Committed +Statute/Ordin : 316.192 (1) + +\*\*\*\*\* O F F E N S E R E P O R T # 2 \*\*\*\*\* +State Class : Other criminal offense Attmpt/Committ : Committed +Statute/Ordin : 316.061 (1) + +\*\*\*\*\* N A M E P R I M A R Y R E L A T I O N S H I P S \*\*\*\*\* + +Name #...: 001 (OTHR) [REDACTED], ANTHONY +Vehicle #.: 001 / OTHER (ARSON/CRIM.MISC) + +Name #...: 002 (OTHR) [REDACTED], KATHY +Property #: 001 MISCELLANEOUS / - DAMAGED / +Property #: 002 MISCELLANEOUS / - DAMAGED / +Property #: 003 MISCELLANEOUS / - DAMAGED / + +Name #...: 003 (OTHR) [REDACTED], ROBERT +Property #: 001 MISCELLANEOUS / - DAMAGED / +Property #: 002 MISCELLANEOUS / - DAMAGED / +Property #: 003 MISCELLANEOUS / - DAMAGED / + +\*\*\*\*\* P R O P E R T Y I N F O R M A T I O N # 1 \*\*\*\*\* +Category : DAMAGED Damaged : During Other Offense +Quantity : 1 Description : PALM TREE +Value : 2,500.00 Property type : MISCELLANEOUS + +"E" + +a• + +Date: 6/11/09 Time: 10:47:40 PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Page: 2 Offense Report Program: CMS301L + +Category . . . : DAMAGED Quantity . . . : 1 Value • 300.00 + +PROPERTY Category . . . : DAMAGED Quantity . . . : 1 Value • 200.00 **INFORMATION # Damaged . . . Description . Property type 3 : During Other Offense : LAWN X-MAS DECORATION : MISCELLANEOUS** + +,\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* V EH Case number . : License # . . : Category . . . : State Veh Type : Make • Model Name . . : Color - Bottom : Damaged . . . : Stolen value . : Insured by . . : Keys in car : **TRANS AM Red Other 1 ALLSTATE Yes ICLE INFORMATION # i 5472 FL UNITED STATES M IEMARSON/CRIM.MISC) AUTO Year PONTIAC Model Color VIN Disposition Insured . . . Cntrl Officer 1 1994 TRANS AM Top Red : TOWED BY WOTATION : Yes , GUILLERMINA** + +S Case Number • : Street Name • : Birth Date . • : Birth City . ▪ **: Oper Lic No. Race Ethnic Origin : Maximum Height : Maximum Weight : Juvenile . . . : Hair Length . : Complexion . . : Citizenship . : Status USPECT/ARRE 1-03-005472 UNKNOWN 4/05/1980 23 UNKNOWN, wnite Non-Hispanic 511 180 ADULT Medium (Up to Light UNITED STATES Still Suspect STEE INFORMATION- # 1 \*\* Prompt valid in: VINYARD, PRESTON SCOTT Maximum Age . : 23 -0 FL UNITED STATES Sex Minimum Height Minimum Weight Occupation . . Hair Color . . 2") Eye Color . Build Marital Status : Male 509 160 UNKNOWN Blonde SLIGHT Single** + +**Case Number \*\*\*EMPLOYER : 1-03-005472 INFORMATION\*\*\* Employer Name : UNKNOWN** + +**1-03 Damaged . . . Description . Property type -005472 (Continued) : During Other Offense : LAWN GRASS : MISCELLANEOUS** + +**WITNESS Case Number : 1-03-005472 Street Number : City Home Phone No. : Race Ethnic Origin : Non-Hispanic Juvenile . . . : JUVENILE INFORMATION- # 1 \*\*\*\*\* \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* Last Name . . : Birth Date . . Sex • Female Occupation . . : STUDENT** + +**\*\*\*EMPLOYER INFORMATION\*\*\* Case Number . : 1-03-005472 Employer Name : N/A** Date: 6/11/09 Time: 10:47:40 PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Offense Report + +Page: 3 Program: CMS301L + +1-03-005472 (Continued) + +WITNESS INFORMATION # 2 Case Number . : 1-03-005472 Last Name . . : , ROBERT Street Number : 600 BANYAN BLVD. City WEST PALM BEACH, FL Home Phone No. : 561/11k-AMMS Business Phone : 561/653-3456 Age • 0/00/0000 45 Race Sex • Male Ethnic Origin : on- ispanic Occupation . : POLICE OFFICER Juvenile . . : ADULT + +## \*\*\*EMPLOYER INFORMATION\*\*\* + +Case Number . : 1-03-005472 Employer Name : WEST PALM BEACH POLICE DEPT. + +\* \* \* \* \*\*\*\*\* OTHER PERSON Case Number . : 1-03-005472 Last Name . . : Person Type . : Street Number : City PALM BEACH, FL 33411 Home Phone No. : 561 798-6685 Business Phone : Birth Date : 5/25/1980 23 Race Sex • Male Occupation : UNKNOWN Ethnic Origin : Juvenile . . . : INFORMATION - # 1 , ANTHONY 561 723-7646 Non-Hispanic ADULT + +Case Number : 1-03-005472 Employer Name : UNKNOWN + +#### \*\*\*EMPLOYER INFORMATION\*\*\* + +OTHER PERSON Case Number . Person Type Street Number City Home Phone No Sex Occupation . : 1-03-005472 : OWNER OF PROPERTY : ION IS VMS STREET • Ill PALM BEACH, FL : 561 110-2MIND • Female : UNKNOWN INFORMATION - # 2 Last Name . . , KATHY 33411 Race Ethnic Origin : Non-Hispanic Juvenile . . . : ADULT \*\*\*\*\*\* \* \* \* + +Case Number : 1-03-005472 Employer Name : UNKNOWN + +0 T H Case Number . Person Type . Street Number City Home Phone No. Sex Occupation . . E R PERSON : 1-03-005472 : OWNER OF PROPERTY : S ser MS STREET • PALM BEACH, FL 561 .--11111111 • Male : UNKNOWN INFORMATION - # 3 Last Name . . , ROBERT 33411 Race Ethnic Origin : Non-Hispanic Juvenile . . . : ADULT \* \* \* \* \*\*\*\*\* + +Case Number : 1-03-005472 Employer Name : UNKNOWN + +## \*\*\*EMPLOYER INFORMATION\*\*\* + +## \*\*\*EMPLOYER INFORMATION\*\*\* + +NARRATIVE # 1 + +t. • Time: 10:47:40 Offense Report + +Date: 6/11/09 III. PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT + +Page: 4 Program: CMS301L + +Original Reported By: Entered By.: Reviewed By: 1-03-005472 , GUILLERMINA LLERMINA E. (Continued) 12/24/03 12/24/03 12/26/03 + +See P/C + +Pending arrest on suspect at large. Citations pending. + +NARRAISE # 2 P.C.AFFIDAVIT/VINYARD Reported By: , JANET L. Entered By.: , JANET L. 1/27/04 1/27/04 + +ON THE ABOVE DATE AND TIME I WAS DISPATCHED TO 40WVOR MOS STREET, REGARDING A TRAFFIC CRASH, VEHICLE VS TREE. ARRIVAL I MADE CONTACT WITH THE VICTIM ROBERT WHO ADVISED A MALE, LATER IDENTIFIED AS PRESTON SCOTT VINYARD, W/M DOB 04/05/80, WAS ONE OF THE OCCUPANTS IN THE VEHICLE THAT CRASHED INTO HIS PALM T DAMAGED HIS LAWN AND LAWN ORNAMENTS. HE STATED HE OBSERVED A FEMALE EXIT THE VEHICLE AFTER IT CAME TO A STOP NEXT TO HIS RESIDENCE E FEMALE TER IDENTIFIED AS THE PASSENGER, RAN ON FOOT AWAY FROM THE SCENE. HE THEN STATED THE MALE THEN EXITED THE VEHICLE. ROBERT WENT TO PREVENT THE DEFENDANT FROM"LEAVING THE SCENE OF THE CRASH AND STRUGGLED WITH HIM ON THE GROUND, BEFORE THE SUBJECT FLED ON FOOT BEHIND THE RESIDENCE. A COMPUTER CHECK OF THE VEHICLE IDENTIFIED ERED OWNER AS, ANTHONY . CONTACT WAS MADE WITH , AT HIS RESIDENCE, WHERE HE WAS ASLEEP. HE STATED HIS FRIEND/ROOM MATE WAS DRIVING THE VEHICLE. HE S ESTON WAS AT HIS HOME EARLIER THAT EVENING WITH HIS GIRLFRI . PRESTON WOKE HIM UP FR HIS LEEP AND ASKED TO BORROWED TH E TO G VEN HIS GIRLFRIEND A RIDE HOME. CONTACT WAS MADE WI AT HER ESIDENCE, SHE STATED, SHE WAS THE PASSENGER IN THE VEHICLE. STATED PRESTON AND HERSELF WERE AT A PARTY. SHE THEN STATED SHE LAST REMEMBERS GETTING INTO THE PASSENGERS SEAT, IN THE RED PONTIAC TRANS AM, WHILE PRESTON WAS DRIVING. SHE THEN REMEMBERS TELLING PRESTON HE WAS TRAVELING TOO FAST, JUST PRIOR TO THE CRASH. THE VEHICLE WAS REMOVED BY ROTATION, JD'S TOWING. THE INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED REVEALED PRESTON SCOTT VINYARD AS THE DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE DURING THE CRASH AND THE SUBJECT THAT FLED THE SCENE OF A CRASH WITH PROPERTY DAMAGE TOTALING PARROXIMATELY \$3000.00. THE INVESTIGATION HAS GIVEN PROBABLE CAUSE FOR THE ARREST OF PRESTON SCOTT VINYARD UNDER FSS 316.061 (1), LEAVING THE SCENE OF A CRASH WITH DAMAGE AND FSS 316.192 (1) RECKLESS DRIVING. + +S.A. DISPOSITION/VINYARD NARRATIVE # 3 Reported By: , GUILLERMINA Entered By.: , JANET L. 3/02/04 3/05/04 + +NO FILE FOR: + +LEAVING SCENE OF CRASH INVOLVING DAMAGE RECKLESS DRIVING + +Date: 6/11/09 Time: 10:47:40 Ella PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Offense Report + +Page: 5 Program: CMS301L + +Supplemental NARRATIVE Reported By: Entered By.: Reviewed By: # 4 GUILLERMINA LLERMINA E. 12/24/03 12/24/03 3/22/04 + +On March 10, 2004 Mr. Roberta awitness statement was completed incident of 12/24/03. The witness to the state attorney's office. arrived at the Police department, regarding his role in the statement was forwarded + +NARRATIV # 5 Supplemental Reported By: , GUILLERMINA Entered By.: LLERMINA Reviewed By: E. 12/24/03 12/24/03 3/22/04 + +1-03-005472 + +(Continued) + +This case is pending court calender call on 3/23/04. + +SA DISPO/VINYARD NARRATIV E # 6 Reported By: , GUILLERMINA Entered By.: , JANET L. 11/30/04 12/02/04 + +DEFENDANT PLED GUILTY TO RECKLESS DRIVING AND LEAVING SCENE OF ACCIDENT INVOLVING DAMAGE. DEFENDANT WAS ADJUDICATED AND ORDERED TO PAY COURT COSTS. DEFENDANT SENTENCED TO TWO DAYS IN THE PALM BEACH COUNTY JAIL. + +END OF REPORT + +PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE +CENTRAL RECORDS +FSS EXEMPTIONS/CONFIDENTIAL + +- 119.071(2)(c) active criminal intelligence/active criminal investigative information +- 119.071(2)(d) Comprehensive policies or plans pertaining to the mobilization, deployment or tactical operations involved in responding to emergencies. (Deputies schedules) +- 119.071(2)(e) confessions +- 119.071(2)(f) confidential informants +- 119.071(5)(g) 1. Biometric Identification Information (Fingerprints, palm prints, and footprints) +- 365.171(15) identity of 911 caller or person requesting emergency service +- 119.071(4)(d)(1) home address, telephone, soc. security #, photos of active/former LE personnel, spouses and children +- 316.066(5)(a) crash reports are confidential for period of 60 days after the report is filed +- 119.071(2)(h) (1) I'd. of victim of sexual battery, lewd and lascivious offense upon person less than 16 years old, child abuse, sexual offense +- 119.071(2)(i) assets of crime victim +- 985.04(1) juvenile offender records +- 119.071(5)(a)(5) social security numbers held by agency +- 119.0712(2) personal information contained in a motor vehicle record +- 119.071(5)(b) bank account #, debit, charge and credit card #s held by an agency +- 395.3025(7)(a) and/or 456.057(7)(a) medical information +- 394.4615(7) mental health information +- 119.071(2)(b) criminal intelligence/investigative information from a non-Florida criminal justice agency +- 943.053/943.0525 NCIC/FCIC/FBI and in-state FDLE/DOC +- 119.071(4)(c) undercover personnel +- 119.07(4)(d) extra fee if request is voluminous or requires extensive personnel, technology +- OTHER: \_\_\_\_\_ + +Royal Palm Beh +Case number: 000-63-5472 Clerk ID: 8453 Date: 6-16-09 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746391/EFTA02746391.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746391/EFTA02746391.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c4e3e67d6b7705c439289dc60c5c6d869d58dfec --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746391/EFTA02746391.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,375 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746391.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 11309, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.1, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "***ASSIGNMENT HISTORY***", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 329.66999999999996 + ], + [ + 361.08, + 329.66999999999996 + ], + [ + 361.08, + 340.2 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 340.2 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "***EMPLOYER INFORMATION***", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 222.75 + ], + [ + 388.656494140625, + 222.75 + ], + [ + 388.656494140625, + 234.09 + ], + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 234.09 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "***EMPLOYER INFORMATION***", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 391.0553894042969, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 391.0553894042969, + 395.28 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 395.28 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "***EMPLOYER INFORMATION***", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 523.26 + ], + [ + 393.2293395996094, + 523.26 + ], + [ + 393.2293395996094, + 534.6 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 534.6 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "***EMPLOYER INFORMATION***", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 660.96 + ], + [ + 394.9830627441406, + 660.96 + ], + [ + 394.9830627441406, + 672.3 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 672.3 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE CENTRAL RECORDS FSS EXEMPTIONS/CONFIDENTIAL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.676, + 51.03 + ], + [ + 444.924, + 51.03 + ], + [ + 444.924, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 197.676, + 94.77000000000001 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 185 + ], + [ + "Line", + 87 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 497 + ], + [ + "Line", + 135 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 421 + ], + [ + "Line", + 94 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 494 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 212 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746391" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746397/EFTA02746397.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746397/EFTA02746397.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4b16db2f7dd56ebf608dc8cceba5d4fb9dedb5ad --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746397/EFTA02746397.md @@ -0,0 +1,150 @@ +Date: 6/14/07 +Time: 14:57:04 + +ROYAL PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT +Offense Report + +Page: 3 +Program: CMS301L + +Day Of Week : Sunday +Occur From Date: 10/31/04 3:21 +Dept Class : MISDEMEANOR - OTHER +Street Number : LA MANCHA, [REDACTED] +City : [REDACTED] PALM BEACH, FL 33411. +Zone/division : Zone One (1) (No of Okee) +Location Type : RES-SNGL FAMILY +Report Officer : HOLBERTON, NICHOLAS +Supervisory Emp: [REDACTED], THOMAS 11/02/04 +Verif. Employee: HILL, JR., JOHN 11/02/04 +Case Status Dt : 10/31/04 +Report Date : 10/31/04 3:21 +Occur To Date : 10/31/04 3:31 + +\*\*\*\*\* A D D I T I O N A L T I M E S \*\*\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-04-004495 +Date Arrived : 10/31/04 3:31 +Date Dispatched: 10/31/04 3:24 +Date Cleared : 10/31/04 10:43 + +\*\*\*\*\* C A S E M A N A G E M E N T I N F O R M A T I O N \*\*\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-04-004495 +Case Status : CLEARED BY ARREST +Dept Class : MISDEMEANOR - OTHER +Case Status Dt : 10/31/04 + +\*\*\*\*\* O F F E N S E R E P O R T # 1 \*\*\*\*\* +State Class : Other criminal offense +Statute/Ordin : 741.31 +Structure Occup: Occupied +State Dispo : Committed by Adult or Adult/Juv +Dispo Date : 10/31/04 +Exception Clear: ARRESTED ON PRIMARY OFFENSE +Arrest Case No.: 1-04-004495 +People Arrested: 1 + +\*\*\*\*\* C O M P L A I N A N T I N F O R M A T I O N - # 1 \*\*\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-04-004495 +Home Phone No. : 561/856-8355 +Race : Black +Ethnic Origin : UNKNOWN / OTHER +Juvenile : ADULT +Last Name : BESPINIS, JOHN +Birth Date : 12/06/1956 47 +Sex : Male +Occupation : CAB DRIVER + +\*\*\*\*\* S U S P E C T / A R R E S T E E I N F O R M A T I O N - # 1 \*\*\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-04-004495 +Street Number : 103 WEYBRIDGE CR C +City : [REDACTED] PALM BEACH, FL 33411 +County : PALM BEACH +Birth Date : 4/05/1980 24 +Birth State : OK +Oper Lic No. : [REDACTED] PL UNITED STATES +Race : White +Ethnic Origin : Non-Hispanic +Maximum Height : 601 +Maximum Weight : 175 +Hair Color : Blonde +Hair Style : Parted in Center +Glasses : No +Facial Hair : None +Build : MEDIUM +Citizenship : UNITED STATES +Home Phone No. : 561/798-9410 +Maximum Age : 24 +Birth Country : UNITED STATES +Sex : Male +Minimum Height : 600 +Minimum Weight : 170 +Juvenile : ADULT +Hair Length : Medium (Up to 2") +Eye Color : [REDACTED] +Complexion : Me +Teeth : Uni +Speech : Non +Hand Use : Unk + +"F" + +Date: 6/14/07 Time: 14:57:04 'III; PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Page: 2 Offense Report Program: CMS301L + +Residency Type : Religion . . . Arrest Case No.: Pants • Palm Beach UNKNOWN 0-00-049796 KHAKIS 1-04-004495 (Continued) Residency Sts : Full Year Marital Status : Single Shirt • NONE Shoes • NM + +\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* \*\*\*IF\*\* VICTIM Case Number : 1-04-004495 Street Number City Home Phone No. Oper Lic No. . : Race Ethnic Origin : Non-Hispanic Weight 90 Juvenile . . . : JUVENILE File Charges . : No Victim Sobriety: HAD BEEN DRINKING I N FORMATION - # 1 Prompt valid in: • Birth Date . . : 17 FL UNITED STATES Sex Female Height 505 Occupation . . : STUDENT Victim Type . : Adult Can Identify . : Yes Injury Extent : Not Applicable + +V Case Number : Victim Type : Can Identify : Injury Extent : ICTIM 1-04-004495 Government Yes Not Applicable INFORMATION - # 2 Piwmpt valid in: STATE OF FLORIDA, File Charges . : Yes Victim Sobriety: SOBER + +0 T H Case Number . Person Type . Street Number City Home Phone No. Oper Lic No. . Race Ethnic Origin E R P E R : 1-04-004495 : FATHER W ite : Non-Hispanic S0 N INFORMATION - # 1 Last Name . . : FL Birth Date . UNITED STATES Sex Male Juvenile . . : ADULT 43 + +Original NARRATIVE # 1 Reported By: HOLBERTON, NICHOLAS Entered By.: HOLBERTON, NICHOLAS Reviewed By: , JR., JOHN C. 10/31/04 10/31/04 11/02/04 + +For further information on case# 04-4495, refer to PC Affidavit. + +No further information. + +P.C. AFFIDAVIT/VINYARD NARRATIVE # 2 Reported By: HOLBERTON, NICHOLAS Entered By.: , JANET L. 10/31/04 11/03/04 + +ON THE ABOE DATE/TIME I WAS DISPATCHED TO TO A BATTERY IN THE BACK OF A TAXI AND THEFT OF SERVICES. IN REFERENCE + +UPON ARRIVAL I MADE CONTACT WITH THE CAB DRIVER JOHN BESPINIS. BESPINIS ADVISED ME THE WAS DRIVING PRESTON S VINYARD AND + +Date: 6/14/07 +Time: 14:57:04 + +PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT +Offense Report + +Page: 3 +Program: CMS301L + +1-04-004495 (Continued) +TO [REDACTED] WHEN THEY STARTED TO ARGUE BECAUSE NEITHER OF [REDACTED] THEM HAD MONEY TO PAY THE CAB. AT SOME POINT DURING THE ARGUMENT, BESPINIS SAID VINYARD HIT [REDACTED] UPON ARRIVING AT [REDACTED] AND VINYARD GOT OUT OF THE VEHICLE AND RAN INTO THE RESIDENCE. I WALKED UP TO THE FRONT DOOR AND NOTICED IT WAS PARTIALLY OPEN. SHORTLEY AFTER SGT. [REDACTED] AND OFC. DOERR ARRIVED TO ASSIST ME. I KNOCKED ON THE DOOR SEVERAL TIMES AND SAID "POLICE", BUT NO ONE ANSWERED. MYSELF SGT. [REDACTED], AND OFC. DOERR ENTERED THE RESIDENCE TO MAKE SURE NO ONE WAS INJURED. AS I ENTERED THE RESIDENCE, [REDACTED] STEPPED OUT FROM BEHIND A WALL WITH A PAIR OF SHORTS AND NO SHIRT EXPOSING HER BREAST. [REDACTED] TOLD US TO GET OUT OF HER HOUSE NUMEROUS TIMES. I ADVISED [REDACTED] TO PUT A SHIRT ON AND SHE DID SO. I TRIED TO EXPLAIN TO [REDACTED] WHY WE WERE THERE, BUT SHE KEPT TELLING US TO GET OUT OF HER HOUSE, AND THAT NO ONE WAS IN HER HOUSE. [REDACTED] THEN CALLED HER FATHER, [REDACTED] AND TOLD HIM POLICE WERE IN THERE HOUSE FOR NO REASON. I THEN GOT ON THE PHONE WITH [REDACTED] AND INFORMED HIM OF THE SITUATION. SINCE [REDACTED] WAS A JUVENILE, I ASKED [REDACTED] FOR CONSENT TO SEARCH HIS RESIDENCE FOR THE BATTERY SUSPECT. [REDACTED] AGREED TO LET US SEARCH THE HOUSE, BUT [REDACTED] WOULD NOT LET US SEARCH HER FATHERS BEDROOM AND LOCKED HERSELF IN THERE. [REDACTED] STAYED ON THE PHONE WITH HER FATHER AND KEPT TELLING HIM SHE WANTED US OUT OF THEIR HOUSE. WE TALKED BACK AND FORTH WITH [REDACTED] FOR ABOUT THIRTY MINUTES AND I TRIED TO HAVE HER OPEN THE DOOR. [REDACTED] THEN TOLD HER FATHER SHE WAS GOING TO KILL HERSELF. SGT. [REDACTED] ADVISED THE FATHER THAT SINCE SHE MADE THAT STATEMENT WE HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO FORCE ENTRY INTO THE ROOM IF THE DOOR WAS NOT OPENED. [REDACTED] ADVISED HE WAS ON THE WAY HOME FROM FT PIERCE AND THAT HE WILL BE HOME AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. [REDACTED] THEN OPENED THE DOOR AND WAS PLACED IN HANDCUFFS FOR OUR PROTECTION. I THEN SAT [REDACTED] ON THE [REDACTED] IN THE LIVING ROOM WHILE SGT. [REDACTED] SEARCHED THE BEDROOM AND DISCOVERED VINYARD UNDER THE BED. VINYARD WAS PLACED IN CUFFS AND SAT DOWN ON THE [REDACTED] IN THE LIVING ROOM. AFTER RUNNING VINYARD BY HIS FLORIDA DRIVERS LICENSE, HE CAME BACK WITH A PROTECTION ORDER FOR [REDACTED]. SHORTLEY AFTER [REDACTED] ARRIVED HOME AND WAS UPDATED ON THE SITUATION. VINYARD WAS PALCED UNDER ARREST FOR VIOLATION OF PROTECTION ORDER AND TRANSPORTED TO THE COUNTY JAIL WITHOUT INCIDENT. [REDACTED] ADVISED VINYARD DID NOT HIT HER AT ANY TIME, AND REFUSED TO PROSECUTE. BESPINIS HAD LEFT THE SCENE EARLIER AND WHEN CONTACTED REFUSED TO RETURN TO [REDACTED] TO IDENTIFY VINYARD OR TO PROSECUTE FOR THEFT OF SERVICES. + +[REDACTED] WAS TURNED OVER TO HER FATHER. + +NO FURTHER INFORMATION. + +\*\*\*\*\* N A R R A T I V E # 3 \*\*\*\*\* +Supplemental Reported By: DOERR, [REDACTED] P. 10/31/04 +Entered By: DOERR, [REDACTED] P. 10/31/04 +Reviewed By: [REDACTED], JR., JOHN C. 11/04/04 + +ON 10/31/04 I RESPONDED TO [REDACTED]. AS BACK-UP FOR THEFT OF A CAB FAIR. UPON ARRIVAL I OBSERVED THE FRONT DOOR OF [REDACTED] CRACKED OPEN. I THEN MADE CONTACT WITH THE + +a + +,Date: 6/14/07 Time: 14:57:04 PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Page: 4 Offense Report Program: CMS301L + +1-04-004495 (Continued) CAB DRIVER WHO ADVISED ME THAT A FEMALE WALKED AWAY SOUTH ON BILBAO AND A MALE WENT I . MYSELF AND OFC HOLBERTON MADE CONTACT WITH WHO ADVISED US THAT THERE WAS NO MALE IN THE HOUSE. I THEN VERIFIED WITH MALE DID EXIT INSISTED THAT MADE CONTACT WITHIN'''. (FATHER) WHO AUTHORIZED SEARCH THE HOUSE FOR THE SAFETY OF MM. NO FURTHER INFORMATION AT THIS TIME. THE CAB DRIVER WHO ADVISED ME THAT A HIS CAB AND RAN INSIDE THEE WAS NOBODY INSIDE. SGT + +Supplemental NARRATIVE # Reported By: Entered By.: Reviewed By: , JR., 4 E. E. C. 10/31/04 10/31/04 11/04/04 + +On 10/31/04 at approximately 0331 hrs. I responded as back-up for Ofc. Holberton to a reported theft of services (from acab) at cabdr've espinis had driven a w/m and w/f to the area of . The w/m and w/f became involved in an argument that became physical when the male struck the female. The . female left the scene by walking or runnin south on Bilbao St. The male entered the house at Bespinis continued to wait for the police, parked nt e driveway of the residence. Bespinis advised that both the male and female were young adults. Ofc. Holberton, Ofc. Doerr, and myself approached the front door and found that it was ajar by 6-B inches. Ofc. Holberton knocked on the door and loudly called "police" into the open door but received no response. Ibecame concerned that the male and female had possibly given the cabdriver afake address with the intention of not paying and eluding the cabdriver and that the male might have illegally entered the residence at . in an attempt to skip out on paying the cab are. Ofc. Holberton, Doerr, and myself entered the residence to ensure that no crime was ongoing and to check on the welfare of an residents. We were standing just inside the front door lookin around the livingroom when a w/f (later IDed as 17 years of age) stepped out of her bedroom wearing not ing but panties. I asked her to dress, which she did and she then asked why we were in her house. I related to her that acabdriver had watched a young male run into her house. IlleirTcked and she kept asking how we got in her house and stated that this was untrue and that her door had why were we there. I explained the circumstances to her several times but she insisted that her door was locked and noone was in her house. She then stated she was going to call her father and I told her that I agreed that was agood idea. Ithen spoke to on his cellphone and related the information to, hiThilaathat I believed it possible that aw/m was possibly still in his house. told me that he wanted us to check his house to ensure his daughter's . Upon arrival I learned the following: + +'Date: 6/14/07 Time: 14:57:04 PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Page: 5 Offense Report Program: CMS301L + +1-04-004495 (Continued) safety. He then informe that he had given us permission to check the house. became enraged at this and began to curse Wall at her father over the phone and she ran into the bedroom and locked the oor, refusing to allow us to enter. I could hear yelling at her father on the phone cursing at him and then I heard her tell him that if he didn't tell us (the police) to leave that she would kill herself. She repeated this same threat to him about 2 or 3 times. I went • to the kitchen and picked up the extension and told was still on the phone in the bedroom) that because was now threatening to harm herself that we would ave to force entry into the bedroom to ensure that she didn't harm herself and that she would probably be Baker Acted for her protection. When heard this she left the bedroom and came into the livingroom where Ofc. Holberton and myself handcuffed her for safety reasons until the situation could be sorted out. stated that he would be at his house in about 5 minutes and asked Ichecked in the bedroom and found PrestorMil tinyard for us top wait for him before doing anything to (who is known to me iding under the bed. Vinyard was handcuffed for safety reasons and placed in the livingroom. A computer check on Vinyard revealed avalid protection order on him to eta away from While waiting for to arrive, admitted that shi and Vinyard had gone out and when her car broke down they took the cab home, but had no mone to pay for it, so they began to argue about how to pay. stated that Vinyard never struck her and that she left t e scene because she was "pissed". IIIIIIIInever said how she got in the house without the cabdriver seeing her. When got to his residence he stated that Vinyard had battere approximately amonth ago and that was why there was arotection order against him. and I spoke with at length and she stated severe times that she never intended to harm or kill herself, but that she had only told that to her father to try to convince him to make the police lea the house so we wouldn't find Vinyard hiding there. was convinced that was truthful about not hurting herself and I believed t at she was no danger to herself, only that she had been trying to get us to leave and used that.threat as leverage against her father. Idetermined that a Baker Act was not warranted because I believed at that point thatallilliwas no threat to herself. During this entire incident Bespinis had left the scene and when contacted by phone advised that he didn't want to prosecute and refused to come back to the scene to sign awaiver of prosecution. Vinyard was arrested for the violation of the protection order and -was released to her father. \*\*Nothing further\*\* + +END OF REPORT \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746397/EFTA02746397.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746397/EFTA02746397.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..46853b2b7ad37a8e35a6de3d93b2115ef234d3b1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746397/EFTA02746397.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,206 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746397.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 13273, + "elapsed_seconds": 12.01, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "ROYAL PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Offense Report", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 195.84, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 414.324, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 414.324, + 107.73000000000002 + ], + [ + 195.84, + 107.73000000000002 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 433 + ], + [ + "Line", + 100 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 607 + ], + [ + "Line", + 71 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 600 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746397" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746402/EFTA02746402.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746402/EFTA02746402.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fa03644256264924f44567ca8001d907df48f568 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746402/EFTA02746402.md @@ -0,0 +1,358 @@ +**ADMINISTRATIVE** + +**Agency ORI Number FLO 502800 Agency Name PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT** + +**Charge Type:** Check as many as apply. 1. Felony 3. Misdemeanor 4. Traffic Felony 5. Ordinance 6. Other + +**Location of Arrest (Include Name of Business) 151 Bilbao St Palm Bch, Fl 33411** + +**Date of Arrest 10/31/04 Time of Arrest 0407 Booking Date 10/31/04 Booking Time 0455 Jail Date 10/31/04 Jail Time Location of Vehicle N/A** + +**Name (Last, First, Middle) Vinyard, Preston, S** + +**Race W Sex M Date of Birth 04/05/1980 Height 6'00" Weight 170 Eye Color Br Hair Color Blo Complexion Fair Build Med** + +**DEFENDANT Co-Defendant Name (Last, First, Middle) Forearm, Back, Shoulder** + +**CODE 103-C Weybridge Cr Palm Bch, Fl 33411** + +**DEFENDANT Permanent Address (Street, Apt. Number) same** + +**JUVENILE Business Address (Name, Street)** + +**CODE V563677801250 Soc. Soc. Number 441782517 INS Number Place of Birth (City, State) Oklahoma Citizenship US** + +**CODE Notified by: (Name) Date Time Inventory Disposition 1. Handled processed within Dept. and Released. 2. TOT HRS / DYS 3. Incarcerated Date Time** + +**CODE The above address provided by Defendant and / or Defendant's parent(s) the child and / or parent was fold to keep the Juvenile Court Clerk (Phone 355-2520) Informed of any change of address. School Attended Grade** + +**CODE Property Critique? Description of Property Value of Property** + +**CODE Drug Activity N. N/A P. Possess S. Sell B. Buy T. Traffic R. Smuggle D. Deliver E. Use M. Manufacture/ Z. Other Product Climatic Drug Type N. N/A A. Amphetamine B. Berbiturate C. Cocaine E. Heroin H. Hatucinogen M. Marijuana O. Opium/Derv. P. Periphemelia/ Equipment S. Synthetica U. Unknown Z. Other** + +**CHARGE Description Violation of Protection Order Counts 1 Domestic Violence Y N Statute Violation Number 741.31 Violation of ORD # N/A** + +**CHARGE Drug Activity Drug Type Amount / Unit Offense # 04-4495 Warrant / Caples Number N/A Bond** + +**CHARGE Drug Activity Drug Type Amount / Unit Offense # 04-4495 Warrant / Caples Number N/A Bond** + +**CHARGE Drug Activity Drug Type Amount / Unit Offense # 04-4495 Warrant / Caples Number N/A Bond** + +**CHARGE Drug Activity Drug Type Amount / Unit Offense # 04-4495 Warrant / Caples Number N/A Bond** + +**CHARGE Instruction No. 1 Mandatory Appearance in Court Location (Court, Room Number, Address) Criminal Justice Complex 3228 Gun Club Rd** + +**CODE Instruction No. 2 You need not appear in Court but must comply with instructions on Reverse Side. Court Date and Time Month November Day 30th Year 2004 Time 8:00 A.M. P.M.** + +**NOTICE TO APPEAR AGREE TO APPEAR AT THE TIME AND PLACE DESIGNATED TO ANSWER THE OFFENSE CHARGED OR TO PAY THE FINE SUBSCRIBED. I UNDERSTAND THAT SHOULD I WILL FULLY FAIL TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT AS REQUIRED BY THIS NOTICE TO APPEAR, THAT I MAY BE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF COURT AND A WARRANT FOR MY ARREST SHALL BE ISSUED** + +**Signature of Defendant (or Juvenile and Parent / Custodian) Date Signed** + +**ADMIN HOLD for other Agency Name: Signature of Arresting Officer Name Verification (Printed by Arrest)** + +**ADMIN Dangerous Suicidal Restricted Arrest Name of Agreeing Officer (Print) I.D. # P(PRINT)** + +**ADMIN Instake Deputy I.D. # Pouch # Transporting Officer ID # Agency Witness here if subject signed with an** + +ARREST / NOTICE TO APPEAR +Juvenile Referral Report + +1. Arrest +2. N.T.A. +3. Request for Warrant +4. Request for Captas + +| Agency ORI Number
FLO 502800 | | Agency Name
PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT | | Agency Report Number (N.T.A.'s only)
8 6 - 0, 4 - 4, 4, 9, 5 | | Weapon Belted / Type
2 1. Yes 2. No | | Multiple Clearance Indicator | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|-------------------------------------------------|--|-------------------------------------------|--|-------------------------------------------|--|-------------------------------------------|--|----------------------------------------------------|--|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|-------------------------------------------|--|-------------------------------------------|--|-------------------------------------------|--|------------------------|--|----------------------|--| +| Charge Type: Check as many as apply. 1. Felony 2. Traffic Felony 3. Misdemeanor 4. Traffic Misdemeanor 5. Ordinance 6. Other | | Location of Arrest (Including Name of Business)
151 Bilbao St Palm Bch, Fl 33411 | | Location of Offense (Business Name, Address)
same | | Date of Arrest
10/31/04 | | Date of Arrest
04/05/1980 | | Date of Birth
04/05/1980 | | Height
6'00" | | Weight
170 | | Eye Color
Br | | Hair Color
Blo | | Complexion
Fair | | Build
Med | | | | | | +| Date of Arrest
10/31/04 | | Time of Arrest
04/07 | | Booking Date
10/31/04 | | Booking Time
0455 | | Jail Date
10/31/04 | | Jail Time
10/31/04 | | Location of Vehicle
N/A | | Alias (Name, DOB, Soc. Sec. #, Etc.) | | Race
W | | Sex
M | | Date of Birth
04/05/1980 | | Height
6'00" | | Weight
170 | | | | +| Name (Last, First, Middle)
Vinyard, Preston, S | | Sex
W | | Date of Birth
04/05/1980 | | Height
6'00" | | Weight
170 | | Eye Color
Br | | Hair Color
Blo | | Complexion
Fair | | Build
Med | | Race
W | | Sex
M | | Date of Birth
04/05/1980 | | Height
6'00" | | Weight
170 | | +| Defendant Name
Forearm, Back, Shoulder | | Local Address (Street, Apt. Number)
103-C Weybridge Cr | | City
Palm Bch, Fl 33411 | | State
(State) | | Zip
(Zip) | | Phone
(561) 798-9410 | | Religion
Unk | | Indication of: Alcohol Influence
Drug Influence | | Residence Type:
1. City
2. County
3. Florida
4. Out of State | | Address Source
Defendant | | Occupation
Unk | | Citizenship
US | | | | | | +| Business Address (Name, Street)
V563677801250 | | Soc. Sec. Number
441782517 | | INS Number
441782517 | | Place of Birth (City, State)
Oklahoma | | Phone
(561) 798-9410 | | Race
Unk | | Religion
Unk | | Indication of: Alcohol Influence
Drug Influence | | Residence Type:
1. City
2. County
3. Florida
4. Out of State | | Address Source
Defendant | | Occupation
Unk | | Citizenship
US | | | | | | +| Co-Defendant Name (Last, First, Middle)
Palm Bch, Fl 33411 | | Date of Arrest
10/31/04 | | Date of Birth
10/31/04 | | Race
W | | Sex
M | | Date of Birth
10/31/04 | | 1. Arrested
2. Al Large | | 3. Felony
4. Misdemeanor
5. Juvenile | | 6. Juvenile | | 7. Juvenile | | 8. Juvenile | | 9. Juvenile | | | | | | +| Co-Defendant Name (Last, First, Middle)
Vinyard, Preston, S | | Date of Arrest
10/31/04 | | Date of Birth
10/31/04 | | Race
W | | Sex
M | | Date of Birth
10/31/04 | | 1. Arrested
2. Al Large | | 3. Felony
4. Misdemeanor
5. Juvenile | | 6. Juvenile | | 7. Juvenile | | 8. Juvenile | | 9. Juvenile | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Violation of Protection Order | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | +| Charge Description
Charge Description | | Counts
1 | | Domestic Violence
Y N | | Statute Violation Number
741.31 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | + +PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT + +**ADMIN** OBTS Number **PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT** + +**Agency ORI Number Agency Name Agency Report Number** + +**FLO Charge Type Check as many as apply 1. Felony 2. Traffic Felony 3. Misdemeanor 4. Traffic Misdemeanor 5. Ordinance 6. Other** + +**Charge Description Charge Description** + +**Charge Description Charge Description** + +**Vinyard, Preston, S Violation of Protection Order** + +**Victim's Name (Last, First, Middle) State of Florida** + +**Local Address (Street, Apt., Number) (City) (State) (Zip) Phone Address Source** + +**Business Address (Name, Street) (City) (State) (Zip) Phone Occupation** + +**Govt** + +**The undersigned certifies and swears that he/she has just and reasonable grounds to believe, and does believe that the above named Defendant committed the following violation of law.** + + committed the below acts in my presence. was observed by \_\_\_\_\_ who told \_\_\_\_\_ that he/she saw the arrested person commit the below acts. was found to have committed the below acts, resulting from my (described) investigation. + +On the 31st day of November 2004 at 0321 A.M. P.M. (Specifically include facts constituting cause for arrest.) + +**On the above date/time I was dispatched to \_\_\_\_\_ in reference to a Battery in the back of a taxi and Theft of Services.** + +**Upon arrival I made contact with the cab driver John Bespinis. Bespinis advised me he was driving Preston S Vinyard and \_\_\_\_\_ when they started to argue because neither of them had money to pay the cab. At some point during the argument, Bespinis said Vinyard hit \_\_\_\_\_ Upon arriving at \_\_\_\_\_ and Vinyard got out of the vehicle and ran into the residence. I walked up to the front door and noticed it was partially open. Shortley after Sgt. Murphy and Ofc. Doerr arrived to assist me. I knocked on the door several times and said "Police", but no one answered. Myself, Sgt. Murphy, and Ofc. Doerr entered the residence to make sure no one was injured. As I entered the residence \_\_\_\_\_ stepped out from behind a wall with a pair of shorts on and no shirt exposing her breast \_\_\_\_\_ told us to get out of her house numerous times. I advised \_\_\_\_\_ to put a shirt on and she did so. I tried to explain to \_\_\_\_\_ why we were there, but she kept telling us to get out of her house, and that no one was in her house \_\_\_\_\_ then called her father, \_\_\_\_\_ and told him police were in there house for no reason. I then got on the phone with \_\_\_\_\_ and informed him of the situation. Since \_\_\_\_\_ was a juvenile, I asked \_\_\_\_\_ for consent to search his residence for the battery suspect \_\_\_\_\_ agreed to let us search the house, but \_\_\_\_\_ would not let us search her fathers bedroom and locked herself in there. \_\_\_\_\_ stayed on the phone with her father and kept telling him she wanted us out of there house. We talked back and forth with \_\_\_\_\_ for about thirty minutes and I tried to have her open the door. \_\_\_\_\_ then told her father she was going to kill herself. Sgt. Murphy advised the father that since she made that statement we had no choice but to force entry into the room if the door was not opened \_\_\_\_\_ advised he was on the way home from Ft. Pierce and that he will be home as soon as possible. \_\_\_\_\_ then opened the door and was placed in handcuffs for our protection. I then sat \_\_\_\_\_ on the couch in the living room while Sgt. Murphy searched the bedroom and discovered Vinyard under the bed. Vinyard was placed in cuffs and sat down on the \_\_\_\_\_ in the living room. After running Vinyard by his Florida Drivers License, he came back with a Protection Order for \_\_\_\_\_ Shortley after \_\_\_\_\_ arrived home and was updated on the situation. Vinyard was placed under arrest for Violation of Protection Order and transported to the county jail without incident \_\_\_\_\_ advised Vinyard did not hit her at any time, and refused to prosecute. Bespinis had left the scene earlier and when contacted refused to return to \_\_\_\_\_ entify Vinyard or to prosecute for theft of services.** + +**ADMINISTRATIVE** + +**SWORN AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME** + +NOTARY PUBLIC / CLERK OF COURT / POLICE OFFICER + +**10/31/2004** + +DATE + +**SIGNATURE OF ARRESTING / INVESTIGATING OFFICER** + +**Ofc. Holberton #251** + +NAME OF OFFICER (PLEASE PRINT) + +**10/31/2004** + +DATE + +**PAGE** + +**1** OF **2** + +DISTRIBUTION: - Court Copy - State Attorney YELLOW - Agency PINK - Agency GOLDENROD - + +PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT + +1. Arrest +2. N.T.A. + +3. Request for Warrant +4. Request for Capias + +1 + +Juvenile + +OBTS Number + +Agency ORI Number +FLO 5 0 2 8 0 0 + +Agency Name +ROYAL PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT + +Agency Report Number +8 6 - 0 4 4 4 9 5 + +Charge Type: +Check as many as apply. +1. Folony +2. Traffic Folony +3. Misdemeanor +4. Traffic Misdemeanor +5. Ordinance +6. Other + +Special Notes: + +Cont. + +Name (Last, First, Middle) +Vinyard, Preston, S + +Alias + +Race +W + +Sex +M + +Date of Birth + +Charge Description +Violation of Protection Order + +Charge Description + +Charge Description + +Charge Description + +Victim's Name (Last, First, Middle) +State of Florida + +Race + +Sex + +Date of Birth + +Local Address (Street, Apt., Number) + +(City) + +(State) + +(Zip) + +Phone + +Address Source + +Victim + +Business Address (Name, Street) + +(City) + +(State) + +(Zip) + +Phone + +Occupation + +Govt + +The undersigned certifies and swears that he/she has just and reasonable grounds to believe, and does believe that the above named Defendant committed the following violation of law. +The Person taken into custody ... + + committed the below acts in my presence. + + was observed by \_\_\_\_\_ who told \_\_\_\_\_ + + confessed to \_\_\_\_\_ +admitting to the below facts. + + was found to have committed the below acts, resulting from my (described) investigation. + +On the 31st day of November 20 04 at 0321 A.M. P.M. (Specifically include facts constituting cause for arrest.) + +Cont. + +[REDACTED] was turned over to her father. + +No further information. + +PROBABLE CAUSE STATEMENT + +SWORN AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME + +NOTARY PUBLIC / CLERK OF COURT / POLICE OFFICER +10/31/2004 +DATE + +SIGNATURE OF ARRESTING / INVESTIGATING OFFICER +Ofc. Holberton #251 +NAME OF OFFICER (PLEASE PRINT) +10/31/2004 +DATE + +PAGE +2 OF 2 + +## IN THE CIRCUIT/COUNTY COURT, FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +STATE OF FLORIDA. + +S. .dy, rate) I up name, Defendant Lel Ci VI. + +BOOKING NO f 157 .3?1? + +CASE NO + +# ORDER OF NO CONTACT a + +- The Defendant is specifically ordered to have NIO CONTACT and to not attempt to contwing person or persons: + - 4. Alleged victim(s) 3 Co-defendant(s) O Witness(es) +- 2. The Defendant shall NOT CONTACT or attempt to contact the above-listed person(s) until this case is closed or until further order of the Court. whichever occurs first. +- 3. For purposes of this Order, -no contact' means ti-Nt. \* al\ + - 1. NO direct or indirect messages or Commtlhications by the Defendant. + - 2. NO direct or indirect contact by athird perion bn behalf of the Defendant. + - 3. NO communication of any kindincluding telePhopeOllsi messages on answering machines and voice or electronic mail: all written forms o69flimuniodtiont inducting letters of apology: or any other means of communication. including the deliver/01PS at erif timettither at a residence. school. or workplace. ' reizt ,/ +- 4. The Defendant has been expressly advised that if any of the abosr isted person(s) attempts to contact the Defendant, he/she must avoid any such contact and the Defendant has tieen further advised that he/she would be in violation of this Order if the Defendant communicates with any of the above-listed persons even if contact is initiated by the above-listed person(s). +- 5. Exception (applies only if checked): + - The Defendant may return to the residence where the above-listed person(s) resides for the purpose of removing the Defendants PERSONAL EFFECTS ONLY and then only in the presence of auniformed law enforcement officer and on ONE occasion only. O Contact may be in writing. OContact may be by telephone. ❑ Contact may occur but only through athird party and only to facilitate visitation with the Defendant's minor children. The Defendant has been expressly advised that violation of this Order will subject the Defendant to arrest and commitment by the Court. plus. if applicable, bond forfeiture. + +rvil\ crift fi hit /10 Conk s+ a reit-- + +Ihave Mid and do understand Ints Order and agree to obey It I undernand that ONLY A CRIMINAL DIVISION JUDGE may modify INS Order. I understand therefore that the alleged victim In MN case. iti slate attorney, and any ether attorney or person DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY to modify ANY PORTION of this Order without A PROVAL BY THE JUDGE. + +Icompletely understand and agree that III disobey this Order. Me Judg may possMI oko and forfeit any bond. andlor erdar m Immediate Inattention ale + +ortagiteSdom.. Ze/agi ca...-e rOrwwr + +'it DONE AND ORDERED at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, td owl Miges4 .... 20\_r + +eine thoo Some Altana? p.m Pubic 0e4M011/Celense Mai ney (Werwl•Al Alecto, velem Weeded by SIN4 AeOrety) C•OO Jae weeds + +CIRCUIT/COUNTY COURT JUDGE r. 2004. + +#### IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, STATE OF FLORIDA CRIMINAL DIVISION "TDC" + +STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 04MM027322A02 BOOKING NO. 2004351347 + +vs. + +PRESTON VINYARD, W/M, 04/05/1980, 441-78-2517 + +### INFORMATION FOR: + +# 1) VIOLATION OF INJUNCTION AGAINST REPEAT OR DATING VIOLENCE + +In the Name and by Authority of the State of Florida: + +BARRY E. KRISCHER, State Attorney for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County, Florida, by and through his undersigned Assistant State Attorney, charges that PRESTON VINYARD on or about October 31, 2004, in the County of Palm Beach and State of Florida, did willfully, after having been served with an Injunction for Protection Against Repeat or Dating Violence issued pursuant to section 784.046 or a foreign protection order accorded full faith and credit pursuant to the residence, school, place of employment, or a specified place frequented regularly • and any named family or household member, contrary to Florida Statute 784.047(2). + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +Appeared before me, STACEY Florida, personally known to me, who, faith. IBARRA Assistant State Attorney for Palm Beach County, being first duly sworn, says that this prosecution is instituted in good + +STA Y COL B FL. BAR NO. 0162541 Assistant State Attorney Palm Beach County, Florida /Le to Nov Is Ctrkv 2994 ir 4 Coop fe2!A\*. ?OW?, •S + +liefr Ass\$is t Stat ttomey + +Swom to and subscribed to before me this It—day of Nove ber, 2004. + +FCIC REFERENCE NUMBERS: + +Y PUBLIC, Florida + +Iowa A Rodeigue: IMCCIAMSSi0N 0 0024565 EONS 20 2008 + +11 VIOLATION OF INJUNCTION AGAINST REPEAT OR DATIN ENG\* rauwitt 00( + +![](_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg) + +O E \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746402/EFTA02746402.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746402/EFTA02746402.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..484552834f5507719c8e4d970675fc412c3fc3b4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746402/EFTA02746402.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,435 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746402.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 43069, + "elapsed_seconds": 85.09, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "ARREST / NOTICE TO APPEAR Juvenile Referral Report", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 234.39600000000002, + 38.07 + ], + [ + 353.124, + 38.07 + ], + [ + 353.124, + 57.50999999999999 + ], + [ + 234.39600000000002, + 57.50999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 230.724, + 48.599999999999994 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 48.599999999999994 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 59.94 + ], + [ + 230.724, + 59.94 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 231.948, + 49.41 + ], + [ + 348.84, + 49.41 + ], + [ + 348.84, + 60.75 + ], + [ + 231.948, + 60.75 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT/COUNTY COURT, FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 63.81071853637695, + 60.75 + ], + [ + 535.5, + 60.75 + ], + [ + 535.5, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 63.81071853637695, + 76.94999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER OF NO CONTACT a", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 140.76, + 153.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 544.2320556640625, + 153.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 544.2320556640625, + 198.45000000000002 + ], + [ + 140.76, + 198.45000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT \nIN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, STATE OF FLORIDA \nCRIMINAL DIVISION \"TDC\"", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 131.57999999999998, + 46.980000000000004 + ], + [ + 488.08453369140625, + 46.980000000000004 + ], + [ + 488.08453369140625, + 91.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 131.57999999999998, + 91.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "INFORMATION FOR:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.02400000000003, + 230.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 372.4463806152344, + 230.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 372.4463806152344, + 246.05352783203125 + ], + [ + 246.02400000000003, + 246.05352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "1) VIOLATION OF INJUNCTION AGAINST REPEAT OR DATING VIOLENCE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 44.676, + 256.77 + ], + [ + 470.42218017578125, + 256.77 + ], + [ + 470.42218017578125, + 274.10302734375 + ], + [ + 44.676, + 274.10302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 52 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 585 + ], + [ + "Line", + 60 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 104 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746402" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746402/_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746402/_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..93e05c8fc41478fbc31f20bd46be8cd476f4f0dc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746402/_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f1b4de688abdd89864c5d22d1fa5d1746ce2769748792afcd543d80983e7b230 +size 3045 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746408/EFTA02746408.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746408/EFTA02746408.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f0a924b5ead8f4d4a9b084c4a6bfdaa509cc5e06 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746408/EFTA02746408.md @@ -0,0 +1,129 @@ +## The Psychological Trauma Center + +adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc. + +Medical Director: Gilbert W. Kliman, M. D. + +2105 Divindero St., San Francisco, CA 94115 Phone (415)292-7119 Fax (415) 749-2802 met earatchlleforkrhionvom + +Forensic Child Psychiatric £valuations. Life Care Plans & Testimony + +Tape 2 + +with Dr. Kliman 12/2/08 + +Transcription by: K. Rios + +00:00:05 + +Dr. Kliman: This is the second tape we're making today; you know I realized that I didn't get your preference for what you would like me to call you. + +a SIP + +Dr. Kliman: III. I apologize.f0 + +a That's okay. + +Dr. Kliman: The time is now 3:27 and you were telling me when I asked you about other bad things that happened in college, you mentioned some thing's that were; sounded more like there in obstacles category rather than in harmful things like your soccer got in the way of international business and biology; but you finally finished international business with an A; and your gonna be taking biology so I was thinking of those as obstacles. While, the problems with your alcoholic drug abusing disappointing boyfriend whom you cared about so much that sounds like astressful problem. Now...when you had those troubles with your boyfriend would you say that those were serious problems for you, emotionally? + +Emotionally, yes I cared about him but I mean you can only take so much; Imean I was with him, known him for like 5 years; and after awhile you just kinda like... you realize like you love the person but your not in love with the person; and that's kinda like, kinda how what happened to me; like I loved him and I knew I wasn't in love with him that's not the person Iwanted to be with. So I mean, I took me like 3 years to realize that; 2 'A years I mean the last like two years I mean there was really nothing there I just kinda of kept going back to the like same old same old and after a + +while you just, I don't know; I didn't want to be with him anymore. 1k0 + +00:02:39 + +Dr. Kliman: What emotional reactions did you have to this change in your relationship? + +S Nothing really, I mean its not like I was around him all the time because I lived in Boca and he was living in Jacksonville. So it wasn't like he was around all the time for me to like really be disappointed because when I went to college I was single, I was by myself. I was going up to Jacksonville pretty much like every weekend though to go visit him, but I was used to like being by myself throughout the week and like the girls on my team were there to help me and support me and like one of my roommate was kinds of like going through the same thing; so we were both kinda there for each other; and I don't know, I just have...I have alot of good friends there to help me like, I was going out with my friends get my mind off of it and eventually that's when I met...I ended up meeting somebody else he kinda filled that void for me. + +00:03:47 + +Dr. Kliman: How long did it take you between the time of the restraining order and the time of meeting someone else? + +a Well...I got the restraining order when I was probably like 17 years old; and I got back together with Preston when I was probably around 18. So its not like the restraining order was what made me stop seeing Preston. I met Allan, I knew Allan...my new boyfriend; Imet him at the end; like the last week of college. He goes to my school. + +Dr. Kliman: Last week of the first year of college? + +a + +Dr. Kliman: Freshman year? + +r Yeah my freshman year so I didn't really know him; I o whim for like aweek and then Sophomore year when i got back to I just like knew of him me and him were like friends. There was nothing there like freshman year; like we were just friends. Like when I would go out in Boca I'd see him out; and finally whenever I cut all ties with my exboyfriend I would go out all the time, go out with my friends and like we would hang out alot more like in the beginning of my junior year. Is whenever things like were really good between me an Allan. + +00:05:15 + +Yeah + +Dr. Kliman: Does he spell his name with an "E"? + +SIN + +Dr. Kliman: Were you planning to get married? + +IOW + +Dr. Kliman: Uh huh. + +HMO + +00:10:25 + +Dr. Kliman: Would you say that it was avery serious relationship at the time? + +a + +Dr. Kliman: So you had actually broken up before he died? + +a + +Dr. Kliman: Okay, now any other bad things that have happened in your life? + +a + +Dr. Kliman: There was another one I forgot to ask you about...tell me of your other friends' death? + +a + +Imean I got over it probably like a year and ahalf after his death, like two years. Like it always still bothered, whenever I think about it; it always still bothers me on how like how he died and his life was taken at such a young age but it doesn't really like; I mean it's been so long; that it...I don't know. Like certain songs that remind me of him or...certain things that I'll think about but... + +With him? + +No, that was never brought up. + +No more of alike good friends...and then it just kinda like ended up being; we realized we weren't like a good relationship that we were better off as friends so; whenever we broke up it wasn't anything like I hate you, it was just kind like... + +Yeah. + +Imean between my ex and my two friends dying. It's really... + +My friend Jen, when I grew up Jennifer [not audible] she... I grew up with her, she lived right down the road from me and I was really close with her like cause growing up I would always go to High School parties and we would always hang out and like whenever I would have people come over to my house for a gettogether, she would come over and whenever she ever had people at her house I would always go over there, she lived right down like around the corner from me. We grew up like; she was like a year older than me, so like growing up we would always hang out but then there was that time whenever like...we didn't hang out with each other but whenever I got into High School we hung out again alot more, we were really close. It wasn't her fault she wasn't drinking and driving but she was...there was atruck driver and he was like sleeping and supposedly + +r + +and they said they he had alcohol in his blood. They ran her off the road, and she went to swerve and she had two friends in the backseat which I'm friends with now and she ended up getting hit and got the worst of it ended dying. That was, that was hard because that was like my really good friend, like that, I mean it was just...I don't know, it was really weird how it happened I was like in shock for the first two months, I didn't believe that had happened. Cause I remember like; I ended up getting in acar accident with my ex boyfriend Preston, we were going down like a 25mph lane or whatever and he was doing probably like 60 when he went to hit the turn he ended up flipping the car that I was in; and the car that I was in, got totaled. And I remember being back at...like the next week nothing had happened I was completely fine I remember sitting there talking to her; like yeah... she's like you're so lucky that nothing happened to you and; just like sitting there talking about how fortunate I was that nothing happened and then like aweek later after just having aconversation I remember like hearing about news and I just...I couldn't believe it. It was kinda like....I don't know it was so weird. + +00:13:42 + +Dr. Kliman: So you were in an accident where Preston was doing 60 in a25 miles an hour zone? + +aUh huh + +Dr. Kliman: And he flipped the car over, totaled the car, you weren't hurt. Were you in aseat belt? + +No. + +Dr. Kliman: How old were you? + +IS Probably 17, I don't remember. + +Dr. Kliman: And I week later... + +It seemed like it, it might not have been like a week, it might have been like a month; but it seemed like aweek after I was just talking to Jen that she had gotten into an accident. + +Dr. Kliman: That she was killed. Was she the driver when she was killed? + +Uh huh + +Dr. Kliman: So these were shocking experiences? + +Yeah. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746408/EFTA02746408.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746408/EFTA02746408.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d449ddc5d8983f9984199e544b14e4a6c66f71b5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746408/EFTA02746408.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,188 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746408.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 8254, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.5, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "The Psychological Trauma Center", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 231.6763916015625, + 67.23 + ], + [ + 404.532, + 67.23 + ], + [ + 404.532, + 81.14654541015625 + ], + [ + 231.6763916015625, + 81.14654541015625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 421 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 495 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 480 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 433 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746408" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746412/EFTA02746412.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746412/EFTA02746412.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..963631afa6ee27a83561d3ef204ed2cc14fc76ba --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746412/EFTA02746412.md @@ -0,0 +1,54 @@ +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR +PALM BEACH COUNTY FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, + +CASE NO. 502008CA006596XXXXMB + +Plaintiff, +vs. +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, +[REDACTED] +and [REDACTED] + +Defendants. + +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +AFFIDAVIT OF [REDACTED] + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared [REDACTED] +[REDACTED], who after being first duly sworn, deposes and says: + +1. 1. My name is [REDACTED]. +2. 2. I am and have been represented by McIntosh, Sawran, Peltz & Cartaya, P.A. +3. 3. I was a Defendant in the case styled, Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, [REDACTED] + [REDACTED] and [REDACTED], Case No. 502008CA006596XXXXMB AB. +4. 4. I have read the document entitled "Plaintiffs Jane Does' 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs' Jane Does 101 and 102's Motion for No-Contact Order." +5. 5. I am writing this affidavit in response to the statements within the motion that refer to me. +6. 6. I have not had any contact with Jeffrey Epstein since he was arrested. +7. 7. I have not been asked by Mr. Epstein or his attorneys to gather information about Jane Doe 4 and Jane Doe 7. + +"I" + +- 8. I am not being supported by Mr. Epstein nor did I say that to Jane Doe 4 and + - 7. +- 9. Based on the statements within the motion, I can identify Jane Doe 7 and only spoke to her when she and her boyfriend approached and confronted me at Dr. Feelgood's. +- 10. When Jane Doe 7 and her boyfriend confronted me, I told her that I could not believe she was bringing alawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein, as I know that she has taken money from anumber of older men and even traveled to Chicago with one of them. +- 11. I also told Jane Doe 7 and her boyfriend that I intended to tell the truth about everything I know about her and what she has done with other men. +- 12. I will tell the truth about Mr. Epstein, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 7 or anyone else that I am asked about. I resent any suggestion that I would lie to assist Mr. Epstein. + +FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +SON + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me & (Ndday of -a) \\.1 2009, by \...\ v AA c2No\o... 1 (name of person), who is personally known to me or who has produced CL- CD Lt./ na\_e (type of identification) as identification. + +CG 4 SIGNAT OF\-\10te n-- (I\ + +PRINTED NAME OF NOTARY + +![](_page_1_Picture_7.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746412/EFTA02746412.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746412/EFTA02746412.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8597aaaabd11e49c2d8400b16ec84f5489ff56ac --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746412/EFTA02746412.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,161 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746412.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2326, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.42, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_1_Picture_7.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 80.19 + ], + [ + 520.2, + 80.19 + ], + [ + 520.2, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 115.83 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 194.00400000000002, + 296.46 + ], + [ + 407.592, + 296.46 + ], + [ + 407.592, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 194.00400000000002, + 320.76 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 218 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 302 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746412" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746412/_page_1_Picture_7.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746412/_page_1_Picture_7.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1c599adcc664f80a1121a9117c8d6a2259d7b59c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746412/_page_1_Picture_7.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:282f4e17e90e723a94e49bbfd19666cdd6e1bdb0a66c10eeb11099e1c10f620c +size 9553 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746414/EFTA02746414.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746414/EFTA02746414.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..87edaa98d35136f8d77b733ea0dacd90a8ed6dd3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746414/EFTA02746414.md @@ -0,0 +1,448 @@ +IN RE: JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +TAPED INTERVIEW OF + +ORIGINAL + +Sandy + +Notary Public, State of Florida + +Consor and Associates + +Phone - 561.682.0905 + +ft + +J. Consor & Associates Reporting & Transcription 561.682.0905 + + (Thereupon, the following interview was had:) + +BY MALE SPEAKER: + +Q Today's date is October 4th, 2005. This is ID number 7915 Detective (inaudible) of the Palm Beach Police Department. Present at 1301 (inaudible) Road is Detective Michael Dawson of the Palm Beach Police Department. + + And can you state your name for the record? + +A + +Q \_how do you spell your last name? + +A + + Q Okay. How old are you? + + A I'm 18. + +QEighteen. Okay. You're currently in college? + + A Yeah. + +QOkay. What college are you attending? + + A Valencia. + +QValencia. Okay. And your date of birth is? + +A + +Q Okay. Can you raise your right hand for me? Do + +you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God? + +A Yes. + +Q if you could tell me from the beginning how + +you met Jeffrey Epstein. Iknow you have some information + +and we are conducting an investigation. We were here last night, spoke with your mom and dad. If you can just start from the beginning as to how you met him. + +A Okay. + +Q And how it came about. + +A I met him through my friend Haley. + +Q Okay. How long ago was that? + +A It was probably about almost a year ago. + +Q Okay. Okay. + +A And he -- I went there once with her and she gave him a massage and then she asked me if I wanted to do it and I did it or whatever and then after that like he kind of scared me when I went there so Ijust decided not to go back. + +Q Okay. The first time you went with Haley did you go upstairs with him? + +A No, I stayed downstairs. + +Q Did Haley tell you that -- what was entailed as to what had to be done? + +A Well she said the first time you go it's just like a massage and she said well like well the more you go supposedly the more he like expects and likes flirting with girls and that's what kind of like scared me. + +Q Okay. I've interviewed other girls and they've told me pretty much the same thing about the massage but + +1 2 3 4 5 there's more to that. More to the massage. Okay? That's why I didn't want mom to be in here. And you can talk to me about anything. Okay? Like I said, I've interviewed other people already who've told me what transpired in that room. Iknow it's going to be difficult for you but... + +6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17said that if like I wanted to come back and do more then he 18would like to pay me more and then I would have to talk to 19Haley and I could come back. AWell the first time I went there I did a massage and he was just asking me a lot of questions, he seemed really nice, and then he kept like staring at me and stuff. And then like I did a massage and he just kept looking at me and he was like II, you're being shy and I'm like yeah. And he's like do you feel uncomfortable and I was like yeah, a little bit. And he's like okay. And he's like well do you want to stop, and I was like no, it's okay. And he was like why are you like being shy and I was like II, I don't know and then he would like change the subject and he started talking about other things. And then when we were done he + +20 21 QOkay. What kind of questions did he ask you as you were massaging him? + +22 23 AHe was asking about -- it was a year ago. I don't remember everything but... + +24 Q Right. + +25 AHe was asking me if I had any friends that would like.to give a massage and I said I don't know. Then he asked me about what I wanted to do when I grew up and stuff like that and I asked him what he did and he said he was like ascientist basically. + +Q Okay. Did he ever ask you how old you were? + +A No. + +Q No. Did he know that you were 17? + +A No, I don't think so. + +Q Well it would have been 16 if it was a year ago, right? + +A Well it was almost a year ago. (Inaudible.) + +Q Okay. During the massage did you -- were you naked or + +A No. I had my clothes on. + +Q You had all your clothes on? + +A Uh-huh. + +Q Okay. Did he touch you in anyway? + +A He was like kind of like leaning towards it but I was like you could tell I was shy so I think that's why he didn't but I heard about other girls that he -- that he got flirtatious with them and he made them take off their clothes and stuff. + +Q Okay. What -- that was the first time you went, right? + +A Yeah. + +1 Q Okay. + +2 3 AWell, no, it was the second time I gave him a massage. The first time I went up with Haley. + +4 Q You went upstairs with Haley? + +5 ANo, I was in the kitchen. + +6 7 QYou were in the kitchen. You only had two times that you went there? + +8 A Yeah. + +9 10 QThe first time you didn't do anything but just sit in the kitchen? + +11 A Yeah. + +12 QWho did you sit in the kitchen with? + +13 14 AHe had a that was there and he had -- there was like two other girls that live with him. + +15 16 QOkay. Did you massage his back? Was he naked when you were massaging him? + +17 18 AWell, he had like atowel around his -- his upper was (inaudible) but he had like atowel around him. + +19 Q Okay. Did he ever remove that towel? + +20 A No. + +21 22 QWhen you were massaging him he never removed the towel? + +23 A No. + +24 25 QOkay. Did you -- did he have you touch his private area? + +A No. No. I wouldn't do that. + +Q You wouldn't do that? + +Okay. Did he touch you in your private area? + +A No. No. + +Q No. + +A He kept like staring at me and like, I don't know, + +I just felt uncomfortable and I left. But I heard other + +stories that like -- + +Q Right. I'm concerned with you. I know about other stories and I've interviewed other people have told me different things. That's why I'm trying to find out what happened to you. Okay? You're the victim in this so that's why I'm trying to find out what happens to you. + +A Uh-huh. + +Q Okay? Who took you upstairs to the room? + +A This girl Sarah that lives with him. + +Q Okay. So Sarah took you up? + +A Yeah. + +Q Did she tell you anything? Did she say anything? + +A Huh-huh. There's a massage table and she just laid atowel down and she said that Jeffrey will be out for his massage. + +0 Okay. Have you received any massage training? + +A No. + +Q No. I have to ask. + +Was Sarah one of the two girls that was in the + +kitchen with you? + +A Yeah. + +Q Okay. Did you ever go back to his house? + +A Well, I just went there twice. + +Q Right. + +A After that -- + +Q After that you've never come back? Never went + +back? + +How much did you receive for the massage? + +A Two hundred. + +Q You received 200. + +Okay. Did Haley explain to you what was going to + +be involved? + +A She said the first time you go there you pretty + +much just give a massage but the more you go there the more + +he expects so that's it. That scared me. + +Q That's what scared you? + +BY DETECTIVE DAWSON: + +Q Did she say (inaudible) or did she (inaudible) + +Say -- + +A Say didn't have to say it exactly but she implied + +like, you know, like taking your clothes off and stuff like + +that. + +1 BY MALE SPEAKER: + +2 Q Okay. So you didn't remove any of your clothing? + +3 A No. + +4 Q What were you wearing? Can you remember? + +5 A I don't know. It was a long time ago. I don't + +6 remember exactly. + +7 Q Okay. + +8 A I don't want to tell you wrong. + +9 Q I know. And I know you already told your mom what 10 happened. And like I said, I know this is hard for you 11 but... + +12 A I was just scared. I just didn't want my name to 13 like -- + +14 Q Don't worry. You're not the only person I've 15 talked to. Okay? There's a lot of people that I've talked 16 to and I'm going to talk to. + +17 How did you get to his house? + +18 A With Haley. + +19 Q Haley. Haley took you the first time and you sat 20 in the kitchen. + +21 A Yeah. + +22 Q What about the second time? + +23 A The second time I drove and she came with me. + +24 Because I didn't want to -- + +25 Q You drove. What is it you drive? + +1 A I used to have a Cavalier. + +2 Q A Cavalier. What color? + +3 A Red. + +4 Q Okay. Can you describe to me what Mr. Epstein 5 looks like? Jeffrey looks like? + +6 A He's tall and he has like greyish/black hair and 7 he usually wears like glasses and he has blue eyes. + +8 Q Okay. When you messaged him, you messaged his 9 back area? + +10 A Yes. And I did his feet too. + +11 Q And his feet. Okay. Did you do his legs? + +12 A Yeah, like his calves. + +13 Q His calves. Thigh area? + +14 A No. + +15 Q His chest area? + +16 A No. + +17 Q No. Can you describe what his body looks like? + +18 A He's not fat but he's not like thin. He's like 19 normal like average. + +20 Q Average? Okay. Is he hairy? Is he not hairy? + +21 A A little bit. + +22 Q A little bit? A little bit he's got hair on his 23 back? + +24 A Yeah. + +25 Q Yeah? How about hair on his chest? + + A Um -- + + Q You don't remember? Okay. + +He did not touch you inappropriately? + +A No. + +Q No. Did he masturbate? + +A No. + +Q No. Do you know what masturbate means? + +A Yeah. + +Q Okay. Why don't you tell me what it means just so I know that you know. + +APlaying with yourself. + +Q Okay. Okay. I have to make sure you understand what it means. Okay? I know it's difficult. He didn't touch himself -- + +A No. + +0 -- while you were massaging him? + +A No. + +Q No. Is there anything else you'd like to add? + +A No. I mean I heard of other stories that he did and I don't think it's very like appropriate like + +0 Right. + +A -- the stories I heard. + +0 Right. Well, alot of people that I've been talking to are about your age and a couple younger than you so that's the part that I have serious problems with. + +1 A Yeah. + +2 MALE SPEAKER: Do you have any questions? + +3 BY DETECTIVE DAWSON: + +4 Q Did you see any others -- when you were there you 5 said there were two girls in the kitchen. The second time 6 you went you went with Haley. Were there any other girls 7 there? + +8 A Yeah, there were the same two girls that were 9 there. + +10 Q Same two girls? Okay. + +11 A I'm pretty sure they like live and travel with 12 him. + +13 MALE SPEAKER: Okay. All right. Well at 14 this time I'm going to conclude this statement. + +15 It's 11:45 a.m. + +16 (Thereupon, the interview ended.) + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +1 C E R T I F I C A T E + +2 + +3 STATE OF FLORIDA ) +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +4 + +5 I, Sandra [REDACTED], Court Reporter, State of +Florida at Large, certify that I was authorized to +6 and did stenographically report the forgoing +proceedings, and that the transcript is a true and +7 complete record of the tape as listened to by me. + +8 + +9 Dated this 16th day of January, 2007. + +10 + +11 + +Sandra [REDACTED] ----- + +Sandra [REDACTED], Court Reporter + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746414/EFTA02746414.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746414/EFTA02746414.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8d48eb0728485b053c0544ab6f944c5621483657 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746414/EFTA02746414.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,462 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746414.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 13, + "chars": 10751, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.13, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 240 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 298 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 373 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 276 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 274 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 260 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 230 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 247 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Text", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746414" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746427/EFTA02746427.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746427/EFTA02746427.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8198271f1352dc05a0d1afae4d7d60968f1dee4b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746427/EFTA02746427.md @@ -0,0 +1,68 @@ +DISPOSITION: ZULU +DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +ACCIDENTAL INJURY CODE: 9567 DATE: 04/10/05 SUNDAY +ZONE: B41 GRID: 4B15 DEPUTY ID.: 5035 ASSIST: TIME D 1511 A 1518 C 1557 +OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 04/10/05 , 1500 HOURS AND DATE: 04/10/05 , 1500 HOURS +EXCEPTION TYPE: +INCIDENT LOCATION: 2315 ESPANA REAL APT. NO.: +CITY: WEST PALM BEACH STATE: FL ZIP: 33415 +NO. OFFENSES: 00 NO. OFFENDERS: 00 NO. VEH. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. ENTERED: 0 +LOCATION: OTHER +NO. VICTIMS: 00 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 + +.. +OTHER ROBERT C DUSHANE DOB: 05/04/1967 +SEX: M RACE: W HT: 506 WT: 150 HR: BLOND EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 6149 CALLE DEL GREENACRES FL 33463 +HOME PHONE: 561 261-7128 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 471-5391 +OTHER BELINDA DUSHANE DOB: 05/05/1920 +SEX: F RACE: W HT: 0 WT: 0 HR: UNKNOWN EYE: UNKNOWN +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 6149 CALLE DEL GREENACRES FL 33463 +HOME PHONE: 561 261-7130 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 +OTHER KENNETH C DUSHANE DOB: 07/26/1994 +SEX: M RACE: W HT: 0 WT: 0 HR: UNKNOWN EYE: UNKNOWN +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 6149 CALLE DEL GREENACRES FL 33463 +HOME PHONE: 561 261-7130 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 +OTHER DEBRA A DISLORIA DOB: 08/14/1959 +SEX: F RACE: W HT: 509 WT: 150 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: BLUE +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 612 ELAINE RD WEST PALM FL 33413 +HOME PHONE: 561 682-1162 +BUSINESS NAME ADDRESS: 2315 ESPANA REAL, GREENACRES, FL 33415 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 965-5165 +WITNESS DOB: 09/03/1990 +SEX: F RACE: W HT: 502 WT: 90 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 2319 AVENIDA BA WEST PALM FL 33415 +HOME PHONE: 561 967-3601 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +.. +.. +.. +.. +REPORT NUMBER: 1 +FLORIDA VICTIM ? N +WEATHER: CLEAR + +I RESPONDED TO 2315 ESPANA REAL IN REFERENCE TO AN ACCIDENTAL INJURY. UPON ARRIVAL, EMS WAS ALREADY ON THE SCENE TREATING THE VICTIM, KENNY DUSHANE. APPARENTLY A WITNESS BY THE NAME OF [REDACTED] STATED THAT KENNY WAS JUMPING ON TOP OF A [REDACTED] TRANSFORMER BOX, WHICH IS LOCATED AT THE OFFICE NEXT TO THE POOL. THE DOOR TO THE TRANSFORMER BOX HAD SWUNG OPEN, AND THAT IS WHEN KENNY HAD GONE INSIDE AND APPARENTLY GRABBED THE WIRES, SHOCKING HIM. I OBSERVED SEVERAL BURN MARKS ON KENNY ON BOTH ARMS + +"K" + +WITH THE WORST APPARENTLY BEING ON THE LEFT ARM. PARAMEDICS FROM STATION #36 WERE TREATING HIM AND TRANSPORTED HIM TO ~~SECURE~~ HOSPITAL UNDER RUN NUMBER 30805. FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT WAS NOTIFIED, AND BOB STALLINGS, A RESTORATION SPECIALIST, RESPONDED TO THE SCENE. HE ADVISED ME THAT APPARENTLY THE TRANSFORMER BOX WAS NOT LOCKED PROPERLY, AND THAT IS WHAT CAUSED IT TO OPEN. HE SECURED THE BOX AND ADVISED ME THAT IT WOULD BE UNDER TICKET NUMBER 292 (THE REPAIR NUMBER). + +I THEN RESPONDED TO ~~SECURE~~ HOSPITAL WHERE KENNY WAS BEING TREATED BY DR. ~~SECURE~~ IN THE PEDIATRICS UNIT. DR. ~~SECURE~~ ADVISED ME THAT HE HAD FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD DEGREE ~~SECURE~~ ON BOTH HIS ARMS WITH THE LEFT ARM WITH NERVE DAMAGE. HE WOULD NEED PLASTIC SURGERY, AND HE WOULD BE ADMITTED INTO ~~SECURE~~ HOSPITAL UNDER THE PACU UNIT. + +I THEN SPOKE WITH KENNY'S MOTHER, BELINDA, AND GAVE HER THE CASE NUMBER ALONG WITH ROBERT DESHANE, THE FATHER OF KENNY. THEY ADVISED ME THAT KENNY HAS BEEN GETTING INTO TROUBLE FOR QUITE SOME TIME, AND THEY HAVE NEVER HAD PROBLEMS WITH THEIR OTHER CHILDREN BUT WITH KENNY. HE IS JUST A VERY ACTIVE BOY. + +I SPOKE WITH KENNY. HE ADVISED ME THAT HE WAS JUMPING ON TOP OF THE ELECTRICAL BOX, AND THAT THE BOX DID OPEN, AND THAT HE DID, IN FACT, GO INSIDE THE BOX AND GRAB ONE OF THE WIRES, CAUSING IT TO SHOCK HIM. + +ALSO ON THE SCENE WAS THE MANAGER TO THE OFFICE, DEBBIE DISLORIA. I ADVISED HER OF THE CASE NUMBER AND THE INCIDENT THAT HAD HAPPENED. + +AT THIS TIME, THERE IS NO FURTHER INFORMATION AVAILABLE. THIS CASE IS A ZULU. + +D/S ROBERT CRESSWELL, ID #5035 +DICTATED: 04-12-05/0805 HOURS +TRANSCRIBED: 04-12-05/BV \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746427/EFTA02746427.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746427/EFTA02746427.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1dba6a7889a84ce57cc999607dede852fcc1bff2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746427/EFTA02746427.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,104 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746427.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 3853, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.2, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PAGE 1 OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 05053028", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 9.18, + 20.25 + ], + [ + 465.12, + 20.25 + ], + [ + 465.12, + 44.55 + ], + [ + 9.18, + 44.55 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746427" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746429/EFTA02746429.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746429/EFTA02746429.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..273e86326518c5d6a6ada7c6640769de6d55b681 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746429/EFTA02746429.md @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@ +PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PAGE 1 +OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 06054723 + +DISPOSITION: UNFOUNDED +DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +ABUSE/CHILD CODE: 9000 DATE: 04/13/06 THURSDAY +ZONE: B41 GRID: 4B15 DEPUTY ID.: 7644 ASSIST: TIME D 1456 A 1512 C 1632 +OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 01/01/05 , 1200 HOURS AND DATE: 04/13/06 , 1500 HOURS +EXCEPTION TYPE: + +INCIDENT LOCATION: [REDACTED] APT. NO.: +CITY: WEST PALM BEACH STATE: FL ZIP: 33415 +NO. OFFENSES: 01 NO. OFFENDERS: 02 NO. VEH. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. ENTERED: 0 +LOCATION: RESIDENCE - SINGLE FAMILY +NO. VICTIMS: 01 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 + +OFFENSE NO. 1 FLORIDA STATE STATUTE: 827 04 CIS CODE 9000 + +VICTIM NO. 001 DOB: 09/03/1990 +SEX: F RACE: W HT: 502 WT: 90 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: [REDACTED] WEST PALM FL 33415 + +HOME PHONE: 561 [REDACTED] +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +SUSPECT DOB: 01/28/1963 +SEX: M RACE: W HT: 506 WT: 180 HR: BALD EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: [REDACTED] W PALM BCH FL 33415 + +HOME PHONE: 561 [REDACTED] +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +SUSPECT DOB: 09/28/1963 +SEX: F RACE: W HT: 500 WT: 135 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: [REDACTED] WPB FL 33415 + +HOME PHONE: 561 [REDACTED] +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +.. +.. +.. +.. + +OFFENSE INDICATOR: OFFENSE 1 VICTIM NUMBER: 1 +VICTIM TYPE: JUVENILE +RESIDENCE TYPE: COUNTY RESIDENCE STATUS: FULL YEAR +EXTENT OF INJURY: NONE +INJURY TYPE(1): NOT APPLICABLE +INJURY TYPE(2): NOT APPLICABLE +VICTIM RELATION: CHILD +DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RELATED: YES + +REPORT NUMBER: 1 +FLORIDA VICTIM ? N + +WEATHER: CLEAR +WITNESS TO CRIME KNOWN ? . Y +CAN VICTIM I.D. SUSPECT ? Y +WILL VICTIM PROSECUTE ? . N +IS M.O. SIGNIFICANT ? . . . . . N +LATENTS LIFTED ? . . . . . N +TAG NUMBER KNOWN ? . . . . . N +SUSPECT NAME KNOWN ? . . . . . Y +SUSPECT LOCATION KNOWN ? . . . Y +STOLEN PROPERTY TRACEABLE ? N +EVIDENCE LEFT AT SCENE ? . . . N +SUSPECT'S VEHICLE KNOWN ? . . N +PROPERTY DAMAGE ? . . . . . N + +ON 4-13-06 AT APPROX 1500 HOURS I RESPONDED TO [REDACTED] +ESTE, LOCATED IN TRAVARES COVE MOBILE HOME PARK IN UNINC. WEST PALM BEACH + +L + +ON ARRIVAL I MET WITH DCF INVESTIGATOR, [REDACTED], WHO GAVE ME A COPY OF AN ABUSE REPORT ON 2006-358210-01, WHICH STATED: + +"SINCE THE AGE OF 13 [REDACTED] HAS BEEN SMOKING MARIJUANA WITH HER FATHER EVERY OTHER DAY. SHE HAD NOT SUFFERED ANY INJURIES. MOM IS AWARE OF [REDACTED] SMOKING MARIJUANA WITH DAD. IT WAS STATED THAT MOM DOES NOT CARE ABOUT THAT. [REDACTED] STATED THAT SHE IS GAY AND SHE AND HER FATHER SMOKE TOGETHER BECAUSE THIS IS THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN BOND. HER FATHER IS AN ALCOHOLIC, NO DETAILS ARE KNOWN ABOUT THE DRINKING." + +I SPOKE WITH THE MOTHER [REDACTED] AND SHE TOLD ME SHE WAS AWARE OF THE ALLEGATIONS AND SHE HAS DONE ALOT TO HELP HER DAUGHTER [REDACTED]. SHE PLACED HER DAUGHTER IN GROWING TOGETHER TREATMENT CENTER ON 3-10-06. THEN BAKER ACTED HER ON 4-7-06 TO [REDACTED]. SHE HAS ALSO CONTACTED CARP AND HAS AN APPOINTMENT ON 4-25-06. SHE ALSO HAS BEEN GIVING [REDACTED] HOME DRUG TESTS. + +I SPOKE WITH [REDACTED] AND SHE TOLD ME SHE WAS DOING MUCH BETTER WITH HER PROBLEMS. SHE TOLD ME HER AND HER FATHER, [REDACTED], CAN ONLY SMOKE MARIJUANA APPROX 5 TIMES AND HAS NOT DONE SO IN APPROX ONE YEAR. + +BASED ON MY INVESTIGATION, THIS CASE WAS UNFOUNDED. I COMPLETED AND FAXED A COPY OF THE CHILD SAFETY DATABASE FORM TO SUI. NOTHING FURTHER. + +D/S HUDSON, ID 7644 +04132006/1722/LEM \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746429/EFTA02746429.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746429/EFTA02746429.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..df4063ad4a75d43af4157c7a7c6d788e759b1e8f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746429/EFTA02746429.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,154 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746429.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 3439, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.44, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PAGE 1 OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 06054723", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 12.24, + 16.200000000000003 + ], + [ + 471.24, + 16.200000000000003 + ], + [ + 471.24, + 48.599999999999994 + ], + [ + 12.24, + 48.599999999999994 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFENSE REPORT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 39.78, + 12.149999999999999 + ], + [ + 468.18, + 12.149999999999999 + ], + [ + 468.18, + 36.45 + ], + [ + 39.78, + 36.45 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OFFENSE REPORT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 131.57999999999998, + 28.35 + ], + [ + 296.82, + 28.35 + ], + [ + 296.82, + 40.5 + ], + [ + 131.57999999999998, + 40.5 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746429" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746431/EFTA02746431.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746431/EFTA02746431.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..be9bf90ca1c35e6f3fc08239b459503b057007a1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746431/EFTA02746431.md @@ -0,0 +1,165 @@ +DISPOSITION: ZULU +DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +SUICIDE CODE: 9532 DATE: 12/22/06 FRIDAY +ZONE: B41 GRID: 4B15 DEPUTY ID.: 8380 ASSIST: TIME D 0825 A 0828 C 0832 +OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 12/22/06 , 0730 HOURS AND DATE: 12/22/06 , 0935 HOURS +EXCEPTION TYPE: +INCIDENT LOCATION: 2319 AVENIDA BARCELONA ESTADE APT. NO.: +CITY: WEST PALM BEACH STATE: FL ZIP: 33415 +NO. OFFENSES: 00 NO. OFFENDERS: 00 NO. VEH. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. ENTERED: 0 +LOCATION: HIGHWAY / ROADWAY +NO. VICTIMS: 01 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 + +WITNESS SCOTT FOLSOM DOB: 04/12/1963 +SEX: M RACE: W HT: 510 WT: 145 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: BLUE +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 37000 3 ST CP FL 33438 +HOME PHONE: 561 000-0000 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 449-3412 + +COMPLAINANT DOB: 09/03/1990 +SEX: F RACE: W HT: 502 WT: 90 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +PROPERTY OWNER DOB: 09/03/1990 +SEX: F RACE: W HT: 502 WT: 90 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 2319 AVENIDA BA WEST PALM FL 33415 +HOME PHONE: 561 969-3601 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 969-3601 + +DECEASED JAMES D [REDACTED] DOB: 06/09/1986 +SEX: M RACE: W HT: 602 WT: 165 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 311 FORESTA TR WEST PALM FL 33415 +HOME PHONE: 561 797-3776 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +WITNESS SONYA [REDACTED] DOB: 12/11/1971 +SEX: F RACE: W HT: 501 WT: 198 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 6033 CALLE DELM WEST PALM FL 33415 +HOME PHONE: 561 303-4309 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +OTHER MIRNA BARRIGA DOB: 09/14/1963 +SEX: F RACE: W HT: 0 WT: 0 HR: UNKNOWN EYE: UNKNOWN +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 311 FORESTIA TR WPB FL 33415 +HOME PHONE: 561 000-0000 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +.. +.. +.. +.. +.. + +JUSTIFIABLE CIRCUMSTANCES: NOT APPLICABLE +JUSTIFIABLE CODE: NOT APPLICABLE +AGENCY: PBSO OFFICER NAME: GREER #8380/DET. ORTIZ #5427 +WHERE BODY FOUND: IN STREET BETWEEN 2323/2322 AVENIDA BARCELONA ESTADA +OFFICER VIEWED BODY AT: MIDDLE OF STREET +UNIDENTIFIED REMAINS: N +BODY I.D. BY: GIRLFRIEND, [REDACTED] +AMBULANCE: PB FIRE RESCUE #36 FIRE RESCUE: PB FIRE RESCUE #36 +PRONOUNCE BY: ER DOCTOR AT: [REDACTED] HOSPITAL +CAUSE OF DEATH: GUNSHOT WOUND TO THE HEAD + +"M" + +DEATH'S CERTIFICATE SIGNED BY: MICHAEL BELL, MD +BODY RELEASED TO: MEDICAL EXAMINER'S OFFICE + +ON FRIDAY, 12/22/06 AT 0829 HOURS, I RESPONDED TO [REDACTED] +[REDACTED] IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF WEST PALM BEACH IN REFERENCE TO +SHOTS FIRED/POSSIBLE SUICIDE. UPON MY ARRIVAL TO THE SCENE, IT WAS +DISPATCHED THAT THE SUBJECT STILL HAD A FIREARM. I OBSERVED THE SUBJECT +LAYING FACE UP IN THE MIDDLE OF STREET BETWEEN THE RESIDENCES AT [REDACTED] ON +THE NORTH SIDE AND [REDACTED] ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF [REDACTED] ESTADES. +THERE WAS A SILVER HANDGUN ON THE GROUND ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SUBJECT'S +HEAD. THE SUBJECT'S HEAD WAS WRAPPED IN A [REDACTED] TOWEL AND A FEMALE +SUBJECT, LATER IDENTIFIED AS [REDACTED] WHO RESIDES AS [REDACTED] +[REDACTED] WAS KNEELING OVER THE BODY. ABOUT 10-15 FEET TO THE +WEST OF THE BODY THERE WERE TWO FEMALE SUBJECTS KNEELING IN THE ROAD, +LATER IDENTIFIED AS [REDACTED] AND SONYA [REDACTED]. +I APPROACHED THE SUBJECT LYING IN THE ROAD, LATER IDENTIFIED AS +JAMES [REDACTED]. I DISBURSED THE CROWDS AND REMOVED ALL THE PEOPLE FROM +AROUND THE SCENE AND THE BODY. I THEN PUSHED THE FIREARM FROM [REDACTED] +IMMEDIATE CONTROL. ADDITIONAL UNITS ARRIVED ON THE SCENE TO INCLUDE +BRAVO 41, BRAVO 36, 384, AND BRAVO 35. CRIME SCENE PERIMETERS WERE +SET UP. I THEN SPOKE WITH THE WITNESS SCOTT W. FULSOM, WHO ADVISED THAT +HE WAS DOING SOME ELECTRICAL WORK IN THE BACK OF THE RESIDENCE LOCATED +AT [REDACTED] AND HEARD A SINGLE GUNSHOT. FULSOM +SAID THAT HE CAME FROM THE REAR OF THE RESIDENCE AT 2323 AND SAW [REDACTED] +PUT A GUN TO HIS HEAD AND PULL THE TRIGGER. FULSOM SAW AND HEARD THE +SECOND SHOT. FULSOM ADVISED THAT HE THEN TRIED TO KEEP PEOPLE AWAY FROM +[REDACTED]. + +I THEN SPOKE WITH [REDACTED] GIRLFRIEND WHO +RESIDES AS [REDACTED]. SAID THAT [REDACTED] +CAME TO THE RESIDENCE AT 0700 HOURS ON 12/22/06. [REDACTED] SAID THAT SHE +WAS MAD BECAUSE [REDACTED] WAS OUT ALL NIGHT AND SHE TOLD HIM THAT SHE +NEEDS HER SPACE. [REDACTED] GOT MAD AND LEFT THE FRONT DOOR AREA ON THE +WEST SIDE OF THE RESIDENCE AND HEADED TOWARDS THE STREET. [REDACTED] WAS +STILL INSIDE THE RESIDENCE. [REDACTED] SAID SHE HEARD A GUNSHOT AND THEN +A SECOND. [REDACTED] WENT OUTSIDE AND SAW [REDACTED] LYING IN THE STREET. + +[REDACTED] RAN TO HIM AND TOUCHED THE BODY. +I THEN SPOKE TO [REDACTED] MOTHER WHO WAS PRESENT IN THE RESIDENCE +IDENTIFIED AS [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] SAID SHE KNEW [REDACTED] AND [REDACTED] +WERE ARGUING, BUT SHE WAS IN THE SHOWER. [REDACTED] SAID THAT SHE ALSO HEARD +TWO GUNSHOTS AND THEN WENT OUTSIDE AND TRIED TO RESTRAIN HER DAUGHTER. + +I THEN SPOKE TO SONYA [REDACTED] WHO RESIDES AT [REDACTED] +WHICH IS DIRECTLY BEHIND [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] SAID THAT SHE +HEARD TWO GUNSHOTS, WENT TO THE SCENE AND SAW [REDACTED] AND HER MOTHER. +[REDACTED] WAS FIGHTING WITH HER MOTHER, TRYING TO GET AWAY TO GET TO +[REDACTED]. [REDACTED] WAS SAYING THAT SHE HAD TO GET THE GUN AND HIDE IT. +[REDACTED] SAID THAT [REDACTED] GOT AWAY FROM HER MOTHER AND HAD TOUCHED THE +FIREARM AND THAT [REDACTED]'S MOTHER HAD SLAPPED THE FIREARM OUT OF +[REDACTED]'S HAND. [REDACTED] SAID THAT SHE HAD OBSERVED THE FIREARM IN +[REDACTED] RIGHT HAND AND THAT THE RIGHT HAND WAS DRAPED OVER THE +ABDOMINAL PART OF [REDACTED] BODY. [REDACTED] SAYS SHE WAS ABLE TO RESTRAIN +[REDACTED] UNTIL POLICE SHOWED UP. + +PALM BEACH COUNTY FIRE RESCUE UNIT #31, RUN NUMBER 2006108384 TRANSPORTED +[REDACTED] TO [REDACTED] HOSPITAL. SGT. ORTEZ WAS NOTIFIED AND RESPONDED +TO THE SCENE. DEPUTY GOMEZ SECURED THE FIREARM. BOTH SHELL CASINGS WERE +LOCATED. ONE WAS APPROXIMATELY 10' EAST OF THE BODY, THE OTHER SIDE OF + +THE ROAD. THE OTHER SHELL CASING WAS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE RESIDENCE AT 2319 WHERE [REDACTED] HAD THE ARGUMENT WITH [REDACTED]. THE CASING WAS APPROXIMATELY 4' NORTH OF THE STEPS BESIDES THE RESIDENCE WALL. LET IT BE NOTED THAT [REDACTED], THE MOTHER OF [REDACTED], DID TOUCH THE SHELL BY THE RESIDENCE THINKING IT WAS SOMETHING ELSE, BUT NEVER MOVED IT FROM THE LOCATION OF WHICH SHE FOUND IT. + +DETECTIVES ARRIVED ON SCENE AND WERE BRIEFED ON THE INCIDENT. THEN CRIME SCENE ALSO ARRIVED ON SCENE. SCENE WAS TOT'D TO DETECTIVES. THIS CASE WILL BE TURNED OVER TO DETECTIVE UNIT FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION. + +D/S GREER #8380 12/22/06 1300 HOURS + +TRANSCRIBED LBL#3890 12/23/06 0700 HOURS + +DISPOSITION: ZULU DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +SUICIDE CODE: 9532 DATE: 12/22/06 FRIDAY ZONE: B41 GRID: 4815 DEPUTY ID.: 8396 ASSIST: TIME D 0825 A 0828 C 0832 OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 12/22/06 , 0730 HOURS AND DATE: 12/22/06 , 0935 HOURS EXCEPTION TYPE: INCIDENT LOCATION: APT. NO.: CITY: WEST PALM BEACH STATE: FL ZIP: 33415 NO. OFFENSES: 00 NO. OFFENDERS: 00 NO. VEH. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. ENTERED: 0 LOCATION: HIGHWAY / ROADWAY NO. VICTIMS: 01 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 + +GREENACRES, FL 33461 IN REGARDS TO A POSSIBLE III ,DE. ON FRIDAY 12/22/06, AT APPROXIMATELY 0615 HRS, I RESPONDED TO UPON ARRIVAL IT WAS FOUND THAT A IIIIIrMALE HAD IN FACT RECEIVED A GUN SHOT WOULD TO THE HEAD AND WAS NOTCLATING IN THE ROADWAY IN FRONT OF 2319AVENIDA BARCELONIA. FIRE RESCUE RESPONDED TO THE SCENE. ACRIME SCENE WAS ESTABLISHED AT WHICH TIME I WAS ASSIGNED TO START A CRIME SCENE LOG DOCUMENTING ALL PERSONS ENTERING THE CRIME SCENE. I STARTED MY LOG AT APPROXIMATELY 0845 HRS AND DOCUMENTED THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE ENTERING THE CRIME SCENE BETWEEN 0845 HRS AND 0927 HRS WHEN THE CRIME SCENE WAS BROKEN DOWN. D/S H GOMEZ, SGT ORTIZ ID 5427, D/S 0 ID 4740, D/S F GREER ID 8380, D/S ID 3807, CSI HOOK ID 6452, DET ADA TYZ- Tb 3461, AND MR DOB ID 7739, D/S M ID 7g797—tits ID 7866, LT MAY 012263 WHO RESIDED AT THE RESIDENCE. AT THIS TIME, THIS IS MY ONLY INVOLVEMENT IN THIS CASE AND I HAVE NO FURTHER INFORMATION. D/S BLACKMAN (8396) 12/22/06 1140 HRS TRANS: 01/05/06 6224 + +DISPOSITION: ZULU DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +SUICIDE CODE: 9532 DATE: 01/08/07 ZONE: B41 GRID: 4815 DEPUTY ID.: 6452 ASSIST: TIME D 0825 A OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 12/22/06 , 0730 HOURS AND DATE: 12/22/06 , EXCEPTION TYPE: INCIDENT LOCATION: APT. CITY: aSST BEACH Sr ZIP: NO. OFFENSES: 00 NO. OFFENDERS: 00 NO. VEH. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. LOCATION: HIGHWAY / ROADWAY NO. VICTIMS: 01 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 FRIDAY 0828 C 0832 0935 HOURS NO.: 33415 ENTERED: 0 + +ON FRIDAY, DECEMBER 22, 2006 AT APPROXIMATELY 0833 HOURS, CSI HOOK WAS NOTIFIED BY COMMUNICATION TO RESPOND TO WHICH IN THE TRAVERSE COVE MOBILE HOME PARK THAT IS SOUTH OF LANE AND EAST OF JOG ROAD IN SUBURBAN WEST PALM BEACH. CSI HOOK ARRIVED ON SCENE AT APPROXIMATELY 0901 HOURS AND MET WITH D/S GOMEZ, ID: 7442, WHO ADVISED CSI HOOK THAT THE DECEDENT, JAMES , W/M, DOB: 06-09-1986 SHOT HIMSELF IN THE HEAD IN THE STREET AFTER GETTING INTO AN ARGUMENT WITH HIS GIRL-FRIEND. THE VICTIM WAS TRANSPORTED TO tallaa SOW WHERE HE WAS PRONOUNCED. CSI HOOK RECEIVED FROM D/S GOMEZ A .45-CALIBER HANDGUN WITH A MAGAZINE THAT HE RECOVERED FROM THE STREET WHEN HE ARRIVED. + +CSI HOOK PHOTOGRAPHED THE SCENE USING A DEPARTMENT ISSUED NIKON D100 DIGITAL CAMERA WITH A 28-200MM LENS AND USING LEXAR COMPACT FLASH CARD. CSI HOOK ALSO TOOK ADDITIONAL CLOSE-UP PHOTO-GRAPHS WITH STANCHIONS OF TWO CASINGS, ONE IN THE STREET AND ONE NEXT TO , WHERE THE DECEDENT LIVED. AFTER PHOTOGRAPHING CSI HOOK COLLECTED THE CASINGS AND PLACED THEM IN SEPARATE COIN ENVELOPES. + +CSI HOOK CLEARED THE SCENE AT APPROXIMATELY 0939 HOURS. CSI HOOK RECEIVED FROM DET. L'ETOILE THE DECEDENT'S CLOTHING, WHICH CONSISTED OF A SHIRT, PANTS, AND SHOES. + +CSI HOOK PHOTOGRAPHED THE CLOTHING, CASINGS, FIREARM AND MAGAZINE IN THE CRIME SCENE PROCESSING ROOM USING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED CAMERA EQUIPMENT AND FLASH CARD. AFTER PHOTOGRAPHING, CSI HOOK SEALED THE CASINGS IN SEPARATE COIN ENVELOPES AND THEN SEALED THE ENVELOPES IN AN EVIDENCE BAG. THE GUN AND MAGAZINE WERE SEALED IN AN EVIDENCE BOX. THE CLOTHING WAS SEALED IN SEPARATE EVIDENCE BAGS. THE BOX AND BAGS WERE THEN SUBMITTED TO EVIDENCE. THE FLASH CARD USED WAS SEALED IN AN EVIDENCE BAG AND SUBMITTED TO THE PHOTO LAB. + +THIS CONCLUDES CSI HOOK'S INVOLVEMENT IN THIS CASE. CSI H. HOOK/ID #6452/1-5-07 COPY/PASTE/1-8-07/SS + +# DISPOSITION: ZULU DIVISION: DETECTIVE + +SUICIDE CODE: 9532 DATE: 01/05/07 FRIDAY ZONE: B41 GRID: 4815 DEPUTY ID.: 3461 ASSIST: TIME D 0825 A 0828 C 0832 OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 12/22/06 , 0730 HOURS AND DATE: 12/22/06 , 0935 HOURS EXCEPTION TYPE: INCIDENT LOCATION: PINNIMMIIIIIIIIela APT. NO.: CITY: WEST PALM BEACH STATE: FL ZIP: 33415 NO. OFFENSES: 00 NO. OFFENDERS: 00 NO. VER. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. ENTERED: 0 LOCATION: HIGHWAY / ROADWAY NO. VICTIMS: 01 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 + +ON DECEMBER 22, 2006, AT APPROXIMATELY 0854 HOURS, I WAS INSTRUCTED BY DET. SGT. CYNTHIA frip iTO RESPOND TOSSIGN UNINCORPORATED WEST P IN REFERENCE TO AN ATTEMPTED SUICIDE. THE VICTIM HAD BEEN TRANSPORTED TOMOS IS HOSPITAL WITH AN APPARENT GUNSHOT WOUND TO THE HEAD. UPON MY ARRIVAL, I OBSERVED YELLOW CRIME SCENE TAPE COMPLETELY SECURING THE CRIME SCENE AREA. PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE ROAD UNITS WERE SECURING THE OUTER PERIMETER OF THE CRIME SCENE. + +IMET WITH D/S GREER (ID 8380). D/S GREER TOLD ME THAT THE VICTIM, IDENTIFIED AS JAMES D. HAD BEEN LIVING WITH HIS GIRLFRIEND, I FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS. ALSO LIVING IN THAT HOUSE ARE IMMIMMUPS PARENTS. THE VICTIM HAD ARRIVED AT THE RESIDENCE AT APPROXIMATELY 0700 HOURS THIS MORNING AFTER BEING OUT ALL NIGHT. HE AND HIS GIRLFRIEND, ins GOT INTO A VERBAL ARGUMENT, AND THE GIRLFRIEND TOLD HIM THAT SHE WANTED SOME SPACE. HE BECAME ANGRY AND WALKED OUTSIDE THE RESIDENCE AND THE GIRLFRIEND HEARD ONE SHOT, THEN SHORTLY AFTER THAT SHE HEARD ANOTHER SHOT. WHEN SHE AND HER FAMILY EXITED THE TRAILER, SHE SAW HIM LYING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET. D/S GREER SPOKE TO SCOTT W. FULSON, WHO WAS DOING SOME ELECTRICAL WORK FOR FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT IN THE BACK OF HER RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 232 AVENIDA BARCELONA ESTE. FULSON HEARD A GUNSHOT AND HE CAME FROM THE REAR OF THE RESIDENCE AND SAW THE VICTIM, PUT THE GUN TO HIS HEAD AND PULL THE TRIGGER (FOR FURTHER DETAILSMIRRO D/S GREER'S REPORT). + +WHILE ON THE SCENE, I MET WITHWRNA BARRIGA, THE MOTHER OF THE VICTIM. MS. BARRIGA ARRIVED AFTER THE FACT AND HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT EXACTLY HAD TRANSPIRED. SHORTLY AFTER, MRS. BARRIGA'S HUSBAND ARRIVED ON THE SCENE AND DROVE HER TOSS HOSPITAL, SO SHE COULD BE WITH HER SON. ISPOKE TO THE GIRLFRIEND OF THE VICTIM. eila TOLD ME THAT HER BOYFRIEND, HAD A FIREARM AND THAT THE FIREARM WAS HIS AND THAT SHE BELIEVES IT 45 CALIBER. MY INVESTIGATION CONCLUDED THAT THERE WAS NO FOUL PLAY IN THIS INCIDENT. + +ON 12/22/2006 AT APPROXIMATELY 1222 HOURS, I WAS NOTIFIED BY OS gmessor HOSPITAL NURSING STAFF THAT THE VICTIM, JAMES HAD EXPIRED. I, IN TURN, NOTIFIED THE PALM BEACH COUNTY MED INER'S OFFICE INVESTIGATOR RUIZ AND GAVE HIM THE FACTS OF THE CASE. A POSTMORTEM EXAMINATION WAS CONDUCTED BY DR. MICHAEL BELL, WHO DETERMINED THE CAUSE OF DEATH WAS A GUNSHOT WOUND TO THE HEAD AND THE MANNER OF DEATH A SUICIDE. THIS REPORT IS FOR DOCUMENTATION PURPOSES ONLY. + +DET. ADA TYZ ID 3461/CJ TRANS. 01/25/2007 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746431/EFTA02746431.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746431/EFTA02746431.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..37b82b09fea4651ec02fb901041e850359671eff --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746431/EFTA02746431.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,371 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746431.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 13362, + "elapsed_seconds": 20.37, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PAGE 1 OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 06148935", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 37.331999999999994, + 20.25 + ], + [ + 483.48, + 20.25 + ], + [ + 483.48, + 44.55 + ], + [ + 37.331999999999994, + 44.55 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PAGE 2 OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 06148935", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 37.944, + 20.25 + ], + [ + 479.196, + 20.25 + ], + [ + 479.196, + 44.55 + ], + [ + 37.944, + 44.55 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 06148935", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 9.18, + 20.25 + ], + [ + 462.06000000000006, + 20.25 + ], + [ + 462.06000000000006, + 40.5 + ], + [ + 9.18, + 40.5 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUPPLEMENT 2 OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 06148935", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 47.124, + 27.540000000000006 + ], + [ + 476.4790954589844, + 27.540000000000006 + ], + [ + 476.4790954589844, + 38.24261474609375 + ], + [ + 47.124, + 38.24261474609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUPPLEMENT 3 OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 06148935", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 45.9, + 28.35 + ], + [ + 478.3829040527344, + 28.35 + ], + [ + 478.3829040527344, + 40.5 + ], + [ + 45.9, + 40.5 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DISPOSITION: ZULU \nDIVISION: DETECTIVE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 266.21999999999997, + 48.599999999999994 + ], + [ + 411.3250732421875, + 48.599999999999994 + ], + [ + 411.3250732421875, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 266.21999999999997, + 72.9 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 416 + ], + [ + "Line", + 77 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 324 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 487 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 598 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746431" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/EFTA02746437.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/EFTA02746437.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a27ebf0dd7e7786219d053b179d3154ebb2bc419 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/EFTA02746437.md @@ -0,0 +1,634 @@ +CASE NO : 502006CF014171AXXXMB + +ST OF FL VS [REDACTED] + +GRAND THEFT FROM A DWELLING + +REC'D DE MAR 04 03 03 B INT 2006 FAC 04 07 TYPE SB 0.000 + +Date 1/31/07 Judge Labanag Crt. Rep. ABelona + +ASA Deft---Pres / Not Pres. W/ W/O Def. Co. / DO Int (Esq) / PD---Pres / Not Pres. + +Before the Court for: Granted Denied With / Without Prejudice Withdrawn Court Reserves Ruling Written Order to Follow + + Warrant Ordered Recalled Bond Set at \$ See Below Also Covers Sp Cond + + Bond Forf OR: Disch/Revoked/Reinstated Bond Disch/Revoked ASOR Disch/Revoked/Reinstated + + Bond Forf Vacated Previous Bond Reinstated, if Bondsman agrees State failed to file charges Released O.R. / S.O.R. + + Deft Indigent PD Appt Hrg only PD Pres Court Appts + +Evaluation for: Drug Farm DOC Non-Secure Bed by Pre-Plea PSI ordered by/within days w/input from DJJ / Staffing + + Referred to: PTI / SAAP / PADD Case placed on the absentee docket + +DEFT ENTERED A PLEA OF: NOT GUILTY GUILTY NO CONTEST BEST INTEREST TO THE COURT + + Charged-Cts 1,2 Lesser Cts Lesser Charge + + Sw & Test Adv of Rts Waived PSI Lesser Cts Lesser Charge + + ADJ GUILTY as Charged as to Cts Lesser Cts Sent W/HELD as to Cts + + FOUND GUILTY as Charged as to Cts 1,2 Dismiss Nolle Prosse Cts Dispo Order to follow/Filed + + FOUND AND ADJUDICATED DELINQUENT as to Cts Dismiss Nolle Prosse Cts Dispo Order to follow/Filed + + FOUND & ADJ NOT GUILTY as to Cts Dismiss Nolle Prosse Cts Nolle Prosse Cts Dispo Order to follow/Filed + +Prob / Comm Control: Revoked Reinstated Modified Term. Successfully / Unsuccessfully + + Stip/Found: (violent) Habitual Off. 775.084 Stip/Found: Sexual Offender / Sexual Predator Stip/Found: P.R.R. + +SENTENCE: PBCJ: Cts: / DOC: Cts: PBCJ: Cts: / DOC: Cts: + + W/Credit for Days / Mos. / Yrs. Deft Remanded Deft to remain on same rel. status pending sent. + +Cone / Consee / Co-Term w/cases / cts: + + Execution of Sentence Stayed Sentence Suspended Time served as to Cts + + Youthful Off Habitual Off Min / Mand: as to Cts + + ABOVE SENTENCE TO BE FOLLOWED By: Probation Drug / Sex Off Prob Comm. Control I II See Pg. 2 + + DRIVERS LICENSE TO BE SUSPENDED / REVOKED FOR YEARS AS A RESULT OF THIS PLEA. + +deft. mother present + +| Set / Remains Set / Reset | Div | Rm | at | AM/PM | +|---------------------------|-----|----|----|-------| +| Set / Remains Set / Reset | Div | Rm | at | AM/PM | + +Def sign Def Co Prob Jail DJJ GAL County Courthouse 205 N. Dixie, West Palm Beach + + ASA Bondsman Notified by mail by: Courtroom, Criminal Justice Bldg. Courtroom, Criminal Justice Complex + +38844 State Road 80, Belle Glade 3228 Gun Club Rd., West Palm Beach + +IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACCOMMODATION AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURT, PALM BEACH COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 205 N. DIXIE HWY, RM WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401; TELEPHONE (961) 355-4380, WITHIN 2 WORKING DAYS OF YOUR RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE. IF YOU ARE HEARING OR VOICE IMPAIRED, CALL 1-800-955-4771. + +DATE: 1/31/07 + +CASE NO. 06CF04171 AXX + +NAME: [REDACTED] + +TERM OF (Prob) Sex Off / Drug Off Prob / C.C. I / C.C. II: 2 mos (yrs) as to Cls. 1, 2 + + conc w/ E conseq. w/ lach offers (1st 9 mos. to be served on CC II) + + Probation transferred to: (beginning) today + +SPECIAL CONDITIONS: + +- Complete Originally Ordered Conditions +- Curfew: \_\_\_\_\_ p.m., with the following exception: \_\_\_\_\_ +- Deft. to report to Prob. Dept. immediately upon release +- Deft. not to have in care, custody, or control any unlawful or illegal material, subst., device, or object. +- Deft. to immediately notify Prob. Officer if place of residence or job changes. +- Restitution CRO filed +- Subject to all ordinary and special conditions of Probation + + Substance Abuse Eval. / Psychological Eval. / Psychosexual Eval. within / by: 30 days and deft. to successfully complete recommended treatment + +- Random Drug/Alcohol Testing At Deft's Expense Costs Waived +- No Consumption/Possession of Alcohol or Drugs or Intoxicants without a Prescription. +- Attend \_\_\_\_\_ AA and/or NA Meetings per Week. +- Deft. not to frequent any place of business whose primary purpose is the sale of alcohol. + + Complete \_\_\_\_\_ Hrs. of Community Service to be done at the rate of \_\_\_\_\_ Hrs. per Wk / Mo. (Min.) + +- License Revoked / Suspended for \_\_\_\_\_ mos / yrs +- Attend and successfully complete DUI school and 1 session of Victim Impact Panel + + No Contact / No Violent Contact / No Direct or Indirect contact w/Victim(s) or others listed: w/ Victim or Victim's family + +- No Contact w/Minor Children w/o Adult Supervision aware of this case and the disposition. +- Cost of Supervision: \$ \_\_\_\_\_ per month Waived by Court. \_\_\_\_\_ +- Enter and Successfully Complete DOC Non-Secure Bed Program and Any Recommended Aftercare. +- Hold in Custody, release only to DOC Non-Secure Bed Program Officer. +- Enter and Successfully Complete PBSO Long / Short Track Drug Farm and Any Rec. Aftercare. +- Forfeit Weapon / Money seized at the time of arrest to: + +- Enter and Complete: Anger Management Program Batterers Intervention Program +- Theft Abatement Program: \_\_\_\_\_ Other: \_\_\_\_\_ +- Defendant may apply for Early Termination after \_\_\_\_\_, provided all conds. are satisfied. +- Serve \_\_\_\_\_ days / months in PBCJ, with credit for \_\_\_\_\_ days / months. + + Youthful Affender Probation + + 2 DNA samples + + Assistance \$350. to be paid w/in 30 days to victim + +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE +FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, +CRIMINAL DIVISION, IN AND FOR PALM +BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +CASE NO: 06-14171 OF AMB +STATE OF FLORIDA, + +vs. + +[REDACTED] + +Defendant. + +DO NOT WRITE IN THIS AREA + +ORDER FOR RESTITUTION + +IN ADDITION TO ANY OTHER PUNISHMENT imposed by the Court in this case, +RESTITUTION IS ORDERED. It is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the victim, Shawn Livingston, (See + +Section 775.089(1)(c)), residing at 2403 Avenida Barcelona Uste +West Palm Beach, FL (shall have and recover from the Defendant, Asure), date + +of birth 9-30-1990, social security number - - the sum of + +\$350.00. Said sum (see section 775.089(3)(a),(b),(c)): + +(designate payment schedule below) to be paid within + + Is a condition of probation/community control, and is to be paid in \_\_\_\_\_ installments +of \$\_\_\_\_\_ and a final installment of \$\_\_\_\_\_, on the \_\_\_\_\_ day of each month, to +commence on \_\_\_\_\_, 20\_\_\_\_. + +*within +30 days* + +[ ] is to be paid before \_\_\_\_\_, 20\_\_\_\_. + +[ ] is to be paid immediately, hence, FOR WHICH LET EXECUTION ISSUE. + +Complete satisfaction of this Order is a condition of any probation, community control or parole +of the Defendant. (See Section 775.089(4)) + +This Order for Restitution may be enforced by the State, or a victim named in this Order +to receive the restitution, in the same manner as a judgment in a civil action. (See Section +775.089(5)) + +DONE AND ORDERED at West Palm Beach, Florida, this 31st day of +January, 2007 + +CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE + +BLUE: Victim +YELLOW: Probation +GOLD: Defendant + +**FILED** +Circuit Criminal Department + +SHARON R. BOCK +Clerk & Comptroller +Palm Beach County + +23 + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +![](_page_3_Picture_875.jpeg) + +IN THE CIRCUIT DIVISION OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT. IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +CASE NUMBER(S): S02006(F014)7/AXX4/D + +PLEA IN THE CIRCUIT COURT + +- 1. DEFENDANT: I am the defendant in the above-mentioned matter(s), and I am represented by the attorney indicated below. I understand I have the right to be represented by an attorney at all stages of the proceeding until the case is terminated, and if I cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed free of charge. [VA] +- 2. DEFENDANT: I understand I have the right to a speedy and public trial either by jury or by court. I hereby waive and give up this right. [VA] +- 3. DEFENDANT: I understand I have the right to be confronted by the witnesses against me and to cross examine them by myself or through my attorney. I hereby give up these rights. [VA] +- 4. DEFENDANT: I understand I have the right to testify on my own behalf, but I cannot be compelled to be a witness against myself and may remain silent if I so choose. I hereby give up these rights. [VA] +- 5. DEFENDANT: I understand I have the right to call witnesses to testify in my behalf and to invoke the compulsory process of the Court to subpoena those witnesses. I hereby give up these rights. [VA] +- 6. DEFENDANT: I understand I have the right to appeal all matters relating to the charge(s) and, unless I plea Guilty or No Contest, specifically reserving my right to appeal, I will give up such right of appeal. [VA] +- 7. DEFENDANT: I understand that if I am not a United States Citizen, my plea may subject me to deportation pursuant to the laws and regulations governing the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service; and, this Court has no jurisdiction (authority) in such matters. [VA] +- 8. DEFENDANT: I have not received any promises from anyone, including my attorney, concerning eligibility for any form of early release authorized by law and further no promises have been made to me as to the actual amount of time that I will serve under the sentence to be imposed. Further, I understand that this plea may be used to enhance future criminal penalties in any court system, even if adjudication of guilt is withheld. [VA] +- 9. DEFENDANT: I offer my plea freely and voluntarily and of my own accord, with full understanding of all matters set forth in the pleadings and this waiver. [VA] +- 10. DEFENDANT: I have personally placed my initials in each bracket above, and I understand each and every one of the rights outlined above. I hereby waive and give up each of them in order to enter my plea to the within charge(s). I understand that even though the Court may approve the agreement of sentence, the Court is not bound by the agreement, the Court may withdraw its approval at any time before pronouncing judgment, in which case I shall be able to withdraw my plea should I desire to do so. + +- 11. DEFENDANT: Choose one: + - If applicable, I choose a program which is or may be spiritually based. [ ] + - If applicable, I choose a program which is NOT spiritually based. [ ] + - If applicable, I have no preference if the program is or may be spiritually based. [ ] + +![](_page_3_Picture_881.jpeg) + +FILED +Circuit Criminal Department 34-07 +DATE JAN 31 2007 + +DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY ONLY: + +I am attorney of record. I have explained each of the above rights to the defendant and have explored the facts with him/her and studied his/her possible defenses to the charge(s). I concur with his/her decision to waive the rights and to enter this plea. I further stipulate that this document may be received by the Court as evidence of defendant's intelligent waiver of these rights and that it shall be filed by the Clerk as permanent record of that waiver. + +ATTORNEY FOR THE DEFENDANT + +3/1/Jan 07 +DATE + +4050 + +EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2005 + +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, CRIMINAL DIVISION, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. + +CASE NO: DECPORT AMB 06CF014171AXX + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +vs. [REDACTED] +Defendant: [REDACTED] +Social Security No.: [REDACTED] +Date of Birth: [REDACTED] + +RECORDER'S SPACE + +ORDER ASSESSING ADDITIONAL CHARGES, COSTS AND FINES AND ENTERING JUDGEMENT (IF INDICATED) + +The Defendant is hereby ordered to Pay and a judgement is hereby entered on behalf of Palm Beach County, Palm Beach County Administrative Complex, Palm Beach County, Florida 33401 and the State of Florida, Florida Department of Financial Services, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 in the following sums as indicated: + +INITIAL +IF WAIVED + +| 1. | \$ _____ | Total of fines assessed in sentence. | Fines | +|--------|------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------| +| 2. | \$ _____ | (Crimes Compensation Trust Fund) pursuant to Section 938.04, Florida Statutes (statutorily mandated 5% surcharge/cost on any fine entered in line 1). | | +| 3. | \$ _____ | (Crime Stoppers Trust Fund) \$20.00 pursuant to Section 938.06(1), Florida Statutes (statutorily mandated cost to be added if any fine imposed). | | +| 4. | \$ 50.00 | Mandatory Costs | | +| 5. | \$ 3.00 | (County Crime Prevention Fund) pursuant to Section 775.083(2), Florida Statutes (statutorily mandated). Strike out if not a negotiated settlement and not imposed by the Court. | | +| 6. | \$ 50.00 | (Additional Court Cost Clearing Trust Fund) pursuant to section 938.01(1), Florida Statutes (statutorily mandated). | | +| 7. | \$ 2.00 | (Crimes Compensation Trust Fund) pursuant to Section 938.03(1), Florida Statutes (statutorily mandated). | | +| 8. | \$ 200.00 | (Criminal Justice Education by Municipalities and Counties) pursuant to Section 938.15, Florida Statutes to be paid to: | | +| 9. | \$ 65.00 | [ ] Palm Beach County, Florida. (standorily mandated where locally authorized). | | +| 10. | \$ 3.00 | [ ] the City/Town/Village of _____, Florida. (Statutorily mandated where locally authorized). | | +| 11. | \$ 40.00 | (Additional Court Costs) pursuant to Section 938.05(1), Florida Statutes (statutorily mandated). | | +| 12. | \$ 150.00 | (Additional Court Costs for local requirements and other County funded programs) pursuant to Section 939.185(1)(a), Florida Statutes (statutorily mandated where locally authorized). | | +| 13. | \$ _____ | (Teen Court) pursuant to Section 938.19(2), Florida Statutes (statutorily mandated where locally authorized). | | +| 14. | \$ 50.00 | Discretionary or Specific Offense/Required Costs | | +| 15. | \$ _____ | (Public Defender Application Fee) pursuant to Sections 27.52(2)(a) and 938.29, Florida Statutes (a \$40.00 fee shall be imposed if not previously collected or waived). Strike out if previously paid or represented by private counsel. | | +| 16. | \$ _____ | (Public Defender's Fees and Costs) pursuant to Section 938.29, Florida Statutes and Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.720(d)(1) and Local Administrative Order. | | +| 17. | \$ _____ | (Minimum fee of \$150.00 is statutorily mandated following notice of imposition and right to contest amount, additional amount is discretionary). Strike out if represented by private counsel. | | +| 18. | \$ _____ | (Additional fees and costs of publicly appointed counsel) pursuant to Section 938.29, Florida Statutes and Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.720(d)(1) (notice of imposition and right to contest amount required). | | +| 19. | \$ _____ | (County Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Trust Fund) pursuant to Sections 938.21 and 938.23, Florida Statutes (may be imposed for any criminal violation of s.316.193, s.856.011, s.856.015, or Chapters 562, 567, 568, or 893, but may not exceed the amount of any fine imposed for the offense) | | +| 20. | \$ 50.00 | (DUI Court Cost) \$135.00 pursuant to Section 938.07, Florida Statutes for any violation of Sections 316.193 or 327.35 (statutorily mandated). | | +| 21. | \$ 667.00 | (Child Advocacy Center) \$101.00 pursuant to Section 938.10, Florida Statutes for any violation of Sections 784.085, 796.03, 800.04, 847.0145. | | +| Total: | \$ 667.00 | (Domestic Violence Surcharge) \$201.00 pursuant to Section 938.08, Florida Statutes for any violation of Sections 784.011, 784.021, 784.03, 784.041, 784.045, 784.048, 784.07, 784.08, 784.081, 784.082, 784.083, 784.085, 794.011, and any offense of Domestic Violence as described in Section 741.28, Florida Statutes (statutorily mandated). | | +| Other: | | Other Charges | | + +Payment of charges, costs, and fines are: + +| ( ) | a condition of probation | | +|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| +| ( ) | to be paid IN FULL TODAY; Defendant to proceed immediately to the Clerk and Comptroller's Office to pay the full amount due. | | +| ( ) | due immediately; hence, FOR WHICH LET EXECUTION ISSUE. This Judgment shall bear interest at the rate prescribed by law used (signed). | | +| ( ) | due within _____ days / months / year and is to be paid through the Clerk and Comptroller's Office pursuant to a COLLECTIONS AGREEMENT ESTABLISHED HOW. | | +| ( ) | \$ _____ will be paid today to the Clerk and Comptroller's Office as a down payment on the collections agreement. | | +| ( ) | to be paid by the defendant performing: (circle one) community service or AA/NA meetings, at a rate of \$ _____ /per hour/meeting, due within _____ days/months/years in lieu of actual payment. | | + +ALLURE TO PAY YOUR FINES AND COURT COSTS WILL RESULT IN YOUR DRIVER'S LICENSE BEING SUSPENDED AND/OR A WARRANT BEING ISSUED FOR YOUR ARREST ONE AND ORDERED in Open Court in Palm Beach County, Florida + +BROUGHT COURT FILES + +BY: GOLD: State Attorney [Signature] YELLOW: Probation [REDACTED] DEFENDANT: [REDACTED] + +BLUE: Administrative Office of the Court + +BCH FEB 05 2007 Palm Circuit (Rev 6/2005) 22 + +Form 004-B + +![](_page_5_Picture_42.jpeg) + +PLEA IN THE CIRCUIT COURT +THE FOLLOWING IS TO REFLECT ALL TERMS OF THE NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT + +Name: [Redacted] + +Plea: Guilty X Guilty/Best Interest Nole Contendere + +Table with 4 columns: Case No., Charge, Count, Lesser, Degree. Contains handwritten entries for Case No. 06CF01417 and AMB ST from Dwelling. Count columns show 1 and 2. Lesser columns show NO and NO. Degree columns show 20 Fdy and 30 Fdy. + +Circuit Criminal Department + +JAN 31 2007 + +State to Nolle Prosse the following at sentencing: + +SHARON R. BOCK +Clerk & Comptroller +Palm Beach County + +PSI: Waived/Not Required X Required/Requested + +ADJUDICATION: Adjudicate [ ] Withhold [ ] Court's Discretion [ ] +If the Defendant is convicted of possession, safe, trafficking or conspiracy to possess, sell or traffic in any controlled substance, the Court directs the Department of Motor Vehicles and Highway Safety to revoke the Defendant's driver's license for two (2) years. + +SENTENCE: + +Sentence text block with dates and fine count information. Includes handwritten notes like 'Party hel' and 'offender'. + +PROBATION: + +ALL CONDITIONS OF PROBATION MUST BE SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED NO LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE PROBATION IS SCHEDULED TO TERMINATE UNLESS STATED BELOW. + +STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PROBATION HAVE BEEN EXPLAINED BY DEFENSE COUNSEL. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF PROBATION: \$350 to Lingston + +- A) Restitution as per the accompanying order. + B) Fine: \$ Court Costs: \$ Drug Trust Fund: \$ + C) Substance abuse evaluation and successful completion of recommended treatment (check if ordered) + D) Random Drug Testing at Defendant's expense (check if ordered) + E) hours of community service at a rate of no less than hours per month + F) Incarceration: Days Months Year with credit for time served; which is days. + +OTHER COMMENTS OR CONDITIONS: + +- 1 9 months CCII + 2 Restitution \$350 to be paid w/in 30 days to D. + +SENTENCING IS DEFERRED UNTIL IN COURT ROOM +THE DEFENDANT UNDERSTANDS IF S/HE FAILS TO APPEAR OR IS ARRESTED ON NEW CHARGES, A CAPIAS WILL BE ISSUED AND THE COURT WILL IMPOSE ANY LAWFUL SENTENCE + +Assistant State Attorney +Date of Plea F-31-07 +Form Circuit 2 (from 8/2000) + +Attorney for the Defendant +Defendant +BCH FEB 05 2007 Form 005 + +4050 + +IN THE CRIMINAL DIVISION OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF FLORIDA, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY + +CASE NO. OUCE 01417HAMP DIV. R + +OBTS NUMBER \_\_\_\_\_ + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +[ ] COMMUNITY CONTROL VIOLATOR + +v. + +[ ] PROBATION VIOLATOR + +[REDACTED] + +DEFENDANT + +[REDACTED] + +W RACE + +F GENDER + +SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER \_\_\_\_\_ + +CFN 20070062199 +OR BK 21388 PG 1325 +RECORDED 02/07/2007 11:42:47 +Palm Beach County, Florida +Sheron R. Bock, CLERK & COMPTROLLER +Pg 1325; (1pg) + +**JUDGMENT** + +The above Defendant, being personally before this Court represented by A. Stine (attorney) + +| [ ] Having been tried and found guilty of the following crime(s): | X1 Having entered a plea of guilty to the following crime(s): | [ ] Having entered a plea of nolo contendere to the following crime(s): | +|-------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|-------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +| COUNT | CRIME | OFFENSE STATUTE NUMBER(S) | DEGREE | +|----------|------------------------------------|--------------------------------|-------------| +| 1 | Burglary of adwelling | 810.02(1) & (3) | 3FEL | +| 2 | Grand traff from a dwelling | 812.04(1) & (2) (d) | 3FEL | + +[ ] and no cause having been shown why the Defendant should not be adjudicated guilty, IT IS ORDERED THAT the Defendant is hereby ADJUDICATED GUILTY of the above crime(s). + +[X] and having been convicted or found guilty of, or having entered a plea of nolo contendere or guilty, regardless of adjudication, to attempts or offenses relating to sexual battery (ch. 794), lewd and lascivious conduct (ch. 800), or murder (s. 782.04), aggravated battery (s. 784.045), burglary (s. 810.02), carjacking (s. 812.133), or home invasion robbery (s. 812.135), or any other offense specified in section 943.325, the defendant shall be required to submit blood specimens. + +[X] and good cause being shown: IT IS ORDERED THAT ADJUDICATION OF GUILT BE WITHHELD + +SENTENCE STAYED The Court hereby stays and withholds imposition of sentence as to count(s) and plea of contendere (conditions of probation and/or [ ] Community Control under the supervision of the Dept. of Corrections (conditions of probation set forth in separate order). + +SENTENCE DEFERRED [ ] The Court hereby defers imposition of sentence until \_\_\_\_\_ SHARON R. BOCK Clerk & Comptroller Palm Beach County of Court + +The Defendant in Open Court was advised of his right to appeal from the Judgment by filing notice within thirty days following the date sentence is imposed or probation is ordered pursuant to this adjudication. The defendant was also advised of his right to the assistance of counsel in taking said appeal at the expense of the State upon showing of indigency. + +DON AND ORDERED in Open Court at Palm Beach County, Florida, this 3rd day of January, 2007. + +CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE + +Form Circuit 3A (rev 10/2000) + +Form 009A + +ROM FER A & 4000 + +17 + +IN THE CRIMINAL DIVISION OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE +FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF FLORIDA, +IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY + +CASE NO. 502006CF014171AXXXMB DIV. R + +OBTS NUMBER: 5003197309 + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +[ ] COMMUNITY +CONTROL +VIOLATOR + +V + +[ ] PROBATION +VIOLATION + +[REDACTED] + +DEFENDANT + +[REDACTED] + +W H I T E + +F + +DATE OF BIRTH + +RACE + +GENDER + +SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER + +*M. Louise Rubar 84457 +Deputy Sheriff +Palm Beach County, FL* + +The fingerprints below are those of said Defendant taken by Deputy Sheriff + +A + +![]()THE COURT CERTIFIES that the fingerprints shown below are those of the Defendant and were placed thereon by said Defendant in the Court's presence in Open Court at Palm Beach County, Florida, this 5th day of JAN, 20 07. + +![]()**FILED** +Circuit Criminal Department + +JAN 3 1 2007 + +SHARON R. BOCK +Clerk & Comptroller +Palm Beach County + +18 + +RULE 3.992(a) CRIMINAL PUNISHMENT CODE SCORESHEET + +06CF014171AXY + +| 1. DATE OF SENTENCE
3/31/07 | 2. PREPARER'S NAME DC SAO | 3. COUNTY
PB | 4. SENTENCING JUDGE
LABARGA | +|---------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------| +| 5. NAME (LAST, FIRST, MI.I.)
[REDACTED] | 6. DOB
9.3.90
DC # | 8. RACE
B W OTHER | 10. PRIMARY OFF. DATE
10/4/06 | +| | | 9. GENDER
M F | 12. PLEA
TRIAL | +| | | | 11. PRIMARY DOCKET #
06CF014171AWB | + +I. PRIMARY OFFENSE: If Qualifier, please check \_\_\_A\_\_\_S\_\_\_C\_\_\_R (A=Attempt, S=Solicitation, C=Conspiracy, R=Reclassification) + +| FELONY DEGREE | F.S.# | DESCRIPTION | OFFENSE LEVEL | POINTS | +|---------------|------------------|---------------------------|---------------|------------| +| 25 | 810.02(3) | Bureau of Dwelling | 7 | .56 | + +(Level - Points: 1=4, 2=10, 3=18, 4=22, 5=28, 6=38, 7=58, 8=74, 9=92, 10=116) + +Prior capital felony triples Primary Offense points + +II. ADDITIONAL OFFENSE(S): Supplemental page attached + +| DOCKET# | FEL/MM DEGREE | F.S.# | OFFENSE LEVEL | QUALIFY | COUNTS | POINTS | TOTAL | +|----------------------|--------------------|------------------------|---------------|----------------|----------|--------------|--------------| +| 06CF014171AWB | 30F | 812.04(1)(2)(3) | 2 | A S C R | 1 | x 1.2 | = 1.2 | +| Description | GT Dwelling | | | A S C R | 1 | x 1.2 | = 1.2 | +| Description | GT Dwelling | | | A S C R | 1 | x 1.2 | = 1.2 | +| Description | GT Dwelling | | | A S C R | 1 | x 1.2 | = 1.2 | +| Description | GT Dwelling | | | A S C R | 1 | x 1.2 | = 1.2 | + +(Level - Points: M=0.2, 1=0.7, 2=1.2, 3=2.4, 4=3.6, 5=5.4, 6=18, 7=28, 8=37, 9=46, 10=58) + +Prior capital felony triples Additional Offense points + +Supplemental page points **FILED 1.2** +Circuit Criminal Department + +III. VICTIM INJURY: + +| | Number | Total | Number | Total | +|-------------------------------|--------|-------|-----------------|-------| +| 2 nd Degree Murder | 240 X | = | Slight | 4 X | +| Death | 120 X | = | Sex Penetration | 80 X | +| Severe | 40 X | = | Sex Contact | 40 X | +| Moderate | 18 X | = | | | + +**JAN 31 2007** +**SHARON R. BOCK** +**Clerk & Comptroller** +**Palm Beach County** +III. \_\_\_\_\_ + +IV. PRIOR RECORD: Supplemental page attached + +| FEL/MM DEGREE | F.S.# | OFFENSE LEVEL | QUALIFY | DESCRIPTION | NUMBER | POINTS | TOTAL | +|---------------|----------------|---------------|----------------|---------------------------|----------|--------------|--------------| +| 3P | 790.115 | 4 | A S C R | poss wrapun school | 1 | x 2.4 | = 2.4 | +| | | | | | | X | = | +| | | | | | | X | = | +| | | | | | | X | = | +| | | | | | | X | = | +| | | | | | | X | = | + +(Level - Points: M=0.2, 1=0.5, 2=0.8, 3=1.6, 4=2.4, 5=3.6, 6=9, 7=14, 8=19, 9=23, 10=29) + +Supplemental page points \_\_\_\_\_ + +DISTRIBUTION: +![Criminal Department logo]() / Original / Clerk + / DC Data + Canary / State Attorney + Pink / Defense Attorney + Goldenrod / DC Offender File + Page 1 Subtotal: **BOX FEB 05 2007** + +06CF01417IAX Page 1 Subtotal \_\_\_\_\_ + +V. Legal Status violation = 4 Points + +VI. Community Sanction violation before the court for sentencing 6 points x each successive violation OR New felony conviction = 12 points x each successive violation + +V. \_\_\_\_\_ +VI. \_\_\_\_\_ + +VII. Firearm/Semi-Automatic or Machine Gun = 18 or 25 Points + +VII. \_\_\_\_\_ + +VIII. Prior Serious Felony = 30 Points + +VIII. \_\_\_\_\_ + +Subtotal Sentence Points \_\_\_\_\_ + +IX. Enhancements (only if the primary offense qualifies for enhancement) + +| Law Enforcement Protection | Drug Trafficking | Ground Theft Motor Vehicle | Street Gang | Domestic Violence (offenses committed on or after 10-1-07) | +|-------------------------------|------------------|----------------------------|-------------|------------------------------------------------------------| +| ___ x 1.5 ___ x 2.0 ___ x 2.5 | ___ x 1.5 | ___ x 1.5 | ___ x 1.5 | ___ x 1.5 | + +Enhanced Subtotal Sentence Points IX. \_\_\_\_\_ + +TOTAL SENTENCE POINTS 59.6 + +SENTENCE COMPUTATION + +If total sentence points are less than or equal to 44, the lowest permissible sentence is any non-state prison sanction. + +If total sentence points are greater than 44: + +| 59.6 | minus 28 = | 31.6 | x .75 = | 23.7 | +|-----------------------|------------|----------------------------------------------|---------|-------------| +| total sentence points | | lowest permissible prison sentence in months | | | + +The maximum sentence is up to the statutory maximum for the primary and any additional offenses as provided in s. 775.082, F.S., unless the lowest permissible sentence under the code, exceeds the statutory maximum. Such sentences may be imposed concurrently or consecutively. If total sentence points are greater than or equal to 363, a life sentence may be imposed. + +20 years +maximum sentence in years + +TOTAL SENTENCE IMPOSED + +| | Years | Months | Days | +|-----------------------------------------------|----------|--------|-------| +| State Prison | _____ | _____ | _____ | +| Life | _____ | _____ | _____ | +| County Jail | _____ | _____ | _____ | +| Time Served | _____ | _____ | _____ | +| Community Control | _____ | _____ | _____ | +| Probation | 2 | _____ | _____ | + +Please check if sentenced as habitual offender, habitual violent offender, violent career criminal, prison releasee reoffender, or a mandatory minimum applies. + + Mitigated Departure Plea Bargain + +Other Reason + +CLASSIFIED AS A [REDACTED] FUL OFFENDER + +JUDGE'S SIGNATURE [Signature] 1/31/07 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/EFTA02746437.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/EFTA02746437.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..95df83a1df97930b6d568e605a3ec95c542a7d92 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/EFTA02746437.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,746 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 37817, + "elapsed_seconds": 91.04, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_3_Picture_875.jpeg", + "_page_3_Picture_881.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_42.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "GRAND THEFT FROM A DWELLING", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 113.83200000000001, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 300.492, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 300.492, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 113.83200000000001, + 112.59 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SPECIAL CONDITIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 44.676, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 578.34, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 578.34, + 166.04999999999998 + ], + [ + 44.676, + 166.04999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER FOR RESTITUTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 220.32, + 271.35 + ], + [ + 373.32, + 271.35 + ], + [ + 373.32, + 287.54999999999995 + ], + [ + 220.32, + 287.54999999999995 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLEA IN THE CIRCUIT COURT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 239.904, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 370.26, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 370.26, + 131.22 + ], + [ + 239.904, + 131.22 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ASSESSING ADDITIONAL CHARGES, COSTS AND FINES AND ENTERING JUDGEMENT (IF INDICATED)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 87.51599999999999, + 213.84 + ], + [ + 530.604, + 213.84 + ], + [ + 530.604, + 232.46999999999997 + ], + [ + 87.51599999999999, + 232.46999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLEA IN THE CIRCUIT COURT\nTHE FOLLOWING IS TO REFLECT ALL TERMS OF THE NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.62, + 60.75 + ], + [ + 532.4399999999999, + 60.75 + ], + [ + 532.4399999999999, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 82.62, + 89.1 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SENTENCE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 45.9, + 332.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 113.22, + 332.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 113.22, + 348.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 45.9, + 348.29999999999995 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROBATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 45.9, + 433.35 + ], + [ + 119.34, + 433.35 + ], + [ + 119.34, + 449.55000000000007 + ], + [ + 45.9, + 449.55000000000007 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OTHER COMMENTS OR CONDITIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 45.9, + 603.45 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 603.45 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 623.7 + ], + [ + 45.9, + 623.7 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JUDGMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 271.35 + ], + [ + 364.14, + 271.35 + ], + [ + 364.14, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 295.65 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE CRIMINAL DIVISION OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF FLORIDA, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 52.63199999999999, + 82.62 + ], + [ + 412.48800000000006, + 82.62 + ], + [ + 412.48800000000006, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 52.63199999999999, + 128.79 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "RULE 3.992(a) CRIMINAL PUNISHMENT CODE SCORESHEET", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 135.252, + 59.129999999999995 + ], + [ + 477.36, + 59.129999999999995 + ], + [ + 477.36, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 135.252, + 73.71000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IX. Enhancements (only if the primary offense qualifies for enhancement)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 52.019999999999996, + 206.54999999999998 + ], + [ + 345.78, + 206.54999999999998 + ], + [ + 345.78, + 226.8 + ], + [ + 52.019999999999996, + 226.8 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SENTENCE COMPUTATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 311.85 + ], + [ + 364.14, + 311.85 + ], + [ + 364.14, + 328.05 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 328.05 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TOTAL SENTENCE IMPOSED", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 214.2, + 510.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 364.14, + 510.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 364.14, + 526.5 + ], + [ + 214.2, + 526.5 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 32 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 58 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 789 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 44 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 14 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 40 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Table", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 88 + ], + [ + "Text", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "Form", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 41 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Table", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746437" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/_page_3_Picture_875.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/_page_3_Picture_875.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..036f872b28b5f9b3fe2961027fcc26855ef3eb8e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/_page_3_Picture_875.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:53e1933219904d9948a30a79a3d248d6581f583f18dcf0cb560af18e0eed771a +size 4455 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/_page_3_Picture_881.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/_page_3_Picture_881.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2ed30dc4cb6c36cd4a6d7667ab1f3819145bc355 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/_page_3_Picture_881.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f2a05c74e034c36f783252e9d1820ed50ea7d87b9ff33e687834c4263d4e2179 +size 6167 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/_page_5_Picture_42.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/_page_5_Picture_42.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d0b3eb606f6c1307b910e29b622b2ec9033c5209 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746437/_page_5_Picture_42.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f1ced408ebb414401e4dcab1c8e8688cb0dee50256af76eabae58324943a649a +size 2427 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746447/EFTA02746447.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746447/EFTA02746447.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a1e8bf5cf6e29e7ff700aaf94df24c59e482757c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746447/EFTA02746447.md @@ -0,0 +1,351 @@ +ALIAS NAMES: + +OVER 8 NAMES: + +JACKET #: 0331736 + +#: 200701351 + +NONE + +Friday, March 09, 2007 +4:52:20 PM + +PALM BEACH SHERIFFS OFFICE +BOOKING CARD + +INCARCERATION DATE/TIME 03/09/2007 16:50 + +PRISONER TYPE LOCAL CHARGES + +DOB: [REDACTED] + +AGE: 16 + +R/S: W/F +HEIGHT: 4 ft 11 in +WEIGHT: 96 + +BKG.LOC: MDC INTAKE +BKG. ID #: 6077 +HAIR COLOR: BRO +EYE COLOR: BLU + +ADDRESS: [REDACTED] + +CITY: WPB + +STATE: FL ZIP: 33415 + +ID #: 20070309107 + +POUCH: 2615 + +SID #: 06493867 + +AFIS: + +ALIEN #: + +U.S. MARSHAL #: + +FBI #: + +OBTS #: + +NCIC: + +DOC #: + +INCIDENT #: + +ARREST ADDRESS:3444 S CONGRESS AV + +ARREST DATE: 03/09/2007 + +BKG. DATE: 03/09/2007 + +WARRANT/CASE#: 502006CF014171 + +ARREST OFFICER: [REDACTED] + +TRANS. OFFICER: SAME + +CITY: LAKE WORTH + +ARREST TIME: 15:00 + +BKG. TIME: 16:50 + +COURT DIVISION: + +ARREST AGENCY: 96 - DOC PROBATION + +TRANS. AGENCY: + +STATE: FL ZIP: 33461 + +CASE TYPE: VOP-FE! + +NOTE: "BK" + +STATUTE: + +948.0F + +OUT OF COUNTY BOND +NO DATE SET IN COMPUTER +(After setting, please give to docket) + +BOND + +MISD/JUV NON CRITRIA + +B TYPE: C + +NO THEFT FROM A DWELLING + +NO + +\*E/TIME: HOLD REM. BY + +HOLD REM. DEPT. + +JUVENILE + +NO H NEEDED + +BOND DISCHARGED +BOND FORFEITURE VACATED + +A. + +NCIC + +PALMS I + +MED. CLEA + +RELEASE DATE + +COURT DATE/TIME: + +NTA DATE/TIME: + +NTA LOC: + +RELEASE: + +F.P. ENTERED: + +F.P. CLEAR: + +PHOTO ID: + +CLASSIFICATION: + +RELEASE MOVE: + +MED.CLEAR IN: + +RELEASE INFORMATION: + +COURT LOCATION: + +331736 *Juvenile* + +Rough Arrest Only + +| ADMINISTRATION | OBTS Number | ARREST / NOTICE TO APPEAR | | | 1. Arrest | 3. Request for Warrant | 1 | Juvenile | | | | | +|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------|--------------------|--|--| +| | VOP (Case #: 502006CF014171AXXXMB) | Agency Name | | | 2. N.T.A. | 4. Request for Capias | | | | | | | +| | Agency ORI Number FL050045G | DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS | | | Agency Report Number | | | | | | | | +| | Cherge Type: 1. Felony 3. Misdemeanor 5. Ordinance 6. Other VOP | Weapon Saized/Type | | | Multiple Clearance Indicator | | | | | | | | +| | Check as many as apply. 2. Traffic Felony 4. Traffic Misdemeanor | 1. Yes 2. No | | | | | | | | | | | +| | Location of Arrest (Including Name of Business) | | | Location of Offense (Business Name, Address) | | | | | | | | | +| | Dept of Corrections, 3444 South Congress Ave, Lake Worth, FI 33461 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| | Date of Arrest | Time of Arrest | Booking Date | Booking Time | Jail Date | Jail Time | Location of Vehicle | | | | | | +| | 3/19/07 1:50pm | | | | | | | | | | | | +| | Name (Last, First, Middle) | | | | | | | | Alias (Name, DOB, Sec. Sec. #, Etc.) | | | | +| [REDACTED] | | | | | | | | | | | | | +| Ref. No. | I - American Indian | Sex | Date of Birth | Height | Weight | Eye Color | Hair Color | Complexion | Build | | | | +| B - Back | O - Original/Asian | F | 4'11 | 096 | Blue | Brwn | Light | small | | | | | +| Scars, Marks, Tattoos, Unique Physical Features (Location, type, Description) | | | | | | | Marital Status | Religion | Indication of: Y N Unk. | | | | +| [REDACTED] | | | | | | | Phone | Residence Type | | | | | +| [REDACTED] | | | | | | | | 1. City 3. Florida | | | | | +| [REDACTED] | | | | | | | | 2. County 4. Out of State | 3 | | | | +| Permanent Address (Street, Apt. Number) | | | (City) | | (State) | | (Zip) | | Phone | Address Source | | | +| same as above | | | (City) | | (State) | | (Zip) | | Phone | Occupation | | | +| Business Address (Street, Apt. Number) | | | (City) | | (State) | | (Zip) | | Phone | | | | +| D/L Number, State | Soc. Sec. Number | INS Number | | Place of Birth | | Citizenship | | | | | | | +| | 139-90-0196 | | | N.T. | | N.S. | | | | | | | +| CO-OFF | Co-Defendant Name (Last, First, Middle) | | | Race | Sex | Date of Birth | 1. Arrested | 3. Felony | 5. Juvenile | | | | +| | Co-Defendant Name (Last, First, Middle) | | | Race | Sex | Date of Birth | 1. Arrested | 3. Felony | 5. Juvenile | | | | +| | | | | 2. At Large | 4. Misdemeanor | | | | | | | | +| JUVENILE | Parent | Name (Last) | (First) | (Middle) | Residence Phone | | | | | | | | +| | Local Custodian | Ramiro | | | | | | | | | | | +| | Other | (City) | (State) | (Zip) | Business Phone | | | | | | | | +| | Address (Phone Address) | | | Date | | Juvenile Disposition | | 2. TOT HRS/CYF | | | | | +| | Received by: (Name) | | | Date | Time | 1. Handled/Processed within Dept. and Released | | 3. Incarcerated | | | | | +| Released To: (Name) | | | Relationship | FCIC/NCIC | | Date | Time | | | | | | +| The above address was provided by defendant and/or defendant's parents. The child and/or parent was told to keep the Juvenile Court Clerk's Office informed of any change of address: | | | | | | | | Grade | | | | | +| Yes, by: (Name) No: (Reason) | | | | | | | | | | | | | +| CODE | Recovery Information | | | | | | | | | | | | +| | 0, N/A | 1. Voluntary | 2. Located Not Returned | 3. Hospitalized | 4. HRS Custody | 5. Law Enforcement Custody | 6. Returned to Patient | 7. Declared | 8. Other | | | | +| | Drug Activity | S. Soil | R. Smuggle | K. Dispense/ | M. Manufacture | Z. Other | Drug Type | B. Barbitula | H. Hallucinogen | P. Paraphernal/a/ | | | +| N. N/A | B. Buy | D. Deliver | D. Deliver | Distribute | Produce/ | N. N/A | C. Cocaine | M. Guana | E. Equipment | | | | +| | P. Possess | T. Traffic | E. Use | | | A. Amphetamine | E. Heroin | O. Opium/Deriv. | S. Synthetic | U. Unknown | | | +| CHARGE | Charge Description | | | | Counts | Domestic Violence | Statute Violation Number | | | Violation of ORD # | | | +| | VOP (CASE #: 502006CF014171AXXXMB) | | | | Yes | No | 948.06 (1) | | | | | | +| Drug Activity | Drug Type | Amount/Unit | Offense # | | | Warrant/Capias Number | | | Bond | | | | +| | | | Offense # | | | Statute Violation Number | | | | | | | +| Charge Description | | | Counts | | | Domestic Violence | Statute Violation Number | | | Violation of ORD # | | | +| | | | Counts | | | Yes | No | | | | | | +| Charge Description | | | Counts | | | Domestic Violence | Statute Violation Number | | | Violation of ORD # | | | +| | | | Counts | | | Yes | No | | | | | | +| Charge Description | | | Counts | | | Domestic Violence | Statute Violation Number | | | Violation of ORD # | | | +| | | | Counts | | | Yes | No | | | | | | +| Charge Description | | | Counts | | | Domestic Violence | Statute Violation Number | | | Violation of ORD # | | | +| | | | Counts | | | Yes | No | | | | | | +| NOTICE TO APPEAR | Instruction No. 1
Mandatory Appearance in Court | | | | Location (Court, Room Number, Address)
Court Date and Time
Month Day Year Time A.M. P.M. | | | | | | | | +| | Instruction No. 2
You need not appear in Court but must Comply with instructions on reverse side. | | | | I AGREE TO APPEAR AT THE TIME AND PLACE DESIGNATED TO ANSWER THE OFFENSE CHARGED OR TO PAY THE FINE SUBSCRIBED. I UNDERSTAND THAT SHOULD I WILL FULLY FAIL TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT AS REQUIRED BY THIS NOTICE TO APPEAR, THAT I MAY BE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF COURT AND A WARRANT FOR MY ARREST SHALL BE ISSUED. | | | | | | | | +| | Signature of Defendant (or Juvenile and Parent/Custodian) | | | | Date Signed | | | | | | | | +| ADMIN. | HOLD for other Agency | | | | Signature of Agenting Officer | | | | Name Vanification (Pented by Arrestee)
(PRINT) | | | | +| | Name: | | | | X | | | | (PRINT) | | | | +| | Dangerous | Resisted Arrest | Name of Arresting Officer (Print) | | | | I.D. # | | | | | | +| | Suicidal | Other: | Peter [REDACTED] | | | | 01915 | | | | | | +| Intake Deputy | I.D. # | Pouch # | Transporting Officer | I.D. # | Agency | Witness here is subject signed with an "X". | | | | PAGE | | | +| | | | | | | 1 OF | | | | | | | + +8453 . • 05/26/09 PALM . BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF' S OFFENSE REPORT ENBH OFFICE PAGE 1 CASE NO. 07047444 + +> DISPOSITION: CLEARED BY ARREST DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +20GM CNBS WO RX CODE: 350A DATE: 03/09/07 FRIDAY ZONE: B44 GRID: 4828 DEPUTY ID.: 8229 ASSIST: TIME D 1344 A 1433 C 1602 OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 03/09/07 , 1429 HOURS AND DATE: 03/09/07 , 1608 HOURS EXCEPTION TYPE: INCIDENT LOCATION: 7448 LAKE WORTH CITY: LAKE WORTH NO. OFFENSES: 01 NO. OFFENDERS: 01 NO. VEH. LOCATION: HOTEL / MOTEL NO. VICTIMS: 01 NO. ARRESTED: 2 FORCED ENTRY: 0 STATE: FL STOLEN: 0 RD APT. ZIP: NO. PREM. NO.: 122 33460 ENTERED: 0 + +OFFENSE NO. 1 FLORIDA STATE STATUTE: 893 13 68 CIS CODE 350A + +• • ARRESTEE ARON C SEX\* E: W DOB: 06/22/1987 EYE: + +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: HOME PHONE: BUSINESS PHONE: 561 RR FL + +ARRESTEE SEX: F RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 1.111 Sege HOME PHONE: 561 BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 : 90 HR: DOB: 09/03/1990 EYE: WET PALM FL RIM + +NAME ROLE LIST: + +ROLE: + +OTHER NO. 1 REAt: HANNAN BYRNE SEX: RACE: HT: 0 WT: 0 HR: BUS ADDRESS: 3444 S CONGRESS AV APT: LAKE BUSINESS PHONE: (561) 434 - 3960 DOB: EYE: WORTH FL 33460 + +OTHER NO. 2 REAL: PETER SEX: RACE: HT: BUS ADDRESS: 3444 S CONGRESS BUSINESS PHONE: (561) 434 - 3960 DOB: 0 HR: EYE: AV APT: LAKE WORTH FL 33460 + +B453 05/26/09 ENBH + PALMBEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PAGE 2 + OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 07047444 + +| STATUS | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | +|--------|---|-------------------|---|-----------------|----------------------------------|-------------------------|---|---|---| +| STOLEN | 1 | S/R DIFFERENT DAY | | | | | | | | +| CODES | 3 | S/R SAME DAY | | 4 | RECOVERED FOR OTHER JURISDICTION | | | | | +| (STA) | 5 | LOST ITEMS | 8 | EVIDENCE SEIZED | 9 | OTHER (ARSON/VANDALISM) | | | | + + + +| DATE | S | T | P | R | O | P | E | R | T | Y | +|-----------|-------|---------|---------------|--------|-----------|---|---|----------|---|---| +| STLN/TY | BRAND | CALIBER | SERIAL/NUMBER | VALUE | VALUE | | | TELETYPE | | | +| RECOV A P | NAME | (GUN) | DESCRIPTION | STOLEN | RECOVERED | | | NUMBER | | | + + + +| 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | +|--------|---|---|---|------|-------|---|---|---|---|---| +| 030907 | 2 | D | M | | | | | | | | +| | | | | PLST | BAGGY | | | | | | +| | | | | 70Z | | | | | | | + +.. + .. + OFFENSE INDICATOR: OFFENSE 1 VICTIM NUMBER: 1 + VICTIM TYPE: OTHER + RESIDENCE TYPE: NOT APPLICABLE RESIDENCE STATUS: NOT APPLICABLE + EXTENT OF INJURY: NONE + INJURY TYPE(1): NOT APPLICABLE + INJURY TYPE(2): NOT APPLICABLE + VICTIM RELATION: NOT APPLICABLE + +ON 03/09/07 AT APPROXIMATELY 1429 HRS., CPL. C. [REDACTED] - + ID# 4791, AND I RESPONDED TO 7448 LK WORTH RD., AT THE + COLONY VILLAGE MOTEL, UNINCORPORATED LK WORTH, IN REFERENCE + TO ASSISTING PROBATION OFFICERS IN APPREHENDING A PERSON + WANTED FOR VIOLATION OF PROBATION. + +UPON ARRIVAL I MET W/DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS OFFICERS HANNAH + BYRNE-ID# 1954 AN DPETER [REDACTED]-ID# 1822, WHO STATED THAT + THEY HAD A VIOLATION OF PROBATION WARRANT FOR 2 SUSPECTS + IDENTIFIED AS ARON [REDACTED] AND [REDACTED]. + +UPON PLACING ARON UNDER ARREST FOR VIOLATION OF PROBATION. + ARON ADMITTED TO ME THAT HE HAD A PLASTIC BAG OF MARIJUANA + IN THE TOP DRESSER DRAWER LOCATED IN HIS MOTEL ROOM #122. + OFFICER HANNAH THEN RETRIEVED THE PLASTIC BAGGY OF SUSPECTED + MARIJUANA, IDENTIFIED AS A [REDACTED] LEAFY SUBSTANCE IN A PLASTIC + BAGGY. I CONDUCTED A MARIJUANA FIELD TEST USING A DUQUENOIS + MARIJUANA TEST KIT. THE TEST REVEALED A POSITIVE RESULT FOR + MARIJUANA. THE MARIJUANA WAS THEN WEIGHED USING AN OHAUS + TRIPLE BEAM BALANCE SCALE AND WEIGHED APPROXIMATELY 7 OZ. + +AT THIS TIME I FOUND ARON IN VIOLATION OF FSS 893.13(6B) + POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA UNDER 20 GRAMS. I THEN PLACED ARON + IN HANDCUFFS BEHIND HIS BACK AND CHECKED FOR PROPER FIT AND + DOUBLE LOCKED THEM. I THEN TRANSPORTED ARON TO COUNTY JAIL + W/OUT INCIDENT. + +THE MARIJUANA WAS PLACED INTO PBSO EVIDENCE. THIS REPORT + WAS CLEARED BY ARREST. + D/S GUEVARA/8229/031107/LDW + DICT: 031007/0641 + +CJ Case No.: 2006CP014171AXX "R" ST of FL vs. [REDACTED] Charges: + +- 1. BURGLARY OF A DWELLING + 2. GRAND THEFT FROM A DWELLING (VOP) + +Arrest#: 2007013510 Bond# JAIL Type \$ A/C + +Date 3/13/07 Judge Lalmaga Crt. Rep. S Bethan ASA DC EC Int Esq / PD---Pres / Not Pres. Deft. Pres / Not Pres. + +Before the Court for: VOP Preliminary Hearing + +- Granted Denied With / Without Prejudice Withdrawn Court Reserves Ruling Written Order to Follow +- Warrant Ordered Recalled Bond Set at S See Below Also Covers Sp Cond +- Bond Forf OR: Disch / Revoked / Reinstated Bond: Disch / Revoked SOR: Disch / Revoked / Reinstated +- Bond Forf Vacated Previous Bond Reinstated, if Bondsman agrees State failed to file charges Released O.R. / S.O.R. + +Deft Indigent PD Appt Hrg only PD Pres DELINQUENT Court Appts Evaluation for: Drug Farm DOC Non-Secure Bed by Pre-Plea PSI ordered by/within days w/input from DJJ / Staffing Referred to: PTI / SAAP / PADD Case placed on the absentee docket + +DEFT ENTERED A PLEA OF: NOT GUILTY GUILTY NO CONTEST BEST INTEREST TO THE COURT As Charged-Cts Lesser Cts Lesser Charge Sw & Test Adv of Rts Waived PSI Lesser Cts Lesser Charge + +- ADJ GUILTY as Charged as to Cts Lesser Cts +- FOUND GUILTY as Charged as to Cts Lesser Cts +- ADJ W/HELD as to Cts SENT W/HELD as to Cts +- FOUND AND ADJUDICATED DELINQUENT as to Cts Dispo Order to follow / Filed +- FOUND & ADJ NOT GUILTY as to Cts Dismiss Nolle Prosse Cts + +Prob / Comm Control: Revoked Reinstated Modified Term. Successfully / Unsuccessfully Deft. to pay fine or complete hrs. Community Service or Serve days PBCJ. + +Stip/Found: (violent) Habitual Off. 775.084 Stip/Found: Sexual Offender / Sexual Predator Stip/Found: P.R.R. SENTENCE: PBCJ: Cts: / DOC: Cts: PBCJ: Cts: / DOC: Cts: + +W/Credit for Days / Mos. / Yrs. Deft Remanded Deft to remain on same rel. status pending sent. Conc / Consec / Co-Term w/cases / cts: + +- Execution of Sentence Stayed Sentence Suspended Time served as to Cts +- Youthful Off Habitual Off Min / Mand: as to Cts +- ABOVE SENTENCE TO BE FOLLOWED By: Probation Drug Off Prob Comm. Control I II - See Page 2 + +Mental health evaluation ordered due by April 2, 2007 + +Status Set / Remains Set / Reset 4/5/07 Div R Rm 106 at 8:30 AM/PM Set / Remains Set / Reset Div Rm at AM/PM + +Deft sign Def Co PO ASA R Clark Notified by mail by: on 3 / 26 / 07 Prob Jail DJJ GAL County Courthouse Courtroom, Criminal Justice Bldg. Courtroom, Criminal Justice Complex 205 N. Dixie, West Palm Beach 38844 State Road 80, Belle Glade 3228 Gun Club Rd., West Palm Beach + +IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT ROBIN SHEPERT, ADA COORDINATOR IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURT, PALM BEACH COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 205 N. DIXIE HWY, RM 5.2500, WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401; TELEPHONE (561) 355-4380, WITHIN 2 WORKING DAYS OF YOUR RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE. IF YOU ARE HEARING OR VOICE IMPAIRED, CALL 1-800-955-9771. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746447/EFTA02746447.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746447/EFTA02746447.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a180bb26bb8686e4644630acdc8a1328999e0a4f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746447/EFTA02746447.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,210 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746447.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 68733, + "elapsed_seconds": 25.35, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "PALM BEACH SHERIFFS OFFICE BOOKING CARD", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 293.76, + 89.91 + ], + [ + 463.896, + 89.91 + ], + [ + 463.896, + 118.25999999999999 + ], + [ + 293.76, + 118.25999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 101 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 306 + ], + [ + "Line", + 67 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 417 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746447" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746452/EFTA02746452.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746452/EFTA02746452.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..497d0cdd90dff8bc63b98b1a50434226834b7437 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746452/EFTA02746452.md @@ -0,0 +1,138 @@ +CJ \_\_\_\_\_ Case No.: 2006CF014171AXX IR: ST of FL vs. [REDACTED] + +Charges: + +- 1. BURGLARY OF A DWELLING +- 2. GRAND THREAT FROM A DWELLING + +Arrest#: 2007013510 Bond#: JAIL Type: \_\_\_\_\_ \$ \_\_\_\_\_ A/C \_\_\_\_\_ + +Date: 4/10/07 Judge: Lairan Crt. Rep.: S. Bethan +ASA: Berkeley DC: EC Int: \_\_\_\_\_ +Deft---Pres: Not Pres. W/O Def. Co.: G. Mitchell (Esg / PD---Pres) Not Pres. + +Before the Court for: Status Check + Granted Denied With / Without Prejudice Withdrawn Court Reserves Ruling Written Order to Follow + +- Warrant Ordered Recalled Bond Set at \$ \_\_\_\_\_ See Below Also Covers Sp Cond +- Bond Forf OR: Disch / Revoked / Reinstated Bond: Disch / Revoked SOR: Disch / Revoked / Reinstated +- Bond Forf Vacated Previous Bond Reinstated, if Bondsman agrees State failed to file charges Released O.R. / S.O.R. + +- Deft \_\_\_ Indigent PD Appt Hrg only PD Pres \_\_\_\_\_ Court Appts \_\_\_\_\_ +- Evaluation for: Drug Farm DOC Non-Secure Bed by \_\_\_\_\_ + Pre-Plea PSI ordered by/within \_\_\_\_\_ days w/input from DJJ / Staffing +- Referred to: PTI / SAAP / PADD Case placed on the absentee docket + +- DEFT ENTERED A PLEA OF: NOT GUILTY GUILTY NO CONTEST BEST INTEREST TO THE COURT +- As Charged-Cts: VOP Lesser Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ Lesser Charge: \_\_\_\_\_ +- Sw & Test Adv of Rts Waived PSI Lesser Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ Lesser Charge: \_\_\_\_\_ + +- ADJ GUILTY as Charged as to Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ Lesser Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ +- FOUND GUILTY as Charged as to Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ Lesser Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ +- ADJ W/HELD as to Cts: ADJ W/HELD SENT W/HELD as to Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ +- FOUND AND ADJUDICATED DELINQUENT as to Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ Dispo Order to follow / Filed +- FOUND & ADJ NOT GUILTY as to Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ Dismiss Nolle Prosse Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ + +- Prob / Comm Control: Revoked Reinstated Modified Term. Successfully / Unsuccessfully +- Deft. to pay fine or complete \_\_\_\_\_ hrs. Community Service or Serve \_\_\_\_\_ days PBCJ. + + Stip/Found: (violent) Habitual Off. 775.084 Stip/Found: Sexual Offender / Sexual Predator Stip/Found: P.R.R. +SENTENCE: PBCJ: \_\_\_\_\_ Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ / DOC: \_\_\_\_\_ Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ +PBCJ: \_\_\_\_\_ Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ / DOC: \_\_\_\_\_ Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ + +- W/Credit for \_\_\_\_\_ Days / Mos. / Yrs. Deft Remanded Deft to remain on same rel. status pending sent. + +Conc / Consec / Co-Term w/cases / cts: \_\_\_\_\_ + +- Execution of Sentence Stayed Sentence Suspended Time served as to Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ + +- Youthful Off Habitual Off Min / Mand: \_\_\_\_\_ as to Cts: \_\_\_\_\_ + + ABOVE SENTENCE TO BE FOLLOWED By: Probation Drug Off Prob Comm. Control I II - See Page 2 + +\_\_\_\_\_ + +\_\_\_\_\_ + +\_\_\_\_\_ Set / Remains Set / Reset \_\_\_\_\_ Div \_\_\_\_\_ Rm \_\_\_\_\_ at \_\_\_\_\_ AM/PM + +\_\_\_\_\_ Set / Remains Set / Reset \_\_\_\_\_ Div \_\_\_\_\_ Rm \_\_\_\_\_ at \_\_\_\_\_ AM/PM + +- Deft sign \_\_\_\_\_ + +- Def Co.: \_\_\_\_\_ ASA: \_\_\_\_\_ Bondsman: \_\_\_\_\_ + +- Prob Jail DJJ GAL Notified by mail by: \_\_\_\_\_ on \_\_\_\_\_ / \_\_\_\_\_ +- County Courthouse Courtroom, Criminal Justice Bldg. Courtroom, Criminal Justice Complex +- 205 N. Dixie, West Palm Beach 38844 State Road 80, Belle Glade 3228 Gun Club Rd., West Palm Beach + +IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROPERTY OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT ROBIN SHEPPETT, ADA COORDINATOR IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURT, PALM BEACH COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 205 N. DIXIE HWY., S. 2500, WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401; TELEPHONE (561) 355-4380, WITHIN 2 WORKING DAYS OF YOUR RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE. IF YOU ARE HEARING OR VOICE IMPAIRED, CALL 1-800-955-8771. + +DATE: 4/10/07 + +CASE NO. DGCF14171AXX + +NAME: [REDACTED] + +TERM OF Prob / Sex Off / Drug Off Prob / C.C. I / C.C. II: \_\_\_\_\_ gos / yrs as to C.S. \_\_\_\_\_ + + conc w/ consec. w/ \_\_\_\_\_ + + Probation transferred to: + +SPECIAL CONDITIONS: + +- Complete Originally Ordered Conditions +- Curfew: \_\_\_\_\_ p.m., with the following exception: \_\_\_\_\_ +- Deft. to report to Prob. Dept. immediately upon release +- Deft. not to have in care, custody, or control any unlawful or illegal material, subst., device, or object. +- Deft. to immediately notify Prob. Officer if place of residence or job changes. +- Restitution CRO filed +- Subject to all ordinary and special conditions of Probation + + Substance Abuse Eval. / Psychological Eval. / Psychosexual Eval. within by: 30 days and deft. to successfully complete recommended treatment + +- Random Drug/Alcohol Testing At Deft's Expense Costs Waived +- No Consumption/Possession of Alcohol or Drugs or Intoxicants without a Prescription. +- Attend \_\_\_\_\_ AA and/or NA Meetings per Week. +- Deft. not to frequent any place of business whose primary purpose is the sale of alcohol. + + Complete \_\_\_\_\_ Hrs. of Community Service to be done at the rate of \_\_\_\_\_ Hrs. per Wk / Mo.(Min.) + + License Revoked / Suspended for \_\_\_\_\_ mos / yrs + + Attend and successfully complete DUI school and 1 session of Victim Impact Panel + + No Contact / No Violent Contact / No Direct or Indirect contact w/Victim(s) or others listed: +Anon Ketelaan + + No Contact w/Minor Children w/o Adult Supervision aware of this case and the disposition. + + Cost of Supervision: \$ \_\_\_\_\_ per month Waived by Court. \_\_\_\_\_ + + Enter and Successfully Complete DOC Non-Secure Bed Program and Any Recommended Aftercare. + + Hold in Custody, release only to DOC Non-Secure Bed Program Officer. + + Enter and Successfully Complete PBSO Long / Short Track Drug Farm and Any Rec. Aftercare. + + Forfeit Weapon / Money seized at the time of arrest to: + + Enter and Complete: Anger Management Program Batterers Intervention Program + Theft Abatement Program: \_\_\_\_\_ Other: \_\_\_\_\_ + + Defendant may apply for Early Termination after \_\_\_\_\_, provided all conds. are satisfied. + + Serve 32 days / months in PBCJ, with credit for 32 days / months. + + Defendant on Community Control II. until November 1, 2007 + + Enroll in outpatient mental health treatment within 30 days. + + and complete all treatment. + + \_\_\_\_\_ + + \_\_\_\_\_ + + \_\_\_\_\_ \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746452/EFTA02746452.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746452/EFTA02746452.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bd0b183e99522671801c18b8aa17707cb7c3e7f9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746452/EFTA02746452.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746452.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 6184, + "elapsed_seconds": 16.52, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "SPECIAL CONDITIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 46.512, + 145.8 + ], + [ + 177.48, + 145.8 + ], + [ + 177.48, + 162.0 + ], + [ + 46.512, + 162.0 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 32 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 484 + ], + [ + "Text", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 49 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746452" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746454/EFTA02746454.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746454/EFTA02746454.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aabfb4769e271d45f00a1eac1c5abb18b6218bb0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746454/EFTA02746454.md @@ -0,0 +1,322 @@ +NAME: [REDACTED] + +JACKET #: 0331736 BOOK #: 2007044154 + +ALIAS NAMES: OVER 8 NAMES: + +NONE + +Wednesday, August 08, 2007 +3:27:43 PM + +PALM BEACH SHERIFFS OFFICE +BOOKING CARD + +INCARCERATION DATE/TIME 08/08/2007 15:24 + +BKG.LOC: MDC INTAKE + +PRISONER TYPE JUVENILE + +BKG. ID #: 7851 + +DOB: [REDACTED] + +R/S: W/F + +HAIR COLOR: BRO + +AGE: 16 + +HEIGHT: 4 ft 11 in + +EYE COLOR: BLU + +SSN: [REDACTED] + +WEIGHT: 96 + +ADDRESS: [REDACTED] + +CITY: WPB + +STATE: FL ZIP: 33415 + +CITIZEN COUNTRY: USA + +ID #: 20070808075 + +POUCH: 1020 + +NCIC: + +SID #: 06493867 + +AFIS: + +DOC #: + +ALIEN #: + +U.S. MARSHAL #: + +INCIDENT #: + +FBI #: + +OBTS #: + +ARREST ADDRESS: 2319 AVENIDA BARCELONA ESTE + +CITY: WPB + +STATE: FL ZIP: 33415 + +ARREST DATE: 08/08/2007 + +ARREST TIME: 12:45 + +BKG. DATE: 08/08/2007 + +BKG. TIME: 15:24 + +CURRENT BOND: \$0.00 + +WARRANT/CASE#: + +COURT DIVISION: + +ARREST OFFICER: [REDACTED] + +ARREST AGENCY: 96 - DOC PROBATION + +TRANS. OFFICER: MITCHELL + +TRANS. AGENCY: 01 - PBSO + +CASE TYPE: VOP STREET VIOLATION + +NOTE: + +STATUTE: + +CT: DESCRIPTION: CASE FLAG: NO BOND + +VOFC: B TYPE: CUR. BOND: + +948.06 (NN) + +1 PROB VIOLATION-OR COMMTY CONT RE UNK/FEL/MISD/JUV NON CRITRIA + + NO + +\$0.00 + +() + +0 STREET VIOLATION (VOP) - DOC + +\$0.00 + +() + +0 PALM BEACH CO: CS #0614171 - 1-2) BURGLARY-DW/JOCC CONVEY 3-4) G/T \$100-\$300 DWELLING + +\$0.00 + +() + +0 BOOKED PER ACMIN ORDER 2.06B - MUST 1ST APPEAR + +\$0.00 + +HOLDS: + +HOLD DATE/TIME: + +HOLD BY: + +HOLD DEPT.: + +HOLD REM.DATE/TIME: + +HOLD REM. BY: + +HOLD REM. DEPT: + +1 + +2 + +3 + +ALERT DESCRIPTION: + +ALERT NARRATIVE: + +1 30 + +DNA ON FILE/SUBMITTED + +2 + +SENTENCED TO ADULT PROBATION ON 01/31/2007 + +3 + +OVER 3 ALERTS: + +KEEP SEPARATE FROM: + +NONE + +OVER 6 NAMES: + +ASSIGNED HOUSING: + +NTA DATE/TIME: + +NTA LOC: + +NCIC INTAKE: + +NCIC RELEASE: + +F.P. ENTERED: + +F.P. CLEAR: + +PALMS REL.: + +PHOTO ID: + +CLASSIFICATION: + +MED.CLEAR IN: + +MED. CLEAR REL: + +RELEASE MOVE: + +RELEASE DATE/TIME: + +RELEASE INFORMATION: + +COURT DATE/TIME: + +COURT LOCATION: + +CLERK + +WARRANTS + +STATE ATTY + +CENTRAL RCDS + +CLASS + +Handwritten signature and initials. + +0331736 + +Rough Arrest Only + +| ADMINISTRATION | OBTS Number | ARREST / NOTICE TO APPEAR
Juvenile Referral Report | | | | | 1. Arrest | 3. Request for Warrant | Juvenile | | | | | | | +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------|----------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| | Agency ORI Number | Agency Name | | | | | 2. N.T.A. | 4. Request for Capias | | | | | | | | +| | FL05000000 | DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS | | | | | Agency Report Number | | | | | | | | | +| | Charge Type: 1. Felony 3. Misdemeanor 5. Ordinance 6. Other | DOC - 014171CFA | | | | | Weapon Seized/Type | Multiple Clearance Indicator | | | | | | | | +| Check as many as apply. 1. Traffic Felony 2. Traffic Misdemeanor 3. Other | | Locked and Delayed By [Redacted] | | | | | 1. Yes 2. No 2 | | | | | | | | | +| Date of Arrest 05-01-07 | | Time of Arrest 12:45 | Booking Date 8/8/07 | Booking Time | Jail Date | Jail Time | Location of Vehicle | | | | | | | | | +| Alias (Name, DOB, Soc. Sec. #, Etc.)
[Redacted]
Race 1. American Indian Sex Date of Birth Height Weight Eye Color Hair Color Complexion Build
Scars, Marks, Tattoos, Unique Physical Features (Location, Type, Description)
Mantel Status Religion Indication of: Y N Unk.
Single None Alcohol Influence Drug Influence
| | | | | | | | | | Mantel Status | Religion | Indication of: Y N Unk. | Single | None | Alcohol Influence Drug Influence | +| Mantel Status | Religion | Indication of: Y N Unk. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +| Single | None | Alcohol Influence Drug Influence | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +| Residence Type 1. City 3. Plainde 2. County 4. Out of State DOC
Address Source DOC
Business Address (Street, Apt. Number) (City) (State) (Zip) Phone () Occupation () | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +| D/L Number, State A416873908230 | | Soc. Sec. Number [Redacted] | INS Number | Place of Birth Vineland, NJ | | Citizenship US | | | | | | | | | | +| Co-Defendant Name (Last, First, Middle) | | Race 1. Arrested 2. At Large 3. Felony 4. Misdemeanor 5. Juvenile | Race 1. Arrested 2. At Large 3. Felony 4. Misdemeanor | Race 1. Arrested 2. At Large 3. Felony 4. Misdemeanor | Race 1. Arrested 2. At Large 3. Felony 4. Misdemeanor | Race 1. Arrested 2. At Large 3. Felony 4. Misdemeanor | Race 1. Arrested 2. At Large 3. Felony 4. Misdemeanor | Race 1. Arrested 2. At Large 3. Felony 4. Misdemeanor | Race 1. Arrested 2. At Large 3. Felony 4. Misdemeanor | | | | | | | +| Parent Name (Last) V.O.P. Street Viol
Legal Custodian Other
Address (Street, Apt. Number) (City) (State) (Zip) Business Phone () | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +| JUVENILE | | Notified by: (Name) | Date | Time | Juvenile Disposition 1. Handied/Processed within Dept. and Released 2. TOT HRS/CYF 3. Incarcerated | | | | | | | | | | | +| Released To: (Name) | | Relationship | FCIC/NCIC | Date | Time | | | | | | | | | | | +| The above address was provided by defendant and/or defendant's parents. The child and/or parent was told to keep the Juvenile Court Clerk's Office informed of any change of address:
Yes, by: (Name) No: (Reason) | | | | | | School Attended Grade | | | | | | | | | | +| Recovery Information 0. N/A 1. Voluntary 2. Located Not Relumed 3. Hospitalized 4. HRS Custody 5. Law Enforcement Custody 6. Returned to Parent 7. Deceased 8. Other | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +| Drug Activity S. Sell R. Smuggle K. Dispense/ Distribute M. Manufacture Z. Other Drug Type B. Barbitulate H. Hallucinogen P. Paraphenoid/ Equipment U. Unknown
N. N/A B. Buy D. Deliver C. Cocaine C. Cocaine D. Deliver E. Use A. Amphetamine E. Harpin F. Opium/Deriv. G. Synthetic | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +| Charge Description Violation of Probation | | Counts 1 | Domestic Violence Yes No | Statute Violation Number 948.06 | | Violation of ORD # | | | | | | | | | | +| Drug Activity | | Drug Type | Amount/Unit | Offense # | Warrant/Capias Number | Bond | NONE | | | | | | | | | +| Charge Description | | Counts | Domestic Violence Yes No | Statute Violation Number | | Bond | NONE | | | | | | | | | +| Drug Activity | | Drug Type | Amount/Unit | Offense # | Warrant/Capias Number | Bond | NONE | | | | | | | | | +| Charge Description | | Counts | Domestic Violence Yes No | Statute Violation Number | | Bond | NONE | | | | | | | | | +| Drug Activity | | Drug Type | Amount/Unit | Offense # | Warrant/Capias Number | Bond | NONE | | | | | | | | | +| Charge Description | | Counts | Domestic Violence Yes No | Statute Violation Number | | Bond | NONE | | | | | | | | | +| Drug Activity | | Drug Type | Amount/Unit | Offense # | Warrant/Capias Number | Bond | NONE | | | | | | | | | +| I AGREE TO APPEAR AT THE TIME AND PLACE DESIGNATED TO ANSWER THE OFFENSE CHARGED OR TO PAY THE FINE SUBSCRIBED. I UNDERSTAND THAT SHOULD I WILL FULLY FAIL TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT AS REQUIRED BY THIS NOTICE TO APPEAR, THAT I MAY BE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF COURT AND A WARRANT FOR MY ARREST SHALL BE ISSUED. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +| Signature of Defendant (or Juvenile and Parent/Custodian) Date Signed | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +| ADMIN | HOLD for other Agency Name: DOC | | Signature of Arresting Officer X | Name Venification (Printed by Arrested) (PRINT) | | PAGE 1 OF 1 | | | | | | | | | | +| | Dangerous | Resisted Arrest | Name of Arresting Officer (PRINT) | I.D. # | | PAGE 2 | | | | | | | | | | +| | Suscedal | Other: | Conrad [Redacted] 01993 | Agency Witness here is subject Signed with an "X". | | | | | | | | | | | | +| Intake Deputy I.D. # | | Pouch # | Transporting Officer I.D. # | | Agency Witness here is subject Signed with an "X". | | | | | | | | | | | + +| OBTS Number | | PROBABLÉ CAUSE AFFIDAVIT | | 1 | Juvenile | +|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------|--------------------------|----------| +| Agency ORI Number | | 1. Arrest 2. N.T.A. 3. Request for [REDACTED] 4. Request for Capias | | | | +| FLO 5 0 0 0 0 0 | | Agency Name | | Agency Report Number | | +| FLO 5 0 0 0 0 0 | | DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS | | 06-014171CFA | | +| Charge Type: 1. Felony 3. Misdemeanor 5. Ordinance | | Special Notes: | | | | +| Check as many 2. Traffic Felony 4. Traffic Misdemeanor 6. Other | | | | | | +| as apply. | | | | | | +| Date of Birth [REDACTED] First, Middle | | Race | Sex | Date of Birth [REDACTED] | | +| [REDACTED] | W | | F | | | +| Charge Description | | Charge Description | | | | +| Violation of Probation | | 948.06 | | | | +| Charge Description | | Charge Description | | | | +| Victim's Name (Last, First, Middle) | | Race | Sex | Date of Birth | | +| Victim's Local Address (Street, Apt. Number) | (City) | (State) | (Zip) | Address Source | | +| Victim's Business Address (Name, Street) | (City) | (State) | (Zip) | Occupation | | +|

The undersigned certifies and swears that he/she has just and reasonable grounds to believe, and does believe that the above named Defendant committed the following violation of law. The Person taken into custody...

committed the below acts in my presence.      was observed by _____ who told _____
confessed to _____ that he/she saw the arrested person commit the below acts.
was found to have committed the below acts, resulting from my (described) investigation.

| | | | | | +| On the 8 th day of August, 2007at | | A.M. P.M. (Specifically include facts constituting cause for arrest). | | | | + +**NARRATIVE:** + +Violation of Community Control, by failing to live and remain at liberty without violating any law by committing the criminal offense of possession of Marijuana on Aug. 8, 2007, in Palm Bench, County, FL, and as grounds for belief that the offender violated her probation, Officer Conrad Hill states that the offender was arrested on Aug. 8, 2007, for the said offense by Officer Conrad Hill D.O.C. . A violated condition 5 of the order of commonly control by possessing marijuana and possessing drug manipulation as attested by officer Conrad Hill. The offender is a 16 yrs wife who has been sentenced as an auditorial On January 31, 2007 the Offender was placed on Community Control by Judge Labarga for the this probational Original Offenses of Ct.1 Burglary of a Dwelling, and Ct. 2 Grand Theft from a Dwelling for a term of Nine Months. care. + +| Signature and Subscribed before me | | +|-------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------| +| Jim S. Smith crso | Conrad Hill Crso | +| Signature Notary Public / Clerk of Court / Officer (F.S.S 117.10) | | +| Lisa S. Timothy | | +| Name of Notary Public / Clerk of Court / Officer (F.S.S 117.10) | | +| 08-08-07 | | +| Date | | + +9453 PALM BEACH CO OFFE 05/26/09 ENBH UNTY SHERIFF' SOFFICE PAGE 1 NSE REPORT CASE NO. 07106114 + +> DISPOSITION: ZULU DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +ASSIST TO ANOTHER DEPT. CODE: 9576 DATE: 08/08/07 ZONE: B41 GRID: 4B15 DEPUTY ID.: 7132 ASSIST: 00 TIME D 1156 A OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 08/08/07 , 1200 HOURS AND DATE: EXCEPTION TYPE: INCIDENT LOCATION:a - APT. CITY: WEST PALM BEACH STATE: FL ZIP: NO. OFFENSES: 00 NO. OFFENDERS: 00 NO. VEH. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. LOCATION: RESIDENCE - SINGLE FAMILY NO. VICTIMS: 00 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 WEDNESDAY 1201 C 1329 0000 HOURS NO.: 33416 ENTERED: 0 + +ARRESTEE SS . SEX: F RACE: W HT: 502 WT: 90 HR: II, EYE: !NW RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 41.14 PALM FL HOME PHONE: 561 BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 DOB: 09/03/1990 + +STATUS 1 = STOLEN 2 = S/R DIFFERENT DAY CODES 3 = S/R SAME DAY 4 =RECOVERED FOR OTHER JURISDICTION (STA) 5 = LOST ITEMS 8 =EVIDENCE SEIZED 9 = OTHER (ARSON/VANDALISM) ===== C9====iv==OO==of==m=ii==============mm===mmm + +| DATE | S | T | BRAND | CALIBER | SERIAL/NUMBER | P R O P E R T Y | | | +|--------|---|---|------------|---------|---------------|-----------------|-----------|----------| +| STLN/ | T | Y | | | | VALUE | VALUE | TELETYPE | +| RECOV | A | P | NAME | (GUN) | DESCRIPTION | STOLEN | RECOVERED | NUMBER | +| 080807 | 8 | D | M-MARIJUAN | .8 | ██████████ | | 1 | | +| 080807 | 8 | 1 | | | GOLD COLOR | | 1 | | +| | | | | | SMOKING PIPE | | | | +| 080807 | 8 | Z | | | SCALE | | 1 | | +| .. | | | | | | | | | +| .. | | | | | | | | | + +ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 8, 2007 AT 1200 HOURS, I WAS DISPATCHED + +ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 8, 2007 AT 1200 HOURS, I WAS DISPATCHED TO - nUIMEMS INN, LOCATED IN THE TAVARES COVE MOBILE HOME PARK IN WEST PALM BEACH TO ASSIST THE FLORIDA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS. + +ON SCENE, I MET WITH INVESTIGATOR CONRAD MI 401993. III. TOLD ME HE HAD JUST PLACED Ma UNDER ARREST FOR VIOLATION OF PROBATION. APPARENTLY, INVESTIGATORS WENT TO 1L 'S HOME TO CHECK UP ON HER IN A PROBATION CHECK. IN DOING SO, THEY FOUND A SMALL AMOUNT OF MARIJUANA, A SMOKING PIPE CONTAINING MARIJUANA RESIDUE IN IT AND A SCALE SUSPECTED TO MEASURE AND WEIGH DRUGS. I PLACED ALL THE ITEMS INTO EVIDENCE FOR THE INVESTIGATOR. I THEN TRANSPORTEDS TO THE PALM BEACH COUNTY JAIL FOR BOOKING AND PROCESSING WITHOUT INCIDENT. REFERENCE DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS CASE 406-014171CFR FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THIS CASE. + +THIS ENDS MY INVOLVEMENT IN THIS CASE. THIS REPORT IS FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. D/S MITCHELL 47132 DICT 8/9/07 AT 0814 HOURS + +81453 05/26/09 ENBH .P A'LwM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PAGE 2 OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 07106114 + +TRANS 8/16/07/KR \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746454/EFTA02746454.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746454/EFTA02746454.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1d64d429ebbdb5241daf9765142ef6b863a5bf5e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746454/EFTA02746454.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,245 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746454.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 116596, + "elapsed_seconds": 65.74, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "PALM BEACH SHERIFFS OFFICE BOOKING CARD", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 211.14, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 377.604, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 377.604, + 123.93 + ], + [ + 211.14, + 123.93 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NARRATIVE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 41.004000000000005, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 126.68399999999998, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 126.68399999999998, + 379.89 + ], + [ + 41.004000000000005, + 379.89 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 223 + ], + [ + "Text", + 156 + ], + [ + "Line", + 105 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Form", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 445 + ], + [ + "Line", + 71 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746454" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746459/EFTA02746459.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746459/EFTA02746459.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ee44370161587aa06525761fb0c12f8d52fc7e65 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746459/EFTA02746459.md @@ -0,0 +1,65 @@ +UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA +WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION +CASE NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA + +| JANE DOE, et al., | | WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA | +|-------------------|---|--------------------------| +| | | | +| Plaintiffs, | | JUNE 12, 2009 | +| | | | +| vs. | | | +| | | | +| JEFFREY EPSTEIN, | | | +| | | | +| Defendant. | | | +| | x | | + +TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING +BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, +UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE + +APPEARANCES: + +FOR THE PLAINTIFFS: ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQ. +Mermelstein & Horowitz +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Miami, FL 33160 305.931.2200 +For Jane Doe + +[REDACTED] J. [REDACTED], ESQ. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Jane Doe 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 +954.522.3456 + +ISIDRO M. [REDACTED], ESQ. +[REDACTED] Elkins Boehringer +224 Datura Avenue +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +Jane DOE II 561.832.8033 +RICHARD H. WILLITS, ESQ. +2290 10th Avenue North +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +For C.M.A. 561.582.7600 + +"R" + +1 course, he would be entitled to take discovery, and we don't 2 believe that any of that violates the non-prosecution 3 agreement. + +4 The issue with the pleading that he filed, the motion 5 to dismiss the case, I believe it's Jane Doe 101, represented 6 by Mr. Josefsberg, is that that is a case that was filed 7 exclusively under 18 U.S.C., Section 2255. . She met that 8 requirement. Mr. Epstein is moving to dismiss it, not on the 9 basis of damages, he is saying that he cannot be held liable 10 under 2255 because he was not convicted of an offense. + +11 The reason why he was not convicted of an offense is 12 because he entered into the non-prosecution agreement. So that 13 we do believe is a breach. + +14 The issue really that was raised in the motion to stay 15 and that I addressed in our response to the motion to stay is 16 that Mr. Epstein's -- Mr. Epstein wants to stay the litigation 17 in order to leave, in order to sort of attack the cases of the 18 victims whether they are fully within the non-prosecution dr 19 not, non-prosecution agreement or not, and leave the Government 20 without a remedy if he does, in fact, breach those terms. And 21 that is why we opposed the stay. + +22 THE COURT: I'm not sure what you mean by that last 23 statement. + +24 MS. VILLAFANA: Well, because this issue related to 25 the motion to dismiss on Mr. Josefsberg's client came up after 1 we had filed that response. And what we said in the response 2 'to the motion to stay is that the reason why he wants to stay 3 the litigation is so that the non-prosecution agreement 4 terminates based on a period of time, as he puts it. And then 5 afterwards he would be able to come in here and make all of 6 these arguments that clearly violate the non-prosecution 7 agreement but we would be without remedy. + +8 THE COURT: But you're not taking the position that 9 other than possibly doing something in litigation which is a 10 violation of an express provision of the non-prosecution 11 agreement, any other discovery, motion practice, investigations 12 that someone would ordinarily do in the course of defending a 13 civil case would constitute a violation of the agreement? + +14 MS. VILLAFANA: No, Your Honor. I mean, civil 15 litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take 16 discovery is part of what civil litigation is about. And while 17 there may be, for example, if someone were to try to subpoena 18 the Government, we would obviously resist under statutory 19 reasons, all that sort of stuff. But, no, Mr. Epstein is 20 entitled to take the deposition of a plaintiff and to subpoena 21 records, etc. + +22 THE COURT: And even if he seeks discovery from a 23 Government agency, you have the right to resist it under the 24 rules of procedure but that would not constitute a violation, 25 again unless there's a provision in the prosecution agreement \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746459/EFTA02746459.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746459/EFTA02746459.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1a59d396f074f2956e78fdaae7ddaa147941b315 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746459/EFTA02746459.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,200 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746459.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 4219, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.08, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION CASE NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 239.904, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 440.02799999999996, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 440.02799999999996, + 131.22 + ], + [ + 239.904, + 131.22 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 220.32, + 324.0 + ], + [ + 489.6, + 324.0 + ], + [ + 489.6, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 220.32, + 368.55 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "APPEARANCES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 122.4, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 208.07999999999998, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 208.07999999999998, + 396.90000000000003 + ], + [ + 122.4, + 396.90000000000003 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 135 + ], + [ + "Line", + 68 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746459" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746462/EFTA02746462.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746462/EFTA02746462.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8135c0ce2faa47b8f643fe9edfcb2329848fdac8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746462/EFTA02746462.md @@ -0,0 +1,183 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### Defendant's Sur-Reply In Connection With Plaintiffs', Jane Does 2-7, Motion For Protective Order (DE 226) and Reply (DE 266) With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law, And Pursuant To This Court's Order (DE 285) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein" or "Defendant"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Sur-Reply In Connection With Plaintiffs', Jane Does 2-7, Motion For Protective Order (DE 226) and Plaintiffs' Reply (DE 266), With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law, And Pursuant To This Court's Order (DE 285). In support, Mr. Epstein states as follows: + +## I. Introduction & Argument + +1. Plaintiffs have attempted to prevent discovery relating to their medical, psychological, criminal and employment histories, as well as their general backgrounds. Now Plaintiffs wish to prevent Epstein from investigating the very claims they assert against him by asking this court to stop Epstein's defense team from learning information about the Plaintiffs that would contradict their claims and the damages they seek to recover. In an attempt to halt any investigation, Plaintiffs claim "they have great fear and concern [of] their identities being disclosed as Epstein's victims. . . ." however, they do not state that investigators are identifying them as said victims, or identifying them with Jeffrey Epstein (emphasis added). (DE 266, p.2) + +2. Notably, Plaintiffs have several preexisting and diagnosed conditions for which they now attempt to pawn off on Epstein in an effort to increase their damages. See infra. For instance, prior to any of their alleged encounters with Epstein, certain Plaintiffs have been raped, sexually abused, molested and physically and verbally abused. See infra. Some of them have been diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder or obsessive compulsive disorder, and some have suicidal thoughts and/or have attempted suicide on more than one occasion. Moreover, some of the Plaintiffs have witnessed close friends or family members commit suicide. While the above incidents are nothing less than tragic, the impact of those incidents on each of the Plaintiffs must be taken into consideration with the claims they make and the damages they seek from Epstein. + +3. Certainly, this court cannot expect or force Epstein to accept what Plaintiffs choose to provide at deposition or what they filter through discovery without further investigation. Requiring Epstein to do so would be tantamount to giving the Plaintiffs the key to the bank in that Epstein will not be afforded the right to investigate the claims made against him. + +4. Plaintiffs' delay tactics are largely out-of-control in that same have delayed the timely progress of this case and resulted in several unnecessary discovery motions and judicial resources. Plaintiffs continue to attempt to prevent discovery at every turn, and their next step will likely be to prevent Epstein from participating in depositions in connection with the cases that Plaintiffs have filed against him. + +#### (a) Plaintiffs' Reply Memorandum In Support Of Their Motion For Protective Order + +5. On August 14, 2009, Plaintiffs filed their Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion for Protective Order (DE 266). Plaintiffs claim in their Reply that it would be of little relevance as to whether Plaintiffs gave "older-rich guys" "massages" for money and, as such, Defendant's investigators should be precluded from learning that information all together. (DE 266, p. 6) Is Plaintiffs' counsel serious? Plaintiffs seek damages for allegedly giving massages that purportedly transformed into a sexual assault. Is it not relevant whether Plaintiffs have given massages or massages of a sexual nature for money in the past? Will that not lead to the discovery of admissible evidence? Is it not relevant whether Plaintiffs bragged to others about making money for allegedly giving older men massages, whether they worked in the proverbial "jack shack" and whether they convinced their friends to do the same. Assuming Plaintiffs provided massages of a sexual nature to older men for money and that they did work in "jackshacks" and/or as prostitutes, that information is relevant to this action in that Plaintiffs are seeking millions of dollars for psychological injuries, which may have been caused by acts other than those allegedly caused by Epstein. + +6. This is a civil case, and consent goes to the heart of Plaintiffs' damages claims. If Plaintiffs were promiscuous and prostituted themselves out for money, does this court believe that Plaintiffs would provide Epstein with that information in an effort to prove his affirmative defense of consent or to limit Plaintiffs' damages? Personal injury cases and the damages Plaintiffs claim are disproved everyday by virtue of investigation and surveillance. Here, Plaintiffs seek millions of dollars in personal injury + +damages for, among other things, "confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries." See Amended Complaint. As such, Epstein is permitted to conduct the appropriate investigation to determine whether other events in the Plaintiffs' lives have caused their psychological problems separate and apart from what they alleged in their respective Complaints. As such, this court should not allow Plaintiffs to hide behind the cloak of their allegations in an effort to prevent discovering their true backgrounds and thus disproving the claims they allege against Epstein in these civil cases. + +7. Next, Plaintiffs claim they are worried about their identities being revealed by Epstein's investigators; however, the declarations cited below do NOT state that Epstein's investigators have affiliated Plaintiffs with Jeffrey Epstein, revealed that they are alleged sexual battery victims, or that Plaintiffs initiated specious civil lawsuits against Jeffrey Epstein.' Moreover, several third-party subpoenas have been served and Plaintiffs' counsel has filed Cross-Notices of those Non-Party Depositions on individuals without redacting Epstein's name. Plaintiffs' counsel has not complained to their colleagues about taking such an approach. Is it Plaintiffs' counsel's contention that when they depose third parties, they will never identify Jane Doe 2-7 or associate them with Epstein? How else will Plaintiffs prove their damages? Clearly, Plaintiffs seek only to limit Epstein's discovery, not their own. + +8. After the filing of the Reply, Plaintiffs filed new declarations. In particular, Plaintiffs attach to or cite in their Reply the declaration of Jane Doe 4 (dated + +2 Epstein's investigators have thus far taken a conservative investigative approach. However, that is not to say that a more aggressive investigative approach relative to the very claims Plaintiffs allege is improper so long as Epstein's investigators remain, as they have, professional. How else is Epstein going to learn the veracity of the allegations Plaintiffs allege against him. + +August 14, 2009), the declaration of Jane Doe 7 (dated August 14, 2009) and the declaration of Jane Doe 4's sister (Y.B.'s declaration dated August 18, 2009). Once again, none of the declarations provide that Epstein's investigators have identified them as alleged sexual assault victims or affiliate them in anyway with Jeffrey Epstein. + +# (i) The Declaration of Jane Doe Number #4 + +9. As to Jane Doe #4's declaration, investigators interviewed her former boyfriend, Preston Vinyard, by telephone. Mr. Vinyard commented that he knew the investigators wanted information about Jane Doe #4 without the investigators even mentioning Jane Doe's name. Importantly, Jane Doe #4 provided Mr. Vinyard's name to her expert, Gilbert Kliman, M.D. In fact, she stated in the interview with Dr. Kliman that Mr. Vinyard was not a good influence on her and that he was an alcoholic. See Exhibit "A". In addition, on 9/20/04, a battery report was filed involving Jane Doe #4 and Mr. Vinyard in reference to an argument where he grabbed her by the neck and began spitting on her and calling her a cheater. Jane Doe #4 also tried to bite Mr. Vinyard. See Exhibit "B". Next, a repeat domestic violence case was filed on 9/21/04 and was closed on a Final Judgment for Protection Order on 10/6/04. Apparently, Mr. Vinyard was physically and verbally abusive to Jane Doe Number 4. See Exhibit "C". On 10/6/04, an Order of Protection was issued against Vinyard and was enforce until 10/6/05. See Exhibit "D". Mr. Vinyard was also arrested on 12/24/03 and charged with reckless driving and leaving the scene of an accident with damages after he and Jane Doe #4 hit a tree and fled the scene after leaving a party. See Exhibit "E". On 10/31/04, officers entered Jane Doe #4's home in connection with a disturbance between her and Mr. Vinyard. Officers found Jane Doe #4 without a top on and advised her to get dressed; + +however, she kept yelling at police demanding that they leave her house. See Exhibit "F". On 11/31/04, Mr. Vinyard was arrested for violation of domestic violence injunction order for repeat violence against Jane Doe #4. Apparently, Jane Doe #4 and Vinyard were arguing in a cab over not having money to pay the fair and Mr. Vinyard hit Jane Doe #4. See Exhibit "G". + +10. In addition, Jane Doe Number #4 advised Dr. Kliman that her boyfriend (Chris) died in a car accident involving a DUI and her best friend (Jen) died in an automobile accident involving drinking. See Exhibit "H." In 2003, Jane Doe #4 sought counseling because of a dysfunctional home situation, particularly with her father. Finally, Jane Doe #4 described herself as angry, bitter, disliking herself, depressed, and having problems with her body image — all pre-Epstein. See supra. + +11. Clearly, Mr. Vinyard is a person Epstein is entitled to interview by and through his investigators. Mr. Vinyard was contacted and he provided information to Epstein's investigators. The telephone interview lasted approximately 20 minutes, and Mr. Vinyard ended the telephone call and offered to call investigators back. To date, Mr. Vinyard has not contacted the investigators. + +## (ii) The Declaration of Y.B., Jane Doe #4's Sister + +12. On August 8, 2009 at approximately 2:40 p.m., investigators visited with Y.B. and her husband at their Port St. Lucie address. Epstein's investigators announced that they wished to speak to Y.B. about Jane Doe #4, and provided Y.B. a state issued private investigator's license and business card. Y.B. stated that she would have to speak to Jane Doe #4 before discussing anything with the investigators. Y.B. appeared more concerned with how investigators obtained her public address because Y.B. thought + +her address was non-public due to her husband's position of employment, which appeared to be with a particular fire department. Investigators asked Y.B to discuss her sister, Jane Doe #4; however, at approximately 2:49 p.m., Y.B. abruptly ended the conversation and led her husband back inside the home. Nothing further was discussed, and nothing was revealed during this nine (9) minute conversation. + +## (iii) The Declaration of Jane Doe #7 + +13. Jane Doe #7's declaration is telling. First, she lists several questions that investigators allegedly asked three of her friends: + +- (a) Was she promiscuous in high school; +- (b) What was her reputation in high school; +- (c) How many guys has she been with; +- (d) Did she date older, rich guys; +- (e) Did she give massages for money; and +- (f) Who were her friends in high school and what is their contact information + +14. Clearly, the above questions are basic background questions and cannot be limited without violating Epstein's constitutional due process rights to defend himself. + +15. Next, Jane Doe #7 claims that investigators mentioned but fails to state what references were made relative to Is it Jane Doe #7's contention that investigators cannot ask others whether they ever heard of Such a contention would be silly given the fact that Jane Doe #7 herself makes allegations regarding in paragraph 13 of her Amended Complaint. Therefore, it is imperative know whether Jane Doe #7 ever spoke about and, if so, what did Jane Doe #7 say about + +affidavit tells a different story; that is, Jane Doe #7 approached her at a local bar and discussed Jeffrey Epstein with her in a public forum, i.e., Jane Doe #7 discussed her lawsuit with in public, with others. See Exhibit "I", MI Affidavit. Even so, an elementary review of the alleged questioning by the investigators as set forth in Jane Doe #7's declaration shows that same is relevant and may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Surely, Jane Doe #7 is not being heard to argue that information concerning is not relevant to this action when her complaint makes allegations to the contrary. + +16. Moreover, on October 4, 2005, Jane Doe #7 gave a taped interview to the police under oath, which directly conflicts with the allegations in her Amended Complaint Exhibit "J". In that police interview, Jane Doe # 7 stated: + +- (a) that she was introduced to Epstein by +- (b) that she went to Epstein's home with -the first time; +- (c) that she gave Epstein a massage with her clothes on the second time she visited the home; +- (d) that she only went to Epstein's home 2 times; +- (e) that when she massaged Epstein he was not naked and he never removed his towel; (0 that she did not touch his private areas and he did not ask her to do same; +- (g) that he did not touch her in her private areas; and +- (h) that after the second trip to the home she never went back. +- 17. Contrast the above with the allegations in the Amended Complaint: +- (a) Paragraph 13 during the first massage, Epstein "sexually assaulted" her and "masturbated," +- (b) Paragraph 14 Jane Doe #7 "...returned on many occasions to the Palm + +Beach mansion to provide Epstein with massages for money. On those occasions, Epstein engaged in sexual contact and activity with Jane, which included, among other things, Epstein touching [her] breasts, placing a vibrator on her vagina and masturbating himself. This sexual abuse continued over a period of approximately 18 to 24 months." + +18. In her answers to interrogatories, Jane Doe #7 states that she went to the Palm Beach Mansion 8 to 10 times and that she brought friends on 2 separate occasions and was paid \$200 per friend, each of which directly conflicts with the statement she gave to police. See supra. + +19. As to Dr. Kliman, Jane Doe #7 told him that she came back to the home for a second massage with Epstein, and Epstein asked if he could see her bra and asked questions regarding her sex life. She also told Dr. Kliman that during this second massage, she took her shirt off, gave him a massage in her bra and that he masturbated under a towel. She also stated that she believes she visited Epstein 8 times and that the last time or one of the last times she went there Epstein was aggressive, grabbed her butt, tried to feel parts of her body, pulled her bra down, exposed her nipples and touched her breasts which, once again, is in direct conflict with what Jane Doe #7 told police under oath. + +20. Based upon the foregoing, it is clear that the basic questions asked of the three non-parties were relevant and reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Moreover, whether any of the individuals ever heard of by and through Jane Doe #7 is also relevant in that any information obtained may also lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, which may contradict the allegations Jane Doe #7 has made against Epstein much like Jane Doe #7 contradicts herself in the statements she made to police and the allegations she subsequently made in the Amended + +Complaint. + +# (iv) The Declaration of Jane Doe #6 + +21. Jane Doe #6's declaration requests that Epstein not speak to Jane Doe's former employers relative to her background. However, Jane Doe # 6's background is directly relevant to this action and the damages she seeks to recover from Epstein. For instance, according to interrogatory answer number 7, Jane Doe #6 was diagnosed with PTSD following a car accident in 2003. On 4/10/05, Jane Doe #6 witnessed a friend enter transformer box, play with the wires and electrocute himself. See Exhibit "K". On 4/13/06, Jane Doe #6's mother made a child abuse report, and advised police that Jane Doe #6 and her father had been smoking marijuana together since she was 13. See Exhibit "L" Jane Doe #6's mother told police that she tried to help Jane Doe #6 by placing her in Growing Together Treatment Program on 3/10/06 and by having her Baker Acted on 4/7/06. See Exhibit "L" Then, on 12/22/06, Jane Doe #6 and her then boyfriend, James, got into an argument and he went out into the street and put a gun to his head and killed himself. See Exhibit "M". + +22. On 1/31/07, Jane Doe #6 pled guilty to grand theft and burglary, and she pled guilty and was sentenced to a 30 day substance abuse program, 9 months community control and 2 years probation. See Exhibit "N". On 3/09/07, Jane Doe #6 was arrested and on 3/20/07 was ordered to undergo a mental health evaluation. See Exhibit "O" On 4/10/07, she was ordered to 32 days in jail and community control until 11/1/07 with probation for 2 years. See Exhibit "P". On August 8, 2007, she was arrested for possession of drug paraphernalia and violated her probation. See Exhibit "Q". + +23. Based upon the foregoing and the allegations in the Amended Complaint, + +investigating Jane Doe #6's background is directly relevant to this action as it relates to her medical, psychiatric, social and family histories and the damages she seeks to recover. + +## (v) Brief Conclusion + +24. Here, the number and scope of damages claimed are vast. Preventing Epstein from investigating this case and the claims made concerning some of the pivotal issues in this case would work an injustice by preventing Epstein from being able to defend himself. Even the ASAO contemplated that Epstein ". . .could fight the damages portion [of a lawsuit], which means that, of course, he would be entitled to depositions; of course, he would be entitled to take discovery. . ." and investigate claims. See Exhibit "R", pp. 33-34, June 12, 2009 Transcript. + +Wherefore, Epstein requests that this court enter an order denying Jane Doe's 2-7 Motion for Protective Order which seeks to prevent Epstein from investigating the claims made against him and the individual Jane Does that make thospejaims d for such other and further relief as this court deem just and proper. + +> By: MICHAEL TPIKE, SQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of d identifi on following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of , 2009 + +Respectfully su tted, + +By: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike©belclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +#### Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomey.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. a Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 isx@searcvlaw.com inlasearcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff CM.A. + +Brad a Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@drra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassello@law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. Lail., P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 dosefsberg@podhurst.com kezell®nodhurst.com + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecfbmcereinhar n Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold-Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 skuvin©riccilaw.com tleopold@riccilaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagescabellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746462/EFTA02746462.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746462/EFTA02746462.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6f20a04322177b2410dd32c996600406164d0ea1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746462/EFTA02746462.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,810 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746462.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 21908, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.98, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 415.5164489746094, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 415.5164489746094, + 106.10302734375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 106.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant's Sur-Reply In Connection With Plaintiffs', Jane Does 2-7, Motion For \nProtective Order (DE 226) and Reply (DE 266) With Incorporated Memorandum \nOf Law, And Pursuant To This Court's Order (DE 285)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 96.696, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 522.3202514648438, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 522.3202514648438, + 410.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 96.696, + 410.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction & Argument", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 221.54399999999998, + 559.71 + ], + [ + 398.4696044921875, + 559.71 + ], + [ + 398.4696044921875, + 575.9730072021484 + ], + [ + 221.54399999999998, + 575.9730072021484 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(a) Plaintiffs' Reply Memorandum In Support Of \nTheir Motion For Protective Order", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 166.46400000000003, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 446.6573791503906, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 446.6573791503906, + 134.2230224609375 + ], + [ + 166.46400000000003, + 134.2230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(i) The Declaration of Jane Doe Number #4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 182.37599999999998, + 186.3 + ], + [ + 432.706787109375, + 186.3 + ], + [ + 432.706787109375, + 204.35302734375 + ], + [ + 182.37599999999998, + 204.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(ii) The Declaration of Y.B., Jane Doe #4's Sister", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 172.58399999999997, + 519.21 + ], + [ + 444.9914245605469, + 519.21 + ], + [ + 444.9914245605469, + 535.10302734375 + ], + [ + 172.58399999999997, + 535.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(iii) The Declaration of Jane Doe #7", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 215.46000000000004 + ], + [ + 410.96783447265625, + 215.46000000000004 + ], + [ + 410.96783447265625, + 231.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 231.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(iv) The Declaration of Jane Doe #6", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 106.11000000000001 + ], + [ + 410.28387451171875, + 106.11000000000001 + ], + [ + 410.28387451171875, + 122.60302734375 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 122.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(v) Brief Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 242.964, + 159.57000000000002 + ], + [ + 371.8719787597656, + 159.57000000000002 + ], + [ + 371.8719787597656, + 175.85302734375 + ], + [ + 242.964, + 175.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 364.95050048828125, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 364.95050048828125, + 106.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 106.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 424.3880615234375, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 424.3880615234375, + 134.2230224609375 + ], + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 134.2230224609375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 155 + ], + [ + "Line", + 77 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746462" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746476/EFTA02746476.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746476/EFTA02746476.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ccada13a0688d33f35795b143b54ae69d02cf39c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746476/EFTA02746476.md @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S ATTENDANCE AT DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFFS, AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2 through 8 ("Plaintiffs"), by and through undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(1) and Local Rule 7.1, hereby files this Motion for Protective Order as to Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance at Deposition of Plaintiffs, and state as follows: + +I. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's counsel has advised Plaintiffs' counsel that Jeffrey Epstein plans to attend the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 on September 16, 2009. This deposition is to be videotaped, as stated in the Notice served by Defendant's counsel. Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 file this Motion for Protective Order to prevent Jeffrey Epstein from attending the depositions of Plaintiffs in person, and thereby avoid the unnecessary trauma and distress to Plaintiffs which may reasonably be expected if they have to be present in a room with Jeffrey Epstein for deposition. + +2. Instead, Plaintiffs propose that Jeffrey Epstein should only be permitted to view a live videofeed of the deposition from another closed room on the premises. + +3. The requested relief is a natural corollary to the No-Contact Order entered by this Court on July 31, 2009. (D.E. 238). In that Order, the Court directed Jeffrey Epstein not to have any contact whatsoever with Plaintiffs: "[Title Court finds it necessary to state clearly that Defendant is under this Court's order not to have direct or indirect contact with any plaintiffs . . ." (Emphasis supplied). Palm Beach County Circuit Court Judge Pucillo gave Jeffrey Epstein the same instruction at his plea conference. Id. As a result, Jeffrey Epstein's appearance at Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's deposition would violate the No-Contact Order literally, and be contrary to its spirit and intent. Plaintiffs herein propose a protective order that will allow Jeffrey Epstein to participate in his defense as any other civil defendant, and at the same time avoid contact between Jeffrey Epstein and Plaintiffs consistent with the Court's July 31, 2009 Order. + +4. The Plaintiffs are fragile young adults who have been traumatized as a result of one or more sexual assaults by Jeffrey Epstein. See Affidavit of Dr. Kliman (attached as Exhibit "A" to D.E. 226). Since the filing of this lawsuit, Jeffrey Epstein has continued to harass and intimidate the Plaintiffs through repeated and intrusive contacts made by his investigators. See Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order and supporting Declarations. (D.E. 226). + +5. Jeffrey Epstein's attendance at the deposition of the Plaintiffs will intimidate the Plaintiffs and create a genuine risk of psychological harm. Kliman Decl., II 3, 13 & 21, D.E. 226, Exh. A. On the other hand, his physical presence adds nothing.' Under Plaintiffs' proposal, Jeffrey Epstein would not be prejudiced as he and his counsel would still have an opportunity to confer during the depositions. Similarly, Jeffrey Epstein would have an opportunity to read the transcripts and review the videotaped recording. + +7. A party does not have a constitutional or fundamental right to attend depositions in civil cases. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(1) authorizes this Court to enter an Order "designating the persons who may be present while the discovery is conducted." Relief can be granted under 26(c) to prevent a party from "annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden..." Although this rule is to be used sparingly, courts have excluded a party from a deposition in a variety of circumstances. =, & Marcus, Federal Practice and Procedure § 2041 (1994) citing Galella v. Onassis, 487 F.2d 986 (2d Cir. 1973) (excluding party from attending deposition of opposing party where he had a pattern of unlawful harassment of opposing party); Gottlieb v. County of Orange, 151 F.R.D. 258 (S.D.N.Y. 1993) (limiting persons who can attend depositions of nursing personnel in child abuse case); In re Shell Oil Refinery, 136 F.R.D. 615 (E.D. La. 1991) (excluding corporate representative from employee's deposition unless representative had actual supervisory authority over deponent and was not a witness). Beacon v. R.M. Apartment Rentals, 79 F.R.D. 141 (N.D.E. 1978). + +8. Good cause exists for Jeffrey Epstein to be excluded from the deposition of the Plaintiffs. This case does not involve garden variety facts. Jeffrey Epstein is a convicted sex offender who preyed on the Plaintiffs and other disadvantaged young girls. He has a history of exploiting these young girls, and even during this litigation, has intimidated and harassed them. Now his young victims must answer questions about the lewd acts Jeffrey Epstein perpetrated + +Jeffrey Epstein has not attended any other depositions in the lawsuits consolidated for discovery. + +during their childhood. A deposition can be an intimidating exercise for any witness, but under these circumstances it would be extraordinarily difficult if Jeffrey Epstein were there in person. Accordingly, a protective order is warranted to balance the interests of the parties. The relief that Plaintiffs request - restricting Jeffrey Epstein to an adjacent room where he would have a live videofeed of the deposition but no contact with the Plaintiffs - would create an appropriate balance under the unique circumstances of these cases. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, JANE DOE NOS. 2-8, respectfully request a Protective Order pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c) preventing Jeffrey Epstein from physically attending the depositions of the Plaintiffs, but allowing him to view a live videofeed of the deposition from another closed room on the premises while having no contact with Plaintiffs, and all other relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A3 + +Undersigned counsel has conferred with Defendant's counsel in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this motion, and has been unable to do so. + +Dated: September 9, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on September 9, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746476/EFTA02746476.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746476/EFTA02746476.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9bdab6b0cd72e1e2f46ec1ccd65a9f316302c600 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746476/EFTA02746476.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,364 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746476.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 7722, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.06, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER \nAS TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S ATTENDANCE AT DEPOSITION OF \nPLAINTIFFS, AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 103.428, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 509.30316162109375, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 509.30316162109375, + 430.863037109375 + ], + [ + 103.428, + 430.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.744, + 374.22 + ], + [ + 483.5617980957031, + 374.22 + ], + [ + 483.5617980957031, + 389.60302734375 + ], + [ + 129.744, + 389.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 85.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746476" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746482/EFTA02746482.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746482/EFTA02746482.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8535c5f466fd68609ef4f39bf67d3a2e4384e96c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746482/EFTA02746482.md @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## OMNIBUS ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration and/or Request for Rule 4 Review and Appeal of Portions of the Magistrate's Order (D.E. #282) and Defendant's Supplementary Brief pursuant to Magistrate's Order Requesting a More Particularized Showing Re: Fifth Amendment (D.E. #283). + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm beach, New York and St. with the promise of money in exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +In 2008, Epstein entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement with the United States Attorney General's Office for the Federal Southern District of Florida and the State Attorney's Office for Palm Beach County. Under the terms of the Non-Prosecution Agreement, any criminal prosecution against Epstein is deferred as long as he abides by the certain terms and conditions contained therein. If at any time the United States Attorney's Office has reason to believe Epstein is in breach of the Agreement, it need only provide Epstein's counsel with notice of the breach and then move forward with Epstein's prosecution. Accordingly, the undersigned would agree with Epstein's statement at page 4 of its Response, that the fact there exists a Non-Prosecution Agreement does not mean that Epstein is free from future criminal prosecution, and that in fact, "the threat of prosecution is real, substantial, and present." Id. + +On August 4, 2009, the undersigned entered an Order on Plaintiffs Motion to Compel as to certain requests to which Defendant Epstein was asserting a Fifth Amendment privilege. By the two motions referred to above Epstein is seeking reconsideration of a portion of the Order as it relates to Interrogatory numbers 7 and 11 (D.E. #282) and pursuant to the Court's directive has submitted a more particularized showing as to why Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege as to Request for Production Numbers 10, 11, 19 and 21 should be sustained (D.E. #283). + +The Fifth Amendment serves as a guarantee against testimonial compulsion and provides, in relevant part, that "[n]o person...shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against himself." Id. In practice, the Fifth Amendment's privilege against selfincrimination "permits a person not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings." Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985)(citing Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973)). The privilege is accorded "liberal construction in favor of the right it was intended to secure," Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951), and extends not only to answers that would in themselves support a criminal conviction, but extends also to those answers which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a crime. Id.; Blau v. United States, 340 U.S. 159 (1950). Thus, information is protected by the privilege not only if it would support a criminal conviction, but also in those instances where "the responses would merely 'provide a lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate." United States v. Neff, 615 F.2d 1235, 1239 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 925 (1980). + +The Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination comes into play only in those instances where the witness has "reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer." Hoffman, 341 U.S. at 486 (citing Mason v. United States, 244 U.S. 362, 365 (1917)). "The claimant must be 'confronted by substantial and 'real,' and not merely trifling or imaginary, hazards of incrimination." United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 128 (1980). + +When applied to documentary production, the law is well established that the Fifth Amendment privilege may not apply to specific documents "even though they contain incriminating assertions of fact or belief, because the creation of those documents was not 'compelled' within the meaning of the privilege." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 35- 36 (2000). However, in certain instances, "'the act of production' itself may implicitly communicate 'statements of fact.'" Id. For this reason the Fifth Amendment privilege also encompasses the circumstance where the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena or production request has a compelled testimonial aspect Id. Thus, in those instances where the existence and/or location of the requested documents are unknown, or where production would "implicitly authenticate" the requested documents, the act of producing responsive documents is considered testimonial and is protected by the Fifth Amendment. In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 1 F.3d 87, 93 (2d Cir. 1993); see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391, 410 (1976)(issue expressed as whether compliance with a document request or subpoena "tacitly conceded" the item's authenticity, existence or possession by the defendant). + +## MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND/OR APPEAL (D.E. #282) + +Interrogatory Number 7 requests all time periods during which Epstein was present in the State of Florida, including for each the date he arrived and the date he departed. Interrogatory Number 11 requests all telephone numbers used by Epstein, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete phone number and name of the provider. In the August 4, 2009 Order the undersigned rejected Epstein's assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege as applied to these requests finding the objection "so general and sweeping in nature" that they "amount[ed] to a blanket assertion of the privilege." Id. p.11. + +In the instant Motion for Reconsideration, Epstein has set forth additional facts and detailed reasoning successfully demonstrating how forcing him to answer these requests would realistically and necessarily furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against him and would require him to provide self-incriminating evidence relative to this case and to the other related cases that could result in a specific hazard of selfincrimination. In light of the additional information provided, the Court is now persuaded that Epstein's whereabouts and telephone numbers are crucial issues in this case and other related cases and that if he is forced to reveal this information, these testimonial disclosures could subsequently be used to incriminate him and/or prosecute him for a criminal offense. See Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951); United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36 (2000). + +As such, the Court hereby vacates that portion of the August 4, 2009 Order which grants Plaintiff's Motion to Compel as it relates to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 and instead denies Plaintiff's Motion in this limited respect. Accordingly, Epstein's assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege as it relates to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 is sustained and he need not provide answers to these questions. + +## MORE PARTICULARIZED SHOWING (D.E. #283) + +In the August 4, 2009 Order Epstein was ordered to provide a more particularized showing with respect to Production Requests 10, 11, 19 and 21, so as to demonstrate why his Fifth Amendment privilege as applied to these requests should be sustained. Epstein has sustained his burden in this regard by his showing that the contested requests for production seeking detailed information relating to Epstein's air travel, aircraft used and flight manifests, all communications with female models, MC2 models or Jean Luc Brunel relating or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries and his personal calendars and schedules, could reveal the availability to him and/or use by him of interstate facilities and thus would constitute a link in the chain of evidence that could potentially expose him to the dangers of self-incrimination. + +In this and the other civil actions, Plaintiffs allege that Epstein violated certain federal and state criminal statutes in an attempt to make claims against Epstein ranging from sexual battery to intentional infliction of emotional distress. The lynchpin for the exercise of federal criminal jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. §2422(b), which figures in some of the Complaints filed, is "the use of any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce" and the analogous essential element of 18 U.S.C. §2423((b), which also figures in some of the Complaints, is "travel[s] in interstate commerce or travels into the United States or ... travels in foreign commerce." Accordingly, requiring Epstein to provide responses to the subject production requests would in essence be compelling him to provide assertions of fact, thereby admitting that such documents existed and further admitting that the documents in his possession or control were authentic. In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 1 F.3d 87, 93 (2d Cir. 1993)(noting that in those instances where the existence and/or location of the requested documents are unknown, or where production would "implicitly authenticate" the requested documents, the act of producing responsive documents is considered testimonial and is protected by the Fifth Amendment). + +In summary, the Court finds that the danger Epstein faces by being forced to respond and produce documents relative to Production Requests 10, 11, 19 and 21 is substantial and real and therefore the assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege relative to these requests is sustained and Plaintiff's Motion to Compel as it relates to these requests is denied. + +In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: + +(1) Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration and/or Request for Rule 4 Review and Appeal of Portions of the Magistrate's Order (D.E. #282) is GRANTED. The undesigned has reconsidered the August 4, 2009 relative to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 and finds Epstein's assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege as to these requests valid. Accordingly, that portion of the August 4, 2009 Order which grants Plaintiff's Motion to Compel as it relates to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 is hereby VACATED. Instead, Plaintiff's Motion to Compel as it relates to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11 is denied. Accordingly, Epstein's assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege as it relates to these interrogatories is sustained and he need not provide answers to these questions; and + +(2) Defendant's Supplementary Brief pursuant to Magistrate's Order Requesting a More Particularized Showing Re: Fifth Amendment (D.E. #283) is GRANTED. Because the Court finds the danger Epstein faces by being forced to respond and produce documents relative to Production Requests 10, 11, 19 and 21 is substantial and real, his assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege relative to these requests is sustained and Plaintiff's Motion to Compel as it relates to these requests is denied. + +DONE AND ORDERED this September 9, 2009, in at West Palm Beach, + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marza +All Counsel of Record + +UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE +LINNEA R. JOHNSON + +![]()Florida. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746482/EFTA02746482.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746482/EFTA02746482.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6add2e0c99e321fbe327ce1fb146882aebf3dc09 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746482/EFTA02746482.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,401 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746482.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 12124, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.94, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 101.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 406.7668151855469, + 101.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 406.7668151855469, + 129.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 129.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OMNIBUS ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 473.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 361.3642272949219, + 473.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 361.3642272949219, + 489.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 489.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND/OR APPEAL (D.E. #282)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 121.17600000000002, + 512.73 + ], + [ + 491.50103759765625, + 512.73 + ], + [ + 491.50103759765625, + 527.6835327148438 + ], + [ + 121.17600000000002, + 527.6835327148438 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MORE PARTICULARIZED SHOWING (D.E. #283)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 167.688, + 567.0 + ], + [ + 444.93975830078125, + 567.0 + ], + [ + 444.93975830078125, + 583.1835174560547 + ], + [ + 167.688, + 583.1835174560547 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746482" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746490/EFTA02746490.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746490/EFTA02746490.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..59e66b8822c63a0ac3035210c65c2af6ae98bd26 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746490/EFTA02746490.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +![](_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg) + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on a Joint Motion For Extension of Time in which to Respond to Plaintiff, Jane Does' Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall Respond to Plaintiff's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. + +on or before September 11, 2009. + +444-- DONE and ORDERED this 4 ' day of;.-ae -fr • , 2009. + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record Kenneth A. a Una R United States Sietrieldudge 144.14,144112ATt \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746490/EFTA02746490.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746490/EFTA02746490.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0147794b6a4847709fba11d2478ccb8f54b56f48 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746490/EFTA02746490.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,149 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746490.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1101, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.89, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.87, + 89.91 + ], + [ + 408.9739074707031, + 89.91 + ], + [ + 408.9739074707031, + 117.603515625 + ], + [ + 207.87, + 117.603515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 285.36, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 331.6638488769531, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 331.6638488769531, + 405.6035461425781 + ], + [ + 285.36, + 405.6035461425781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746490" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746490/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746490/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..63176157a2064b1ece5963c6df8d28ad5f27bf69 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746490/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ad73b97acc1c3176eab0a979292d812c5b7f7ec5c701bd9318c2cbe4f549006f +size 9523 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746492/EFTA02746492.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746492/EFTA02746492.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b6a0874dfae4dd7d26a84d5a7875e9b51854258e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746492/EFTA02746492.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAIJOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on a Joint Motion For Extension of Time in which to Respond to Plaintiff, Jane Does' Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiff's counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall Respond to Plaintiff's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. + +on or before September 18, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746492/EFTA02746492.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746492/EFTA02746492.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..49db9805028b9e32e03c01d84adde2d57bf21310 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746492/EFTA02746492.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746492.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1040, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.75, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 415.8864440917969, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 415.8864440917969, + 102.35302734375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 102.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 284.58, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 335.2379150390625, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 335.2379150390625, + 406.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 284.58, + 406.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 12 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746492" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746494/EFTA02746494.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746494/EFTA02746494.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c839c7d1575d3c11aecf5895b3e115fc9b288f83 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746494/EFTA02746494.md @@ -0,0 +1,132 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CW-80119-MARRA/JIM. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +/ + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +/ + +### JOINT UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUEST TO PRODUCE, ANSWERS TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS. AND ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, and Plaintiff, JANE DOE, by and through their undersigned counsel move this Court for an Extension of Time until September 18, 2009, to file Responses to Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 A.1(j)(S.D. Fla. 2008). As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +1. Brad a Counsel for the Plaintiff, was scheduled to return to the office after having a surgical procedure on Tuesday, September 8, 2009. However, Mr. will not return to his office in his full capacity until Monday, September 14, 2009. + +2. Mr and the undersigned have agreed to review the above Motions in an effort to determine whether any of the issues therein are covered by the Court's Order on other 5m Amendment Privilege issues (DE 242). + +3. The undersigned counsel has spoken with Mr.M. and each party has agreed to the extension of time until September 18, 2009. + +4. While the undersigned lawyers are attempting to resolve certain issues in the above motions to conserve on judicial resources, no admissions are being made in this Motion and no arguments are being abandoned. + +# Rule 7.1 A.3 Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for P1:intiff by telephone and/or electronic mail, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agree t w' requested extension. + +> By: MIC Flori + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 101° day of Se tem r, 2009 + +Respectf mitted, + +By: ROBE CRI ON, JR., ESQ. Flori a Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bcIclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN +303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/J** [REDACTED] + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED] Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80469* + +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsx@searcvlaw.com inh@searcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.corn Counsel for Defendant + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 rjosefsbergQpodhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 iagesci@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746494/EFTA02746494.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746494/EFTA02746494.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6f0d586e436804b978e8d818423a0cd06505d13b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746494/EFTA02746494.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,280 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746494.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5174, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.81, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 417.81060791015625, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 417.81060791015625, + 103.23248291015625 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 103.23248291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JOINT UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION \nOF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTIONS \nTO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUEST TO PRODUCE, ANSWERS TO \nREQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS. AND ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.92, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 525.3225708007812, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 525.3225708007812, + 421.23248291015625 + ], + [ + 97.92, + 421.23248291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A.3 Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 174.42, + 292.40999999999997 + ], + [ + 445.29278564453125, + 292.40999999999997 + ], + [ + 445.29278564453125, + 310.10302734375 + ], + [ + 174.42, + 310.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 458.46 + ], + [ + 368.67791748046875, + 458.46 + ], + [ + 368.67791748046875, + 475.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 475.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/J [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 223.56000000000003 + ], + [ + 424.116, + 223.56000000000003 + ], + [ + 424.116, + 265.68 + ], + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 265.68 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746494" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/EFTA02746498.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/EFTA02746498.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2dfc01bd42b8c6023311c6a00f70e7c4e2dbfd37 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/EFTA02746498.md @@ -0,0 +1,797 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +![](_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg) + +## Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion To Strike Plaintiff's Motion For Protective Order WE 292) And Emergency Motion To Allow The Attendance Of Jeffrey Epstein At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs And Response In Opposition To Plaintiffs', Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion For Protective Order As To Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, by and through his undersigned counsel, and pursuant to all applicable rules, including Local Rule 7.1(e) and Local Rule 12, hereby files and serves his Emergency Motion To Strike Plaintiff's Motion For Protective Order (DE 292) And Emergency Motion To Allow The Attendance Of Jeffrey Epstein At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs And Response In Opposition To Plaintiffs', Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion For Protective Order As To Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs. In support, Epstein states: + +# Introduction and Background + +- 1. On August 19, 2009, Defendant sent a Notice for Taking the Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 for September 16, 2009. See Exhibit "1" + +2. Additionally, notices were sent out in other cases in connection with deposing additional Plaintiffs. + +3. No objection(s) was/were received for Jane Doe No. 4, which was the only deposition set relative to the Jane Doe 2-8 Plaintiffs. + +4. On August 27, 2009, the undersigned counsel sent aletter to counsel for Jane Doe No. 4 concerning her deposition and the scheduling of same on the above date. See Exhibit "2". + +5. No response was received until counsel for Jane Doe No. 4 called on September 8, 2009, approximately eight days prior to the scheduled deposition, to indicate that they now had an objection and would be filing amotion for protective order seeking to preventEpstein from attending the deposition. Once again, Plaintiffs areattempting to stifle this litigation through their own delay tactics during discovery. Plaintiffs wish not only to attempt to force Epstein to trial without any meaningful discovery, but now wish to ban Epstein from any depositions, thereby preventing him from assisting his attorneys in his very own defense. What's next — will Plaintiffs seek to preventEpstein from attending any of the trials that result from the lawsuits Jane Does 2-8 have initiated? Plaintiffs see millions of dollars in damages, both compensatory and punitive, against Defendant. + +6. Defendant is filing this emergency motion and his immediate response to the motion for protective order to guarantee his right to be present and assist counsel in deposing not only Jane Doe No. 4, but other plaintiffs and witnesses in these cases. To hold otherwise would violate Epstein's due process rights to defend the very allegations Plaintiffs have alleged against him. Does aDefendant not have a right to be present at depositions or other court proceedings to assist counsel with the defense of his case? Does a Defendant, no matter what the charges or the allegations, have full and unbridled access to the court system and the proceedings it governs, including discovery? The short answer is unequivocally, yes. To hold otherwise would be a direct violation of Epstein's constitutional due process rights. Plaintiffs' attempts to play fast and loose with the law should not be tolerated. + +7. As the court is aware, plaintiffs and defendants routinely attend depositions of parties and other witnesses in both State and Federal court proceedings. In fact, parties have a right under the law to attend such depositions. + +8. As the court will note from Exhibit 2, counsel for the Defendant specifically stated that "Please be advised that Mr. Epstein plans to be in attendance at the deposition of your client. He does not intend to engage in any conversation with your client. However, it is certainly his right as a party-defendant in the lawsuit to be present and to assist counsel in the defense of any case." Despite this right, Plaintiffs continue to attempt to control how discovery is conducted in this case and how this court has historically governed discovery. + +9. Interestingly, in Jane Doe II, the state court case, attorney Sid took the deposition of the Defendant and his client, Jane Doe II, was present throughout the deposition. This is despite her claims of "emotional trauma" set forth in her complaint. Jane Doe No. II is also a Plaintiff in the federal court proceeding Jane Doe II v. Jeffrey Epstein (Case No. 09-CIV-80469). Is this court going to start a precedent where it allows Plaintiffs to attend the depositions of Jeffrey Epstein, but not allow Epstein to attend their depositions (i.e., the very Plaintiffs that have asserted claims against him for millions of dollars)? This court should not condone such a practice. + +10. The undersigned is well aware of the court's No-Contact Order entered on July 31, 2009 (DE 238). A copy of the order is attached as Exhibit "3". In fact, the order provides that the defendant have no direct or indirect contact with the plaintiffs, nor communications with the plaintiffs either directly or indirectly. However, there is no prohibition against Mr. Epstein's attendance at a deposition where, as is reflected in the order, the communication will be made to the plaintiff solely through defense counsel with one or more of plaintiffs' counsel of record present in the room in a videotaped deposition. Obviously, any inappropriate contact or communication will certainly be flagged by the attorneys in attendance. As such, Plaintiffs really have the cart before the horse in this instance (i.e., nothing prevents Epstein from attending these depositions and, to the extent Plaintiffs believe that something improper occurs at any deposition only then can that circumstance be addressed by a motion such as the instant one.) + +11. Next, Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-8, attempt to use the Affidavit of Dr. Kliman for every motion for protective order/objection filed to date. This also includes the two most recent motions, which attempt to prevent Defendant's investigators from doing their job, such that the Defendant and his attorneys can defend the claims asserted in these cases. Plaintiffs lose sight of the fact that the court, in discussing the Non-Prosecution Agreement, inquired as to whether Epstein and his counsel could fully defend the case, which included discovery and investigation. All plaintiffs' counsel and the USAO responded in the affirmative. In fact, Plaintiffs universally agreed at the June 12, 2009 hearing on Defendant's Motion to Stay that regular discovery could proceed. See Composite Exhibit "4" at pages 26-30 & 33-34. For instance, the court asked Plaintiffs' attorneys the following questions: + +The Court: [] So again, I just want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend a case being prosecuted against him or her, that that in and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to criminal prosecution? (Ex. "A," p.26). + +•r• + +The Court: You agree he should be able to take the ordinary steps that a defendant in a civil action can take and not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? (Ex. "A," p.27). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: Okay. But again, you're in agreement with everyone else so far that's spoken on behalf of a plaintiff that defending the case in the normal course of conducting discovery and filing motions would not be a breach? (Ex. "A," p.30). + +Mr. Horowitz — counsel for Jane Does 2-7: Subject to your rulings, of course, yes. (Ex. "A," p.30). + +The Court: But you're not taking the position that other than possibly doing something in litigation which is any other discovery, motion practice, investigations that someone would ordinarily do in the course of defending a civil case would constitute a violation of the agreement? (Ex. "A," p.34). + +Ms. Villafana: No, your honor. I mean, civil litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take discovery is part of what civil litigation is all about.... But. . . , Mr. Epstein is entitled to take the deposition of a Plaintiff and to subpoena records, etc. (Ex. "A," p.34) + +12. It is clear from the transcript attached as Exhibit "4" that each of the Plaintiffs' attorneys, including Mr. Horowitz for Jane Does 2-8, expected and conceded that regular/traditional discovery would take place (i.e., discovery, motion practice, depositions, requests for records, and investigations). + +13. Importantly, Plaintiffs' counsel advised the undersigned that they coordinate their efforts in joint conference calls at least two times per month. At recent depositions of two witnesses, Alfredo Rodriguez and Juan Alessi, five different plaintiffs' attorneys questioned the witnesses for approximately six to eight hours, often repeating the same or similar questions that had previously been asked. + +14. Clearly, the Plaintiffs' counsel wish to control discovery and how the Defendant is allowed to obtain information to defend these cases. However, the court has ruled on a number of these issues as follows: + +> A. Plaintiffs' counsels sought to preclude the Defendant from serving third party subpoenas and allowing only Plaintiffs' counsel to obtain + +depositions and those materials and "filter them" to defense counsel. That motion was denied, and the court tailored amethod such that the Defendant could obtain the records directly. + +- B. Plaintiffs' counsels sought to limit the scholo ical psychiatric examination in C.M.A. v. Jeffrey Epstein and (Case No. 08- CIV-80811), as to time, subject matter and scope. However, Magistrate entered an order denying the requested restrictions. +- C. Other Plaintiffs' attorneys have said that they object to requested psychological exam of their client(s), thus motions for such exams will now need to be filed; yet all seek millions of dollars in damages for alleged psychological and emotional trauma. +- D. Many Plaintiffs' object to discovery regarding current and past employment (although they are seeking loss of income, both in past and future). +- E. All Plaintiffs object to prior sexual history, consensual and forced as being irrelevant, although in many of the medical records that are now being obtained, as well as the psychiatric exams done by Dr. Kliman, there is reference to rape, molestation, abusive relationships (both physical and verbal), prior abortions, illegal drugs and alcohol abuse. + +15. Clearly, Plaintiffs wish to make allegations; however, they forget that they must meet their burden by proving same. Meeting that burden and disproving those allegations is not possible if this court allows Plaintiffs to stifle and/or control the discovery process. + +16. Specifically, with regard to Jane Doe No. 4, which is the deposition set for next week, September 16, 2009, the plaintiff has in her past(see affidavit of Richard C.W. M.D., an expert psychiatrist retained by Defendant to conduct exams on various claimants.) ag, + +#### Exhibit "5" + +- A. Sought counseling due to a dysfunctional home situation, specifically with regard to her father. She described herself as being angry, bitter, depressed and having body image problems; +- B. Had an ex-boyfriend, Preston Vinyard, who was, on information and belief, a drug dealer who she lived with; +- C. Had drug and alcohol problems herself; and + +- D. Spoke with two psychiatrists when she was sixteen or seventeen (before this lawsuit!) and did not reference Epstein, but did reference her boyfriend and family issues. +- 17. There are police reports that reflect that: + - A. In September 2004, a battery report was filed regarding Jane Doe No. 4 and Vinyard based on an argument where he grabbed her by the neck and began spitting on her and calling her a cheater. + - B. Also in September 2004, there was a domestic violence file opened where Vinyard was physically and verbally abusive to Jane Doe No. 4, his girlfriend at the time. There is reference that the two started a serious relationship in January 2002, when she was only fourteen (14) years old. + - C. Vinyard was arrested in December 2003, and charged with reckless driving and leaving the scene of the accident with Jane Doe No. 4, when their vehicle hit a tree and they fled. +- 18. Moreover, an ex-boyfriend of Jane Doe No. 4 died in a DUI accident and it took her two years to get over his death, and another good friend of hers, "Jen," died in an automobile accident involving drinking. Within her Amended Complaint and Answers to Interrogatories, she indicates that she went to Epstein's house on several occasions. However, at no time did she call the police, at no time did she report any traumatic or severe emotional trauma, nor alleged coercion, force or improper behavior by Epstein until she got. a "lawyer" and is now pursuing claims for millions of dollars. Epstein's assistance to his attorneys at these depositions regarding the above issues is not only aconstitutional due process right afforded to him but essential given the fact that this court has ruled that Plaintiffs' depositions can only occur one time, no "second bite" absent a court order. +- 19. Given the breadth of the allegations made against Epstein and the substantial damages sought, Epstein has an unequivocal and constitutional right to be present at any deposition such that he can assist his counsel with the defense of these cases. See infra. DAM + +also prepared affidavits regarding Jane Does 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7, which are attached to DE 247. + +#### Memorandum Of Law + +20. Plaintiffs' motion is required to be denied as they have failed to meet their burden showing the "extraordinary circumstances" necessary to establish good cause to support a protective order which would grant the extraordinarily rare relief of preventing anamed party from attending in person the deposition of another named party. Also requiring denial of Plaintiffs' motion is the fact that it seeks to exclude Epstein from all the depositions of all the Plaintiffs in actions before this Court. Such relief is unprecedented and attempts to have this Court look at the Plaintiffs' collectively as opposed to analyzing each case based on facts versus broad speculation whether "extraordinary circumstances" exist on a case by case basis. In other words, the standard is such that the Court would be required to determine whether each Plaintiff has met her burden, should the Court consider adopting such extraordinary relief. On its face, the motion does not meet the necessary burden as to Jane Doe 4, or Jane Does 2, 3, 5, 6, or 7. + +# Discussion of Law Requiring the Denial of the Requested Protective Order + +Rule 26(c)(l)(E), Fed.R.Civ.P. (2009), governing protective orders, provides in relevant part that: + +(1) In General. A party or any person from whom discovery is sought may move for aprotective order in the court where the action is pending--or as an alternative on matters relating to a deposition, in the court for the district where the deposition will be taken. The motion must include acertification that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with other affected parties in an effort to resolve the dispute without court action. The court may, for good cause, issue an order to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense, including one or more of the following: + +• • + +(E) designating the persons who may be present while the discovery is conducted; + +In seeking to prevent the Defendant from being present in the room where the Plaintiffs are being deposed, Plaintiffs generally rely on treatise material from "ill &M, 8 Federal Practice & Procedure Civ.2d, §2041, and cases cited therein. The case of Gaella v. Onassis, 487 F.2d 986, at 997 (2d Cir. 1973), cited by Plaintiffs, makes clear that the exclusion of a party from a deposition "should be ordered rarely indeed." Unlike the Gaella case, there is no showing by each of the Plaintiffs that there has been any conduct by Epstein, in rightfully defending the actions filed against him, reflecting "an irrepressible intent to continue ... harassment" of any Plaintiff or a complete disregard of the judicial process, i.e. prior alleged conduct versus any action/conduct displayed in this or other cases that would justify extraordinary relief. There is absolutely no basis in the record to indicate that Epstein will act other than properly and with the proper decorum at the depositions of the Plaintiffs and abide in all respects with the No-Contact Order. + +Wherefore, Epstein respectfully requests that this Court enter an order denying Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order, provide that Epstein is permitted to attend the depositions of the Plaintiffs that have asserted claims against him in the related matters, and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +> Robert D. C on, Jr. Michael J. ike Attorney for Defendant Epstein + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was hand-delivered to the Clerk of the Court as required by the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida and electronically mailed to all counsel of record identified on the following Service List on this 11th day of September, 2009. + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 isx@searcylaw.com inhAsearcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf abrucereinhartl w.corn Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold-Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08804 skuvin@riccilaw.com tleonold@riccilaw.com 08- + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsbere@podhurst.com kezell©Dodhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jaeesq@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully submi + +By: ROBERT CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida No. 224162 Tcringbc law.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 m\_pike@bcIclaw.corn BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN 303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/S + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## RE-NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION + +PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the undersigned attorney will take the videotaped deposition of: + +DEPONENT DATE & TIME LOCATION OF DEPOSITION + +Jane Doe #4 do Menne!stein & Horowitz PA 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 + +September 16, 2009 at 1:00 PM + +Prose Court Reporting 250 Australian Avenue South Suite #115 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +upon oral examination, before Prose Court Reporting Agency, a Notary Public, or any other officer authorized by law to take depositions in th State of Florida. The oral, videotaped examination is being taken for the purpose of di very, for use at trial, or for such other purposes as are permitted under the applicableES tujes of Rules of Court. + +Robe tton, Jr. Attorney for fendant Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by electronic mail (e-mail) on this 2 day of August, 2009 + +N, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 24162 rcrit@bc1claw.co MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 [spike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUMER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +# Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.conl Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Brad Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwarcls@rra-law.corn Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & P.A. Shipley, 08-80469 + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcvlaw.com + +ioh@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brute inhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utakedu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. + +aav7FirTn, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iagesq@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +![](_page_14_Picture_1.jpeg) + +A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP + +J. MICHAEL BURMAN. PA° GREGORY W. COLEMAN. PA ROBERT D. CRJTTON. JR- PA BERNARD LEBEDEKElt MARK T. LUTTIER. PA JEFFREY C. PEPIN MICHAEL J. PIKE HEATHER MCNAMARA RUDA DAVID YAREMA + +'FLORIDA BOARD CERTIFIED CIVIL TRIAL LAWYER + +LADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN FLORIDA AND COLORADO + +August 27, 2009 + +# Sent by E.Mail and U.S. Mail + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd. Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 + +Re: Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein + +Dear Stuart: + +ADELCLIJI J. BENAVENTE PARALEGAL/INVESTIGATOR + +JESSICA CADWELL BOBBIE M. MCKENNA ASHLIE STOKEN-BARJNG BETTY STOKES PARALEGALS + +RJTA H. BUDNYK OF COUNSEL + +ED RICO SPECIAL CONSUMER JUSTICE COUNSEL + +Please be advised that Mr. Epstein plans to be in attendance at the deposition of your client. He does not intend to engage in any conversation with your client. However, it is certainly his right as a party-defendant in the lawsuit to be present and to assist counsel in the defense of any case. + +Cordially ours, + +Robe Critton, Jr. + +RDC/clz + +cc: Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/.=M + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/=M + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-C1V-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRA' + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Jane Doe. No 101 and 102's Motion for No-Contact Order (DE 113) and Plaintiffs Jane Does' 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs' Motion (DE 145). The Court has reviewed the motions, responses, and replies (DE's 113, 127, 136, 145, + +233), and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. Plaintiffs seek a Court order prohibiting Defendant or his agents from communicating with Plaintiffs directly or indirectly. Defendant. Defendant opposes the request as "needless, unwarranted and excessive." (DE 127 at 5). Nonetheless, Defendant states in his response that "neither Mr. Epstein nor his attorneys, nor their agents intend to have any direct or indirect contact with Plaintiffs counsels' clients." (DE 127 at 4). + +The Court notes that Defendant is already under court order not to have direct or indirect contact with any victims. See Transcript of Plea Conference at 20. During the course of Defendant's state plea conference of June 30, 2009, Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillio explicitly instructed Defendant as follows: + +Court: Okay. D is, you shall not have any contact with the victim, are there more than one victim? + +Ms. Belohlavek: There's several. + +Court: Several, all of the victims. So this should be plural. I'm making that plural. You arc not to have any contact direct or indirect, and in this day and age I find it necessary to go over exactly what we mean by indirect. By indirect, we mean no text messages, no e-mail, no Face Book, no My Space, no telephone calls, no voice mails, no messages through carrier pigeon, no messages through third parties, no hey would you tell so and so for me, no having a friend, acquaintance or stranger approach any of these victims with a message of any sort from you, is that clear? + +Defendant: Yes, + +Id. at 20-21. + +In light of Defendant's response to Plaintiffs' motion for no contact order, suggesting that the state court's order only applies to some victims and that parties are always allowed to contact each other directly, the Court finds it necessary to state clearly that Defendant is under this + +court's order not to have direct or indirect contact with any plaintiffs, regardless of the intended scope of the state court's order. Accordingly, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: Plaintiffs Jane Doe. No 101 and 102's Motion for No-Contact Order (DE 113) is GRANTED. Defendant is hereby prohibited from communicating with all plaintiffs directly or indirectly', either personally or through agents, except that Defendant may communicate with plaintiffs only through plaintiffs' attorneys of record, for the duration of this Order. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 31" day of July, 2009 + +> KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record + +&#x27;See infra, excerpt of Transcript of Plea Conference at 20-21, for examples of indirect contact. + +1 + +2 3 + +4 + +S + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +DISTRICT 08-80119-CIV-MARRA DISTRICT COURT OF FLORIDA BEACH DIVISION UNITED STATES SOUTHERN WEST PALM CASE NO. + +WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA + +JUNE 12, 2009 + +JANE DOE, et al., + +Plaintiffs, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +10 + +11 + +## TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE + +12 + +### APPEARANCES: + +13 + +14 + +FOR THE PLAINTIFFS: ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQ. Mermelstein & Horowitz 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Miami, FL 33160 305.931.2200 For Jane Doe + +15 + +16 + +17 + +J. ESQ. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Jane Doe 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 954.522.3456 + +18 + +19 + +20 ISIDRO M. , ESQ. Elkins Boehringer 224 Datura Avenue West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Jane DOE II 561.832.8033 23 RICHARD H. WILLITS, ESQ. 2290 10th Avenue North Lake Worth, FL 33461 For C.M.A. 561.582.7600 + +21 + +22 + +24 + +1 THE COURT: That's not my concern. So, again, I just 2 want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if 3 Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend 4 a case that's being prosecuted against him or her, that that in 5 and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to 6 criminal prosecution. + +7 MR. JOSEFSBERG: I agree, Your Honor. + +8 THE COURT: Any other plaintiff's counsel want to 9 chime in? + +10 MR. WILLITS: Richard Willits on behalf of C.M.A.. I 11 would join, to weigh in on what Mr. Josefsberg said. + +12 MR. JOSEFSBERG: Your Honor, I could not hear. + +13 THE COURT: We'll get him to a microphone. 14 Mr. Willits is speaking. + +15 MR. WILLITS: On behalf of my client, C.M.A., we join 16 in what Mr. Josefsberg said, and we also want to point out 17 something to the Court. + +18 First, we want to make a representation to the Court, 19 we have no intention of complaining to the U.S. Attorney's 20 Office, never had that intention, don't have that intention in 21 the future, but, of course, subject to what occurs in the 22 future. + +23 I want to point out to the Court that Mr. Epstein went 24 into this situation with his eyes wide open, represented by 25 counsel, knowing that civil suits had to be coming. If he + +1 didn't know it, his lawyers knew it. + +2 He appears to be having second thoughts now about he 3 could have negotiated this way or he could have negotiated that 4' way with the U.S. Attorney's Office. And they want to impose 5 their second thoughts on the innocent plaintiffs. We don't 6 think that's fair. We think it's in the nature of invited 7 error, if there was any error whatsoever. + +8 Thank you. + +9 THE COURT: You agree he should be able to take the 10 ordinary steps that a defendant in a civil action can take and 11 not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? + +12 MR. WILLITS: Of course. And we say the same thing 13 Mr. Josefsberg said. It's all subject to your rulings and the 14 direction of this Court as to what is proper and what is not 15 proper. And we're prepared to abide by the rulings of this 16 Court, and we have no intention of running to the State's 17 Attorney. + +18 THE COURT: The U.S. Attorney? + +19 MR. WILLITS: I'm sorry. The U.S. Attorney. + +20 THE COURT: Mr. + +21 MR. : Thank you, Your Honor. + +22 If I may briefly, I think perhaps defense counsel 23 forgot about this, but on pages 17 and 19 of my memorandum of 24 law in opposition to the motion to dismiss, I did make 25 reference to the non-prosecution agreement, and I did say that it, it doesn't relate to our clients. + +THE COURT: Okay. But, again, you're in agreement with everyone else so far that's spoken on behalf of a plaintiff that defending the case in the normal course of conducting discovery and filing motions would not be abreach? + +MR. HOROWITZ: Subject to your rulings, of course, yes. + +THE COURT: Thank you. + +Anyone else have anything to say from the plaintiffs? + +Ms. Villafana, if you would be so kind as to maybe help us out. I appreciate the fact that you're here, and I know you're not a party to these cases and under no obligation to respond to my inquiries. But as I indicated, it would be helpful for me to understand the Government's position. + +MS. VILLAFANA: Thank you, Your Honor. And we, of course, are always happy to try to help the Court as much as possible. But we are not a party to any of these lawsuits, and in some ways we are at a disadvantage because we don't have access. My access is limited to what's on Pacer. So I don't really know what positions Mr. Epstein may have taken either in correspondence or in discovery responses that aren't filed in the case file. + +But your first order was really just what do you think about a stay, and then the second order related to this hearing and asked amuch more specific question, which is whether we + +we had filed that response. And what we said in the response to the motion to stay is that the reason why he wants to stay the litigation is so that the non-prosecution agreement terminates based on aperiod of time, as he puts it. And then Safterwards he would be able to come in here and make all of these arguments that clearly violate the non-prosecution agreement but we would be without remedy. + +THE COURT: But you're not taking the position that other than possibly doing something in litigation which is a violation of an express provision of the non-prosecution agreement, any other discovery, motion practice, investigations that someone would ordinarily do in the course of defending a civil case would constitute aviolation of the agreement? + +MS. VILLAFANA: No, Your Honor. I mean, civil litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take discovery is part of what civil litigation is about. And while there may be, for example, if someone were to try to subpoena the Government, we would obviously resist under statutory reasons, all that sort of stuff. But, no, Mr. Epstein is entitled to take the deposition of a plaintiff and to subpoena records, etc. + +THE COURT: And even if he seeks discovery from a Government agency, you have the right to resist it under the rules of procedure but that would not constitute a violation, again unless there's a provision in the prosecution agreement Jane Doe \$4 + +allan + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +# AFFIDAVIT OP RICHARD C.W. =M.D. + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W. III M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W. S MD. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. since 1996. +- 3. L also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. +- 4. 1 received my undergraduate degree from the Johns SUniversity and Ihave maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and netuochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. + +Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe 44 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon a minor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe 04 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiffs counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Xliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kaman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kliman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #4. + +14. Plaintiff reports a history of alcohol use and an ex-boyfriend who drank alcohol and used pills that were "a form of oxycodine (ski aform of heroine [sic]." (Page 18, tape 1) + +15. Plaintiff reports obtaining a restraining order against her ex-boyfriend, stating that he would spit in her face, push her, and was abusive. (Page 20, tape 1) + +16. Plaintiff reports talking with two psychiatrists at age 16 or 17 due to family + +issues and boyfriend issues. (Pages 2 and 3, tape 3). In the tapes, she makes no mention of telling the psychiatrists of her alleged encounters with Epstein. Moreover, while Plaintiff denies recruiting other girls, on page 24 of the Palm Beach Police Report, Plaintiff said she left anote for Epstein that indicated "for a good. time call [Plaintiff] and (friend)" and left the girls' phone numbers. + +17. Plaintiff noted that while in high school a friend, Chris, died in amotor vehicle accident, that she was in shock from his death and that she got over it after about 1 12/ to 2 years, but that it still bothers her. (Page 4, GK Contemp notes) + +18. Plaintiff noted that aclose friend, Jen, died in amotor vehicle accident and that she was in shock for two months. (Page 4, GK Contemp notes) + +19. Plaintiff reported, "I probably went them over 50 tunes.` (Page 3, tape 4) + +20. Plaintiff was arrested at age 17 for DUI on 3/09/05. (Police Offense Report) + +21. On 10/31/04, fight occurred between plaintiff and Preston.. in back of cab. Plaintiff (age 17) had been drinking. Police were called for theft of cab fare. Upon arriving at residence, police found plaintiff in home with no shirt on. Plaintiff refused to cooperate with police and threatened to kill herselfewas a.rr,tecl for violation of protective order. (Police Offense Report) + +22. On 2/28/02, plaintiff was charged with shoplifting bras from Burdines and was issued a juvenile referral form. (Police Offense Report) + +23. On 9/21/04, a protective order was filed against Preston after art incident on 9/20/04 in which he accused her of cheating on him. He then began choking her, threw her against a wall, and yelled at plaintiff. He dumped beer on her, threw cigarettes in her face, and slammed her into the ground. On a previous incident in August 2004, plaintiff reported they agued and Mr. egrabbed her by her arms and threw her to the ground outside her house. Plaintiff noted she was in fear because he has a violent history and has verbally threatened her friends, family and herself. (Petition for Injunction for Protection) + +24. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, If any, or her current and future level of function. + +25. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, alist of sli indica!,sliniot school,And work'words known to the attorney in the case + +26. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "available important wLi relevant documentswhichare king deliberatelywithheld&JO un." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, wlich3n have mugged or ems we bats stated would ordinarily be arf of medical opinion formation male topics concerning, whichmg inputis requested." We request the same. + +27. It is critical for an WE examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic. psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization; including the type and character of the alleged assault and key victim variables such as demographics; psychological reactions at the time of the trauma; previous psychiatric or psychological history, history of previous victimization; current or previous psychological difficulties; general personality dynamics and coping style; sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +28. It is also essential to understand the plaintiffs level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +29. Knowledge of plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +30. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him a full and complete record that includes medical, previous leg-al, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. + +31. These, in essence, are the same or similar records that plaintiff's expert witness (Dr. Klinian) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such + +identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and/or similar information be made available to us to conduct our examination. + +Respectfully submitted, + +*Richard C. W. Hall ms* +Richard C. W. [REDACTED] MD + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College of +Medicine + +STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared **RICHARD C.W.** +[REDACTED] M.D., who is ( ✓ ) personally known to me or ( ) who has produced +\_\_\_\_\_ as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that +the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this 4th day of August, 2009. + +![](_page_32_Picture_27.jpeg) + +Marcia J. Clyman +Notary Public +Printed Name: Marcia J. Clyman +My Commission Expires: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/EFTA02746498.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/EFTA02746498.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..93afaa16f872bfcfc661a13fd45be9bc3b6032b7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/EFTA02746498.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1637 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 33, + "chars": 47173, + "elapsed_seconds": 14.29, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg", + "_page_14_Picture_1.jpeg", + "_page_32_Picture_27.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.72000000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 415.11566162109375, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 415.11566162109375, + 101.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 201.72000000000003, + 101.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion To Strike Plaintiff's Motion For \nProtective Order WE 292) And Emergency Motion To Allow The \nAttendance Of Jeffrey Epstein At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs And Response \nIn Opposition To Plaintiffs', Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion For Protective Order \nAs To Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs, With \nIncorporated Memorandum of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 109.46999999999998, + 342.63 + ], + [ + 510.0671081542969, + 342.63 + ], + [ + 510.0671081542969, + 429.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 109.46999999999998, + 429.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Introduction and Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 229.395, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 388.44110107421875, + 609.12 + ], + [ + 388.44110107421875, + 625.1030120849609 + ], + [ + 229.395, + 625.1030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Exhibit \"5\"", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.8, + 577.53 + ], + [ + 138.81741333007812, + 577.53 + ], + [ + 138.81741333007812, + 589.8449859619141 + ], + [ + 73.8, + 589.8449859619141 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.385, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 365.92499999999995, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 365.92499999999995, + 140.94 + ], + [ + 245.385, + 140.94 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Discussion of Law Requiring the Denial of the Requested Protective Order", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 115.62, + 459.2699999999999 + ], + [ + 502.4549999999999, + 459.2699999999999 + ], + [ + 502.4549999999999, + 475.029541015625 + ], + [ + 115.62, + 475.029541015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 268.14, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 380.07, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 380.07, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 268.14, + 86.67 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.26500000000001, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 420.0450000000001, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 420.0450000000001, + 251.91 + ], + [ + 191.26500000000001, + 251.91 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.41, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 410.5274658203125, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 410.5274658203125, + 113.103515625 + ], + [ + 205.41, + 113.103515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "RE-NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 161.13, + 366.12 + ], + [ + 458.572998046875, + 366.12 + ], + [ + 458.572998046875, + 380.8535461425781 + ], + [ + 161.13, + 380.8535461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.765, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 364.8829650878906, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 364.8829650878906, + 100.7235107421875 + ], + [ + 252.765, + 100.7235107421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.22500000000002, + 431.73 + ], + [ + 365.22967529296875, + 431.73 + ], + [ + 365.22967529296875, + 447.2235412597656 + ], + [ + 255.22500000000002, + 447.2235412597656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Sent by E.Mail and U.S. Mail", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.725, + 287.54999999999995 + ], + [ + 239.240234375, + 287.54999999999995 + ], + [ + 239.240234375, + 303.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 70.725, + 303.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 210.32999999999998, + 81.81 + ], + [ + 404.23419189453125, + 81.81 + ], + [ + 404.23419189453125, + 112.0570068359375 + ], + [ + 210.32999999999998, + 112.0570068359375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 285.975, + 587.25 + ], + [ + 333.625732421875, + 587.25 + ], + [ + 333.625732421875, + 600.9735412597656 + ], + [ + 285.975, + 600.9735412597656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING \nBEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, \nUNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.935, + 315.9 + ], + [ + 504.2942199707031, + 315.9 + ], + [ + 504.2942199707031, + 359.8251953125 + ], + [ + 226.935, + 359.8251953125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "APPEARANCES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 128.535, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 224.41566467285156, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 224.41566467285156, + 389.8251953125 + ], + [ + 128.535, + 389.8251953125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OP RICHARD C.W. =M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 25, + "polygon": [ + [ + 202.95000000000002, + 186.3 + ], + [ + 458.17499999999995, + 186.3 + ], + [ + 458.17499999999995, + 202.5 + ], + [ + 202.95000000000002, + 202.5 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 72 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 384 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 406 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 398 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 417 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 274 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 101 + ], + [ + "Line", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 133 + ], + [ + "Line", + 66 + ], + [ + "Text", + 63 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 94 + ], + [ + "Line", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 131 + ], + [ + "Line", + 66 + ], + [ + "Text", + 38 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 316 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 316 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 224 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 288 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 289 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 323 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 331 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 319 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 281 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746498" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9c3f9b88748f017dccf64461483ad5c15347326c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:90cd3ecaf7eb827836739a39dbceb9cbf5c4af03489660331d5c58ac9970624d +size 11508 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/_page_14_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/_page_14_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..eacd86d9d757ee90d4a8fda4111c294906089ee1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/_page_14_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7a77cef8d93107365ad6d86444900acf8bc5b5830e5221597e220c088ee7c84b +size 14292 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/_page_32_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/_page_32_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e2b4c02c65a27d8711996662068de05174fba3da --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746498/_page_32_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b36724bd4004c5ea61c7d3e9d6484f2b94a022e520c2c9f9ed91c9f90c538475 +size 12549 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746531/EFTA02746531.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746531/EFTA02746531.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..966afa697238fabe8611547a9241e5a90f1dccdd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746531/EFTA02746531.md @@ -0,0 +1,165 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER ENFORCING NO CONTACT ORDER AND INCORPROATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe, hereby joins in Jane Doe Nos. 2-8's motion for a protective order (Case No. 08-CV-80119, dkt. #292) preventing defendant Epstein from attending her upcoming deposition and supplements the arguments in support of the motion. + +Epstein's counsel has informed Jane Doe's counsel that Epstein plans to attend her upcoming deposition. As a convicted sex offender now on post-sentence release, Epstein's transparent purpose in attending the deposition is to attempt to intimidate and harass Jane Doe by sitting a few feet away from her. Regardless of his motivation, however, such action is forbidden by the no-contact order of the state judge who sentenced him (not to mention a parallel order from this Court). Accordingly, this Court should respect that state court judgment and enter a protective order forbidding Epstein + +from being in the same room with Jane Doe during the deposition. (Jane Doe has no objection to him observing the deposition via video-camera and assisting his attorneys without coming into contact with Jane Doe.) + +# BACKGROUND + +1. Jane Doe incorporates and adopts the facts set forth in the pending motion for a protective order filed by Jane Does 2-8.1 Jane Doe supplements those facts with the following facts. + +2. On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein pled guilty to one count of procuring a person under 18 for prostitution and one count of felony solicitation to prostitution before the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida. He was sentenced to 18 months in jail. + +3. In the course of the plea/sentencing colloquy, Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillio explicitly instructed Defendant as follows: + +Court: Okay. [Item] D is, you shall not have any contact with the victim, .. [is] there more than one victim? + +Ms. Belohlavek: There's several. + +Court: Several, all of the victims. So this should be plural. I'm making that plural. You are not to have any contact direct or indirect, and in this day and age I find it necessary to go over exactly what we mean by indirect. By indirect, we mean no text messages, no e-mail, no Face Book, no My Space, no telephone calls, no voice mails, no messages through carrier pigeon, no messages through third parties, no "hey would you tell so and so for me," no having a friend, acquaintance or stranger approach any of these victims with a message of any sort from you, is that clear? + +&#x27; Jane Doe's 2-8 have filed an affidavit of Dr. Kliman attesting to the psychological harm that they will suffer if Epstein is allowed to intimidate them by attending their deposition. Jane Doe is prepared to file an parallel affidavit from a similarly qualified psychologist if the court believes that such an affidavit is necessary. + +Defendant: Yes, + +Transcript of Plea Conference at 20-21. + +4. Read in context, Judge Pucillio was referring to all victims of sex offenses committed by defendant Epstein, whose names were listed in a document that has been described as an appendix to a non-prosecution agreement with the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida. Jane Doe is listed in that document. + +5. The issue of the breadth of the no contact order has previously been before this Court. Several of the plaintiff/victims with suits pending against Epstein before this Court filed a motion for an order prohibiting defendant or his agents from communicating with them directly or indirectly Epstein opposed the requests as "needless, unwarranted and excessive." Dkt. #127 at 5. This Court, however, firmly overruled Epstein's objections. This Court entered its own, additional no-contact order, ruling: + +In light of Defendant's response to Plaintiff's motion for no contact order, suggesting that the state court's order only applies to some victims and that parties are always allowed to contact each other directly, the Court finds it necessary to state clearly that Defendant is under this court's order not to have direct or indirect contact with any plaintiffs, regardless of the intended scope of the state court court's order. + +Order, Dkt. #238 at 4-5. + +6. In spite of two separate court orders from a state and federal court barring direct and indirect contact by Epstein with the victims in this case, on August 27, 2009, counsel for Epstein sent a letter to counsel for Jane Doe that stated: + +Please be advised that Mr. Epstein plans to be in attendance at the deposition of your clients. He does not intend to engage in any conversation with your clients. However, it is certainly his right as a partydefendant in the lawsuit to be present and to assist counsel in the defense of any case. + +See Exhibit "A," Letter from Robert D. Critton, Jr. to Brad , Esq. (Aug. 27, 2009). + +7. As counsel for Epstein knew when sending the letter on August 27, 2009, undersigned counsel had serious back surgery scheduled for the next day, August 28. On August 28, 2009, undersigned counsel had the back surgery performed and was in the hospital for the next two days. He then returned home and remained under heavy medication for the following week, preventing him from attending to matters pertaining to this or any other case. On September 8, 2009, undersigned counsel was able to circulate the letter from counsel for Epstein to other members of the legal team working on this case, leading to this pleading three days later. + +## ARGUMENT + +8. Jane Doe Nos. 2 through 8 have explained at length why Epstein has no right to attend the upcoming deposition of the victims in this case and why doing so would lead to psychological harm to the victims. In the interests of brevity, Jane Doe simply relies on those arguments as well. + +9. Jane Doe has one additional argument to present. For this Court to authorize Epstein to attend the deposition of Jane Doe would violate the right of a state court judge to set conditions of a state criminal judgment. As noted above, Judge Pucillio has ruled that Epstein is not to have "any contact direct or indirect" with Jane + +Doe. Obviously the "no contact" order would bar Epstein from sitting a few feet away from Jane Doe in a deposition. Sitting next to Jane Doe at the deposition would certainly amount to "contact" with Jane Doe. For example, Epstein presumably intends on making eye contact with Jane Doe at her deposition. + +10. Epstein would apparently read the "no contact" order as allowing him to do anything to Jane Doe except to talk to her or touch her. This bizarre reading would undermine all sorts of Florida rules designed to physically separate persons via "no contact" orders. See e.g., FLORIDA RULES OF JUVENILE PROCEDURE, FORM 8.962 (standard motion for injunction in a domestic violence case containing "no contact" provision). For example, it would allow the abusive boyfriend of a woman subject to a "no contact" order to walk a few feet away from the woman, stare her in the eye, and argue that merely because he had not talked to her he had not had "contact." The law does not take such an absurdly narrow view of what amounts to "contact." See, e.g., BRYAN A. GARNER, BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY (81h ed. 2004) (defining "no contact" order as the same as a "stay-away order" and noting that a "stay-away order" usually "prohibits the defendant from coming within a certain number of feet of the victim's home, school, work, or other specific place"); ORE. REV. STAT. § 163.730(3) (defining "contact" in antistalking statute as "[c]oming into the visual or physical presence of the other person"); State v. Maxwell, 998 P.2d 680, 685-86 (Or. App. 2000) (affirming criminal conviction for violation of a "no contact" order where defendant had merely come into the visual presence of his ex-girl friend). + +11. Judge Pucillio's order should not be implicitly altered by actions of this federal court. In Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 377 (1971), the Supreme Court counseled federal courts to avoid litigating matters properly before the state courts in state criminal proceedings. The Court explained that federal courts "should not act to restrain a criminal prosecution, when the moving party has an adequate remedy at law." Id. at 43. This Younger doctrine is "an important one" that "derives from the vital considerations of comity between the state and national governments." 31 Children v. Bush, 329 F.3d 1255, 1274 (11th Cir. 2003). + +12. Epstein's transparent strategy before this Court is to obtain a ruling that he is permitted to attend the deposition. He will then use that ruling of this Court as a defense to any claim in state court that he has violated the no contact requirement of the criminal judgment. See, e.g., Michael v. State, 992 So.2d 367, 369 (Fla. App. 2008) (violation of a no contact condition has to be willful to be punished). In short, he is using litigation in this federal court to effectively alter the judgment entered against him when he pled guilty to a state sex offense. + +13. If Epstein suddenly and genuinely found some reason that he needs to attend the deposition of Jane Doe2 and believes that Judge Pucillio's order unduly or unfairly restricts his ability to do so, he is free to take up the matter with Judge Pucillio. Unless and until he does so, the State of Florida obviously has a compelling interest in enforcing its criminal judgment barring Epstein has a convicted sex offender from + +2 Epstein has not shown any interest in any other depositions that have been held in this case and has not attended any other depositions. + +having any contact with his victims. Accordingly, this Court should give effect to the state court judgment by entering a protective order. + +# CONCLUSION + +The Court should enter a protective order precluding defendant Epstein from attending her upcoming deposition (but allowing him to view the deposition via videocamera and providing assistance to his counsel outside of the room in which the deposition is being taken). + +DATED this 11th day of September 2009. + +Respectfully Submitted, + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on September 11, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> s/ J. J. + +## SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberaer@aawpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bcIclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrooarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcvlaw.com • + +Katherine War-then Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aolcom + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com + +# EXHIBIT A + +I. MICHAEL BURMAN. PAL' GREGORY W. COLEMAN. Pk ROBERT D. CRITTON. JR. P.A. ' BERNARD LEBEDEKER MARK T LUTHER. PA JEFFREY C. PEPIN MICHAEL ) PIKE HEATHER MCNAMAR.A RUDA DAVID YAREMA + +IILOKIDA BOARD MOOED CIVIL. TRIAL LAWYER )ADMITTED TO PRAClla LEI FLORIN. AND COLOMBO + +Sent b E II and U.S. Mall + +Brad , Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +> Re: Doe v. Epstein L.M. v. Epstein E.W. v. Epstein + +Dear Brad: + +![](_page_10_Picture_1.jpeg) + +A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP + +August 27, 2009 + +ADELCLVI J. BENAVENTE PA RAUGAU INVISTIGATOR + +'MICA CADWELL BOBBIE M. MCKENNA ASHLIE STOKEN-BARING BETTY STOKES + +PARALEGALS RITA H. BUDNYK OP GOVNSFL + +fD RICCI SPECJALCossumia POLICE COUNSEL + +Please be advised that Mr. Epstein plans to be in attendance at the deposition of your clients. He does not intend to engage in any conversation with your clients. However, it is certainly his right as a party-defendant in the lawsuit to be present and to assist counsel in the defense of any case. + +Cordial! vturs + +RobgFt D. Critton, Jr. + +RDC/dz + +cc: Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746531/EFTA02746531.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746531/EFTA02746531.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a84d7cdf5ee7abd7a3ac10b0bc53c3e0704b8fc8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746531/EFTA02746531.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,617 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746531.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 13068, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.02, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_10_Picture_1.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER ENFORCING NO \nCONTACT ORDER AND INCORPROATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 537.1612548828125, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 537.1612548828125, + 416.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 416.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BACKGROUND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 259.488, + 192.77999999999997 + ], + [ + 353.64556884765625, + 192.77999999999997 + ], + [ + 353.64556884765625, + 207.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 259.488, + 207.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ARGUMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 269.28000000000003, + 468.9375 + ], + [ + 344.1871643066406, + 468.9375 + ], + [ + 344.1871643066406, + 483.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 269.28000000000003, + 483.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.772, + 165.24 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 165.24 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 180.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 263.772, + 180.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 125.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 125.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 372.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 350.57220458984375, + 372.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 350.57220458984375, + 387.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 387.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 174.42, + 281.8093566894531 + ], + [ + 450.7895202636719, + 281.8093566894531 + ], + [ + 450.7895202636719, + 345.13409423828125 + ], + [ + 174.42, + 345.13409423828125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 7 + ], + [ + "Line", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 106 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746531" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746531/_page_10_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746531/_page_10_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..61aa3d696e3051928f477a7d4ed14f80700a6c96 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746531/_page_10_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:edb518fc974325f58a572994006b4a6d862b2865280e7266e97f5231cf8aaa80 +size 12471 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746542/EFTA02746542.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746542/EFTA02746542.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8097a81b4c9015d335935c4911b6e6ff7c470c2a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746542/EFTA02746542.md @@ -0,0 +1,165 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/M. + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER ENFORCING NO CONTACT ORDER AND INCORPROATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe, hereby joins in Jane Doe Nos. 2-8's motion for a protective order (Case No. 08-CV-80119, dkt. #292) preventing defendant Epstein from attending her upcoming deposition and supplements the arguments in support of the motion. + +Epstein's counsel has informed Jane Doe's counsel that Epstein plans to attend her upcoming deposition. As a convicted sex offender now on post-sentence release, Epstein's transparent purpose in attending the deposition is to attempt to intimidate and harass Jane Doe by sitting a few feet away from her. Regardless of his motivation, however, such action is forbidden by the no-contact order of the state judge who sentenced him (not to mention a parallel order from this Court). Accordingly, this Court should respect that state court judgment and enter a protective order forbidding Epstein + +from being in the same room with Jane Doe during the deposition. (Jane Doe has no objection to him observing the deposition via video-camera and assisting his attorneys without coming into contact with Jane Doe.) + +# BACKGROUND + +1. Jane Doe incorporates and adopts the facts set forth in the pending motion for a protective order filed by Jane Does 2-8.1 Jane Doe supplements those facts with the following facts. + +2. On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein pled guilty to one count of procuring a person under 18 for prostitution and one count of felony solicitation to prostitution before the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida. He was sentenced to 18 months in jail. + +3. In the course of the plea/sentencing colloquy, Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillio explicitly instructed Defendant as follows: + +Court: Okay. [Item] D is, you shall not have any contact with the victim, .. [is] there more than one victim? + +Ms. Belohlavek: There's several. + +Court: Several, all of the victims. So this should be plural. I'm making that plural. You are not to have any contact direct or indirect, and in this day and age I find it necessary to go over exactly what we mean by indirect. By indirect, we mean no text messages, no e-mail, no Face Book, no My Space, no telephone calls, no voice mails, no messages through carrier pigeon, no messages through third parties, no "hey would you tell so and so for me," no having a friend, acquaintance or stranger approach any of these victims with a message of any sort from you, is that clear? + +&#x27; Jane Doe's 2-8 have filed an affidavit of Dr. Kliman attesting to the psychological harm that they will suffer if Epstein is allowed to intimidate them by attending their deposition. Jane Doe is prepared to file an parallel affidavit from a similarly qualified psychologist if the court believes that such an affidavit is necessary. + +Defendant: Yes, + +Transcript of Plea Conference at 20-21. + +4. Read in context, Judge Pucillio was referring to all victims of sex offenses committed by defendant Epstein, whose names were listed in a document that has been described as an appendix to a non-prosecution agreement with the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida. Jane Doe is listed in that document. + +5. The issue of the breadth of the no contact order has previously been before this Court. Several of the plaintiff/victims with suits pending against Epstein before this Court filed a motion for an order prohibiting defendant or his agents from communicating with them directly or indirectly Epstein opposed the requests as "needless, unwarranted and excessive." Dkt. #127 at 5. This Court, however, firmly overruled Epstein's objections. This Court entered its own, additional no-contact order, ruling: + +In light of Defendant's response to Plaintiff's motion for no contact order, suggesting that the state court's order only applies to some victims and that parties are always allowed to contact each other directly, the Court finds it necessary to state clearly that Defendant is under this court's order not to have direct or indirect contact with any plaintiffs, regardless of the intended scope of the state court court's order. + +Order, Dkt. #238 at 4-5. + +6. In spite of two separate court orders from a state and federal court barring direct and indirect contact by Epstein with the victims in this case, on August 27, 2009, counsel for Epstein sent a letter to counsel for Jane Doe that stated: + +Please be advised that Mr. Epstein plans to be in attendance at the deposition of your clients. He does not intend to engage in any conversation with your clients. However, it is certainly his right as a partydefendant in the lawsuit to be present and to assist counsel in the defense of any case. + +See Exhibit "A," Letter from Robert D. Critton, Jr. to Brad , Esq. (Aug. 27, 2009). + +7. As counsel for Epstein knew when sending the letter on August 27, 2009, undersigned counsel had serious back surgery scheduled for the next day, August 28. On August 28, 2009, undersigned counsel had the back surgery performed and was in the hospital for the next two days. He then returned home and remained under heavy medication for the following week, preventing him from attending to matters pertaining to this or any other case. On September 8, 2009, undersigned counsel was able to circulate the letter from counsel for Epstein to other members of the legal team working on this case, leading to this pleading three days later. + +## ARGUMENT + +8. Jane Doe Nos. 2 through 8 have explained at length why Epstein has no right to attend the upcoming deposition of the victims in this case and why doing so would lead to psychological harm to the victims. In the interests of brevity, Jane Doe simply relies on those arguments as well. + +9. Jane Doe has one additional argument to present. For this Court to authorize Epstein to attend the deposition of Jane Doe would violate the right of a state court judge to set conditions of a state criminal judgment. As noted above, Judge Pucillio has ruled that Epstein is not to have "any contact direct or indirect" with Jane + +Doe. Obviously the "no contact" order would bar Epstein from sitting a few feet away from Jane Doe in a deposition. Sitting next to Jane Doe at the deposition would certainly amount to "contact" with Jane Doe. For example, Epstein presumably intends on making eye contact with Jane Doe at her deposition. + +10. Epstein would apparently read the "no contact" order as allowing him to do anything to Jane Doe except to talk to her or touch her. This bizarre reading would undermine all sorts of Florida rules designed to physically separate persons via "no contact" orders. See e.g., FLORIDA RULES OF JUVENILE PROCEDURE, FORM 8.962 (standard motion for injunction in a domestic violence case containing "no contact" provision). For example, it would allow the abusive boyfriend of a woman subject to a "no contact" order to walk a few feet away from the woman, stare her in the eye, and argue that merely because he had not talked to her he had not had "contact." The law does not take such an absurdly narrow view of what amounts to "contact." See, e.g., BRYAN A. GARNER, BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY (81h ed. 2004) (defining "no contact" order as the same as a "stay-away order" and noting that a "stay-away order" usually "prohibits the defendant from coming within a certain number of feet of the victim's home, school, work, or other specific place"); ORE. REV. STAT. § 163.730(3) (defining "contact" in antistalking statute as "[c]oming into the visual or physical presence of the other person"); State v. Maxwell, 998 P.2d 680, 685-86 (Or. App. 2000) (affirming criminal conviction for violation of a "no contact" order where defendant had merely come into the visual presence of his ex-girl friend). + +11. Judge Pucillio's order should not be implicitly altered by actions of this federal court. In Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 377 (1971), the Supreme Court counseled federal courts to avoid litigating matters properly before the state courts in state criminal proceedings. The Court explained that federal courts "should not act to restrain a criminal prosecution, when the moving party has an adequate remedy at law." Id. at 43. This Younger doctrine is "an important one" that "derives from the vital considerations of comity between the state and national governments." 31 Children v. Bush, 329 F.3d 1255, 1274 (11th Cir. 2003). + +12. Epstein's transparent strategy before this Court is to obtain a ruling that he is permitted to attend the deposition. He will then use that ruling of this Court as a defense to any claim in state court that he has violated the no contact requirement of the criminal judgment. See, e.g., Michael v. State, 992 So.2d 367, 369 (Fla. App. 2008) (violation of a no contact condition has to be willful to be punished). In short, he is using litigation in this federal court to effectively alter the judgment entered against him when he pled guilty to a state sex offense. + +13. If Epstein suddenly and genuinely found some reason that he needs to attend the deposition of Jane Doe2 and believes that Judge Pucillio's order unduly or unfairly restricts his ability to do so, he is free to take up the matter with Judge Pucillio. Unless and until he does so, the State of Florida obviously has a compelling interest in enforcing its criminal judgment barring Epstein has a convicted sex offender from + +2 Epstein has not shown any interest in any other depositions that have been held in this case and has not attended any other depositions. + +having any contact with his victims. Accordingly, this Court should give effect to the state court judgment by entering a protective order. + +# CONCLUSION + +The Court should enter a protective order precluding defendant Epstein from attending her upcoming deposition (but allowing him to view the deposition via videocamera and providing assistance to his counsel outside of the room in which the deposition is being taken). + +DATED this 11th day of September 2009. + +Respectfully Submitted, + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on September 11, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> s/ J. J. + +## SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberaer@aawpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bcIclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidroaarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcvlaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aolcom + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com + +# EXHIBIT A + +I. MICHAEL BURMAN. PAL' GREGORY W. COLEMAN. Pk ROBERT D CRITTON. HI\_ P.A. ' BERNARD LEBEDEKER MARK T LUTTIEK. PA. JEFFREY C. PFPIN MICHAEL ) PIKE HEATHER MCNAMAR.A RUDA DAVID YAREMA + +'ROCCA 60ARD CERTIFIED CIVIL TRIAL LAWYER )ADMITTED TO PPACTla IN FLORIDA ARO COUMADO + +Sent E II and U.S. Mall + +Brad , Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +> Re: Doe v. Epstein L.M. v. Epstein E.W. v. Epstein + +Dear Brad: + +![](_page_10_Picture_1.jpeg) + +A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP + +August 27, 2009 + +ADELQVI I. BENAVENTE PARALEGAL/INVESTIGATOR + +I MICA CADWELL BOBBIE M. MCKENNA ASHLIE STOKEN-BARING BETTY STOKES + +PARALEGALS RITA H. BUDNYK Of COUNSEL + +fD RICCI SPECJALCoNsuntER WHIce.COVNTEL + +Please be advised that Mr. Epstein plans to be in attendance at the deposition of your clients. He does not intend to engage in any conversation with your clients. However, it is certainly his right as a party-defendant in the lawsuit to be present and to assist counsel in the defense of any case. + +Cordial! vturs + +RobgFt D. Critton, Jr. + +RDCIclz + +cc: Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746542/EFTA02746542.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746542/EFTA02746542.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..67076c7e8c08e17f5ab83bb3fad4536a956288b4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746542/EFTA02746542.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,617 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746542.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 13070, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.72, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_10_Picture_1.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER ENFORCING NO \nCONTACT ORDER AND INCORPROATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 537.948, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 537.948, + 416.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 416.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BACKGROUND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 258.876, + 192.77999999999997 + ], + [ + 353.64556884765625, + 192.77999999999997 + ], + [ + 353.64556884765625, + 207.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 258.876, + 207.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ARGUMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 269.28000000000003, + 468.9375 + ], + [ + 344.1871643066406, + 468.9375 + ], + [ + 344.1871643066406, + 483.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 269.28000000000003, + 483.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 165.24 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 165.24 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 180.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 180.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 125.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 125.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 372.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 350.57220458984375, + 372.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 350.57220458984375, + 387.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 387.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 174.42, + 281.8093566894531 + ], + [ + 450.7895202636719, + 281.8093566894531 + ], + [ + 450.7895202636719, + 345.13409423828125 + ], + [ + 174.42, + 345.13409423828125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 7 + ], + [ + "Line", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 106 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746542" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746542/_page_10_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746542/_page_10_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..545a15f9934e3f821500d9b55095b078b39c318c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746542/_page_10_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:bc1940fdc89b6422ef0e295f4d28f89b29ff723bad2d008deb5104e1db7f9552 +size 12680 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746553/EFTA02746553.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746553/EFTA02746553.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9546a2ef9f532a9b7c5ec39e0728f886a4abec6c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746553/EFTA02746553.md @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARFS + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +![](_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg) + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80993,08-80811, 09-80591, 09-80656, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order Re Contact of Third-Parties by Private Investigators Retained by Defendant (D.E. #226). For the following reasons, said Motion is denied. + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm beach, New York and St. with the promise of money in + +exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +In an effort to mount a defense to the claims asserted against him in this case, Epstein has employed private investigators to contact third-parties believed familiar with any of the Plaintiffs herein and obtain background information about them that may prove helpful to his defense. By the instant Motion, Plaintiffs seek an order that would prevent Epstein from continuing in this fashion by ordering that Epstein's attorneys and investigators "(I) ...cease making ex parte contacts with non-parties identified in plaintiffs' discovery responses... .(ii) ... cease making ex parte contacts with nonparties found during the course of discovery or investigation who know the plaintiff or live in her community, ... .[and] (iii)... cease making ex parte contacts with nonparties who otherwise know one of the plaintiffs personally but who are unaware that she is an alleged victim of childhood sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein." Plaintiffs' Mtn., pp.5-6. According to Epstein, "Plaintiffs' have several preexisting and diagnosed conditions for which they now attempt to pawn off on Epstein in an effort to increase their damages,"' and granting Plaintiffs request to disallow investigators from contacting these third parties "would violate Epstein's due process rights to defend himself, and would further not allow Epstein a full opportunity to confront the + +&#x27; Epstein's Resp. (D.E. #262), p.6 + +Plaintiffs that have made allegations against him with the necessary material to properly cross-examine them at trial."2 + +A Protective Order issued pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c) is based on the standard of "good cause," which calls for a "sound basis or legitimate need" to limit discovery of the subject information. In re Alexander Grant & Co. Litigation, 820 F.2d 352, 356 (11th Cir. 1987). The burden is on the party seeking the protective order to demonstrate good cause for its issuance. See a v. Gen. Motors Corp. 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002); In re Agent Orange Products Liability Litigation, 821 F.2d 139, 145 (2d Cir. 1987); 19thStreet Baptist Church v. St. Peters Episcopal Church 190 F.R.D. 345, 348 (E.D. Penn. 2000). The Court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to satisfy their burden of demonstrating good cause for a protective order to issue. + +The Court agrees with Epstein in this instance and finds that limiting Epstein's investigation of the claims asserted against him in the manner suggested strips from Epstein the ability to mount a defense and, as such, would violate Epstein's Sixth Amendment Right to confront witnesses, and the due process clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. As Epstein correctly observes, the rules of discovery contemplate the hiring of investigators and, assuming certain parameters are met, also protect the information obtained thereby as work-product. See Alachua Gen'l Hosp.. Inc. v. Zimmer USA, Inc. 403 So.2d 1087 (Fla. 15' DCA 1981). In re Faro Technologies Securities Litigation 2008 WL 205318 (M.D. Fla. 2008); Fed. R. Civ. + +&#x27;Id. at 9.

P. 26(b)(3)(B). To restrict Epstein in the manner described would result in Epstein having to rely only on those "handpicked" witnesses disclosed by Plaintiffs in discovery, and would thereby prejudice Epstein in mounting his defense to the claims raised against him.

The Plaintiffs in these consolidated cases are seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, "physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, [and] invasion of her privacy."

1To combat these claims Epstein will have to bring forth evidence to disprove and/or find information that diminishes Plaintiffs' damage claims. This is his right. The Record in this case is clear that the childhood of many of the Plaintiffs was marred by instances of abuse and neglect, which in turn may have resulted, in whole or in part, in the damages claimed by Plaintiffs. Under these circumstances, where Plaintiff is seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages for physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, and the like, a full investigation by private investigators hired by Epstein and/or his attorneys into Plaintiffs' background, including Plaintiffs' past and present psychological, familial and social histories is reasonable and shall not be denied.4

3 Plaintiff, First Am. Compl., Counts l-XXX.

4 The Court notes that in reaching the within conclusion, review and consideration was made of the various declarations filed by Plaintiffs in support of

In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order Re Contact of Third-Parties by Private Investigators Retained by Defendant (D.E. #226) is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this August 15, 2009, in September 15, [redacted] s, at West Palm Beach, Florida.

CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra
All Counsel of Record


their claim that Epstein's investigators were acting in ways which were harassing, humiliating to Plaintiffs and/or otherwise designed to intimidate and finds said allegations without foundation.

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746553/EFTA02746553.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746553/EFTA02746553.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b87e68c943b3f5c28dc49a92bf0c0b3315609bc6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746553/EFTA02746553.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,263 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746553.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 6922, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.84, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 195.5599822998047, + 71.7974853515625 + ], + [ + 402.21, + 71.7974853515625 + ], + [ + 402.21, + 101.40997314453125 + ], + [ + 195.5599822998047, + 101.40997314453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.90500000000003, + 388.66748046875 + ], + [ + 322.7505798339844, + 388.66748046875 + ], + [ + 322.7505798339844, + 403.38 + ], + [ + 274.90500000000003, + 403.38 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746553" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746553/_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746553/_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..09205382c99c4e270870acc34c31156ab3ed9421 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746553/_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:757e0b4e677c1bca1337acb5e0dc7078c6c40a9046e281e5b043b051ef463068 +size 9560 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746558/EFTA02746558.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746558/EFTA02746558.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ee4a2d0768ea5bb24fd3ff0241ee76c725b95c7d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746558/EFTA02746558.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +![](_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg) + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on a Joint Motion For Extension of Time in which to Respond to Plaintiff, Jane Does' Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. Having considered Defendant's motion and Plaintiffs counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall Respond to Plaintiff's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Answers to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories. + +on or before September 18, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this IS day of , 2009. + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record o l s•-rt a...S:7C 0 .frOV't 410.-••••• • + +lielmettnikT-Marta bt N goe hAse-14/ Th United States Dieriet Judge + +1\AAGAec-i-rclik \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746558/EFTA02746558.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746558/EFTA02746558.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..eb5bc314b1b3dc1452dabae825a5b257a686867e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746558/EFTA02746558.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,149 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746558.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1153, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.85, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.02499999999998, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 408.9739074707031, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 408.9739074707031, + 117.2235107421875 + ], + [ + 206.02499999999998, + 117.2235107421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 284.13, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 331.318359375, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 331.318359375, + 406.7235412597656 + ], + [ + 284.13, + 406.7235412597656 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746558" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746558/_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746558/_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..67fc90dd32849bf0da2dc6023aedfa822ec77700 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746558/_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ecdb2c726c017c2b45c99be43377f5710b931c175f8aa15ad82dd5bd5643d430 +size 10969 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746560/EFTA02746560.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746560/EFTA02746560.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ff160048d0b336430ad69e616ecc8b260edabdbd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746560/EFTA02746560.md @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRAME + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228). For the following reasons said Motion is granted. + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm beach, New York and St. , with the promise of money in + +exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +By the instant Motion Epstein seeks an order compelling one of the Plaintiffs, in the case, to submit to an independent psychological/psychiatric medical examination by Ryan M.D., presently scheduled for September 8,2009. has agreed to submit to said exam, but requests the Court impose certain restrictions. Since the filing of the Motion the parties have managed to resolve some of the issues involved, such as the proposed examination's time and date and request to have a representative from her team present at said examination. As for the latter issue, Defendant has agreed to provide, at his expense, a video feed and monitor in an adjacent room for Plaintiff's representative's use. The remaining issues involve Plaintiff's request for a court order limiting the scope of the proposed examination by disallowing repeated questioning regarding "highly sensitive areas of inquiry including Plaintiff's medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history, substance abuse history, etc.,'and imposing certain time restraints on the examination itself. + +Plaintiffs request to limit the scope of the examination is denied. It is Dr. + +&#x27; See Pltffs Resp. to Rep.(D.E. #279), p.3. + +routine procedure when conducting psychological/psychiatric medical examinations of patients to require the patient to fill out a 10-page "Life History Questionnaire" and a 14-page "Patient Questionnaire." Both questionnaires request detailed background information regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like. Presumably Plaintiff will be asked these same questions two more times, first by defense counsel at deposition scheduled to take place shortly, and again by Dr. IMat the upcoming examination. Plaintiff's objection is that by having to answer these same questions about the same subject matter three separate times "would only serve to embarrass, humiliate, intimidate and further victimize Plaintiff." Pltffs Resp. (D.E. #254), p.6. Plaintiff's position is that she should only "be required to regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like, if at all, only one time," either during the "deposition of Plaintiff or through Dr. examination, but certainly not both." Id. + +Plaintiff cites no case law and independent research has uncovered none, to support her novel position that a Plaintiff who puts her mental, emotional and psychiatric state at issue can place a limitation on the number of times defense counsel or agents retained by him can inquire into areas relevant to these issues where the subject matter involved is "highly personal," "embarrassing," "sensitive," or otherwise "humiliating." Plaintiff is seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, "physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, [and] invasion of her privacy." 2 Based on the allegations made in Defendant's Reply,' Plaintiff's childhood was, to put it mildly, a difficult one, with numerous episodes of child abuse and sexual abuse, which in turn may of been the cause of Plaintiff's later engaging in numerous instances of substance abuse, self-mutilation, prostitution, aggravated assault, truancy, and the like. According to Defendant, in 2005 Plaintiff's mother filed a case committing =rifor a Petition for Involuntary Assessment for substance abuse, stating in the accompanying file that has been diagnosed as "Bipoloar and Schizophrenic."' + +Under these circumstances, where Plaintiff is seeking to recover medical expenses associated with these complex medical issues, full knowledge of Plaintiff's past and present medical, psychological, familial and social histories is essential. And while neither duplication nor embarrassment is desired, under the circumstances presented, where the number and scope of damages claimed are vast and Plaintiffs past history eventful, it may nonetheless be unavoidable. This is not to say that restrictions on the scope of questioning may never be put into effect. If, as the case progresses, Plaintiff can show that Defendant's invasive questioning + +2 Plaintiff, First Am. Compl., Counts I-XXX. + +(D.E. #273), pp.7-8, + +4 As quoted in Der s Rep. (D.E. #273), p.8, from Palm Beach County Case #05MH1667. + +is being done in bad faith or for purposes of harassment, the Court may reconsider imposing limitations of the sort requested herein. At this point, however, the Court agrees with Defendant that to restrict the number of times defense counsel may ask Plaintiff personal and sensitive questions concerning some of the pivotal issues in this case, would work an injustice by preventing Defendant from being able to defend himself. + +The Court likewise rejects Plaintiffs request to limit the time for conducting the examination and any related testing to 6 hours. Dr. has filed an affidavit stating that he needs 6-8 hours to conduct the examination and related testing, and that anything less than that might result in compromising the test results.' Considering the 31 counts alleged against Defendant, as well as Plaintiffs event-filled past, the amount of time sought does not appear unreasonable. Should the length of time prove draining, Plaintiff may take breaks as needed, of reasonable duration. Furthermore, Defense Counsel and Drill are hereby put on notice that while the Court has allowed the full 8 hours requested for the examination and related testing, should less time be needed, the Court expects less time will be taken, and in no event may the examination and related testing exceed a total of 8 hours. In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228) is GRANTED IN + +Affidavit of Dr.. attached as Ex. "B" to Defendant's Rep. (D.E. #273). + +## ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF. + +DONE AND ORDERED this September 4, 2009, in at West Palm Beach, + +Florida. + +047 ofiACen......." LINNEA R. JO ON UNITED STA S MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746560/EFTA02746560.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746560/EFTA02746560.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a05ab1ed91365b47ee652685578086b5c30b1ee1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746560/EFTA02746560.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,318 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746560.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 7665, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.28, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 403.9736022949219, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 403.9736022949219, + 112.84552001953125 + ], + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 112.84552001953125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 287.64, + 385.55999999999995 + ], + [ + 334.417236328125, + 385.55999999999995 + ], + [ + 334.417236328125, + 397.7829895019531 + ], + [ + 287.64, + 397.7829895019531 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 79.56, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 346.9665222167969, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 346.9665222167969, + 102.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 79.56, + 102.80352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 213 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 26 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746560" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746566/EFTA02746566.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746566/EFTA02746566.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c7484e35f81c6550d3e9e915a79195c6e6151531 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746566/EFTA02746566.md @@ -0,0 +1,203 @@ +**UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA** + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80893-MARRA/ [REDACTED] + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +--- + +**PLAINTIFF'S ANSWERS TO +DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES** + +PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Plaintiff, JANE DOE, by and through her undersigned counsel, has served her Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories, numbered 1 and 25, inclusive, propounded to said Plaintiff on or about December 10, 2008. + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that the original of the foregoing has been provided by United States mail this 23th day of January, 2009, to: + +Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esquire +Michael J. Pike, Esquire +Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman, LLP +515 North Flagler Drive +Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +with a copy to: + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esquire +Atterburty, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +"B" + +Michael R. Tein, Esquire +██████ Tein, P.L. +3059 Grand Avenue +Suite 340 +Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 + +THE LAW OFFICE OF BRAD ██████ & +ASSOCIATES, LLC + +By: + +![]()Brad ██████, Esquire +Attorney for Plaintiff +Florida Bar No. 542075 +2028 ██████ Street +Suite 202 +Hollywood, Florida 33020 +Telephone: 954-414-8033 +Facsimile: 954-924-1530 +E-Mail: [be@bradedwardslaw.com](mailto:be@bradedwardslaw.com) + +Paul G. Cassell +Attorney for Plaintiff +Pro Hac Vice +332 S. 1400 E. +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +Telephone: 801-585-5202 +Facsimile: 801-585-6833 +E-Mail: [cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +## DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF + +- 1. What is the name and address of all persons answering or assisting in answering these interrogatories, and, if applicable, the person's official position or relationship with the party to whom the interrogatories are directed? + +Jane Doe, with the assistance of my attorney, Brad + +Plaintiff objects to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, having her address, as Mr. Epstein is a registered sex offender and Jane Doe was a victim of his, and disclosure of her address could compromise her safety and privacy. + +- 2. List the names, business addresses, telephone and cell phone numbers, dates of employment, immediate supervisor (name and address) and rates of pay regarding all employers, including self-employment, for whom you have worked in the past 10 years; this includes listing all sources of income you have received. Answer this question by year, i.e. 1998 - 2008. + +Flashdance - West Palm Beach — approximately 2007 + +Platinum Gold - Boynton Beach — approximately 6-8 months in 2006 - 2007 + +International House of Pancakes on Military Trail in West Palm Beach approximately 2006 + +Stan Crooks (auctioneer) - worked as his assistant prior to 2006 + +- 3. List all former names and when you were known by those names. State all addresses where you have lived for the past 10 years, the dates you lived at each address, your social security number, your date of birth, and if you are or have ever been married, the name of your spouse or spouses. List any children by name, date of birth and the father's name and address. List the names and address of your parents and any brother or sister. + +No former names. Date of birth and social security number will be provided to Defendant's counsel confidentially. Objection as to the remainder of this interrogatory as it asks for information that is irrelevant, not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence and harassing. Plaintiff has a reasonable fear for her safety and the safety of other innocent persons and thus objects to releasing such information to a registered sex offender that sexually victimized the Plaintiff. + +- 4. Have you ever been convicted of a crime, other than any juvenile adjudication, which under the law under which you were convicted was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of 1 year, or that involved dishonesty or a false statement regardless of the punishment? If so, state as to each conviction, the specific crime and the date and the place of conviction. + +Offense — shoplifting in Palm Beach County - 2006 + +- 5. Please provide the name, address, telephone number, place of employment and job title of any person who has, claims to have or whom you believe may have knowledge or information pertaining to any fact alleged in the pleadings (as defined in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(a) filed in this action), or any fact underlying the subject matter of this action. + +In addition to all persons mentioned in the criminal discovery that was provided to Epstein by the F.B.I., U.S. Attorney's Office, Palm Beach State Attorney's Office, or Palm Beach Police Department, the following are additional witnesses: + +Randee Speciale, MS, LMHC (Licensed Therapist) Palm Beach County Public Safety Department Victim Services Division 205 North Dixie Highway Suite 5.1100 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 561-355-2428 + +Jeffrey Epstein, and other persons employed by or through Jeffrey Epstein whose names are not yet known to Plaintiff. + +- 6. Please state the specific nature and substance of the knowledge that you believe the person(s) identified in your response to interrogatory no. 5 may have. + +Randee Speciale is my treating trauma therapist and knows and understands the psychological and emotional damage that Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, inflicted upon me. + +Jeffrey Epstein knows that I was a minor child when he sexually touched and abused me and he knows and understands his deviant influence on me and he knows of all of the crimes he committed against me. + +knows that she assisted Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, in contacting me and having me brought to and from his house for the purpose of Jeffrey Epstein sexually abusing me. She knows he paid me and she knows I was underage. She also knows that Jeffrey Epstein has a fascination and sexual disease that attracts him to underage minor girls and that he has acted upon that deviant sexual desire for years and with numerous minor girls and children, and she assisted in furthering his sickness upon me. + +Nadia and other employees of Jeffery Epstein know that I was underage, as were many other minor victims, and that I was a victim of Jeffrey Epstein's. + +- 7. Were you suffering from physical infirmity, disability, disease, sickness or psychiatric/psychological condition at the time of the incident(s) described in the complaint? If so, what was the nature of the infirmity, disability, or sickness? + +Yes, PTSD. + +- 8. Did you consume any alcoholic beverages or take any drugs or medication within 12 hours before the time of each incident(s) described in the complaint? If so, state the type and amount of alcoholic beverages, drugs or medication which were consumed and when and where you consumed them. + +No. + +- 9. Describe each injury (physical, emotional, mental) for which you are claiming damages in this case, specifying the part of your body that was injured, the nature of the injury, and as to any injuries you contend are permanent, the effects on you that you claim are permanent. + +My injuries are primarily emotionaUpsychological and are the direct result of Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's actions. I was touched, battered, and fondled by Defendant during the incidents described in the complaint. I observed the Defendant touch and fondle himself. I observed the Defendant ejaculate numerous times. + +I was made to touch the Defendant. I also observed sexual acts and had sexual acts perpetrated on me by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein. At various times I was unclothed, as was the Defendant and others. + +At all times material, I was a child, under the age of 18 years. The Defendant also used me to bring him other minor girls and he controlled and brainwashed me into believing this lifestyle was healthy and normal for a girl my age. + +I was a victim of various criminal acts and sexual exploitation. I was induced and coerced by the Defendant into acts of prostitution. + +These injuries are further described in more detail in the factual allegations of the complaint. + +My emotionaUpsychological injuries cause severe stomach pains when I think about the abuse that Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, inflicted upon me. + +- 10. Please state each item of damage that you claim, and include in your answer: the count to which the item of damages relates; the factual basis for each item of damages; and an explanation of how you computed each item of damages, including any mathematical formula used. + +I incurred medical and psychological expenses in the past and will incur such expenses in the future. I have suffered a loss of earning capacity due to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's influence because I was encouraged by him as a minor child to enter a life of prostitution for him. + +I suffered a loss of the capacity to enjoy life as a result of being coerced and induced into committing acts of prostitution and as a result of being sexually exploited. I lost self-worth, confidence and self esteem due to his control and influence. + +I have suffered mental anguish, emotional distress, fear, humiliation and psychological trauma as a result of the acts described in the complaint. + +The effect of these injuries is permanent in nature. These damages are further described in the complaint. The factual basis for these damages is described in the answer to #9 above, and in the factual allegations in the complaint. Items of damage have not been calculated. + +- 11. List the names and business addresses of each physician (including psychiatrist, psychologist, etc.) or medical provider (including chiropractors) who has treated or examined you, and each medical facility where you have received any treatment or examination for the injuries for which you seek damages in this case; and state as to each the date of treatment or examination and the injury or condition for which you were examined or treated. + +Randee Speciale, MS, LMHC 205 North Dixie Highway Suite 5.1100 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +- 12. List the names and business addresses of all other physicians, medical facilities, rehab facilities (drug, alcohol or psychiatric) or other health care providers including psychiatrist, psychologist, mental health counselor and chiropractors by whom or at which you have been examined or treated in the past 10 years; and state as to each the dates of examination or treatment and the condition or injury for which you were examined or treated. + +Randee Speciale, MS, LMHC 205 North Dixie Highway Suite 5.1100 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Wellington Rsgimal Hospital 10101 Forest M Boulevard Wellington, Florida 33414 + +St. Mary's Medical Center 901 - 45th Street West Palm Beach, Florida 33407 + +Milton Girls Juvenile Residential Facility 5770 East Milton Road Milton, Florida 32583 + +Shelter Broadway Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida (family therapy) + +Drug Center Belvedere Road West Palm Beach, Florida (drug evaluation when I was 16 yrs old) + +**VERIFICATION** + +The foregoing answers to interrogatories are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. + +Jane Doe + +JANE DOE, Plaintiff + +I, counsel for Jane Doe, the Plaintiff herein, personally witnessed the Plaintiff execute this jurat page and do swear that Jane Doe is personally known to me, is the individual identified in the foregoing answers and is the same individual whose identify has been previously disclosed, under seal, to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's counsel. + +![]()Brad Edwards + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +: + +:SS + +COUNTY OF BROWARD + +: + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 23rd day of January, 2009 by BRAD [REDACTED], who is personally known to me. + +SHAWN A. GILBERT + +Print Name + +![]()Signature + +NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF FLORIDA + +Commission Number: + +My commission expires: +(Notarial Seal) + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746566/EFTA02746566.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746566/EFTA02746566.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3dc42a6543b2df062e2fcde4f498f1b62605d4cf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746566/EFTA02746566.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,479 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746566.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 11795, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.87, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.676, + 79.38 + ], + [ + 410.04, + 79.38 + ], + [ + 410.04, + 105.30000000000001 + ], + [ + 197.676, + 105.30000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 178.704, + 313.47 + ], + [ + 430.84799999999996, + 313.47 + ], + [ + 430.84799999999996, + 340.2 + ], + [ + 178.704, + 340.2 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 134.02800000000002, + 75.05029296875 + ], + [ + 476.6232604980469, + 75.05029296875 + ], + [ + 476.6232604980469, + 88.8170166015625 + ], + [ + 134.02800000000002, + 88.8170166015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VERIFICATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.712, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 353.124, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 353.124, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 260.712, + 98.01 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746566" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746575/EFTA02746575.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746575/EFTA02746575.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a45e7b55219002eaa374a05d20cae95177348427 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746575/EFTA02746575.md @@ -0,0 +1,98 @@ +Jane Doe + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +**AFFIDAVIT OF RYAN C.W. [REDACTED] M.D.** + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Ryan C.W. + +[REDACTED], M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +1. 1. My name is Ryan C.W. [REDACTED], M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +2. 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 2008. +3. 3. I, also, currently serve as an Affiliate Instructor of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine at the University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, and Assistant Professor of Psychiatry in the Department of Medical Education at the University of Central Florida College of Medicine. +4. 4. I received my undergraduate degree from Johns [REDACTED] University and medical degree from Georgetown University. +5. 5. No opinion of mine has ever been disqualified in a legal proceeding. + +![]() + +- 6. I was aRappeport Fellow of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law in 2007. +- 7. I completed an additional year of training fellowship in Forensic Psychiatry at Case Western Reserve in 2007-2008. +- 8. I am Board Certified in Psychiatry by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, with additional qualifications in Forensic Psychiatry. +- 9. The amended complaint filed by against Jeffrey Epstein makes sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seeks damages in excess of \$50 million. has filed a5-count complaint in which she alleges emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of her childhood, and loss of dignity. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. +- 10. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. +- 11. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +- 12. Police records show that came from an unstable and disturbed home where there were incidents of domestic violence, drug use, DCF investigations and criminal activity performed by her father. In 2002, prior to meeting Mr. Epstein) was noted to be truant from school, smoking which is illegal for a minor, ahabitual runaway and was described by her mother as being uncontrollable. Police and other judicial records also indicate that some of her siblings had similar problems and were the direct victims of domestic violence. In addition] has also claimed to suffer from the psychiatric condition of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (l'IbD) prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. This PTSD was alleged to be caused by witnessing (inconsistent statements by Ms. leo about actual level of exposure and what happened) her father beating achild/common law stepbrother to death. For further elaboration of MIMINII history and background, a thorough psychiatric interview/examination and access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + - 13. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any Plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological + +and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, consensual sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +- 14. It is also essential to understand the Plaintiff's level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +- 15. Knowledge of Plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, intrauterine exposure to toxic substances such as cocaine, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. +- 16. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records and that they have time to conduct afull and complete Independent Medical Examination. +- 17. The Independent Medical Examination will cover Plaintiff's full medical and psychiatric history, including: chief complaint, history of present illness, specific complaints of symptoms or injury, medical history, past psychiatric history, family history, abuse history, birth history, childhood history, school history, occupational history, violence history, legal history, relationship history, substance use history, sexual history, review of systems, activities of daily living, mental status examination, diagnoses using DSM-IV axes, and discussion of case findings and opinions. +- 18. Psychological tests and questionnaires to be administered include: Zung Depression Scale, Zung Anxiety Scale, Mini Mental State Examination, + +MCMI-HI, MMPI -2 with forensic implications, Life History Questionnaire, and Forensic Questionnaire. + +- 19. Because Plaintiff's emotional and mental states have been put at issue, the undersigned must ask questions of Plaintiff regarding her physical, emotional and mental problems, in the past and in the present, in order to form an expert opinion. The IME requires the presence of only the Plaintiff and the examiner. Other individuals present will invalidate the process. +- 20. The presence of third-party observers, meaning persons other than the examiner/proctor and examinee, in the examining room is inconsistent with standardized administration of the tests (e.g. MMPI-2 and MCMI-HI) and changes the testing environment considerably by introducing extraneous variables that may distract the examinee and alter the results of the IME. +- 21. I have been retained as an expert in this matter and have been asked to perform an independent medical evaluation of Plaintiff +- 22. I understand that Plaintiffs counsel has requested to videotape the examination and have counsel, acourt reporter, or both present in the room during the examination. +- 23. I strenuously object to allowing the presence of a videographer, court reporter and/or attorney being present in the room during my examination of + +Plaintiff SEIM + +- 24. A psychiatric examination, which consists of, but is not limited to, interview, mental status examination, and tests of intelligence, memory, attention, concentration, problem solving, sensory-perceptual functioning, motor functioning, psychomotor problem solving ability, is properly conducted in the absence of third parties from the examination site (i.e., court reporter, attorney, videographer). The presence of third parties often affects the examinee's responses to examination items and may alter or distract their stream of thought or cause undue embarrassment. +- 25. The presence of a videographer, court reporter and/or attorney in the examination room during my performance of an independent medical examination would create an artificial environment, distractions, and would compromise the integrity of my psychiatric examination. A video camera in the room connected to a monitor by cable outside the room would be acceptable. +- 26. Furthermore, enabling the presence of a videographer, court reporter and/or attorney in the examination room during my performance of an independent medical examination is a clear departure from the normal standards imposed within the psychiatric field for such an examination. + +- 27. For the above reasons, I oppose having third parties present in the examination room during an examination and testing. I may choose not to perform the standard examination in the presence of third parties (court reporter, attorney, videographer) except under Court order and with the caveat that the test results may be invalid. +- 28. As part of the performance of an independent medical examination, I require that examinees complete a"Patient Questionnaire" and a"Forensic Questionnaire" designed to elicit historical information about the examinee, which assists in my performance of the clinical examination and gives the examinee opportunity to review records obtained and obtain appropriate data prior to the examination. +- 29. Requiring that a patient/examinee complete a questionnaire seeking the provision of historical information is astandard protocol of the clinical examination. +- 30. My ability to provide a complete and thorough independent medical examination is compromised without the provision of the historical information sought in my "Patient Questionnaire" and "Forensic Questionnaire." +- 31. Additionally, part of the independent medical examination consists of a + +consultation with the examinee, in which history and background information is obtained, and administration of various written standardized tests and scales. The administration of such tests and scales goes to the essence of such examinations. + +- 32. I have been asked to perform a psychiatric examination of Plaintil IIIII pursuant to a request in the above-styled cause for an independent medical examination. +- 33. The examination of Plaintiff will be conducted in compliance with the ethical principles and code to which I am bound as alicensed psychiatrist. Plaintiff will be allowed to take breaks, as she may need, to relax, eat, drink, and visit the restroom. +- 34. In the event that I must conduct an examination with an attorney present, but outside the examination room, I request that there be no interruption in the examination. Interruptions will distract the Plaintiff, disrupt the examination and skew the validity of the examination. If present at the site, the attorney should not coach the examinee during the examination, during breaks or otherwise. +- 35. It is not possible to predict the exact amount of time that will be necessary for an appropriate psychiatric examination of Plaintif pecause of + +unknown variables such as the amount of information that will be covered in the consultation segment and the pace at which Plaintiff will perform the standardized tests. Such examinations generally take approximately six to seven hours (excluding any break time), with approximately four to six hours used for the face-to-face consultation segment and approximately two to three hours used for the testing segment. However, in this case, I anticipate the IME of Plaintiff to take approximately between five and eight hours, excluding break time. Additional time may be necessary fora complete testing on her own, but again most examinees complete the testing in two to three hours. If IIlla has not completed the "Patient Questionnaire" and the "Forensic Questionnaire" before the examination, which was provided to her attorney prior to the examination, additional time will be needed to obtain pertinent historical information. + +Respectfully submitted, + +71r ," oki oicia 40 + +Ryan C. W. , MD + +Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College of Medicine + +Affiliate Instructor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida + +STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared **RYAN C.W.** [REDACTED], M.D., who is personally known to me or ( ) who has produced \_\_\_\_\_ as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this 25th day of August, 2009. + +*Marcia J. Chapman* + +Notary Public + +Printed Name: MARCIA J CHAPMAN + +My Commission Expires: + +![](_page_10_Picture_103.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746575/EFTA02746575.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746575/EFTA02746575.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b8f466867447d396f9a3a8616ebdcd8a4dc676ad --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746575/EFTA02746575.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,484 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746575.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 13237, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.92, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_10_Picture_103.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RYAN C.W. [REDACTED] M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.63200000000003, + 152.28 + ], + [ + 438.804, + 152.28 + ], + [ + 438.804, + 169.29 + ], + [ + 205.63200000000003, + 169.29 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 208 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 224 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 265 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 263 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 239 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 253 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 235 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 243 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 224 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746575" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746575/_page_10_Picture_103.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746575/_page_10_Picture_103.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d7b2cb84f5ce9398b2fca08c3d34efa5a46bfe55 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746575/_page_10_Picture_103.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b009746e05c4206faa12517063ed879f61f545ac4e2afb70f67ef94191658ad3 +size 12053 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746586/EFTA02746586.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746586/EFTA02746586.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bbe21d5c91e34738f04f12b4f878a9ad752e2cb2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746586/EFTA02746586.md @@ -0,0 +1,470 @@ +**DIRECT FILE COUNTS 3 & 4** + +No.00-875-CFA/B + +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT +Nineteenth Judicial Circuit of Florida +██████████ County + +*I/S* + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +VS. + +A. Tammy ██████████ Huff + +DOB:10/09/1971 + +RACE/SEX: ██████████ Female + +██████████ + +██████████ + +DOB:09/01/1965 + +RACE/SEX: ██████████ Male + +██████████ + +INDICTMENT FOR: + +- 1. FIRST DEGREE FELONY MURDER/PRINCIPAL +- 2. AGGRAVATED CHILD ABUSE +- 3. FIRST DEGREE FELONY MURDER/PRINCIPAL +- 4. AGGRAVATED CHILD ABUSE + +Found Spring Term, Two Thousand + +A TRUE BILL + +![]()Presented in Open Court and Filed +on July 12, 2000 + +MARSHA STILLER, Clerk + +![]()BRUCE H. COLTON +State Attorney, Nineteenth Judicial Circuit +State of Florida + +"D" + +## (B) CT.3 FIRST DEGREE FELONY MURDER/PRINCIPAL + +June 26, 2000 did unlawfully, w en a ed in the perpetration of or perpetrate aggravated child abuse, kill and murder a human being, or the said by a person other than the defendant, but the defendant an e person who killed commission of the aggravated child abuse, in violation of Florida Statutes 777.011 an imes to were principals in the was killed (1)(a)2; + +## IN THE NAME AND BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA : + +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT of the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit of the State of Florida for pi County at the Spring Term thereof, in the year of our Lord Two Thousand, to-wit: The Grand Jury of to of Florida inquiring in and for the body of the County of upon their oaths do present that in =County on or about: + +## (A) CT.1 FIRST DEGREE FELONY MURDER/PRINCIPAL + +June 26, 2000 Tammy Marie did unlawfully, ramwhile en p a ed in the perpetration of or in the atte t to perpetrate aggravated child abuse, kill and murde , a human being, or the said was killed by a person other than the defendant, but the defen an e person who killed were principals in the commission of the aggravated child abuse, in viofation of Florida Statutes 777.011 . 1)(a)2; + +### (A) CT.2 AGGRAVATED CHILD ABUSE + +June 26 2000 Tammy Huff did willfully torture, maliciously punish or willfully and unlawfully cageagl hild under the age of years, or did knowingly or willfully abuse said child and in so doing caused great bodily harm, permanent disability or permanent disfigurement to said child, in violation of Florida Statute 827.03;(2); + +### (B) CT.4 AGGRAVATED CHILD ABUSE + +2000 id willfully torture, maliciously punish or willfully and unlawfully cage.. a child an er e age of 18 years, or did knowingly or willfully abuse said child and in so doing caused great bodily harm, permanent disability or permanent disfigurement to said child, in violation of Florida Statute 827.03;(2); + +I, Nita Demon, Assistant State Attorney for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit hereby certify that t have advised the Grand Jury in the above referenced case. + +Nita Demon Florida Bar No. 0599972 Assistant State Attorney for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit of Florida. Prosecuting for the State of Florida + +pr + +## IN THE CIRCUIT COURT TEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FO COUNTY, FLORIDA. + +STATE OF FLORIDA, + +VS. + +DEFENDANTS. + +CASE NO.00-875-CFB + +#### COLLATERAL CRIMES NOTICE + +THE STATE OF FLORIDA, by and through its undersigned Assistant State Attorney, hereby gives notice of its intent to present evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or bad acts. Such evidence will relate to the following matters: + +- 1) That the defendant had served or been sentenced to serve 16 years in prison prior to the death ofeillir +- 2) That the defendant possessed and/or used crack cocaine, and/or smoked marijuana during the period of September 1999, to June 4, 2000, in violation of the provisions of F.S. 893.13. +- 3) That the defendant possessed and/or used crack cocaine and/or marijuana during the period of June 4, 2000, to June 26, 2000, inclusive in violation of the provisions of F.S. 893.13. +- 4) That the defendant convinced others to take the blame for criminal acts the defendant had committed. In 1997 the defendant committed criminal mischief by intentionally hitting another vehicle in violation of Florida Statute 806.13. When the owner of the vehicle that was struck followed the defendant's truck and called the police, the defendant convinced a co-worker, James + +a to tell.the police that James Wild not the defendant was driving the truck when it sideswiped the Mercedes. + +5) That on various and sundry occasions the defendant committed a battery by striking or beating his wife resulting in the defendant's arrest for these beatings. + +6) That on various occasions between June 4, 2000, and June 26, 2000, the defendant committed a battery upon MID in violation of the provisions of F.S. 784.03(1Xa). + +7) That on various and sundry occasions between June 4, 2000, and June 26, 2000, the defendant committed aggravated child abuse onellaby hitting n his body, arms, and back, by hitting and/or kickinb the stomach, by knockingSinto the dresser, by kicking Sin the side, by hitting •n the back with a belt, and by grabbing genitals in violation of the provisions of F.S. 827.03(2). + +8) That in the year 1997 the defendant committed child abuse or battery against by grabbing her and throwing her to the floor, by punching and kicking her, and pulling her hair, by punching her in the sides and legs, and by kicking her in the back in violation of F.S. 784.03(1)(a) and/or F.S. 827.03(2). + +9) That the defendant committed battery or aggravated child abuse by beating and/or hitting from 1986 to 1992, by hitting the child and leaving bruises all over her legs, by pushing her against a wall in violation of the provisions of F.S. 784.03(1Xa) and/or F.S. 827.03(2). + +The forgoing specified evidence will be offered to prove identify, common scheme or plan, motive, opportunity, intend, preparation, plan, knowledge, absence of mistake and to negate a defense. + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that atrue and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by US Mail, Courthouse Box, Hand Delivery, to Robert G. Udell, Attorney for the Defendant, 1331 SE Ocean Boulevard, Stuart, Florida, 34996, this Pgy of October, 2003. + +Respectfully submitted: + +By: sistant State Attorney Florida Bar No. 112908 411 S. 2nd. St. Fort Pierce, Fl .34950 (561) 465-3000 + +BRUCE H. COLTON STATE ATTO + +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINETE ICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COUNTY, STATE OF FLORIDA. + +2 + +3STATE OF FLORIDA, + +4Plaintiff, + +vs. + +6 + +7 + +9 + +10 TIME: 3:39 P.M. + +11 PLACE: Office of the Public Defender West Palm Beach, Florida + +)2 + +13 + +14 + +13 + +I6 + +17 + +14 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +29 + +Defendant. / + +CASE NO. 00-375-CFA + +DATE: May 9, 2003 + +TAKEN BY: Robert Udell, Esquire + +#### APPEARANCES BY: + +FOR THE STATE: + +FOR DEFENDANT DIAL: + +FOR DEFENDANT HUFF: + +Richard W. Seymour, ASA Nita Denton, ASA Office of the State Attorney 100 E. Ocean Boulevard Stuart, Florida 34994 + +Robert Udell, Esquire 3601 SE Ocean Boulevard Stuart, Florida 34994 + +John Hetherington, APD Office of the Public Defender 435 SE Flagler Avenue Stuart, Florida 34994 + +3 + +4 + +\$ + +6 + +7 + +9 + +10 + +Mr. Udell: Okay. Uhm, please state your name. + +Q: Your last name a + +A: IIIIIIII + +Q: Okay you're daughter correct? + +A: Yeah. + +Q: How old are you today? + +A: Fourteen. + +Q: Fourteen? + +A: (No audible response) + +Q: Uhm, I guess we haven't seen you since October is 5th of the year 2000, when we took your deposition in the same building correct? + +17 Q: Okay. You've gotten alittle older. You- you... We're here concerning the incident in which uhm, was killed. Do you understand that? + +19 Q: Okay. And in connection with that you gave a statement the day after uhm,filliwas killed and in that 21statementbasically you said that you really didn't know umuch about what happened to uhm, that when you went • ss to bed he was fine and when you woke up he was dead? + +A: Yeah. + +A: Yeah. + +24A: Yeah. Q: And then we took your deposition as Ireferred + +#### r=e0r4V. ALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF' SOFFICE PAGE 1 OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 03114489 + +DISPOSITION: UNFOUNDED DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +N4dmary N/OHAR COPE: 9000 DATE: 09/19/03 FRIDAY ZONE: A61 GRID: 3B26 DEPUTY ID.: 6305 ASSIST: TIME 0 1402 A 1430 C 1505 OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 09/19/03 , 1405 HOURS AND DATE: opop HOURS EXCEPTION TYPE: INCIDENT LOCATION: CITY: NO. OFFENSES: 01 NO. OF: : . VEM. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. ENTERED: 0 LOCATION: RESIDENCE - SINGLE FAMILY NO. VICTIMS: 00 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 + +OFFENSE NO. 1 FLORIDA STATE. STATUTE: 827 03 3C CIS CODE 9000 + +OTHER SEX: F RACE: 11 HT: 503 WT: 105 DOB: EYE: BROWN + +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: HOME PHONE: BUSINESS PHONE: 561 + +OTHER SEX: )11.11.5,1NT: 124 RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: HOME PHONE: BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 DOB: MISMINW + +OTHER • SEX: RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: HOME PHONE: BUSINESS PHONE: 561-0 £ RACE: W HT: 502 WT: 180 BR: BROWN EYE: GREEN 0-0000- + +OTHER SEX: - F RhCE: W RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: HOME PHONE: BUSINESS PHONE: 561)000-0000 DOB: GRAY EYE: HAZE + +REPORT NUMBER: 1 + +FLORIDA VICTIM ? N WEATHER: CLEAR WITNESS TO CRIME KNOWN ?. N CAN VICTIM I.D. SUSPECT ?N WILL VICTIM PROSECUTE 7 N IS M.O. SIGNIFICANT ' 1.ATENTS LIFTED ' TAG NUMBER -KNOWN 1 SUSPECT NAME KNOWN SUSPECT LOCATION KNOWN ? N STOLEN PROPERTY TRACEABLE ? N EVIDENCE LEFT AT SCENE ? N SUSPECT'S VEHICLE KNOWN 7 N PROPERTY DAMAGE ' + +ON 09/19/03 AT APPROXIMATELY 1405 HOURS, I RESPONDED TO THE ABOVE INCIDENT ADDRESS LOCATION IN REFERENCE TO CONDUCTING A CHILD ABUSE/NEGLECT INVESTIGA-TION WITH IMMWCASE WORKER SHANA MILLICAN. tARRIVED AT THE SCENE AND SPOKE TO IIIICASE WORKER WHO PROVIDED ME WITH CASE INFORMATION ALONG WITH THE ALLEGATIONS OF ABUSE. THE ALLEGATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS. + +![](_page_7_Picture_13.jpeg) + +THE MOTHER, HAS LEGAL CUSTODY AND [REDACTED], THE GRANDMOTHER, HAS PHYSICAL CUSTODY. [REDACTED] HAD STATED THAT SHE NO LONGER WANTS CUSTODY OF [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] IS VERY SICK. [REDACTED] HAS NOT BEEN TO SCHOOL FOR THE LAST WEEK AND A HALF. [REDACTED] HAS UPPER RESPIRATORY CONGESTION AND A DEEP COUGH. [REDACTED] NEEDS DENTAL WORK. [REDACTED] IS GIVEN OVER THE COUNTER MEDICINE BY [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] HAS FAILED TO PROVIDE MEDICAL TREATMENT FOR [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] HAS BEEN GIVEN APPLICATIONS FOR HEALTHY KIDS AND [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] HAS NOT OBTAINED MEDICAL INSURANCE FOR [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] NEEDS MEDICAL TREATMENT FOR HER UPPER RESPIRATORY CONGESTION TODAY. + +WHILE AT THE RESIDENCE, I SPOKE TO THE GREAT GRANDMOTHER, [REDACTED], WHO ADVISED ME THAT [REDACTED] LIVES WITH HER AND HER GRANDMOTHER, [REDACTED]. WHILE INVESTIGATING THE INCIDENT, [REDACTED] WAS NOT PRESENT AT THE RESIDENCE. I SPOKE TO [REDACTED] GREAT GRANDMOTHER, [REDACTED], WHO EXPLAINED TO ME THAT EVERYONE IN THE RESIDENCE WAS CURRENTLY EXPERIENCING FLU-TYPE SYMPTOMS AND SHE ALSO STATED THAT LAST FRIDAY, 09/12/03, [REDACTED] BEGAN COMPLAINING OF BEING ILL. [REDACTED] STATED THAT [REDACTED] WAS COMPLAINING OF BEING ILL SO MUCH THAT SHE WAS REFUSING TO GO TO SCHOOL. [REDACTED] STATED THAT SHE AND [REDACTED] HAD ATTEMPTED TO PROVIDE VARIOUS OVER THE COUNTER MEDICINES TO [REDACTED] SO THAT SHE CAN RECOUPERATE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE SO THAT SHE COULD AGAIN ATTEND SCHOOL. + +WHEN I SPOKE TO [REDACTED], SHE APPEARED OKAY AND NOT VERY SICK AS STATED IN THE INITIAL ALLEGATION. I ASKED [REDACTED] WHY SHE WAS MISSING SCHOOL FOR APPROXIMATELY A WEEK AND A HALF AND SHE REPLIED BY STATING SHE HAD BEEN TOO SICK TO ATTEND AND HER MOTHER WOULD NOT TAKE HER TO THE DOCTOR'S OFFICE. SHE STATED THAT SHE HAD A BAD COUGH, A RUNNY NOSE AND A SORE THROAT. + +DURING THE CONVERSATION, [REDACTED] STATED THAT SHE DID NOT LIKE SCHOOL AND IT WAS FOR THE REASON THAT SHE WAS SICK FOR WHICH SHE DID NOT ATTEND SCHOOL DURING THOSE LAST FEW DAYS. AS I WAS SPEAKING TO [REDACTED] I NOTICED THAT SHE HAD A LIGHT COUGH & I ASKED HER IF SHE HAD SMOKED IN THE PAST. [REDACTED] STATED THAT SHE SMOKES APPROXIMATELY ONE PACK OF NEWPORT CIGARETTES EVERY 2-3 DAYS, AND SHE HAD BEEN SMOKING FOR THE LAST 3-4 YEARS. [REDACTED] STATED THAT SHE RECEIVES AN ALLOWANCE AND IT IS WITH THE ALLOWANCE THAT SHE GIVES THE MONEY TO A FRIEND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO PURCHASE THE CIGARETTES FOR HER. ACCORDING TO [REDACTED], HER GRANDMOTHER AND GREAT-GRANDMOTHER ARE UNAWARE THAT SHE SMOKES. + +[REDACTED], HER GRANDMOTHER AND GREAT-GRANDMOTHER ARE UNAWARE THAT SHE SMOKES. [REDACTED] DID ACKNOWLEDGE THAT HER GRANDMOTHER AND AUNT HAD PROVIDED VARIOUS OVER THE COUNTER MEDICATIONS IN AN ATTEMPT TO ALLEVIATE HER COUGH AND FLU-LIKE SYMPTOMS. + +I EXPLAINED TO [REDACTED] THAT IT WAS VERY COMMON FOR A PARENT TO PROVIDE OVER THE COUNTER MEDICATIONS TO THEIR CHILDREN IN LIEU OF RUSHING TO THE HOSPITAL OR THE DOCTORS OFFICE WHEN THEY ARE EXPERIENCING COLD OR FLU-LIKE SYMPTOMS. + +AS MYSELF AND THE [REDACTED] CASE WORKER WERE TALKING TO [REDACTED], SHE AT TIMES, BECAME HOSTILE AND UNCOOPERATIVE WITH OUR INVESTIGATION. + +AT ONE POINT, [REDACTED] GOT UP FROM THE [REDACTED] AND WENT TO HER BEDROOM AND REFUSED TO SPEAK WITH US OR ALLOW US TO SEEK ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WHICH MAY FACILITATE THE INVESTIGATION OF THE INCIDENT. + +WHILE AT THE RESIDENCE, IT DID APPEAR THAT [REDACTED] HAD A DISCIPLINARY PROBLEM AND A DISREGARD FOR AUTHORITY. I EXPLAINED TO [REDACTED] THAT SHE NEEDED TO STOP SMOKING BECAUSE IT VERY WELL MAY BE POSSIBLE AND RELATED TO HER CURRENT HEALTH CONDITION AND IT WILL ONLY AGGRAVATE HER HEALTH IF SHE CONTINUES TO SMOKE. + +THE ALLEGATIONS OF CHILD ABUSE BROUGHT FORTH IN THE [REDACTED] CASE, 2003-354050-01 ARE UNFOUNDED. + +IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT I COMPLETED A CHILD SAFETY REVIEW DATABASE FORM AND FAXED A COPY TO THE SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS UNIT FOR REVIEW. + +AT THIS TIME, THERE IS NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN REFERENCE TO THIS CASE. + +D/S C. DORTA #6395 +092303 JLW + +M4DG UO/A4iVi c,ou%) PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF' SOFFICE PAGE- 1. OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 06065267 + +• + +DISPOSITION: UNFOUNDED DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +CHILD ABUSE CODE: 9000 DATE: 05/11/06 THURSDAY ZIONEi 822 GRID: 492 DEPUTY ID.: 7718 ASSIST: TIME D 1346 A 1358 C 1422 OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 05/10/06 , 0829 HOURS AND DATE: 05/11/06. , 1403 HOURS EXCEPTION TYPE: INCIDENT LOCATION: + +CITY: NO. OFFENSES: 01 NO. OFFENDERS: UK LOCATION: RESIDENCE - SINGLE FAMILY NO. VICTIMS: 01 Na. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 NO. VEH. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. ENTERED: 0 + +OFFENSE NO. 1 FLORIDA STATE STATUTE: 827 03 CIS CODE 9000 + +OTHER DOB: SEX: F RACE: W HT: 502 WT: 124 HR: + +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: HOME PHONE: BUSINESS PHONE: 561 0'0-0000 + +OTHER SEX: H RACE: W HT: 511 WT: + +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: HOME PHONE: BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +OTHER SEX: F RACE: W HT: 503 I\*. RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: + +HOME PHONE:a BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +OTHER SEX: M RACE: W HT: 600 WT: 185 HR: BROWN EYE: BROWN RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: + +.HOME - PHONE: BUSINESS PHONE: 561.000-0000 + +OFFENSE INDICATOR: OFFENSE 1 VICTIM NUMBER: 1 + +VICTIM TYPE: GOVERNMENT RESIDENCE TYPE: NOT APPLICABLE RESIDENCE STATUS: NOT APPLICABLE + +EXTENT OF. INJURY: NONE + +:INJURY TYPE(1): NOT APPLICABLE INJURY TYPE(2): NOT APPLICABLE + +VICTIM RELATION: NOT APPLICABLE + +MAY 11TH, 2006, AT. APPROXIMATELY 1347 HOURS, I WAS. DISPATCHED. TO LOCATED IN UNINCORPORATED WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, IN REFERENCE TO A REPORT OF A SUSPECT BEING EXPOSED TO A CHILD. + +UPON ARRIVAL, I NET WITH gir INVESTIGATOR, LLOYD SPENCE, WHO ADVISED ME OF THE FOLLOWING ALLEGATIONS: THE ALLEGATIONS STATED THE FOLLOWING. ON MAY 10TH, 2006, MOM CALLED THE POLICE AND STATED THAT HER SON, SW, HAD PUT HER IN A BEAR HUG, AND SHE WANTED HIM ARRESTED. GEMM. HAS BEEN ARRESTED ON DOMESTIC BATTERY CHARGES. IT WAS STATED THAT MOM + +EXHIBIT + +WiDC VD/AWL/i &nay + +PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PAGE 2 OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 06065267 + +• HAS A COCAINE AND CRACK ADDICTION. MOM, AT ONE TIME, ONLY USED COCAINE, BUT A FRIEND GOT HER INTO USING CRACK. MOM HAS BEEN USING CRACK FOR THE PAST EIGHT MONTHS. MOM ALSO HAD STEPDAD ARRESTED. HE HAS BEEN TRYING TO GET A DIVORCE AND A RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST MOM. MOM CALLED THE POLICE ON THE STEPDAD, BECAUSE HE HAD A WARRANT OUT FOR HIS ARREST. THE STEPFATHER WANTED MOM AND HER CRACK HEAD FRIENDS OUT OF THE HOUSE, BECAUSE HE FEARED MOM WOULD START SELLING THINGS IN THE HOME. THE STEPDAD WAS ARRESTED AND IS IN THE COUNTY JAIL AT THIS TIME. BE IN THE DETENTION CENTER. HIS SISTER, eilMir, HAS BEEN LIVING GRANDMOTHER. SHE MOVED OUT, BECAUSE OF MOM'S CRACK ADDICTION. IT IS UNKNOWN HOW LONG SHE HAS LIVED WITH THE GRANDMOTHER. + +AFTER HEARING THE ABOVE ALLEGATIONS, INVESTIGATOR LLOYD AND IMADE CONTACT WITH A FEMALE, LATER IDENTIFIED AS WE ADVISED HER OF THE REASON WE WERE AT HER RESIDENCE, AND SHE THEN PROVIDED US WITH THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: SHE STATED ON MAY 10TH, 2006, AT APPROXIMATELY THE EVENING HOURS, SHE WAS ATTEMPTING TO CALL THE VICTIM'S ADVOCATE UNIT IN REFERENCE TO A DOMESTIC BATTERY REPORT. (SEE CASE NUMBER 06-064544, WHERE HER HUSBAND (allen WAS ARRESTED ON THE DATE OF MAY 8TH, 2006.) SHE STATED WHILE ATTEMPTING TO MAKE THE PHONE CALL, HER SON, , CAME INTO HER BEDROOM ADVISING HER THAT SHE NEEDED TO GET OF THE TELEPHONE. STATED IMMO= ATTEMPTED TO REMOVE THE PHONE FROM HER, AND SHE THEN PLACED THE PHONE DOWN, AND ems THEN' ADVISED HER THAT HE WAS KICKING HER OUT OF THE RESIDENCE. + +IIIMMENSTATED Mop PLACED HER IN A BEAR HUG ATTEMPTING TO REMOVE HER FROM THE RESIDENCE. IIIMMOMOUrSTATED THAT IIIIINFAND HERSELF WERE IN A PHYSICAL ALTERCATION, AND SHE CALLED THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, AND ININOMIWAS ARRESTED FOR DOMESTIC BATTERY (SEE CASE NUMBER 06-064943). I ASKED IF SHE EVER USED ANY NARCOTICS, AND SHE REPLIED, "NO." IWAS UNABLE TO MAKE CONTACT WITH HER HUSBAND, a, DUE TO HIM HAVING A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST HIM. ALSO, I WAS UNABLE TO MAKE CONTACT WITH gosimer DUE TO HIM BEING INCARCERATED AT THE JUVENILE ASSESSMENT CENTER. WHILE IN THE RESIDENCE, I OBSERVED NO SIGNS OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA NOR DRUG USE. + +INVESTIGATOR LLOYD ADVISED DUE TO THE ALLEGATIONS OF DRUG USE IN THE RESIDENCE IN THE PRESENCE OF A JUVENILE, SHE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO TAKE A DRUG TEST ON A SCHEDULED DATE, AND SHE AGREED. + +AT THIS TIME, THE ALLEGATIONS WERE UNFOUNDED. + +D/S MELVIN ELLIOTT, ID #7718 DICTATED: 05-11-06/2006 HOURS TRANSCRIBED: 05-15-06/6V + +#### 34J1 wvi ,PALM BEACH COUNTY OFFENSE R SHERIFF' SoirI - dE PAGE 1 EPORT -CASE NO. 04140336 + +ABUSE ELDERLY ZONE: A23 GRID: 3826 OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: CODE: 1308 DATE: 12/02/04 THURSDAY DEPUTY ID.: 7093 ASSIST: 03 TIME D 1529 A 1551 C 1743 11/28/04 , 0700 HOURS AND DATE: 11/28/04 , 1000 HOURS + +EXCEPTION TYPE: INCIDENT LOCATION: CITY: NO. OFFENSES: 03 NO. OFFENDERS: UK NO. VEH. STOLE LOCATION: RESIDENCE - SINGLE FAMILY NO. VICTIMS: 01 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 WEAPON TYPE: HANDS / FISTS / FEET OFFENSE NO. 1 FLORIDA STATE STATUTE: 825 102 1 OFFENSE NO. 2 FLORIDA STATE STATUTE: 825 102 1 OFFENSE NO. 3 FLORIDA STATE STATUTE: 827 03 N: 0 NO. PREM. ENTERED: 0 CIS CODE 1308 CIS CODE 1308 CIS CODE 9000 + +DISPOSITION: INACTIVE DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: SEX: F RACE: W BT: 501 WT: 92 HR: GRAY ismaillip DOS: NW EYE: OTHER + +HOME PHONE: le BUSIINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 OTHER. + +SEX: F RACE: W HT: 503 UT: 105 HR: BROWN RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. HOME PHONE: IINSINIMP I BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 EYE: DRONN DOB: SIMS + +OTHER MIMS SEX: F RACE: W HT: 0 NT: 0 HR: UNKNOWN EYE: UNKNOWN RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: HOME PHONE: VISNIIIMINV BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +OTHER eglillaggalagr DOB: SEX: F RACE: N HT: 502 WT: 180 HR: BROW EYE: GREEN RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: HOME PHONE: BUSINESS PHONE:. 561 000-0000 + +OFFENSE INDICATOR: OFFENSE 1 VICTIM NUMBER: 1 + +VICTIM TYPE: ADULT RESIDENCE TYPE: COUNTY RESIDENCE STATUS: FULL YEAR EXTENT OF. INJURY:•NONE INJURY TYPE(1): NOT APPLICABLE INJURY TYPE(2): NOT APPLICABLE VICTIM RELATION: UNDETERMINED + +REPORT NUMBER: 1 FLORIDA VICTIM ? N WITNESS TO CRIME KNOWN 7. N CAN VICTIM Z.D.. SUSPECT ? Y WILL VICTIM PROSECUTE ?.. Y IS M.O. SIGNIFICANT 7 SUSPECT NAME KNOWN SUSPECT LOCATION KNOWN ? Y STOLEN PROPERTY TRACEABLE ? N EVIDENCE LEFT AT SCENE ? N + +LATENTS LIFTED / N SUSPECT'S VEHICLE KNOWN ?.. N + +TAG NUMBER KNOWN PROPERTY DAMAGE ? + +ON 120204 AT APPROXIMATELY 1530 HOURS, I RESPONDED TO LOCATED AT WEST PALM BEACH TO INVESTIGATE AN ELDERLY ABUSE. + +UPON ARRIVAL, I MET WITH I PROTECTIVE INVESTIGATOR JESSE YOUNG. HE GAVE ME A COPY OF THE IIIIABUSE HOTLINE REPORT AND IN THE ALLEGATION NARRATIVE, IT STATED: AVULNERABLE ADULT WHO SUFFERS FROM THE INFIRMITIES OF AGING DUE TO ADVANCED AGE. IMEMMIWIS HEARING IMPAIRED. immINMOMOMPDOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO IS CURRENTLY RESIDING WITH HER DAUGHTER AND PROTECT HERSELF. TEENAGE GRAND DAUGHTER. + +ON 112804 GOT INTO AN ARGUMENT WITH HER TEENAGE GRAND DAUGHTER LATER IDENTIFIED AS . GRANDDAUGHTER tackspommiliglimpta THE LEG AS A RESULT FELL AND BROKE HER LEG. THE GRAND DAUGHTER HAS A TENDENCY TO KICK WHEN THEY ARGUE. THE CAREGIVER'S ARE AWARE OF THE PROBLEMS BETWEEN AND HER GRAND DAUGHTER. THE CAREGIVER'S HAVE NOT DONE ANYTHING TO PREVENT FROM BEING PHYSICALLY ASSAULTED BY HER GRAND DAUGHTER. + +THRE IS A CONCERN FOR WELL BEING. IS CURRENTLY AT THE CAREGIVER'S ARE DAUGHTERS egigmigg, AND + +ISPOKE TO AT THE HOSPITAL AND SHE TOLD ME THE FOLLOWING. HER GRANDDAUGHTERTROT KICK HER INTENTIONALLY. IT WAS AN ACCIDENT ism WAS LAYING ON THE WITH HER FOOT HANGING OVER THE ARMREST. OEM STRETCHED HER LEG OUT JUST AS WALKED BY ACCIDENTALLY HITTING HER CHEST. WAS KNOCKED OFF AAIANCE AND FELL INTO THE BOOK CASE. THERE WAS NO ARGUMENT THAT DAY. imillitAwailgigme HAVE ARGUED IN THE PAST BUTIIIIIIIPHAS NEVER MALICIOUSLY HIT HER. + +AT APPROXIMATELY 1700 HOURS, THAT DAY I WENT TO WEST PALM BEACH WITH 0, FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION. UPON ARRIVAL, I MET WITH AND SHE TOLD ME THE FOLLOWING. SHE DID NOT KICK HER GRAND-MOTHER AND HAS NEVER HIT HER IN THE PAST. THEY DID NOT ARGUE THAT DAY, IT WAS AN ACCIDENT. SHE WAS LAYING ON THE OCUCH WITH HER FOOT OVER THE ARMREST, HER GRANDMOTHER WALKED BY JUST AS SHE STRETCHED HER LEG, HER GRANDMOTHER WALKED INTO HER FOOT LOSING HER BALANCE AND FELL INTO THE BOOKCASE. + +IWAS UNABLE TO MAKE CONTACT WITHIMMISPOR JAN GARTH. THIS CASE REMAINS INACTIVE PENDING FURTHER INVESTIGATION. I FAXED A COPY OF THE SAFETY REVIEW DATABASE FORM TO S.I.U. ON 120204. NO FURTHER INFORMATION. END OF REPORT. + +D/S LERNER 17093 120804 CP + +DISPOSITION: UNFOUNDED DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +ABUSE ELDERLY CODE: 130B DATE: 12/06/04 THURSDAY ZONE: A23 GRID: 3826 DEPUTY ID.: 7093 ASSIST: TIME D 1529 A 1551 C 1743 OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 12/06/04 , 1630 HOURS AND DATE: 12/06/04 , 1700 HOURS EXCEPTION TYPE: INCIDENT LOCATION: + +CITY: NO. OFFENSES: LOCATION: RESIDENCE NO. VICTIMS: 03 NO. OFFENDERS: UK - SINGLE FAMILY 01 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED NO. VER. STOLEN: 0 NO. ENTRY: 0 PREM. ENTERED: 0 WEAPON TYPE: HANDS / FISTS / FEET OFFENSE NO. 1 FLORIDA STATE STATUTE: 825 102 1 CIS CODE 130E OFFENSE NO. 2 FLORIDA STATE STATUTE: 825 102 1 CIS CODE 1308 OFFENSE NO. 3 FLORIDA STATE STATUTE: 827 03 CIS CODE 9000 + +ON 120604 AT APPROXIMATELY 1630 HOURS, I RESPONDED TO WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, 33417, TO INVESTIGATE A CHILD ABUSE. + +THE FOLLOWING. WE WERE THE RP4TO INVESTIGATE THE SAME INCIDENT THAT OCCURRED UPON ARRIVAL, I MET WITH INVESTIGATOR, LLOYD SPENCE, AND HE TOLD ME ON 112804, WHERE IT WAS ALLEGED THAT KICKED HER GRANDMOTHER, , CAUSING HER TO FALL BREAKING HER HIP. AN ALLEGATION WAS MADE THAT A LACK OF SUPERVISION OF BY HER GRANDMOTHER, AND HER AUNT, LED TO THE INC 0 NT THAT OCCURRED. IS AND SHE TOLD ME THE FOLLOWING. SHE RE-AFFIRMED THE STORY OF AND giMEN1agle, THAT WAS JUST LAYING ON THE In DANGLING HER FEET OVER THE SIDE WHEN WALKED BY AND NM ACCIDENTALLY KICKED HER LEG OUT AT THE SAME TIME SHIT HER LEG, CAUSING + +HER TO FALL. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE ACT WAS INTENTIONAL AND NOTHING MORE THAN 'AN ACCIDENT. ALL PARTIES DENIED ANY ALLEGATIONS OF WRONG DOING OR ANY PAST INCIDENT OF PHYSICAL ABUSE. rIS 16 YEARS OLD AND THERE IS NO KNOWN REASON AS TO WHY UM, WOUL NEED 24 HOUR SUPERVISION. NORMALLY, THE GREAT GRANDMOTHER, IS AT HOME WHILE Or IS THERE. THERE IS NO PROBABLE CAUSE AT THIS TIME TO PROVE THAT A CRIME W COMMITTED. THIS CASE IS UNFOUNDED. + +D/S LERNER 17093 120804 LD + +PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PAGE 1 +OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 04120214 + +DISPOSITION: UNFOUNDED +DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +NEGLECT CHILD CODE: 9000 DATE: 10/07/04 THURSDAY +ZONE: A23 GRID: 3B26 DEPUTY ID.: 7651 ASSIST: TIME D 2013 A 2021 C 2154 +OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 10/01/04, 0001 HOURS AND DATE: 10/07/04, 2016 HOURS +EXCEPTION TYPE: +INCIDENT LOCATION: [REDACTED] +CITY: [REDACTED] +NO. OFFENSES: 01 NO. OFFENDERS: UK NO. VEH. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. ENTERED: 0 +LOCATION: RESIDENCE - SINGLE FAMILY +NO. VICTIMS: 00 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 + +OFFENSE NO. 1 FLORIDA STATE STATUTE: 827 05 CIS CODE 9000 +.. +OTHER SEX: F RACE: W HT: 503 WT: 105 HR: BROWN DOB: [REDACTED] EYE: BROWN +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: [REDACTED] +HOME PHONE: [REDACTED] +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 +OTHER SEX: F RACE: W HT: 502 WT: 180 HR: BROWN DOB: [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: [REDACTED] +HOME PHONE: [REDACTED] +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 +OTHER SEX: F RACE: W HT: 504 WT: 140 HR: BLOND DOB: [REDACTED] EYE: UNKNOWN +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: [REDACTED] +HOME PHONE: [REDACTED] +BUSINESS PHONE: [REDACTED] +OTHER SEX: M RACE: W HT: 508 WT: 180 HR: BROWN DOB: [REDACTED] EYE: GREEN +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: [REDACTED] +HOME PHONE: [REDACTED] +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +REPORT NUMBER: 1 +FLORIDA VICTIM ? N +WEATHER: CLOUDY +WITNESS TO CRIME KNOWN ? N SUSPECT NAME KNOWN ?..... N +CAN VICTIM I.D. SUSPECT ? N SUSPECT LOCATION KNOWN ?... N +WILL VICTIM PROSECUTE ?.. N STOLEN PROPERTY TRACEABLE ? N +IS M.O. SIGNIFICANT ?.... N EVIDENCE LEFT AT SCENE ?... N +LATENTS LIFTED ?..... N SUSPECT'S VEHICLE KNOWN ?.. N +TAG NUMBER KNOWN ?..... N + +ON 10/07/04 AT 2016 HOURS, I RESPONDED TO [REDACTED] IN WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA IN REFERENCE TO A CHILD NEGLECT COMPLAINT. +UPON ARRIVAL, I MET WITH [REDACTED] CASE WORKER, APRIL SCOTT. SHE STATED THAT [REDACTED] +RECEIVED A COMPLAINT FROM AN UNKNOWN PERSON, WHICH STATED THE FOLLOWING: +16 YEAR OLD [REDACTED] LIVES AT THIS LOCATION WITH HER GRANDMOTHER, [REDACTED] +[REDACTED] WHO HAS LEGAL CUSTODY. [REDACTED] LEFT APPROXIMATELY A WEEK AGO FOR VACA- + +![](_page_14_Picture_512.jpeg) + +U4DL UO/14/Vi tavy PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF' SOFFICE PAGE 2 OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 04120214 + +TION AND IT WAS INDICATED THAT ummgrwAs UNSUPERVISED. IT ALSO INDICATED THAT SHE WAS HAVING PARTIES AND SUSPECTED DRUG ACTIVITY. + +IMET WITH UMW WHO CONFIRMED THAT S WAS ON VACATION BUT INDICATED THAT HER AUNT, AND UNCLE S WERE MAINTAINING HER SUPER-VISION. SHE CONTACTED BOTH, WHO IMMEDIATELY RESPONDED TO THE HOME. BOTH CONFIRMED THAT THEY WERE MAKING SUPERVISED AND ALL OF HER BASIC NEEDS ARE MET. + +THEY BOTH INDICATED THAT THEY WILL KEEP A MORE STRICT WATCH UNTIL HER GRANDMOTHER ARRIVES HONE ON 10/08/04. NO EVIDENCE OF ILLEGAL ACTIVITY WAS FOUND AT THE HOME. + +THIS CASE IS UNFOUNDED. + +D/S B. CULLEN 17651 + +101904 JLW \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746586/EFTA02746586.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746586/EFTA02746586.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..559876f7629cfba1db55aa55bedf10395521fcc4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746586/EFTA02746586.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,915 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746586.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 16, + "chars": 27235, + "elapsed_seconds": 17.3, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_7_Picture_13.jpeg", + "_page_14_Picture_512.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "DIRECT FILE COUNTS 3 & 4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 52.019999999999996, + 121.5 + ], + [ + 208.692, + 121.5 + ], + [ + 208.692, + 140.13 + ], + [ + 52.019999999999996, + 140.13 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(B) CT.3 FIRST DEGREE FELONY MURDER/PRINCIPAL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 51.40800000000001, + 396.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 336.3698425292969, + 396.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 336.3698425292969, + 411.8240661621094 + ], + [ + 51.40800000000001, + 411.8240661621094 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE NAME AND BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA :", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 50.184000000000005, + 134.46 + ], + [ + 408.44171142578125, + 134.46 + ], + [ + 408.44171142578125, + 150.0841064453125 + ], + [ + 50.184000000000005, + 150.0841064453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(A) CT.1 FIRST DEGREE FELONY MURDER/PRINCIPAL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 51.40800000000001, + 221.13000000000002 + ], + [ + 336.3698425292969, + 221.13000000000002 + ], + [ + 336.3698425292969, + 236.7041015625 + ], + [ + 51.40800000000001, + 236.7041015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(A) CT.2 AGGRAVATED CHILD ABUSE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 51.40800000000001, + 309.42 + ], + [ + 249.95126342773438, + 309.42 + ], + [ + 249.95126342773438, + 324.3445739746094 + ], + [ + 51.40800000000001, + 324.3445739746094 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(B) CT.4 AGGRAVATED CHILD ABUSE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 51.40800000000001, + 485.18999999999994 + ], + [ + 250.22283935546875, + 485.18999999999994 + ], + [ + 250.22283935546875, + 499.9540710449219 + ], + [ + 51.40800000000001, + 499.9540710449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT TEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT \nIN AND FO COUNTY, FLORIDA.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 138.4242401123047, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 489.6, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 489.6, + 138.51 + ], + [ + 138.4242401123047, + 138.51 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COLLATERAL CRIMES NOTICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 308.61 + ], + [ + 407.592, + 308.61 + ], + [ + 407.592, + 322.38 + ], + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 322.38 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "APPEARANCES BY:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 286.41600000000005, + 398.52 + ], + [ + 403.5994873046875, + 398.52 + ], + [ + 403.5994873046875, + 411.4170227050781 + ], + [ + 286.41600000000005, + 411.4170227050781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "r=e0r4V. \nALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF' SOFFICE PAGE 1\nOFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 03114489", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 24.025026321411133, + 30.78 + ], + [ + 486.3959655761719, + 30.78 + ], + [ + 486.3959655761719, + 60.75 + ], + [ + 24.025026321411133, + 60.75 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PAGE 2 OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 03114489", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 50.79600000000001, + 34.83 + ], + [ + 475.524, + 34.83 + ], + [ + 475.524, + 57.50999999999999 + ], + [ + 50.79600000000001, + 57.50999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "34J1 wvi \n,PALM BEACH COUNTY \nOFFENSE R \nSHERIFF' SoirI - dE PAGE 1\nEPORT -CASE NO. 04140336", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 37.70943832397461, + 38.88 + ], + [ + 483.38690185546875, + 38.88 + ], + [ + 483.38690185546875, + 64.80000000000001 + ], + [ + 37.70943832397461, + 64.80000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF' SOFFICE PAGE 3\nSUPPLEMENT I OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 04140336", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 54.467999999999996, + 41.8013916015625 + ], + [ + 481.463134765625, + 41.8013916015625 + ], + [ + 481.463134765625, + 62.48004150390625 + ], + [ + 54.467999999999996, + 62.48004150390625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 146 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 94 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 247 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 100 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 192 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 35 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 240 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 373 + ], + [ + "Line", + 66 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 371 + ], + [ + "Line", + 59 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 502 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 395 + ], + [ + "Line", + 70 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 449 + ], + [ + "Line", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 416 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 413 + ], + [ + "Line", + 73 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 151 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746586" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746586/_page_14_Picture_512.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746586/_page_14_Picture_512.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..05564304e4d30d92e10fac22bd521b048d9670fa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746586/_page_14_Picture_512.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:21642b06ac4b29b95634cc5b122fb6766553bf2abde0986c43ff454f1228f1f8 +size 12705 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746586/_page_7_Picture_13.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746586/_page_7_Picture_13.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cae28c723db54d05d35e1ae9acd68a3b06572081 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746586/_page_7_Picture_13.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:457d7805674695e6ef5880548359980feec260066e53aff08c7f64f22fb38d73 +size 18989 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746602/EFTA02746602.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746602/EFTA02746602.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..004099ac90a69be6234a98acae7acb251e4d45ae --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746602/EFTA02746602.md @@ -0,0 +1,240 @@ +# CURRICULUM VITAE + +Ryan C. 'Al. M.D. + +It 11 + +Updated 06/17/09 + +#### TABLE OF CONTENTS + +| PRESENT POSITION | 2 | +|---------------------------------------------|----------| +| EDUCATION | 2 | +| MEDICAL LICENSE | 2 | +| CERTIFICATION | 3 | +| ADDITIONAL TRAINING | 3 | +| SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS , PAST AND PRESENT | | +| COMMITTEES | 3 | +| HONORS | 4 | +| PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES | 4 | +| REVIEWER | 5 | +| BOOK REVIEWS | 5 | +| PUBLICATIONS | 5 | +| ABSTRACTS | 7 | +| PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL | MEETINGS | +| AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES | 9 | +| MEDIA | 12 | + +NAME: Ryan Chaloner Winton II M.D. + +DATE OF BIRTH: May 10, 1976 + +PLACE OF BIRTH: Titusville, Florida + +MARITAL STATUS: Single + +## PRESENT POSITION: + +07/2008 - Psychiatrist Present Richard C. W. IR MD, PA 2500 West Lake ary Blvd; Ste 219 Lake Mary, FL 32746 Ph: 407-322-8199 + +03/01/2008 - 07/31/2011 Affiliate Instructor University of South Florida Department of Psychiatry + +03/03/09 — Assistant Professor of Psychiatry 06/30/12 University of Central Florida College of Medicine Department of Medical Education + +## EDUCATION: + +1995 - 1999 Johns Maryland Double Major - Biology and Psychology B.A. Degree, graduated Phi Beta Kappa with honors + +1999 - 2003 Georgetown University School of Medicine Washington, DC M.D. Degree + +2003 -2004 Internal Medicine Internship Sinai Hospital of Baltimore/Johns Baltimore, Maryland + +2004 -2007 Residerj Johns Hospital Department 01 Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Baltimore, Maryland + +2007 - 2008 Fellow in Forensic Psychiatry Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio + +### MEDICAL LICENSE: + +2004 Maryland — D62746 - Inactive 2007 Ohio — 89483 - Inactive 2007 Florida — ME99792 + +#### CERTIFICATION: + +2008 Diplomate, American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, #58286 + +#### ADDITIONAL TRAINING: + +2006 Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Chicago, IL + +2007 Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Miami Beach, FL + +2008 Florida Forensic Examiner Training University of South Florida College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, Ft. Lauderdale, FL + +## SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT: + +Member, Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine + +Member, American Psychiatric Association + +Member, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +Member, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +Member, American Medical Association + +Member, Ohio Psychiatric Association + +Member, Florida Psychiatric Society + +Member, Southern Psychiatric Association + +Member, The American College of Psychiatrists + +## COMMITTEES: + +2005 - 2007 Public Relations Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +2005 - 2007 Legislative Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society 2005 - 2007 Disaster Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society 2005 - 2007 Resident and Fellows Committee, Maryland Psychiatry Society 2007 - present Psychopharmacology Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 2007 - present Research Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 2007 - 2009 Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, American Psychiatric Association 2008 - 2009 Member, New Member Task Force, Southern Psychiatric Association + +## HONORS: + +1999 Phi Beta Kappa, Johns University 2004 "Superior" performance rating, 1st-year residency, by Sinai Hospital Department of Medicine's Clinical Competency and Evaluation Committee 2005 Dorfman Award, presented by The Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine for best review article of the year for Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3):195-202, May-June 2005. 2005 Rappeport Fellowship, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +## PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES: + +2008 Written testimony on Elder Abuse in support of bills HB873/SB501 Criminal Law— Crimes Against the Elderly or Persons with a Disability— Penalties, presented to Maryland House Judiciary Committee for Delegate Kramer, District 19 County, Maryland. Hearing March 4. 2009 Central Florida Psychiatric Society representative to Florida Psychiatric Society's Council Meeting, January 10. + +2009 Testified before the Florida Senate Banking and Insurance Committee (SB 354) on Mental Health Parity. March 17. + +#### REVIEWER: + +-Archives of Internal Medicine -Clinical Geriatrics -Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness -European Psychiatry -Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience -Nature Clinical Practice Neurology -Neurology India -Psychosomatics -Social Science & Medicine -World Journal of Surgical Oncology + +### BOOK REVIEWS: + +- 1. Clark MR and Treisman GJ: Pain and Depression: An Interdisciplinary, Patient-Centered Approach. Psychosomatics, July-August 2006, 47(4)365-366. + +### PUBLICATIONS: + +- 1. **RCW, Dunlap PK,. RCW,Mill CA, Blakey RE, .J: Thyroid disease and abnormal thyroid function tests in patients with eating disorders and depression. The Journal of the Florida Medical Association, Inc. 82(3)187-192, 1995.** +- **2. RCW,Ill RCW: Anxiety and Endocrine Disease. In Popkin, MK, Seminars in Clinical Neuropsychiatry 4(2)72-83, 1998.** +- **3. DE,MI RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts. Psychosomatics 40:(1)18-27, 1999.** +- **4. RCW,Ill RCW: Fee-Splitting: Ethical Implications and Principles for Practice Management. Transference 20(2)14, 1999.** +- **5. RCW, Ill RCW: Long-term Psychological and Neurological Complications of Lindane Poisoning. Psychosomatics 40(6)513-517, 1999.** +- **6. RCW: False Allegations: The Role of the Forensic Psychiatrist. Journal of Psychiatric Practice 7(5)343-346, September 2001.** + +- 7. RCW, RCW: Principles of Physician Recruiting. In Handbook of Mental ealth Adminis ration and Management; Reid WH and Silver S (ed.): Brunner-Routledge, New York, NY; Chapter 34:440-448, 2003. +- 8. RCW, ORCW, Chapman M: Identifying Geriatric Patients at Risk for Suicide arli Depressson. Clinical Geriatrics 11(10)36-44, October 2003. +- 9. IERCW, IMIRCW: Establishing Liaison Before Disaster Strikes. http://www.psych.org/disasterpsych/pdfs/apadisasterhandbk.pdf; Chapter 2:12-19. 2004. +- 10. RCW , MRCW, Chapman MJ: Emotional and Psychiatric Effects of Weapons o ass Destruction in First Responders. In: Bioterrorism: Psychological and Public Health Interventions; Ursano RJ, Norwood AE & Fullerton CS (eds). Cambridge University Press:Cambridge; Chapter 14:250-273; 2004. +- 11. -RCW, Appleby B, RCW: Atypical Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome Presenting as Fever o nknown Origin in the Elderly. Southern Medical Journal 1(98) 114-117. January 2005. +- 12. IIIRCW, FRCW, Chapman MJ: Exploitation of the Elderly: Undue Influence as a Form of er Abuse. Clinical Geriatrics 13(2)28-36, February 2005. +- 13. .RCW, •IRCW, Chapman MJ: Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implicationso Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3)195-202, May-June 2005. +- 14. . RCW, RCW: Abuse of Supraphysiologic Doses of Anabolic Steroids. outhern M ical Journal, 98(5)550-555, May 2005. +- 15. IIIRCW, ■RCW, **Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Complications of Anabolic Steroid Abuse. Psychosomatics, 46(4)285-290, July-August 2005.** +- **16. .RCW,** ■RCW, **Chapman MJ: Medical and Psychiatric Casualties caused by Conventional and Radiological (Dirty) Bombs. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(3):242-248, May-June 2006.** +- **17. .RCW, ERCW, Chapman MJ: Postconcussional Syndrome: A Work in Progress (Response to Dr. i. Letter to the Editor. Psychosomatics, 47(3):272, May-June 2006.** +- **18. IIERCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome in the Elderly: Diagnostic Criteria, Incidence, Risk Factors, Pathophysiology, and Treatment. (CME article) Clinical Geriatrics, 14(5):39-46, 2006.** +- **19. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part I: Medical and Psychiatric Complications of Bombings and Biological, Chemical, and Nuclear Attacks. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(8):26-35, 2006.** + +- 20. El RCWINI RCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part 2: Posttraumatic Stress, Acute Stress, and Affective Disorders. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(9):17-24, 2006. +- 21. s RCW: Malingering of PTSD: forensic and diagnostic considerations, characteristics of malingerers and clinical presentations. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(6):525-535, 2006. +- 22. al ROWS RCW: A Profile of Pedophilia: Definition, Characteristics of Offenders, Recidivism, Treatment Outcomes, and Forensic Issues. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 82(4):457-471, 2007. +- 23. RCW,■1 **RCW: Detection of Malingered PTSD: An Overview of Clinical, Psychometric, and Physiological Assessment: Where Do We Stand? Journal of Forensic Sciences, 52(3):717-725, 2007.** +- **24. RCW, Macvaugh GS Ill, Merideth P. J: Commentary: Delving Further Into Liability for Psychotherapy Supervision. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 35(2):196-9, 2007.** +- **25. RCW,fl RCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Effects of Terrorism: Medical and Societal Implications of Recent Attacks. In: Focus on Terrorism, Vot 9; Linden EV (ed), Nova Science:New York; Chapter 11, Publication date: 3'd Quarter, 2007.** +- **26.** RCW,■ **RCW: The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak Model of virus properties on system capacity and function: A lesson for future viral epidemics. American Journal of Disaster Medicine, 2(5):270-276, 2007 27..** RCW,■ **RCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part 1— Causative Agents, Presentation, and Differential Diagnosis. Clinical Geriatrics, 15(12)18-25, 2007. 28 RCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part II — Pathophysiology, Drug Interactions, and Treatment. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(1):24- 28, 2008** +- **29. RCW, Resnick PJ: Psychotherapy Malpractice: New Pitfalls. Journal of Psychiatric Practice, 14(2):119-121, 2008 30 RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part I — Occurrence in Forensic/Criminal Situations, Partner Relationships, and Sexual Offenses. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(5):27-32, 2008** +- **31. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part II — Occurrence in Hospitals and PharmacologicaUBehavioral Treatment of Agitation, Aggression and Violence. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(6):28-32, 2008.** + +- 32. MRCW, IERCW, Chapman MJ. The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak: lessons hospitals and physicians can apply to future viral epidemics. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2008 Sep-Oct;30(5):446-52. Epub 2008 Jul 23 +- 33. RCW, SH: Drug Diversion Program Rights. Legal Digest. The ournal of than Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 36(4):579-580, 2008 +- 34. •RCW, ERCW, Chapman MJ: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and interventions. Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009 +- 35. Paul RK, Lockey C, MRCW, Bursztajn H: Practice Management: Managing Risks When Practicing in Three-Party Care Settings. Psychiatrictimes.com, 26(2), Feb. 3, 2009. +- 36. EIRCW, ERCW, Chapman MJ: Letter to the Editor response re: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and interventions) Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009), Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(4):17-21, 2009. +- 37. ERCW, IIIRCW, Myers W, Chapman M: Testamentary Capacity: History, Physicians' Role, Requirements, and Why Wills are Challenged. Clinical Geriatrics, in press. + +\*Boldface Indicates Ryan C. W. MI MD + +## ABSTRACTS: + +- 1. aRCW, Hazard SC, RCW,JII.ICA, Blakey RE, Thyroid Disease in Eating Disor ered anDepressed Patients. -146th Annual Meeting, American Psychiatric Association, May 25, 1993, San Francisco, CA, P.1.57 (Poster Session). +- 2. RCW, EIDE, IIIRCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide n 00 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts: Evaluation of Suicide Risk in a Time of Managed Care. + - Psychiatric Practice and Managed Care, American Psychiatric Association, Vol. 5. No. 5, P 12, Sept-Oct 1999. +- 3. ERCW, Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J: The Role of Morphine in the Development of Acute Stress Disorder and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Severe Burn Injury. + - 41u Annual Meeting, American Bum Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009. + +- 4. Gould N, McCann U, McKibben JEll RCW: Pea-traumatic Heart Rate as a Predictor of Acute Stress Disorder and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Burn Injury. + +- 41m Annual Meeting, American Bum Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009. + +\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. We, MD PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES: + +- 1. RCW, Hazard SC, Dunlap PK,I. RCW,. CA, Blakey RES J: Thyroid disease and abnormal function tests in patients with eating disorders and depression. Poster Session - American Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, May 25, 1993 +- 2. fl RCW,M RCW: Management of Hostage Situations. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999 +- 3. RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective -- Part I. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999 +- 4. I. RCW,MI RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective - Part II. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999 +- 5. RCW,M DE: Impact of Managed Care on Suicide Risk Assessment. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 1999 Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD, October 15, 1999 +- 6. RCW: Ethical Issues in Managed Care. American Psychiatric Association, 1999 Ethics Workshop, Washington, DC, November 3, 1999 +- 7. IN RCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Disaster Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000 +- 8. II RCW,M RCW: Bloterrorism Dealing with Medical and Psychiatric Consequences of Victims and Responders. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000 +- 9. RCW,M RCW: Psychiatric Consequences of Terrorism, Bloterrorism and + +Disaster. Rocky Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 29, 2000 + +- 10. ERCW, RCW: Suicide in an Era of HMO's and Managed Care. Rocky Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 30, 2000 +- 11. IMIRCW, IIRCW: Psychological Response to Disasters and Terrorism. Internationa ociety of Political Psychology, 23rd Annual Scientific Meeting, Seattle. WA, July 4, 2000 +- 12. MRCW, IMIRCW: Biological Warfare Attack Scenarios, Response to Terrorist Attacks, and Sources of Conflict. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000 +- 13. F IRCW, EfiRCW, Chapman M: Workplace Violence. American Academy of sychiatry an the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000 +- 14. IERCW, IERCW: Biological Warfare: Attack Scenarios and Public Health Issues. Grand Rounds, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, December 8, 2000 +- 15. ERCW, -RCW: Bioterrorism: A Short History of Biowarfare & Analysis of the Threat. Grand Rounds, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, August 15, 2001 +- 16. ERCW, IMRCW: Situational Suicide. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, FL, Septem er 13, 2001 +- 17. ERCW, -RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, FL. September 14, 2001 +- 18. IMIRCW, .RCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Assault with Anthrax as a Biological Weapon. -Florida Psychiatric Society, Fall Meeting, Coconut Grove, FL, November 4, 2001 -Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002 +- 19. RCW, RCW: Smallpox. Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health ciences en er, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002 +- 20. p RCKIIIRCW: Psychopharmacology - Forensic Risk and Clinical ractice: ings the clinician must know. Apopka Community Health Center, Apopka, FL, March 13, 2002 +- 21. RCW,!FRCW: Overview of Terrorism and Bioterrorism. Orlando Police Edemy, r ando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002 + +- 22.. RCW,MI RCW: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002 +- 23. MI RCW,. RCW: Smallpox as aBiological Weapon. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002 +- 24. III RCW,MI RCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Southern Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, Loews Ventana Canyon Resort, Tucson, AZ, October 3, 2002 +- 25. **RCW,IIII RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Mandatory Madness, Halifax Medical Center, Daytona USA, Daytona Beach, FL, December 14, 2002 26.. RCW,. RCW, Chapman MJ: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003** +- **27. RCW,. RCW: Medical and Psychological Sequelae of Bombings: Implications for First Responders and Critical Government Staff. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003** +- **28. ROW,. RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Florida Psychiatric Society Spring Meeting, Orlando, FL, April 5, 2003** +- **29. ROW,. RCW: Terrorist Bombings: Medical and Psychiatric Impact. Southern Psychiatric Association's Annual Meeting, Nashville, TN, October 11, 2003** +- **30. IN RCW, RCW: Terrorism, Bombings, and Psychiatric Casualties. University of Florida, Department of Psychiatry, Visiting Professor Program, November 7, 2003** +- **31. RCW,. RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Tampa Bay Psychiatric Society, Tampa, FL, sponsored by Pfizer, January 29, 2004** +- **32. RCW,. RCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004** +- **33. III RCW, RCW: Medical and Psychiatric Casualties of Terrorist Bombings. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004** +- **34. III RCW, RCW: Medical and Psychological Consequences of Bombings. Grand Rounds, Tulane University, Department of Psychiatry, New Orleans, LA, January 28, 2005** +- **35. III RCW, RCW: Psychological Sequelae of Weapons of Mass Destruction on First Responders. South Central Center for Public Health** + +Preparedness/Alabama Department of Public Health, iAL, Satellite Conference. May 6, 2005 + +- 36. laRCW, laCW: Medical and Psychological Aspects of Terrorist Bombings. rand Rounds, Sinai Hospital, Department of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, June 2, 2005 +- 37. RRCW: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationsh p: he New Realities. (Abbreviated version) Forensic Psychiatry Fellows and Residents, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, January 24, 2006 +- 38. EIRCW, IIIRCW Chapman MJ: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationship: The New Realities. Presidential Address. Southern Psychiatric Association, Baltimore, MD, September 30, 2006. +- 39. IIERCW, IIIIRCW: When the System is Overwhelmed: Protecting the Provider during Biodisaster. Satellite Conference, University of Alabama Birmingham South Central Center for Public Health Preparedness/Alabama Department of Public Health/Tulane University School of Public Health, AL, February 27. 2007. +- 40. F RCW: Testamentary Capacity from Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole RikGrand ounds, Case Western Reserve School of Medicine, Cleveland, 8, 2008 +- 41. EIRCW, RCW, Rundell JR, Winstead DK: Psychiatrists' Role in Disaster Management: essons Learned. Course 14, American Psychiatric Association. Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, May 3, 2008. +- 42. RCW: Violence in the Elderly: Forensic and Treatment Concerns. Forensic ovum, Florida Psychiatric Society, ChampionsGate, FL, September 20, 2008. +- 43. RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole a P./ hem Psychiatric Association, September 25, 2008. +- 44. RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole a Ensic Psychiatry Program, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, January 29, 2009. +- 45. -RCW, ERCW: Domestic Violence as Portrayed in Film A Realistic Appraisal? Florida Psychiatric Society, St. Petersburg Beach, FL, March 20, 2009. 46 ERCW, Silberman E, Preven D, Weissman S (chairperson): Indications for the Use of Combined Talking Therapy and Pharmacotherapy and How to Teach in Residency. Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, CW16, American Psychiatric Association, San Francisco, CA, May 19, 2009. + +• Boldface indicates Ryan C. W. M, MD + +#### MEDIA: + +- 1. Time Magazine, Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome, May 16, 2005 +- 2. Reach MD Radio, Pedophilia. April 25, 2007 +- 3. MD Consult. Doug Joint telephone interview with Richard C. W. ■. **MD, Pedophilia. May 2, 2007** +- **4. The Korean Broadcasting System, KBS Special, Pedophilia. March 11, 2008.** +- **5. Tony Pipitone, WKMG-TV Channel 6, Mothers Who Kill Their Children. October 28, 2008.** +- **6. J. L. Orlando Medical News. Cyberchondriacs. November 13, 2008.** +- **7. Fox 35 News, Orlando. Forensic Implications of Anthony case. December 11, 2008.** +- **8. Fox 35 News, Orlando. The Anthony Case: DNA Evidence. December 12, 2008.** +- **9. Jessica WKMG-TV Channel 6. The Anthony Case: Baker Act and Stressors. January 23, 2009.** +- **10. Nam Nae Won and Jihyun Song. Korea Educational Broadcasting System. Pedophilia. March 30, 2009.** +- **11. Keith Landry, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress and Financial Strain. June 15, 2009.** +- **12. Heidi Hatch, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress on Families. June 16, 2009.** \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746602/EFTA02746602.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746602/EFTA02746602.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ca6a4b330b9fac19a9fcd7ae94a96f338f16353a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746602/EFTA02746602.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,961 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746602.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 22589, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.86, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "CURRICULUM VITAE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.204, + 366.93 + ], + [ + 366.3862609863281, + 366.93 + ], + [ + 366.3862609863281, + 382.4470520019531 + ], + [ + 255.204, + 382.4470520019531 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TABLE OF CONTENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 365.976, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 365.976, + 111.78000000000002 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 111.78000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRESENT POSITION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 195.3759002685547, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 195.3759002685547, + 226.7005615234375 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 226.7005615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EDUCATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.00800000000001, + 406.62 + ], + [ + 155.24618530273438, + 406.62 + ], + [ + 155.24618530273438, + 421.7005615234375 + ], + [ + 82.00800000000001, + 421.7005615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDICAL LICENSE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 188.62571716308594, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 188.62571716308594, + 116.4405517578125 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 116.4405517578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 175.76999999999998 + ], + [ + 173.62359619140625, + 175.76999999999998 + ], + [ + 173.62359619140625, + 189.570556640625 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 189.570556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ADDITIONAL TRAINING:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 236.51999999999998 + ], + [ + 211.50230407714844, + 236.51999999999998 + ], + [ + 211.50230407714844, + 250.7005615234375 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 250.7005615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.00800000000001, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 333.3656005859375, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 333.3656005859375, + 408.9405517578125 + ], + [ + 82.00800000000001, + 408.9405517578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COMMITTEES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 83.844, + 636.66 + ], + [ + 163.86859130859375, + 636.66 + ], + [ + 163.86859130859375, + 651.570556640625 + ], + [ + 83.844, + 651.570556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "HONORS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.396, + 328.05 + ], + [ + 137.2425537109375, + 328.05 + ], + [ + 137.2425537109375, + 342.9405517578125 + ], + [ + 81.396, + 342.9405517578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.396, + 534.6 + ], + [ + 236.25643920898438, + 534.6 + ], + [ + 236.25643920898438, + 549.9405517578125 + ], + [ + 81.396, + 549.9405517578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REVIEWER:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 146.9958038330078, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 146.9958038330078, + 163.7005615234375 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 163.7005615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BOOK REVIEWS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 174.75082397460938, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 174.75082397460938, + 334.320556640625 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 334.320556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PUBLICATIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 170.63308715820312, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 170.63308715820312, + 408.2005615234375 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 408.2005615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ABSTRACTS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.396, + 417.96 + ], + [ + 156.38352966308594, + 417.96 + ], + [ + 156.38352966308594, + 433.320556640625 + ], + [ + 81.396, + 433.320556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDIA:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 123.3700180053711, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 123.3700180053711, + 122.83056640625 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 122.83056640625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 87 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "TableOfContents", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 74 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 93 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 86 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 367 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746602" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746616/EFTA02746616.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746616/EFTA02746616.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d666b5759727b941787b548a7db90619dbd1ecd4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746616/EFTA02746616.md @@ -0,0 +1,222 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### Defendant, Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion To Compel Plaintiff's Independent Medical Examination Pursuant to Rule 35 + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his attorneys, and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 35 and other applicable rules, hereby moves this Court for an order directing that the Plaintiff, Jane Doe (case #80893), submit to a compulsory psychological/psychiatric medical examination (a/k/a independent medical examination) by Ryan ■, **M.D. of Richard** ■, **M.D. at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP. located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401. In support, Epstein states:** + +### **Background** + +**1. This Court entered an order relating to the IME of CMA, another Plaintiff seeking similar damages against Epstein. See Exhibit "A." Given the damages claimed in this matter, it is clear that Plaintiff has placed her medical condition at issue and that an IME is required. Despite that fact and the fact that discovery has been** + +consolidated, Plaintiffs counsel has refused to produce Jane Doe for an IME without the undersigned having to file a Rule 35 Motion. Thus, the undersigned believes that an Omnibus Order is required relative to all the Plaintiffs" IMEs in that each claim similar damages and raise similar claims. Such an order would conserve judicial resources and require that the attorneys only negotiate dates and times for said IMEs. + +2. Nonetheless, this particular Motion, pursuant to Rule 35, only addresses the IME of Jane Doe. + +3. Plaintiff has alleged in her action that Defendant sexually battered her and "caused her emotional distress, past and future suffering, physical injury, pain and suffering, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of her child hood, loss of dignity, invasion of privacy, and other damages associated with Defendant . . . [andjcontrolling, manipulating, and coercing her into a perverse and unconventional way of life for a minor. The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses and. . . will in the future suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. Plaintiff . . .has suffered a loss of income, a loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of capacity to enjoy life. These injuries are permanent in nature and Plaintiff . . . will continue to suffer these losses in the future." See Paragraph 28, First Amended Complaint. (DE 38) and Paragraph 34 thereof. Plaintiff also claims Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress. See Paragraph 35-40, First Amended Complaint. (DE 38) + +4. Additionally, see Plaintiffs answers to interrogatories, in response to interrogatory numbers 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10 and 11 wherein Plaintiff claims (a) she worked at + +various strip clubs, (b) she was arrested for shop lifting, (c) that she has seen therapists, (d) that she was emotionally and psychologically damaged, (e) that she suffered from PTSD prior to or at the time of the incident alleged in the complaint, (f) that she incurred medical and psychological expenses in the past and will to continue to incur same into the future, (g) that she suffered mental anguish, emotional distress, fear, humiliation and psychological trauma as a result of her alleged encounter with Epstein, and (h) that she was admitted to Milton Girl's Juvenile Residential Facility, a Shelter in West Palm Beach and a Drug Center in West Palm Beach. Certainly, all of the above experiences go directly to the heart of her allegations (i.e., damages) in that Epstein's medical examiner is entitled to know whether any experiences in her life pre-Epstein caused any of the emotional, physical and psychological trauma she attempts to pawn-off on Epstein. See Responses to Interrogatories, Exhibit "B". + +5. It is important for this court to review the detailed Affidavit of Dr. ■ **attached hereto in that it delineates for the Court several experiences visited upon Jane Doe which may have caused the physical, emotional and psychological trauma she claims occurred at the hands of Epstein, including, but not limited to, child neglect, drug use, being a child runaway, having domestic issues, suffering from PTSD, and her father beating her step-brother to death and serving iail time as a result thereof. See Affidavit of Dr.** ■ **Attached hereto as Exhibit "C". See also Police Reports at Composite Exhibit "D".** + +**6. Based upon the foregoing, it is clear that Jane Doe has placed her physical, emotional, medical and psychological conditions at issue. Therefore, and IME** + +is warranted. Without an IME, Epstein would be severely prejudiced. The Affidavit of Dr.. clearly sets out the IME and scope of the examination that must be conducted. + +See also, the curriculum vitae of Dr. Ryan. See Exhibit "E". The examination is set to occur at the undersigned office on October 13, 14, 15 or 16, 2009 (whichever is more convenient for Plaintiff or whichever date the court so orders). Plaintiff will not provide dates for the IME; however, out of abundance of caution and to comply with the applicable rule, Defendant has, on a unilateral basis set same pending the outcome of this Motion. Obviously, if the date noticed is not sufficient or agreeable, the undersigned will renotice same for one of the four dates suggested. + +7. As this court is well aware, Plaintiff and Defendant are required to complete discovery under the deadlines set by this court. It is not the undersigned's intention to require the court additional work; however, it is imperative that discovery be timely scheduled and completed. The court's assistance is needed in this instance as to the IME. + +8. Based upon the foregoing, an IME of Plaintiff must occur in order to address her claims and the damages she seeks to recover. The IME is expected to last between 6-8 hours, and the scope of same is set forth in the Affidavit. + +9. Pursuant to Rule 35, Fed.R.Civ.Pro, a party may move for an examination by a qualified examiner if the Plaintiff's mental/emotional and/or psychological status is at issue in a case. + +10. Defendant would be severely prejudiced unless he is able to have an examination conducted by a qualified examiner separate and apart from any + +psychologist/psychiatrist or similar behavioral health provider who may have or may ultimately see the Plaintiff and testify in court. + +11. Defendant's counsel has retained the services of Richard M.D. and Ryan al M.D., of C.W. M.D., P.A. located at 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd., #219 Lake Mary, FL 32746. Ryan ■ **M.D., will be performing the examination. Dr. Ryan Halls' specialties include forensic psychiatry, general psychiatry and medical psychiatry. See Exhibit "C" attached to DE 245 outlining Ryan • M.D.'s qualifications and the scope of the examination which he intends and is required to conduct in order to render a report. See also Affidavit of Ryan C.W. M.D., outlining the scope of examination and other Rule 35 requirements. Accordingly, this motion comports with Rule 35. The applicable notice has been filed simultaneously. Defendant will arrange for a videotape of the examination.** + +**12. The undersigned is requesting the court's assistance with regard to compelling the IME of Plaintiff along with dates for same to occur.** + +# Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff by telephone and by e-mail; however, an agreement has not been reached. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an Order: + +- a. providing a date and time for Plaintiff's IME to occur on October 13, 14, 15 or 16, 2009; +- b. providing that the independent medical examination take place at 9:00 a.m. (on a date to be determined by the court) at the law firm of Burman, Critton, + +> Luttier and Coleman, LLP. located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401 under the protocol set forth by Dr.. in his affidavit, by videotape and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +### Rule 7.1 Certification + +I hereby certify that counsel for the respective parties communicated by telephone in a good faith effort to resolve the discovery issues prior to the filing of this motion. Counsel was unable to resolve the issues outlined herein. + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified n th ollowing Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this ,-day of , 2009 + +Respectfully su + +By: R . CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +orida Bar No. 224162 + +rcritabciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. ██████, Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Brad ██████ Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. ██████, Esq. +██████ Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 +Fax: 561-515-2610 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-08804* +[skuvin@riccilaw.com](mailto:skuvin@riccilaw.com) +[tleopold@riccilaw.com](mailto:tleopold@riccilaw.com) + +cc. Dr. Ryan [REDACTED] + +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746616/EFTA02746616.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746616/EFTA02746616.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b8da942f07d7f0cbb9a9b8f1395cc03decd146ea --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746616/EFTA02746616.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,489 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746616.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 12370, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.92, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 412.0253601074219, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 412.0253601074219, + 102.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 102.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant, Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion To Compel Plaintiff's Independent Medical \nExamination Pursuant to Rule 35", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 361.3074951171875 + ], + [ + 525.17626953125, + 361.3074951171875 + ], + [ + 525.17626953125, + 389.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 389.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 271.728, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 347.7705993652344, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 347.7705993652344, + 610.3374938964844 + ], + [ + 271.728, + 610.3374938964844 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 173.19599999999997, + 494.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 446.3711853027344, + 494.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 446.3711853027344, + 513.1024780273438 + ], + [ + 173.19599999999997, + 513.1024780273438 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 191.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 366.5740661621094, + 191.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 366.5740661621094, + 205.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 205.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.412, + 299.70000000000005 + ], + [ + 371.6554260253906, + 299.70000000000005 + ], + [ + 371.6554260253906, + 315.1800231933594 + ], + [ + 245.412, + 315.1800231933594 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 686.0699999999999 + ], + [ + 366.4051208496094, + 686.0699999999999 + ], + [ + 366.4051208496094, + 702.1125030517578 + ], + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 702.1125030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.72, + 107.73000000000002 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 107.73000000000002 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 189.72, + 119.88 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746616" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746624/EFTA02746624.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746624/EFTA02746624.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..afb250a9f81da4f92a4cf91a7adf8e0c7b3cc197 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746624/EFTA02746624.md @@ -0,0 +1,117 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE (80893) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan M, M.D. of C.W. M, M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on October 13, 2009 at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luther and Coleman, LLP, located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring a sweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. See infra and Motion attached at DE (301) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well. + +2. Plaintiff has not agreed to this date; however, unless a timely and valid objection to this Notice is made, the Plaintiff is required by this Rule to be in attendance at the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as a witness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (301). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (301). See Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documen s h provided to the Plaintiffs counsel and, therefore, sufficient noti ade. + +> By: MI . PIKE, Fl 'da Bar 4617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this /5" day of September, 2009 + +By: ROB ON, JR., ESQ. Flo ar . 224162 it@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bc1claw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case 08-80811 reelrhw@,hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.. Esq. + +Brad Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp@law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. =, Esq. No. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, 08-80469 +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +08-08804 + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746624/EFTA02746624.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746624/EFTA02746624.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..122cad6628ef052d2d21b8ef7856650ffb9eb105 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746624/EFTA02746624.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,257 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746624.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5282, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.94, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 412.8403625488281, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 412.8403625488281, + 101.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 101.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF \nPLAINTIFF, JANE DOE (80893)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.86, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 520.09912109375, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 520.09912109375, + 392.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 94.86, + 392.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 364.20050048828125, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 364.20050048828125, + 529.10302734375 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 529.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.108, + 238.14 + ], + [ + 522.0360000000001, + 238.14 + ], + [ + 522.0360000000001, + 280.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 189.108, + 280.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 135 + ], + [ + "Line", + 67 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 56 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746624" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746628/EFTA02746628.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746628/EFTA02746628.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3b7a0f2f51051ae788cabb778d597c7252612d53 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746628/EFTA02746628.md @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARal + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +0840232, 08-80380, 0840381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 0840811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 0940591, 0940656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228). For the following reasons said Motion is granted. + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant , allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm beach, New York and St. , with the promise of money in + +exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +By the instant Motion Epstein seeks an order compelling MES, one of the Plaintiffs, in the case, to submit to an independent psychological/psychiatric medical examination by Ryan ElII, M.D., presently scheduled for September 8, 2009. EMI has agreed to submit to said exam, but requests the Court impose certain restrictions. Since the filing of the Motion the parties have managed to resolve some of the issues involved, such as the proposed examination's time and date and MINE request to have a representative from her team present at said examination. As for the latter issue, Defendant has agreed to provide, at his expense, a video feed and monitor in an adjacent room for Plaintiffs representative's use. The remaining issues involve Plaintiff's request for a court order limiting the scope of the proposed examination by disallowing repeated questioning regarding "highly sensitive areas of inquiry including Plaintiff's medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history, substance abuse history, etc.,'and imposing certain time restraints on the examination itself. + +Plaintiffs request to limit the scope of the examination is denied. It is Dr. + +&#x27; See Pltff's Resp. to Rep.(D.E. #279), p.3. + +routine procedure when conducting psychological/psychiatric medical examinations of patients to require the patient to fill out a 10-page "Life History Questionnaire" and a 14-page "Patient Questionnaire." Both questionnaires request detailed background information regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like. Presumably Plaintiff will be asked these same questions two more times, first by defense counsel at.= deposition scheduled to take place shortly, and again by Dr.. at the upcoming examination. Plaintiff's objection is that by having to answer these same questions about the same subject matter three separate times "would only serve to embarrass, humiliate, intimidate and further victimize Plaintiff." Pltff s Resp. (D.E. #254), p.6. Plaintiffs position is that she should only "be required to regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like, if at all, only one time," either during the "deposition of Plaintiff or through Dr. examination, but certainly not both." Id. + +Plaintiff cites no case law and independent research has uncovered none, to support her novel position that a Plaintiff who puts her mental, emotional and psychiatric state at issue can place a limitation on the number of times defense counsel or agents retained by him can inquire into areas relevant to these issues where the subject matter involved is "highly personal," "embarrassing," "sensitive," or otherwise "humiliating." Plaintiff is seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, "physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional + +distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, [and] invasion of her privacy." 2 Based on the allegations made in Defendant's Reply? Plaintiffs childhood was, to put it mildly, a difficult one, with numerous episodes of child abuse and sexual abuse, which in turn may of been the cause of Plaintiff's later engaging in numerous instances of substance abuse, self-mutilation, prostitution, aggravated assault, truancy, and the like. According to Defendant, in 2005 Plaintiffs mother filed a case committing MEI for a Petition for Involuntary Assessment for substance abuse, stating in the accompanying file that has been diagnosed as "Bipoloar and Schizophrenic."' + +Under these circumstances, where Plaintiff is seeking to recover medical expenses associated with these complex medical issues, full knowledge of Plaintiffs past and present medical, psychological, familial and social histories is essential. And while neither duplication nor embarrassment is desired, under the circumstances presented, where the number and scope of damages claimed are vast and Plaintiffs past history eventful, it may nonetheless be unavoidable. This is not to say that restrictions on the scope of questioning may never be put into effect. If, as the case progresses, Plaintiff can show that Defendant's invasive questioning + +2 Plaintiff, First Am. Compl., Counts I-XXX. + +(D.E. #273), pp.7-8, + +`As quoted in Defs Rep. (D.E. #273), p.8, from Palm Beach County Case #05MH1667. + +is being done in bad faith or for purposes of harassment, the Court may reconsider imposing limitations of the sort requested herein. At this point, however, the Court agrees with Defendant that to restrict the number of times defense counsel may ask Plaintiff personal and sensitive questions concerning some of the pivotal issues in this case, would work an injustice by preventing Defendant from being able to defend himself. + +The Court likewise rejects Plaintiff's request to limit the time for conducting the examination and any related testing to 6 hours. Dr..has filed an affidavit stating that he needs 6-8 hours to conduct the examination and related testing, and that anything less than that might result in compromising the test results.s Considering the 31 counts alleged against Defendant, as well as Plaintiff's event-filled past, the amount of time sought does not appear unreasonable. Should the length of time prove draining, Plaintiff may take breaks as needed, of reasonable duration. Furthermore, Defense Counsel and Dr. Mare hereby put on notice that while the Court has allowed the full 8 hours requested for the examination and related testing, should less time be needed, the Court expects less time will be taken, and in no event may the examination and related testing exceed a total of 8 hours. In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228) is GRANTED IN + +s Affidavit of Dr. ■, **attached as Ex. "B" to Defendant's Rep. (D.E. #273).** + +## ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF. + +DONE AND ORDERED this September 4, 2009, in , at West Palm Beach, + +Florida. + +t.)-2 ..l' OC7c5 40t—\_/ LINNEA R. JO ON UNITED STA S MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746628/EFTA02746628.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746628/EFTA02746628.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..77a9963a965be3fb3bf7ba95a1160d83b4a40dbc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746628/EFTA02746628.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,318 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746628.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 7695, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.23, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 409.275390625, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 409.275390625, + 116.67352294921875 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 116.67352294921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 287.02799999999996, + 387.18 + ], + [ + 336.8460388183594, + 387.18 + ], + [ + 336.8460388183594, + 403.17352294921875 + ], + [ + 287.02799999999996, + 403.17352294921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.784, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 346.98956298828125, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 346.98956298828125, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 80.784, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746628" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746634/EFTA02746634.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746634/EFTA02746634.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fe681db2eb589dde1aa5c858cb0d5d5ffa1c6aa2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746634/EFTA02746634.md @@ -0,0 +1,64 @@ +**The Psychological Trauma Center** +a division of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc. +Medical Director: Gilbert W. Kliman, M. D. + +2105 Divisadero St., San Francisco, CA 94115 +Phone (415)292-7119 Fax (415) 749-2802 +[www.expertchildpsychiatry.com](http://www.expertchildpsychiatry.com) + +--- + +*Forensic Child Psychiatric Evaluations, Life Care Plans & Testimony* + +Tape 2 + +[REDACTED] with Dr. Kliman +12/2/08 + +Transcription by: K. Rios + +00:00:05 + +Dr. Kliman: This is the second tape we're making today; you know I realized that I didn't get your preference for what you would like me to call you. + +[REDACTED] Oh [REDACTED] + +Dr. Kliman: [REDACTED] I apologize. + +[REDACTED] That's okay. + +Dr. Kliman: The time is now 3:27 and you were telling me when I asked you about other bad things that happened in college, you mentioned some thing's that were; sounded more like there in obstacles category rather than in harmful things like your soccer got in the way of international business and biology; but you finally finished international business with an A; and your gonna be taking biology so I was thinking of those as obstacles. While, the problems with your alcoholic drug abusing disappointing boyfriend whom you cared about so much that sounds like a stressful problem. Now...when you had those troubles with your boyfriend would you say that those were serious problems for you, emotionally? + +[REDACTED] Emotionally, yes I cared about him but I mean you can only take so much; I mean I was with him, known him for like 5 years; and after a while you just kinda like... you realize like you love the person but your not in love with the person; and that's kinda like, kinda how what happened to me; like I loved him and I knew I wasn't in love with him that's not the person I wanted to be with. So I mean, I took me like 3 years to realize that; 2 ½ years I mean the last like two years I mean there was really nothing there I just kinda of kept going back to the like same old same old and after a while you just, I don't know; I didn't want to be with him anymore. + +"B" + +or + +00:02:39 + +Dr. Kliman: What emotional reactions did you have to this change in your relationship? + +S + +00:03:47 + +Dr. Kliman: How long did it take you between the time of the restraining order and the time of meeting someone else? + +Dr. Kliman: Last week of the first year of college? + +S Yeah + +Dr. Minim: Freshman year? + +r + +00:05:15 + +Nothing really, I mean its not like I was around him all the time because I lived in Boca and he was living in Jacksonville. So it wasn't like he was around all the time for me to like really be disappointed because when I went to college I was single, I was by myself. I was going up to Jacksonville pretty much like every weekend though to go visit him, but I was used to like being by myself throughout the week and like the girls on my team were there to help me and support me and like one of my roommate was kinda of like going through the same thing; so we were both kinda there for each other; and I don't know, I just have...I have alot of good friends there to help me like, I was going out with my friends get my mind off of it and eventually that's when I met...I ended up meeting somebody else he kinda filled that void for me. + +Well.../ got the restraining order when I was probably like 17 years old; and I got back together with Preston when I was probably around 18. So its not like the restraining order was what made me stop seeing Preston. I met Allan, I knew Allan...my new boyfriend; Imet him at the end; like the last week of college. He goes to my school. + +Yeah my freshman year so I didn't really know him; I o whim for like aweek and then Sophomore year when I got back toll'. I just like knew of him me and him were like friends. There was nothing there like freshman year; like we were just friends. Like when I would go out in Boca I'd see him out; and finally whenever I cut all ties with my exboyfriend Iwould go out all the time, go out with my fiiends and like we would hang out alot more like in the beginning of my junior year. Is whenever things like were really good between me an Allan. + +Dr. Kliman: Does he spell his name with an "B"? \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746634/EFTA02746634.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746634/EFTA02746634.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..41adf8e6b45c86fcd9d9d692fc5f097a11349645 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746634/EFTA02746634.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746634.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 4282, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.17, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "The Psychological Trauma Center a division of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc. Medical Director: Gilbert W. Kliman, M. D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 188.496, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 446.76, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 446.76, + 125.55000000000001 + ], + [ + 188.496, + 125.55000000000001 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 429 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 513 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746634" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746636/EFTA02746636.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746636/EFTA02746636.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ccde975efabaa6047b34a20f70d288b94fb005d8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746636/EFTA02746636.md @@ -0,0 +1,117 @@ +Date: 6/16/09 +Time: 13:00:34 + +PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT +Offense Report + +Page: 1 +Program: CMS301L + +Day Of Week : Monday +Occur From Date: 9/20/04 21:30 +Dept Class : BATTERY SIMPLE +Street Number : LAMANCHA, [REDACTED] +City : [REDACTED] PALM BEACH, FL 33411 +Zone/division : Zone One (1) (No of Okee) +Location Type : RES-SNGL FAMILY +Report Officer : PIES, [REDACTED] +Verif. Employee: [REDACTED], JR., JOHN 9/21/04 +Case Status Dt : 9/20/04 + +Report Date : 9/20/04 22:31 +Occur To Date : 9/20/04 22:31 +Case Status : OPEN / NOT ACTIVE +Supervisory Emp: [REDACTED], [REDACTED] 9/21/04 + +\*\*\*\*\* A D D I T I O N A L T I M E S \*\*\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-04-003966 Date Dispatched: 9/20/04 22:37 +Date Arrived : 9/20/04 22:45 Date Cleared : 9/21/04 1:00 + +\*\*\*\*\* C A S E M A N A G E M E N T I N F O R M A T I O N \*\*\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-04-003966 Dept Class : BATTERY SIMPLE +Case Status : OPEN / NOT ACTIVE +Investigator : PIES, T. +Case Status Dt : 9/20/04 + +\*\*\*ASSIGNMENT HISTORY\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-04-003966 Dept Unit : PATROL/Law Enforcement +Investigator : PIES, [REDACTED] Supervisor : ROBKIN, ROBERT +Assignment Date: 9/22/04 + +\*\*\*\*\* O F F E N S E R E P O R T # 1 \*\*\*\*\* +State Class : Battery Simple Attmpt/Committ : Committed +Statute/Ordin : 784.03(1)(A) Weapon Type : Hands/Fists/Feet +State Dispo : Committed by Adult or Adult/Juv + +\*\*\*\*\* O F F E N S E P R I M A R Y R E L A T I O N S H I P S \*\*\*\*\* +Offense #: 001 Battery Simple / / 784.03(1)(A) +Name #...: 001 (SUSP) VINYARD, PRESTON +Name #...: 001 (VICT) [REDACTED] + +\*\*\*\*\* N A M E P R I M A R Y R E L A T I O N S H I P S \*\*\*\*\* +Name #...: 001 (VICT) [REDACTED] +Name #...: 001 (SUSP) VINYARD, PRESTON / BOYFRIEND/GIRLFRIEND + +\*\*\*\*\* S U S P E C T / A R R E S T E E I N F O R M A T I O N - # 1 \*\* +Case Number : 1-04-003966 Prompt valid in: VINYARD, PRESTON +Street Number : [REDACTED] +City : [REDACTED] PALM BEACH, FL 33411 +Birth Date : 4/05/1980 24 Maximum Age : 24 +Oper Lic No. : [REDACTED] FL UNITED STATES +Race : White Sex : Male +Ethnic Origin : UNKNOWN / OTHER Minimum Height : 509 +Maximum Height : 510 Juvenile : ADULT + +\*\*\*\*\* V I C T I M I N F O R M A T I O N - # 1 \*\*\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-04-003966 Prompt valid in: [REDACTED] +Street Number : [REDACTED] +City : ROYAL PALM BEACH, FL 33411 + +"C" + +Date: 6/16/09 Time: 13:00:34 PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Offense Report + +Page: 2 Program: CMS301L + +Home Phone No. : Oper Lic No. Race Ethnic Origin Victim Type . Can Identify . Injury Extent Med Treatment : UNKNOWN / OTHER : Juvenile : Yes : Minor : Not Applicable Birth Date . : 6/06/1987 17 FL UNITED STATES Sex Female Juvenile . . . : JUVENILE File Charges . No Victim Sobriety: UNKNOWN Injury Type 1 : Other + +1-04-003966 (Continued) + +NARRATIVkil Original Reported By: PIES, Entered By.: i , Reviewed By: , JR., JOHN C. 9/20/04 9/20/04 9/21/04 + +Iwas dispatched to in reference to a battery. Upon arrival, I met w , who stated that while she was with her boyfrie • a '-ra Ave., they began arguing. Her boyfriend, Mr. Preston Vinyard, grabbed her around her neck and be an spitting on her, accusing her of cheating on him. stated that when she tried to leave, she tried to bite et w , but he bit her on the finger. I observed that upper li was eginning to swell up, and her finger was ruised. stated that she did not wa to rosecute Preston to a ery. Information ern was given to about segking\_a restraining order. Preston is apparently vat 147 I'm Ave. at this time. He was not at the residence at the time of this report. + +\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* \* \* \* \* \* END OF REPORT + +**PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE +CENTRAL RECORDS +FSS EXEMPTIONS/CONFIDENTIAL** + +- 119.071(2)(c) active criminal intelligence/active criminal investigative information +- 119.071(2)(d) Comprehensive policies or plans pertaining to the mobilization deployment or tactical operations involved in responding to emergencies. (Deputies schedules) +- 119.071(2)(e) confessions +- 119.071(2)(f) confidential informants +- 119.071(5)(g)1, Biometric Identification Information (Eingerprints, palm prints, and footprints) +- 365.171(15) identity of 911 caller or person requesting emergency service +- 119.071(4)(d)(1) home address, telephone, soc. security #, photos of active/former LE personnel, spouses and children +- 316.066(5)(a) crash reports are confidential for period of 60 days after the report is filed +- 119.071(2)(h) (1) I'd. of victim of sexual battery, lewd and lascivious offense upon person less than 16 years old, child abuse, sexual offense +- 119.071(2)(l) assets of crime victim +- 985.04(1) juvenile offender records +- 119.071(5)(a)(5) social security numbers held by agency +- 119.0712(2) personal information contained in a motor vehicle record +- 119.071(5)(b) bank account #, debit, charge and credit card #s held by an agency +- 395.3025(7)(a) and/or 456.057(7)(a) medical information +- 394.4615(7) mental health information +- 119.071(2)(b) criminal intelligence/investigative information from a non-Florida criminal justice agency +- 943.053/943.0525 NCIC/FCIC/FBI and in-state FDLE/DOG +- 119.071(4)(c) undercover personnel +- 119.07(4)(d) extra fee if request is voluminous or requires extensive personnel, technology +- OTHER: \_\_\_\_\_ + +*Royal Rainbow* +Case number: 04-3966 + +Clerk ID: 8463 + +Date: 6-16-09 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746636/EFTA02746636.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746636/EFTA02746636.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f49d44d29e6e15e827a34dac9d4631df8a372c10 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746636/EFTA02746636.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,169 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746636.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 5411, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.3, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Offense Report", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 194.61599999999999, + 60.75 + ], + [ + 428.4, + 60.75 + ], + [ + 428.4, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 194.61599999999999, + 83.42999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE CENTRAL RECORDS FSS EXEMPTIONS/CONFIDENTIAL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 66.42 + ], + [ + 441.8639999999999, + 66.42 + ], + [ + 441.8639999999999, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 109.35000000000001 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 320 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746636" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746639/EFTA02746639.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746639/EFTA02746639.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5ec9f60c9ffe58bdb07f77ab20158b42482d06cc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746639/EFTA02746639.md @@ -0,0 +1,278 @@ +• + +• • + +#### IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +Case No.: DA 6•020134 la-3S—XXX1C018 • • ion: Ft + +Petitioner, + +9/1: 1 + +rI Oen 8c nt tnyA Va Respondent. and + +:7 Cy: 1V '1:1 "1•• LRN + +# PETITION FOR INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST DATING VIOLENCE + +I, (full legal name)ea, being sworn, certifythat the following statements are true: + +# SECTION I. PETITIONER (This section is about you. It must be corn • leted. + +- 1. Date of Birth of Petitioner: [4. if applies] 1,1 Petitioner seeks an Injunction for protection on beim Petitioner is the parent or legal guardian of (full legal name aminor child who is living at home. +- 2. Filing Fees [ d one only) + - a. Petitioner is paying the filing fee and sheriffs (or other authorized law enforcement agency's) service fees. + - b. Petitioner does not have enough money to pay the filing fee or service fees and is filing an Affidavit and Motion for Waiver of Fees for Petition for Injunction for Protection, %O Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.980(a), and a Family Law Financial Affidavit, grba Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure Fonn 12.902(b) or (c). Petitioner asks that hefsbe not have to pay the fees necessary to process the petition and serve the injunction and any motions or orders needed to enforce the injunction, subject to later order(s) of the Court about the payment of such fees. +- 3. Petitioner's attorney's name, address, and telephone number is: (If you do not have an attorney, write "none.") + +Florida Supreme Court Approved Furth. Low Form 12.980(o). Petition ibr Injunction for Protection Again% Dating Violence (05/03) Page lot 5 + +sly + +#### IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +Case No.: pA 60e0t)1 Oft O it??3S-Mkina 4 . • ion: FS + +O Petitioner, + +and • 0 • + +neePre3 I Oln &ott Mnvora Respondent. + +# PETITION FOR INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST DATING VIDLENICE + +I, (full legal name) , being sworn, certify that t the following statements are true: + +### SECTION I. PETITIONER (This section is about you. It must be corn • feted. + +- 1. Date of Birth of Petitioner: + +[I if applies) + +I, Petitioner seeks an Injunction for protection on beha Petitioner is the parent or legal guardian of (full legal name aminor child who is living at home. + +### 2. Filing Fees + +[ 1 one only] + +- a. Petitioner is paying the filing fee and sheriffs (or other authorized law enforcement agencys) service fees. +- b. Petitioner does not have enough money to pay the filing fee or service fees and is filing an Affidavit and Motion for Waiver of Fees for Petition for Injunction for Protection, %CI Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.980(a), and a Family Law Financial Affidavit, %CI Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure Form 12.902(b) or (c). Petitioner asks that he/she not have to pay the fees necessary to process the petition and serve the injunction and any motions or orders needed to enforce the injunction, subject to later order(s) of the Court about the payment of such fees. + +3. Petitioner's attorney's name, address, and telephone number is: (If you do not have an attorney, write "none.") + +• • + +#### SECTION IL RESPONDENT (This section is about the person you want to be protected from. It must be completed.) + +- 1. Respondent currently EMlaille lives at: [address, city, state, and zip code) 4-resterirk gb•li (A 1 PCA I m . tatt \_ C I - -1 FL M 3LI I 1 Respondent's Driver's License number is: (if btown) +- 2. Petitioner has known Respondent since (date) \_TonucivtA 1 , 700 2\_ +- 3. Respondent's last known place of employment: Un Lnel.l31/1 Employment address: 1\.1 I II Working hours: N I A +- 4. Physical description of Respondent: Race: Nn,/ Sex: Male N/ Female Date of Birth: Li 105 1 1C4 0 Height: 5 'L " Weight: 17I 4, Eye Color: Hair Color: (it v 1- \.1 n1 C4111 Distinguishing marks and/or scars: i Get 1 On YDS , u; cw i Qty... oh lock c V- aro av rin) Vehicle: (make/model) N 1 ial Color:NI 6 Tag Number: +- 5. Other names Respondent goes by (aliases or nicknames): NI 1 ie. +- 6. Respondent's attorney's name, address, and telephone number is: 1'4011C (If you do not know whether Respondent has an attorney, write "unknown." If Respondent does not have an attorney, write "none.") +- 7. If Respondent is a minor, the address of Respondent's parent or legal guardian is: ti one + +#### SECTION III. CASE HISTORY AND REASON FOR SEEKING PETITION (This section must be completed.) + +- 1. Describe the nature of the relationship between the Petitioner and Respondent (include the length of time of the relationship, the romantic or intimate nature of the relationship, the frequency or type of interaction, and any other facts that characterize the relationship) 'Ten an.\_ 7nol rc1Uitnl N.on I bictiCk r-\ I CAtc IP u vie ICAL-LOA-Wn O Check here if you are attaching additional pages to continue these facts. +- 2. Have the Petitioner and Respondent been involved in a dating relationship within the past six months? ✓ Yes No + +3. Has Petitioner ever received or tried to get an injunction for protection against domestic violence, dating violence or repeat violence against Respondent in this or any other court? +( ) Yes ( ) No If yes, what happened in that case? *{include case number, if known}* + +4. Has Respondent ever received or tried to get an injunction for protection against domestic violence, dating violence or repeat violence against Petitioner in this or any other court? +( ) Yes ( ) No If yes, what happened in that case? *{include case number, if known}* + +5. Describe any other court case that is either going on now or that happened in the past between Petitioner and Respondent (include case number, if known): None + +6. Respondent has directed an incident of "violence," meaning assault, aggravated assault, battery, aggravated battery, sexual assault, sexual battery, stalking, aggravated stalking, kidnaping, or false imprisonment, or any criminal offense resulting in physical injury or death against Petitioner or a member of Petitioner's immediate family. The incident (including date and location) is described below. + +On *{date}* 9/20/04, at *{location}* [REDACTED] + +Respondent and I were requiring in red when I gay friend called my call on the Presion Stated I was a silt, whore I want that I was checking on him. Presion Stated checking me into the hostress and then when I went to get my purse he threw me against the wall and started yelling at me. Then Presion disched me out the door and when I asked for the rest of my bridgings he told me to wait when he came back he spilled back all over me and threw clarett's in my face and he slamed me into the ground and I went to my car and he followed me. + + Check here if you are attaching additional pages to continue these facts. + +7. Other prior incidents (including dates and location) are described below: +On *{date}* August, 2004, at *{location}* [REDACTED] + +Respondent We were arguing and Presion argued me by my arms and threw me on the ground outside of my house. + +DATE 9/21/04 DA \_\_\_\_\_ + +PETITIONER'S NAME [REDACTED] + +**CONTINUATION SHEET** + +**Please DO NOT write on back or margins of petition or any papers.** + +continued from 9/20/04. I shut my cur door +and he opened it and split in my face and +continued to call me a whore, slut and +kunt. I shut the door and he opened it +again and got in my face, grabbed my +arms very hard. to make him let go i bit his +arm and he bit me back on my finger and +cut it open he was biting so hard. He has +repeatively harrassed me since last night's +incodent. This morning when i woke up +my hip was top swollen and my neck and +ichw were in pain + +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + + Check here if you are attaching additional pages to continue these facts. + +8. Petitioner genuinely fears dating violence by Respondent. Explain: +I am in fear because he has violent history and has verbally threaten my friends, ~~family~~ and I. +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + +9. Additional Information + +[✓ all that apply] + +\_\_\_\_\_ a. Respondent owns, has, and/or is known to have guns or other weapons. +Describe weapon(s): \_\_\_\_\_ + +✓ b. This or prior acts of dating violence have been previously reported to: *(person or agency)* +RONALD PAUM BEACH P.D. and family and friends. + +SECTION IV. INJUNCTION (This section must be completed.) + +1. 1. Petitioner asks the Court to enter an injunction prohibiting Respondent from committing any acts of violence against Petitioner and: + 1. a. prohibiting Respondent from going to or within 500 feet of any place Petitioner lives; + 2. b. prohibiting Respondent from going to or within 500 feet of Petitioner's place(s) of employment or the school that Petitioner attends: the address of Petitioner's place(s) of employment and/or school is: [REDACTED]; +2. c. prohibiting Respondent from contacting Petitioner by telephone, mail, by e-mail, in writing, through another person, or in any other manner; +3. d. ordering Respondent not to use or possess any guns or firearms; + +[✓ all that apply] + +1. ✓ e. prohibiting Respondent from going to or within 500 feet of the following place(s) + Petitioner or Petitioner's immediate family must go to often: seminale park, seminale park, or cenelle park - Forest Hill PLOD. WPB + Boccer Field (Practice); +2. ✓ f. prohibiting Respondent from knowingly and intentionally going to or within 100 feet of Petitioner's motor vehicle; and any other terms the Court deems necessary for the safety of Petitioner and Petitioner's immediate family. + +**I UNDERSTAND THAT BY FILING THIS PETITION, I AM ASKING THE COURT TO HOLD A HEARING ON THIS PETITION, THAT BOTH THE RESPONDENT AND I WILL BE NOTIFIED OF THE HEARING, AND THAT I MUST APPEAR AT THE HEARING.** + +• • + +IUNDERSTAND THAT I AM SWEARING OR AFFIRMING UNDER OATH TO THE TRUTHFULNESS OF THE CLAIMS MADE IN THIS PETITION AND THAT THE PUNISHMENT FOR KNOWINGLY MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT INCLUDES FINES AND/OR IMPRISONMENT. + +Dated: 7-21-04/ + +ignature of Petitioner Printed Hint Anwar City, State, Zip: Telephone Number Fax Number + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +Sworn to or affirmed and signed before me otin + +![](_page_6_Picture_6.jpeg) + +Personally laietai.%.. Produced identification Type of identification produced + +NO-ThRtPUBLIC or DEPUTY CLERK + +Belinda DaSilva + +[Print, type, or stamp commissioned name of notary or clerk.] + +# S ONDENT DESCRIPTION SHEET\* + +SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT Case No.: + +Division: FB 502004DR012235XXXXMB + +- ( ) DOMESTIC VOLENCE F.S. 741.30 I I REPEAT VIOLENCE - F.S. 784.046 +- IX) DATING VIOLENCE F.S. 784.046 ISEXUAL VIOLENCE - F.S. 784.046 + +Respondent's Name: PRESTON SCOTT VINYARD Nickn e/Alias: Address. PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33411 Residence Telephone Number: 798-6685 + +Respondent's Other Address: + +Place of Employment: UNKNOWN + +Place of Employment Telephone Number. + +D.O.B.: APRIL 05,1980 Hair: DIRTY BLOND Height: 5'6" Race: Eyes: GREY Weight: 176 LBS. + +Sex: MALE D.L. # + +Other: TATOO- CROSS, WARLOCK ON BACK AND ARM + +Service Preference: [ ] Work (X ] Home Best Time to Serve: EVENING + +[ ] Respondent has weapon Weapon Description: Weapon(s) Location: + +Respondent's vehicle: + +Make: + +Model: + +[ ] Respondent is currently in jail Date Arrested: + +Petitioner's Name: + +Petitioner's D.O.B.: + +Petitioner's Sex: FEMALE + +Color: + +Tag # + +Year: + +Petitioner's Race: HISPANIC + +Petitioner's Home Phone: (561) 798-3650 + +CASE NUMBER: 502004 DR 022 35XXXXXX DIVISION: PB + +PETITIONER NAME: [REDACTED] + +INTERPRETER NEEDED IN COURT? This information MUST be completed. +Respondent: Yes No Petitioner: Yes No What Language?            + +**ADDITIONAL INFORMATION** + +The following information is necessary for service/enforcement of your injunction by law enforcement. Please answer all questions: + +Petitioner's Date of Birth: [REDACTED] \*\*\* Petitioner's Race: H + +Petitioner's Sex: Female ( ) Male \*\*\* Petitioner's Home Phone#: [REDACTED] + +Petitioner's Cell Phone#: [REDACTED] \*\*\* Petitioner's Work Phone #: [REDACTED] + +Petitioner's Driver's License #: [REDACTED] Petitioner's vehicle tag#:            + +\*\*\*\*\* + +RESPONDENT NAME: Preston Scott Vincent + +Does Respondent have children in his/her care? ( ) yes ( ) no. How many children?            + +Is the Respondent wanted by the police? ( ) yes ( ) no. For what?            + +If Respondent has weapons, where are weapons located? N/A + +Is Respondent in jail? ( ) yes ( ) no \*\*\* Date of arrest:            + +Respondent's vehicle year: N/A \*\*\* Respondent's Phone #: 798-6685 + +Respondent resides in Palm Beach County Respondent's Other address?            + +Respondent's Hangouts (name and/or address):            + +Respondent's close relatives (names/addresses/phone #s): MOTHER WAYBRIDGE +CIVIL ROYAL PALM BEACH + +Best place to serve respondent: ( ) home\* ( ) work\*\* (check only one, please) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746639/EFTA02746639.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746639/EFTA02746639.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..743996c6ca300b24742c177c14ece09899f5e36f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746639/EFTA02746639.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,707 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746639.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 13022, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.73, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_6_Picture_6.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, \nIN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 133.416, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 473.9328918457031, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 473.9328918457031, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 133.416, + 119.88 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PETITION FOR INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST DATING VIOLENCE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 90.576, + 275.40000000000003 + ], + [ + 523.26, + 275.40000000000003 + ], + [ + 523.26, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 90.576, + 295.65 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SECTION I. PETITIONER (This section is about you. It must be corn \u2022 leted.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.62, + 340.2 + ], + [ + 495.72, + 340.2 + ], + [ + 495.72, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 82.62, + 360.45000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, \nIN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 137.7, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 476.1360000000001, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 476.1360000000001, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 137.7, + 126.35999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PETITION FOR INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST DATING VIDLENICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.43952941894531, + 283.5 + ], + [ + 524.2193603515625, + 283.5 + ], + [ + 524.2193603515625, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 94.43952941894531, + 303.75 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SECTION I. PETITIONER (This section is about you. It must be corn \u2022 feted.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 87.91271209716797, + 352.35 + ], + [ + 495.72, + 352.35 + ], + [ + 495.72, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 87.91271209716797, + 368.55 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "2. Filing Fees", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.74, + 498.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 177.63397216796875, + 498.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 177.63397216796875, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 88.74, + 514.3499999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SECTION IL RESPONDENT (This section is about the person you want to be protected from. \nIt must be completed.)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 83.844, + 106.11000000000001 + ], + [ + 530.8359985351562, + 106.11000000000001 + ], + [ + 530.8359985351562, + 136.353515625 + ], + [ + 83.844, + 136.353515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SECTION III. CASE HISTORY AND REASON FOR SEEKING PETITION (This section \nmust be completed.)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 85.06800000000001, + 489.23999999999995 + ], + [ + 531.35546875, + 489.23999999999995 + ], + [ + 531.35546875, + 518.8535461425781 + ], + [ + 85.06800000000001, + 518.8535461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONTINUATION SHEET", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 232.56, + 190.35 + ], + [ + 382.5, + 190.35 + ], + [ + 382.5, + 206.54999999999998 + ], + [ + 232.56, + 206.54999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "9. Additional Information", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.62, + 275.40000000000003 + ], + [ + 232.56, + 275.40000000000003 + ], + [ + 232.56, + 287.54999999999995 + ], + [ + 82.62, + 287.54999999999995 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SECTION IV. INJUNCTION (This section must be completed.)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.62, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 394.74, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 394.74, + 396.90000000000003 + ], + [ + 82.62, + 396.90000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "S ONDENT DESCRIPTION SHEET*", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.304, + 53.21453857421875 + ], + [ + 431.2536926269531, + 53.21453857421875 + ], + [ + 431.2536926269531, + 77.7779541015625 + ], + [ + 209.304, + 77.7779541015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ADDITIONAL INFORMATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 214.2, + 186.3 + ], + [ + 397.79999999999995, + 186.3 + ], + [ + 397.79999999999995, + 202.5 + ], + [ + 214.2, + 202.5 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 363 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 361 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 103 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 110 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 212 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 183 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 40 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746639" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746639/_page_6_Picture_6.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746639/_page_6_Picture_6.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..71e645859b9afb0d5c538a5ff1c7a0c7b170af6b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746639/_page_6_Picture_6.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:56bd1200d27a93ef7cfd161dfb186a8dbcfd75237cedf82dd25827739a54642b +size 11972 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746648/EFTA02746648.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746648/EFTA02746648.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..718232e9a2a211ef6b04f280aa79e68b4674ebc0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746648/EFTA02746648.md @@ -0,0 +1,108 @@ +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, +IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +Case No: 502004DR012235XXXXMB + +Division: FB + +MEMO OF DISPOSITION + +[REDACTED] + +Petitioner + +VS + +[ ] Present w/Counsel: + +[ ] Not Present + +[ ] Called/contacted clerk + +-VS- + +PRESTON SCOTT VINYARD + +Respondent + +[ ] Present w/Counsel: + +[ ] Not Present + +[ ] Called/contacted clerk + +Type of Hearing: + +*Jim J. Guidament of Join* + +Date of hearing: + +10-6-04 + +Time + +8:00am + +Heard by Judge: + +*Kathleen J. Korle* + +Service: + +[ ] Executed by: PBSO + +per + +*notion* on 9-23-04 + +[ ] Unexecuted by: + +per + +on + +Court Extends Injunction For/Till + +10-6-05 + +Court Appoints: + +[ ] Guardian Ad Litem + +[ ] BIP + +[ ] Other + +Case Disposition + +[ ] DA - Dismissed After hearing + +[ ] DB - Dismissed Before hearing + +[ ] DJ - Disposed by Judge + +Case Reopened: + +[ ] Yes + +[ ] No + +Comments: + +*Agues Pinal guidament ext for Lyon* + +Petitioner's New Address + +Respondent's New Address: + +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + +\_\_\_\_\_ +\_\_\_\_\_ + +**Sherrie Norton** + +Deputy Clerk + +"E" \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746648/EFTA02746648.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746648/EFTA02746648.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c8fb765f59d10dd5f08a6dc4dc8bce0ac2fe92e4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746648/EFTA02746648.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,132 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746648.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1024, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.69, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 165.24, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 477.97200000000004, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 477.97200000000004, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 165.24, + 95.58 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEMO OF DISPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 258.876, + 144.17999999999998 + ], + [ + 383.724, + 144.17999999999998 + ], + [ + 383.724, + 155.52 + ], + [ + 258.876, + 155.52 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRESTON SCOTT VINYARD", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 228.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 232.56, + 228.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 232.56, + 240.57 + ], + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 240.57 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 101 + ], + [ + "Span", + 86 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746648" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746649/EFTA02746649.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746649/EFTA02746649.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f8119452b82d19f12158c481ff406d92a1bee037 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746649/EFTA02746649.md @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@ +Date: 6/11/09 Time: 10:47:40 IIIIIIPALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Offense Report Page: 1 Program: CMS301L + +Day Of Week Occur From Date: Dept Class . . : Street Number City Zone/division Location Type Report Officer : Supervisory Emp: Verif. Employee: Case Status Dt : Wednesday 12/24/03 3:30 TRAFFIC - HIT LA MANCHA, IIIIIIPALM BEACH, FL33411 raarbne (1) (No of Okee) HIGHWAY/ROADWAY 3 Case Status GUILLERMINA 12/26/03 12/26/03 Report Date . : 12/24/03 3:39 Occur To Date : 12/24/03 3:39 : OPEN / NOT ACTIVE + +Case Number . Date Arrived . : 1-03-005472 12/24/03 3:44 ADDITIONAL Date Date TIMES Dispatched: 12/24/03 3:39 Cleared . : 12/24/03 5:10 \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* \*\*\*\*\* \*\*\*\*\* + +\*\*\*\*\*\* \*\*\*\*\*\* C A Case Number . : Case Status . : Investigator . SE MANAGE 1-03-005472 OPEN / NOT ACTIVE G. MENT Dept Case INFOR Class . . Status Dt A T I 0 N\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* TRAFFIC - HIT AND RUN 12/24/03 + +Case Number Investigator . : Assignment Date: 1-03-005472 Dept Unit GUILLERMINA Supervisor : PATROL/Law Enforcement : PERVENECKI, DAVID + +# \*\*\*ASSIGNMENT HISTORY\*\*\* + +State Class . Statute/Ordin OFFENSE Other criminal offense 316.192 (1) REPORT # 1 Attmpt/Committ : Committed + +State Class . : Statute/Ordin : OFFENSE Other criminal offense 316.061 (1) REPORT # 2 Attmpt/Committ : Committed + +### \* \* \* \* \* NAME PRIMARY RELATIONS H I P S \*\*\*\*\*\* irr.\*\*\*\*\* + +Name #...: 001 (OTHR) ANTHONY Vehicle N.: 001 / OTHERIXREUR7CRIM.MISC) + +Name 0...: 002 Property #: Property #: Property #: (OTHR) I'm KATHY 001 MISCELLANEOUS / - 002 MISCELLANEOUS / - 003 MISCELLANEOUS / - DAMAGED DAMAGED DAMAGED / + +Name #...: 003 Property #: Property #: Property #: (OTHR) MINI, ROBERT 001 misc2=Xlmous / - DAMAGED 002 MISCELLANEOUS / - DAMAGED 003 MISCELLANEOUS / - DAMAGED + +## \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*PROPERTY I N F ORMATION # 1 + +Category . . . : DAMAGED Damaged . . . : During Other Offense Quantity . . . : 1 Description . : PALM TREE Value • 2,500.00 Property type : MISCELTANROUS + +ser + +• Date: 6/11/09 Time: 10:47:40 Ilia PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Page: 2 Offense Report Program: CMS301L + +Category . . . : DAMAGED Quantity . . : 1 Value 300.00 1-03-005472 (Continued) Damaged . . . : During Other Offense Description . : LAWN GRASS Property type : MISCELLANEOUS + +\*\*\*\*\*\* \* \* \* Category Quantity Value PROPERTY . . . : DAMAGED . . . : 1 • 200.00 INFO RMATION # Damaged . . . Description . Property type 3 : During Other Offense : LAWN X-MAS DECORATION : MISCELLANEOUS + +VEHICLE INFO Case number . : License # • : Category . . . : State Veh Type : Make Model Name . . Color - Bottom Damaged . . . Stolen value . Insured by . . Keys in car . 1- 5472 FL UNITED fltiER (ARSON/CRIM AUTO PONTIAC : TRANS AM : Red : Other : 1 : ALLSTATE : Yes RMATION # 1 STATES .MISC) Year Model Color Top VIN Disposition Insured . . . Cntrl Officer • 1994 • TRANS AM : GUILLERMINA + +Case Number Street Name Birth Date . Birth City . Oper Lic No Race Ethnic Origin Maximum Height Maximum Weight Juvenile . . . Hair Length . Complexion . . Citizenship . Status SUSPECT 1-03-005472 UNKNOWN : 4/05/1980 23 : UNKNOWN, IFFEINIM 0 : Non-Hispanic : 511 : 180 : ADULT : Medium : Light : UNITED STATES • Still Suspect / A R (Up to 2") RESTEE INF ORMATION- # 1 \*\* : VINYARD, PRESTON SCOTT Prompt valid in Maximum Age . FL UNITED STATES Minimum Height Minimum Weight Occupation . . Hair Color . . Eye Color . . Build Marital Status : 23 : Male : 509 : 160 : UNKNOWN • SLIGHT : Single + +Case Number \*\*\*EMPLOYER . : 1-03-005472 Case Number . : Street Number : City Home Phone No. : Race Ethnic Origin : Juvenile . . . : ITNESS 1-03-005472 e Non-Hispanic JUVENILE INFORMATION\*\*\* Employer Name NFORMATION Last Name . . : UNKNOWN - # 1 \*\*\* \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* \*\*\*\*\*\* Birth Date . Sex • Female Occupation . . : STUDENT + +\*\*\*EMPLOYER INFORMATION\*\*\* Case Number . : 1-03-005472 Employer Name : N/A Date: 6/11/09 Time: 10:47:40 NM PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Offense Report Page: 3 Program: CMS301L + +Case Number . Street Number City Home Phone No Age Sex Occupation . . WITNESS : 1-03-005472 : 600 BANYAN BLVD. WEST PALM BEACH, FL : 561/1Mk-AMMS : 0/00/0000 45 Male : POLICE OFFICER NFORMATION; Last Name , ROBERT Business Phone : Race Ethnic Origin : Non-Hispanic Juvenile . . . : ADULT 53-3456 + +Case Number . Employer Name : \*\*\*EMPLOYER INFORMATION\*\*\* 1-03-005472 WEST PALM BEACH POLICE DEPT. + +1-03-005472 (Continued) + +\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*OTHER P E R Case Number . 1-03-005472 Person Type . . Street Number : City Home Phone No. : Birth Date . . : Sex • Occupation . . : S0 N I N F O R M A - # 1\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* Last Name . . : , ANTHONY PALM BEACH, 561/798-6685 5/25/1980 23 Male UNKNOWN FL 33411 Business Phone : 23-7646 Race Ethnic Origin : Non-Hispanic Juvenile . . . : ADULT + +Case Number \*\*\*EMPLOYER INFORMATION\*\*\* . : 1-03-005472 Employer Name : UNKNOWN + +0 T Case Number . Person Type Street Number City Home Phone No. Sex Occupation . H E R PERSON : 1-03-005472 . : OWNER OF PROPERTY INS STREET PALM BEACH, FL : 561 100-2MMIS - Female : UNKNOWN -# Last Name . . : , KATHY 33411 Race • Ethnic Origin : Non-Hispanic Juvenile . . . : ADULT 2 \*\*\*\*\* \*\*\*,, + +Case Number \*\*\*EMPLOYER . : 1-03-005472 INFORMATION\*\*\* Employer Name : UNKNOWN + +OTHER PERSON INFORMAT NMI mLm2 N- # 3 Case Number . : 1-03-005472 Last Name . . : , ROBERT Person Type . : OWNER OF PROPERTY Street Number : MOW MOM STREET City PALM BEACH, FL 33411 Home Phone No. : 561 lik-MMIP Race sex Male Ethnic Origin : Non-Hispanic Occupation . . : UNKNOWN Juvenile . . . : ADULT + +\*\*\*EMPLOYER INFORMATION\*\*\* Case Number . : 1-03-005472 Employer Name UNKNOWN + +NARRATIVE # 1 + +9. • • Date: 6/11/09 Times 10:47:40 Offense Report PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Page: 4 Program: CMS301L + +Original Reported By: Entered By.: Reviewed By: 1-03-005472 GUILLERMINA GUILLERMINA E. (Continued) 12/24/03 12/24/03 12/26/03 + +See P/C Pending arrest on suspect at large. Citations pending. + +NARRATIVE # 2 P.C.AFFIDAVIT/VINYARD Reported By: JANET L. 1/27/04 Entered By.: JANET L. 1/27/04 + +ON THE ABOVE DATE AND TIME I WAS DISPATCHED TO MellOW Ma STREET, REGARDING A TRAFFIC CRASH, VEHICLE VS TREE. UPON ARRIVAL I MADE CONTACT WITH THE VICTIM ROBERT WHO ADVISED A IIIIIIMALE, LATER IDENTIFIED AS PRESTON SCOTT VINYARD, W/M DOB UTTU7/80, WAS ONE OF THE OCCUPANTS IN THE VEHICLE THAT CRASHED INTO HIS PALM TREE AND DAMAGED HIS LAWN AND LAWN ORNAMENTS. HE STATED HE OBSERVED A FEMALE EXIT THE VEHICLE AFTER IT CAME TO A STOP NEXT TO HIS CE HE FEMALE TER IDENTIFIED AS THE PASSENGER, RAN ON FOOT AWAY FROM THE SCENE. HE THEN STATED THE MALE THEN EXITED THE VEHICLE. ROBERT WENT TO PREVENT THE DEFE FROM LEAVING THE SCENE OF THE CRASH AND STRUGGLED WITH HIM ON THE GROUND, BEFORE THE SUBJECT FLED ON FOOT BEHIND THE RESIDENCE. A COMPUTER CHECK OF THE VEHICLE IDENTIFIED THE REGISTERED OWNER AS, ANTHONY qapps CONTACT WAS MADE WITH , AT HIS RESIDENCE, WHERE HE P. HE STATED HIS FRIEND WAS DRIVING THE VEHICLE. HE S STON WAS AT HIS HOME EARLIER THAT EVENING WITH PRESTON WOKE HIM UP FR HIS LEEP AND ASKED HIS ETO G VEN HIS GIRLFRIEND A RIDE HOME. GIRLFRI TO BORROWED TH CONTACT WAS MADE WI AT HE ESIDENCE, SHE STATED, SHE WAS THE PASSENGER IN THE VEHICLE. STATED PRESTON AND HERSELF WERE AT A PARTY. SHE THEN STATED SHE LAST REMEMBERS GETTING INTO THE PASSENGERS SEAT, IN THE RED PONTIAC TRANS AM, WHILE PRESTON WAS DRIVING. SHE THEN REMEMBERS TELLING PRESTON HE WAS TRAVELING TOO FAST, JUST PRIOR TO THE CRASH. THE VEHICLE WAS REMOVED BY ROTATION, JD'S TOWING. THE INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED REVEALED PRESTON SCOTT VINYARD AS THE DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE DURING THE CRASH AND THE SUBJECT THAT FLED THE SCENE OF A CRASH WITH PROPERTY DAMAGE TOTALING PARROXIMATELY \$3000.00. THE INVESTIGATION HAS GIVEN PROBABLE CAUSE FOR THE ARREST OF PRESTON SCOTT VINYARD UNDER FSS 316.061 (1), LEAVING THE SCENE OF A CRASH WITH DAMAGE AND FSS 316.192 (1) RECKLESS DRIVING. + +NARRATIVE # 3 S.A.DISPOSITION/VINYARD Reported By: , GUILLERMINA Entered By.: , L. 3/02/04 3/05/04 + +NO FILE FOR: LEAVING SCENE OF CRASH INVOLVING DAMAGE RECKLESS DRIVING + +Date: 6/11/09 Time: 10:47:40 PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Offense Report + +Page: 5 Program: CMS301L + +Supplemental N ARRATIVE Reported By: Entered By.: Reviewed By: 1-03-005472 (Continued) # 4 GUILLERMINA GUILLERMINA E. 12/24/03 12/24/03 3/22/04 + +On March 10, 2004 Mr. Robert I.arrived at the Police department, awitness statement was comple e regarding his role in the incident of 12/24/03. The witness statement was forwarded to the state attorney's office. + +Supplemental N ARRA Reported By: Entered By.: Reviewed By: TI V E # 5 \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* \* \*\*\*\*\*\* \*\* GUILLERMINA 12/24/03 GUILLERMINA 12/24/03 E. 3/22/04 + +This case is pending court calender call on 3/23/04. + +SA DISPO/VINYARD N ARRATIVE # 6 Reported By: GUILLERMINA Entered By.: L. 11/30/04 12/02/04 + +DEFENDANT PLED GUILTY TO RECKLESS DRIVING AND LEAVING SCENE OF ACCIDENT INVOLVING DAMAGE. DEFENDANT WAS ADJUDICATED AND ORDERED TO PAY COURT COSTS. DEFENDANT SENTENCED TO TWO DAYS IN THE PALM BEACH COUNTY JAIL. + +END OF REPORT + +PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE +CENTRAL RECORDS +FSS EXEMPTIONS/CONFIDENTIAL + +- 119.071(2)(c) active criminal intelligence/active criminal investigative information +- 119.071(2)(d) Comprehensive policies or plans pertaining to the mobilization, deployment or tactical operations involved in responding to emergencies. (Deputies schedules) +- 119.071(2)(e) confessions +- 119.071(2)(f) confidential informants +- 119.071(5)(g)1. Biometric Identification information (Eingerprints, palm prints, and footprints) +- 365.171(15) identity of 911 caller or person requesting emergency service +- 119.071(4)(d)(1) home address, telephone, soc. security #, photos of active/former LE personnel, spouses and children +- 316.066(5)(a) crash reports are confidential for period of 60 days after the report is filed +- 119.071(2)(h) (1) I'd. of victim of sexual battery, lawd and lascivious offense upon person less than 16 years old, child abuse, sexual offense +- 119.071(2)(l) assets of crime victim +- 985.04(1) juvenile offender records +- 119.071(5)(a)(5) social security numbers held by agency +- 119.0712(2) personal information contained in a motor vehicle record +- 119.071(5)(b) bank account #, debit, charge and credit card #s held by an agency +- 395.3025(7)(a) and/or 456.057(7)(a) medical information +- 394.4615(7) mental health information +- 119.071(2)(b) criminal intelligence/investigative information from a non-Florida criminal justice agency +- 943.053/943.0525 NCIC/FCIC/FBI and in-state FDLE/DOG +- 119.071(4)(c) undercover personnel +- 119.07(4)(d) extra fee if request is voluminous or requires extensive personnel, technology +- OTHER: \_\_\_\_\_ + +Case number: Royal Palm Beh 88-83-5472 Clerk ID: 8463 Date: 6/16/09 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746649/EFTA02746649.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746649/EFTA02746649.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4828f25c44f67bf823d82d65a2502733272cd0aa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746649/EFTA02746649.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,348 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746649.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 11001, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.82, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "***ASSIGNMENT HISTORY***", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 336.15 + ], + [ + 371.0160827636719, + 336.15 + ], + [ + 371.0160827636719, + 350.20416259765625 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 350.20416259765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "* * * * * \nNAME PRIMARY \nRELATIONS \nH I P S ****** irr.*****", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 39.78, + 481.75274658203125 + ], + [ + 587.4070434570312, + 481.75274658203125 + ], + [ + 587.4070434570312, + 496.83416748046875 + ], + [ + 39.78, + 496.83416748046875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "*********PROPERTY I N F ORMATION # 1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 39.78, + 652.0027313232422 + ], + [ + 575.28, + 652.0027313232422 + ], + [ + 575.28, + 664.1999999999999 + ], + [ + 39.78, + 664.1999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "****** ***PROPERTY INFORMATION # 2 ****", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 39.78, + 704.7 + ], + [ + 465.12, + 704.7 + ], + [ + 465.12, + 718.4541625976562 + ], + [ + 39.78, + 718.4541625976562 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE CENTRAL RECORDS FSS EXEMPTIONS/CONFIDENTIAL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 64.80000000000001 + ], + [ + 440.64, + 64.80000000000001 + ], + [ + 440.64, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 109.35000000000001 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 242 + ], + [ + "Line", + 117 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 526 + ], + [ + "Line", + 143 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 448 + ], + [ + "Line", + 100 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 510 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 233 + ], + [ + "Line", + 51 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746649" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746655/EFTA02746655.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746655/EFTA02746655.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8eec1ea8c39d2713f1742135fc614f9d10706430 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746655/EFTA02746655.md @@ -0,0 +1,145 @@ +Date: 6/14/07 +Time: 14:57:04 + +ROYAL PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT +Offense Report + +Page: 1 +Program: CMS301L + +Day Of Week : Sunday +Occur From Date: 10/31/04 3:21 +Dept Class : MISDEMEANOR - OTHER +Street Number : LA MANCHA, [REDACTED] +City : ROYAL PALM BEACH, FL 33411 +Zone/division : Zone One (1) (No of Okee) +Location Type : RES-SNGL FAMILY +Report Officer : HOLBERTON, NICHOLAS +Supervisory Emp: [REDACTED] 11/02/04 +Verif. Employee: HILL, JR., JOHN 11/02/04 +Case Status Dt: 10/31/04 + +Report Date : 10/31/04 3:21 +Occur To Date : 10/31/04 3:31 + +\*\*\*\*\* A D D I T I O N A L T I M E S \*\*\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-04-004495 Date Dispatched: 10/31/04 3:24 +Date Arrived : 10/31/04 3:31 Date Cleared : 10/31/04 10:43 + +\*\*\*\*\* C A S E M A N A G E M E N T I N F O R M A T I O N \*\*\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-04-004495 Dept Class : MISDEMEANOR - OTHER +Case Status : CLEARED BY ARREST Case Status Dt: 10/31/04 + +\*\*\*\*\* O F F E N S E R E P O R T # 1 \*\*\*\*\* +State Class. : Other criminal offense Attempt/Committ : Committed +Statute/Ordin : 741.31 Ported Entry : No +Structure Occup: Occupied +State Dispo : Committed by Adult or Adult/Juv +Dispo Date : 10/31/04 +Exception Clear: ARRESTED ON PRIMARY OFFENSE +Arrest Case No.: 1-04-004495 People Arrested: 1 + +\*\*\*\*\* C D M P L A I N A N T I N F O R M A T I O N - # 1 \*\*\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-04-004495 Last Name : BESPINIS, JOHN +Home Phone No. : 561/856-8355 Birth Date : 12/06/1956 47 +Race : Black Sex : Male +Ethnic Origin : UNKNOWN / OTHER Occupation : CAB DRIVER +Juvenile : : : : : ADULT + +\*\*\*\*\* S U S P E C T / A R R E S T E E I N F O R M A T I O N - # 1 \*\* +Case Number : 1-04-004495 Prompt valid in: VINYARD, PRESTON S +Street Number : 103 WEYBRIDGE CR C +City : [REDACTED] PALM BEACH, FL 33411 +County : PALM BEACH +Birth Date : 4/05/1980 24 +Birth State : OK +Oper Lic No. : [REDACTED] PL UNITED STATES +Race : [REDACTED] +Ethnic Origin : Non-Hispanic +Maximum Height : 601 +Maximum Weight : 179 +Hair Color : Blonde +Hair Style : Parted in Center +Glasses : No +Facial Hair : None +Build : MEDIUM +Citizenship : UNITED STATES + +Home Phone No. : 561/798-9410 +Maximum Age : 24 +Birth Country : UNITED STATES +Sex : Male +Minimum Height : 600 +Minimum Weight : 170 +Juvenile : : : : : ADULT +Hair Length : [REDACTED] (Up to 2") +Eye Color : [REDACTED] +Complexion : : : : : Me +Teeth : : : : : Uni +Speech : : : : : Noi +Hand Use : : : : : Unk + +"G" + +pate: 6/14/07 Time: 14:57:04 PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Offense Report Page: 2 Program: CMS301L + +Residency Type : Palm Beach Religion . . . i UNKNOWN Arrest Case No.: 0-00-049796 Pants KHAKIS VICTIM Case Number : 1-04-004495 Street Number : City Home Phone No. : Oper Lic No. Race Ethnic, Origin : Weight Juvenile . . • : File Charges . : Non-Hispanic 90 JUVENILE No Victim Sobriety: HAD BEEN DRINKING 1-04-004495 (Continued) Residency Sts : Full Year Marital Status : Single Shirt Shoes • INFORMATION - Prompt valid in: Birth Date . FL UNITED STATES Sex Height Occupation . Victim Type Can Identify Injury Extent 17 Female 505 STUDENT Adult Yes Not Applicable + +Case Number Victim Type . Can Identify . Injury Extent VICTIM : 1-04-004495 : Government : Yes Not Applicable INFORMATION - Prompt valid in File Charges . Victim Sobriety it 2 : STATE OF FLORIDA, : Yes : SOBER + +0 T Case Number . Person Type Street Number City Home Phone No. Over Lic No. Race Ethnic Origin H E R PERSON : 1-04-004495 . : PATHS to : Non-Hispanic INFORMA Last Name . . Birth Date . FL UNITED STATES Sex Male : ADULT •TJuvenile . . 43 + +Original NARRATIVE # 1 Reported By: HOLBERTON, NICHOLAS Entered By.: RTON, NICHOLAS Reviewed By: , JR., JOHN C. 10/31/04 10/31/04 11/02/04 + +For further information on case# 04-4495, refer to PC Affidavit. No further information. + +P.C. AFFIDAVIT/VINYARD NARRATIVE # 2 Reported By: RTON, NICHOLAS Entered By.: , JANET L. 10/31/04 11/03/04 + +ON THE ABOE DATE/TIME I WAS DISPATCHED TO IN REFERENCE TO A BATTERY IN THE BACK OP A TAXI AND THEFT OF SERVICES. UPON ARRIVAL I MADE CONTACT WITH THE CAB DRIVER JOHN BESPINIS. BESPINIS ADVISED ME THE WAS DRIVING PRESTON S VINYARD AND + +Date: 6/14/07 [REDACTED] PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Page: 3. + Time: 14:57:04 Offense Report Program: CMS301L + +1-04-004495 (Continued) + TO [REDACTED] WHEN THEY STARTED TO ARGUE BECAUSE NEITHER OF [REDACTED] THEM HAD MONEY TO PAY THE CAB. AT SOME POINT DURING THE ARGUMENT, BESPINIS SAID VINYARD HIT [REDACTED] UPON ARRIVING AT [REDACTED] AND VINYARD GOT OUT OF THE VEHICLE AND RAN INTO THE RESIDENCE. I WALKED UP TO THE FRONT DOOR AND NOTICED IT WAS PARTIALLY OPEN. SHORTLEY AFTER SGT. [REDACTED] AND OFC. DOERR AARRIVED TO ASSIST ME. I KNOCKED ON THE DOOR SEVERAL TIMES AND SAID "POLICE", BUT NO ONE ANSWERED. MYSELF SGT. [REDACTED], AND OFC. DOERR ENTERED THE RESIDENCE TO MAKE SURE NO ONE WAS INJURED. AS I ENTERED THE RESIDENCE, [REDACTED] STEPPED OUT FROM BEHIND A WALL WITH A PAIR OF SHORTS AND NO SHIRT EXPOSING HER BREAST. [REDACTED] TOLD US TO GET OUT OF HER HOUSE NUMEROUS TIMES. I ADVISED [REDACTED] TO PUT A SHIRT ON AND SHE DID SO. I TRIED TO EXPLAIN TO [REDACTED] WHY WE WERE THERE, BUT SHE KEPT TELLING US TO GET OUT OF HER HOUSE, AND THAT NO ONE WAS IN HER HOUSE. [REDACTED] THEN CALLED HER FATHER, [REDACTED] AND TOLD HIM POLICE WERE IN THERE HOUSE FOR NO REASON. I THEN GOT ON THE PHONE WITH [REDACTED] AND INFORMED HIM OF THE SITUATION. SINCE [REDACTED] WAS A JUVENILE, I ASKED [REDACTED] FOR CONSENT TO SEARCH HIS RESIDENCE FOR THE BATTERY SUSPECT. [REDACTED] AGREED TO LET US SEARCH THE HOUSE, BUT [REDACTED] WOULD NOT LET US SEARCH HER FATHERS BEDROOM AND LOCKED HERSELF IN THERE. [REDACTED] STAYED ON THE PHONE WITH HER FATHER AND KEPT TELLING HIM SHE WANTED US OUT OF THEIR HOUSE. WE TALKED BACK AND FORTH WITH [REDACTED] FOR ABOUT THIRTY MINUTES AND I TRIED TO HAVE HER OPEN THE DOOR. [REDACTED] THEN TOLD HER FATHER SHE WAS GOING TO KILL HERSELF. SGT. [REDACTED] ADVISED THE FATHER THAT SINCE SHE MADE THAT STATEMENT WE HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO FORCE ENTRY INTO THE ROOM IF THE DOOR WAS NOT OPENED. [REDACTED] ADVISED HE WAS ON THE WAY HOME FROM FT PIERCE AND THAT HE WILL BE HOME AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. [REDACTED] THEN OPENED THE DOOR AND WAS PLACED IN HANDCUFFS FOR OUR PROTECTION. I THEN SAT [REDACTED] ON THE [REDACTED] IN THE LIVING ROOM WHILE SGT. [REDACTED] SEARCHED THE BEDROOM AND DISCOVERED VINYARD UNDER THE BED. VINYARD WAS PLACED IN CUFFS AND SAT DOWN ON THE [REDACTED] IN THE LIVING ROOM. AFTER RUNNING VINYARD BY HIS FLORIDA DRIVERS LICENSE, HE CAME BACK WITH A PROTECTION ORDER FOR [REDACTED]. SHORTLEY AFTER [REDACTED] ARRIVED HOME AND WAS UPDATED ON THE SITUATION. VINYARD WAS PALCED UNDER ARREST FOR VIOLATION OF PROTECTION ORDER AND TRANSPORTED TO THE COUNTY JAIL WITHOUT INCIDENT. [REDACTED] ADVISED VINYARD DID NOT HIT HER AT ANY TIME, AND REFUSED TO PROSECUTE. BESPINIS HAD LEFT THE SCENE EARLIER AND WHEN CONTACTED REFUSED TO RETURN TO [REDACTED] TO IDENTIFY VINYARD OR TO PROSECUTE FOR THEFT OF SERVICES. + +[REDACTED] WAS TURNED OVER TO HER FATHER. + +NO FURTHER INFORMATION. + +\*\*\*\*\* N A R R A T I V E # 3 \*\*\*\*\* + Supplemental Reported By: DOERR, [REDACTED] P. 10/31/04 + Entered By: DOERR, [REDACTED] P. 10/31/04 + Reviewed By: [REDACTED], JR., JOHN C. 11/04/04 + +ON 10/31/04 I RESPONDED TO [REDACTED], AS BACK-UP FOR THEFT OF A CAB FAIR. UPON ARRIVAL I OBSERVED THE FRONT DOOR OF [REDACTED] CRACKED OPEN. I THEN MADE CONTACT WITH THE + +--- + +| Date: 6/14/07 | ROYAL PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT | Page: 4 | +|----------------|------------------------------------|------------------| +| Time: 14:57:04 | Offense Report | Program: CMS301L | + +--- + +1-04-004495 (Continued) + +CAB DRIVER WHO ADVISED ME THAT A WHITE FEMALE WALKED AWAY SOUTH ON BILBAO AND A WHITE MALE WENT INTO [REDACTED]. MYSELF AND OFC HOLBERTON MADE CONTACT WITH [REDACTED] WHO ADVISED US THAT THERE WAS NO MALE IN THE HOUSE. I THEN VERIFIED WITH THE CAB DRIVER WHO ADVISED ME THAT A WHITE MALE DID EXIT HIS CAB AND RAN INSIDE [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] INSISTED THAT THERE WAS NOBODY INSIDE. SGT MURPHY MADE CONTACT WITH [REDACTED] (FATHER) WHO AUTHORIZED US TO SEARCH THE HOUSE FOR THE SAFETY OF [REDACTED]. NO FURTHER INFORMATION AT THIS TIME. + +\*\*\*\*\* N A R R A T I V E # 4 \*\*\*\*\* + +| Supplemental | Reported By: MURPHY, THOMAS E. | 10/31/04 | +|--------------|---------------------------------|----------| +| | Entered By.: MURPHY, THOMAS E. | 10/31/04 | +| | Reviewed By: HILL, JR., JOHN C. | 11/04/04 | + +On 10/31/04 at approximately 0331 hrs. I responded as back-up for Ofc. Holberton to a reported theft of services (from a cab) at [REDACTED]. Upon arrival I learned the following: cabdriver John Bespinis had driven a w/m and w/f to the area of [REDACTED]. The w/m and w/f became involved in an argument that became physical when the male struck the female. The female left the scene by walking or running south on Bilbao St. The male entered the house at [REDACTED]. Bespinis continued to wait for the police, parked in the driveway of the residence. Bespinis advised that both the male and female were young adults. Ofc. Holberton, Ofc. Doerr, and myself approached the front door and found that it was ajar by 6-8 inches. Ofc. Holberton knocked on the door and loudly called "police" into the open door but received no response. I became concerned that the male and female had possibly given the cabdriver a fake address with the intention of not paying and eluding the cabdriver and that the male might have illegally entered the residence at [REDACTED]. in an attempt to skip out on paying the cab fare. Ofc. Holberton, Doerr, and myself entered the residence to ensure that no crime was ongoing and to check on the welfare of an residents. We were standing just inside the front door looking around the livingroom when a w/f (later IDed as [REDACTED] 17 years of age) stepped out of her bedroom wearing nothing but panties. I asked her to dress, which she did and she then asked why we were in her house. I related to her that a cabdriver had watched a young white male run into her house. [REDACTED] stated that this was untrue and that her door had been locked and she kept asking how we got in her house and why were we there. I explained the circumstances to her several times but she insisted that her door was locked and noone was in her house. She then stated she was going to call her father and I told her that I agreed that was a good idea. I then spoke to [REDACTED] on his cellphone and related the information to him and that I believed it possible that a w/m was possibly still in his house. [REDACTED] told me that he wanted us to check his house to ensure his daughter's + +Date: 6/14/07 [REDACTED] PALM BRACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Page: 5 +Time: 14:57:04 Offense Report Program: CMS301L + +1-04-004495 (Continued) + +safety. He then informed [REDACTED] that he had given us permission to check the house. [REDACTED] became enraged at this and began to curse and well at her father over the phone and she ran into the [REDACTED] bedroom and locked the door, refusing to allow us to enter. I could hear [REDACTED] yelling at her father on the phone cursing at him and then I heard her tell him that if he didn't tell us (the police) to leave that she would kill herself. She repeated this same threat to him about 2 or 3 times. I went into the kitchen and picked up the extension and told [REDACTED] ([REDACTED]) was still on the phone in the bedroom) that because [REDACTED] was now threatening to harm herself that we would have to force entry into the bedroom to ensure that she didn't harm herself and that she would probably be Baker Acted for her protection. When [REDACTED] heard this she left the bedroom and came into the livingroom where Ofc. Holberton and myself handcuffed her for safety reasons until the situation could be sorted out. [REDACTED] stated that he would be at his house in about 5 minutes and asked for us top wait for him before doing anything to [REDACTED] I checked in the [REDACTED] bedroom and found Preston Scott Vinyard (who is known to me) hiding under the bed. Vinyard was handcuffed for safety reasons and placed in the livingroom. A computer check on Vinyard revealed a valid protection order on him to stay away from [REDACTED]. While waiting for [REDACTED] to arrive, [REDACTED] admitted that she and Vinyard had gone out and when her car broke down they took the cab home, but had no money to pay for it, so they began to argue about how to pay. [REDACTED] stated that Vinyard never struck her and that she left the scene because she was "pissed". [REDACTED] never said how she got in the house without the cabdriver seeing her. When [REDACTED] got to his residence he stated that Vinyard had battered [REDACTED] approximately a month ago and that was why there was a protection order against him. [REDACTED] and I spoke with [REDACTED] at length and she stated several times that she never intended to harm or kill herself, but that she had only told that to her father to try to convince him to make the police leave the house so we wouldn't find Vinyard hiding there. [REDACTED] was convinced that [REDACTED] was truthful about not hurting herself and I believed that she was no danger to herself, only that she had been trying to get us to leave and used that threat as leverage against her father. I determined that a Baker Act was not warranted because I believed at that point that [REDACTED] was no threat to herself. During this entire incident Bespinis had left the scene and when contacted by phone advised that he didn't want to prosecute and refused to come back to the scene to sign a waiver of prosecution. Vinyard was arrested for the violation of the protection order and [REDACTED] was released to her father. \*\*Nothing further\*\* + +\* \* \* \* \* END OF REPORT \* \* \* \* \* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746655/EFTA02746655.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746655/EFTA02746655.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..82b5c2db37c0d8123c1cd1af63921511759e001f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746655/EFTA02746655.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,190 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746655.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 13945, + "elapsed_seconds": 12.73, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "ROYAL PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Offense Report", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 412.48800000000006, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 412.48800000000006, + 123.12 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 123.12 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 439 + ], + [ + "Line", + 113 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746655" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746660/EFTA02746660.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746660/EFTA02746660.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..17e360f03157fb58724ef99c6771b35ef4153424 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746660/EFTA02746660.md @@ -0,0 +1,304 @@ +Number 04-27322 MMA TRS + +ARREST / NOTICE TO APPEAR +Juvenile Referral Report + +ADMINISTRATIVE + +Agency ORI Number FLO 602800 Agency Name PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Agency Report Number (N.T.A.'s only) 8 6 - 0 4 - 4 4 9 5 + +Location of Arrest (Including Name of Business) 151 Bilbao St Royal Palm Bch, Fl 33411 Location of Offense (Business Name, Address) NA + +Date of Arrest 10/31/04 Time of Arrest 0407 Booking Date 10/31/04 Booking Time 0455 Jail Date 10/31/04 Jail Time Location of Vehicle N/A + +Name (Last, First, Middle) Vinyard, Preston, S Alias (Name, DOB, Soc. Sec. #, Etc.) + +Race W - White I - American Indian B - Black O - Oriental/Asian Sex W Date of Birth 04/05/1980 Height 6'00" Weight 170 Eye Color Br Hair Color Blo Complexion Fair Build Med + +Sexual Marks, Tailoos, Urinary Physical Features (Location, Type, Description) Forearm, Back, Shoulder Merital Status Single Religion Unk Indication of: Alcohol Influence Y Indication of: Alcohol Independence N + +Local Address (Street, Apt. Number) 103-C Weybridge Cr Palm Bch, Fl 33411 Phone (561) 798-9410 Residence Type: 1. City 2. County 3. Florida 4. Out of State + +Permanent Address (Street, Apt. Number) Same Address Source Defendant + +Business Address (Name, Street) Business Address (Name, Street) Occupation Unk + +Dit. Number, State V563677801250 Soc. Sec. Number 441782517 INS Number Place of Birth (City, State) Oklahoma Citizenship US + +Co-Defendant Name (Last, First, Middle) Race Sex Date of Birth Yes No + +Co-Defendant Name (Last, First, Middle) Race Sex Date of Birth Yes No + +Parent Name (Last) (First) (Middle) Residence Phone + +Legal Custodian No. (Name) (City) (State) (Zip) Business Phone + +Notified by: (Name) Date Time Injury/Disposition T. Handied/ processed within Dept. and Released. 2. TOT HRS / DYS 3. Incarcerated + +Released Yes (Name) Relationship Date Time + +The above address provided by Defendant and / or Defendant's parent(s) (The child and / or parent was old to keep the juvenile court clerk (Phone 366-2526) informed of any change of address. Yes, by: (Name) No (Reason) + +Property Cities Yes No Description of Property Value of Property + +Code Drug Activity S. Sell N. N/A S. Sell R. Smuggle K. Dispensal/ Distribute M. Manu/acture/ Z. Other Drug Type N. N/A B. Berbiturate C. Cocaine H. Hallucinogen M. Marijuana P. Paraphenala/ Equipment O. Opium/Deriv. U. Unknown N. N/A P. Possess T. Traffic D. Deliver E. Use M. Marijuana O. Opium/Deriv. S. Synthetics + +Charge Description Violation of Protection Order Counts 1 Domestic Violence None Statute Violation Number 741.31 Violation of ORD # N/A + +Drug Activity Drug Type N Amount / Unit N/A Offense # 04-4495 Warrant 1 Caples Number N/A Band + +Charge Description Counts Domestic Violence Y None Statute Violation Number Violation of ORD # + +Drug Activity Drug Type Amount / Unit Offense # Warrant 1 Caples Number Band + +Charge Description Counts Domestic Violence Y None Statute Violation Number Violation of ORD # + +Drug Activity Drug Type Amount / Unit Offense # Warrant 1 Caples Number Band + +Charge Description Counts Domestic Violence Y None Statute Violation Number Violation of ORD # + +Drug Activity Drug Type Amount / Unit Offense # Warrant 1 Caples Number Band + +Charge Description Counts Domestic Violence Y None Statute Violation Number Violation of ORD # + +Drug Activity Drug Type Amount / Unit Offense # Warrant 1 Caples Number Band + +Instruction No. 1 Mandatory Appearance in Court Location (Court, Room Number, Address) Criminal Justice Complex 3228 Gun Club Rd + +Instruction No. 2 You need not appear in court but must comply with instructions on Reverse Side. Court Date and Time Month November Day 30th Year 2004 Time 8:00 A.M. P.M. + +AGREE TO APPEAR AT THE TIME AND PLACE DESIGNATED TO ANSWER THE OFFENSE CHARGED OR TO PAY THE FINE SUBSCRIBED. I UNDERSTAND THAT SHOULD I WILL FULLY FAIL TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT AS REQUIRED BY THIS NOTICE TO APPEAR, THAT I MAY BE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF COURT AND A WARRANT FOR MY ARREST SHALL BE ISSUED + +Signature of Defendant (or Juvenile and Parent) (Custodian) Date Signed + +HOLD for other Agency Name: Signature of Arresting Officer Name Verification (Printed by Arrest) + +Denamous Syllabed Other: Name of Agreeing Officer (Print) Ofc. Holberton #251 I.D. # 251 (PRINT) + +Denamous Syllabed Other: LD. # Pouch # Transporting Officer ID # Agency Witness here if subject signed with it + +Entities Deputy LD. # Pouch # Transporting Officer ID # Agency Witness here if subject signed with it + +04.27322 MNA Agts + +ARREST / NOTICE TO APPEAR +Juvenile Referral Report + +- 1. Arrest +- 2. N.T.A. +- 3. Request for Warrant +- 4. Request for Capias + +1 Juvenile + +ADMINISTRATIVE + +Agency ORI Number + +FLO 502800 + +Agency Name +**PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT** + +Agency Report Number (N.T.A.'s only) +8 6 - 0, 4 - 4, 4, 9, 5 + +Charge Type: Check as many as apply. 1. Felony 2. Traffic Felony 3. Misdomestic 4. Traffic Misdomestic 5. Ordinance 6. Other + +Location of Arrest (Including Name of Business) +**151 Bilbao St Palm Bch, Fl 33411** + +Date of Arrest 10/31/04 Time of Arrest 0407 Booking Date 10/31/04 Booking Time 0455 Jail Date 10/31/04 Jail Time Location of Offense (Business Name, Address) **same** + +Name (Last, First, Middle) +**Vinyard, Preston, S** + +Race W - White I - American Indian B - Black O - Oriental/Asian Sex M Date of Birth 04/05/1980 Height 6'00" Weight 170 Eye Color Br Hair Color Blo Complexion Fair Build Med + +Sexes, Marks, Tattoos, Unique Physical Features (Location, Type, Description) + +**Forearm, Back, Shoulder** + +Local Address (Street, Apt. Number) +**103-C Weybridge Cr Palm Bch, Fl 33411** + +Permanent Address (Street, Apt. Number) +**same** + +Business Address (Name, Street) + +D/L Number, State **V563677801250** Soc. Soc. Number **441782517** INS Number + +Co-Defendant Name (Last, First, Middle) + +Co-Defendant Name (Last, First, Middle) + +Parent Name (Last) (First) (Middle) + +Other Name (Last) (First) (Middle) + +Address (Street, Apt. Number) + +Notified by: (Name) + +Released Yes (Name) + +The above address provided by defendant and / or defendant's parent (The child and / or parent was old) heep the Juvenile Court Clerk (Phone 385-2528) Informed of any change of address. Yes, by: (Name) + +Property Charge? Yes No Description of Property + +Charge Description +**Violation of Protection Order** + +Drug Activity N. N/A Drug Type N Amount / Unit N/A Offense # **04-4495** + +Charge Description +**Charge** + +Drug Activity Drug Type Drug Type Amount / Unit Amount / Unit Offense # + +Charge Description +**Charge** + +Drug Activity Drug Type Drug Type Amount / Unit Amount / Unit Offense # + +Charge Description +**Charge** + +Drug Activity Drug Type Drug Type Amount / Unit Amount / Unit Offense # + +Charge Description +**Charge** + +Drug Activity Drug Type Drug Type Amount / Unit Amount / Unit Offense # + +Charge Description +**Charge** + +Instruction No. 1 Mandatory Appealance in Court +Instruction No. 2 You need not appear in Court but must comply with instructions on Reverse Side. + +Location (Court, Room Number, Address) + +Court Date and Time Month **November** Day **30th** Year **2004** Time **8:00** A.M. P.M. + +AGREE TO APPEAR AT THE TIME AND PLACE DESIGNATED TO ANSWER THE OFFENSE CHARGED OR TO PAY THE FINE SUBSCRIBED. I UNDERSTAND THAT SHOULD I WILL FULLY FAIL TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT AS REQUIRED BY THIS NOTICE TO APPEAR, THAT I MAY BE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF COURT AND A WARRANT FOR MY ARREST SHALL BE ISSUED + +Signature of Defendant (or Juvenile and Parent/Custodian) + +Signature of Arresting Officer + +Name of Arresting Officer (Print) +**Ofc. Holberton #251** ID # **251** +Transporting Officer ID # **HOLBERTON 251** Agency **R173** + +Name Verification (Printed by Arrest) +(PRINT) + +| ORIGIN Number | | PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT | | 1. Arrest
2. N.Y.A. | 3. Request for Warrant
4. Request for Captain | 1 | Juvenile | +|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|--------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|----------| +| Agency ORI Number
FLO 5 0 2 8 0 0 | | Agency Report Number
PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT | | 8, 6 | 0, 4, 4, 4, 9, 5 | | | +| Charge Name
Charge No. [Redacted] | | 1. Felony
2. Traffic Felony | 3. Misdemeanor
4. Traffic Misdemeanor | 5. Ordinance
6. Other | Special Notes: | | | +| Name (Last, First, Middle)
Vinyard, Preston, S | | Alias | | Race
W | Sex
M | Date of Birth
0, 4, 0, 5, 8, 0 | | +| Charge Description
Violation of Protection Order | | Charge Description | | | | | | +| Charge Description | | Charge Description | | | | | | +| Victim's Name (Last, First, Middle)
State of Florida | | | | Race | Sex | Date of Birth | | +| Local Address (Street, Apt., Number) | | (City) | (State) | (Zip) | Phone | Address Source | | +| Business Address (Name, Street) | | (City) | (State) | (Zip) | Phone | Occupation
Govt | | +|

The undersigned certifies and swears that he/she has just and reasonable grounds to believe, and does believe that the above named Defendant committed the following violation of law.
The Person taken into custody ...

committed the below acts in my presence.
confessed to _____
admitting to the below facts.
was observed by _____ who told _____ that he/she saw the arrested person commit the below acts.
was found to have committed the below acts, resulting from my (described) investigation.
On the 31st day of November 2004 at 0321 A.M. P.M. (Specifically include facts constituting cause for arrest.)

On the above date/time I was dispatched to [Redacted] in reference to a Battery in the back of a taxi and Theft of Services.

Upon arrival I made contact with the cab driver John Bespinis. Bespinis advised me he was driving Preston S Vinyard and [Redacted] to [Redacted] when they started to argue because neither of them had money to pay the cab. At some point during the argument, Bespinis said Vinyard hit [Redacted]. Upon arriving at [Redacted] and Vinyard got out of the vehicle and ran into the residence. I walked up to the front door and noticed it was partially open. Shortley after [Redacted] and Ofc. Doerr arrived to assist me. I knocked on the door several times and said "Police", but no one answered. Myself, Sgt. Murphy, and Ofc. Doerr entered the residence to make sure no one was injured. As I entered the residence [Redacted] stepped out from behind a wall with a pair of shorts on and no shirt exposing her breast [Redacted] told us to get out of her house numerous times. I advised [Redacted] to put a shirt on and she did so. I tried to explain to [Redacted] why we were there, but she kept telling us to get out of her house, and that no one was in her house [Redacted] when called her father, [Redacted] and told him police were in there house for no reason. I then got on the phone with [Redacted] and informed him of the situation. Since [Redacted] was a juvenile, I asked [Redacted] for consent to search his residence for the battery suspect [Redacted] agreed to let us search the house, but [Redacted] would not let us search her father's bedroom and locked herself in there. [Redacted] stayed on the phone with her father and kept telling him she wanted us out of there house. We talked back and forth with [Redacted] for about thirty minutes and I tried to have her open the door. [Redacted] then told her father she was going to kill herself. Sgt. Murphy advised the father that since she made that statement we had no choice but to force entry into the room if the door was not opened. [Redacted] advised he was on the way home from Ft. Pierce and that he will be home as soon as possible. [Redacted] then opened the door and was placed in handcuffs for our protection. I then sat [Redacted] on the couch in the living room while Sgt. Murphy searched the bedroom and discovered Vinyard under the bed. Vinyard was placed in cuffs and sat down on the [Redacted] in the living room. After running Vinyard by his Florida Drivers License, he came back with a Protection Order for [Redacted]. Shortley after [Redacted] arrived home and was updated on the situation. Vinyard was placed under arrest for Violation of Protection Order and transported to the county jail without incident [Redacted] advised Vinyard did not hit her at any time, and refused to prosecute. Bespinis had left the scene earlier and when contacted refused to return to [Redacted] entity Vinyard or to prosecute for theft of services.

| | | | | | | | +| ADMINISTRATIVE
SWORN AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME
[Signature]
NOTARY PUBLIC / CLERK OF COURT / POLICE OFFICER
10/31/2004
DATE | | SIGNATURE OF ARRESTING / INVESTIGATING OFFICER
Ofc. Holberton #251
NAME OF OFFICER (PLEASE PRINT)
10/31/2004
DATE
PAGE 1 OF 2 | | | | | | + +![]()IN THE CIRCUIT/COUNTY COURT, FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +STATE OF FLORIDA. + +BOOKING NO. 20043651347 + +CASE NO. \_\_\_\_\_ + +*Prestor Vergard S.* +(first name) (last name) +Defendant. + +**ORDER OF NO CONTACT** + +*unless civil judge and judge in lift criminal case no contact order* + +1. The Defendant is specifically ordered to have NO CONTACT and to not attempt to contact the following person or persons: + +- Alleged victim(s) +- Co-defendant(s) +- Witness(es) + +![](_page_4_Picture_655.jpeg) + +2. The Defendant shall NOT CONTACT or attempt to contact the above-listed person(s) until this case is closed or until further order of the Court, whichever occurs first. + +3. For purposes of this Order, "no contact" means: *none at all* + +- 1. NO direct or indirect messages or communications by the Defendant. +- 2. NO direct or indirect contact by a third person on behalf of the Defendant. +- 3. NO communication of any kind including telephone calls, messages on answering machines and voice or electronic mail; all written forms of communication including letters of apology; or any other means of communication, including the delivery of gifts at any time, either at a residence, school, or workplace. + +4. The Defendant has been expressly advised that if any of the above-listed person(s) attempts to contact the Defendant, he/she must avoid any such contact and the Defendant has been further advised that he/she would be in violation of this Order if the Defendant communicates with any of the above-listed persons even if contact is initiated by the above-listed person(s). + +- 5. **Exceptions:** (applies only if checked): + - The Defendant may return to the residence where the above-listed person(s) resides for the purpose of removing the Defendant's PERSONAL EFFECTS ONLY and then only in the presence of a uniformed law enforcement officer and on ONE occasion only. + - Contact may be in writing. + - Contact may be by telephone. + - Contact may occur but only through a third party and only to facilitate visitation with the Defendant's minor children. + +6. The Defendant has been expressly advised that violation of this Order will subject the Defendant to arrest and commitment by the Court, plus, if applicable, bond forfeiture. + +I have read and do understand this Order and agree to obey it. I fully understand that ONLY A CRIMINAL DIVISION JUDGE may modify this order. I understand therefore that the alleged victim in this case, the state attorney, and any other attorney or person DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY to modify ANY PORTION of this Order without APPROVAL BY THE JUDGE. + +I completely understand and agree that if I disobey this Order, the Judge may possibly provoke and forfeit any bond, and/or order may immediately incarceration. + +*Prestor Vergard S.* +Defendant + +DONE AND ORDERED at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 18th day of November, 2004 + +CIRCUIT/COUNTY COURT JUDGE +ENT NOV 03 2004 + +copies Blue Punk Yellow Gold +State Attorney Public Defender/Defense Attorney Defendant Alleged victim (provided by State Attorney) Jail records + +3 + +FCIC REFERENCE NUMBERS: + +### IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, STATE OF FLORIDA CRIMINAL DIVISION "TDC" + +STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 04MM027322A02 BOOKING NO. 2004351347 + +vs. + +PRESTON VINYARD, W/M, 04/05/1980, 441.78-2517 + +#### INFORMATION FOR: + +## 1) VIOLATION OF INJUNCTION AGAINST REPEAT OR DATING VIOLENCE + +In the Name and by Authority of the State of Florida: + +BARRY E. KRISCHER, State Attorney for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County, Florida, by and through his undersigned Assistant State Attorney, charges that PRESTON VINYARD on or about October 31, 2004, in the County of Palm Beach and State of Florida, did willfully, after having been served with an Injunction for Protection Against Repeat or Dating Violence issued pursuant to section 784.046 or aforeign protection order accorded full faith and credit pursuant to the residence, school, place of employment, or aspecified place frequented regularly and any named family or household member, contrary to Florida Statute 784.047p + +> STA Y CO i B FL. BAR NO. 0162541 Assistant State Attomey Palm Beach County, Florida CIRCUtt tcnik:"Aity coo Op • P7S /Le t) No? 16 2104 + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +Appeared before me, STACEY ', BARRA Assistant State Attorney for Palm Beach County, Florida, personally known to me, who, being first duly sworn, says that this prosecution is instituted in good faith. + +sietCP Assis ant Stat ttomey + +Sworn to and subscribed to before me this it -day of Nov ber, 2004. + +T Y PUBLIC, State U Florida + +tom A Rakturt Ni gL4 wzen65 t 2ccult7Es" + +## I) VIOLATION OF INJUNCTION AGAINST REPEAT OR DATINslin ENOR inbagssi + +![](_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746660/EFTA02746660.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746660/EFTA02746660.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..83e838c525521f4046c768ab9e8b0f390aaba11d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746660/EFTA02746660.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,424 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746660.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 63032, + "elapsed_seconds": 145.55, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_4_Picture_655.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "ARREST / NOTICE TO APPEAR Juvenile Referral Report", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.412, + 50.22 + ], + [ + 359.856, + 50.22 + ], + [ + 359.856, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 245.412, + 69.66 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ARREST / NOTICE TO APPEAR Juvenile Referral Report", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.86, + 50.22 + ], + [ + 362.304, + 50.22 + ], + [ + 362.304, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 247.86, + 70.47 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT/COUNTY COURT, FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 526.3199999999999, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 526.3199999999999, + 92.34 + ], + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 92.34 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER OF NO CONTACT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 146.88, + 162.0 + ], + [ + 452.88, + 162.0 + ], + [ + 452.88, + 206.54999999999998 + ], + [ + 146.88, + 206.54999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT \nIN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, STATE OF FLORIDA \nCRIMINAL DIVISION \"TDC\"", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 138.924, + 62.37 + ], + [ + 480.06298828125, + 62.37 + ], + [ + 480.06298828125, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 138.924, + 104.49 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "INFORMATION FOR:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 240.57 + ], + [ + 370.77972412109375, + 240.57 + ], + [ + 370.77972412109375, + 252.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 252.71999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "1) VIOLATION OF INJUNCTION AGAINST REPEAT OR DATING VIOLENCE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 56.916000000000004, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 465.1923828125, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 465.1923828125, + 282.68999999999994 + ], + [ + 56.916000000000004, + 282.68999999999994 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I) VIOLATION OF INJUNCTION AGAINST REPEAT OR DATINslin ENOR inbagssi", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 61.2, + 714.053825378418 + ], + [ + 456.47967529296875, + 714.053825378418 + ], + [ + 456.47967529296875, + 733.05 + ], + [ + 61.2, + 733.05 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Form", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 48 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "Form", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "Form", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 571 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 372 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746660" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746660/_page_4_Picture_655.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746660/_page_4_Picture_655.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6d2c5cda594994fbf79f81e278785e3c52bfb3c1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746660/_page_4_Picture_655.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6be4698ed25753b892c4745a445f92c0629bb85fd649cf891c6b2e83ff6fc032 +size 10586 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746660/_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746660/_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cd22ce3375d3b20c71b6607c57bf9d086ee94eb6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746660/_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:5f924366e82867011ef70c4a00dd9ce657e80649f1891df3f486cbf134668698 +size 3075 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746666/EFTA02746666.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746666/EFTA02746666.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8ebd714cfab72fd37cba39abd28f1cb4c7171afd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746666/EFTA02746666.md @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ +INN + +Dr. Kliman: Were you planning to get married? + +INS With him? + +Dr. Kliman: Uh huh. + +a + +00:10:25 + +Dr. Kliman: Would you say that it was a very serious relationship at the time? + +a + +Dr. Kliman: So you had actually broken up before he died? + +Dr. Kliman: Okay, now any other bad things that have happened in your life? + +a + +Dr. Kliman: There was another one I forgot to ask you about...tell me of your other friends' death? + +Imean I got over it probably like a year and ahalf after his death, like two years. Like it always still bothered, whenever I think about it; it always still bothers me on how like how he died and his life was taken at such a young age but it doesn't really like; I mean it's been so long; that it...I don't know. Like certain songs that remind me of him or...certain things that I'll think about but... + +No, that was never brought up. + +No more of alike good friends...and then it just kinds like ended up being; we realized we weren't like a good relationship that we were better off as friends so; whenever we broke up it wasn't anything like I hate you, it was just kind like... + +Yeah. + +Imean between my ex and my two friends dying. It's really... + +.4 My friend Jen, when I grew up Jennifer [not audible] she... 1 grew up with her, she lived right down the road from me and I was really close with her like cause growing up I would always go to High School parties and we would always hang out and like whenever I would have people come over to my house for a gettogether, she would come over and whenever she ever had people at her house I would always go over there, she lived right down like around the corner from me. We grew up like; she was like a year older than me, so like growing up we would always hang out but then there was that time whenever like...we didn't hang out with each other but whenever I got into High School we hung out again alot more, we were really close. It wasn't her fault she wasn't drinking and driving but she was...there was atruck driver and he was like sleeping and supposedly + +usn + +S Uh huh + +Dr. Kliman: And he flipped the car over, totaled the car, you weren't hurt. Were you in aseat belt? + +S No. + +Dr. Kliman: How old were you? + +Dr. Kliman: And I week later... + +IMO It seemed like it, it might not have been like a week, it might have been like a month; but it seemed like aweek after I was just talking to Jen that she had gotten into an accident. + +Dr. Kliman: That she was killed. Was she the driver when she was killed? + +S Uh huh + +Dr. Kliman: So these were shocking experiences? + +1 Yeah. + +r + +and they said they he had alcohol in his blood. They ran her off the road, and she went to swerve and she had two friends in the backseat which I'm Mends with now and she ended up getting hit and got the worst of it ended dying. That was, that was hard because that was like my really good friend, like that, I mean it was just...I don't know, it was really weird how it happened Iwas like in shock for the first two months, I didn't believ,e that had happened. Cause I remember like; I ended up getting in acar accident with my ex boyfriend Preston, we were going down like a 25mph lane or whatever and he was doing probably like 60 when he went to hit the turn he ended up flipping the car that I was in; and the car that I was in, got totaled. And I remember being back at...like the next week nothing had happened Iwas completely fine I remember sitting there talking to her; like yeah...she's like you're so lucky that nothing happened to you and; just like sitting there talking about how fortunate I was that nothing happened and then like aweek later after just having aconversation I remember like hearing about news and I just...I couldn't believe it. It was kinds like....I don't know it was so weird. + +00:13:42 + +Dr. Kliman: So you were in an accident where Preston was doing 60 in a25 miles an hour zone? + +Probably 17, I don't remember. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746666/EFTA02746666.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746666/EFTA02746666.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a4c6f2d37de5608a0303167e85aa22bbf147864d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746666/EFTA02746666.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746666.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 4032, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.06, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 491 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 456 + ], + [ + "Line", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746666" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746668/EFTA02746668.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746668/EFTA02746668.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..184b523e2b4ea0b67e3277565d261e622abf14cc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746668/EFTA02746668.md @@ -0,0 +1,346 @@ +**CURRICULUM VITAE** + +![]()![]()Updated 06/17/09 + +### TABLE OF CONTENTS + +| PRESENT POSITION | 2 | +|---------------------------------------------|----------| +| EDUCATION | 2 | +| MEDICAL LICENSE | 2 | +| CERTIFICATION | 3 | +| ADDITIONAL TRAINING | 3 | +| SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS , PAST AND PRESENT | | +| COMMITTEES | 3 | +| HONORS | 4 | +| PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES | 4 | +| REVIEWER | 5 | +| BOOK REVIEWS | 5 | +| PUBLICATIONS | 5 | +| ABSTRACTS | 7 | +| PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL | MEETINGS | +| AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES | 9 | +| MEDIA | 12 | + +NAME: Ryan Chaloner Winton■, **M.D.** + +**DATE OF BIRTH: May 10, 1976** + +**PLACE OF BIRTH: Titusville, Florida** + +**MARITAL STATUS: Single** + +#### **PRESENT POSITION:** + +**07/2008 — Psychiatrist Present Richard C. W.., MD, PA 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd; Ste 219 Lake Mary, FL 32746 Ph: 407-322-8199** + +**03/01/2008 - 07/31/2011 Affiliate Instructor University of South Florida Department of Psychiatry** + +**03/03/09 — Assistant Professor of Psychiatry 06/30/12 University of Central Florida College of Medicine Department of Medical Education** + +#### **EDUCATION:** + +**1995 - 1999 Johns University Baltimore, Maryland Double Major - Biology and Psychology B.A. Degree, graduated Phi Beta Kappa with honors** + +**1999- 2003 Georgetown University School of Medicine Washington, DC M.D. Degree** + +**2003 -2004 Internal Medicine Internship Sinai Hospital of Baltimore/Johns Baltimore, Maryland** + +**2004 -2007 Resid Johns.. Hospital Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Baltimore, Maryland** + +**2007 - 2008 Fellow in Forensic Psychiatry Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio** + +## MEDICAL LICENSE: + +2004 Maryland — D62746 - Inactive 2007 Ohio — 89483 - Inactive 2007 Florida — ME99792 + +## CERTIFICATION: + +2008 Diplomate, American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, #58286 + +## ADDITIONAL TRAINING: + +2006 Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Chicago, IL + +2007 Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Miami Beach, FL + +2008 Florida Forensic Examiner Training University of South Florida College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, Ft. Lauderdale, FL + +## SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT: + +Member, Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine + +Member, American Psychiatric Association + +Member, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +Member, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +Member, American Medical Association + +Member, Ohio Psychiatric Association + +Member, Florida Psychiatric Society + +Member, Southern Psychiatric Association + +Member, The American College of Psychiatrists + +## COMMITTEES: + +2005 - 2007 Public Relations Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +2005 - 2007 2005 - 2007 2005 - 2007 2007 - present 2007 - present 2007 - 2009 2008 - 2009 Legislative Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society Disaster Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society Resident and Fellows Committee, Maryland Psychiatry Society Psychopharmacology Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Research Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, American Psychiatric Association Member, New Member Task Force, Southern Psychiatric Association + +## HONORS: + +1999 Phi Beta Kappa, Johns University 2004 \*Superior" performance rating, 1st-year residency, by Sinai Hospital Department of Medicine's Clinical Competency and Evaluation Committee 2005 Dorfman Award, presented by The Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine for best review article of the year for Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcusslonal Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3):195-202, May-June 2005. 2005 Rappeport Fellowship, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +## PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES: + +2008 Written testimony on Elder Abuse in support of bills HB873/S8501 Criminal Law - Crimes Against the Elderly or Persons with a Disability— Penalties, prelsolagt2 Maryland House Judiciary Committee for Delegate Kramer, District 19 County, Maryland. Hearing March 4. 2009 Central Florida Psychiatric Society representative to Florida Psychiatric Society's Council Meeting, January 10. + +2009 Testified before the Florida Senate Banking and Insurance Committee (SB 354) on Mental Health Parity. March 17. + +### REVIEWER: + +-Archives of Internal Medicine -Clinical Geriatrics -Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness -European Psychiatry -Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience -Nature Clinical Practice Neurology -Neurology India -Psychosomatics -Social Science & Medicine -World Journal of Surgical Oncology + +## BOOK REVIEWS: + +- 1. Clark MR and Treisman GJ: Pain and Depression: An Interdisciplinary, Patient-Centered Approach. Psychosomatics, July-August 2006, 47(4)365-366. + +## PUBLICATIONS: + +- 1. **RCW, Dunlap PK, RCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid disease and abnormal thyroid function tests in patients with eating disorders and depression. The Journal of the Florida Medical Association, Inc. 82(3)187-192, 1995.** +- **2. RCW, RCW: Anxiety and Endocrine Disease. In Popkin, MK, Seminars in Clinical Neuropsychiatry 4(2)72-83, 1998.** +- **3. RCW, DE, RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts. Psychosomatics 40:(1)18-27, 1999.** +- **4. RCW, RCW: Fee-Splitting: Ethical Implications and Principles for Practice Management. Transference 20(2)14, 1999.** +- **5. ERCW, RCW: Long-term Psychological and Neurological Complications of Lindane Poisoning. Psychosomatics 40(6)513-517, 1999.** +- **6. RCW, RCW: False Allegations: The Role of the Forensic Psychiatrist. Journal of Psychiatric Practice 7(5)343-346, September 2001.** + +- 7. RCW, Hall RCW: Principles of Physician Recruiting. In Handbook of Mental rmIth Administration and Management; Reid WH and Silver S (ed.): Brunner-Routfedge, New York, NY; Chapter 34:440-448, 2003. +- 8. •RCW, •RCW, Chapman M: Identifying Geriatric Patients at Risk for Suicide and Depression. Clinical Geriatrics 11(10)36-44, October 2003. +- 9. RCW, IMIRCW: Establishing Liaison Before Disaster Strikes. ii://www.psych.org/disasterpsych/pdfs/apadisasterhandbk.pdf; Chapter 2:12-19. 2004. +- 10. ERCW, •RCW, Chapman MJ: Emotional and Psychiatric Effects of Weapons of Mass Destruction in First Responders. In: Bioterrorism: Psychological and Public Health interventions; Ursano RJ, Norwood AE & Fullerton CS (eds). Cambridge University Press:Cambridge; Chapter 14:250-273; 2004. +- 11. .RCW, Appleby B, FiRCW: Atypical Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome Presenting as Fever o nknown Origin in the Elderly. Southern Medical Journal 1(98) 114-117, January 2005. +- 12. IRCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Exploitation of the Elderly: Undue Influence as a orm of Elder Abuse. Clinical Geriatrics 13(2)28-36. February 2005. 13, •RCW, IMIRCW, Chapman MJ: Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implicationsof Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3)195-202, May-June 2005. +- 14. -RCW, MRCW: Abuse of Supraphysiologic Doses of Anabolic Steroids. Southe rn M ical Journal, 98(5)550-555, May 2005. +- 15. El ROW, ■RCW, **Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Complications of Anabolic Steroid Abuse. Psychosomatics, 46(4)285-290, July-August 2005.** +- **16.** ■ROW. **ERCW, Chapman MJ: Medical and Psychiatric Casualties caused by Conventional and Radiological (Dirty) Bombs. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(3):242-248, May-June 2006.** +- **17. ERCW,FRCW, Chapman MJ: Postconcussional Syndrome: A Work In Progress ( esponse to Dr. .. Letter to the Editor. Psychosomatics, 47(3):272, May-June 2006.** +- **18. ROW. RCW, Chapman MJ: Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome in the Elderly: Diagnostic Criteria, Incidence, Risk Factors, Pathophysiology, and Treatment. (CME article) Clinical Geriatrics, 14(5):39-46, 2006.** +- **19. F RCW, liRCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, art I: Medica and Psychiatric Complications of Bombings and Biological, Chemical, and Nuclear Attacks. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(8):26-35, 2006.** + +- 20. IMRCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part 2: Posttraumatic Stress, Acute Stress, and Affective Disorders. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(9):17-24, 2006. +- 21. IMIRCW, IMIRCW: Malingering of PTSD: forensic and diagnostic considerations, characteristics of malingerers and clinical presentations. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(6):525-535, 2006. +- 22. iSRCW, IERCW: A Profile of Pedophilia: Definition, Characteristics of Offenders, Recidivism, Treatment Outcomes, and Forensic Issues. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 82(4):457-471, 2007. +- 23. •RCW, ERCW: Detection of Malingered PTSD: An Overview of Clinical, Psychometric, and Physiological Assessment: Where Do We Stand? Journal of Forensic Sciences, 52(3):717-725, 2007. +- 24. MRCW, Macvaugh GS III, Merideth P, J: Commentary: Delving Further Into Liability for Psychotherapyl it,I. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 35(2):196-9, 2007. +- 25. .RCW, -RCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Effects of Terrorism: Medical and Societal Implications of Recent Attacks. In: Focus on Terrorism, Vol. 9; Linden EV (ed), Nova Science:New York; Chapter 11, Publication date: 3fd Quarter, 2007. +- 26. -RCW, ERCW: The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak Model of virus properties on system capacity and function: A lesson for future viral epidemics. American Journal of Disaster Medicine, 2(5):270-276, 2007 +- 27. .RCW, ERCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part (— Causative Agents, Presentation, and Differential Diagnosis. Clinical Geriatrics, 15(12):18-25, 2007. +- 28. RCW, IIIRCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part II Pat ophysio ogy, Drug Interactions, and Treatment. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(1):24- 28, 2006 +- 29. IFRCW, Resnick PJ: Psychotherapy Malpractice: New Pitfalls. Joumal of sychiatric Practice, 14(2):119-121, 2008 +- 30. F RCW, I RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part I ccurrence n Forensic/Criminal Situations, Partner Relationships, and Sexual Offenses. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(5):27-32, 2008 +- 31. IMIRCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part II Occurrence n Hospitals and PharmacologicaUBehavioral Treatment of Agitation, Aggression and Violence. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(6):28-32, 2008. + +- 32. **RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ. The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak: lessons hospitals and physicians can apply to future viral epidemics. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2008 Sep-Oct;30(5):446-52. Epub 2008 Jul 23** +- **33. RCW, SH: Drug Diversion Program Rights. Legal Digest. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 36(4):579-580, 2008** +- **34. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Interventions. Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009** +- **35. Paul RK, Lockey C,ERCW, Bursztajn H: Practice Management: Managing Risks When Practicing in Three-Party Care Settings. Psychiatrictimes.com, 26(2), Feb. 3, 2009.** +- **36. ERCW,M RCW, Chapman MJ: Letter to the Editor response re: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Interventions) Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009), Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(4):17-21, 2009.** +- **37. ERCW, RCW, Myers W, Chapman M: Testamentary Capacity: History, Physicians' Role, Requirements, and Why Wills are Challenged. Clinical Geriatrics, in press.** + +**\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W.** ■, **MD** + +### **ABSTRACTS:** + +- **1. RCW, Hazard SC, ERCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid Disease in Eating Disordered and Depressed Patients. -146th Annual Meeting, American Psychiatric Association, May 25, 1993, San Francisco, CA, P.1.57 (Poster Session).** +- **2. RCW, DE, RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts: Evaluation of Suicide Risk in a Time of Managed Care.** + - **Psychiatric Practice and Managed Care, American Psychiatric Association, Vol. 5, No. 5, P 12, Sept-Oct 1999.** +- **3. ERCW, Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J: The Role of Morphine In the Development of Acute Stress Disorder and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Severe Burn Injury.** + - **411` Annual Meeting, American Burn Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009.** + +- 4. Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J, **RCW: Pen-traumatic Heart Rate as a Predictor of Acute Stress Disorder and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Burn Injury.** + +**- 419 Annual Meeting, American Burn Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009.** + +**\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W. M, MD PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES:** + +- **1. Thyroid RCW, Hazard SC, Dunlap PK, liRCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: disease and abnormal funct on test tents with eating isor ers and depression. Poster Session - American Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, May 25, 1993** +- **2. RCW, RCW: Management of Hostage Situations. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **3. RCW, RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective -- Part I. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **4. RCW,M RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective - Part II. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **5. RCW, ERCW, DE: Impact of Managed Care on Suicide Risk Assessment. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 1999 Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD, October 15, 1999** +- **6. RCW, RCW: Ethical Issues in Managed Care. American Psychiatric Association, 1999 Ethics Workshop, Washington, DC, November 3, 1999** +- **7. RCW, RCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Disaster Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **8. RCW, ERCW: Bioterrorism Dealing with Medical and Psychiatric Consequences of Victims and Responders. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **9. RCW, RCW: Psychiatric Consequences of Terrorism, Bioterrorism and** + +Disaster. Rocky Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 29, 2000 + +- 10. RCW, URCW: Suicide in an Era of HMO's and Managed Care. Rocky Entain Emo tonal Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 30, 2000 +- 11. RCW, IIIRCW: Psychological Response to Disasters and Terrorism. grnationa ociety of Political Psychology, 23rd Annual Scientific Meeting, Seattle, WA, July 4, 2000 +- 12. ERCW, MRCW: Biological Warfare Attack Scenarios, Response to Terrorist Attacks, and Sources of Conflict. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000 +- 13. •RCW, IRCW, Chapman M: Workplace Violence. American Academy of Psychiatry an the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000 +- 14. ERCW, MRCW: Biological Warfare: Attack Scenarios and Public Health Issues. Grand Rounds, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, December 8, 2000 +- 15. ERCW, Bioterrorism: A Short History of Biowarfare & Analysis of the Threat. rand Rounds, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, August 15, 2001 +- 16. RCW, IFIRCW: Situational Suicide. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, MiSeptem er 13, 2001 +- 17. ERCW, ERCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, FL, September 14, 2001 +- 18. EIRCW, IIRCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Assault with Anthrax as a Biological eapon. -Florida Psychiatric Society, Fall Meeting, Coconut Grove, FL, November 4, 2001 -Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002 +- 19. RCW,pRCW: Smallpox. Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health ciences enter, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002 +- 20. IIERCW, MRCW: Psychopharmacology Forensic Risk and Clinical Practice: Things the clinician must know. Apopka Community Health Center, Apopka, FL, March 13, 2002 +- 21. **RCW, pRCW: Overview of Terrorism and Bioterrorism. Orlando Police Academy, r ando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002** + +- 22. ■I **RCW: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002** +- **23.** ■I **Rcwin RCW: Smallpox as a Biological Weapon. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002** +- **24. RCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Southern Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, Loews Ventana Canyon Resort, Tucson, AZ, October 3, 2002** +- **25. In RCW,MI RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Mandatory Madness, Halifax Medical Center, Daytona USA, Daytona Beach, FL, December 14, 2002 26.. RCW,. RCW, Chapman MJ: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003** +- **27. RCW,Ill RCW: Medical and Psychological Sequelae of Bombings: Implications for First Responders and Critical Government Staff. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003** +- **28. RCW,MI RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Florida Psychiatric Society Spring Meeting, Orlando, FL, April 5, 2003** +- **29. RCW,. RCW: Terrorist Bombings: Medical and Psychiatric Impact. Southern Psychiatric Association's Annual Meeting, Nashville, TN, October 11, 2003** +- **30. III RCW,. RCW: Terrorism, Bombings, and Psychiatric Casualties. University of Florida, Department of Psychiatry, Visiting Professor Program, November 7, 2003** +- **31. RCW,. RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Tampa Bay Psychiatric Society, Tampa, FL, sponsored by Pfizer, January 29, 2004** +- **32. RCW, RCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004** +- **33. In RCW, RCW: Medical and Psychiatric Casualties of Terrorist Bombings. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004** +- **34. RCW,Ill RCW: Medical and Psychological Consequences of Bombings. Grand Rounds, Tulane University, Department of Psychiatry, New Orleans, LA, January 28, 2005** +- **35. IN RCW, RCW: Psychological Sequelae of Weapons of Mass Destruction on First Responders. South Central Center for Public Health** + +Preparedness/Alabama Department of Public Health,, AL, Satellite Conference, May 6, 2005 + +- 36. RCW,MI RCW: Medical and Psychological Aspects of Terrorist Bombings. Grand Rounds, Sinai Hospital, Department of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, June 2, 2005 RCW: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationship: The New Realities. (Abbreviated version) Forensic Psychiatry Fellows and Residents, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, January 24, 2006 +- 38. i RCW,MI RCW, Chapman MJ: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationship: The New Realities. Presidential Address. Southern Psychiatric Association, Baltimore, MD, September 30, 2006. +- 39. i RCW,MI RCW: When the System is Overwhelmed: Protecting the Provider during Biodisaster. Satellite Conference, University of Alabama Birmingham South Central Center for Public Health Preparedness/Alab Department of Public Health/Tulane University School of Public Health, AL, February 27, 2007. RCW: Testamentary Capacity from Isaac Ray to Anna N e . Grand Rounds, Case Western Reserve School of Medicine, Cleveland, , March 28, 2008 +- 41. **RCW,M RCW, Rundell JR, Winstead DK: Psychiatrists' Role In Disaster Management: Lessons Learned. Course 14, American Psychiatric Association, Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, May 3, 2008.** +- **42. RCW: Violence in the Elderly: Forensic and Treatment Concerns. Forensic Forum, Florida Psychiatric Society, ChampionsGate, FL, September 20, 2008.** +- **43. RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole Southern Psychiatric Association, September 25, 2008.** +- **44. RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole-Forensic Psychiatry Program, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, January 29, 2009.** +- **45. RCW, MI RCW: Domestic Violence as Portrayed in Film A Realistic Appraisal? Florida Psychiatric Society, St. Petersburg Beach, FL, March 20, 2009.** +- **46. El RCW, Silberman E, Preven D, Weissman S (chairperson): Indications for the Use of Combined Talking Therapy and Pharmacotherapy and How to Teach in Residency. Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, CW16, American Psychiatric Association, San Francisco, CA, May 19, 2009.** + +**\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. MD** + +### MEDIA: + +- 1. Time Magazine, Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome, May 16, 2005 +- 2. Reach MD Radio, Pedophilia. April 25, 2007 +- 3. MD Consult. Doug Joint telephone interview with Richard C. W. ■, **MD, Pedophilla. May 2, 2007** +- **4. The Korean Broadcasting System, KBS Special, Pedophilla. March 11, 2008.** +- **5. Tony Pipitone, WKMG-TV Channel 6, Mothers Who Kill Their Children. October 28, 2008.** +- **6. J. L. . Orlando Medical News. Cyberchondriacs. November 13, 2008.** +- **7. Fox 35 News, Orlando. Forensic Implications of Anthony case. December 11, 2008.** +- **8. Fox 35 News, Orlando. The Anthony Case: DNA Evidence. December 12, 2008.** +- **9. Jessica , WKMG-TV Channel 6. The Anthony Case: Baker Act and Stressors. January 23, 2009.** +- **10. Nam Nae Won and Jihyun Song. Korea Educational Broadcasting System. Pedophilia. March 30, 2009.** +- **11. Keith Landry, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress and Financial Strain. June 15, 2009.** +- **12. Heidi Hatch, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress on Families. June 16, 2009.** + +Jane Doe #4 + +[REDACTED] + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +**AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. [REDACTED] M.D.** + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W. [REDACTED] M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +1. My name is Richard C.W. [REDACTED] M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. + +2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. + +3. I, also, currently serve as a Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + +4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns [REDACTED] University and + +"K" + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe I/4 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe \$4 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiffs counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Klirnan of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Klimart, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kliman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe \$4. + +14. Plaintiff reports a history of alcohol use and art ex-boyfriend who drank alcohol and used pills that were "a form of oxycodine [sic' aform of heroine [sic)." (Page 18, tape 1) + +15. Plaintiff reports obtaining a restraining order against her ex-boyfriend, stating that he would spit in her face, push her, and was abusive. (Page 20, tape 1) + +16. Plaintiff reports talking with two psychiatrists at age 16 or 17 due to family + +issues and boyfriend issues. (Pages 2 and 3, tape 3). In the tapes, she makes no mention of telling the psychiatrists of her alleged encounters with Epstein. Moreover, while Plaintiff denies recruiting other girls, on page 24 of the Palm Beach Police Report, Plaintiff said she left anote for Epstein that indicated "for a good time call [Plaintiff] and [friend]" and left the girls' phone numbers. + +17. Plaintiff noted that while in high school a friend, Chris, died in amotor vehicle accident, that she was in shock from his death, and that she got over it after about/ In to 2 years, but that it still bothers her. (Page 4, GK Contemp notes) + +18. Plaintiff noted that aclose friend, Jen, died in a motor vehicle accident and that she was in shock for two months. (Page 4, GK Contemp notes) + +19. Plaintiff reported, "1 probably went there over 50 times." (Page 3, tape 4) + +20. Plaintiff was arrested at age 17 for DUI on 3/09/05. (Police Offense Report) + +21. On 10/31/04, fight occurred between plaintiff and Preston4a in back of cab. Plaintiff (age 17) had been drinking. Police were called for theft of cab fare. Upon arriving at residence, police found plaintiff in home with no shirt on. Plaintiff refused to cooperate with police and threatened to kill herself. alawas arrested for violation of protective order. (Police Offense Report) + +22. On 2/28/02, plaintiff was charged with shoplifting bras from Sardines and was issued a juvenile referral form. (Police Offense Report) + +23. On 9/21/04, a protective order was filed against Preston after an incident on 9/20/04 in which he accused her of cheating on him. He then began choking her, threw her against a wall, and yelled at plaintiff. He dumped beer on her, threw cigarettes in her face, and slammed her into the ground. On a previous incident in August 2004, plaintiff reported they agued and Mr. egrabbed her by her arms and threw her to the ground outside her house. Plaintiff noted she was in fear because he has a violent history and has verbally threatened her friends, family and herself. (Petition for Injunction for Protection) + +24.. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +25. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Pull Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, /lift 4.f amedical, clinical,school, and work records known to the attorney in the case. + +26. Dr. Kfiman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "available important aait lrelevantdocumentswhichsa beingdeliberatelywithheld from us." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, which wg hate r ested or thatwe ve stated would pig of medical opinion formation cal tbs topics concerning, which cam input is requested!' We request the same. + +27. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization; including the type and character of the alleged assault and key victim variables such as demographics; psychological reactions at the time of the trauma; previous psychiatric or psychological history, history of previous victimization; current or previous psychological difficulties; general personality dynamics and coping style; sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +28. It is also essential to understand the plaintiffs level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +29. Knowledge of plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +30. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. + +31. These, in essence, are the same or similar records that plaintiffs expert witness (Dr. Klizn an) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such + +identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and/or similar information be made available to us to conduct our examination. + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College of +Medicine + +STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared **RICHARD C.W.** +**[REDACTED]** M.D., who is ( ) personally known to me or ( ) who has produced +\_\_\_\_\_ as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that +the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this 4th day of August, 2009. + +![](_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg) + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746668/EFTA02746668.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746668/EFTA02746668.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..075be51a3acfc44337e1678bf4660aa2c0eace5f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746668/EFTA02746668.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1262 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746668.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 22, + "chars": 33862, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.51, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "CURRICULUM VITAE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 364.14, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 364.14, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 383.93999999999994 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TABLE OF CONTENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.02400000000003, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 364.14, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 364.14, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 246.02400000000003, + 110.16000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRESENT POSITION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.33600000000001, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 223.56000000000003 + ], + [ + 78.33600000000001, + 223.56000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EDUCATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.784, + 406.62 + ], + [ + 151.55532836914062, + 406.62 + ], + [ + 151.55532836914062, + 418.77 + ], + [ + 80.784, + 418.77 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDICAL LICENSE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 184.86572265625, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 184.86572265625, + 111.570556640625 + ], + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 111.570556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 170.91 + ], + [ + 169.48358154296875, + 170.91 + ], + [ + 169.48358154296875, + 185.070556640625 + ], + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 185.070556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ADDITIONAL TRAINING:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 231.66 + ], + [ + 207.37229919433594, + 231.66 + ], + [ + 207.37229919433594, + 246.2005615234375 + ], + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 246.2005615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 328.8640441894531, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 328.8640441894531, + 404.4505615234375 + ], + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 404.4505615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COMMITTEES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 632.61 + ], + [ + 157.8585968017578, + 632.61 + ], + [ + 157.8585968017578, + 647.070556640625 + ], + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 647.070556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "HONORS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 328.86 + ], + [ + 134.61058044433594, + 328.86 + ], + [ + 134.61058044433594, + 344.070556640625 + ], + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 344.070556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 536.22 + ], + [ + 233.24644470214844, + 536.22 + ], + [ + 233.24644470214844, + 550.7005615234375 + ], + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 550.7005615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REVIEWER:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 144.73580932617188, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 144.73580932617188, + 163.7005615234375 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 163.7005615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BOOK REVIEWS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 171.7356414794922, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 171.7356414794922, + 334.33056640625 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 334.33056640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PUBLICATIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 394.47 + ], + [ + 167.626220703125, + 394.47 + ], + [ + 167.626220703125, + 408.570556640625 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 408.570556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ABSTRACTS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.33600000000001, + 418.77 + ], + [ + 152.66659545898438, + 418.77 + ], + [ + 152.66659545898438, + 432.6033630371094 + ], + [ + 78.33600000000001, + 432.6033630371094 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDIA:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 121.8700180053711, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 121.8700180053711, + 125.83056640625 + ], + [ + 78.94800000000001, + 125.83056640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. [REDACTED] M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 456.552, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 456.552, + 196.82999999999998 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 196.82999999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 9 + ], + [ + "Line", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 88 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "TableOfContents", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 198 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 95 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 87 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 113 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 86 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 219 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 289 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 290 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 327 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 335 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 334 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 283 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746668" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746668/_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746668/_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f4fa4e8112410236430b234ff8032482cb9bfb7a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746668/_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:107189756497c29bb738e7569ec26a32b7257fc7c65fa3f1ad6cfb16d7366cfc +size 12349 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746690/EFTA02746690.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746690/EFTA02746690.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3ee2f93c97a3b584a026d88d67cdc4a3dc0d253d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746690/EFTA02746690.md @@ -0,0 +1,185 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +### Defendant Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion To Compel Plaintiff, Jane Doe #4's Independent Medical Examination Pursuant to Rule 35 + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his attorneys, and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 35 and other applicable rules, hereby moves this Court for an order directing that the Plaintiff, Jane Doe # 4 (case #80380), submit to a compulsory psychological/psychiatric medical examination (a/k/a independent medical examination) by Ryan e, M.D. of Richard e M.D. at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP. located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401. In support, Epstein states: + +## Background + +1. This Court entered an order relating to the IME of CMA, another Plaintiff seeking similar damages against Epstein. See Exhibit "A." Given the damages claimed in this matter, it is clear that Plaintiff has placed her medical condition at issue + +and that an IME is required. Despite that fact and the fact that discovery has been consolidated, Defendant is required to file a Rule 35 Motion seeking an IME. Thus, the undersigned believes that an Omnibus Order is required relative to all Plaintiffs' IMEs in that each claim similar damages and raise similar claims. Such an order would conserve judicial resources and require that the attorneys only negotiate dates and times for said IMEs. + +2. Nonetheless, this particular Motion, pursuant to Rule 35, only addresses the IME of Jane Doe #4. + +3. Plaintiff has alleged in her action that Defendant sexually battered her and, as a result, Plaintiffs seek millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, "confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries." See Second Amended Complaint. (DE 62) Plaintiff, Jane Doe #4, also claims Epstein "intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Jane Doe, creating reasonable fear of imminent peril. . . [and] [a]s a proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane Doe, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages." Id. at ¶¶ 16-22. Jane Doe # 4 further alleges that she suffered ". ..mental or sexual injury. . .that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. . .[and]. .Jane Doe has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain." Id. at ¶¶ 23-28. + +4. In addition, Jane Doe #4 provided her former boyfriend's name, Mr. Vinyard, to her expert, Gilbert Kliman, M.D. In fact, she stated in the interview with Dr. Kliman that Mr. Vinyard was not a good influence on her and that he was an alcoholic. + +See Exhibit "B". In addition, on 9/20/04, a battery report was filed involving Jane Doe #4 and Mr. Vinyard in reference to an argument where he grabbed her by the neck and began spitting on her and calling her a cheater. Jane Doe #4 also tried to bite Mr. Vinyard. See Exhibit "C". Next, a repeat domestic violence case was filed on 9/21/04 and was closed on a Final Judgment for Protection Order on 10/6/04. Apparently, Mr. Vinyard was physically and verbally abusive to Jane Doe Number 4. See Exhibit "D". On 10/6/04, an Order of Protection was issued against Vinyard and was enforce until 10/6/05. See Exhibit "E". Mr. Vinyard was also arrested on 12/24/03 and charged with reckless driving and leaving the scene of an accident with damages after he and Jane Doe #4 hit a tree and fled the scene after leaving a party. See Exhibit "F". On 10/31/04, officers entered Jane Doe #4's home in connection with a disturbance between her and Mr. Vinyard. Officers found Jane Doe #4 without a top on and advised her to get dressed; however, she kept yelling at police demanding that they leave her house. See Exhibit "G". On 11/31/04, Mr. Vinyard was arrested for violation of domestic violence injunction order for repeat violence against Jane Doe #4. Apparently, Jane Doe #4 and Vinyard were arguing in a cab over not having money to pay the fair and Mr. Vinyard hit Jane Doe #4. See Exhibit "H". + +5. In addition, Jane Doe Number #4 advised Dr. Kliman that her boyfriend (Chris) died in a car accident involving a DUI and her best friend (Jen) died in an automobile accident involving drinking. See Exhibit "I." In 2003, Jane Doe #4 sought counseling because of a dysfunctional home situation, particularly with her father. Finally, Jane Doe #4 described herself as angry, bitter, disliking herself, depressed, and having problems with her body image — all pre-Epstein. See supra. + +6. Furthermore, it is important for this court to review the detailed Affidavit of Dr. • attached hereto in that it delineates for the Court several experiences visited upon Jane Doe which may have caused the physical, emotional and psychological trauma she claims occurred at the hands of Epstein. See Affidavit of Dr. IMAttached hereto as Exhibit "J". + +7. Based upon the foregoing, it is clear that Jane Doe #4 has placed her physical, emotional, medical and psychological conditions at issue. Therefore, an IME is warranted. Without an IME, Epstein would be severely prejudiced. The Affidavit of Dr. Mclearly sets out the IME and scope of the examination that must be conducted. See also, the curriculum vitae of Dr. Ryan. See Exhibit "K". The examination is set to occur at the undersigned office on October 13, 14, 15 or 16, 2009 (whichever is more convenient for Plaintiff or whichever date the court so orders). Plaintiff has not provide dates for the IME; however, out of abundance of caution and to comply with the applicable rule, Defendant has, on a unilateral basis, set same pending the outcome of this Motion. Obviously, if the date noticed is not sufficient or agreeable, the undersigned will renotice same for one of the four dates suggested. + +8. As this court is well aware, Plaintiff and Defendant are required to complete discovery under the Court's trial schedule. It is not the undersigned's intention to require the court additional work; however, it is imperative that discovery be timely scheduled and completed. The court's assistance is needed in this instance as to the IME. + +9. Based upon the foregoing, an IME of Plaintiff must occur in order to address her claims and the damages she seeks to recover. The IME is expected to last between 6-8 hours, and the scope of same is set forth in the Affidavit of Dr. IN + +10. Pursuant to Rule 35, Fed.R.Civ.Pro, a party may move for an examination by a qualified examiner if the Plaintiffs mental/emotional and/or psychological status is at issue in a case. + +11. Defendant would be severely prejudiced unless he is able to have an examination conducted by a qualified examiner separate and apart from any psychologist/psychiatrist or similar behavioral health provider who may have or may ultimately see the Plaintiff and testify in court. + +12. Defendant's counsel has retained the services of Richard M.D. and Ryan S M.D., of C.W. S M.D., P.A. located at 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd., #219 Lake Mary, FL 32746. Ryan e M.D., will be performing the examination. Dr. Ryan Halls' specialties include forensic psychiatry, general psychiatry and medical psychiatry. See Exhibit attached outlining Ryan S M.D.'s qualifications and the scope of the examination which he intends and is required to conduct in order to render a report. See also Affidavit of Ryan C.W. • M.D., outlining the scope of examination and other Rule 35 requirements. Accordingly, this motion comports with Rule 35. The applicable notice has been filed simultaneously. Defendant will arrange for a videotape of the examination. + +13. The undersigned is requesting the court's assistance with regard to compelling the IME of Plaintiff along with dates for same to occur. + +# Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff by telephone and by email; however, an agreement has not been reached. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an Order: + +- a. providing a date and time for Plaintiffs IME to occur on October 13, 14, 15 or 16, 2009; +- b. providing that the independent medical examination take place at 9:00 a.m. (on a date to be determined by the court) at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP. located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401 under the protocol set forth by Dr. ■ **in his affidavit, by videotape and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper.** + +## **Certificate of Service** + +**I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of recqrsi identifi on t e following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this fe day of , 2009** + +**Respectfully s bmi** + +**By: CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Flo da Bar No. 224162 rcritAbciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpikeabcIclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)** + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. █, Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Brad █, Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. █, Esq. +█ Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 +Fax: 561-515-2610 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-08804* +[skuvin@riccilaw.com](mailto:skuvin@riccilaw.com) +[tleopold@riccilaw.com](mailto:tleopold@riccilaw.com) + +cc. Dr. Ryan [REDACTED] + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746690/EFTA02746690.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746690/EFTA02746690.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aa6f92918b2c3adc418c23c1df456977073f1f63 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746690/EFTA02746690.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,443 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746690.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 12622, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.49, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 202.572, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 412.7753601074219, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 412.7753601074219, + 102.53997802734375 + ], + [ + 202.572, + 102.53997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion To Compel Plaintiff, Jane Doe #4's \nIndependent Medical Examination Pursuant to Rule 35", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 95.47200000000001, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 521.97509765625, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 521.97509765625, + 393.16998291015625 + ], + [ + 95.47200000000001, + 393.16998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 271.728, + 598.59 + ], + [ + 348.349853515625, + 598.59 + ], + [ + 348.349853515625, + 614.4199981689453 + ], + [ + 271.728, + 614.4199981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 162.792, + 703.89 + ], + [ + 460.13885498046875, + 703.89 + ], + [ + 460.13885498046875, + 720.1700057983398 + ], + [ + 162.792, + 720.1700057983398 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.412, + 372.6 + ], + [ + 371.34881591796875, + 372.6 + ], + [ + 371.34881591796875, + 387.9574890136719 + ], + [ + 245.412, + 387.9574890136719 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 426.56399999999996, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 426.56399999999996, + 135.27 + ], + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 135.27 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746690" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746698/EFTA02746698.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746698/EFTA02746698.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fa5e4b2a6fdfe5a108967e430d44ec0e42b10bc0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746698/EFTA02746698.md @@ -0,0 +1,145 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE # 4 (80380) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan M, M.D. of C.W. S M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on October 14, 2009 at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP, located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring a sweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. See infra and Motion attached at DE (303) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well. + +2. Plaintiff has not provided an available date; however, unless a timely and valid objection to this Notice is made, the Plaintiff is required by this Rule to be in attendance at the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as a witness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (303). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (303). + +See Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documents have been to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient notice has + +> By MICHA IKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of resojd identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on thisieb day of September, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: ROB . CR1TTON, JR., ESQ. Flo da Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 moike@bc1claw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mennelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com ahorowitzOsexabuseattomev.com Counsel for Plaintiffs. In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. II, Esq. + +Brad la, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp®law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe Isidro M. MI, Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datum Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, 08-80469 + +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isx@searcvlaw.com + +irth(@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecfbrucer + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@vodhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesa@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746698/EFTA02746698.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746698/EFTA02746698.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a937a57130fcbc088c8e7d6c57cc3f7a7db71911 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746698/EFTA02746698.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,265 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746698.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5078, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.6, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 412.8403625488281, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 412.8403625488281, + 102.7230224609375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 102.7230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF \nPLAINTIFF, JANE DOE # 4 (80380)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.248, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 520.924072265625, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 520.924072265625, + 393.35302734375 + ], + [ + 94.248, + 393.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 516.78 + ], + [ + 364.95050048828125, + 516.78 + ], + [ + 364.95050048828125, + 530.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 530.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.108, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 522.0360000000001, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 522.0360000000001, + 281.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 189.108, + 281.2330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 135 + ], + [ + "Line", + 67 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 99 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 47 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746698" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746702/EFTA02746702.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746702/EFTA02746702.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8bc1cb57889163ba87d1b571d1c74a070ad3e7a6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746702/EFTA02746702.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg) + +A LIMITED UABIUTY PARTNERSHIP + +J. MICHAEL BURMAN. PA" GREGORY W. COLEMAN. P.A. ROBERT D. CRITTON. Ht. P.A. I BERNARD LEBEDEKER MARK T. Lurriuk. PA. JEFFREY C PENN MICHAEL 1. PIKE HEATHER MCNAMARA RUDA DAVID YAREMA + +'HONDA WARD CEATMID CIVIL DUAL LAWYER IMHAITTED TO PRACTICE IN FLoNDA AND COLomoo + +August 27, 2009 + +## Sent by E.Mail and U.S. Mail + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd. Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 + +Re: Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein + +Dear Stuart: + +ADELQLII J. BENAVENTE PAPALECAUMNESTiGATOR JESSICA CADWELL BOBBIE M. MCKENNA ASHUE STOKEN-BAIUNG BETTY STOKES PAMUCALS RITA H. EUDNYIC OF COUNSEL ED RICO StECIN.CONSVMER IuSTKE COUNSEL + +Please be advised that Mr. Epstein plans to be in attendance at the deposition of your client. He does not intend to engage in any conversation with your client. However, it is certainly his right as a party-defendant in the lawsuit to be present and to assist counsel in the defense of any case. + +Cordially ours, + +Robe Critton, Jr. + +RDC/ciz + +cc: Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. + +EXHIBIT / \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746702/EFTA02746702.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746702/EFTA02746702.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..36f8f42c2237fa124c6d7389be4b4a489626857a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746702/EFTA02746702.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746702.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1094, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.87, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Sent by E.Mail and U.S. Mail", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 85.68, + 300.51 + ], + [ + 244.33343505859375, + 300.51 + ], + [ + 244.33343505859375, + 315.42352294921875 + ], + [ + 85.68, + 315.42352294921875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 96 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746702" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746702/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746702/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c94f046729528c26f5fa6ff33901bb9d3d4ca665 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746702/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7cc1154570c2772f05d4813a776cf0299038cc19d4fd7fafcfcce3e8047ac524 +size 12792 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746703/EFTA02746703.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746703/EFTA02746703.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c431e9f440e9abce19c0f785f96a1ecc75bc34a8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746703/EFTA02746703.md @@ -0,0 +1,154 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAall + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Caser 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08.80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +![](_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg) + +## Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion To Strike Plaintiff's Motion For Protective Order (DE 292) And Emergency Motion To Allow The Attendance Of Jeffrey Epstein At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs And Response In Opposition To Plaintiffs', Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion For Protective Order As To Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, by and through his undersigned counsel, and pursuant to all applicable mles, including Local Rule 7.1(e) and Local Rule 12, hereby files and serves his Emergency Motion To Strike Plaintiff's Motion For Protective Order (DE 292) And Emergency Motion To Allow The Attendance Of Jeffrey Epstein At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs And Response In Opposition To Plaintiffs', Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion For Protective Order As To Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs. In support, Epstein states: + +## Introduction and Background + +1. On August 19, 2009, Defendant sent aNotice for Taking the Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 for September 16, 2009. Exhibit "1" + +EXHIBIT\_ 2.\_ + +2. Additionally, notices were sent out in other cases in connection with deposing additional Plaintiffs. + +3. No objection(s) was/were received for Jane Doe No. 4, which was the only deposition set relative to the Jane Doe 2-8 Plaintiffs. + +4. On August 27, 2009, the undersigned counsel sent aletter to counsel for Jane Doe No. 4 concerning her deposition and the scheduling of same on the above date. See Exhibit "2". + +5. No response was received until counsel for Jane Doe No. 4 called on September 8, 2009, approximately eight days prior to the scheduled deposition, to indicate that they now had an objection and would be filing amotion for protective order seeking to preventEpstein from attending the deposition. Once again, Plaintiffs are attempting to stifle this litigation through their own delay tactics during discovery. Plaintiffs wish not only to attempt to force Epstein to trial without any meaningful discovery, but now wish to ban Epstein from any depositions, thereby preventing him from assisting his attorneys in his very own defense. What's next — will Plaintiffs seek to preventEpstein from attending any of the trials that result from the lawsuits Jane Does 2-8 have initiated? Plaintiffs see millions of dollars in damages, both compensatory and punitive, against Defendant. + +6. Defendant is filing this emergency motion and his immediate response to the motion for protective order to guarantee his right to be present and assist counsel in deposing not only Jane Doe No. 4, but other plaintiffs and witnesses in these cases. To hold otherwise would violate Epstein's due process rights to defend the very allegations Plaintiffs have alleged against him. Does aDefendant not have a right to be present at depositions or other court proceedings to assist counsel with the defense of his case? Does a Defendant, no matter what the charges or the allegations, have full and unbridled access to the court system and the proceedings it governs, + +including discovery? The short answer is unequivocally, yes. To hold otherwise would be a direct violation of Epstein's constitutional due process rights. Plaintiffs' attempts to play fast and loose with the law should not be tolerated. + +7. As the court is aware, plaintiffs and defendants routinely attend depositions of parties and other witnesses in both State and Federal court proceedings. In fact, parties have a right under the law to attend such depositions. + +8. As the court will note from Exhibit 2, counsel for the Defendant specifically stated that "Please be advised that Mr. Epstein plans to be in attendance at the deposition of your client. He does not intend to engage in any conversation with your client. However, it is certainly his right as aparty-defendant in the lawsuit to be present and to assist counsel in the defense of any case." Despite this right, Plaintiffs continue to attempt to control how discovery is conducted in this case and how this court has historically governed discovery. + +9. Interestingly, in Jane Doe II, the state court case, attorney Sid took the deposition of the Defendant and his client, Jane Doe II, was presentthroughout the deposition. This is despite her claims of "emotional trauma" set forth in her complaint. Jane Doe No. II is also aPlaintiff in the federal court proceeding Jane Doe II v. Jeffrey Epstein (Case No. 09-CIV-80469). Is this court going to start a precedent where it allows Plaintiffs to attend the depositions of Jeffrey Epstein, but not allow Epstein to attend their depositions (i.e., the very Plaintiffs that have asserted claims against him for millions of dollars)? This court should not condone such a practice. + +10. The undersigned is well aware of the court's No-Contact Order entered on July 31, 2009 (DE 238). A copy of the order is attached as Exhibit "3". In fact, the order provides that the defendant have no direct or indirect contact with the plaintiffs, nor communications with + +the plaintiffs either directly or indirectly. However, there is no prohibition against Mr. Epstein's attendance at a deposition where, as is reflected in the order, the communication will be made to the plaintiff solely through defense counsel with one or more of plaintiffs' counsel of record present in the room in a videotaped deposition. Obviously, any inappropriate contact or communication will certainly be flagged by the attorneys in attendance. As such, Plaintiffs really have the cart before the horse in this instance (i.e., nothing prevents Epstein from attending these depositions and, to the extent Plaintiffs believe that something improper occurs at any deposition, only then can that circumstance be addressed by amotion such as the instant one.) + +11. Next, Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-8, attempt to use the Affidavit of Dr. Kliman for every motion for protective order/objection filed to date. This also includes the two most recent motions, which attempt to prevent Defendant's investigators from doing their job, such that the Defendant and his attorneys can defend the claims asserted in these cases. Plaintiffs lose sight of the fact that the court, in discussing the Non-Prosecution Agreement, inquired as to whether Epstein and his counsel could fully defend the case, which included discovery and investigation. All plaintiffs' counsel and the USAO responded in the affirmative. In fact, Plaintiffs universally agreed at the June 12, 2009 hearing on Defendant's Motion to Stay that regular discovery could proceed. 5.e.A Composite Exhibit "4" at pages 26-30 & 33-34. For instance, the court asked Plaintiffs' attorneys the following questions: + +The Court: [) So again, I just want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend acase being prosecuted against him or her, that that in and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to criminal prosecution? (Ex. "A," p.26). + +•wr + +The Court: You agree he should be able to take the ordinary steps that a defendant in acivil action can take and not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? (Ex. "A," p.27). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: Okay. But again, you're in agreement with everyone else so far that's spoken on behalf of a plaintiff that defending the case in the normal course of conducting discovery and filing motions would not be abreach? (Ex. "A," p.30). + +Mr. Horowitz — counsel for Jane Does 2-7: Subject to your rulings, of course, yes. (Ex. "A," p.30). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: But you're not taking the position that other than possibly doing something in litigation which is any other discovery, motion practice, investigations that someone would ordinarily do in the course of defending acivil case would constitute aviolation of the agreement? (Ex. "A," p.34). + +Ms. Villafana: No, your honor. I mean, civil litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take discovery is part of what civil litigation is all about.... But.. ., Mr. Epstein is entitled to take the deposition of aPlaintiff and to subpoena records, etc. (Ex. "A," p.34) + +12. It is clear from the transcript attached as Exhibit "4" that each of the Plaintiffs' attorneys, including Mr. Horowitz for Jane Does 2-8, expected and conceded that regular/traditional discovery would take place (i.e., discovery, motion practice, depositions, requests for records, and investigations). + +13. Importantly, Plaintiffs' counsel advised the undersigned that they coordinate their efforts in joint conference calls at least two times per month. At recent depositions of two witnesses, Alfredo Rodriguez and Juan Alessi, five different plaintiffs' attorneys questioned the witnesses for approximately six to eight hours, often repeating the same or similar questions that had previously been asked. + +14. Clearly, the Plaintiffs' counsel wish to control discovery and how the Defendant is allowed to obtain information to defend these cases. However, the court has ruled on a number of these issues as follows: + +> A. Plaintiffs' counsels sought to preclude the Defendant from serving third party subpoenas and allowing only Plaintiffs' counsel to obtain + +depositions and those materials and "filter them" to defense counsel. That motion was denied, and the court tailored amethod such that the Defendant could obtain the records directly. + +- B. Plaintiffs' counsels sought to limit the ' al psychiatric examination in C.M.A. v. Jeffrey Epstein and (Case No. 08- 111111), as to time, subject matter and scope. However, Magistrate entered an order denying the requested restrictions. +- C. Other Plaintiffs' attorneys have said that they object to requested psychological exam of their client(s), thus motions for such exams will now need to be filed; yet all seek millions of dollars in damages for alleged psychological and emotional trauma. +- D. Many Plaintiffs' object to discovery regarding current and past employment (although they are seeking loss of income, both in past and future). +- E. All Plaintiffs object to prior sexual history, consensual and forced as being irrelevant, although in many of the medical records that are now being obtained, as well as the psychiatric exams done by Dr. Kliman, there is reference to rape, molestation, abusive relationships (both physical and verbal), prior abortions, illegal drugs and alcohol abuse. + +15. Clearly, Plaintiffs wish to make allegations; however, they forget that they must meet their burden by proving same. Meeting that burden and disproving those allegations is not possible if this court allows Plaintiffs to stifle and/or control the discovery process. + +16. Specifically, with regard to Jane Doe No. 4, which is the deposition set for next week, September 16, 2009, the plaintiff has in her past(see affidavit of Richard C.W. M.D., an expert psychiatrist retained by Defendant to conduct exams on various claimants.) See + +### Exhibit "5" + +- A. Sought counseling due to a dysfunctional home situation, specifically with regard to her father. She described herself as being angry, bitter, depressed and having body image problems; +- B. Had an ex-boyfriend, Preston Vinyard, who was, on information and belief, a drug dealer who she lived with; +- C. Had drug and alcohol problems herself; and + +- D. Spoke with two psychiatrists when she was sixteen or seventeen (before this lawsuit!) and did not reference Epstein, but did reference her boyfriend and family issues. + +17. There are police reports that reflect that: + +- A. In September 2004, a battery report was filed regarding Jane Doe No. 4 and Vinyard based on an argument where he grabbed her by the neck and began spitting on her and calling her acheater. +- B. Also in September 2004, there was adomestic violence file opened where Vinyard was physically and verbally abusive to Jane Doe No. 4, his girlfriend at the time. There is reference that the two started aserious relationship in January 2002, when she was only fourteen (14) years old. +- C. Vinyard was arrested in December 2003, and charged with reckless driving and leaving the scene of the accident with Jane Doe No. 4, when their vehicle hit atree and they fled. + +18. Moreover, an ex-boyfriend of Jane Doe No. 4 died in aDUI accident and it took her two years to get over his death, and another good friend of hers, "Jen," died in an automobile accident involving drinking. Within her Amended Complaint and Answers to Interrogatories, she indicates that she went to Epstein's house on several occasions. However, at no time did she call the police, at no time did she report any traumatic or severe emotional trauma, nor alleged coercion, force or improper behavior by Epstein until she got a "lawyer" and is now pursuing claims for millions of dollars. Epstein's assistance to his attorneys at these depositions regarding the above issues is not only aconstitutional due process right afforded to him but essential given the fact that this court has ruled that Plaintiffs' depositions can only occur one time, no "second bite" absent acourt order. + +19. Given the breadth of the allegations made against Epstein and the substantial damages sought, Epstein has an unequivocal and constitutional right to be present at any deposition such that he can assist his counsel with the defense of these cases. See infra. Dr. ■ + +also prepared affidavits regarding Jane Does 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7, which are attached to DE 247. + +#### Memorandum Of Law + +20. Plaintiffs' motion is required to be denied as they have failed to meet their burden showing the "extraordinary circumstances" necessary to establish good cause to support a protective order which would grant the extraordinarily rare relief of preventing anamed party from attending in person the deposition of another named party. Also requiring denial of Plaintiffs' motion is the fact that it seeks to exclude Epstein from all the depositions of all the Plaintiffs in actions before this Court. Such relief is unprecedented and attempts to have this Court look at the Plaintiffs' collectively as opposed to analyzing each case based on facts versus broad speculation whether "extraordinary circumstances" exist on a case by case basis. In other words, the standard is such that the Court would be required to determine whether each Plaintiff has met her burden, should the Court consider adopting such extraordinary relief. On its face, the motion does not meet the necessary burden as to Jane Doe 4, or Jane Does 2, 3, 5, 6, or 7. + +# Discussion of Law Requiring the Denial of the Requested Protective Order + +Rule 26(cX1)(E), Fed.R.Civ.P. (2009), governing protective orders, provides in relevant part that: + +(1) In General. A party or any person from whom discovery is sought may move for aprotective order in the court where the action is pending--or as an alternative on matters relating to a deposition, in the court for the district where the deposition will be taken. The motion must include acertification that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with other affected parties in an effort to resolve the dispute without court action. The court may, for good cause, issue an order to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense, including one or more of the following: • • + +(E) designating the persons who may be present while the discovery is conducted; + +In seeking to prevent the Defendant from being present in the room where the Plaintiffs are being deposed, Plaintiffs generally rely on treatise material from & 8 Federal Practice & Procedure Civ.2d, P041, and cases cited therein. The case of Gaella v. Onassis 487 F.2d 986, at 997 (2d Cir. 1973), cited by Plaintiffs, makes clear that the exclusion of a party from adeposition "should be ordered rarely indeed." Unlike the Gaella case, there is no showing by each of the Plaintiffs that there has been any conduct by Epstein, in rightfully defending the actions filed against him, reflecting "an irrepressible intent to continue ... harassment" of any Plaintiff or acomplete disregard of the judicial process, i.e. prior alleged conduct versus any action/conduct displayed in this or other cases that would justify extraordinary relief. There is absolutely no basis in the record to indicate that Epstein will act other than properly and with the proper decorum at the depositions of the Plaintiffs and abide in all respects with the No-Contact Order. + +Wherefore, Epstein respectfully requests that this Court enter an order denying Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order, provide that Epstein is permitted to attend the depositions of the Plaintiffs that have asserted claims against him in the related matters, and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +> Robert D. on, Jr. Michael J. ike Attorney for Defendant Epstein + +#### Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that atrue copy of the foregoing was hand-delivered to the Clerk of the Court as required by the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida and electronically mailed to all counsel of record identified on the following Service List on this 1 1 th day of September, 2009. + +#### Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08- 80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08- 80994 Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80811 reelrhw@,hotmail.com Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +Brad MI Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@sra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80893 Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp®law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe Isidro M. Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isicironarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80469 + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 isx@searcvlaw.com ith@searcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecfg,brucer inhart y.coimam Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold-Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 skuvin@riccilaw.com tle000ld@riccilaw.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsberg@oodhurst.corn kezellapodburst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jazescabellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully submi + +By: + +ROBERT CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida B No. 224162 rcrit@bc law.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike(abc1claw.com BURMAN, CRTITON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 303Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746703/EFTA02746703.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746703/EFTA02746703.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..575cd5fa708a29a835cc22958d8f3b0e87c322c5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746703/EFTA02746703.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,621 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746703.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 20474, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.8, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 407.592, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 407.592, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 112.59 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion To Strike Plaintiff's Motion For \nProtective Order (DE 292) And Emergency Motion To Allow The \nAttendance Of Jeffrey Epstein At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs And Response \nIn Opposition To Plaintiffs', Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion For Protective Order \nAs To Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs, With \nIncorporated Memorandum of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 119.952, + 343.43999999999994 + ], + [ + 504.9, + 343.43999999999994 + ], + [ + 504.9, + 427.85931396484375 + ], + [ + 119.952, + 427.85931396484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Introduction and Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 238.68, + 600.21 + ], + [ + 390.8306884765625, + 600.21 + ], + [ + 390.8306884765625, + 614.79 + ], + [ + 238.68, + 614.79 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Exhibit \"5\"", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 87.51599999999999, + 577.53 + ], + [ + 148.2588653564453, + 577.53 + ], + [ + 148.2588653564453, + 590.6800842285156 + ], + [ + 87.51599999999999, + 590.6800842285156 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 144.17999999999998 + ], + [ + 365.2420349121094, + 144.17999999999998 + ], + [ + 365.2420349121094, + 157.14000000000001 + ], + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 157.14000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Discussion of Law Requiring the Denial of the Requested Protective Order", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 128.51999999999998, + 459.2699999999999 + ], + [ + 500.9687194824219, + 459.2699999999999 + ], + [ + 500.9687194824219, + 479.11663818359375 + ], + [ + 128.51999999999998, + 479.11663818359375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 272.34000000000003, + 91.53 + ], + [ + 381.55316162109375, + 91.53 + ], + [ + 381.55316162109375, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 272.34000000000003, + 104.49 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 257.03999999999996, + 224.37 + ], + [ + 365.5640869140625, + 224.37 + ], + [ + 365.5640869140625, + 236.51999999999998 + ], + [ + 257.03999999999996, + 236.51999999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 261 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 399 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 408 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 433 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 406 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 418 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 435 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 416 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 306 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 342 + ], + [ + "Line", + 68 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 293 + ], + [ + "Line", + 68 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746703" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746703/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746703/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d12fd31ddd9f7502ebe6374076ba690dbad34174 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746703/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c964e6e38b3ee9d9550f25ebf9e080604482b4bc7d8c70b7980360f48c9a29af +size 10744 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746714/EFTA02746714.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746714/EFTA02746714.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7d64d7b616dee57d74cf1542adaa0d0ae3b83977 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746714/EFTA02746714.md @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ +Robert D. Critton Jr. + +From: Adam Horowitz phorowitz©sexabuseattomey.comi + +Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 11:43 AM + +To: Michael J. Pike; Robert D. Critton Jr. + +Cc: Stuart Mermelstein + +Subject: Jane Does v. Epstein + +Please allow this to confirm that Jeffrey Epstein will not attend tomorrow's deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 (in the absence of a Court order permitting him to attend). We understand you may wish to have your client listen in by telephone or view a videofeed of the deposition, but will not be seen by our client. + +Regards, + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +www. sexabuseattorney. corn + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +ahorowitzesexabuseattorney.corn + +Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +From: Michael J. Pike [mailto:MPike@bddaw.com) + +Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 10:54 AM + +To: Stuart Mermelstein; Adam Horowitz + +Cc: Robert D. Critton Jr.; Jessica Cadwell + +Subject: FW: Jane Does v. Epstein + +Gentlemen: + +Isent the e-mail below weeks ago. I have not heard back from you. I'm entitled to the questionnaires Kliman had your clients fill out and which he utilized to formulate his opinions. I need them by tomorrow since they are well over due. If not, I will have no other choice to file a motion, which I do not want to do given how we have worked together on these issues in the past. Let me know, pike. + +From: Michael J. Pike + +Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 11:37 AM + +To: Robert D. Critton Jr.; Stuart Mermelstein; Ashlie Stoken-Baring; Connie Zaguirre + +Subject: Jane Does v. Epstein + +From reviewing the transcripts, it seems Dr. Kliman utilized Questionnaire's with all of your clients. I need them. Please advise of your position. I'm sure you will produce since they are + +EXHIBIT 3 + +discoverable. Thanks. + +Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman 515 N. Flagler Dr., Ste. 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Telephone: (561) 842-2820 Facsimile (561) 844-6929 + +## PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION + +The information contained in this transmission is attorney/client privileged and/or attorney work product. If you are not the addressee or authorized by the addressee to receive this message, you shall not review, disclose, copy, distribute or otherwise use this message (including any attachments). If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy the message (including attachments) and all copies. Thank you. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746714/EFTA02746714.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746714/EFTA02746714.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1c272f2ca78211d847fd4ba2dbd1c0b0ef25b9bc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746714/EFTA02746714.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746714.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2498, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.55, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 53.24399999999999, + 185.49 + ], + [ + 366.2596130371094, + 185.49 + ], + [ + 366.2596130371094, + 200.18701171875 + ], + [ + 53.24399999999999, + 200.18701171875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 339 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 33 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746714" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746716/EFTA02746716.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746716/EFTA02746716.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d54ac4afd672ce68230ff820de8c3fd5dfa17e23 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746716/EFTA02746716.md @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +/ + +## AFFIDAVIT OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Jeffrey E. Epstein having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +- 1. My office is located at 250 Australian Avenue South, 14th Floor, West Palm Beach, Florida. Its location has been well publicized in the news. +- 2. I met with my attorneys, Robert D. Critton, Jr. and Mark T. Luttier, at 12:30 p.m. in preparation for the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 which was to take place beginning at 1:00 p.m. on September 16, 2009. +- 3. I was aware of the motion for protective order which had been served in this case by counsel for Jane Doe No. 4 and the Emergency Motion To Strike Plaintiff's Motion For + +EXHIBIT y + +Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein Page 2 + +Protective Order And Emergency Motion To Allow The Attendance Of Jeffrey Epstein At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs And Response In Opposition To Plaintiff's', Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion For Protective Order As To Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs, With Inceiporated MeinOrtiiidinn of Law, which had been -filed on my behalf such that I could attend the deposition and assist my attorneys in my defense. + +4. I also understood that as of 1:00 p.m. on September 16, after I had finished speaking with my attorneys that the court had not ruled regarding the above-referenced motions. + +5. I was instructed by my attorneys that I could not attend the deposition and therefore avideo feed was set up such that I could view the deposition from my home. + +6. I also understood that my attorneys did not want me in the building after the deposition began. + +7. At 1:04 p.m. after we assumed that everyone would be in the deposition room, my lawyers went down on one elevator and I went down on another elevator with my driver, Igor Zinoviev, both exiting at approximately the same time. + +8. I asked Igor where he had parked, and he said "out front". We exited the elevator, I walked toward the front door. Near the front door, I saw ataller woman and a shorter woman who I thought might be Jane Doe No. 4 and immediately turned to my left and went out a separate exit to the garage. + +9. At no time did I speak with or attempt to interact with either women. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +effrey\_B Bps + +Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein Page 3 + +## STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +Ihereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to adnainiater oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Jeffrey E. Epstein known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above named person: \_le rectr , and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this day of Slit.. i 7 , 2009. + +Mail) + +AME: Shr n /. IM" itm,,(SEAL) NOTARY PUBLIC/STATE OF FLORIDA COMMISSION NO.: + +MY COMMISSIOI'lgARES: + +![](_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746716/EFTA02746716.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746716/EFTA02746716.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d9d99009e04ad532ce458b533cc0f989db1a460d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746716/EFTA02746716.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,218 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746716.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3417, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.17, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.8457336425781, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 412.8457336425781, + 116.63999999999999 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 116.63999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 371.79 + ], + [ + 418.58154296875, + 371.79 + ], + [ + 418.58154296875, + 387.18 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 387.18 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "STATE OF FLORIDA \nCOUNTY OF PALM BEACH", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 163.62 + ], + [ + 228.88800000000003, + 163.62 + ], + [ + 228.88800000000003, + 190.35 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 190.35 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 222 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 325 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 195 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746716" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746716/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746716/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dae0ccb51cb2808c2f697a90ab1444688d815046 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746716/_page_2_Picture_8.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8a9aba0cadd795e0463674ec8d9e04467f315b43e1ef26ac5268abcb58237a2a +size 18166 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746719/EFTA02746719.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746719/EFTA02746719.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3b06883e7f41b0b8c8179b72b39cb85b06483a45 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746719/EFTA02746719.md @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +## AFFIDAVIT OF IGOR ZINOVIEV + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Igor Zinoviev having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +- 1. I work for Jeffrey Epstein. I as well drive him from place to place. +- 2. At approximately 1:04 p.m., Mr. Epstein and I went down in the elevator from the 14th floor to the ground level. I was to drive Mr. Epstein to his home. His lawyers went down at approximately the same time in a separate elevator. +- 3. I parked the car at the front entrance. As I walked toward the front door and noticed that Mr. Epstein quickly turned to the left so as to exit through the door to the garage of the building rather than the front entrance. + +EXHIBIT + +Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein +Page 2 + +4. At no time did Mr. Epstein speak or gesture to anyone, including the individuals whom I saw near the front door. + +5. At no time did I speak with the individuals at the main entrance. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +![]()STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +I hereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Igor Zinoviev known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above named person: Jeffery Epstein, and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this day of Sept. 17, 2009. + +![](_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg) + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746719/EFTA02746719.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746719/EFTA02746719.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8fbdb1de3052d1c5991965b62fb76230864a8bba --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746719/EFTA02746719.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,153 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746719.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1928, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.27, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 85.9403076171875 + ], + [ + 415.63214111328125, + 85.9403076171875 + ], + [ + 415.63214111328125, + 117.64141845703125 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 117.64141845703125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF IGOR ZINOVIEV", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 216.64799999999997, + 369.810302734375 + ], + [ + 404.4375, + 369.810302734375 + ], + [ + 404.4375, + 388.391357421875 + ], + [ + 216.64799999999997, + 388.391357421875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746719" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746719/_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746719/_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..980e397cce2e23c34529c2526e00fb087475a27b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746719/_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ec0dcb18843d4bb3793ed7e7785ead340e22adb19fe1d4e3c9c78df1525b1124 +size 17854 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746721/EFTA02746721.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746721/EFTA02746721.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f7b2beaa93fe485cbe12d54057404e7a3a775893 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746721/EFTA02746721.md @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA- + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +AFFIDAVIT OF ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR. + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS + +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Robert 1D. Critton, Jr., having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +- 1. I am counsel for Jeffrey Epstein in the above-styled matter and other civil lawsuits. +- 2. The information contained in motion, paragraphs 1 through 9, 11, 13, 14 and 16 is true and accurate based on my personal knowledge. + - 3. The costs and fees set forth in the motion are true, correct and reasonable. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +Robert Critton, Jr. + +XHIBIT 6 + +Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein +Page 2 + +STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +I hereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Robert D. Critton, Jr.. known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above named person: Dolgorally known, and that an oath was was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this day of 17, September, 2009. + +![](_page_1_Picture_13.jpeg) + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746721/EFTA02746721.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746721/EFTA02746721.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dd241a569c54147599a840439aa5c22d18c19f5f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746721/EFTA02746721.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,153 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746721.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1570, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.64, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_1_Picture_13.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 74.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 413.23565673828125, + 74.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 413.23565673828125, + 102.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 102.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 121.5 + ], + [ + 222.768, + 121.5 + ], + [ + 222.768, + 149.04 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 149.04 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746721" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746721/_page_1_Picture_13.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746721/_page_1_Picture_13.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ba7b2cd335d6a06c53ed9694715678899ea5e2cf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746721/_page_1_Picture_13.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:dab3cb73aab3f9b8ae8fb5a91437da39de2a187303ac9dbb959c7f28838c94f8 +size 12787 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746723/EFTA02746723.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746723/EFTA02746723.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..35aaac3dd2773f84a681b9002f7e2ce5574319f9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746723/EFTA02746723.md @@ -0,0 +1,59 @@ +Mark T. Luttier + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +AFFIDAVIT OF MARK T. LUTTIER + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS + +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Mark T. Luttier., having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +- 1. I am counsel for Jeffrey Epstein in the above-styled matter and other civil lawsuits. +- 2. The information contained in motion, paragraphs 1 through 10, 11, 13, 14 and 16 is true and accurate based on my personal knowledge. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +EXHIBIT 7 + +Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein +Page 2 + +STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +I hereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Mark T. Luttier, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above named person: Personally known, and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this 17th day of ~~FRIDAY~~ SAT, 2009. + +*Jessica Cadwell* +PRINT NAME: JESSICA CADWELL (SIGNATURE) + +NOTARY PUBLIC/STATE OF FLORIDA + +COMMISSION NO.: DD 853529 + +MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: 04/19/13 + +![](_page_1_Picture_21.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746723/EFTA02746723.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746723/EFTA02746723.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f759ef26ef652049d6d22d916ab5b3d4058b4b56 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746723/EFTA02746723.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,130 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746723.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1627, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.48, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_1_Picture_21.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 415.1364440917969, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 415.1364440917969, + 101.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 101.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746723" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746723/_page_1_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746723/_page_1_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..76e829002302ed08c70cc56bdaa274be466a0d18 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746723/_page_1_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:311c8e15ed5af69391e7e86f00ef05997b68ad9713ad24cf9be393dae5b892e9 +size 12794 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746725/EFTA02746725.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746725/EFTA02746725.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..af2da3bc5b242221609d214dc27f8c9ba2ed0b8a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746725/EFTA02746725.md @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO.2, + +Plaintiff, + +-vs- + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +/ + +## DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE #4 + +Wednesday, September 16, 2009 1:03 - 1:08 p.m. + +250 Australian Avenue South Suite 115 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Reported By: Cynthia , RPR, FPR Notary Public, State of Florida Prose Court Reporting + +EXHIBIT + +1 APPEARANCES: 2 On behalf of die KaintifE 3 ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQUIRE MPRMPI STEIN & Hoitowrrz, P.A. 4 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 5 P.fmni, Florida 33160 Phone: 305.931.2200 6 7 On behalf of the Defendant: ROBERT D. CARTON. Mt. ESQUIRE MARK T. LUITIER. ESQUIRE 9 BURMAN. carrroii, LUTHER & COLEMAN, LLP 303 Banyan Boulevard 10 Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 11 Thane: 561.842.2820 12 On behalf of &May EpsIeM 13 JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER ESQUIRE ATTF-RBURY. GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 14 250 Manahan Avant South Suite 1400 15 West Palm Beach, Raids 33401-5012 Phone: 561.659.8300 16 17 18 On behalf of LM and EW: WILLIAM J. BERGER. ESQUIRE ROTHSTEIN. ROSENFELDT. ADLER 19 401 East Las Ohs Boulevard Suite 1650 20 Fort Lau:kid:1R Florida 33301 Phone: 954.522.3456 21 22 On behalf ofilt 23 JACK P. ESQUIRE SF-ARCY. DENNEY, SCAROLA, 24 BARNIIART & SHIPLEY, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach It Boulevard 25 West Palm Bach Fonda 33409 + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PROCEEDINGS MR. HOROWITZ: Adam Horowitz, counsel for Plaintiff, Jane Doe 4. MR. CRITTON: Cindy, what time is it? THE COURT REPORTER: It is 1:03. MR. BERGER: William J. Berger for LM and EW. MR. MI: Jack MI for CMA. MR. LANGINO: Adam Langino from Leopold Kuvin on behalf of BB. MR. LUTT1ER: Mark Luttier on behalf of Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman for the Defendant. MR. CRITTON: Robert Critton on behalf of Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein. MR. HOROWITZ: This is Adam Horowitz. We're canceling today's deposition. Before appearing here today, we had a stipulation with Defense counsel that Mr. Jeffrey Epstein, the Defendant, would not be here. He would not cross paths with our client. And immediately as we were approaching the deposition room, he made face-to-face contact with our client. He was just feet away from + +1 APPEARNCES CONTINUED... 2 3 On behalf of BB: 4 ADAM J. LANGINO, ESQUIRE LEOPOLD KUV1N 5 2925 PGA Boulevard Suite 200 6 Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410 Phone: 561.515.1400 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 + +1 her and intimidated her, and for that reason 2 we're not going forward. 3 MR. CRITTON: I didn't see any contact 4 because I, obviously, was not out there. We 5 started at about -- when you came in it was 6 approximately 1:03. Mr. Epstein has an office 7 here at the Florida Science Foundation. Had 8 you been here at 1:00, your paths never would 9 have crossed because Mr. Epstein was leaving 10 the building. I instructed him to leave the 11 building so that he would not be here. 12 He was going to appear by way of Skype so 13 that he could be on a video camera so that he 14 could see this. 15 (Mr. Goldberger entered the mom.) 16 MR. CRITTON: Had you been here on time, 17 and not faulting, I am just saying had you been 18 here on time at 1:00, as everyone else seemed 19 to be here at least get here before you did, 20 Adam, you and your client, your paths never 21 would have crossed. 22 I directed Mr. Epstein to leave the 23 building so he would not be here so that there 24 would be no way that your paths could have 25 crossed. It was neither my intent nor was it + +1 my client's intent specifically, because I also +2 advised him that he was not to cross paths, not +3 to have any contact with your client, and +4 certainly by our agreement not to be here today +5 for the deposition. + +6 MR. HOROWITZ: And at approximately 1:00 +7 is exactly when my client crossed paths with +8 Jeffrey Epstein. And not only did he cross +9 paths but he proceeded to stare her down just +10 feet away from her. For that reason she became +11 an emotional wreck and cannot proceed with the +12 deposition. She's simply not in an emotional +13 state to do so. + +14 And in addition Mr. Epstein violated the +15 agreement between counsel that he would not +16 cross paths or come into contact with our +17 client. And it will be also for the criminal +18 court judge to decide whether he has violated a +19 no-contact order. I have nothing else to say. + +20 MR. CRITTON: Again I instructed +21 Mr. Epstein to leave the building so absolutely +22 no contact could occur between he and +23 Mr. Horowitz and his client nor anyone else. +24 Until the court, until either Judge Marra or +25 Judge [REDACTED] ruled on the issue as to whether + +1 CERTIFICATE +2 +3 STATE OF FLORIDA +4 COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +5 +6 I, Cynthia [REDACTED], Registered Professional +7 Reporter and Florida Professional Reporter, State of +8 Florida at large, certify that I was authorized to +9 and did stenographically report the foregoing +10 proceedings and that the transcript is a true and +11 complete record of my stenographic notes. + +12 Dated this 16th day of September, 2009. + +![]()1 or not he could appear at the depositions of +2 not only Jane Doe 4 but any other individuals, +3 so you do what you need to do. + +4 MR. HOROWITZ: Off the record. +5 (The Deposition was concluded.) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746725/EFTA02746725.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746725/EFTA02746725.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..92c2652fee59ee3c75ac489916623ebeb22b52a4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746725/EFTA02746725.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,204 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746725.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 5467, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.1, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 182.988, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 414.6077575683594, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 414.6077575683594, + 104.09210205078125 + ], + [ + 182.988, + 104.09210205078125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE #4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.168, + 408.24 + ], + [ + 399.2530517578125, + 408.24 + ], + [ + 399.2530517578125, + 424.3320617675781 + ], + [ + 192.168, + 424.3320617675781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "1 CERTIFICATE 2 3 STATE OF FLORIDA 4 COUNTY OF PALM BEACH", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 318.85200000000003, + 59.94 + ], + [ + 487.15200000000004, + 59.94 + ], + [ + 487.15200000000004, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 318.85200000000003, + 106.92 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 341 + ], + [ + "Line", + 153 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 133 + ], + [ + "Line", + 61 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746725" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746728/EFTA02746728.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746728/EFTA02746728.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1f1ab3c0f5ae2ea853cb32c8568ba5cb423a5598 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746728/EFTA02746728.md @@ -0,0 +1,62 @@ +## Prose Court Reporting Agency, Inc + +One Clearlake Centre 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1500 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 (561) 832-7500 Phone (561) 832-7506 Fax Tax ID: 26-3892897 www.prosecra.com + +September 17, 2009 + +Robert Critton, Esquire Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman - WPB 303 Banyan Boulevard Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +> Invoice Number CH 411 + +Re: Jane Doe No. 2 vs. Jeffrey Epstein 9-18-09 Scheduled Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 Statement for Record + +## Description of Services + +| Depo App NT - 1st Hr | Appearance 1st Hr | +|----------------------|----------------------| +| Depo Trans 0&1-Reg | Transcript Pages - B | +| E-Transcript Emalled | Complimentary | + +Invoice total: \$138.80 + +Thank you for choosing Prose Court Reporting Agency, Inc. Payment is due upon receipt + +EXHIBIT." + +![](_page_1_Picture_15.jpeg) + +P.O. Box 6967 West Palm Beach, FL 33405 + +**Invoice** + +| Date | Number | +|----------------|---------------| +| 9/17/2009 | 28616 | +| Terms | | +| Due on receipt | | + +BURMAN, CRITTON & LUTTIER + ROBERT CRITTON + 303 BANYAN BLVD + SUITE 400 + WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401 + +**Case / Reference: JANE DOE #2 v EPSTEIN** + +| Date | Services Rendered | Qty | Amount | +|-------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------|---------------| +| 9/16/2009 | VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF: JANE DOE # 4
Tech Time - 1ST 2 Hours
Digital Tape [REDACTED] | 1 | 275.00 | +| | [REDACTED] TAPE CONSISTS OF DISCUSSIONS BETWEEN ATTORNEYS PRIOR TO SWEARING IN REGARDING CANCELLATION OF DEPO. | 1 | 15.00 | +| 9/17/2009 | Delivery
[REDACTED] TAPES FORWARDED PER YOUR REQUEST. NO COPIES HAVE BEEN MADE OR KEPT ON FILE AT VISUAL EVIDENCE. SHOULD COPIES BE REQUIRED IN THE FUTURE PLEASE FORWARD [REDACTED] TAPES TO OUR OFFICE FOR DUPLICATION. THANK YOU. | 1 | 0.00 | + +MORE THAN JUST VIDEO! See ALL available presentation technology services at: [www.visualevidence.org](http://www.visualevidence.org). + +**TOTAL: \$290.00** + +Remit to: + P.O. Box 6967 + West Palm Beach, FL 33405 +**Tax ID # 59-2476529** + office@visualevidence.org + +Phone: (561) 655-2855 Fax: (561) 655-2896 office@visualevidence.org \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746728/EFTA02746728.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746728/EFTA02746728.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4fe1656edabc7515dc386d57bc0ad86638f5c3b5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746728/EFTA02746728.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,176 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746728.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2968, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.12, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_1_Picture_15.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Prose Court Reporting Agency, Inc", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 188.496, + 44.55 + ], + [ + 428.9677429199219, + 44.55 + ], + [ + 428.9677429199219, + 64.13238525390625 + ], + [ + 188.496, + 64.13238525390625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Description of Services", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 83.844, + 357.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 192.9852294921875, + 357.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 192.9852294921875, + 373.0570373535156 + ], + [ + 83.844, + 373.0570373535156 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Invoice", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 501.84000000000003, + 52.650000000000006 + ], + [ + 572.22, + 52.650000000000006 + ], + [ + 572.22, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 501.84000000000003, + 72.9 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "Table", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746728" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746728/_page_1_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746728/_page_1_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b30f49527d6918d2b9bf49ed06549387a4d42cbc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746728/_page_1_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c12be49038ac29ae3f77417efacae2211ef28a893ea29df96c0418a0d7420fc0 +size 11839 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746730/EFTA02746730.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746730/EFTA02746730.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..315550f2b909f1af609d5a98795fa5b0c4b2bb89 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746730/EFTA02746730.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARFtA- + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO. 4 AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT THEREOF + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion For Sanctions and to Compel Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4. Having considered Defendant's motion, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is hereby GRANTED: Plaintiff shall pay sanctions in the amount of in costs and \$ in fees directly to Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman within 10 days, and further directs that the Plaintiff make herself available for deposition no later than October 2009 beginning at 9:30 a.m. at the same location. Mr. Epstein shall not be present in the building on the day of the deposition absent a court order on pending motions. + +Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein + +Page 2 + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746730/EFTA02746730.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746730/EFTA02746730.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e5e82af25b4a9fd631ff2638926b09a73a7eb1d8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746730/EFTA02746730.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746730.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1240, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.61, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 414.0064392089844, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 414.0064392089844, + 101.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 101.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, MOTION FOR SANCTIONS \nAND TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO. 4 \nAND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT THEREOF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 91.8, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 525.2432250976562, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 525.2432250976562, + 406.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 91.8, + 406.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 16 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746730" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746732/EFTA02746732.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746732/EFTA02746732.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5459e6d82d09ffd0ea4b4f4bb71434027a441e8c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746732/EFTA02746732.md @@ -0,0 +1,268 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MAFtRA-a + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +### DEFENDANT'S, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO. 4 AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT THEREOF + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, moves this court for an order granting sanctions pursuant to Rule 30(d)(2) and (3)(A) and (C) (referencing Rule 37(a)(5)), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and compelling the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 within fifteen (15) days and as grounds therefore would state: + +- 1. On August 16, 2009, the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 was noticed for September 16, 2009 to begin at 1:00 p.m. Plaintiff's counsel had advised that Jane Doe No. 4 could not appear for a deposition prior to that time of day, i.e. 1:00 p.m. +- 2. The deposition was originally set at the offices of the undersigned, but Plaintiff's counsel requested that it be moved to the court reporter's office. The court reporter is Prose Court Reporting located at 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 115, West Palm Beach, FL 33401. + +3. The undersigned's office began attempting to set the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 on July 21, 2009. Because of the number of attorneys who would be attending (based on the court's consolidation order) coordinating the video deposition creates logistical problems. + +4. On August 27, 2009, the undersigned wrote a letter to counsel for the Plaintiff indicating that Mr. Epstein would be present at the deposition. A copy of that letter is attached as Exhibit 1. + +5. Some 13 days later, counsel for Jane Doe No. 4 filed a motion for protective order on September 9, 2009 attempting to prohibit Mr.Epstein's presence at the deposition. The Defendant immediately filed a response (an Emergency Motion) on September 11, 2009 requesting that the court enter an order allowing Epstein, the Defendant in this matter, to attend the deposition. This is common procedure. See Exhibit 2, without exhibits. As of the date of the deposition, the court had not ruled on these motions. + +6. On Monday, counsel for Jane Doe No. 4 and the undersigned spoke, an agreement was reached that the deposition would proceed as scheduled, and that Mr. Epstein would not be in attendance other than by telephone or other means. See Exhibit 3. + +7. The deposition was originally scheduled on the 15th Floor and moved by Prose to a larger ground floor to accommodate the number of people who were to attend + +8. The undersigned and his partner, Mark T. Luttier, had scheduled a meeting with Mr. Epstein for approximately an hour prior to the deposition. It is well known through multiple newspaper articles that Mr. Epstein's office at the Florida Science Foundation is located on the 14th Floor in the same building as the court reporter and Mr. Epstein's criminal attorney, Mr. Goldberger. As well, had the court issued an order prior to the deposition that would have allowed Mr. Epstein to attend, he was readily available. + +9. As of 1:00 p.m., no order had been received from the court, so Epstein's attorneys, in good faith, decided that Epstein would not attend the deposition (as per the agreement), if we chose to proceed, which we were doing. The undersigned and Mr. Luttier specifically waited until just after 1:00 o'clock, the time that the deposition was to start, prior to leaving with Mr. Epstein. Counsel instructed Mr. Epstein to leave the building. Clearly, Defendant and his counsel simply wish to have meaningful discovery. + +10. The undersigned and Mr. Luttier exited the elevator heading toward the deposition mom and Mr. Epstein and his driver, Igor Zinoviev exited in separate elevator at the same time and turned to depart from through the front entrance such that he could go to his home to watch the deposition and assist counsel, from a video feed. + +11. Completely unbeknownst and unexpected by anyone, apparently the Plaintiff and her attomey(s) were at the front door where Mr. Epstein was intending to exit. Upon seeing two women, one who might be the Plaintiff, Mr. Epstein immediately made a left turn and exited through a separate set of doors to the garage area. See affidavit of Jeffrey Epstein and Igor Zinoviev, Exhibit 4 and 5, respectively. + +12. The entire incident was completely unknown to the undersigned and Mr. Luttier until Adam Horowitz, Esq. came in and announced that the deposition was not going to take place in that Mr. Epstein and his client saw one another, she was upset and therefore the deposition was cancelled from his perspective. + +13. The undersigned and his partner, Mr. Luttier, had a court reporter and a videographer present. Additionally, Mr. ■ **on behalf of C.M..A., Adam Langino on behalf of B.B., William Berger on behalf of three Plaintiffs were present for the deposition.** + +14. Any suggestion that the chance "visual" between Mr. Epstein and Jane Doe No. 4 was "pre-planned" would be absurd, disingenuous and false. The undersigned counsel went out of his way to make certain Mr. Epstein would not be in the building after the time the deposition was set to begin. Had the Plaintiff and her counsel been in the deposition room at the appointed time, no visual contact would have occurred. + +15. It is possible that Plaintiff's counsel, by filing their motion for protective order on September 9, 2009 and then advising the undersigned on September 14, 2009 that the deposition would not go forward unless the undersigned agreed to exclude Mr. Epstein from the deposition, were not prepared and/or did not want to proceed with the deposition. + +16. The unilateral termination of the deposition was unnecessary, inappropriate and a substantial waste of attorney time and the costs related to the deposition (court reporter and videographer). (See Affidavit of Robert D. Critton, Jr., Mark T. Luttier and Deposition Transcript, Exhibits 6, 7, and 8 respectively). + +17. Had the "visual" been premeditated, the cancellation of the deposition may have been justified, however, under these circumstances, it was grandstanding and improper. In that the Plaintiff has stated that she voluntary went to JE's home 50 plus times without trauma until she filed a lawsuit, this brief visual encounter from a distance should not have resulted in the unilateral cancellation of her deposition. + +18. The costs associated with the court reporter and videographer total \$428.80. See Exhibit 9. + +# Memorandum of Law In support of Motion + +A substantial amount of administrative time went into the setting up the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4. Almost two months passed from the time that the Defendant's counsel first + +requested a date for the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4. The deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 was to begin at 1:00 p.m, based on her schedule, and was moved from the undersigned's office to the office of the court reporter at her counsel's request. + +Pursuant to Rule 30(d)(2) and (3)(A) and (C) and its reference to 37(a)(5)), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court may impose an appropriate sanction, including reasonable expenses in attorneys fees incurred by any party on a person who impedes or delays the fair examination of the deponent. In this instance, the brief visual encounter, which was completely unintended and inadvertent, should not have been grounds for Plaintiffs counsel and Plaintiff refusing to move forward with the deposition. Furthermore, pursuant to (3)(A) and (C), Plaintiff and Plaintiffs counsel had no right to unilaterally terminate/cancel the deposition and fail to move forward. Plaintiff should have continued with the deposition and filed any motion deemed appropriate post deposition. Therefore, Defendant is asking for the costs associated with the attendance of the court reporter, her transcript and the presence of the videographer. Defendant would also request reasonable fees for 2.5 hours at \$500 per hour for being required to prepare this motion and affidavits associated with same. + +The records obtained thus far on Jane Doe No. 4, do not reflect any "emotional trauma" by her own account of some 50 plus visits to the Defendant's home prior to the time that she hired an attorney. Even in her interview with attorney's handpicked expert, Dr. Kliman, by her own comments, her significant emotional trauma relates to physical and verbal abuse by a prior boyfriend, Preston Vineyard, and deaths associated with two close friends, Chris and Jen. Therefore, the supposed "emotional trauma" caused by a chance encounter resulting in a "glance" at best, should not be the basis for Plaintiff unilaterally cancelling her deposition. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff by telephone and by e-mail; however, an agreement has not been reached. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant moves this court for an order granting sanctions to include attorneys fees and costs as set forth above and costs associated with the attendance of the court reporter, the transcript and the presence of the videographer and direction that Jane Doe No. 4 appear for deposition within fifteen (15) days from the date of the court's order at the court reporter's office. If the court has not issued an order regarding Mr. Epstein's attendance at Plaintiff's deposition when Jane Doe No. 4 is to appear, the Defendant will agree that Mr. Epstein will not be present in the building on the date of her scheduled deposition such that no "inadvertent" contact will occur. + +Robert. Critton, Jr. Mich 1 J. Pike Attorneys for Defendant Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was hand-delivered to the Clerk of the Court as required by the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida and electronically mailed to all counsel of record identified on the following Service List on this 0 I I) day of September, 2009. + +> Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-NIARRA/JOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssmesexabuseattomey.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08- 80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08- 80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80811 + +reelrhw@,hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. M, Esq. + +Seamy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsxO,searcvlaw.com + +iph@searevlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiffkine Doe + +Isidro M. =, Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datum Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +gosefsberg©modhurst.c,om + +kezellQpodhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecfbnicereinhar n + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold-Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +08804 + +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +Ileopold@riccilaw.com + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesq©bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully submit , + +By: + +ROBERT D. V RITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar o. 224162 + +rcrit@bc1c1 .com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +nmike@bc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +303 Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/213-0164 Fax + +(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746732/EFTA02746732.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746732/EFTA02746732.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..64ccbf34a2d3cbf987c23a199d70c8fb4ad9893f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746732/EFTA02746732.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,432 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746732.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 12851, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.47, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 413.2564392089844, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 413.2564392089844, + 101.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 101.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND \nTO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO. 4 AND MEMORANDUM IN \nSUPPORT THEREOF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 99.756, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 517.0298461914062, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 517.0298461914062, + 406.10302734375 + ], + [ + 99.756, + 406.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Memorandum of Law In support of Motion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 194.00400000000002, + 626.94 + ], + [ + 424.4675598144531, + 626.94 + ], + [ + 424.4675598144531, + 642.4335174560547 + ], + [ + 194.00400000000002, + 642.4335174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 170.74800000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 443.73529052734375, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 443.73529052734375, + 87.363037109375 + ], + [ + 170.74800000000002, + 87.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 501.39 + ], + [ + 364.9179382324219, + 501.39 + ], + [ + 364.9179382324219, + 515.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 515.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 163 + ], + [ + "Line", + 81 + ], + [ + "Text", + 57 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 86 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 38 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746732" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746740/EFTA02746740.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746740/EFTA02746740.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..be6686620148931d963ae7c4482320a8f0a294c4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746740/EFTA02746740.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## DECLARATION OF ADAM D. HOROWITZ + +- 1. My name is Adam D. Horowitz. I am an attorney for Jane Doe No. 4. +- 2. The deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 was scheduled for September 16, 2009 at 1:00 p.m. at 350 Australian Ave. South, Suite 115, West Palm Beach, Florida. On the day before the deposition, the undersigned and counsel for Jeffrey Epstein entered into a written stipulation in which it was agreed that "Jeffrey Epstein will not attend tomorrow's deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 (in the absence of a court order permitting him to attend)." It was further agreed that Jeffrey Epstein may listen in to the deposition by telephone or view a videofeed of the deposition, but under no circumstances would he "be seen by our client." +- 3. While Jane Doe No. 4 and I were in the lobby of 350 Australian Ave South at approximately 1:00 p.m. for her deposition on September 16, 2009, we crossed paths with Jeffrey Epstein and someone who appeared to be his bodyguard. Jeffrey Epstein stopped + +![](_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg) + +walking and began to stare at and intimidate Jane Doe No. 4. Jane Doe No. 4 was terrified, began crying and ran outside the building. Jeffrey Epstein smirked at her and walked away. + +4. As a result of this incident, Jane Doe began crying uncontrollably and was unable to proceed with her deposition. + +Under penalties of perjury I declare that I have read the foregoing Declaration and the facts stated in it are true. + +Dated: September /7 2009 + +Adam D. Horowitz 71/41 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746740/EFTA02746740.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746740/EFTA02746740.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8c6aa780098c7d537cf4c8ba2a02f6fecb3983f7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746740/EFTA02746740.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,157 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746740.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1774, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.76, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 96.67889404296875 + ], + [ + 406.6930847167969, + 96.67889404296875 + ], + [ + 406.6930847167969, + 124.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 124.56353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DECLARATION OF ADAM D. HOROWITZ", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 182.988, + 387.18 + ], + [ + 428.48797607421875, + 387.18 + ], + [ + 428.48797607421875, + 401.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 182.988, + 401.68353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746740" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746740/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746740/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..da5f4e3dad75239736b9dfbdc00d4a65f3f5e490 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746740/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e2d43b0bbe2f8d4abbd6a195b910d7977eb8f582e19e843a6b5f49519a253b2d +size 8270 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746742/EFTA02746742.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746742/EFTA02746742.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..39f9717000a258c6a0b187ecb8f76f5b3dc4a4c0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746742/EFTA02746742.md @@ -0,0 +1,223 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO.2, + +Plaintiff, + +-vs- + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +/ + +DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE #4 + +Wednesday, September 16, 2009 1:03 - 1:08 p.m. + +250 Australian Avenue South Suite 115 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Reported By: Cynthia , RPR, FPR Notary Public, State of Florida Prose Court Reporting + +![](_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg) + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +APPEARANCES: + +On behalf of the Plaintiff: + +ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQUIRE MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Phone: 305.931.2200 + +On behalf of the Defendant: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE MARK T. LUTTIER, ESQUIRE BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP 303 Banyan Boulevard Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Phone: 561.842.2820 + +On behalf of Jeffrey Epstein: + +JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-5012 Phone: 561.659.8300 + +On behalf of LM and EW: + +WILLIAM J. BERGER, ESQUIRE ROTHSTEIN, ROSENFELDT, ADLER 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Phone: 954.522.3456 + +On behalf of CMA: + +JACK P. , ESQUIRE SEARCY, DENNEY, SCAROLA, BARNHART & SHIPLEY, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +APPEARNCES CONTINUED... + +On behalf of BB: + +ADAM J. LANGINO, ESQUIRE + +LEOPOLD KUVIN + +2925 PGA Boulevard + +Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, Florida + +Phone: 561.515.1400 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +## PROCEED I NG S + +MR. HOROWITZ: Adam Horowitz, counsel for Plaintiff, Jane Doe 4. + +MR. CRITTON: Cindy, what time is it? + +THE COURT REPORTER: It is 1:03. + +MR. BERGER: William J. Berger for LM and EW. + +MR. Jack for CMA. + +MR. LANGINO: Adam Langino from Leopold Kuvin on behalf of BB. + +MR. LUTTIER: Mark Luttier on behalf of Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman for the Defendant. + +MR. CRITTON: Robert Critton on behalf of Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein. + +MR. HOROWITZ: This is Adam Horowitz. We're canceling today's deposition. Before appearing here today, we had a stipulation with Defense counsel that Mr. Jeffrey Epstein, the Defendant, would not be here. He would not cross paths with our client. + +And immediately as we were approaching the deposition room, he made face-to-face contact with our client. He was just feet away from + +1 2 her and intimidated her, and for that reason we're not going forward. + +3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 MR. CRITTON: I didn't see any contact because I, obviously, was not out there. We started at about -- when you came in it was approximately 1:03. Mr. Epstein has an office here at the Florida Science Foundation. Had you been here at 1:00, your paths never would have crossed because Mr. Epstein was leaving the building. I instructed him to leave the building so that he would not be here. + +12 13 14 He was going to appear by way of Skype so that he could be on avideo camera so that he could see this. + +15 (Mr. Goldberger entered the room.) + +16 17 18 19 20 21 MR. CRITTON: Had you been here on time, and not faulting, Iam just saying had you been here on time at 1:00, as everyone else seemed to be here at least get here before you did, Adam, you and your client, your paths never would have crossed. + +22 23 24 25 Idirected Mr. Epstein to leave the building so he would not be here so that there would be no way that your paths could have crossed. It was neither my intent nor was it + +1 2 3 4 5 my client's intent specifically, because I also advised him that he was not to cross paths, not to have any contact with your client, and certainly by our agreement not to be here today for the deposition. + +6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 MR. HOROWITZ: And at approximately 1:00 is exactly when my client crossed paths with Jeffrey Epstein. And not only did he cross paths but he proceeded to stare her down just feet away from her. For that reason she became an emotional wreck and cannot proceed with the deposition. She's simply not in an emotional state to do so. + +14 15 16 17 18 19 And in addition Mr. Epstein violated the agreement between counsel that he would not cross paths or come into contact with our client. And it will be also for the criminal court judge to decide whether he has violated a no-contact order. I have nothing else to say. + +20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. CRITTON: Again I instructed Mr. Epstein to leave the building so absolutely no contact could occur between he and Mr. Horowitz and his client nor anyone else. Until the court, until either Judge Marra or Judge ruled on the issue as to whether + +or not he could appear at the depositions of not only Jane Doe 4 but any other individuals, so you do what you need to do. + +MR. HOROWITZ: Off the record. + +(The Deposition was concluded.) + +## CERTIFICATE + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +I, Cynthia , Registered Professional Reporter and Florida Professional Reporter, State of Florida at large, certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings and that the transcript is a true and complete record of my stenographic notes. + +Dated this 16th day of September, 2009. + +Cynthia , RPR, FPR \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746742/EFTA02746742.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746742/EFTA02746742.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e002a95d9785173fbe8ae132209fd1fdb4846219 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746742/EFTA02746742.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,384 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746742.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 5434, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.26, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.304, + 58.31999999999999 + ], + [ + 472.2393798828125, + 58.31999999999999 + ], + [ + 472.2393798828125, + 86.77496337890625 + ], + [ + 209.304, + 86.77496337890625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROCEED I NG S", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.97999572753906, + 58.31999999999999 + ], + [ + 427.12322998046875, + 58.31999999999999 + ], + [ + 427.12322998046875, + 71.065185546875 + ], + [ + 252.97999572753906, + 71.065185546875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.1699981689453, + 59.129999999999995 + ], + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 59.129999999999995 + ], + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 253.1699981689453, + 71.28 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 114 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 127 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 36 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 103 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 36 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 291 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746742" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746742/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746742/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cf4c59880a782f5d357f8dd3f4a1e26e0af3c6ad --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746742/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6c3d9f1712195ecfb5022f4d8acc60a7639a52e5f83304385a3a8a6615f4a548 +size 7554 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746750/EFTA02746750.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746750/EFTA02746750.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b620a6c9a83e8fbb4a88506f33cc1d9e6129c8ca --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746750/EFTA02746750.md @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +## Adam Horowitz + +From: Adam Horowitz Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 11:43 AM To: 'Michael J. Pike'; 'Robert D. Critton Jr.' Cc: Stuart Mermelstein Subject: Jane Does v. Epstein + +Please allow this to confirm that Jeffrey Epstein will not attend tomorrow's deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 (in the absence of a Court order permitting him to attend). We understand you may wish to have your client listen in by telephone or view a videofeed of the deposition, but will not be seen by our client. + +Regards, + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. www.sexabusentorney.corn Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 ahorowitzesexabuseattorney.com Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +![](_page_0_Picture_6.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746750/EFTA02746750.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746750/EFTA02746750.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ac621ac5a028366b159a2f9ed6a86b002c170524 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746750/EFTA02746750.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746750.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 732, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.46, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_6.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Adam Horowitz", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 54.467999999999996, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 149.05027770996094, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 149.05027770996094, + 87.0841064453125 + ], + [ + 54.467999999999996, + 87.0841064453125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746750" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746750/_page_0_Picture_6.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746750/_page_0_Picture_6.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f769c6c268086bdab285dd381a50faa7af20836a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746750/_page_0_Picture_6.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f1760d825d8bd8b056119ede71aa5133cf23435d8a7fbde35e6b680501496d3a +size 7817 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746751/EFTA02746751.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746751/EFTA02746751.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b1ed8e80a17e88a932fb9e1f8f9e8d6036034026 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746751/EFTA02746751.md @@ -0,0 +1,93 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +/ + +#### PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, and states as follows: + +I. By now, this Court is familiar with Jeffrey Epstein's practice of intimidating and harassing his victims, as well as the Plaintiffs' level of fear of Jeffrey Epstein. See, e.g. Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for No-Contact Order (D.E. 113); Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7's Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel and/or Identify Plaintiffs in the Style of this Case (D.E. 144); Plaintiffs Jane Does' 2-7 Motion for Protective Order and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (D.E. 223); Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8's Motion for + +Protective Order as to Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance at Deposition of Plaintiffs, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (D.E. 292); Affidavit of Dr. Kliman (D.E. 223, Exh. A). + +2. On September 16, 2009, Jeffrey Epstein's conduct reached a new low when he recklessly violated (i) this Court's No-Contact Order dated July 31, 2009; and (2) a written stipulation between the parties that Jeffrey Epstein would not attend the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 or be seen by Jane Doe No. 4 while attending her deposition. + +3. Prior to the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, the Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Protective Order to preclude Jeffrey Epstein from attending the depositions of the Plaintiffs. The Motion was filed for the specific purpose of preventing Jeffrey Epstein from intimidating or harassing the Plaintiffs as he has repeatedly done in the past. As the Motion had not been adjudicated prior to the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, Plaintiff's counsel stipulated with defense counsel that "Jeffrey Epstein will not attend the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4." It was further stipulated that Jeffrey Epstein may listen to the deposition by telephone or view a videofeed of the deposition, but under no circumstances was he to be seen by our client while attending the deposition. (See Exhibit "C", email of September 15, 2009). These were express conditions agreed to by counsel before Jane Doe No. 4 would appear for deposition on September 16, 2009. + +4. The deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 was scheduled for 1:00 p.m. on September 16, 2009 at 350 Australian Ave South, Suite 115, West Palm Beach, Florida. + +5. At approximately 1:00 p.m. on September 16, 2009, Jane Doe No. 4 and her counsel were walking in the lobby of 350 Australian Ave South, Suite 115, West Palm Beach, Florida, toward the ground-floor conference room where her deposition was to be held.' Just a + +Defendant's counsel set the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 for the same office building where Jeffrey Epstein has an office. + +few feet away from this conference room, Jeffrey Epstein crossed paths with Jane Doe No. 4. Jeffrey Epstein stopped walking and began staring at her. He intimidated her until she began to cry. Jeffrey Epstein made no immediate attempt to walk away from our client. Instead, he stopped and continued to stare at her until she ran away. Jeffrey Epstein was accompanied by what appeared to be his bodyguard. See Declaration of Adam Horowitz, counsel for Jane Doe No. 4, Exhibit "A". + +6. Jane Doe No. 4 became an emotional wreck upon being stared at by Jeffrey Epstein, whom she believed she would not encounter. After attempting to console his client, Plaintiff's counsel cancelled the deposition after a brief discussion with defense counsel about the events that occurred in the lobby. See Transcript of Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, Exhibit + +7. Jeffrey Epstein's contact with and intimidation of Jane Doe No. 4 is in direct violation of this Court's No-Contact Order dated July 31, 2009. In that Order, this Court stated that Jeffrey Epstein shall have no "direct or indirect contact" with the Plaintiffs. (D.E. 238). + +8. The July 31, 2009 Order mirrored the June 30, 2008 criminal sentence entered by Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillio, wherein she instructed Jeffrey Epstein that he shall have "no direct or indirect contact" with the Plaintiffs. (D.E. 238) + +9. There can be no doubt that Jeffrey Epstein knew where Jane Doe No. 4 would be at 1 p.m. on September 16, 2009. Of all of the places he could have been, he chose to be at the location of her deposition in flagrant disregard of two (2) No-Contact Orders and the stipulation of the parties in this case. Even worse, when he saw Jane Doe No. 4, he chose to stop and stare her down to the point of intimidation until she began to cry and flee. + +10. This Court has discretion to enter a protective order to protect a party from annoyance, embarrassment or oppression. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c). In this regard, the Court has discretion for cause shown to, inter alia, designate the persons who may attend depositions, and specify the time and place of discovery. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c)(1)(A) and (E). Additionally, this Court has authority to sanction a party for civil contempt for violating the terms of a court order. See Sizzler Family Steak Houses v. Western Sizzlin Steak House. Inc., 793 F.2d 1529, 1534-35 (11th Cir. 1986) (attorneys' fees may be awarded for civil contempt in failure to comply with court order). + +II. Jeffrey Epstein is a felon and registered sex offender. Judicial oversight, at Jeffrey Epstein's expense, is required to keep his conduct under control. + +12. Given Jeffrey Epstein's violation of this Court's No-Contact Order and the written stipulation of the parties, appropriate sanctions and other relief are necessary to compensate Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 and prevent future misconduct by Defendant Epstein. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4, respectfully requests (1) an award of sanctions, including attorneys' fees and costs reasonably and necessarily incurred by Plaintiff due to Defendant's non-compliance with the Court's No-Contact Order; (2) an Order excusing Jane Doe No. 4 from her deposition on September 16, 2009, due to Defendant's violation of the No-Contact Order and defense counsel's breach of his promise to Plaintiff's counsel that Defendant would not be seen at Plaintiffs deposition; (3) an order directing that any depositions of Plaintiffs in the future be at a court reporter's office selected by Plaintiffs' counsel; (4) appointment of a special to preside at Plaintiffs' depositions and control the proceeding, to be paid for by Defendant; and (5) all other relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A.3 + +Undersigned counsel has conferred with Defendant's counsel in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this motion, and has been unable to do so. + +Dated: September 17, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWT17., P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on September 17, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +### SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746751/EFTA02746751.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746751/EFTA02746751.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d52b988e5c6c13502c2247932147ea5e0ef6d82a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746751/EFTA02746751.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,360 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746751.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 8481, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.04, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4'S MOTION FOR \nSANCTIONS AND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER \nAND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 148.10399999999998, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 464.802734375, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 464.802734375, + 430.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 148.10399999999998, + 430.56353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.744, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 483.1954345703125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 483.1954345703125, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 129.744, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.44, + 413.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 413.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 428.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 226.44, + 428.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746751" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746757/EFTA02746757.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746757/EFTA02746757.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b4e12428b4663153ca6632c1a4704e0ea5de5061 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746757/EFTA02746757.md @@ -0,0 +1,146 @@ +S2P ig-)-7(c? • + +AU ESA (Rev. 01A9) Subpoces to Testify Ns Deposition or to Produce Douai= in Civil Attica + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT + +for the + +Southern District of Florida + +Jane Doe Plaintiff v. Jeffrey Epstein Defindant + +CD + +Civil Action No. 08-CIV-MARRiVJOHNSON (If the action is pending in anotha district, state where: + +### SUBPOENA TO TESTIFY AT A DEPOSITION OR TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS IN A CIVIL. ACTION + +To: Records Custodian. Bear Stearns, 245 Park Avenue, New York. NY + +el Testimony: YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear at the time, date, and place set forth below to testify at a deposition to be taken in this civil action. If you are an organization that is not a party in this case, you must designate one or more officers, directors, or managing agents, or designate other persons who consent to testify on your behalf about the following matters, or those set forth in an attachment: + +| Place: Esquire Court Reporters, One Penn Plaza, Suite 4715
New York, NY | Date and Time:
09/22/2009 9:00 am | +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------| +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------| + +The deposition will be recorded by this method: Legal Papers Served + +((Yew York) I Production: You, or your representatives, must also bring with you to the deposition the following documents, electronically stored information, or objects, and permit thetr inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of the material: AUG 0 ./UU9 + +See Schedule "A" attached to this Suboena. O Inter-office Mail + +- C) Federal Express O Fax O U S. Mail Reviewed by: O Certified Mail akiand Drilivery CI Enuct 0 314/Q.../ I/ • + +The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c), relating to your protection as a person subject to a subpoena, and Rule 45 (d) and (e), relating to your duty to respond to this subpoena and the potential consequences of not doing so, are attached. + +Date: CLERK OF COURT + +OR Stratum of Clerk or Deputy Clerk Attorneys signature + +The name, address, e-mail, and telephone number of the attorney representing (name of pony) + +, who issues or requests this subpoena, are: Brad Esq., Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler. Suite 1650, 401 East Las Olas Blvd. Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301. Bedwar s n-a-iew.com. (954) 622 3456. + +"Aft + +AO SSA (Key. 01;09) Subpoena to Testy as a Depos ill on or to Produce Dockorr:nts in a Civil Action (rcr.. 2) + +Civil Action No. 08-CIV•MARRA(JCHNSON + +### PROOF OF SERVICE + +(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 45.) + +This subpoena for (name of individual and ink. Van)) was received by me on (date) + +O I personally served the subpoena on the individual at (place) on (dare) ; Or + +O I left the subpoena at the individual's residence or usual place of abode with (name) , a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there, On (dote) , and mailed a copy to the individual's last known address; or + +O I served the subpoena on frame of individual) , who is designated by law to accept service of process on behalf or (name pforganiuttlon) on (date) ; Or + +O 1 returned the subpoena unexecutcd because ; or + +• Other (specify): + +Unless the subpoena was issued on behalf of the United States, or one of its officers or agents, I have also tendered to the witness fees for one day's attendance, and the mileage allowed by law, in the amount of S + +My fees arc \$ for travtl and \$ for services, for a total of S 0.00 + +Date: .Server's signature + +I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. + +Additional information regarding attempted service, etc: + +Printed name and Me + +Server's address + +**Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (c), (d), and (e) (Effective 12/1/07)(c) Protecting a Person Subject to a Subpoena.****(1) Avoiding Undue Burden or Expense; Sanctions.** A party or attorney responsible for issuing and serving a subpoena must take reasonable steps to avoid imposing undue burden or expense on a person subject to the subpoena. The issuing court must enforce this duty and impose an appropriate sanction — which may include lost earnings and reasonable attorney's fees — on a party or attorney who fails to comply. + +**(2) Command to Produce Materials or Permit Inspection.****(A) Appearance Not Required.** A person commanded to produce documents, electronically stored information, or tangible things, or to permit the inspection of premises, need not appear in person at the place of production or inspection unless also commanded to appear for a deposition, hearing, or trial. + +**(B) Objections.** A person commanded to produce documents or tangible things or to permit inspection may serve on the party or attorney designated in the subpoena a written objection to inspecting, copying, testing or sampling any or all of the materials or to inspecting the premises — or to producing electronically stored information in the form or forms requested. The objection must be served before the earlier of the time specified for compliance or 14 days after the subpoena is served. If an objection is made, the following rules apply: + +(i) At any time, on notice to the commanded person, the serving party may move the issuing court for an order compelling production or inspection. + +(ii) These acts may be required only as directed in the order, and the order must protect a person who is neither a party nor a party's officer from significant expense resulting from compliance. + +**(3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena.****(A) When Required.** On timely motion, the issuing court must quash or modify a subpoena that: + +(i) fails to allow a reasonable time to comply; + +(ii) requires a person who is neither a party nor a party's officer to travel more than 100 miles from where that person resides, is employed, or regularly transacts business in person — except that, subject to Rule 45(c)(3)(B)(iii), the person may be commanded to attend a trial by traveling from any such place within the state where the trial is held; + +(iii) requires disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, if no exception or waiver applies; or + +(iv) subjects a person to undue burden. + +**(B) When Permitted.** To protect a person subject to or affected by a subpoena, the issuing court may, on motion, quash or modify the subpoena if it requires: + +(i) disclosing a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information; + +(ii) disclosing an unretained expert's opinion or information that does not describe specific occurrences in dispute and results from the expert's study that was not requested by a party; or + +(iii) a person who is neither a party nor a party's officer to incur substantial expense to travel more than 100 miles to attend trial. + +**(C) Specifying Conditions as an Alternative.** In the circumstances described in Rule 45(c)(3)(B), the court may, instead of quashing or modifying a subpoena, order appearance or production under specified conditions if the serving party: + +(i) shows a substantial need for the testimony or material that cannot be otherwise met without undue hardship; and + +(ii) ensures that the subpoenaed person will be reasonably compensated. + +**(d) Duties in Responding to a Subpoena.****(1) Producing Documents or Electronically Stored Information.** These procedures apply to producing documents or electronically stored information: + +**(A) Documents.** A person responding to a subpoena to produce documents must produce them as they are kept in the ordinary course of business or must organize and label them to correspond to the categories in the demand. + +**(B) Form for Producing Electronically Stored Information Not Specified.** If a subpoena does not specify a form for producing electronically stored information, the person responding must produce it in a form or forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in a reasonably usable form or forms. + +**(C) Electronically Stored Information Produced in Only One Form.** The person responding need not produce the same electronically stored information in more than one form. + +**(D) Inaccessible Electronically Stored Information.** The person responding need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the person identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the person responding must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule 26(b)(2)(C). The court may specify conditions for the discovery. + +**(2) Claiming Privilege or Protection.****(A) Information Withheld.** A person withholding subpoenaed information under a claim that it is privileged or subject to protection as trial-preparation material must: + +(i) expressly make the claim; and + +(ii) describe the nature of the withheld documents, communications, or tangible things in a manner that, without revealing information itself privileged or protected, will enable the parties to assess the claim. + +**(B) Information Produced.** If information produced in response to a subpoena is subject to a claim of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation material, the person making the claim may notify any party that received the information of the claim and the basis for it. After being notified, a party must promptly return, sequester, or destroy the specified information and any copies it has; must not use or disclose the information until the claim is resolved; must take reasonable steps to retrieve the information if the party-disclosed it before being notified; and may promptly present the information to the court under scal for a determination of the claim. The person who produced the information must preserve the information until the claim is resolved. + +**(e) Contempt.** The issuing court may hold in contempt a person who, having been served, fails without adequate excuse to obey the subpoena. A nonparty's failure to obey must be excused if the subpoena purports to require the nonparty to attend or produce at a place outside the limits of Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(ii). + +## SCHEDULE "A" + +THIS SUBPOENA ENCOMPASSES ALL RECORDS, INFORMATION, DOCUMENTS, OR MATERIAL THAT IN ANY WAY RELATES TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN, AND IS IN NO WAY LIMITED BY THE SPECIFIC REQUESTS DELINEATED IN 1-3 BELOW, AND BEAR STEARS HAS A LEGAL OBLIGATION TO TURN OVER ALL JEFFREY EPSTEIN RELATED MATERIALS IN RESPONSE TO THIS SUBPOENA + +- 1. The complete Personnel File of Jeffrey Epstein, including all correspondence to and from Mr. Epstein and/or any third parties, employment application, references, recommendations, warnings, reports, Incident reports, and all other documentation for the entire time Mr. Epstein began any relationship whatsoever with Bear Steams through the present (2009). +- 2. The complete file of Mr. Epstein's business and/or individual accounts and/or institutions for which Mr. Epstein was responsible or affiliated from the beginning of Mr. Epstein's employment relationship with Bear Stearns through the present (2009). +- 3. A complete list of the person(s) with the most knowledge from Bear Steams of: + - a. the hiring of Jeffrey Epstein by Bear Stearns; + - b. the employment of Jeffrey Epstein by Bear Steams: + - c. the departure of Epstein from employment with Bear Steams Bear Steams + - d. Jeffrey Epstein's relationship with Bear Steams subsequent to his departure as an employee of Bear Steams; and + - e. Jeffrey Epstein's his role as it relates to the prosecution of Bear Stearns employees or executives. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746757/EFTA02746757.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746757/EFTA02746757.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e4fc6a15ba260fd19e696dfe05fd7cad6777b4bc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746757/EFTA02746757.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,419 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746757.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 11758, + "elapsed_seconds": 24.06, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 188.496, + 91.53 + ], + [ + 431.069580078125, + 91.53 + ], + [ + 431.069580078125, + 113.52978515625 + ], + [ + 188.496, + 113.52978515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUBPOENA TO TESTIFY AT A DEPOSITION \nOR TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS IN A CIVIL. ACTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.66, + 228.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 433.447998046875, + 228.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 433.447998046875, + 254.20758056640625 + ], + [ + 186.66, + 254.20758056640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROOF OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.1, + 116.63999999999999 + ], + [ + 362.5230712890625, + 116.63999999999999 + ], + [ + 362.5230712890625, + 129.97113037109375 + ], + [ + 260.1, + 129.97113037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (c), (d), and (e) (Effective 12/1/07)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 162.18, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 452.26800000000003, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 452.26800000000003, + 120.69 + ], + [ + 162.18, + 120.69 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(c) Protecting a Person Subject to a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.096, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 238.06800000000004, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 238.06800000000004, + 138.51 + ], + [ + 66.096, + 138.51 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Command to Produce Materials or Permit Inspection.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 75.888, + 205.74 + ], + [ + 278.46000000000004, + 205.74 + ], + [ + 278.46000000000004, + 216.27 + ], + [ + 75.888, + 216.27 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.216, + 412.29 + ], + [ + 214.812, + 412.29 + ], + [ + 214.812, + 422.82 + ], + [ + 72.216, + 422.82 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(d) Duties in Responding to a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 312.12, + 125.55000000000001 + ], + [ + 459.0, + 125.55000000000001 + ], + [ + 459.0, + 136.89000000000001 + ], + [ + 312.12, + 136.89000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Claiming Privilege or Protection.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 317.01599999999996, + 381.51 + ], + [ + 447.98400000000004, + 381.51 + ], + [ + 447.98400000000004, + 392.04 + ], + [ + 317.01599999999996, + 392.04 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SCHEDULE \"A\"", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 273.564, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 357.74725341796875, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 357.74725341796875, + 132.84 + ], + [ + 273.564, + 132.84 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 108 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Form", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 53 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 259 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746757" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746761/EFTA02746761.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746761/EFTA02746761.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b02b7fe28f37f94bb454be12728547fe99c2517c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746761/EFTA02746761.md @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +David Palercsak Assistant Vico President. Loda/ Specialist Officer 1.9(pl find Compliance Dervadrnent + +September I. 2009 + +VIA FACSIMILE 054-527-86631 AND FIRST CLASS MAIL + +farad—. Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler Suite 1650 4(11 East Las Ohs Blvd. Fort Lauderdale. FL 33301 + +RE: Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein (USDC, SD Ha. Case No. "08-CIV-MARRS) + +Dear Mr. + +Iam writing on behalf of non-party iPMorgan Chase & Co. (''JPMC""') in response to the subpoena that appears to be incorrectly dated September IS. 2009 addressed "Bear Stearns" in the abovereferenced matter (the "Subpoena".) As you may he aware. JPMC' acquired the various Bear Stearns entities in May 2(X)8. Pursuant to Rule 45(e)(2k II) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. JPMC hereby objects to the Subpoena on the following grounds: + +- The subpoena is jurisdictionally defective in that it issues out of the Southern District of Florida but is addressed to a New York entity. +- The subpoena appears to not include a valid Civil Action Number. +- The Subpoena does not provide sufficient time to respond. +- The Subpoena is overly broad and unduly burdensome and. contrary to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)( II. is not reasonably tailored to avoid imposing on JPMC undue burden and expense'. +- The Subpoena seeks documents that are more easily and fairly be obtained front panics to the Action. +- JPMC objects to the Subpoena to the extent that the Subpoena seeks documents that are confidential and/or proprietary to JPMC or third panics. contain trade secrets. or otherwise contain or reflect sensitive information. No such documents or information will be provided absent entry of an appropriate protective order by the court. +- The Subpoena seeks documents not in JPMC"s possession. custody or control. +- The Subpoena attempts to impose on JPMC obligations beyond those required by the Federal Rules of Civil Ptoce0ino. + +JPMorgan Chase & Co. • t Chose Ilanhailan Pbzo. Min now. New York. NY 10005 + +rotoptinno: 212 552 251 I • retsina, 212 552 479a 1134Id petarcsA0dprooroan corn + +- The Subpoena seeks documents that are neither relevant to the claims and/or defenses in the action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. +- The Subpoena seeks documents protected from disclosure by the attorney-client communication privilege, the work product doctrine. and other applicable privileges. Any inadvertent production shall not be deemed a waiver of any applicable privilege or protection. A party receiving inad'ertently produced privileged or legally protected information must return. sequester or destroy that informtion, retrieve any copies shared with parties or non-parties and may not use or disclose the privileged or legally protected information unless and until the claim of privilege or legal protection is resolved. +- JPMC objects to the Subpoena to the extent that it seeks to impose the undue burden and expense of searching backup electronit media. including but not limited to backup tapes. Any electronic information ultimately produced by JPMC will be produced in paper printout form or in electronic format as kept and maintained by JPMC in the ordinary course of its business. +- The Subpoena requests am vague and ambiguous. + +The Subpoena also makes no effort to reimburse JPMC for the obligations it is being asked to undertake. As a matter of law. before searching for and producing documents responsive to the Subpoena. JPMC is entitled to assurances that it will be reimbursed for the costs incurred in connection with the Subpoena. This includes, hut is not limited to, attorneys' fees, employee time and expense. nonemployee worker costs. copying costs, labeling costs, and mailing and shipping costs. + +Nothing in this lever shall constitute. nor shall be construed to be, awaiver of any rights, defenses or additional objections that JPMC may have as regards the Subpoena. and WNW reserves the right to amend, alter or supplement these objections as necessary or appropriate. Funher, the tat thai JPMC is asserting these objections is not a representation that responsive documents exist or can be located. + +For all of these reasons, JPMC will not be producing any responsive documents at this time, nor will it produce awitness on September 22, 2009. JPMC is nonetheless trilling to review and consider revised Subpoena that addresses the foregoing objections. Please feel free to call me with any question's. + +![](_page_1_Picture_9.jpeg) + +Sinrely. + +![](_page_1_Picture_7.jpeg) + +David Peteresak Assistant Vice President \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746761/EFTA02746761.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746761/EFTA02746761.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2d39fff8e15c447712034ee4e096fe2e743f6440 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746761/EFTA02746761.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,151 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746761.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 4568, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.05, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_1_Picture_9.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_7.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "JPMoRGAN CHASE & CO.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 315.79200000000003, + 32.400000000000006 + ], + [ + 554.6704711914062, + 32.400000000000006 + ], + [ + 554.6704711914062, + 52.650000000000006 + ], + [ + 315.79200000000003, + 52.650000000000006 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 393 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 436 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "PictureGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746761" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746761/_page_1_Picture_7.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746761/_page_1_Picture_7.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0099ef99a582157c76989798ff5df6f1b3b9f122 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746761/_page_1_Picture_7.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f3068d80462e748f298d87772cdbc02d7682f7dfbad449dfa644b349046aec8c +size 1497 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746761/_page_1_Picture_9.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746761/_page_1_Picture_9.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6164d0c9cfe51f17d3f967a2fa4ea2316771b550 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746761/_page_1_Picture_9.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:63ace2b7ccc7b4fd71ac211ba1a37e1bf73bd9fc9822d4dced5408e4213c4f54 +size 1883 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746763/EFTA02746763.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746763/EFTA02746763.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f7edc9aae15b9d69e4e985b06f3621f7fc49b9d5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746763/EFTA02746763.md @@ -0,0 +1,166 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRSI + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +# EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO QUASH AND MOTION FOR P E ORDER AND OBJECTIONS AS TO THE SUBPOENA SERVED ON JP CHASE & CO WHICH IS INCORRECTLY TITLED AND ADDRESSED TO BEAR STEARNS + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(3)(A)(iii), moves to quash the September 18, 2009 (incorrectly dated) ("Subpoena") attached hereto as Exhibit "A" served by Plaintiff, Jane Doe ("Jane Doe"), on JP Chase & Co ("JP Chase")Which Is Incorrectly Titled And Addressed To Bear Steams, and moves for a protective order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) and asserts various objection thereto, and states: + +1. Purportedly, on September 18, 2009 (SIC), Jane Doe served the Subpoena (attached as Exhibit A) on JP Chase, seeking production of: + +- a. The Complete Personnel File of Jeffrey Epstein, including all correspondence to and from Mr. Epstein and/or any third parties, employment applications, references, recommendations, warnings, reports, incident reports, and all other documentation for the entire time Mr. Epstein began any relationships whatsoever with Bear Stearns through the present (2009). + +- b. The Complete file of Mr. Epstein's business and/or individual accounts and/or institutions for which Mr. Epstein was responsible or affiliated from the beginning of Mr. Epstein's employment relationship with Bear Steams through to the present(2009). + +- c. A Compete list of the person's with the most knowledge from Bear Steams of: (i) the hiring of Jeffrey Epstein by Bear Steams, (ii) the employment of Jeffrey Epstein by Bear Steams, (iii) the departure of Epstein from employment with Bear Steams, (iv) Epstein's relationship with Bear Steams subsequent to his departure as an employee of Bear Steams and (v) Epstein's role as it relates to the prosecution of Bear Steams employees or executives. + +- 2. As set out in JP Chase's objections to the Subpoena (attached as Exhibit + +"B"), which are incorporated herein by reference, Epstein also objects to the Subpoena pursuant to Rule 45(c)(2)(B) on the following grounds: + +- a. The Subpoena is jurisdictionally defective in that it is issued out of the Southern District of Florida and addressed to aNY entity. +- b. It appears to lack avalid Civil Action Number. +- c. It does not provide sufficient time to respond as dated and appears to be improperly dated (i.e., September 18, 2009). +- d. The Subpoena is overly broad, irrelevant, harassing, vague, ambiguous, seeks confidential and proprietary information, seeks confidential and proprietary financial information (most of which pertain to unknown and unidentified third parties), is unduly burdensome and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. +- e. JP Chase has responded, despite its objections, that the information is not in its pos custody or control, and seeks to impose obligations on JP MI chase beyond those required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. +- f. The Subpoena appears to seek information that is protected by the attorney-client and work-product privileges (e.g., recommendations, warnings, reports, incident reports, business and/or individual accounts and/or institutions for which Mr. Epstein was responsible or affiliated from the beginning of Mr. Epstein's employment relationship with Bear Stearns through to + +the present, the hiring of Jeffrey Epstein by Bear Stearns, the employment of Jeffrey Epstein by Bear Steams, the departure of Epstein from employment with Bear Steams, Epstein's relationship with Bear Stearns subsequent to his departure as an employee of Bear Stearns and Epstein's role as it relates to the prosecution of Bear Stearns employees or exectid it seeks to impose an undue burden and expense on JP Chase as stated in its attached objections. + +3. Epstein's work history is not an issue in this case, and no allegations are made in the complaint relative to same. + +4. Moreover, the clients he may have serviced while employed at Bear Stearns are not relevant to the claims alleged, and those individuals that may have been his clients have a Constitutional Right to Privacy, especially with regard to their financial information (i.e., the Subpoena seeks all communications between Epstein and all third parties and, as well, seeks to identify business and/or individual accounts and/or institutions for which Mr. Epstein was responsible). The Subpoena is not narrowly tailored to prevent disclosure of third-party financial information. Even so, JP Chase has responded that no such documents are within its possession, custody or control. Therefore, the Subpoena is moot and should be quashed. + +5. Plaintiff is not entitled to "carte blanche" access to ALL of Defendant's clients' business and/or individual accounts and/or institutions he was responsible for during his alleged employment with Bear Steams. Is Plaintiff's counsel serious? + +6. When the purpose of the discovery is to obtain information for reasons other than the prosecution or defense of the lawsuit, discovery will be denied in its entirety." See, Ocean Atlantic Woodland Corporation v. DRH Cambridge Homes, Inc., 262F.Supp.2d 923 (N.D. Ill. 2003). Epstein has the right to object to these Subpoenas because he has a personal right or privilege with respect to the subject matter requested in the Subpoenas, i.e., his financial Jane Poe V. Epstein + +information or "individual accounts", etc. See, v. Midland Brake. Inc., 162 F.R.D. 683 (D. Kansas, 1995); Berkeley v. Eisen, 699So.2d 789 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (Court orders compelling discovery constitute astate action that can impinge on an individual's constitutional rights, including the right of privacy provided under the Florida Constitution — including the third parties Plaintiff seeks to identify through financial documents). It is well recognized that a person's financial information is entitled to protection by the state constitutional right of privacy if there is no compelling or relevant reason to compel disclosure. See Mogul v. Mogul, 730 So.2d 1287 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). Here, there is no relevant or compelling reason for the Plaintiff to compel the financial information other than to attempt to harass the Defendant, which includes Epstein's financial information and other third-party financial information. To the extent the production of information reveals the names of Epstein's clients and/or aclient list(s) could be derived therefrom, that too could violate Epstein or JP Chase's trade-secret and/or commercially sensitive information as same is proprietary business data. Berkeley v. Eisen, 699 So.2d 789 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)(The significant harm to most, if not all, of certain unsuspecting individuals in allowing such a fishing expedition (i.e., the disclosure of their names) is great and far outweighs the plaintiff's need for same. Non-party clients have areasonable expectation of privacy). + +7. Florida Statute §655.059 sets, in part, the standard in Florida for disclosing personal financial data, and equally applicable is 15 U.S.C. §6801, Protection of Non-Public Personal Information. See also 5 Fla.Jur. 2d, Banks and Lending Institutions, §49 and Banc of America Investment Services, Inc. v. Barnett, 997So.2d 1154 (3d DCA 2008)(order compelling production of bank records based upon account holder's refusal to return five million shares transferred to their account due to clerical error would result in harmful invasion of third party's + +privacy rights that could not be remedied on appeal and, thus, bank was entitled to writ of certiorari to quash order; trial court did not weigh privacy interests of third parties against interests of account holders, and demand for confidential documents was overly broad, irrelevant to the issues and was not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence). + +8. 15 U.S.C. §680 (a), Protection of Non-Public Personal Information, provides: "[i]t is the policy of Congress that each financial institution has an affirmative and continuing obligation to respect the privacy of its customers and to protect the security and confidentiality of those customers non-public personal information." 15 U.S.C. §680 (b)(1) and (3) provide, in relevant part, that financial institutions must: ". . .insure the security and confidentiality of customer records and information" and "protect against unauthorized access to or use of such records or information which could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any customer." Id. Certainly, this court could foresee inconvenience on the part of any third-party having to reveal their "entire file" and/or "business and/or individual accounts" showing detailed financial data or financial strategy etc. . . . See e.g., Arias-Zeballos v. Tan, 2007WL 210112, at \*1 (S.D.N.Y.2007)(quashing Subpoena to bank seeking copies of defendant's personal checks and documents concerning the purchase of residential real estate, finding that "courts have found that individuals, whose banking records are Subpoenaed, have a privacy interest in their personal financial affairs that gives them standing to move to quash aSubpoena served on anon-party financial institution); Transcor, Inc. v. Furney Charters, Inc., 212F.R.D. 588, 591 (D.Kan.2003)(Personal rights claimed with respect to bank account records give a party sufficient standing to challenge athird party Subpoena served upon financial institutions holding such information). Here, Plaintiff has failed to even identify the third-parties whose records may be produced and, as aresult, substantial harm could be done in that those unidentified parties will + +not be afforded their right to object to same. However, as set forth below, Epstein himself has a right to object to the Subpoena. + +9. For instance, Epstein maintains a complicated business practice, which revolves around confidential relationships and proprietary financial information of third-parties. To the extent the production of information reveals the names of Epstein's clients and/or aclient list(s) could be derived therefrom, that too could violate Epstein or JP= Chase's trade-secret and/or commercially sensitive information as same is proprietary business data. Berkeley v. Eisen, 699So.2d 789 (Fla. 4'h DCA 1997)(the significant harm to most, if not all, of certain unsuspecting individuals in allowing such a fishing expedition (i.e., the disclosure of their names) is great and far outweighs the plaintiff's need for same.) As such, Epstein has a right and privilege to object to and move to quash the above Subpoena, especially since it seeks to identify the financial information of several unidentified third parties that may have been his clients. Transcor, Inc. v. Fumey Charters, 212F.R.D. at 590-91; see also Woodward v. Berkery, 714 So.2d 1027 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)(the "law in Florida recognizes an individual's legitimate expectation of privacy in individual's private bank account [and] financial records"), Winfield v. Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, 477So.2d 544 (Fla. 1985); Art. 1, §23, Fla. Const. (("Every natural person has the right to be let alone and free from governmental intrusion into his private life except as otherwise provided herein.") and NM v. Heart Institute of Port St. Lucie, Inc., 863 So.2d 189 (Fla. 2003)(the disclosure of personal financial information may cause irreparable harm to a person forced to disclose it in acase in which the information is not relevant") + +10. Accordingly, and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(3)(AXiii), Epstein respectfully requests the Court quash the Subpoena and/or enter an appropriate Motion for Protective Order. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, respectfully requests the Court, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(3)(A)(iii), quash the Subpoena directed to Bear Stearns and grant any additional relief the Court deems just and proper including, but not limited to, a protective order. + +**Certificate of Service** + +![]()I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 17 day of September, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()**Certificate of Service** + +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA** [REDACTED] + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesqabellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746763/EFTA02746763.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746763/EFTA02746763.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..90caf2881ca39bceff4014a18bc08b6a314025bc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746763/EFTA02746763.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,443 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746763.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 15445, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.3, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.6464538574219, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.6464538574219, + 102.35302734375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 102.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO QUASH AND MOTION FOR P E ORDER AND \nOBJECTIONS AS TO THE SUBPOENA SERVED ON JP CHASE & CO \nWHICH IS INCORRECTLY TITLED AND ADDRESSED TO BEAR STEARNS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.784, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 539.6494140625, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 539.6494140625, + 406.10302734375 + ], + [ + 80.784, + 406.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 209.79000000000002 + ], + [ + 362.916, + 209.79000000000002 + ], + [ + 362.916, + 223.56000000000003 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 223.56000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 124.74 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 124.74 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 418 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 391 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 401 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 406 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 393 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 208 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 38 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746763" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746772/EFTA02746772.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746772/EFTA02746772.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b995052026b5b8f99955e6c81b58eaab2f628dab --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746772/EFTA02746772.md @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228). For the following reasons said Motion is granted. + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm beach, New York and St. with the promise of money in + +sAa + +exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +By the instant Motion Epstein seeks an order compelling one of the Plaintiffs, in the case, to submit to an independent psychological/psychiatric medical examination by Ryan El M.D., presently scheduled for September 8,2009. ,=ahas agreed to submit to said exam, but requests the Court impose certain restrictions. Since the filing of the Motion the parties have managed to resolve some of the issues involved, such as the proposed examination's time and date and M. request to have a representative from her team present at said examination. As for the latter issue, Defendant has agreed to provide, at his expense, a video feed and monitor in an adjacent room for Plaintiffs representative's use. The remaining issues involve Plaintiff's request for a court order limiting the scope of the proposed examination by disallowing repeated questioning regarding "highly sensitive areas of inquiry including Plaintiffs medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history, substance abuse history, etc.,'and imposing certain time restraints on the examination itself. + +Plaintiffs request to limit the scope of the examination is denied. It is Dr. + +&#x27; See Pltff's Resp. to Rep.(D.E. #279), p.3. + +routine procedure when conducting psychological/psychiatric medical examinations of patients to require the patient to fill out a 10-page "Life History Questionnaire" and a 14-page "Patient Questionnaire." Both questionnaires request detailed background information regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like. Presumably Plaintiff will be asked these same questions two more times, first by defense counsel at deposition scheduled to take place shortly, and again by Dr.. at the upcoming examination. Plaintiffs objection is that by having to answer these same questions about the same subject matter three separate times "would only serve to embarrass, humiliate, intimidate and further victimize Plaintiff? Pltff's Resp. (D.E. #254), p.6. Plaintiffs position is that she should only "be required to regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like, if at all, only one time," either during the "deposition of Plaintiff or through Dr. examination, but certainly not both." Id. + +Plaintiff cites no case law and independent research has uncovered none, to support her novel position that a Plaintiff who puts her mental, emotional and psychiatric state at issue can place a limitation on the number of times defense counsel or agents retained by him can inquire into areas relevant to these issues where the subject matter involved is "highly personal," "embarrassing," "sensitive," or otherwise "humiliating." Plaintiff is seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, "physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, land] invasion of her privacy." 3 Based on the allegations made in Defendant's Reply,' Plaintiffs childhood was, to put it mildly, a difficult one, with numerous episodes of child abuse and sexual abuse, which in turn may of been the cause of Plaintiff's later engaging in numerous instances of substance abuse, self-mutilation, prostitution, aggravated assault, truancy, and the like. According to Defendant, in 2005 Plaintiffs mother filed a case committing for a Petition for Involuntary Assessment for substance abuse, stating in the accompanying file that has been diagnosed as "Bipoloar and Schizophrenic." 4 + +Under these circumstances, where Plaintiff is seeking to recover medical expenses associated with these complex medical issues, full knowledge of Plaintiffs past and present medical, psychological, familial and social histories is essential. And while neither duplication nor embarrassment is desired, under the circumstances presented, where the number and scope of damages claimed are vast and Plaintiffs past history eventful, it may nonetheless be unavoidable. This is not to say that restrictions on the scope of questioning may never be put into effect. If, as the case progresses, Plaintiff can show that Defendant's invasive questioning + +2 Plaintiff, First Am. Compl., Counts I-XXX. + +(D.E. #273), pp.7-8, + +4 As quoted in Defs Rep. (D.E. #273), p.8, from Palm Beach County Case #05MH1667. + +is being done in bad faith or for purposes of harassment, the Court may reconsider imposing limitations of the sort requested herein. At this point, however, the Court agrees with Defendant that to restrict the number of times defense counsel may ask Plaintiff personal and sensitive questions concerning some of the pivotal issues in this case, would work an injustice by preventing Defendant from being able to defend himself. + +The Court likewise rejects Plaintiff's request to limit the time for conducting the examination and any related testing to 6 hours. Dr.. has filed an affidavit stating that he needs 6-8 hours to conduct the examination and related testing, and that anything less than that might result in compromising the test results.' Considering the 31 counts alleged against Defendant, as well as Plaintiffs event-filled past, the amount of time sought does not appear unreasonable. Should the length of time prove draining, Plaintiff may take breaks as needed, of reasonable duration. Furthermore, Defense Counsel and Dr.■ **are hereby put on notice that while the Court has allowed the full 8 hours requested for the examination and related testing, should less time be needed, the Court expects less time will be taken, and in no event may the examination and related testing exceed a total of 8 hours. In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby** + +**ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228) is GRANTED IN** + +**Affidavit of Dr.., attached as Ex. "B" to Defendant's Rep. (D.E. #273).** + +## ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF. + +DONE AND ORDERED this September 4, 2009, in MM at West Palm Beach, + +Florida. + +Or4.-r7 S LINNEA R. JO ON UNITED STA S MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746772/EFTA02746772.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746772/EFTA02746772.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5456e82efb4fc4d04706a48ff766f90f26155906 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746772/EFTA02746772.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,318 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746772.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 7683, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.33, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.63200000000003, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 408.49981689453125, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 408.49981689453125, + 114.42352294921875 + ], + [ + 205.63200000000003, + 114.42352294921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 286.41600000000005, + 385.55999999999995 + ], + [ + 335.7060241699219, + 385.55999999999995 + ], + [ + 335.7060241699219, + 400.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 286.41600000000005, + 400.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 79.56, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 347.3365173339844, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 347.3365173339844, + 101.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 79.56, + 101.30352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 312 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746772" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746778/EFTA02746778.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746778/EFTA02746778.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bf6810e69bf69670eaaa96e874fa4d6378aaa135 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746778/EFTA02746778.md @@ -0,0 +1,129 @@ +## The Psychological Trauma Center + +adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc. + +Medical Director: Gilbert W. Kliman, M. D. + +2105 Divisadero St., San Francisco, CA 94115 + +Phone(415)292-7119 Fax (415) 749-2802 + +www.expertchildpsvchiatrv.com + +Forensic Child Psychiatric Ev.alnations, Life Care Plans & Testimony + +Tape 1 + +allinnillikwith Dr. Kliman + +12.6.08 + +Transcription by: K. Rios + +00:00:05 + +Dr. Kliman: aI'm just gonna make some announcements but first I'd like to be sure that you want me to call you is that...? + +Me That's fine. + +Dr. Kliman: That's fine; and I'm just reminding you that today you're talking with me at the Mardot Courtyard Suite 304 and today is December 6th 2008. My name is Dr. Gilbert Kliman. I know you only met me only a moment ago and I haven't real y ha achance to orient you, I don't know how much orientation you've had towards this interview. It's my duty to tell you that your attorney has requested me to talk with you and that his Mr. Jeffrey Herman. I noticed you looked up when I said Jeffery; because there is another party named Jeffrey perhaps that caught your attention. You're suing aMr. Jeffrey is that right? + +Dr. Kliman: And because you're meeting with me at the request of your attorney I can't keep this confidential. I will have to share this videotape with your attorney and he might use it in your case. That means that the confidentiality is lacking, usually if you talk to a psychiatrist or to a psychologist or counselor you can expect some confidentiality but you don't have that in asituation where the purpose is connected with a lawsuit. Is that okay with you? + +00:02:29 + +a + +Uh huh. + +That's fine. + +Dr. Kliman: Okay you have a very quiet voice so I'm gonna move the camera closer to you. Now I find the room actually alittle warm but you found it cold and + +"3 4 + +you put your coat on which is fine; but I wondered if you put it on because you were uncomfortable? + +Dr. Kliman: And you said you were nervous on the drive down here. + +S Yeah. + +Dr. Kliman: Could you tell me about that. + +S In 2003 I got into a car accident on the I-4 and we got hit by a semi truck...so I don't ride on the interstate no more. + +No. + +Dr. Kliman: Okay what was the date of that accident? + +It was in June but I don't know the exact date. + +Dr. Kliman: 2003 did you say? + +I think so. + +00:03:42 + +Dr. Kliman: So were you badly hurt? + +I wasn't hurt my mom was and I had my...my two cousins were in the back but they weren't hurt bad; just my mom. + +Dr. Kliman: How is she doing? + +She's alright now. + +Dr. Kliman: What happened to her in that accident? + +spolli She was too close to the airbag and it burned off her face...it burned off part of her face. + +Dr. Kliman: Where were you sitting? + +In the front seat. + +Dr. Kliman: Well it seemed to you that actually part of her face was burned off? + +Just the top layer of her skin and then her nose was bleeding. She had in her arm and her chest. + +Dr. Kliman: So that was a very serious scare at least? + +Dr. Kliman: How long have you been driving yourself? + +MIS I don't drive. + +Dr. Kliman: Have you ever driven? + +S Yeah but I just don't... + +Dr. Kliman: You're licensed? + +MI I No. I don't even bother. + +00:05:18 + +Dr. Kliman: So you've never been an independent driver? + +Dr. Kliman: How did you get your license without driving? + +MIMg I haven't got my license. + +Dr. Kliman: **.. you still haven't?** + +Dr. Kliman: **MIAin order to do a really good job understanding your case and you as aperson and your complaints about Mr. Jeffrey. I'd like to hear more about yourself as aperson, could you tell me whatever you can in your own way about yourself as aperson.** + +ANS **Uh...I don't know, I'm just...nice** + +Dr. Kliman: bring there? **I'm gonna show the camera that you're busy down there. What did you** + +Dr. Kliman: **that's very helpful.** + +Dr. Kliman: **You were starting to say you were anice person.** + +Yeah...we don't go on the interstate no more. + +[Shaking her head] + +**No, I don't bother because I'm not gonna drive.** + +**its most of my attorney papers...not attomey...from my all my psychiatrists and the programs I've been in and...** + +**Picture of my son. But...I don't know.** \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746778/EFTA02746778.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746778/EFTA02746778.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dd101a949500436cf89c571a1250e6939d719dbc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746778/EFTA02746778.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,154 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746778.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 4282, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.54, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "The Psychological Trauma Center", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 238.66683959960938, + 59.94 + ], + [ + 383.724, + 59.94 + ], + [ + 383.724, + 72.004638671875 + ], + [ + 238.66683959960938, + 72.004638671875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 398 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 271 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746778" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746781/EFTA02746781.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746781/EFTA02746781.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ee808e5c0651fca136eefe30d2b98e05cb6db267 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746781/EFTA02746781.md @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +9453 PALM 05/26/09 BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF' SOFFICE PAGE 1 OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 03038033 + +> DISPOSITION: ZULU DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +SUSP PERSON/VEHICLE CODE: 9513 DATE: 03/02/03 ZONE: 851 GRID: 4815 DEPUTY ID.: 5471 ASSIST: TIME O 0812 A OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 03/02/03 , 0730 HOURS AND DATE: EXCEPTION TYPE: Sallimmil INCIDENT LOCATION: APT. CITY: WEST PALM BEACH STATE: FL ZIP: NO. OFFENSES: 00 NO. OFFENDERS: UK NO. VEH. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. LOCATION: RESIDENCE - OTHER NO. VICTIMS: 00 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 SUNDAY 0817 C 0834 0000 HOURS NO.: 33415 ENTERED: 0 + +COMPLAINANT SEX: F RACE: W HT: 500 WT: 135 RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: HOME PHONE: BUSINESS PHONE: COMPLAINANT S E: W HT: 502 WT: RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: HOME PHONE: : BUSINESS PHONE: 561 00 - 00 Sa HR: EYE: n=WA FL WM 90 HR: PALM FL 33415 + +• • • + +ON 03/02/03 AT APPROXIMATELY 0800 HOURS I RESPONDED TO Mae PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, WHICH IS LOCATED IN THE IN REFERENCE TO A SUSPICIOUS PERSON. + +UPON MY ARRIVAL I MET WITH COMPLAINANTIIPS THE COMPLAINANT TOLD ME THAT UPON GOING OUTSIDE THIS DATE AT APPROXIMATELY 0730HOURS TO DO WASH IN HER SHED, SHE CAME IN CONTACT WITH A MALE (5'6", THIN BUILD, BLACK AND a, WEARING A I'll. SHIRT TAN PANTS) THAT WAS INSIDE OF HER SHED IT HER UNDERWEOOMIDE OF HIS MOUTH. THE COMPLAINANT SAID THAT THE SUBJECT SAID HELLO AND TOOK THE UNDERWEAR OUT OF HIS MOUTH AND RAN OUTSIDE IN A NORTHERN DIRECTION. THE COMPLAINANT STATED THAT THE SUBJECT PUT THE UNDERWEAR IN THE DRYER PRIOR TO HIM RUNNING AWAY. + +AN ATTEMPT TO LOCATE THE SUBJECT WAS MADE WITH NEGATIVE RESULTS. THE COMPLAINANT WANTED THIS TO BE DOCUMENTED. AT THIS TIME I GAVE THE CASE NUMBER TO THE COMPLAINANT. THIS CASE IS FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. D/S SCHRODER 5471/DICT 030203 0842/TRAN 030503 DM + +1P1 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746781/EFTA02746781.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746781/EFTA02746781.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9ed82f2487369a22b711ccd51d0b5840db629a23 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746781/EFTA02746781.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746781.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1826, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.55, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 380 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746781" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746782/EFTA02746782.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746782/EFTA02746782.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..410d01f671c82ae5c715e9bf0b7f29b99b800589 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746782/EFTA02746782.md @@ -0,0 +1,89 @@ +DISPOSITION: OPEN DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +BATTERY CODE: 1308 DATE: 08/28/02 WEDNESDAY ZONE: B52 GRID: 4816 DEPUTY ID.: 3475 ASSIST: TIME D 0959 A 1008 C 1025 OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 08/27/02 , 1600 HOURS AND DATE: 08/27/02 , 1630 HOURS EXCEPTION TYPE: INCIDENT LOCATION: DR APT. NO.: CITY: WEST PALM BEACH STATE: FL ZIP: NO. OFFENSES: 01 NO.OFFENDERS: 03 NO. VEH. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. ENTERED: 0 LOCATION: NO. VICTIMS: 01 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 WEAPON TYPE: HANDS / FISTS / FEET OFFENSE NO. 1 FLORIDA STATE STATUTE: 784 03 CIS CODE 1308 + +VICTIM NO. 001 SEX: F RACE: W HT: 502 WT: 90 RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: FL 33415 + +HOME PHONE: BUSINESS NAME ADDRESS: OKEEHEELEE MIDDLE SCHOOL, 6TH GR, PINEHURST D BUSINESS PHONE: alallIP + +SUSPECT 184101.11aS SEX: F RACE: B HT: 0 WT: 0 HR: UN EYE: UNKNOWN RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: DR GREENACRES FL 33463 HOME PHONE: BUSINESS NAME ADDRESS: STUDENT, IMRSISIIIIIINfl, 7TH GRADE BUSINESS PHONE: 401= mum + +OTHER SEX: F RACE: B HT: 506 WT: 120 HR: BLACK EYE: RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 3811 57 AV WPB FL 33415 HOME PHONE: 561 000-0000 BUSINESS NAME ADDRESS: OKEEHEELEE BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 MIDDLE SCHOOL, 6TH GRADE + +WITNESS SEX: M RACE: W HT: RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 5955 LONGBOW HOME PHONE: 561 000-0000 BUSINESS NAME ADDRESS: OKEEHEELEE MIDDLE BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 0WT: 0 HR: UNKNOWN EYE: UNKNOWN LA APT. 8 WPB .FL 0 SCHOOL, 7TH GRADE + +NAME ROLE LIST: + +ROLE: + +OTHER NO. 2 + +REAL: RAMEICA QUASHIE SEX: F RACE: B HT: 0 WT: 0 HR: DOB: EYE: + +OFFENSE INDICATOR: OFFENSE 1 VICTIM TYPE: JUVENILE RESIDENCE TYPE: COUNTY EXTENT OF INJURY: MINOR VICTIM NUMBER: 1 RESIDENCE STATUS: FULL YEAR + +ft) •1 + +05/26/09 ENBH +PAGE 2 +PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE +OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 02108838 + +INJURY TYPE(1): ABRASIONS / BRUISE +INJURY TYPE(2): NOT APPLICABLE +VICTIM RELATION: ACQUAINTANCE + +REPORT NUMBER: 1 +FLORIDA VICTIM ? N + +WEATHER: CLOUDY +WITNESS TO CRIME KNOWN ?. Y SUSPECT NAME KNOWN ?..... Y +CAN VICTIM I.D. SUSPECT ? Y SUSPECT LOCATION KNOWN ?... Y +WILL VICTIM PROSECUTE ?.. Y EVIDENCE LEFT AT SCENE ?... N +IS M.O. SIGNIFICANT ?..... N SUSPECT'S VEHICLE KNOWN ?.. N +LATENTS LIFTED ?..... N PROPERTY DAMAGE ?..... N +TAG NUMBER KNOWN ?..... N + +ON WEDNESDAY, 082802 AT APPROX. 1017 HRS., I SPOKE WITH [REDACTED] +A SIXTH GRADE STUDENT AT OKEEHEELEE MIDDLE SCHOOL LOCATED ON PINEHURST DRIVE +IN THE CITY OF GREENACRES. [REDACTED] WAS DRIVEN TO THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE BY HER +MOTHER. [REDACTED] STATED THAT ON 082702 AT APPROX. 1600 TO 1615 HRS., SHE LEFT +SCHOOL AND WAS WALKING HOME. [REDACTED] WALKS NORTH ON PINEHURST DRIVE TO FOREST +[REDACTED] BLVD. AND THEN EAST ON FOREST [REDACTED] TOWARDS TAVARES COVE. [REDACTED] FELT +THAT SOMETHING WAS GOING TO HAPPEN BETWEEN HER AND FOUR OTHER GIRLS THAT WERE +FOLLOWING HER. [REDACTED] STATED THAT SHE CUT THROUGH THE [REDACTED] LOCATED JUST +NORTH OF THE SCHOOL IN ORDER TO AVOID ANY FURTHER PROBLEMS. [REDACTED] STATED +THAT THEY FOLLOWED HER INTO THE [REDACTED] AND THAT TWO OF THE GIRLS, [REDACTED] +[REDACTED] AND A SECOND SUSPECT UNKNOWN NAME, PULLED HER HAIR, PUSHED HER DOWN, +AND WHILE THE OTHERTWO GIRLS WATCHED. THREATS WERE MADE TOWARDS HER BY +HIGGINS AND THE OTHER GIRL, POSSIBLY [REDACTED]' COUSIN. WHILE THIS WAS HAPPEN- +ING, A WITNESS [REDACTED] CAME UP AND STOOD IN BETWEEN THE VICTIM AND +THE FOUR OTHER GIRLS. [REDACTED] GAVE A SWORN STATEMENT AND DURING THE INTERVIEW +EXPLAINED THAT HE DID IT BECAUSE THREE OTHER GIRLS WERE BIGGER THAN THE VICTIM +AND THAT HE STEPPED IN TO AVOID ANY FURTHER CONFLICTS. + +AFTER SPEAKING WITH [REDACTED], I THEN WENT TO OKEEHEELEE MIDDLE SCHOOL WHERE +I INTERVIEWED AND GOT A SWORN STATEMENT FROM CARCAMO. I THEN INTERVIEWED +[REDACTED] AND [REDACTED] [REDACTED] WHICH WAS NOT THERE. I EXPLAINED +TO THEM THE SITUATION AND THAT THEY WERE TO HAVE NO CONTACT WITH THE VICTIM. +I EXPLAINED TO THEM THAT SHOULD THEY CONTACT THE VICTIM EITHER DIRECTLY OR +INDIRECTLY THROUGH FRIENDS THEY COULD POSSIBLY BE CHARGED WITH TAMPERING WITH +A VICTIM OR WITNESS IN REFERENCE TO THE CRIME. I THEN SPOKE WITH [REDACTED] AND +[REDACTED] WHO BOTH STATED THAT THE INCIDENT STARTED WHEN [REDACTED] DURING SCHOOL +HAD MADE COMMENTS ABOUT FRIENDS OF [REDACTED] AND [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] CONFRONTED +[REDACTED] WITHIT. [REDACTED] STATED THAT AS SHE WAS TALKING TO [REDACTED] +WALKED PAST HER AND BUMPED INTO HER AND CONTINUED TO WALK. [REDACTED] ADMITTED +THAT SHE SHOULD HAVE LEFT IT ALONE BUT DIDN'T AND IT ESCALATED. I EXPLAINED +TO THEM THAT THE CHARGE WOULD BE FILED WITH THE STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND +PENDING THE OUTCOME THE DECISION BY THE STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN REFERENCE +TO THIS CASE. + +PENDING ACTIONS BY THE STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, CASE IS OPEN. +D/S GARTEN, #3475; 082802 @ 1316///BWR + +## PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE CENTRAL RECORDS FSS EXEMPTIONS/CONFIDENTIAL + +- 119.071(2)(c) active criminal intelligence/active criminal investigative information 119.071(2) (d) Comprehensive policies or plans pertaining to the mobilization, deployment or tactical operations Involved in responding to emergencies. (Deputies schedules) 119.071(2)(e) confessions 0 119.071(2)(f) confidential informants 119.071(5)(g)1, Biometric Identification Information (Fingerprints, palm prints, and footprints) C.3 365.171(15) identity of 911 caller or person requesting emergency service ;• 119.071(4)(d)(1) home address, telephone, soc. security 11, photos of active/former LE personnel. spouses and children 316.066(5)(a) crash reports are confidential for period of 60 days after the report is filed 119.071(2) (h) (1) I'd. of victim of sexual battery, lewd and lascivious offense upon person less than 16 years old, child abuse, sexual offense 119.071(2)(I) assets of crime victim -1 985.04(1) juvenile offender records 119.071(5)(a)(5) social security numbers held by agency 119.0712(2) personal information contained in a motor vehicle record 119.071(5)(b) bank account #, debit, charge and credit card #s held by an agency 395.3025(7)(a) and/or 456.057(7)(a) medical information 394.4615(7) mental health information 119.071(2)(b) criminal intelligence/investigative information from a non-Florida criminal justice agency 943.053/943.0525 NCIC/FCIC/FBI and in-state FDLE/DOC 119.071(4)(c) undercover personnel +- 119.07(4)(d) extra fee if request is voluminous or requires extensive personnel, technology OTHER: + +Case number: OR/OWN Clerk ID: "Tgen Date: 6-14-O \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746782/EFTA02746782.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746782/EFTA02746782.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ef98d0229328da3cadd024ae6d35d4c330769a30 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746782/EFTA02746782.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,181 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746782.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 6551, + "elapsed_seconds": 10.99, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "05/26/09 ENBH PAGE 2 PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 02108838", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 27.54, + 20.25 + ], + [ + 489.6, + 20.25 + ], + [ + 489.6, + 52.650000000000006 + ], + [ + 27.54, + 52.650000000000006 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE \nCENTRAL RECORDS \nFSS EXEMPTIONS/CONFIDENTIAL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.168, + 51.84 + ], + [ + 444.5806579589844, + 51.84 + ], + [ + 444.5806579589844, + 95.070556640625 + ], + [ + 192.168, + 95.070556640625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 372 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746782" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746785/EFTA02746785.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746785/EFTA02746785.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4c82ab4413828f66b6688cdb864defaafc6084b7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746785/EFTA02746785.md @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@ +> DISPOSITION: INACTIVE DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +AFFRAY/RIOT CODE: 1308 DATE: 11/22/03 ZONE: B41 GRID: 4B15 DEPUTY ID.: 7059 ASSIST: TIME D 1455 A OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 11/22/03 , 1500 HOURS AND DATE: 11/22/03 SATURDAY 1511 C 1545 1530 HOURS + +EXCEPTION TYPE: INCIDENT LOCATION: 000 /AVENIDA AL HAI4BRA LA APT. CITY: WPB STATE: FL ZIP: NO. OFFENSES: 01 NO. OFFENDERS: 02 NO. VEH. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. NO.: ENTERED: 0 + +LOCATION: HIGHWAY / ROADWAY NO. VICTIMS: 02 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 + +WEAPON TYPE: HANDS / FISTS / FEET OFFENSE NO. 1 FLORIDA STATE STATUTE: 870 01 1 CIS CODE 130B + +VICTIM NO. 002 SEX: F RACE: W HT: 502 WT: 120 HR: BROW, R WN + +SUSPECT SEX: F RACE: W HT: 502 WT: 120 \_DOB: LAKE WORTH FL 33461 KR: + +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: HOME PHONE: BUSINESS PHONE: 561 + +VICTIM NO. 001 SEX: FRACE: N HT: 502 WT: 90 HR: DOB: 09/03/1990 + +SUSPECT SEX: RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: SPONINIS FRACE: N NT: 502 WT: 90 HR: EYE: + +HOME PHONE: BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +OFFENSE INDICATOR: OFFENSE 1 VICTIM NUMBER: 1 + +VICTIM TYPE: JUVENILE RESIDENCE TYPE: COUNTY EXTENT OF INJURY: NONE INJURY TYPE(1): NOT APPLICABLE INJURY TYPE(2): NOT APPLICABLE VICTIM RELATION: OTHER KNOWN RESIDENCE STATUS: FULL YEAR + +OFFENSE INDICATOR: OFFENSE 1 VICTIM NUMBER: 2 VICTIM TYPE: JUVENILE RESIDENCE TYPE: COUNTY RESIDENCE STATUS: FULL YEAR EXTENT OF INJURY: NONE INJURY TYPE(1): NOT APPLICABLE INJURY TYPE(2): NOT APPLICABLE VICTIM RELATION: OTHER KNOWN + +REPORT NUMBER: 1 FLORIDA VICTIM ? N WEATHER: CLR WITNESS TO CRIME KNOWN ?. CAN VICTIM I.D. SUSPECT ? WILL VICTIM PROSECUTE 7.. Y Y Y SUSPECT NAME KNOWN SUSPECT LOCATION KNOWN ? Y STOLEN PROPERTY TRACEABLE ? N + +IS M.O. SIGNIFICANT ?.... N EVIDENCE LEFT AT SCENE ?... N +LATENTS LIFTED ?..... N SUSPECT'S VEHICLE KNOWN ?.. N +TAG NUMBER KNOWN ?..... N PROPERTY DAMAGE ?..... N + +ON 12203 AT ABOUT 1500 HOURS, I RESPONDED TO THE AREA OF PUDY LANE AND AVENIDA ALHAMBRA, WEST PALM BEACH, IN REFERENCE TO A REPORTED BATTERY TYPE COMPLAINT. + +ON ARRIVAL, I MET WITH [REDACTED] AND LATER WITH [REDACTED]. MY INVESTIGATION REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: + +[REDACTED] AND [REDACTED] GOT INTO A HEATED ARGUMENT IN THE ABOVE AREA BECAUSE OF [REDACTED] TALKING TO [REDACTED] BOYFRIEND. THE ARGUMENT ESCALATED. IT WAS AT THIS TIME, THAT THEY BOTH STARTED SHOVING EACH OTHER. [REDACTED] STRUCK [REDACTED] IN HER LEFT EYE WITH HER CLOSED FIST. [REDACTED] RETALIATED BY STRIKING [REDACTED] BACK IN HER FACE WITH HER CLOSED FIST. + +IT WAS STATED THAT [REDACTED] CONTINED TO STRIKE [REDACTED] UNTIL [REDACTED] WAS BLEEDING. IT WAS AT THIS TIME THAT THEY BOTH SEPARATED AND WENT HOME. [REDACTED] PARENTS CALLED THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO REPORT THE DISTURBANCE. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT HIS BEHAVIOR HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A PERIOD OF TIME. BOTH [REDACTED] AND [REDACTED] COMPLETED SWORN STATEMENTS AND WERE BOTH ISSUED CASE INFORMATION FORMS. + +THE SWORN STATEMENTS WERE LATER TURNED OVER TO THE SHERIF'S DEPARTMENT RECORDS DEPARTMENT. BOTH WERE ADVISED THAT THE CASE WILL BE FILED WITH THE STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FOR THEIR DECISION. + +NO FURTHER INFORMATION. CASE IS INACTIVE PENDING FURTHER INVESTIGATIVE LEADS. + +D/S [REDACTED] 7059///112203 1957 HOURS +NBPRICHARD 6689//TRANS 112403 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746785/EFTA02746785.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746785/EFTA02746785.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e4418cb79de251f1aa22e6f2d0f300d84fb45c2e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746785/EFTA02746785.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,84 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746785.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 3237, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.54, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 379 + ], + [ + "Line", + 80 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746785" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746787/EFTA02746787.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746787/EFTA02746787.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9a4f52a1c97fc2b0139a19272d67ecdb6c37ad41 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746787/EFTA02746787.md @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +cr""akeipip89k8pt1g-Katig UtRociielii;?V F EntereocrIFUStlilodaiii/08/2009 Page 1 of 2 OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 05053028 + +DISPOSITION: ZULU DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +ACCIDENTAL INJURY CODE: 9567 DATE: 04/10/05 ZONE: B41 GRID: 4815 DEPUTY ID.: 5035 ASSIST: TIME D 1511 A OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 04/10/05 , 1500 HOURS AND DATE: 04/10/05 , EXCEPTION TYPE: INCIDENT LOCATION: 2315 ESPANA REAL APT. CITY: WEST PALM BEACH STATE: FL ZIP: NO. OFFENSES: 00 NO. OFFENDERS: 00 NO. VER. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. LOCATION: OTHER NO. VICTIMS: 00 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 SUNDAY 1518 C 1557 1500 HOURS NO.: 33415 ENTERED: 0 + +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 6149 HOME PHONE: 561 SEX: F RACE: N HT: 0 WT: CALLE DEL 261-7130 GREENACRES FL 33463 + +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 OTHER KENNETH C DUSHANE SEX: M RACE: N HT: 0 MT: DOB: 07/26/1994 0HR: UNKNOWN EYE: UNKNOWN GREENACRES FL 33463 + +OTHER ROBERT C DUSHANE SEX: M RACE: W HT: 506 WT: RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 6149 CALLE DEL DOB: 05/i 7 150 HR: BLOND EYE: GREENACRES FL 33463 + +HOME PHONE: 561 261-7128 BUSINESS PHONE: 561 471-5391 OTHER BELINDA DUSHANE DOB: 05/05/1920 0HR: UNKNOWN EYE: UNKNOWN + +CALLE DEL 261-7130 000-0000 RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 6149 HOME PHONE: 561 BUSINESS PHONE: 561 DOB: 08/14/1959 + +OTHER DEBRA A DISLORIA SEX: F RACE: N HT: 509 WT: RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 612 ELAINE RD HOME PHONE: 561 682-1162 150HR: EYE: BLUE WEST PALM FL 33413 + +BUSINESS NAME ADDRESS: 2315 ESPANA REAL, BUSINESS PHONE: 561 96 165 GREENACRES, FL 33415 DOB: 09/0111110 EYE: + +WITNESS ' SEX: F RACEt RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 2319 HOME PHONE: 561 AVENIDA 967-3601 WI: 90 HR: BA WEST PALM FL 33415 + +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +REPORT NUMBER: 1 FLORIDA VICTIM ? N WEATHER: CLEAR. + +IRESPONDED TO 2315 ESPANA REAL IN REFERENCE TO AN ACCIDENTAL INJURY. UPON ARRIVAL, EMS WAS ALREADY ON THE SCENE TREATING THE VICTIM, KENNY DUSHANE. APPARENTLY A WITNESS HE NAME OFINIIIIIIIMMIMOM STATED THAT KENNY WAS JUMPING ON TOP OF A TRANSFORMER BOX, WHICH IS LOCATED AT THE OFFICE NEXT TO THE POOL. THE DOOR TO THE TRANSFORMER BOX HAD SWUNG OPEN, AND THAT IS WHEN KENNY HAD GONE INSIDE AND APPARENTLY GRABBED THE WIRES, SHOCKING HIM. I OBSERVED SEVERAL BURN MARKS ON KENNY ON BOTH ARMS + +•1 + +WITH THE WORST APPARENTLY BEING ON THE LEFT ARM. PARAMEDICS FROM STATION #36 WERE TREATING HIM AND TRANSPORTED HIM TO ~~HOSPITAL~~ HOSPITAL UNDER RUN NUMBER 30805. FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT WAS NOTIFIED, AND BOB STALLINGS, A RESTORATION SPECIALIST, RESPONDED TO THE SCENE. HE ADVISED ME THAT APPARENTLY THE TRANSFORMER BOX WAS NOT LOCKED PROPERLY, AND THAT IS WHAT CAUSED IT TO OPEN. HE SECURED THE BOX AND ADVISED ME THAT IT WOULD BE UNDER TICKET NUMBER 292 (THE REPAIR NUMBER). + +I THEN RESPONDED TO ~~HOSPITAL~~ HOSPITAL WHERE KENNY WAS BEING TREATED BY DR. ~~STALLINGS~~ IN THE PEDIATRICS UNIT. DR. ~~STALLINGS~~ ADVISED ME THAT HE HAD FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD DEGREE ~~HOSPITAL~~ ON BOTH HIS ARMS WITH THE LEFT ARM WITH NERVE DAMAGE. HE WOULD NEED PLASTIC SURGERY, AND HE WOULD BE ADMITTED INTO ~~HOSPITAL~~ HOSPITAL UNDER THE PACU UNIT. + +I THEN SPOKE WITH KENNY'S MOTHER, BELINDA, AND GAVE HER THE CASE NUMBER ALONG WITH ROBERT DESHANE, THE FATHER OF KENNY. THEY ADVISED ME THAT KENNY HAS BEEN GETTING INTO TROUBLE FOR QUITE SOME TIME, AND THEY HAVE NEVER HAD PROBLEMS WITH THEIR OTHER CHILDREN BUT WITH KENNY. HE IS JUST A VERY ACTIVE BOY. + +I SPOKE WITH KENNY. HE ADVISED ME THAT HE WAS JUMPING ON TOP OF THE ELECTRICAL BOX, AND THAT THE BOX DID OPEN, AND THAT HE DID, IN FACT, GO INSIDE THE BOX AND GRAB ONE OF THE WIRES, CAUSING IT TO SHOCK HIM. + +ALSO ON THE SCENE WAS THE MANAGER TO THE OFFICE, DEBBIE DISLORIA. I ADVISED HER OF THE CASE NUMBER AND THE INCIDENT THAT HAD HAPPENED. + +AT THIS TIME, THERE IS NO FURTHER INFORMATION AVAILABLE. THIS CASE IS A ZULU. + +D/S ROBERT CRESSWELL, ID #5035 +DICTATED: 04-12-05/0805 HOURS +TRANSCRIBED: 04-12-05/BV \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746787/EFTA02746787.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746787/EFTA02746787.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0f37ec19807938732f0e2624b6296a6cb9616ec2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746787/EFTA02746787.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,112 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746787.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 4024, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.98, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 137.7, + 44.55 + ], + [ + 296.82, + 44.55 + ], + [ + 296.82, + 60.75 + ], + [ + 137.7, + 60.75 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 465 + ], + [ + "Line", + 84 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746787" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746789/EFTA02746789.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746789/EFTA02746789.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..39cd119dfb5243b6d0ed98465d0d389c35e954a2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746789/EFTA02746789.md @@ -0,0 +1,78 @@ +Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 307-13 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/08/2009 Page 1 of 2 +PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PAGE 1 +OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 06054723 + +DISPOSITION: UNFOUNDED +DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +ABUSE/CHILD +ZONE: B41 GRID: 4B15 DEPUTY ID.: 7644 ASSIST: TIME D 1456 A 1512 C 1632 +OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 01/01/05 , 1200 HOURS AND DATE: 04/13/06 , 1500 HOURS +EXCEPTION TYPE: +INCIDENT LOCATION: ~~SIGNATURE~~ STATE: FL APT. NO.: +CITY: WEST PALM BEACH STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. ENTERED: 0 +NO. OFFENSES: 01 NO. OFFENDERS: 02 NO. VEH. STOLEN: 0 +LOCATION: RESIDENCE - SINGLE FAMILY +NO. VICTIMS: 01 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 + +OFFENSE NO. 1 FLORIDA STATE STATUTE: 827 04 CIS CODE 9000 +VICTIM NO. 001 DOB: 09/03/1990 +SEX: F RACE: W HT: 502 WT: 90 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: ~~SIGNATURE~~ WEST PALM FL 33415 +HOME PHONE: 561 ~~SIGNATURE~~ +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 +SUSPECT DOB: 01/28/1963 +SEX: M RACE: W HT: 506 WT: 180 HR: BALD EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: ~~SIGNATURE~~ W PALM BCH FL 33415 +HOME PHONE: 561 ~~SIGNATURE~~ +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 +SUSPECT DOB: 09/28/1963 +SEX: F RACE: W HT: 500 WT: 135 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: ~~SIGNATURE~~ WPB FL 33415 +HOME PHONE: 561 ~~SIGNATURE~~ +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +OFFENSE INDICATOR: OFFENSE 1 VICTIM NUMBER: 1 +VICTIM TYPE: JUVENILE +RESIDENCE TYPE: COUNTY RESIDENCE STATUS: FULL YEAR +EXTENT OF INJURY: NONE +INJURY TYPE(1): NOT APPLICABLE +INJURY TYPE(2): NOT APPLICABLE +VICTIM RELATION: CHILD +DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RELATED: YES + +REPORT NUMBER: 1 +FLORIDA VICTIM ? N +WEATHER: CLEAR +WITNESS TO CRIME KNOWN ? . Y +CAN VICTIM I.D. SUSPECT ? Y +WILL VICTIM PROSECUTE ? . N +IS M.O. SIGNIFICANT ? . . . . . N +LATENTS LIFTED ? . . . . . N +TAG NUMBER KNOWN ? . . . . . N +SUSPECT NAME KNOWN ? . . . . . Y +SUSPECT LOCATION KNOWN ? . . . Y +STOLEN PROPERTY TRACEABLE ? N +EVIDENCE LEFT AT SCENE ? . . . N +SUSPECT'S VEHICLE KNOWN ? . . N +PROPERTY DAMAGE ? . . . . . N + +ON 4-13-06 AT APPROX 1500 HOURS I RESPONDED TO ~~SIGNATURE~~ +ESTE, LOCATED IN TRAVARES COVE MOBILE HOME PARK IN UNINC. WEST PALM BEACH + +"6" + +IN REFERENCE TO A CALL OF CHILD ABUSE. + +ON ARRIVAL I MET WITH DCF INVESTIGATOR, [REDACTED], WHO GAVE ME A COPY OF AN ABUSE REPORT ON 2006-358210-01, WHICH STATED: + +"SINCE THE AGE OF 13 [REDACTED] HAS BEEN SMOKING MARIJUANA WITH HER FATHER EVERY OTHER DAY. SHE HAD NOT SUFFERED ANY INJURIES. MOM IS AWARE OF [REDACTED] SMOKING MARIJUANA WITH DAD. IT WAS STATED THAT MOM DOES NOT CARE ABOUT THAT. [REDACTED] STATED THAT SHE IS GAY AND SHE AND HER FATHER SMOKE TOGETHER BECAUSE THIS IS THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN BOND. HER FATHER IS AN ALCOHOLIC, NO DETAILS ARE KNOWN ABOUT THE DRINKING." + +I SPOKE WITH THE MOTHER [REDACTED] AND SHE TOLD ME SHE WAS AWARE OF THE ALLEGATIONS AND SHE HAS DONE ALOT TO HELP HER DAUGHTER [REDACTED]. SHE PLACED HER DAUGHTER IN GROWING TOGETHER TREATMENT CENTER ON 3-10-06. THEN BAKER ACTED HER ON 4-7-06 TO [REDACTED]. SHE HAS ALSO CONTACTED CARP AND HAS AN APPOINTMENT ON 4-25-06. SHE ALSO HAS BEEN GIVING [REDACTED] HOME DRUG TESTS. + +I SPOKE WITH [REDACTED] AND SHE TOLD ME SHE WAS DOING MUCH BETTER WITH HER PROBLEMS. SHE TOLD ME HER AND HER FATHER, [REDACTED], CAN ONLY SMOKE MARIJUANA APPROX 5 TIMES AND HAS NOT DONE SO IN APPROX ONE YEAR. + +BASED ON MY INVESTIGATION, THIS CASE WAS UNFOUNDED. I COMPLETED AND FAXED A COPY OF THE CHILD SAFETY DATABASE FORM TO SUI. NOTHING FURTHER. + +D/S HUDSON, ID 7644 +04132006/1722/LEM \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746789/EFTA02746789.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746789/EFTA02746789.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..627df2f7f08b0267276e7bc227ac0ff7e8b07ee2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746789/EFTA02746789.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,76 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746789.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 3545, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.26, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746789" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746791/EFTA02746791.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746791/EFTA02746791.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6bac38416eedd51cc3ae24b8804b23150b886136 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746791/EFTA02746791.md @@ -0,0 +1,82 @@ +DISPOSITION: ZULU +DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +SUICIDE +ZONE: B41 GRID: 4B15 DEPUTY ID.: 8380 ASSIST: TIME D 0825 A 0828 C 0832 +OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 12/22/06 , 0730 HOURS AND DATE: 12/22/06 , 0935 HOURS +EXCEPTION TYPE: +INCIDENT LOCATION: 2319 AVENIDA BARCELONA ESTADE APT. NO.: +CITY: WEST PALM BEACH STATE: FL ZIP: 33415 +NO. OFFENSES: 00 NO. OFFENDERS: 00 NO. VEH. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. ENTERED: 0 +LOCATION: HIGHWAY / ROADWAY +NO. VICTIMS: 01 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 + +WITNESS SCOTT FOLSOM DOB: 04/12/1963 +SEX: M RACE: W HT: 510 WT: 145 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: BLUE +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 37000 3 ST CP FL 33438 +HOME PHONE: 561 000-0000 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 449-3412 +COMPLAINANT SEX: F RACE: W HT: 502 WT: 90 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 2319 AVENIDA BA DOB: 09/03/1990 +HOME PHONE: 561 969-3601 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 969-3601 +DECEASED JAMES D [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +SEX: M RACE: W HT: 602 WT: 165 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 311 FORESTA TR WEST PALM FL 33415 +HOME PHONE: 561 797-3776 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 +WITNESS SONYA [REDACTED] DOB: 12/11/1971 +SEX: F RACE: W HT: 501 WT: 198 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 6033 CALLE DELM WEST PALM FL 33415 +HOME PHONE: 561 303-4309 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 +OTHER MIRNA BARRIGA DOB: 09/14/1963 +SEX: F RACE: W HT: 0 WT: 0 HR: [REDACTED] EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 311 FORESTIA TR WPB FL 33415 +HOME PHONE: 561 000-0000 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +.. +.. +.. +.. + +JUSTIFIABLE CIRCUMSTANCES: NOT APPLICABLE +JUSTIFIABLE CODE: NOT APPLICABLE +AGENCY: PBSO OFFICER NAME: GREER #8380/DET. ORTIZ #5427 +WHERE BODY FOUND: IN STREET BETWEEN 2323/2322 AVENIDA BARCELONA ESTADA +OFFICER VIEWED BODY AT: MIDDLE OF STREET +UNIDENTIFIED REMAINS: N +BODY I.D. BY: GIRLFRIEND, [REDACTED] +AMBULANCE: PB FIRE RESCUE #36 FIRE RESCUE: PB FIRE RESCUE #36 +PRONOUNCE BY: ER DOCTOR AT: [REDACTED] HOSPITAL +CAUSE OF DEATH: GUNSHOT WOUND TO THE HEAD + +"H" + +DEATH'S CERTIFICATE SIGNED BY: MICHAEL BELL, MD +BODY RELEASED TO: MEDICAL EXAMINER'S OFFICE + +ON FRIDAY, 12/22/06 AT 0829 HOURS, I RESPONDED TO [REDACTED] IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF WEST PALM BEACH IN REFERENCE TO SHOTS FIRED/POSSIBLE SUICIDE. UPON MY ARRIVAL TO THE SCENE, IT WAS DISPATCHED THAT THE SUBJECT STILL HAD A FIREARM. I OBSERVED THE SUBJECT LAYING FACE UP IN THE MIDDLE OF STREET BETWEEN THE RESIDENCES AT [REDACTED] ON THE NORTH SIDE AND [REDACTED] ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF [REDACTED] ESTADES. THERE WAS A SILVER HANDGUN ON THE GROUND ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SUBJECT'S HEAD. THE SUBJECT'S HEAD WAS WRAPPED IN A [REDACTED] TOWEL AND A FEMALE SUBJECT, LATER IDENTIFIED AS [REDACTED] WHO RESIDES AS [REDACTED] WAS KNEELING OVER THE BODY. ABOUT 10-15 FEET TO THE WEST OF THE BODY THERE WERE TWO FEMALE SUBJECTS KNEELING IN THE ROAD, LATER IDENTIFIED AS [REDACTED] AND SONYA [REDACTED] + +I APPROACHED THE SUBJECT LYING IN THE ROAD, LATER IDENTIFIED AS JAMES [REDACTED] I DISBURSED THE CROWDS AND REMOVED ALL THE PEOPLE FROM AROUND THE SCENE AND THE BODY. I THEN PUSHED THE FIREARM FROM [REDACTED] IMMEDIATE CONTROL. ADDITIONAL UNITS ARRIVED ON THE SCENE TO INCLUDE BRAVO 41, BRAVO 36, 384, AND BRAVO 35. CRIME SCENE PERIMETERS WERE SET UP. I THEN SPOKE WITH THE WITNESS SCOTT W. FULSOM, WHO ADVISED THAT HE WAS DOING SOME ELECTRICAL WORK IN THE BACK OF THE RESIDENCE LOCATED AT [REDACTED] AND HEARD A SINGLE GUNSHOT. FULSOM SAID THAT HE CAME FROM THE REAR OF THE RESIDENCE AT 2323 AND SAW [REDACTED] PUT A GUN TO HIS HEAD AND PULL THE TRIGGER. FULSOM SAW AND HEARD THE SECOND SHOT. FULSOM ADVISED THAT HE THEN TRIED TO KEEP PEOPLE AWAY FROM [REDACTED] + +I THEN SPOKE WITH [REDACTED] GIRLFRIEND WHO RESIDES AS [REDACTED] SAID THAT [REDACTED] CAME TO THE RESIDENCE AT 0700 HOURS ON 12/22/06. [REDACTED] SAID THAT SHE WAS MAD BECAUSE [REDACTED] WAS OUT ALL NIGHT AND SHE TOLD HIM THAT SHE NEEDS HER SPACE. [REDACTED] GOT MAD AND LEFT THE FRONT DOOR AREA ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE RESIDENCE AND HEADED TOWARDS THE STREET. [REDACTED] WAS STILL INSIDE THE RESIDENCE. [REDACTED] SAID SHE HEARD A GUNSHOT AND THEN A SECOND. [REDACTED] WENT OUTSIDE AND SAW [REDACTED] LYING IN THE STREET. + +[REDACTED] RAN TO HIM AND TOUCHED THE BODY. I THEN SPOKE TO [REDACTED] MOTHER WHO WAS PRESENT IN THE RESIDENCE IDENTIFIED AS [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] SAID SHE KNEW [REDACTED] AND [REDACTED] WERE ARGUING, BUT SHE WAS IN THE SHOWER. [REDACTED] SAID THAT SHE ALSO HEARD TWO GUNSHOTS AND THEN WENT OUTSIDE AND TRIED TO RESTRAIN HER DAUGHTER. + +I THEN SPOKE TO SONYA [REDACTED] WHO RESIDES AT [REDACTED] SAID THAT SHE WHICH IS DIRECTLY BEHIND [REDACTED] AND HER MOTHER. HEARD TWO GUNSHOTS, WENT TO THE SCENE AND SAW [REDACTED] AND HER MOTHER. [REDACTED] WAS FIGHTING WITH HER MOTHER, TRYING TO GET AWAY TO GET TO [REDACTED] WAS SAYING THAT SHE HAD TO GET THE GUN AND HIDE IT. [REDACTED] SAID THAT [REDACTED] GOT AWAY FROM HER MOTHER AND HAD TOUCHED THE FIREARM AND THAT [REDACTED] WAS MOTHER HAD SLAPPED THE FIREARM OUT OF [REDACTED]'S HAND. [REDACTED] SAID THAT SHE HAD OBSERVED THE FIREARM IN [REDACTED] RIGHT HAND AND THAT THE RIGHT HAND WAS DRAPED OVER THE ABDOMINAL PART OF [REDACTED] BODY. [REDACTED] SAYS SHE WAS ABLE TO RESTRAIN [REDACTED] UNTIL POLICE SHOWED UP. + +PALM BEACH COUNTY FIRE RESCUE UNIT #31, RUN NUMBER 2006108384 TRANSPORTED TO [REDACTED] HOSPITAL. SGT. ORTEZ WAS NOTIFIED AND RESPONDED TO THE SCENE. DEPUTY GOMEZ SECURED THE FIREARM. BOTH SHELL CASINGS WERE LOCATED. ONE WAS APPROXIMATELY 10' EAST OF THE BODY, THE OTHER SIDE OF + +THE ROAD. THE OTHER SHELL CASING WAS LOCATED ON THE W T SIDE OF THE RESIDENCE AT 2319 WHERE HAD THE ARGUMENT WITH THE CASING WAS APPROXIMATELY N R H OF THE STEPS BESIDES THE RES DENCE WALL. LET IT BE NOTED THAT, THE MOTHER OF DID TOUCH THE SHELL BY THE RESIDENCE THINKING IT WAS SOMETHING ELSE, BUT NEVER MOVED IT FROM THE LOCATION OF WHICH SHE FOUND IT. DETECTIVES ARRIVED ON SCENE AND WERE BRIEFED ON THE INCIDENT. THEN CRIME SCENE ALSO ARRIVED ON SCENE. SCENE WAS TOT'D TO DETECTIVES. THIS CASE WILL BE TURNED OVER TO DETECTIVE UNIT FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION. D/S GREER 18380 12/22/06 1300 HOURS TRANSCRIBED LBL83890 12/23/06 0700 HOURS + +DISPOSITION: ZULU DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +SUICIDE CODE: 9532 DATE: 12/22/06 FRIDAY ZONE: B41 GRID: 4815 DEPUTY ID.: 8396 ASSIST: TIME D 0825 A 0828 C 0832 OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 12/22/06 , 0730 HOURS AND DATE: 12/22/06 , 0935 HOURS EXCEPTION TYPE: INCIDENT LOCATION: APT. NO.: CITY: WEST PALM BEACH STATE: FL ZIP: 33415 NO. OFFENSES: 00 NO. OFFENDERS: 00 NO. VER. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. ENTERED: 0 LOCATION: HIGHWAY / ROADWAY NO. VICTIMS: 01 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 + +ON FRIDAY , GREENACRES, FL 3346 IN REGARDS TO A POSSIBLECIIII,DE. 2/22/06, AT APPROXIMATELY 0815 HRS, I RESPONDED T UPON ARRIVAL IT WAS FOUND THAT A gm MALE HAD IN FACT RECEIVED A GUN SHOT WOULD TO THE HEAD AND WAS NOW LAYING IN THE ROADWAY IN FRONT OF 2319AVENIDA BARCELONIA. FIRE RESCUE RESPONDED TO THE SCENE. + +ACRIME SCENE WAS ESTABLISHED AT WHICH TIME I WAS ASSIGNED TO START A CRIME SCENE LOG DOCUMENTING ALL PERSONS ENTERING THE CRIME SCENE. I STARTED MY LOG AT APPROXIMATELY 0845 HRS AND DOCUMENTED THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE ENTERING THE CRIME SCENE BETWEEN 0845 HAS AND 0927 HRS THE CRIME SCENE WAS BROKEN DOWN. pfS ggt2E/J SGT ORTIZ ID 54224\_2/S 0 /D 7 0 /S F GREER ID 8380, D/S MEM ID 7739, D/S m:ggIgg ID 7929, D/S ID 7866, LT MAY ID 3807, CSI HOOK ID 6452, DET ADA TYZ ID 3461, AND MR DOB 012263WHO RESIDED AT THE RESIDENCE. + +AT THIS TIME, THIS IS MY ONLY INVOLVEMENT IN THIS CASE AND I HAVE NO FURTHER INFORMATION. D/S BLACKMAN (8396) 12/22/06 1140 HRS TRANS: 01/05/06 6224 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746791/EFTA02746791.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746791/EFTA02746791.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9435876ab561157ff606c6eb341836e098417da3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746791/EFTA02746791.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,156 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746791.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 7754, + "elapsed_seconds": 13.44, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 451 + ], + [ + "Line", + 79 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 166 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 344 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746791" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746795/EFTA02746795.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746795/EFTA02746795.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dc38277922024a52c996a8fd4e7d99781124bc01 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746795/EFTA02746795.md @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@ +Jane Doe #6 + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. M.D. + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W. M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and + +n%\* + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and (Thief Psychiatrist at the M.D. + +Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe #6 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe #6 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiff's counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kliman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kliman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #6. + +14. Plaintiff's interrogatories note a diagnosis of PTSD following an auto accident in 2003. (Pre-Epstein) (Page 5, Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories) + +15. Plaintiff noted "nervous about driving here. Hit by asemi June 2003.1 wasn't hurt but Mom was." (Page 1, GK Contemp notes, Interview Part 1) + +16. "Seroquel . for bad dreams after the car accident.. . longest therapy six months court ordered. I am on probation for stupid stuff I did 2-3 years ago. . . really dumb, I got in trouble, arrested? (Page 2, CK Contemp notes) + +17. A Petition for Involuntary Assessment for Substance Abuse, dated July 19, 2006, noted a domestic disturbance at plaintiff's home with "threats to several family members as well as threats of suicide... appeared to be under the influence of Zanax [sic) bars... She found her grandmother dead three weeks ago, may have pushed her over the edge." (Page 1, Petition for Involuntary Assessment for Substance Abuse, Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida). On January 31, 2007, Plaintiff pled guilty to grand theft and burglary, and was sentenced to a30-day substance abuse program, 9 months community control, and 2 years probation. On February 25, 2007, Plaintiff cutoff her monitoring bracelet and fled her residence violating probation. She was arrested on March 9, 2007 and April 2, 2007 and was ordered to undergo amental health evaluation. On August 8, 2007, she was arrested for possession of drug paraphernalia and violated her probation again. She was in jail for a peziod of 30 days until September 6, 2007 when she was found guilty of the violation of probation and sentenced to remain in jail for evaluation and treatment and then outpatient treatment as well as parenting classes. + +18. A Notice of Related Case reports an incident of the plaintiff being charged with possession of a weapon on school property in November 2004. (Page 2, Notice of Related Case, Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida) + +19. On 4/13/06, in response to acall of child abuse, an officer received a report from DCF noting that "since the age of 13, Plaintiff has been smoking marijuana with her father every other day... Mom is aware of (blacked out) smoking marijuana with dad... She placed her daughter in Growing Together Treatment Center on 3/10/06. Then Baker Acted her on 4/ 7/06 to (blacked out)." (Police Offense Report) + +20. On 4/12/05, police responded to adomestic violence call, which involved plaintiff and her brother kicking and hitting each other at their residence. (Police Offense Report) + +21. A police report of 5/24/04 notes that police responded to a delayed battery charge, in which the plaintiff was involved in averbal argument with afriend who then punched the plaintiff with aclosed fist to the forehead area. (Police Offense Report) + +22. A police report of 11/22/03 noted a physical altercation involving the plaintiff and another individual, which resulted in the plaintiff being struck in her left eye with a closed fist. (Police Offense Report) + +23. On 3/02/03, police responded to acall of a suspicious person at the plaintiff's residence. The plaintiff reported that when she entered her shed to do her laundry, she came in contact with an unknown male, who had some of her underwear inside his mouth. She reported that the male took the underwear out of his mouth, put them in the dryer, and then ran away. (Police Offense Report) + +24. A police report notes an incident of 8/27/02 in. which plaintiff was followed home from school by four girls and allegedly battered by two of the girls subsequent to a verbal conflict at school. (Police Offense Report) + +25. "I met Mr. Jeffrey August 2004. . . I was between repeating sixth grads ...I was not yet 14. ewe came to my house to get me to go and we called acab to go to Jeffrey's. She told me I had to tell him adifferent age, 16 or over because I wouldn't get paid." (Page 1, GK notes) + +26. Plaintiff reported, "I wasn't a virgin. I might have had sex with one person. I was around 13 or 14 that I lost my virginity with alittle kid, achildhood friend." (Page 2, GK notes) + +27. "I smoked some weed during the Xanax... drank alittle but not into it." (Page 2, V wi GK III, 12/6/08) + +28. Plaintiff reported "Cause 1 don't like the way it made me feel and I'd fall asleep on it and yea ... that's alittle bit after I got into that car accident, that's 2006. I started getting bad dreams and they started taking me to therapists and I started getting like anxiety attacks in the car .. It was bad... that's the longest therapist I've ever seen and that was because it was court ordered." "I went to her like six months." (Page 9, Tape 1) + +29. Question: "Have you been more irritable since this happened to you?" + +Plaintiff response, "I don't know."(Page 12, Tape 3). + +30. Plaintiff failed to report to Dr. Kliznan that on Apri110, 2005 she witnessed a friend getelectrocuted. On December 22, 2006, Plaintiff got into a fight with her thenboyfriend, who had been out all night, and the boyfriend went out in the street in front of their house and put a gun to his head and killed himself. + +31. AU of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +32. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled 'Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, A lig ic fmedical clinical, \$chool,and work tecorcia known to the attorney in the case. + +33. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not + +form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason tobelieve a retaining attorney has "availableimportant and relevant documentswhichars \_Lgn deliberatelywithheld fromus." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, whichwe have requestedmilletwe have stated would ordinarily bkg part of medical opinion formation on, the topics concerning, which ourinputis requested." We request the same. + +34. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +35. It is also essential to understand the plaintiff's level of emotional support, whether arty significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescnted), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +Respectfully submitted, + +Richard C. W. [REDACTED] MD + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South +Florida + +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida +College of Medicine + +STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared **RICHARD C.W.** +[REDACTED] M.D., who is ( ) personally known to me or ( ) who has produced +\_\_\_\_\_ as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that +the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this 4th day of August +2009. + +![](_page_9_Picture_25.jpeg) + +Marcia J. Chapman +Notary Public +Printed Name: MARCIA CHAPMAN +My Commission Expires: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746795/EFTA02746795.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746795/EFTA02746795.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4a16a91b6ef6a77ba018cb628ec3119dfd683aaf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746795/EFTA02746795.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,402 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746795.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 12924, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.91, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_9_Picture_25.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 199.26 + ], + [ + 459.0599365234375, + 199.26 + ], + [ + 459.0599365234375, + 217.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 217.07999999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 209 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 288 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 292 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 337 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 316 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 334 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 330 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 337 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 99 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746795" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746795/_page_9_Picture_25.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746795/_page_9_Picture_25.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ac7c96da67cfd6be669177b214a41e92b534f50a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746795/_page_9_Picture_25.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e0345c287bd5e6ec206e70a7489a775e54bf521797d94de943d21f3a3e1c6af9 +size 12212 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746805/EFTA02746805.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746805/EFTA02746805.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..89665eefc065943e2c72cf45a3d4598f847f5333 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746805/EFTA02746805.md @@ -0,0 +1,236 @@ +**CURRICULUM VITAE** + +![]()“J” + +Updated 06/17/09 + +#### TABLE OF CONTENTS + +| PRESENT POSITION | 2 | +|---------------------------------------------|----------| +| EDUCATION | 2 | +| MEDICAL LICENSE | 2 | +| CERTIFICATION | 3 | +| ADDITIONAL TRAINING | 3 | +| SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS , PAST AND PRESENT | | +| COMMITTEES | 3 | +| HONORS | 4 | +| PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES | 4 | +| REVIEWER | 5 | +| BOOK REVIEWS | 5 | +| PUBLICATIONS | 5 | +| ABSTRACTS | 7 | +| PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL | MEETINGS | +| AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES | 9 | +| MEDIA | 12 | + +NAME: Ryan Chaloner VVintonill, M.D. + +DATE OF BIRTH: May 10, 1976 + +PLACE OF BIRTH: Titusville, Florida + +MARITAL STATUS: Single + +# PRESENT POSITION: + +07/2008 — Present Psychiatrist Richard C. W.., MD, PA 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd; Ste 219 Lake Mary, FL 32746 Ph: 407-322-8199 + +03/01/2008 - 07/31/2011 Affiliate Instructor University of South Florida Department of Psychiatry + +03/03/09 — Assistant Professor of Psychiatry 06/30/12 University of Central Florida College of Medicine Department of Medical Education + +# EDUCATION: + +1995-1999 Johns University Baltimore, Maryland Double Major - Biology and Psychology B.A. Degree, graduated Phi Beta Kappa with honors + +1999 - 2003 Georgetown University School of Medicine Washington, DC M.D. Degree + +2003 -2004 Internal Medicine Internship Sinai Hospital of Baltimore/Johns Baltimore, Maryland + +2004 -2007 Resid Johns". Hospital Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Baltimore, Maryland + +2007 - 2008 Fellow in Forensic Psychiatry Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio + +#### MEDICAL LICENSE: + +2004 Maryland — D62746 - Inactive 2007 Ohio — 89483 - Inactive 2007 Florida — ME99792 + +#### CERTIFICATION: + +2008Diplomate, American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, #58286 + +## ADDITIONAL TRAINING: + +2006Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Chicago, IL + +2007Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Miami Beach, FL + +2008Florida Forensic Examiner Training University of South Florida College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, Ft. Lauderdale, FL + +## SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT: + +Member, Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine + +Member, American Psychiatric Association + +Member, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +Member, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +Member, American Medical Association + +Member, Ohio Psychiatric Association + +Member, Florida Psychiatric Society + +Member, Southern Psychiatric Association + +Member, The American College of Psychiatrists + +### COMMITTEES: + +2005- 2007 Public Relations Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +- 2007 Legislative Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society - 2007 Disaster Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society - 2007 Resident and Fellows Committee, Maryland Psychiatry Society - present Psychopharmacology Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law - present Research Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law - 2009 Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, American Psychiatric Association - 2009 Member, New Member Task Force, Southern Psychiatric Association + +## HONORS: + +1999Phi Beta Kappa, Johns University 2004'Superior' performance rating, 1st-year residency, by Sinai Hospital Department of Medicine's Clinical Competency and Evaluation Committee 2005Dorfman Award, presented by The Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine for best review article of the year for Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3):195-202, May-June 2005. 2005Rappeport Fellowship, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +## PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES: + +2008Written testimony on Elder Abuse in support of bills 1-H3873/S8501 Criminal Law— Crimes Against the Elderly or Persons with a Disability— Penalties, pre Maryland House Jud\* ' Committee for Delegate Kramer, County, Maryland. Hearing March 4. District 19 2009Central Florida Psychiatric Society representative to Florida Psychiatric Society's Council Meeting, January 10. + +2009Testified before the Florida Senate Banking and Insurance Committee (SB 354) on Mental Health Parity. March 17. + +#### REVIEWER: + +-Archives of Internal Medicine -Clinical Geriatrics -Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness -European Psychiatry -Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience -Nature Clinical Practice Neurology -Neurology India -Psychosomatics -Social Science & Medicine -World Journal of Surgical Oncology + +## BOOK REVIEWS: + +- 1. Clark MR and Treisman GJ: Pain and Depression: An Interdisciplinary, Patient-Centered Approach. Psychosomatics, July-August 2006, 47(4)365-366. + +#### PUBLICATIONS: + +- 1. **RCW, Dunlap PK, RCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid disease and abnormal thyroid function tests in patients with eating disorders and depression. The Journal of the Florida Medical Association, Inc. 82(3)187-192, 1995.** +- **2. RCW, RCW: Anxiety and Endocrine Disease. In Popkin, MK, Seminars in Clinical Neuropsychiatry 4(2)72-83, 1998.** +- **3. RCW, MI DE, In RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts. Psychosomatics 40:(1)18-27, 1999.** +- **4. RCW, RCW: Fee-Splitting: Ethical Implications and Principles for Practice Management. Transference 20(2)14, 1999.** +- **5. RCW, RCW: Long-term Psychological and Neurological Complications of Lindane Poisoning. Psychosomatics 40(6)513-517, 1999.** +- **6. IIII RCW, RCW: False Allegations: The Role of the Forensic Psychiatrist. Journal of Psychiatric Practice 7(5)343-346, September 2001.** + +- 7. RCW: Principles of Physician Recruiting. In Handbook of Mental Health Administration and Management; Reid WH and Silver S (ed.): Brunner-Routledge, New York, NY; Chapter 34:440-448, 2003. +- 8. III RCW, RCW, Chapman M: identifying Geriatric Patients at Risk for Suicide and Depression. Clinical Geriatrics 11(10)36-44, October 2003. +- 9. IN RCW, MI RCW: Establishing Liaison Before Disaster Strikes. http://www.psych.org/disasterpsych/pdfs/apadisasterhandbk.pdf; Chapter 2:12-19. 2004. +- 10. **RCW,E1 RCW, Chapman MJ: Emotional and Psychiatric Effects of Weapons of Mass Destruction in First Responders. In: Bioterrorism: Psychological and Public Health Interventions; Ursano RJ, Norwood AE & Fullerton CS (eds). Cambridge University Press:Cambridge; Chapter 14:250-273; 2004.** +- **11. RCW, Appleby 6,10 RCW: Atypical Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome Presenting as Fever of Unknown Origin in the Elderly. Southern Medical Journal 1(98) 114-117, January 2005.** +- **12. RCW, Ill RCW, Chapman MJ: Exploitation of the Elderly: Undue Influence as aForm of Elder Abuse. Clinical Geriatrics 13(2)28-36, February 2005.** +- **13. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implicationsof Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3)195-202, May-June 2005.** +- **14. a RCW, MI RCW: Abuse of Supraphysiologic Doses of Anabolic Steroids. Southern Medical Journal, 98(5)550-555, May 2005.** +- **15. El RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Complications of Anabolic Steroid Abuse. Psychosomatics, 46(4)285-290, July-August 2005.** +- **16. El RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Medical and Psychiatric Casualties caused by Conventional and Radiological (Dirty) Bombs. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(3):242-248, May-June 2006.** +- **17. RCW, RCW, Chap Postconcussional Syndrome: A Work in Progress (Response to Dr. ). Letter to the Editor. Psychosomatics, 47(3):272, May-June 2006.** +- **18. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome in the Elderly: Diagnostic Criteria, Incidence, Risk Factors, Pathophysiology, and Treatment. (CME article) Clinical Geriatrics, 14(5):39-46, 2006.** +- **19. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part I: Medical and Psychiatric Complications of Bombings and Biological, Chemical, and Nuclear Attacks. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(8):26-35, 2006.** + +- 20. IIII RCWINI RCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part 2: Posttraumatic Stress, Acute Stress, and Affective Disorders. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(9):17-24, 2006. 21.. ROW\* RCW: Malingering of PTSD: forensic and diagnostic considerations, characteristics of malingerers and clinical presentations. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(6):525-535, 2006. +- 22. RCW: A Profile of Pedophilla: Definition, Characteristics of Offenders, Recidivism, Treatment Outcomes, and Forensic Issues. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 82(4):457-471, 2007. +- 23. MI RCW,. RCW: Detection of Malingered PTSD: An Overview of Clinical, Psychometric, and Physiological Assessment: Where Do We Stand? Journal of Forensic Sciences, 52(3):717-725, 2007. +- 24. RCW, Macvaugh GS III, Merideth P. J: Commentary: Delving Further Into Liability for Psychotherapy Supervision. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 35(2):196-9, 2007. +- 25. InRCW,i RCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Effects of Terrorism: Medical and Societal Implications of Recent Attacks. In: Focus on Terrorism, Vol. 9; Linden EV (ed), Nova Science:New York; Chapter 11, Publication date: 3r° Quarter, 2007. +- 26. RCW: The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak Model of virus properties on system capacity and function: A lesson for future viral epidemics. American Journal of Disaster Medicine, 2(5):270-276, 2007 +- 27. ROW,. RCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part Causative Agents, Presentation, and Differential Diagnosis. Clinical Geriatrics, 15(12):18-25, 2007. +- 28. RCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part II Pathophysiology, Drug Interactions, and Treatment. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(1):24- 28, 2008 +- 29. El RCW, Resnick PJ: Psychotherapy Malpractice: New Pitfalls. Journal of Psychiatric Practice, 14(2):119-121, 2008 30.. RCW, 10 RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part I — Occurrence in Forensic/Criminal Situations, Partner Relationships, and Sexual Offenses. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(5):27-32, 2008 +- 31. In RCW,M RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part II Occurrence in Hospitals and Pharmacological/Behavioral Treatment of Agitation, Aggression and Violence. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(6):28-32, 2008. + +- 32. IERCW, iffiRCW, Chapman MJ. The 1995 KikwIt Ebola outbreak: lessons hospitals an physicians can apply to future viral epidemics. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2008 Sep-Oct:30(5):446-52. Epub 2008 Jul 23 +- 33. CW, H: Drug Diversion Program Rights. Legal Digest. The el of thiPria Sn Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 36(4):579-580, 2008 +- 34. •RCW, IERCW, Chapman MJ: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Interventions. Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009 +- 35. Paul RK, Lockey C, RCW, Bursztajn H: Practice Management: Managing Risks When Practicing in ree-Party Care Settings. Psychiatrictimes.com, 26(2), Feb. 3, 2009. +- 36. ERCW, SRCW, Chapman MJ: Letter to the Editor response re: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Interventions) Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009), Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(4):17-21, 2009. +- 37. ERCW, RIRCW, Myers W. Chapman M: Testamentary Capacity: History, Physicians ole, Requirements, and Why Wills are Challenged. Clinical Geriatrics, in press. + +\* Boldface Indicates Ryan C. W. e MD + +## ABSTRACTS: + +- 1. RCW, Hazard SC, IIRCW, CA, Blakey RE, =IJ: Thyroid Pease in Eating Disor ered anillie.sed Patients. -146th Annual Meeting, American Psychiatric Association, May 25, 1993, San Francisco, CA, P.1.57 (Poster Session). +- 2. RCW, RI DE, M RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk ac for Suicide n 00 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts: Evaluation of Suicide Risk in a Time of Managed Care. + - Psychiatric Practice and Managed Care, American Psychiatric Association, Vol. 5, No. 5, P 12, Sept-Oct 1999. +- 3. RCW, Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J: The Role of Morphine in the Selopment of Acute Stress Disorder and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Severe Burn Injury. + - 41m Annual Meeting, American Burn Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009. + +- 4. Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J,MI RCW: Peri-traumatic Heart Rate as a Predictor of Acute Stress Disorder and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Burn Injury. + - 41n Annual Meeting, American Bum Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009. + +\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. MD PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES: + +- 1. **RCW, Hazard SC, Dunlap** ■RCW, **CA, Blakey RE, .): Thyroid disease and abnormal function tests in patients with eating disorders and depression. Poster Session - American Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, May 25, 1993** +- **2. RCW,Ill RCW: Management of Hostage Situations. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **3. RCW, RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective — Part I. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **4. RCW, RCW: Terrorism: its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective - Part II. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **5. RCW,Ill RCW,M DE: Impact of Managed Care on Suicide Risk Assessment. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 1999 Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD, October 15, 1999** +- **6. III RCW,MI RCW: Ethical Issues in Managed Care. American Psychiatric Association, 1999 Ethics Workshop, Washington, DC, November 3, 1999** +- **7. RCW,Ill RCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Disaster Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **8. RCW: Bioterrorism Dealing with Medical and Psychiatric Consequences of Victims and Responders. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **9. RCW, RCW: Psychiatric Consequences of Terrorism, Bioterrorism and** + +Disaster. Rocky Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 29, 2000 + +- 10. MI RCW,IIII RCW: Suicide in an Era of HMO's and Managed Care. Rocky Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 30, 2000 +- 11. ■l **RCW,. RCW: Psychological Response to Disasters and Terrorism. International Society of Political Psychology, 23rd Annual Scientific Meeting, Seattle, WA, July 4, 2000 12.11 RCW,IMI RCW: Biological Warfare - Attack Scenarios, Response to Terrorist Attacks, and Sources of Conflict. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000 13.E RCW,. RCW, Chapman M: Workplace Violence. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000 14.. RCW, RCW: Biological Warfare: Attack Scenarios and Public Health Issues. Grand Rounds, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, December 8, 2000** +- **15. RCW,Ill RCW: Bioterrorism: A Short History of Biowarfare & Analysis of the Threat. Grand Rounds, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, August 15, 2001** +- **16. RCW,III RCW: Situational Suicide. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, FL, September 13, 2001** +- **17. RCW,M RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, FL, September 14, 2001** +- **18. El RCW,Ill RCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Assault with Anthrax as a Biological Weapon. -Florida Psychiatric Society, Fall Meeting, Coconut Grove, FL, November 4, 2001 -Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002** +- **19. II RCW,M RCW: Smallpox. Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002** +- **20. RCW, IN RCW: Psychopharmacology Forensic Risk and Clinical Practice: Things the clinician must know. Apopka Community Health Center, Apopka, FL, March 13, 2002** +- **21. RCW,. RCW: Overview of Terrorism and Bioterrorism. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002** + +- 22. i IRCW, IiiRCW: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations a isk: Ana ysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002 +- 23. RCW,AIRCW: Smallpox as a Biological Weapon. Orlando Police Remy, r ando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002 +- 24. RCW, RCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Southern lichiatricl is lociation Annual Meeting, Loews Ventana Canyon Resort, Tucson, AZ, October 3, 2002 +- 25. RCW,RRCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Mandatory Rness, a ax Medical Center, Daytona USA, Daytona Beach, FL, December 14, 2002 +- 26. iiRCW, ERCW, Chapman MJ: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003 +- 27. ERCW, MIRCW: Medical and Psychological Sequelae of Bombings: Implications or First Responders and Critical Government Staff. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003 +- 28. ERCW, uRCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Florida Psychiatric octety Spring Meeting, Orlando, FL, April 5, 2003 +- 29. RCW, IRCW: Terrorist Bombings: Medical and Psychiatric Impact. Mthern Psyc iatric Association's Annual Meeting, Nashville, TN, October 11, 2003 +- 30. RCW, RCW: Terrorism, Bombings, and Psychiatric Casualties. niversity o orida, Department of Psychiatry, Visiting Professor Program, November 7, 2003 +- 31. RCW, FRCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Tampa Bay Rchiatric ociety, Tampa, FL, sponsored by Pfizer, January 29, 2004 +- 32. RCW,JERCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Orlando Pie Aca emy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004 +- 33. ERCW, ice Medical and Psychiatric Casualties of Terrorist Bombings. Orlando Po Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004 +- 34. RCW, TRCW: Medical and Psychological Consequences of Bombings. End Roun s, Tulane University, Department of Psychiatry, New Orleans, LA, January 28, 2005 +- 35. ERCW, ERCW: Psychological Sequelae of Weapons of Mass Destruction on First Responders. South Central Center for Public Health + +Preparedness/Alabama Department of Public Health,MIS, AL, Satellite Conference, May 6, 2005 + +- 36. RCW, RCW: Medical and Psychological Aspects of Terrorist Bombings. Grand Rounds, Sinai Hospital, Department of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, June 2, 2005 +- 37. RCW,MI RCW: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationship: The New Realities. (Abbreviated version) Forensic Psychiatry Fellows and Residents, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, January 24, 2006 +- 38. El RCW,. RCW, Chapman MJ: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationship: The New Realities. Presidential Address. Southern Psychiatric Association, Baltimore, MD, September 30, 2006. +- 39. RCW,MI RCW: When the System is Overwhelmed: Protecting the Provider during Biodisaster. Satellite Conference, University of Alabama Birmingham South Central Center for Public Health Preparedness/Alab Department of Public Health/Tulane University School of Public Health, AL, February 27, 2007. +- 40. RCW: Testamentary Capacity from Isaac Ray to Anna Nicae Grand Rounds, Case Western Reserve School of Medicine, Cleveland,M, March 28, 2008 +- 41. III RCW,M RCW, Rundell JR, Winstead DK: Psychiatrists' Role In Disaster Management: Lessons Learned. Course 14, American Psychiatric Association, Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, May 3, 2008. +- 42. RCW: Violence in the Elderly: Forensic and Treatment Concerns. Forensic Forum, Florida Psychiatric Society, ChampionsGate, FL, September 20, 2008. +- 43. RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole Southern Psychiatric Association, September 25, 2008. 44.. RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole Forensic Psychiatry Program, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, January 29, 2009. +- 45. El RCW,M RCW: Domestic Violence as Portrayed in Film A Realistic Appraisal? Florida Psychiatric Society, St. Petersburg Beach, FL, March 20, 2009. +- 46. El RCW, Silberman E, Preven D, Weissman S (chairperson): indications for the Use of Combined Talking Therapy and Pharmacotherapy and How to Teach in Residency. Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, CW16, American Psychiatric Association, San Francisco, CA, May 19, 2009. + +\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W. E, MD + +## MEDIA: + +- 1. Time Magazine, Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome, May 16, 2005 +- 2. Reach MD Radio, Pedophilia. April 25, 2007 +- 3. MD Consult. Doug Joint telephone interview with Richard C. W. MD, Pedophilia. May 2, 2007 +- 4. The Korean Broadcasting System, KBS Special, Pedophilia. March 11, 2008. +- 5. Tony Pipitone, WKMG-TV Channel 6, Mothers Who Kill Their Children. October 28, 2008. +- 6. J. L. . Orlando Medical News. Cyberchondriacs. November 13, 2008. +- 7. Fox 35 News, Orlando. Forensic Implications of Anthony case. December 11, 2008. +- 8. Fox 35 News, Orlando. The Anthony Case: DNA Evidence. December 12, 2008. +- 9. Jessica , WKMG-TV Channel 6. The Anthony Case: Baker Act and Stressors. January 23, 2009. +- 10. Nam Nae Won and Jihyun Song. Korea Educational Broadcasting System. Pedophilia. March 30, 2009. +- 11. Keith Landry, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress and Financial Strain. June 15, 2009. +- 12. Heidi Hatch, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress on Families. June 16, 2009. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746805/EFTA02746805.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746805/EFTA02746805.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..94f632c1cacd392f65adfdd47631ed4973576795 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746805/EFTA02746805.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,961 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746805.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 22627, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.04, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "CURRICULUM VITAE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 365.364, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 365.364, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 383.93999999999994 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TABLE OF CONTENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 110.16000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRESENT POSITION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 209.79000000000002 + ], + [ + 196.13316345214844, + 209.79000000000002 + ], + [ + 196.13316345214844, + 225.2005615234375 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 225.2005615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EDUCATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.62, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 155.99618530273438, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 155.99618530273438, + 420.2005615234375 + ], + [ + 82.62, + 420.2005615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDICAL LICENSE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 184.1162567138672, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 184.1162567138672, + 115.37896728515625 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 115.37896728515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 176.57999999999998 + ], + [ + 169.83358764648438, + 176.57999999999998 + ], + [ + 169.83358764648438, + 188.73000000000002 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 188.73000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ADDITIONAL TRAINING:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 237.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 208.3389434814453, + 237.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 208.3389434814453, + 250.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 250.28999999999996 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 83.23200000000001, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 332.14178466796875, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 332.14178466796875, + 408.4342956542969 + ], + [ + 83.23200000000001, + 408.4342956542969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COMMITTEES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 86.29199999999999, + 638.2800000000001 + ], + [ + 165.08250427246094, + 638.2800000000001 + ], + [ + 165.08250427246094, + 651.0535736083984 + ], + [ + 86.29199999999999, + 651.0535736083984 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "HONORS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.00800000000001, + 332.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 135.38807678222656, + 332.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 135.38807678222656, + 345.06 + ], + [ + 82.00800000000001, + 345.06 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.456, + 538.6500000000001 + ], + [ + 237.21827697753906, + 538.6500000000001 + ], + [ + 237.21827697753906, + 551.61 + ], + [ + 84.456, + 551.61 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REVIEWER:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.784, + 150.66 + ], + [ + 144.432, + 150.66 + ], + [ + 144.432, + 162.2554931640625 + ], + [ + 80.784, + 162.2554931640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BOOK REVIEWS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.784, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 172.79013061523438, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 172.79013061523438, + 333.7630920410156 + ], + [ + 80.784, + 333.7630920410156 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PUBLICATIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.784, + 395.28 + ], + [ + 169.524, + 395.28 + ], + [ + 169.524, + 407.626708984375 + ], + [ + 80.784, + 407.626708984375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ABSTRACTS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.62, + 417.96 + ], + [ + 158.2535400390625, + 417.96 + ], + [ + 158.2535400390625, + 432.2005615234375 + ], + [ + 82.62, + 432.2005615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDIA:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.396, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 124.86183166503906, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 124.86183166503906, + 120.9505615234375 + ], + [ + 81.396, + 120.9505615234375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 88 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "TableOfContents", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 179 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 244 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 260 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 361 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 402 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 88 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 97 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 76 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746805" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746819/EFTA02746819.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746819/EFTA02746819.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8f639f7984ef6ae91670d5c09df6a9036bc7ad94 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746819/EFTA02746819.md @@ -0,0 +1,192 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### Defendant Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion To Compel Plaintiff, Jane Doe #6's Independent Medical Examination Pursuant to Rule 35 + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his attorneys, and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 35 and other applicable rules, hereby moves this Court for an order directing that the Plaintiff, Jane Doe # 6 (case #80994), submit to a compulsory psychological/psychiatric medical examination (a/k/a independent medical examination) by Ryan IN, M.D. of Richard M, M.D. at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP. located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401. In support, Epstein states: + +## Background + +1. This Court entered an order relating to the IME of CMA, another Plaintiff seeking similar damages against Epstein. See Exhibit "A." Given the damages claimed in this matter, it is clear that Plaintiff has placed her medical condition at issue + +and that an IME is required. Despite that fact and the fact that discovery has been consolidated, Defendant is required to file a Rule 35 Motion seeking an IME. Thus, the undersigned believes that an Omnibus Order is required relative to all Plaintiffs' IMEs in that each claim similar damages and raise similar claims. Such an order would conserve judicial resources and require that the attorneys only negotiate dates and times for said IMEs. + +2. Nonetheless, this particular Motion, pursuant to Rule 35, only addresses the IME of Jane Doe #6. + +3. Plaintiff has alleged in her action that Defendant sexually battered her and, as a result, Plaintiffs seek millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, "severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages." See Amended Complaint. (DE 18) Plaintiff, Jane Doe #6, also claims Epstein "intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Jane Doe, creating reasonable fear of imminent peril. . . [and] [a]s a proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane Doe, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages." Id. at ¶¶ 16-20. Jane Doe #6 further alleges that she suffered ". . .mental or sexual injury. . .that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. . .[and]. .Jane Doe has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain." Id. at ¶¶ 24-26. + +4. In addition, Jane Doe #6 informed her expert, Gilbert Kliman, M.D that she doesn't drive, is afraid to drive and does not hold a driver's license due to the fact that in 2003 on 1-4, she was riding in a car with her mother and their vehicle was hit by a + +semi-truck. In fact, she stated in the interview with Dr. Kliman that her mother was severely injured and the airbag "burned off her face...it burned part of her face." Jane Doe #6 was riding in the passenger seat of the vehicle. See Exhibit "B". According to Interrogatory answer # 7, Jane Doe #6 was diagnosed will PTSD following the car accident. + +5. In addition, on March 2, 2003, Jane Doe #6 made a suspicious person report when an unknown male confronted her in her shed when she went out to do her laundry. The male was standing there with her underwear in his mouth. He fled and was never apprehended. See Exhibit "C". On August 28, 2003, Jane Doe #6 was alledgely battered by four (4) girls who followed her home through the . See Exhibit "D". On November 22, 2003, Jane Doe #6 was in afight with a girl over the girl's boyfriend. See Exhibit "E" - all pre-Epstein. See supra. + +6. Also, on April 10, 2005, Jane Doe #6 witnessed a friend enter a transformer box, play with the wires and electrocute himself. See Exhibit "F". On April 13, 2006, Jane Doe #6's mother made a child abuse report, and advised police that Jane Doe #6 and her father have been smoking pot together since she was thirteen (13) years old. See Exhibit "G". Then on December 22, 2006, Jane Doe #6 and her boyfriend, James got into an argument and her went out into the street and put agun to his head and killed himself. See Exhibit "H". Certainly, Epstein is permitted to know and investigate through his IME expert whether Plaintiff's physical, psychological, mental, and emotional damages were caused by other incidents in Plaintiff's life separate and apart from what she attempts to pawn-off on Epstein in her attempt to recover millions of dollars. + +semi-truck. In fact, she stated in the interview with Dr. Kliman that her mother was severely injured and the airbag "burned off her face...it burned part of her face." Jane Doe #6 was riding in the passenger seat of the vehicle. See Exhibit "B". According to Interrogatory answer # 7, Jane Doe #6 was diagnosed will PTSD following the car accident. + +5. In addition, on March 2, 2003, Jane Doe #6 made a suspicius person report when an unknown male confronted her in her shed when she went out to do her laundry. The male was standing there with her underwear in his mouth. He fled and was never apprehended. See Exhibit "C". On August 28, 2003, Jane Doe #6 was alledgely battered by four (4) girls who followed her home through the la See Exhibit "D". On November 22, 2003, Jane Doe #6 was in a fight with a girl over the girl's boyfriend. See Exhibit "E" - all pre-Epstein. See supra. + +6. Also, on April 10, 2005, Jane Doe #6 witnessed a friend enter a transformer box, play with the wires and electrocute himself. See Exhibit "F". On April 13, 2006, Jane Doe #6's mother made a child abuse report, and advised police that Jane Doe #6 and her father have been smoking pot together since she was thirteen (13) years old. See Exhibit "G". Then on December 22, 2006, Jane Doe #6 and her boyfriend, James =1, got into an argument and her went out into the street and put a gun to his head and killed himself. See Exhibit "H". Certainly, Epstein is permitted to know and investigate through his IME expert whether Plaintiffs physical, psychological, mental, and emotional damages were caused by other incidents in Plaintiffs life separate and apart from what she attempts to pawn-off on Epstein in her attempt to recover millions of dollars. + +7. Furthermore, it is important for this court to review the detailed Affidavit of Dr. IN attached hereto in that it delineates for the Court several experiences visited upon Jane Doe which may have caused the physical, emotional and psychological trauma she claims occurred at the hands of Epstein. See Affidavit of Dr. •Attached hereto as Exhibit "I". + +8. Based upon the foregoing, it is clear that Jane Doe #6 has placed her physical, emotional, medical and psychological conditions at issue. Therefore, an IME is warranted. Without an IME, Epstein would be severely prejudiced. The Affidavit of Dr. ■clearly **sets out the IME and scope of the examination that must be conducted. See also the curriculum vitae of Dr. Ryan. See Exhibit "J". The examination is set to occur at the undersigned office on November 9, 10, 11, 12, or 13, 2009 (whichever is more convenient for Plaintiff or whichever date the court so orders). Plaintiff has not provided dates for the IME; however, out of abundance of caution and to comply with the applicable rule, Defendant has, on a unilateral basis, set same pending the outcome of this Motion. Obviously, if the date noticed is not sufficient or agreeable, the undersigned will renotice same for one of the four dates suggested; however, this Court must order same to occur.** + +**9. As this court is well aware, Plaintiff and Defendant are required to complete discovery under the Court's trial schedule. It is not the undersigned's intention to require the court additional work; however, it is imperative that discovery be timely scheduled and completed. The court's assistance is needed in this instance as to the IME.** + +10. Based upon the foregoing, an IME of Plaintiff must occur in order to address her claims and the damages she seeks to recover. The IME is expected to last between 6-8 hours, and the scope of same is set forth in the Affidavit of Dr. + +11. Pursuant to Rule 35, Fed.R.Civ.Pro, a party may move for an examination by a qualified examiner if the Plaintiffs mental/emotional and/or psychological status is at issue in a case. + +12. Defendant would be severely prejudiced unless he is able to have an examination conducted by a qualified examiner separate and apart from any psychologist/psychiatrist or similar behavioral health provider who may have or may ultimately see the Plaintiff and testify in court. + +13. Defendant's counsel has retained the services of Richard ■ **M.D. and Ryan** ■ **M.D., of C.W.** ■ **M.D., P.A. located at 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd., #219 Lake Mary, FL 32746. Ryan S M.D., will be performing the examination. Dr. Ryan Halls' specialties include forensic psychiatry, general psychiatry and medical psychiatry. See Exhibit attached outlining Ryan I. M.D.'s qualifications and the scope of the examination which he intends and is required to conduct in order to render a report. See also Affidavit of Ryan C.W. M.D., outlining the scope of examination and other Rule 35 requirements. Accordingly, this motion comports with Rule 35. The applicable notice has been filed simultaneously. Defendant will arrange for a videotape of the examination.** + +**14. The undersigned is requesting the court's assistance with regard to compelling the IME of Plaintiff along with dates for same to occur.** + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff by telephone and by email; however, an agreement has not been reached. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an Order: + +- a. providing a date and time for Plaintiff's IME to occur on November 9, 10, 11, 12 or 13, 2009; +- b. providing that the independent medical examination take place at 9:00 a.m. (on a date to be determined by the court) at the law firm of Burman, Griffon, Luttier and Coleman, LLP. located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401 under the protocol set forth by Dr. El in his affidavit, by videotape and for such other and further relief as this court deemp st and proper. + +# Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identifi e following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 11day of , 2009 + +Respecffu + +By: ROBE T C,CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florid Bar No. 224162 rcritabcIclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpikeAbciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. █, Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Brad █, Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. █, Esq. +█ Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 +Fax: 561-515-2610 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-08804* +[skuvin@riccilaw.com](mailto:skuvin@riccilaw.com) +[tleopold@riccilaw.com](mailto:tleopold@riccilaw.com) + +cc. Dr. Ryan [REDACTED] + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746819/EFTA02746819.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746819/EFTA02746819.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6a62e39fbad8116997fde801043b9e595eae0e0a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746819/EFTA02746819.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,473 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746819.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 14296, + "elapsed_seconds": 10.54, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 415.7900085449219, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 415.7900085449219, + 102.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 204.40800000000002, + 102.91998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion To Compel Plaintiff, Jane Doe #6's \nIndependent Medical Examination Pursuant to Rule 35", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 98.53200000000001, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 525.0625, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 525.0625, + 392.78997802734375 + ], + [ + 98.53200000000001, + 392.78997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.176, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 350.20989990234375, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 350.20989990234375, + 613.6699981689453 + ], + [ + 274.176, + 613.6699981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 161.568, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 459.76885986328125, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 459.76885986328125, + 108.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 161.568, + 108.91998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.86, + 396.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 374.275390625, + 396.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 374.275390625, + 412.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 247.86, + 412.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 187.272, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 429.624, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 429.624, + 133.65 + ], + [ + 187.272, + 133.65 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 356 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 76 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746819" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746828/EFTA02746828.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746828/EFTA02746828.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c499129830ce25cb28f3ebdf0aff3bebb2e515a0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746828/EFTA02746828.md @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE # 6 (80994) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan M.D. of C.W. III, M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on November 9, 2009 at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP, located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring a sweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. See infra and Motion attached at DE (308) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well. + +2. Plaintiff has not provided an available date; however, unless a timely and valid objection to this Notice is made, the Plaintiff is required by this Rule to be in attendance at the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as awitness, the psychiatrist shall not be. identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (308). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (308). See Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documents have been provided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient notice h • made. + +By: + +MIC . I E, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that atrue copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 17 day of September, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, 08-80469 + +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isx@searcylaw.com + +iph@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf@brucereinhartlaw.am + +Counsel for Defendan + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsbertOpodhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesci@bel Isouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746828/EFTA02746828.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746828/EFTA02746828.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..37f1324bee57d93a3b43abb978170b2dde7a8ace --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746828/EFTA02746828.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,257 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746828.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5597, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.53, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.740234375, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 412.740234375, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF \nPLAINTIFF, JANE DOE # 6 (80994)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 522.787841796875, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 522.787841796875, + 391.838623046875 + ], + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 391.838623046875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 366.7790832519531, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 366.7790832519531, + 527.3100000000001 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 527.3100000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 279.45 + ], + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 279.45 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 203 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 292 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 70 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 99 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 47 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746828" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746832/EFTA02746832.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746832/EFTA02746832.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aa3e80c94d908de7c48e787a487e929fe4a538c4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746832/EFTA02746832.md @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 0840380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 0940802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228). For the following reasons said Motion is granted. + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant , allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm beach, New York and St. with the promise of money in + +A •t + +exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +By the instant Motion Epstein seeks an order compelling one of the Plaintiffs, in the case, to submit to an independent psychological/psychiatric medical examination by Ryan I. M.D., presently scheduled for September 8, 2009. .=frnhas agreed to submit to said exam, but requests the Court impose certain restrictions. Since the filing of the Motion the parties have managed to resolve some of the issues involved, such as the proposed examination's time and date and MS request to have a representative from her team present at said examination. As for the latter issue, Defendant has agreed to provide, at his expense, a video feed and monitor in an adjacent room for Plaintiff's representative's use. The remaining issues involve Plaintiff's request for a court order limiting the scope of the proposed examination by disallowing repeated questioning regarding "highly sensitive areas of inquiry including Plaintiffs medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history, substance abuse history, etc.,'and imposing certain time restraints on the examination itself. + +Plaintiffs request to limit the scope of the examination is denied. It is Dr. + +&#x27; See Pltff's Resp. to Rep.(D.E. #279), p.3. + +In routine procedure when conducting psychological/psychiatric medical examinations of patients to require the patient to fill out a 10-page "Life History Questionnaire" and a 14-page "Patient Questionnaire." Both questionnaires request detailed background information regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like. Presumably Plaintiff will be asked these same questions two more times, first by defense counsel all= deposition scheduled to take place shortly, and again by Dr.." at the upcoming examination. Plaintiff's objection is that by having to answer these same questions about the same subject matter three separate times "would only serve to embarrass, humiliate, intimidate and further victimize Plaintiff." Pltff's Resp. (D.E. #254), p.6. Plaintiffs position is that she should only "be required to regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like, if at all, only one time," either during the "deposition of Plaintiff or through Dr. S examination, but certainly not both." Id. + +Plaintiff cites no case law and independent research has uncovered none, to support her novel position that a Plaintiff who puts her mental, emotional and psychiatric state at issue can place alimitation on the number of times defense counsel or agents retained by him can inquire into areas relevant to these issues where the subject matter involved is "highly personal," "embarrassing," "sensitive," or otherwise "humiliating." Plaintiff is seeking millions of dollars in personal Injury damages for, among other things, "physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, [and] invasion of her privacy." 2 Based on the allegations made in Defendant's Reply,' Plaintiffs childhood was, to put it mildly, a difficult one, with numerous episodes of child abuse and sexual abuse, which in turn may of been the cause of Plaintiff's later engaging in numerous instances of substance abuse, self-mutilation, prostitution, aggravated assault, truancy, and the like. According to Defendant, in 2005 Plaintiffs mother filed a case committing for a Petition for Involuntary Assessment for substance abuse, stating in the accompanying file that has been diagnosed as 4Bipoloar and Schizophrenic." + +Under these circumstances, where Plaintiff is seeking to recover medical expenses associated with these complex medical issues, full knowledge of Plaintiffs past and present medical, psychological, familial and social histories is essential. And while neither duplication nor embarrassment is desired, under the circumstances presented, where the number and scope of damages claimed are vast and Plaintiffs past history eventful, it may nonetheless be unavoidable. This is not to say that restrictions on the scope of questioning may never be put into effect. If, as the case progresses, Plaintiff can show that Defendant's invasive questioning + +Plaintiff, First Am. Compl., Counts I-XXX. + +&#x27; (D.E. #273), pp.7-8,

4As quoted in Defs Rep. (D.E. #273), p.8, from Palm Beach County Case #05MH1667.

is being done in bad faith or for purposes of harassment, the Court may reconsider imposing limitations of the sort requested herein. At this point, however, the Court agrees with Defendant that to restrict the number of times defense counsel may ask Plaintiff personal and sensitive questions concerning some of the pivotal issues in this case, would work an injustice by preventing Defendant from being able to defend himself.

The Court likewise rejects Plaintiff's request to limit the time for conducting the examination and any related testing to 6 hours. Dr. ■has filed an affidavit stating that he needs 6-8 hours to conduct the examination and related testing, and that anything less than that might result in compromising the test results! Considering the 31 counts alleged against Defendant, as well as Plaintiffs event-filled past, the amount of time sought does not appear unreasonable. Should the length of time prove draining, Plaintiff may take breaks as needed, of reasonable duration. Furthermore, Defense Counsel and Dr. Mare hereby put on notice that while the Court has allowed the full 8 hours requested for the examination and related testing, should less time be needed, the Court expects less time will be taken, and in no event may the examination and related testing exceed a total of 8 hours. In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228) is GRANTED IN

&#x27;Affidavit of Dr. ■, attached as Ex. "B" to Defendant's Rep. (D.E. #273).

ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF.

DONE AND ORDERED this September 4, 2009, in , at West Palm Beach,

Florida.

LINNEA R. JO ON UNITED STA S MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746832/EFTA02746832.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746832/EFTA02746832.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8ae3d0383c4187d9fc854b03073580804550eb35 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746832/EFTA02746832.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,318 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746832.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 7952, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.31, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 403.9773254394531, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 403.9773254394531, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 114.20999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 287.02799999999996, + 386.37 + ], + [ + 334.41033935546875, + 386.37 + ], + [ + 334.41033935546875, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 287.02799999999996, + 399.3299999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.784, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 347.3265075683594, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 347.3265075683594, + 100.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 80.784, + 100.56353759765625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 218 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 300 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 285 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746832" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/EFTA02746838.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/EFTA02746838.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dbd2d246f3a326739ceb29187168d016cae8d3b4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/EFTA02746838.md @@ -0,0 +1,187 @@ +Dr. Kliman: Uh huh. + +S + +Dr. Kliman: + +00:05:49 + +Dr. Kliman: + +a + +Dr. Kliman: + +S + +Dr. Kliman: + +I just don't like the fact that you're in a vehicle that really high up in the air and if something small happens you can pretty much die. So, I don't know maybe I'm afraid of heights but I haven't really gotten too high up to figure out whether or not I am. I just pretty much stay in the safe zone, actually. I like to be in a comfort zone and this is just a little bit out of my comfort zone. I'm just very nervous. I get nervous. + +Are you generally a nervous person? + +Like I said when I'm not comfortable I get really nervous; and I start like moving around and I can't stop; and I can't really talk quite clear sometimes because I'm so nervous that its just...kinda shaking inside? + +Are you shaking now inside? + +A little bit. + +I'm sorry. + +No its okay it's just me. I've just always been kind of nervous like that in front of people that I don't really know. + +Have you been shy person? + +Not really necessarily. I'm not really shy; I used to be friendly more friendly towards people that I didn't know, maybe. My mom used to always say that I would...I was too friendly to people sometimes and maybe that's what got me into a lot of trouble. But now I think I'm like over protective of myself, now I'm just scared of everything. Like...I'm just...I don't know I always feel like people are following me or something for some reason. So, it's kinds weird; everybody says that I'm kinda skittish, which is I guess more slang for just really tense; and I don't know...nervous about people that I don't know, I don't know. So what else? + +00:07:31 + +a That's a very uncomfortable feeling to feel that you're being followed all the time. + +got 4 + +00:25:15 + +Fr. Kliman: Okay. Had some tubes in your ears? + +S Yeah that was about it. + +Dr. Kliman: How old were you? + +e When I was younger...when I lived in Virginia so probably when I was + +Dr. Kliman: Okay and...your parents divorced when you were how old? + +Dr. Kliman: Do you remember how that affected you? + +00:26:44 + +Dr. Klirnan: Had a vulnerable youngster there and that you didn't... + +Dr. Kliman: Have a father figure the way you're thinking right now. + +Ididn't have surgery for anything. + +3. + +Idon't know...I don't remember how I felt then but I could remember what happened. Just like...just like all the violence kind of going on all around and my dad like running away from us and just moving to another state and not seeing him for along period of time. So its...its already that I didn't have like afather figure and then another guy comes in my life and then... its totally weird and I don't know, just taking advantage of me and then I had nobody to really tell that to besides my friends; so now I mostly rely on my friends; and now my friends aren't always really there. + +So one of the things was that this guy lets call him Epstein... + +Yeah. + +Yeah. + +Yeah. + +Dr. Kliman: You did have astepfather... + +grigaill Yeah but he was more of always just yelling at me so I always in my room by myself or I was hanging out with my friends. + +Dr. Kliman: What was the violence with your mother and father when you were 3? + +S + +Dr. Kliman: It was interesting to me there were some stairs involved in there that your step dad hit your dad and them; what was the business about stairs? + +Dr. Kliman: This story about... + +Dr. Kliman: Your mom and your step dad; your dad hit your mom; your step dad hit him and then there were stairs. + +Dr. Kliman: Okay. I was just struck... + +Dr. Kliman: By the image. There's stairs in both these bad events. + +Well my dad... he never hit me but the would hit my little brother and my brothers actually my two brothers; and my dad brought us home from being with him for the day and my mom went to go change my little brother and he was like beaten on his back and on butt and stiff like that and my mom got really angry and she called my dad to come back here...back to the house where he dropped us off and I just remember him going upstairs. He had hit my mom and then my step dad hit him and my dad went down the stairs cause we lived on like the second floor and then...I just remember sitting in the window and the cops came in the house and they couldn't fmd my dad; because my dad basically ran off to another state so...I haven't seen my dad in awhile after that. + +In which story? + +• okay. + +Well cause my dad had just fallen down the stairs and he...he just got punched and he fell down the stairs and started tumbling and then he got up and then he ran off and then he ran to North Carolina; and I'm no too sure what's up with the stairs though. + +It was just the image. + +UM That's true. + +Dr. Kliman: Not after that time your step dad was not avery comfortable replacement for you. He would yell at you? + +S + +He would always...he was even alittle bit violent with my mom; but he had three kids of his own and my mom had four kids of her own so we had seven all together and our whole life was just about whose kids have done what and whose kids are bad; and whose kids are good; and whose kids + +did this and that and...its all they argued about was us; and its like so annoying, cause its not really...it doesn't really matter what each kid did...its like what they did; its not like whose kid it was that did it. It was what they did that was bad, but he would just get mad at me for like random things like he told...like he would say something and he told me not to tell my sister and I like told my sister because she's my sister and then he like spanked me or hit me or something and sent me to my room without dinner. And then like he was yelling at his son when 1 got older and I was like why are you guys fighting Shawn didn't even do anything and then he just came at me and smacked across the face and then kicked me out of his house; I don't know why but I was trying to help; it seems that every time I try to help I always get in the way... + +Dr. Kliman: How old are you at that point? + +00:31:37 + +Dr. Kliman: Had the Epstein thing happen yet when you were kicked out of the house? + +a No. + +Dr. Kliman: Which came first? + +NOM I believe I got kicked out first and then it happened. + +Dr. Kliman: Okay how much time was there in between? + +Dr. Kliman: Okay. + +I was probably 17, yeah 17. + +About 2 years, no it couldn't have been because I was like 17. I mostly remember when I dated people when...what I did in school and stuff like that about the timing. + +And the age and stuff. So I must have been...when I just got my car and I was still driving the mini van so that was like 16 almost 17; and then it happened when I was 17 the Epstein thing....when I was about to be 18. So it was probably a year difference almost. + +Dr. Kliman: So you were almost 18 when the Epstein thing happened? + +Yeah. + +Dr. Kliman: Okay now, the choices we have now include the fact that it's almost 12 o'clock. I'm sorry it's almost 1 o'clock. + +00:37:39 + +Dr. Kliman: At that time, had you already met Epstein? + +Dr. Kliman: And what were the effects if you can tell me of this hurricane experience on you emotionally? + +Dr. Kliman: Did it scare you? + +Dr. Kliman: Did your house survive so you could live in it? + +Dr. Kliman: Okay now...you mentioned in part one; question 5. That you had a sexual assault by a family member or someone you know, for example a rapper an attempted rape, could you tell me about that? + +00:39:54 + +Dr. Kliman: Who is the he? + +MI Palm High School yes. + +Uh huh. + +What were my effects? + +yeah it scared me but in the same way because my brothers were around they were making it funny and they were making like videos and they went out in the middle of the eye of the hurricane and was filming. There was a bowl in my front yard when it was over with so...it's kind of funny at the same time but it was also really scary because our property was torn up. We had to clean up the whole yard and we had 5 acres to clean up; there was tree that landed on a car that was right next to my car in my driveway; and then there was this huge tree that landed on our house that broke our screen enclosure to our pool. So that also happened when we were in the house; just a lot of different little things that happened. + +Yeah...it was okay...we just didn't have power or water for 11 days; and I had to go to my friends house and just to like take showers and stuff like that; and I don't know... that's all I really remember about that. + +Yeah I was actually dating my step brother's friend; like his best friend and I was hanging out with them, there's just been a couple of times actually. He like wanted me to sit on his lap. + +Dr. Kliman: Yeah. + +![](_page_5_Picture_11.jpeg) + +And he was standing right in between it, I saw a little piece of the door that was still open and so I had a weird feeling and vibe that he was still in my room and that he didn't really leave; and then he...I guess had ducked down and then crawled around to the side of my bed again and he...he was doing like I heard like somebody breathing like right near me; and I was freaking out but I was still awake at the time; I knew what was going on and then he like tried to do it again and that's when I freaked out and I was like get out now! I was just like get out of my room please, like I didn't know what to say for him to go away. He finally left and then I locked my door and that was it for that time and then my parents kicked him out for like a day and then he came back the like the next.... + +Dr. Kliman: So you told your parents? + +![](_page_5_Picture_14.jpeg) + +Yeah I told my parents but they didn't really think that they could do anything about it...so they kicked him out and he just snuck back in the house like he always did so no matter what I do or he did he was never getting punished for it he just always kept coming back and I was; there's just a couple of stories like I found him in my room with... he was like naked under my covers like in my room and I am such like a perfectionist; like I'm a neat clean kind of person and I put everything in its own specific place in my room and I know when people go through my stuff and I had feeling that someone was going in my room cause he knows how to like get through locks and stuff like that so I came home early from school one day and I ran my room really quick and he was like trying to get out of my room and get out of bed; and I opened my door really quick and he was like...he jumped from my bed to my closet and he was naked; and my pink sandals were right next to my bed which is were they weren't before so he was like wearing them or something and then like my underwear like my see through underwear was like missing for like months and month and months and then I just recently found it in like my laundry basket like tucked away so where I couldn't have found it; and its just really weird. And then I told my parents about that and then they kicked him out for like couple day and then he just came back so...I don't know, its just really weird how everything happens; but I always lock everything and I just know when people are touching my stuff and it gets me so irritated. + +00:46:15 + +Dr. Kliman: So you can tell when your stuff is being touched but now...did you experience other than at the time when it happened; did you experience an emotional distress that lasted more than that day? + +![](_page_5_Picture_19.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/EFTA02746838.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/EFTA02746838.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5c2f9f523167a7312a5763f141ab5a5dd61619c2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/EFTA02746838.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,228 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 11393, + "elapsed_seconds": 10.22, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_5_Picture_11.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_14.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_19.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 90 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 302 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 460 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 84 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 78 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746838" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/_page_5_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/_page_5_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7d57922c6f5088638f3e9f4db2a69ef61a4a898a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/_page_5_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:9f07c87195e41a54f0d6052881f8330a2004640dd7e827b372e32c802135fa8d +size 1633 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/_page_5_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/_page_5_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..672562d374d602138cfaf4fd29a2582ca766902a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/_page_5_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7731e1a3414d6824ee2c68f9bb4fe69ff08048cdf6c9785f7fb0e03e6148c218 +size 1898 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/_page_5_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/_page_5_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5e3a0574ec5aabc2eca5e3a8c06d5f79f7d24eb5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746838/_page_5_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e04cd72cce416534ffad4bd375de6b9d1f1674590e1e41d01e9f71aee1716f11 +size 6246 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746844/EFTA02746844.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746844/EFTA02746844.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..73da6908dd8d65205bb1b2c131408de95f12b232 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746844/EFTA02746844.md @@ -0,0 +1,93 @@ +MIS I've smoked probably... do you want like an estimate? + +IS MS It was for about a year and a half, yeah...a year and a half to two years. + +Dr. Kliman: That's a lot of time. + +Dr. Kliman: Don't you think? That's two years out of twenty; that 10 percent of your life. + +Dr. Kliman: How about cocaine? + +Dr. Kliman: Did you try it? + +yeah? + +Yeah that is a lot of time, I didn't realize that. + +No, not much for cocaine. + +I have recently, but I haven't like...I haven't felt anything from it; but I've tried it but I... + +Dr. Kliman: Not interested in it? + +a Yeah I'm not really interested in that. + +00:48:28 + +Dr. Kliman: How about marijuana? + +That actually I have tried and I have done that before and I think that is what...I think that is the only thing that can calm be down like when I get in those anger...angered moods stuff like that; like when I feel I cant do anything to stop myself. + +Dr. Kliman: When did you start noticing that? + +SIM When I first smoked pot? Marijuana... + +Dr. Kliman: When is that? + +It was probably 12thgrade, so I was...yeah 18 or 19 when I first tried it. + +Dr. Kaman.- Okay and what's been your current use let's say in the past year? + +Dr. Kliman: Yeah how many joints if that's how you use it. + +ASS + +Dr. Kliman: Try to finish the sentence. A couple of joints how often? + +Dr. Kliman: Okay and what's you're average the year before that, how many joints a month would you smoke? + +Dr. Kliman: No you started at 18 or 19. + +a + +Dr. Kliman: Okay so now your 20? + +a + +Dr. Kliman: The year before that how many joints would you have in a month? Before this year? + +• S + +Dr. Kliman: Okay so it's a little bit increased. + +a + +Dr. Kliman: Yeah. It's increased over the previous year. + +00:50:48 + +Dr. Kliman: Any other drugs? + +Dr. Kliman: Prescription drugs? + +S + +Yeah I would just say I don't know...couple of joints like whenever I get mad that's the way I would calm myself down. + +Probably in a month. + +Before I tried it? + +Yeah. + +Yeah. + +...probably like 1. + +Yeah. + +I've been going through a lot and that what I tell my parents. + +That's it. + +....Xanax that's...that's what my mom had given me like if I go on a trip or something; its like .025, I think it is; and she would give me one of \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746844/EFTA02746844.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746844/EFTA02746844.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..715f0d6394688b13840b844d53d1a046ef37c1f1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746844/EFTA02746844.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746844.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2197, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.5, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746844" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/EFTA02746846.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/EFTA02746846.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0746f52d71ad6ba775c2c453d705b8bb3177e4a6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/EFTA02746846.md @@ -0,0 +1,68 @@ +View My: Plcs I Videos + +![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg) + +Home Browse People Find Friends Local Music Video More • Bluerver • Log In Sign Up + +![](_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg) + +'You break El You buy El <3- + +id States + +Last Login: 4/19/2005 + +## Contactie + +2:lw Send Message Gal Forward to Friend Add to Friends I21 Add to Favorites 8e IM / Call 43 Block User 482, Add to Group j8j Rank User + +## BlueEyez's Interests + +General Party hardy with my guys and whatever girl friends I do have. I Love Poems:these are mine \*You are Just a dream,you are not real. You're what I want you're what I feel. "Every girl's got one, It's the latest thing. They've got you tied up on a string. 'Sweetness and charm is what you've got. But your eyes is what makes you hot \*You're always there,you're always around. In my heart is where you're found. \*The question stands in my brain,why can't I have you? And why am I in so much pain? 'The answer is uncertain and im still unsure. Guys are such a wage of time, atleast I thought they were. 'For now I'm Just a single gki,Pm gunny stay this way. Until the perfect guy comes along and knows Just what to say. Nes better to have toyed and lost then to have never loved at all.What's love and why do you fall? 'What's the point if you Just get hurt? Say no to boyfriends and just flirt 'For the world is full of perverted guys. Just watch out for their innocent Iles. \*Your better off alone, be + +j WebY Search + +a is in your extended network view more + +IIIIIII.atest Bled Entry (Subscribe to this B lop [view All Meg Entries) + +gasBlurbs + +About me: I'm the type of girl that loves to go to parties. I make friends very easily because im an easy person to get along with and talk to. When I go places I try to be the center of everyone's attention. I'm only aBitch when someone pisses me off. I'm not a person to try to make enemies, but I guess girls just hate me because I get along better with guys than girls. Girls are just way too crazy to be Mends with. + +Who I'd like to meet: iosh Hartnett and Marilyn Monroe + +°end Space (Top 1) Lends. + +![](_page_0_Picture_19.jpeg) + +%newelFriends: All I Online I New + +IIIMIFriends Comments Add Comment + +| | by yourself. And just play the cards you were dealt. *So hope to God that you're blessed being lucked.Or else you're plain out fucked. | +|------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| Music | Mostly Country!!! When I want to dance it's rap all the way! | +| Movies | 40 days and 40 nights....(Josh Hartnett) | +| Television | I dont watch a lot of tv, but I guess Nip/Tuck or Rescue Me. | +| Books | Harry Potter...I know its nerdy...those are the only books I read | +| Heroes | Superman...Hulk...Spiderman *Hotties* | + +| Details | | +|----------------|----------------------------------| +| Status: | Single | +| Here for: | Friends | +| Orientation: | Straight | +| Hometown: | Loxahatchee(Florida Girl) | +| Body type: | 5' 2" | +| Zodiac Sign: | Pisces | +| Smoke / Drink: | No / Yes | +| Children: | Someday | +| Education: | High school | +| Occupation: | Life of the Party...if Im drunk! | + +About | Help | Terms | Privacy Policy | Safety Tips | Report Abuse | Advertise | MySpace International | MySpace Latino + +©2003-2009 MySpace.com. All Rights Reserved. + +![](_page_1_Picture_37.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/EFTA02746846.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/EFTA02746846.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a53fc3ca659c1668b9ddc3029bec13ccf6d1d048 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/EFTA02746846.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,160 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 4137, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.69, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_37.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Contactie", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 63.647999999999996, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 115.05599999999998, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 115.05599999999998, + 371.79 + ], + [ + 63.647999999999996, + 371.79 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BlueEyez's Interests", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 63.647999999999996, + 444.69000000000005 + ], + [ + 162.70993041992188, + 444.69000000000005 + ], + [ + 162.70993041992188, + 456.5495910644531 + ], + [ + 63.647999999999996, + 456.5495910644531 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 504 + ], + [ + "Line", + 74 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746846" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3c1cd87d930897b7e280a6aaf01f2692d0f8c2a2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1119a9b278ecb4e155e4b8340d9f00335b0390906cbb02c66ceda0eba332eac0 +size 31352 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/_page_0_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/_page_0_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aa94dcde5bd4716d98ec59b284cf688ecfa8e4a1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/_page_0_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c277a8fde4ae4a7a339f7a53d7b92cf5e04abc574161327279783637c76bdab3 +size 6297 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fc89674cb634aaff54c45b297a4a5d814271aab7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4b031441b74d0fee8d2f6801ae15980734713032a18c917911aa89bf88173ddf +size 24403 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/_page_1_Picture_37.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/_page_1_Picture_37.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e94c329364873ae59271c0c9bb173f2c8d22cb9a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746846/_page_1_Picture_37.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:fbff4ad491d6291b6968a9f594e5564f6e99476b7e321fd95cf88cac397b7015 +size 12033 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746848/EFTA02746848.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746848/EFTA02746848.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0eb2a183f560971247f264a5400feaf57918a74a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746848/EFTA02746848.md @@ -0,0 +1,151 @@ +Jane Doe #2 + +a + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W.a, M.D. + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W.O. M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W.III, M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. +- 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +kelt + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe #2 against Jeffrey Epstein makes sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe #2 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiff's counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventative Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kliman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kliman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #2. + +14. The records available in this case at this time show that during the winter of 2003, plaintiff spent approximately one hour in defendant's house and 30-45 minutes alone with the defendant (Page 11, interrogatories). She denied that she was suffering from any physical infirmity, disability, disease, sickness, or psychiatric/psychological condition at the time of the incident (Answers to defendant's first interrogatories, page 7). + +15. Plaintiff reports that she moved repetitively during her childhood. She 'sports she was born in Buffalo, New York; lived there until one year, family then moved to Florida, a long process of moving back and forth twice to Virginia, twice to Florida, once to Tennessee (Page 1, transcript 12/4/08). "I was moving from Buffalo to Florida, then seven years in Florida til fourth grade til seventh grade in Virginia, then eighth to graduate high school, I was back in Florida, West Palm Beach, -Palm Beach High School. Then after high school, I moved back to Virginia myself because I knew my parents were moving to Tennessee and I didn't want to. My friends were in Virginia. Virginia for two years, then Midlothian, Virginia for two years. .." (Page 2, transcript 12/4/08). + +16. Plaintiff reports that she currently has a good relationship with her boyfriend and that she is living with two other couples in ahouse in Richmond. "I am hanging out and having fun . . .." "Now I am having more fun, bike riding with boyfriend and roommates and half pipe skateyard ramp in back yard, not just staying in the house, which Ido if I am not working." (Page Z transcript) + +17. Plaintiff reports that her mom and dad were always talking about her, putting pressure on her, "so I shut myself away from the world." "I asked them if they want me to fail in Virginia and come home...1 don't want to give them the satisfaction." "My family argues too much. It gives me headaches. (Page 2, transcript) + +18. Prior to her meeting Mr. Epstein, she reports, "My family made me the person I am, not being paid attention to. . ." (Page 2, transcript). + +19. Plaintiff reports that prior to seeing Mr. Epstein, the friend who took + +her, told her that she would be giving massages for money, didn't need experience, and told her to lieabout her age. She reports that she was 17+ at the time, but it was clear that she had to be 18. "She said if anybody asks, you have to be 18." (Page 4, transcript) "I'll vouch for you that you are 18" (Page 4, transcript). + +20. She reports she didn't advise her mother or her boyfriend of any distress (Pages 4 and 5, transcript). She notes that her parents divorced when she was three years of age. "I didn't have afather figure and this guy comes into my life and is totally weird and I had nobody to tell that to." (Page 6, transcript) + +21. She reports that her father struck her little brothers and that her father had assaulted her mother and her stepfather then assaulted her father (Page 6, transcript). She notes that her stepfather was "a little violent with my morn. He had three kids of his own and mom had four and our whole life was whose kids did what, which were good and which were bad. It was so annoying .. . and he would get mad at me for random things, like if I told my sister something, he told me not to. He would spank me... and smack me across the face and kicked me out of the house when I was 17. This was before the Epstein thing, when I was about 16, almost 17, and then Epstein, when I was about to be 18" (Page 6, transcript 1). + +22. Plaintiff reports that she is afraid of flying, that hurricanes scare her, and that her "property was torn up during ahurricane" (page 1, transcript 2,12/4/08). + +23. (Part 1, question 5 of Dr. Kliman's interrogatory and Page 1, transcript 2) Plaintiff reports that she was sexually harassed by her stepbrother. "My stepbrother wanted me to sit on his lap when his friend left us alone. I'm not going to do anything. I said 'no, that's weird.' I had grown up with him and I think of him as abrother. That night, Iforgot to lock one of my doors, which was achain lock to the bathroom... I was about 1.6." (Prior to Epstein) "I was sleeping and felt something at the end of my bed, shins, grazing my leg, cracked my eyes open and I freaked out and he pretended to be confused 'where am I.' Then he walked between two doors and I had aweird feeling he didn't leave. .. I guess he ducked down and crawled around... I heard someone breathing and he tried to do it again. . . I said 'get out, get out of my room please.' I told my parents and they kicked him out for a day. He snuck back in the house and wasn't punished. . . Once I found him in my room naked under the covers... I had a feeling someone was in my room. .. I ran in and he was trying to get out of my bed to my closet. . . and he was naked. . . My pink sandals were out of place and my see-through underwear was missing for months...I told my parents and they kicked him out for a couple of days. I was distressed, scared of him. He was always running after me and no one could stop him... He is three years older than me, taller than me, and he has cerebral palsy, which they blame it on, that he doesn't know what he is doing." (Page 1, transcript 2) "He did something to my sister, touching her neck and hair when she was on the computer. She told me, which this was after he did that to me." "Be is a big part of why I am the way I am, too.He has beat up my mom and my sister and me. He has been in jail for hitting my mom. He threw her on the ground and kicked her in the face. The police got him. I was 16." (Pre-Epstein) (Page 2, transcript 2) + +24. "I am so overprotective of everything and freaked out all the time. Always looking behind me. Someone will steal me. I am always paranoid now." (Page 2, transcript 2) + +25. "I have been thinking of hurting myself three or four years, feeling like I was nobody and getting angry." (Page 2, transcript 2) "A good thing I started doing was writing poems. I was 15. It was about my family problems. I want to lock people out and have them come and find me." (Page 3, transcript 2) + +26. Plaintiff reports she saw acounselor, Cathy Sloan, who was aprivate counselor that her mother had seen. "She talked to my mother about her problems because my stepdad was not as nice and mellow as he is now. He used to be angry and when he came home you would know you had to go in your room or go with your friends." Plaintiff reports that afemale psychiatrist wished to prescribed medications for her, but that medicines made her face break out and that she didn't wish to take them. (Page 3, transcript 2) "Beginning when I first went to Cathy Sloan at age 18, they said I was bipolar. They said I have BPD (bipolar disorder) or OCD." (Page 3, transcript 2) + +27. Plaintiff reports that before meeting Epstein, "I had two boyfriends that I had + +sex with." (Page 4, transcript 2) + +28. Plaintiff reports that she tried marijuana in the 12th grade and that it calms her down. (Page 5, transcript 2) + +29. She notes that her mother would give her Xanax to calm her down and that a friend gave her amphetamines (Adderall) and that she could concentrate more and get things done easier. "Hived life more and had more energy." (Page 5, transcript 2) Dr. Kliman notes she has had no evaluation for attention deficit disorder, acondition that would have existed pre-Epstein. The plaintiff had to read things several times while in school to comprehend. (Page 5, transcript 2) + +30. (Page 9, Tape 1, Dr. Kaman, 12/4/08) Plaintiff currently reports "I'm just hanging out right now, I'm having fun and I kind of like it" ... "I feel free." + +31. Plaintiff reports, "I just let people do whatever. I don't know what going through my mind actually at the time. So much is going through my mind. I'm not even thinking about what I should be doing." (Page 18, Tape 1) + +32. Plaintiff reports that she had some understanding of what would happen when she saw Mr. Epstein. She notes that aschool friend told her "I go to this place and I give people massages for money; and you don't have to have any experience. I was like 'wow... that sounds really weird. That sounds awesome, you know? What do you have to do?' And she basically told me in anote... She was like 'well if you show anybody this or if you tell anybody... I'll beat your ass' and I was like thinking to myself; why would she get that mad about me telling somebody? What's wrong with what I'm going to do if she wants to beat me up if I say something to somebody?. . . So she wrote me that note and then she's like 'yea... the only thing is that everybody makes fun of me for it is that, it's like older guys.' I was like . that's not a problem. It's just an older person that you give a massage to; and she was like 'yea, that's it' and then she picked me up from work one day and that's when I was working at Publix and she took me in her car down to Palm Beach City and we're; and stei wly slo ;started unraveling everything like ...eryNng that wal supposed happen,she started actually kind of telling me alittle bit as soon as we got to his house or alittle bit before it and she told me, you know," (at this point, plaintiff was interrupted by Dr. Kliman, who changed the subject). (Page 21, Tape 1) + +33. Plaintiff reports that she knew that Mr. Epstein did not want anyone younger than 18. "She was like .. .'all right, well if anybody asks you're 18 because you have to be 18to be here; and they are going to ask probably for like name and your number or whatever just give that to them; but I'll vouch for you and say that you're 18." (Page 22, Tape 1) + +34. (Tape 2, Dr. Kliman) Question, Dr. Kliman: "And did you tell her that you were 18?" Plaintiff" "I don't . . . I don't remember if I told her I was 18 or if she already assumed because that's what the age of the girls that had been brought there are always that age. Have to be that certain age, so I think Yolanda told her that I was 18 cause like I said I'm not really a good liar." (Page 1) + +35. Plaintiff reported that her parents divorced when she was three. She reports that she could remember what was happening around the time of the divorce. "Just like all the violence kind of going on all around and my dad like running away from us and just moving to another state and not seeing him for a long period of time. So it's ... it's already that I didn't have like afather figure. . ." (Page 9, tape 2) Dr. Kliman: "You did have a stepfather?" Plaintiff: "Yea, but he was more of always just yelling at me so I always in my room by myself or I was hanging out with my friends." (Page 9, tape 2) + +36. Plaintiff reports that her father would hit her two brothers and that after the mother had found that he had significantly beaten one of the brothers on "his back and butt," the mother got angry. Her father hit her mother and the stepdad then hit her father. (Page 10, tape 2) She reports that her stepfather was also violent with her mother and that she grew up in a family of seven children (three of the stepfather's and four of her mother's). (Page 10, tape 2) She reports that the stepfather would spank her or hit her or send her to her room without dinner to punish her. On one occasion, she remembers, "he just came at me and smacked me across the face and then kicked me out of the house." [16+1(Page 11, tape 2) She believes this was about a year before the Epstein incident, when she was "almost 18." (Page 11, tape 2) + +37. Plaintiff reports that while living in Loxahatchee, Florida, she was frightened during Hurricane Katrina and then another hurricane when she was approximately 18 or 19. She notes it was "a frightening, crazy time apparently." She reports that the hurricane scared her and that it was "really scary because our property was torn up. .. Huge tree that landed on our house, that broke our screen enclosure to our pool." (Pages 13 & 14, Tape 2) + +38. Plaintiff reported (Part 1, question 5, Dr. Kliman's interrogatory) that she had asexual assault by a family member or someone she knew. (Page 14, tape 2) She reported that "my stepbrother Cody, he wanted me to sit on his lap like when his friend, which was my boyfriend, had left us alone and we were like outside some kid's house waiting in the van, and I was outside on the ground and my stepbrother was sitting in the passenger's side with the door wide open talking to me and he was like 'why are you sitting on the floor, why don't you come sit on my lap?' and I was like 'because I'm fine right here( and he was like... 'II I'm not going to do anything, it's okay, you can sit on my lap.' I was like 'no, that's weird cause you're my brother' and I've grown up with these boy since I was three. Since my dad left, so it's pretty much like they are my brothers and I think of them as that; and then it was the same night that he asked me to sit on his lap. That it was like 3:00 or 4:00 in the morning and I was sleeping and I forgot to lock one of my doors. I have two doors, one door that goes to the bathroom of my room and one that goes to the hallway where everyone else's rooms are; and I always have like achain lock on my bathroom door and I forgotten to lock that one because I always lock my room, everywhere Iam always lock everything for some reason. I think because I'm scared that somebody is going to get to me while I'm asleep." (Fear of assault preceded encounter with Epstein) Plaintiff reported that she was 16 at this time. (Page 15, tape 2) She again describes the episode reported earlier about her brother being in her bedroom and notes that she did tell her parents and they put him out of the house. Subsequently, he was again found in her room, as noted earlier, naked under her covers and she believes that he was using her clothing. (Page 16, tape 2) Dr. 'Gilman asked if she experienced emotional distress that lasted more than that day and her reply was "yea, of course, I wasscared of him." (Page 17, tape 2) "He was always like running after me and like he was always like the terror of my house and nobody could everstop him, nobody could ever do anything. He pretty much just got fucked up all the time. Excuse me." She noted that her stepbrother is three years older than her, making him 19 at the time of these episodes. Plaintiff reports, "He did something to my sister. I guess he like I don't think he did anything sexual to her, but he was like touching her. .. she freaked out. .." (Page 17, tape 2) + +39. Plaintiff expressed her dissatisfaction at not being listened to by the sister, but after the stepbrother touched the sister she felt the sister paid attention. "Now you actually pay attention because it happens to you; but when I said something happened to me, you know, nothing right? So Ithink that's abig Rag why Igm Mg way I M sometimestoo, just because they're ... he's always been like that and he's always beat up my ... he's like beat up my mom before a couple of times; he's beat up my sister; he's beatUR me; he's been to jail a couple of times." (Again demonstrating plaintiffs fear of physical harm and inappropriate sexual contact prior to meeting Epstein.) Plaintiff reports that he was sent to jail for "hitting my mom; he like threw her on the ground and started kicking her in the face and stuff and then she called the cops on him and the police came and got him and then I think . . ." She reports she was around 16 at that time. (Prior to meeting Epstein) (Page 18, tape 2) + +40. Dr. Kliman inquired that since the stepbrother seemed to have asexual interest in her and that he was found naked, did she think that had something to do with the way she was now. Her response was "a little bit of it." (Page 18, tape 2) + +41. Dr. Kliman inquired about "why alittle bit?" and her response was "well, just because a IQ( fo things have happened ts22 that havemade me who IAm, net necessarily jgg that one person. It just might be everything that has happened to me and I'm just so overprotective of everything and I'm just really freaked out most of the time. .. Like I am always looking behind me just because nobody ever looks behind them." (Page 18, tape 2) + +42. Plaintiff reported that she does not have bad dreams or nightmares of the traumatic event with Epstein. (Page 20, tape 2) She reports that her bad dreams are what is going on in her life at the moment. (Page 20, tape 2) In her dreams, she sees herself as angry at somebody and her beating them up in her dreams and that alot of her dreams are about the boys that she is with. (Page 20, tape 2) In her dreams, she reports that she always beats up the girls who may be having a relationship with her boyfriend as well. (Page 21, tape 2) She reports that most of the dreams that she remembers are good dreams. (Page 1, Tape 3) + +43. When questioned by Dr. Kliman about feeling that she is ahorrible person and asked how long she had had those feelings, plaintiff's response was "when I started to get them. .. I don't . . . like I didn't really notice it at first until you started like reminding me of all these things and that everything that put into place . . ." [Indicating she is suggestible] (Page 1, Tape 3) + +44. In a response to a question about how long she had had trouble thinking about hurting herself, plaintiff responded "for three or four years probably." (Age 16 or 17) At that time, she felt she was a nobody and when she would get angry she would write poems. She notes that she began doing that when she was in the ninth grade at about age 15, that she would write about her family problems, and she would lock her doors and lock everyone out. She felt like she wanted someone to talk to her, but that nobody really would. . . "Nobody really ever wanted to because I had brothers and stuff and my mom was always too busy." "So I never really had anybody to talk to besides my friends... I can't talk to my family when I'm mad because they don't understand because they don't even know me." (Page 2, tape 3) + +45. She notes that when she saw atherapist, Cathy Sloan, who was seeing her mother because of problems with the stepfather, that they wanted her to confront the issues with the stepfather's anger. "... when he would come home from work, you would just; you know that you'd have to go to your room; like everybody would just disburse, leave and go and hide. . ." "They wanted her to talk to me because of the Epstein thing and because of my stepbrother and so I talked to her about all that.. . Then she wanted to go and get me on medication, and then . . . I'm not really about medications so j j.w.t never took the medication that they would prescribe to me. .." "I'veneverreallygo= help, but I've always wanted to gethelp. But I've just never fully gone 100% through with it I guess you could say." (Page 3, tape 3) + +46. Dr. Kliman asked plaintiff, "All right, and you have thoughts of killing yourself?" Plaintiff: "I used to and that is why I started to write poems, cause I would just feel like there was nothing else that I do; and I would just feel like it is better if I wasn't around, then I wouldn't be causing anybody any problems. . ." "It's hard to be who everybody wants you to be all the time . . " (Page 6, tape 3)(The poem writing began prior to Epstein, at approximately age 15.) + +47. Plaintiff reports that she had had sex with two boyfriends prior to Epstein. + +(Page 9, tape 3) Plaintiff is easily influenced. .. . "I just have so much going on I just can't putthings together unless people start talking to me and then I'm like.. yea." (Page 10, tape 3) + +48. Plaintiff reports that she is currently happy with her life and has met someone who she loves and whom she feels loves her. "I finally found somebody; now I'm kind of .. . really happy." "I met him in Virginia. His name is Josh.. . Like love at first sight kind of thing." "He's so adorable, he's like ... he talks to me and he looks at me different and he looks at me like he cares about what I'm saying and he is listening and he really likes me. And that's the thing that I've never gotten out of any boyfriend is that they liked me for the way I am and the way that I will always be cause I'm always going to be the same person.. . I think I love him too. . ." (Pages 11 & 12, tape 3) + +49. Question: "When you have sex with Josh, do you have any interference from thoughts about Epstein." Reply: "No, no." (Pages 11 and 12, tape 3) + +50. Plaintiff notes that she drank prior to the episode with Epstein. (Page 14, tape 3) She continued to drink afterward and increased her drinking. She reported that she blacked out a couple of times. She notes at times that her amnesia was not simply due to alcohol, but that she didn't remember some parts of what she did because "I didn't want to remember some of it." [Volitional.] (Page 14, tape 3) + +51. Plaintiff reports that she has used cocaine and marijuana, with her first + +marijuana use at age 18 or 19. (Page 16, tape 3) She notes that her mother had given her Xanax, afriend gave her Adderall, and her mother gave her Strattera. (Pages 18 and 19, tape 3) + +52. She noted that she had difficulty in school. "I can't read something and actually understand it" "I actually have to like read it like at least twice." (Page 20, tape 3) She notes that she had difficulty in math and had to repeatalgebra II while in the 12th grade. (Page 20, tape 3) + +53. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +54. In Dr. Klirnan's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, alist al a medical, clinical,School, and wortsrecords known to the attorney in the case. + +55. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain drcumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "available important and relevant documentswhich as being deliberately withheld fromus." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, whichwe have requested or thatwe have stated would ordinarily be liat of medical opinion ormation ffietopics concerning, which out input is requested." We request the same. + +56. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +57. It is also essential to understand the plaintiffs level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +58. Knowledge of plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +59. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. These, in essence, are the same and similar records that plaintiffs expert witness (Dr. Kliman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. To obtain the necessary information, it will be necegary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories + +and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and such other similar information be made available to us to conduct our examination. + +![]()Richard C. W. ████ MD + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South +Florida + +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida +College of Medicine \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746848/EFTA02746848.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746848/EFTA02746848.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2cea61767e59e6bb1e95c98b10bfb7317548b85a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746848/EFTA02746848.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,740 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746848.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 20, + "chars": 29768, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.89, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W.a, M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 168.48 + ], + [ + 454.16094970703125, + 168.48 + ], + [ + 454.16094970703125, + 187.11 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 187.11 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 221 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 292 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 287 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 350 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 364 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 412 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 364 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 329 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 400 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 379 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 381 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 386 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 387 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 375 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 366 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 368 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 333 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 330 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 297 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 108 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746848" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746868/EFTA02746868.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746868/EFTA02746868.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f853a0eb8f681561cdda0504a4abd85048d3b479 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746868/EFTA02746868.md @@ -0,0 +1,233 @@ +# CURRICULUM VITAE + +Ryan C. W. E, M.D. + +If of + +Updated 06/17/09 + +# TABLE OF CONTENTS + +| PRESENT POSITION EDUCATION MEDICAL LICENSE CERTIFICATION ADDITIONAL TRAINING SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT 3 | 2 2 2 3 3 | +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------| +| COMMITTEES | 3 | +| HONORS | 4 | +| PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES | 4 | +| REVIEWER | 5 | +| BOOK REVIEWS PUBLICATIONS ABSTRACTS | 5 | +| AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES | 9 | +| MEDIA | 12 | + +NAME: Ryan Chaloner VVintorel, M.D. + +DATE OF BIRTH: May 10, 1976 + +PLACE OF BIRTH: Titusville, Florida + +MARITAL STATUS: Single + +## PRESENT POSITION: + +07/2008 - Present Psychiatrist Richard C. W.I., MD, PA 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd; Ste 219 Lake Mary, FL 32746 Ph: 407-322-8199 + +03/01/2008 - 07/31/2011 Affiliate Instructor University of South Florida Department of Psychiatry + +03/03/09 — Assistant Professor of Psychiatry 06/30/12 University of Central Florida College of Medicine Department of Medical Education + +# EDUCATION: + +1995 - 1999 JohnsIMI University Baltimore, Maryland Double Major - Biology and Psychology B.A. Degree, graduated Phi Beta Kappa with honors + +1999 - 2003 Georgetown University School of Medicine Washington, DC M.D. Degree + +2003 -2004 Internal Medicine Internship Sinai Hospital of Baltimore/Johns Baltimore, Maryland + +2004 -2007 Resid Johns'''. Hospital Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Baltimore, Maryland + +2007 - 2008 Fellow in Forensic Psychiatry Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio + +#### MEDICAL LICENSE: + +2004Maryland — D62746 - Inactive 2007 Ohio — 89483 - Inactive 2007 Florida — ME99792 + +#### CERTIFICATION: + +2008Diplomate, American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, #58286 + +#### ADDITIONAL TRAINING: + +2006Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Chicago, IL + +2007 Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Miami Beach, FL + +2008 Florida Forensic Examiner Training University of South Florida College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, Ft. Lauderdale, FL + +## SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT: + +Member, Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine + +Member, American Psychiatric Association + +Member, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +Member, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +Member, American Medical Association + +Member, Ohio Psychiatric Association + +Member, Florida Psychiatric Society + +Member, Southern Psychiatric Association + +Member, The American College of Psychiatrists + +#### COMMITTEES: + +2005- 2007 Public Relations Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +- 2007 Legislative Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society - 2007 Disaster Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society - 2007 Resident and Fellows Committee, Maryland Psychiatry Society - present Psychopharmacology Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law - present Research Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law - 2009 Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, American Psychiatric Association - 2009 Member, New Member Task Force, Southern Psychiatric Association + +#### HONORS: + +1999Phi Beta Kappa, Johns University 2004"Superior" performance rating, 1st-year residency, by Sinai Hospital Department of Medicine's Clinical Competency and Evaluation Committee 2005Dorfman Award, presented by The Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine for best review article of the year for Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3):195-202, May-June 2005. 2005Rappeport Fellowship, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +#### PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES: + +2008Written testimony on Elder Abuse in support of bills HB873/SB501 Criminal Law— Crimes Against the Elderly or Persons with a Disability— Penalties, pr Maryland House Ju " Committee for Delegate.' Kramer, District 19 County, Maryland. Hearing March 4. 2009Central Florida Psychiatric Society representative to Florida Psychiatric Society's Council Meeting, January 10. + +2009Testified before the Florida Senate Banking and Insurance Committee (SB 354) on Mental Health Parity. March 17. + +#### REVIEWER: + +-Archives of Internal Medicine -Clinical Geriatrics -Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness -European Psychiatry -Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience -Nature Clinical Practice Neurology -Neurology India -Psychosomatics -Social Science & Medicine -World Journal of Surgical Oncology + +#### BOOK REVIEWS: + +- 1. Clark MR and Treisman GJ: Pain and Depression: An Interdisciplinary, Patient-Centered Approach. Psychosomatics, July-August 2006, 47(4)365-366. + +#### PUBLICATIONS: + +- 1. **RCW, Dunlap PK,MI RCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid disease and abnormal thyroid function tests in patients with eating disorders and depression. The Journal of the Florida Medical Association, Inc. 82(3)187-192, 1995.** +- **2. RCW: Anxiety and Endocrine Disease. In Popkin, MK, Seminars in Clinical Neuropsychiatry 4(2)72-83, 1998.** +- **3. RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts. Psychosomatics 40:(1)18-27, 1999.** +- **4. RCW, RCW: Fee-Splitting: Ethical Implications and Principles for Practice Management. Transference 20(2)14, 1999.** +- **5. RCW,. RCW: Long-term Psychological and Neurological Complications of Lindane Poisoning. Psychosomatics 40(6)513-517, 1999.** +- **6. RCW, RCW: False Allegations: The Role of the Forensic Psychiatrist. Journal of Psychiatric Practice 7(5)343-346, September 2001.** + +- 7. ■RCW: **Principles of Physician Recruiting. In Handbook of Mental Health Administration and Management; Reid WH and Silver S (ed.): Brunner-Routledge, New York, NY; Chapter 34:440-448, 2003.** +- **8. RCW, RCW, Chapman M: Identifying Geriatric Patients at Risk for Suicide and Depression. Clinical Geriatrics 11(10)36-44, October 2003.** 9.■ ■RCW: **Establishing Liaison Before Disaster Strikes. http://Www.psych.org/disasterpsych/pdfs/apadisasterhandbk.pdf; Chapter 2:12-19. 2004.** 10■. **RCW, Chapman MJ: Emotional and Psychiatric Effects of Weapons of Mass Destruction in First Responders. In: Biotemorism: Psychological and Public Health Interventions; Ursano RJ, Norwood AE & Fullerton CS (eds). Cambridge University Press:Cambridge; Chapter 14:250-273; 2004.** +- **11. RCW, Appleby B, RCW: Atypical Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome Presenting as Fever of Unknown Origin in the Elderly. Southern Medical Journal 1(98) 114-117, January 2005.** +- **12. RCW, Chapman MJ: Exploitation of the Elderly: Undue Influence as aForm of Elder Abuse. Clinical Geriatrics 13(2)28-36, February 2005.** +- **13. MI RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implicationsof Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3)195-202, May-June 2005.** +- **14. MI RCW, RCW: Abuse of Supraphysiologic Doses of Anabolic Steroids. Southern Medical Joumal, 98(5)550-555, May 2005.** +- **15. RCW, E1 RCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Complications of Anabolic Steroid Abuse. Psychosomatics, 46(4)285-290, July-August 2005.** +- **16. MI RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Medical and Psychiatric Casualties caused by Conventional and Radiological (Dirty) Bombs. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(3):242-248, May-June 2006.** +- **17. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Postconcussional Syndrome: A Work in Progress (Response to Dr. ). Letter to the Editor. Psychosomatics, 47(3):272, May-June 2006.** +- **18. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome in the Elderly: Diagnostic Criteria, Incidence, Risk Factors, Pathophysiology, and Treatment. (CME article) Clinical Geriatrics, 14(5):39-46, 2006.** +- **19. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part I: Medical and Psychiatric Complications of Bombings and Biological, Chemical, and Nuclear Attacks. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(8):26-35, 2006.** + +- 20. **RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part 2: Posttraumatic Stress, Acute Stress, and Affective Disorders. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(9):17-24, 2006.** +- **21. RCW: Malingering of PTSD: forensic and diagnostic considerations, characteristics of malingerers and clinical presentations. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(6):525-535, 2006. 22.. RCW: A Profile of Pedophilia: Definition, Characteristics of Offenders, Recidivism, Treatment Outcomes, and Forensic Issues. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 82(4):457-471, 2007.** +- **23. RCW, RCW: Detection of Malingered PTSD: An Overview of Clinical, Psychometric, and Physiological Assessment: Where Do We Stand? Journal of Forensic Sciences, 52(3):717-725, 2007.** +- **24. RCW, Macvaugh GS III, Merideth P, J: Commentary: Delving Further Into Liability for Psychotherapy Supervision. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 35(2):196-9, 2007.** +- **25. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Effects of Terrorism: Medical and Societal Implications of Recent Attacks. In: Focus on Terrorism, Vol. 9; Linden EV (ed), Nova Science:New York; Chapter 11, Publication date: 3iO Quarter, 2007.** +- **26. RCW, RCW: The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak Model of virus properties on system capacity and function: A lesson for future viral epidemics. American Journal of Disaster Medicine, 2(5):270-276, 2007** +- **27. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part (— Causative Agents, Presentation, and Differential Diagnosis. Clinical Geriatrics, 15(12):18-25, 2007.** +- **28. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part II Pathophysiology, Drug Interactions, and Treatment. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(1):24- 28, 2008** +- **29. RCW, Resnick PJ: Psychotherapy Malpractice: New Pitfalls. Joumal of Psychiatric Practice, 14(2):119-121, 2008** +- **30. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part I — Occurrence in Forensic/Criminal Situations, Partner Relationships, and Sexual Offenses. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(5):27-32, 2008** +- **31. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part II — Occurrence in Hospitals and Pharmacological/Behavioral Treatment of Agitation, Aggression and Violence. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(6):28-32, 2008.** + +- 32. RCW, MI RCW, Chapman MJ. The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak: lessons hospitals and physicians can apply to future viral epidemics. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2008 Sep-Oct;30(5):446-52. Epub 2008 Jul 23 +- 33. **RCW, SH: Drug Diversion Program Rights. Legal Digest. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 36(4):579-580, 2008** +- **34. RCW, Chapman MJ: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Interventions. Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009** +- **35. Paul RK, Lockey RCW, Bursztajn H: Practice Management: Managing Risks When Practicing in Three-Party Care Settings. Psychiatrictimes.com, 26(2), Feb. 3, 2009.** +- **36. RCW,M RCW, Chapman MJ: Letter to the Editor response re: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Interventions) Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009), Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(4):17-21, 2009.** +- **37. RCW,M RCW, Myers W, Chapman M: Testamentary Capacity: History, Physicians' Role, Requirements, and Why Wills are Challenged. Clinical Geriatrics, in press.** + +**\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W.III, MD** + +#### **ABSTRACTS:** + +- **1. RCW, Hazard SC, RCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid Disease in Eating Disordered and Depressed Patients. -146th Annual Meeting, American Psychiatric Association, May 25, 1993, San Francisco, CA, P.1.57 (Poster Session).** +- **2. RCW, DE, Ill RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts: Evaluation of Suicide Risk in a Time of Managed Care.** + - **Psychiatric Practice and Managed Care, American Psychiatric Association, Vol. 5, No. 5, P 12, Sept-Oct 1999.** +- **3. RCW, Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J: The Role of Morphine in the Development of Acute Stress Disorder and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Severe Burn Injury.** + - **41° Annual Meeting, American Burn Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009.** + +- 4. Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J, Ill RCW: Pea-traumatic Heart Rate as a Predictor of Acute Stress Disorder and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Burn Injury. + +- 41" Annual Meeting, American Burn Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009. + +\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W.E, MD PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES: + +- 1. **RCW, Hazard SC, Dunlap PK,. RCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid disease and abnormal function tests in patients with eating disorders and depression. Poster Session - American Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, May 25, 1993** +- **2.** +- **RCW,M RCW: Management of Hostage Situations. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **3. RCW, RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective -- Part I. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **4. RCW,M RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective - Part II. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **5. RCW,M RCW, DE: Impact of Managed Care on Suicide Risk Assessment. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 1999 Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD, October 15, 1999** +- **6. RCW, RCW: Ethical Issues in Managed Care. American Psychiatric Association, 1999 Ethics Workshop, Washington, DC, November 3, 1999** +- **7. RCW, RCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Disaster Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **8. RCW,M RCW: Bioterrorism Dealing with Medical and Psychiatric Consequences of Victims and Responders. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **9. RCW, RCW: Psychiatric Consequences of Terrorism, Bioterrorism and** + +Disaster. Rocky Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 29. 2000 + +- 10. **RCW: Suicide in an Era of HMO's and Managed Care. Rocky Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 30, 2000** +- **11. RCW: Psychological Response to Disasters and Terrorism. International Society of Political Psychology, 23rd Annual Scientific Meeting, Seattle, WA, July 4, 2000** +- **12. In RCW,M RCW: Biological Warfare Attack Scenarios, Response to Terrorist Attacks, and Sources of Conflict. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000** +- **13. RCW,. RCW, Chapman M: Workplace Violence. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000** +- **14. RCW: Biological Warfare: Attack Scenarios and Public Health Issues. Grand Rounds, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, December 8, 2000 15.. RCW, RCW: Bloterrorism: A Short History of Biowarfare & Analysis of the Threat. Grand Rounds, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, August 15, 2001** +- **16. RCW,Ill RCW: Situational Suicide. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, FL, September 13, 2001** +- **17. RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, FL, September 14, 2001 18El RCW,M RCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Assault with Anthrax as a Biological Weapon. -Florida Psychiatric Society, Fall Meeting, Coconut Grove, FL, November 4, 2001 -Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002** +- **19. RCW, RCW: Smallpox. Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002** +- **20. El RCW, RCW: Psychopharmacology Forensic Risk and Clinical Practice: Things the clinician must know. Apopka Community Health Center, Apopka, FL, March 13, 2002** +- **21. e i RCW, RCW: Overview of Terrorism and Bioterrorism. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002** + +- 22. •RCW, IIRCW: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Ana ysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002 +- 23. ERCW,iiRCW: Smallpox as a Biological Weapon. Orlando Police Academy, r ando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002 +- 24. IERCW, iiRCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Southern Psychiatric ssociation Annual Meeting, Loews Ventana Canyon Resort, Tucson, AZ, October 3, 2002 +- 25. IIRCW,huiRCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Mandatory ness. a ax Medical Center, Daytona USA, Daytona Beach, FL, December 14, 2002 +- 26. WOW, IERCW, Chapman MJ: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003 +- 27. ERCW, IIRCW: Medical and Psychological Sequelae of Bombings: Implications or First Responders and Critical Government Staff. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003 +- 28. ERCW, toRCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Florida Psychiatric ociety Spring Meeting, Orlando, FL, April 5, 2003 +- 29. RCW, RCW: Terrorist Bombings: Medical and Psychiatric Impact outhern Psyc iatric Association's Annual Meeting, Nashville, TN, October 11, 2003 +- 30. RCW, m! RCW: Terrorism, Bombings, and Psychiatric Casualties. niversity o orida, Department of Psychiatry, Visiting Professor Program, November 7, 2003 +- 31. RCW, IIRCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Tampa Bay sychiatric ociety, Tampa, FL, sponsored by Pfizer, January 29, 2004 +- 32. ROW,pRCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Orlando o ice Aca emy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004 +- 33. RCW, RCW: Medical and Psychiatric Casualties of Terrorist Bombings. r ando Po ice Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004 +- 34. RCW, RCW: Medical and Psychological Consequences of Bombings. rand Roun s, Tulane University, Department of Psychiatry, New Orleans, LA, January 28, 2005 +- 35. **ROW, ERCW: Psychological Sequelae of Weapons of Mass Destruction on First Responders. South Central Center for Public Health** + +Preparedness/Alabama Department of Public Health, la AL, Satellite Conference, May 6, 2005 + +- 36. F R CW, Medical and Psychological Aspects of Terrorist ombings. rand Rounds, Sinai Hospital, Department of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, June 2, 2005 +- 37. IERCW, IRCW: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationship: he New Realities. (Abbreviated version) Forensic Psychiatry Fellows and Residents, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, January 24, 2006 +- 38. IERCW, MIRCW, Chapman MJ: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relat onshlp: The New Realities. Presidential Address. Southern Psychiatric Association, Baltimore, MD, September 30, 2006. +- 39. ERCW, ROW: When the System is Overwhelmed: Protecting the Provider dur ng Biodisaster. Satellite Conference, University of Alabama Birmingham South Central Center for Public Health Preparedness/Alabama Department of Public Health/Tulane University School of Public Health, a AL, February 27, 2007. +- 40. u RCW: Testamentary Capacity from Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole tup2Grand ounds, Case Western Reserve School of Medicine, Cleveland, 8, 2008 +- 41. ERCW, .[ROW, Rundell JR, Winstead DK: Psychiatrists' Role in Disaster Management: essons Learned. Course 14, American Psychiatric Association, Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, May 3, 2008. +- 42. RCW: Violence in the Elderly: Forensic and Treatment Concerns. Forensic Pm, Florida Psychiatric Society, ChampionsGate, FL, September 20, 2008. +- 43. RCW: O Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole MI Psychiatric Association, September 25, 2008. +- 44. RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole a Pensic Psychiatry Program, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, January 29, 2009. +- 45. .RCW, RCW: Domestic Violence as Portrayed in Film —A Realistic Appraisal? orida Psychiatric Society, St. Petersburg Beach, FL, March 20, 2009. +- 46. RCW, Silberman E, Preven D, Weissman S (chairperson): Indications for the of Combined Talking Therapy and Pharrnacotherapy and How to Teach in Residency. Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, CW16, American Psychiatric Association, San Francisco, CA, May 19, 2009. + +\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W. M, MD + +## MEDIA: + +- 1. Time Magazine, Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome, May 16, 2005 +- 2. Reach MD Radio, Pedophilia. April 25, 2007 +- 3. MD Consult. Doug Joint telephone interview with Richard C. W. MD, Pedophilia. May 2, 2007 +- 4. The Korean Broadcasting System, KBS Special, Pedophilia. March 11, 2008. +- 5. Tony Pipitone, WKMG-TV Channel 6, Mothers Who Kill Their Children. October 28, 2008. +- 6. J. L. = Orlando Medical News. Cyberchondriacs. November 13, 2008. +- 7. Fox 35 News, Orlando. Forensic Implications of =Anthony case. December 11, 2008. +- 8. Fox 35 News, Orlando. The Anthony Case: DNA Evidence. December 12, 2008. +- 9. Jessica WKMG-TV Channel 6. The Anthony Case: Baker Act and Stressors. January 23, 2009. +- 10. Nam Nae Won and Jihyun Song. Korea Educational Broadcasting System. Pedophilia. March 30, 2009. +- 11. Keith Landry, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress and Financial Strain. June 15, 2009. +- 12. Heidi Hatch, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress on Families. June 16, 2009. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746868/EFTA02746868.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746868/EFTA02746868.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4ecf08c136186a821a31201b82798dd9ca5dfd98 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746868/EFTA02746868.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,961 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746868.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 22976, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.17, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "CURRICULUM VITAE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.204, + 366.93 + ], + [ + 367.2950439453125, + 366.93 + ], + [ + 367.2950439453125, + 382.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 255.204, + 382.56353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TABLE OF CONTENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 370.1728210449219, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 370.1728210449219, + 113.96759033203125 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 113.96759033203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRESENT POSITION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 79.56, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 195.7458953857422, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 195.7458953857422, + 225.570556640625 + ], + [ + 79.56, + 225.570556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EDUCATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.00800000000001, + 405.81000000000006 + ], + [ + 155.24618530273438, + 405.81000000000006 + ], + [ + 155.24618530273438, + 420.570556640625 + ], + [ + 82.00800000000001, + 420.570556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDICAL LICENSE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.33600000000001, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 182.98072814941406, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 182.98072814941406, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 78.33600000000001, + 115.83 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.33600000000001, + 177.39000000000001 + ], + [ + 168.71603393554688, + 177.39000000000001 + ], + [ + 168.71603393554688, + 189.54000000000002 + ], + [ + 78.33600000000001, + 189.54000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ADDITIONAL TRAINING:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 78.33600000000001, + 237.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 207.19979858398438, + 237.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 207.19979858398438, + 250.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 78.33600000000001, + 250.28999999999996 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.784, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 330.6502380371094, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 330.6502380371094, + 407.80963134765625 + ], + [ + 80.784, + 407.80963134765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COMMITTEES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.456, + 637.47 + ], + [ + 162.82119750976562, + 637.47 + ], + [ + 162.82119750976562, + 649.9460601806641 + ], + [ + 84.456, + 649.9460601806641 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "HONORS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.396, + 332.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 135.01806640625, + 332.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 135.01806640625, + 344.6330261230469 + ], + [ + 81.396, + 344.6330261230469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 83.23200000000001, + 538.6500000000001 + ], + [ + 236.46646118164062, + 538.6500000000001 + ], + [ + 236.46646118164062, + 550.8049163818359 + ], + [ + 83.23200000000001, + 550.8049163818359 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REVIEWER:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.784, + 151.47 + ], + [ + 143.32139587402344, + 151.47 + ], + [ + 143.32139587402344, + 162.81 + ], + [ + 80.784, + 162.81 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BOOK REVIEWS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.00800000000001, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 172.77581787109375, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 172.77581787109375, + 333.3793029785156 + ], + [ + 82.00800000000001, + 333.3793029785156 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PUBLICATIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 82.00800000000001, + 395.28 + ], + [ + 169.40371704101562, + 395.28 + ], + [ + 169.40371704101562, + 407.6232604980469 + ], + [ + 82.00800000000001, + 407.6232604980469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ABSTRACTS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.396, + 419.58000000000004 + ], + [ + 154.836, + 419.58000000000004 + ], + [ + 154.836, + 432.30291748046875 + ], + [ + 81.396, + 432.30291748046875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDIA:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 124.8700180053711, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 124.8700180053711, + 123.570556640625 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 123.570556640625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 10 + ], + [ + "Line", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "TableOfContents", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 178 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 238 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 248 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 363 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 365 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 336 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 402 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 339 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746868" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746882/EFTA02746882.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746882/EFTA02746882.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c77f8daeb8d2b08c6adc7d478d64e8efa4ed310a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746882/EFTA02746882.md @@ -0,0 +1,209 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRal + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## Defendant, Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion To Compel Plaintiff, Jane Doe #2's Independent Medical Examination Pursuant to Rule 35 + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his attorneys, and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 35 and other applicable rules, hereby moves this Court for an order directing that the Plaintiff, Jane Doe #2 (case #80119), submit to a compulsory psychological/psychiatric medical examination (a/k/a independent medical examination) by Ryan ■, **M.D. of Richard IN, M.D. at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP. located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401. In support, Epstein states:** + +# **Background** + +**1. This Court entered an order relating to the IME of CMA, another Plaintiff seeking similar damages against Epstein. See Exhibit "A" Given the damages claimed in this matter, it is clear that Plaintiff has placed her medical condition at issue** + +and that an IME is required. Despite that fact and the fact that discovery has been consolidated, Defendant is required to file a Rule 35 Motion seeking an IME. Thus, the undersigned believes that an Omnibus Order is required relative to all Plaintiffs' IMEs in that each claim similar damages and raise similar claims. Such an order would conserve judicial resources and require that the attorneys only negotiate dates and times for said IMEs. + +2. Nonetheless, this particular Motion, pursuant to Rule 35, only addresses the IME of Jane Doe #2. + +3. Plaintiff has alleged in her action that Defendant sexually battered her and, as a result, Plaintiffs seek millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, "severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages." See Second Amended Complaint. (DE 56) Plaintiff, Jane Doe #2, also claims Epstein "intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Jane Doe, creating reasonable fear of imminent peril. . . [and] [a]s a proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane Doe, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages." Id. at 111116-21. Jane Doe #2 further alleges that she suffered ". . .mental or sexual injury. . .that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. . .[and]. . .Jane Doe has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain." Id. at111125-27. + +4. In addition, Jane Doe #2 informed her expert, Gilbert Kliman, M.D that she has always been a "nervous person." In fact, she stated in her interview with Dr. Kliman that her parents divorced when she was three (3) years old and that there was + +violence "going on all around her" leading her natural father to run away. She further stated that her natural father beat her brothers, hit her, and was abusive to her mother. + +In addition, her natural father was in an altercation with her stepfather. Jane Doe #2 also informed Dr. Kliman that her step-father was always yelling at her, was violent with her mother, and that Jane Doe #2 was eventually kicked out of the house. Further, Jane Doe #2 told Dr. Kliman that her step-brother, Cody, was a "weird guy," that he would try to sit on her lap and sneak into her bedroom pretending he had just fallen asleep. Jane Doe #2 indicated that she was very afraid of him and he was always running after her. See Exhibit "B" — all pre-Epstein. See supra. + +5. In addition, Jane Doe #2, admits to her expert Dr. Kliman that she has used cocaine and that she currently uses marijuana. See Exhibit "C" + +6. Also, Jane Doe #2's MySpace page contains quotes such as "Party hardy with my guys an whatever girlfriends I do have" and "Occupation: Life of the party...if I'm drunk!?" See Exhibit "D" + +7. Furthermore, it is important for this court to review the detailed Affidavit of Dr. ■ **attached hereto in that it delineates for the Court several experiences visited upon Jane Doe #2 which may have caused the physical, emotional and psychological trauma she claims occurred at the hands of Epstein. See Affidavit of Dr. • Attached hereto as Exhibit "E"** + +**8. Based upon the foregoing, it is clear that Jane Doe #2 has placed her physical, emotional, medical and psychological conditions at issue. Therefore, an IME is warranted. Without an IME, Epstein would be severely prejudiced. The Affidavit of Dr.. clearly sets out the IME and scope of the examination that must be conducted.** + +See also, the curriculum vitae of Dr. Ryan. See Exhibit "F" The examination is set to occur at the undersigned office on November 9, 10, 11, 12, or 13, 2009 (whichever is more convenient for Plaintiff or whichever date the court so orders). Plaintiff has not provided dates for the IME; however, out of abundance of caution and to comply with the applicable rule, Defendant has, on a unilateral basis, set same pending the outcome of this Motion. Obviously, if the date noticed is not sufficient or agreeable, the undersigned will renotice same for one of the four dates suggested; however, this Court must order same to occur. + +9. As this court is well aware, Plaintiff and Defendant are required to complete discovery under the Court's trial schedule. It is not the undersigned's intention to require the court additional work; however, it is imperative that discovery be timely scheduled and completed. The court's assistance is needed in this instance as to the IME. + +10. Based upon the foregoing, an IME of Plaintiff must occur in order to address her claims and the damages she seeks to recover. The IME is expected to last between 6-8 hours, and the scope of same is set forth in the Affidavit of Dr. El + +11. Pursuant to Rule 35, Fed.R.Civ.Pro, a party may move for an examination by a qualified examiner if the Plaintiff's mental/emotional and/or psychological status is at issue in a case. + +12. Defendant would be severely prejudiced unless he is able to have an examination conducted by a qualified examiner separate and apart from any psychologist/psychiatrist or similar behavioral health provider who may have or may ultimately see the Plaintiff and testify in court. + +13. Defendant's counsel has retained the services of Richard M.D. and Ryan IM M.D., of C.W. M.D., P.A. located at 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd., #219 Lake Mary, FL 32746. Ryan M.D., will be performing the examination. Dr. Ryan Halls' specialties include forensic psychiatry, general psychiatry and medical psychiatry. See Exhibit attached outlining Ryan ■ **M.D.'s qualifications and the scope of the examination which he intends and is required to conduct in order to render a report. See also Affidavit of Ryan C.W.** ■ **M.D., outlining the scope of examination and other Rule 35 requirements. Accordingly, this motion comports with Rule 35. The applicable notice has been filed simultaneously. Defendant will arrange for a videotape of the examination.** + +**14. The undersigned is requesting the court's assistance with regard to compelling the IME of Plaintiff along with dates for same to occur.** + +### **Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference** + +**Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff by telephone and by email; however, an agreement has not been reached.** + +**WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an Order:** + +- **a. providing a date and time for Plaintiffs IME to occur on November 9, 10, 11, 12 or 13, 2009;** +- **b. providing that the independent medical examination take place at 9:00 a.m. (on a date to be determined by the court) at the law firm of Burman, Craton, Luther and Coleman, LLP. located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, WPB,** + +FI. 33401 under the protocol set forth by Dr. [REDACTED] in his affidavit, by videotape and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +**Certificate of Service** + +![]()I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 17 day of Sept, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bclclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bclclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein*) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +![]()*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. ██████████ Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant* ██████████ + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Ricci-Leopold, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. ██████████ Esq. +██████████ Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +skuvinAriccilaw.com + +tleopold riccilaw.com + +cc. Dr. Ryan \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746882/EFTA02746882.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746882/EFTA02746882.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..491564aee86e4756b4e52669b80b32ea2fee8c47 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746882/EFTA02746882.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,439 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746882.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 11572, + "elapsed_seconds": 10.63, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.1553649902344, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.1553649902344, + 103.28997802734375 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 103.28997802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant, Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion To Compel Plaintiff, Jane Doe #2's \nIndependent Medical Examination Pursuant to Rule 35", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 525.4324951171875, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 525.4324951171875, + 393.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 393.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 273.564, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 350.40411376953125, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 350.40411376953125, + 614.4574890136719 + ], + [ + 273.564, + 614.4574890136719 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 161.568, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 459.84271240234375, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 459.84271240234375, + 469.7074890136719 + ], + [ + 161.568, + 469.7074890136719 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.412, + 150.66 + ], + [ + 369.036, + 150.66 + ], + [ + 369.036, + 164.43 + ], + [ + 245.412, + 164.43 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 187.88400000000001, + 494.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 430.84799999999996, + 494.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 430.84799999999996, + 535.41 + ], + [ + 187.88400000000001, + 535.41 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 84 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746882" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746890/EFTA02746890.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746890/EFTA02746890.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0250da3e834ba789653b00009236d6e452364155 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746890/EFTA02746890.md @@ -0,0 +1,139 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRS + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #2 (80119) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan IN, M.D. of C.W. ■, **M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on November 10, 2009 at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP, located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring asweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. age infra and Motion attached at DE (310) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well.** + +2. Plaintiff has not provided an available date; however, unless a timely and valid objection to this Notice is made, the Plaintiff is required by this Rule to be in attendance at the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as a witness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (310). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (310). See Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documents have been provided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient notice has been made. + +![]()**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 17 day of September, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAJJOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomey.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case 08-80811 reelrhw@,hotmail.com Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.M, Esq. No. + +Brad Esq. Rothsteir lE feldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax casselln@law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe Isidro M. Esq. i Lav7FirTn, P.A. Datum Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia®bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaint(If in Related Case No. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, 08-80469 + +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcylaw.com + +inh@searcylaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +tjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@nodhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iagesci@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746890/EFTA02746890.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746890/EFTA02746890.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ff31c1f69f25bd3155b29e31cbd4287270e45a86 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746890/EFTA02746890.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,269 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746890.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5011, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.13, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 411.26400000000007, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 411.26400000000007, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 100.44 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF \nPLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #2 (80119)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 96.084, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 522.0360000000001, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 522.0360000000001, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 96.084, + 390.41999999999996 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 515.16 + ], + [ + 364.75199999999995, + 515.16 + ], + [ + 364.75199999999995, + 528.1200000000001 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 528.1200000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAJJOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 426.23809814453125, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 426.23809814453125, + 281.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 281.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 207 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 144 + ], + [ + "Line", + 69 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 99 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 47 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746890" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746894/EFTA02746894.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746894/EFTA02746894.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7f2eb35cce15ef149d1fbb94e6ad2f0adea82a21 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746894/EFTA02746894.md @@ -0,0 +1,163 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +I + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### JOINT NOTICE OF AGREEMENT RELATIVE TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES REOUEST TO PRODUCE AND RESPONSES TO REOUEST FOR ADMISSIONS, AND UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO REMAINING PORTIONS STILL AT ISSUE + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, and Plaintiff, JANE DOE, by and through their undersigned counsel hereby file this JOINT NOTICE OF AGREEMENT RELATIVE TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES, REOUEST TO PRODUCE AND RESPONSES TO REOUEST FOR ADMISSIONS, AND UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO REMAINING PORTIONS STILL AT ISSUE, and thus move this Court for an Extension of Time until October 6, 2009, to file Responses to Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motions to Compel Responses to Request to Produce, Responses to Request for Admissions, and Answers to Interrogatories, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 A.10XS.D. Fla. 2008). As good cause for the requested extension, Defendant states: + +1. Brad M, Counsel for the Plaintiff, is scheduled to return to his office after having a surgical procedure on September 20, 2009. + +2. Nonetheless, in a diligent effort to conserve on Judicial resources, attorney resources and in light of the court's order addressing the 5th Amendment issues at (DE 242 and 293) Mr. and the undersigned have been able to resolve via telephone several discovery requests, thereby relieving the court from having to address certain requests in the above Motions to Compel and any responses/replies thereto. Mr. does not waive his right to address those requests for which an agreement has been made. + +The Court has already ruled on certain discovery matters. Therefore, that is the binding law of the case, and Plaintiff maintains her objections to said discovery requests for purposes of any appeal. + +3. In sum, the requests delineated below are simply moot for purposes of the court having to rule on same at this time. + +# The Interrogatories + +4. Initially, Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories (DE 196) addressed interrogatories 1-23. + +5. The undersigned attorneys have agreed that this court is relieved from having to currently rule on interrogatory numbers 1, 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22. + +6. Therefore, the remaining interrogatories in dispute are interrogatory numbers 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, and 23. + +# The Requests for Production + +7. Initially, Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production (DE 210) addressed requests numbers 1-16. + +8. The undersigned attorneys have agreed that this court is relieved from having to currently rule on request numbers 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6. + +9. Therefore, the remaining requests in dispute are request numbers 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16. + +### The Requests for Admissions + +10. Initially, Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Admissions (DE 195) addressed requests numbers 1-23. + +11. The undersigned attorneys have agreed that this court is relieved from having to currently rule on request for admission numbers 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20. + +12. Therefore, the remaining requests for admissions in dispute are request numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 21, 22, and 23. + +13. While the undersigned lawyers have resolved certain issues in the above motions to conserve on judicial resources, no admissions or waivers of objections have been made and no arguments are being abandoned. + +14. Therefore, the undersigned attorneys have agreed that Defendant shall file his Response Motions to the above Motions to Compel relative to the requests at issue on or before October 2, 2009. + +# Rule 7.1 A.3 Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff by telephone and/or electronic mail, and Counsel for Plaintiff is in agreement uested exten + +> By: MICH J. PIK Flori ar #617296 + +#### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of rectx1 identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on thisply of September, 2009 + +Respectfully.sub + +By: ROBERT.Pl. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattorney.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com + +Brad M, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, +08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. +08-80811 +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com)* + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED] Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED] Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. +08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746894/EFTA02746894.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746894/EFTA02746894.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e59be862d5bb689fa372197909c75646a1d2b8dc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746894/EFTA02746894.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,414 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746894.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 7505, + "elapsed_seconds": 46.11, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 412.14959716796875, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 412.14959716796875, + 103.61248779296875 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 103.61248779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JOINT NOTICE OF AGREEMENT RELATIVE TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S \nMOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES \nREOUEST TO PRODUCE AND RESPONSES TO REOUEST FOR ADMISSIONS, AND \nUNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO \nREMAINING PORTIONS STILL AT ISSUE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 91.18799999999999, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 521.4848022460938, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 521.4848022460938, + 429.6035461425781 + ], + [ + 91.18799999999999, + 429.6035461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Interrogatories", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 432.54 + ], + [ + 360.11126708984375, + 432.54 + ], + [ + 360.11126708984375, + 447.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 447.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Requests for Production", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 229.5, + 625.3199999999999 + ], + [ + 383.2479553222656, + 625.3199999999999 + ], + [ + 383.2479553222656, + 641.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 641.2330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Requests for Admissions", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 229.5, + 183.06 + ], + [ + 384.6449279785156, + 183.06 + ], + [ + 384.6449279785156, + 197.60302734375 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 197.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A.3 Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 173.808, + 569.4300000000001 + ], + [ + 440.7610778808594, + 569.4300000000001 + ], + [ + 440.7610778808594, + 584.6030120849609 + ], + [ + 173.808, + 584.6030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 362.6679382324219, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 362.6679382324219, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 499.77 + ], + [ + 362.6679382324219, + 499.77 + ], + [ + 362.6679382324219, + 514.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 514.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Counsel for Plaintiffs", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 87.51599999999999, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 195.84, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 195.84, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 87.51599999999999, + 85.05 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 75 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746894" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746899/EFTA02746899.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746899/EFTA02746899.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8081c222e06cf4bbae1436410d1982e5826a1a20 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746899/EFTA02746899.md @@ -0,0 +1,59 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228). For the following reasons said Motion is granted. + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant , allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm beach, New York and St. , with the promise of money in + +"A4 + +exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +By the instant Motion Epstein seeks an order compelling , one of the Plaintiffs, in the case, to submit to an independent psychological/psychiatric medical examination by Ryan M.D., presently scheduled for September 8,2009. has agreed to submit to said exam, but requests the Court impose certain restrictions. Since the filing of the Motion the parties have managed to resolve some of the issues involved, such as the proposed examination's time and date and request to have a representative from her team present at said examination. As for the latter issue, Defendant has agreed to provide, at his expense, a video feed and monitor in an adjacent room for Plaintiff's representative's use. The remaining issues involve Plaintiff's request for acourt order limiting the scope of the proposed examination by disallowing repeated questioning regarding "highly sensitive areas of inquiry including Plaintiffs medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history, substance abuse history, etc.,'and imposing certain time restraints on the examination itself. + +Plaintiffs request to limit the scope of the examination is denied. It is Dr. + +&#x27; See Pltff's Resp. to Rep.(D.E. #279), p.3. + +routine procedure when conducting psychological/psychiatric medical examinations of patients to require the patient to fill out a 10-page "Life History Questionnaire" and a 14-page "Patient Questionnaire." Both questionnaires request detailed background information regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like. Presumably Plaintiff will be asked these same questions two more times, first by defense counsel at deposition scheduled to take place shortly, and again by Dr. ■ **at the upcoming examination. Plaintiff's objection is that by having to answer these same questions about the same subject matter three separate times "would only serve to embarrass, humiliate, intimidate and further victimize Plaintiff." Pltff's Resp. (D.E. #254), p.6. Plaintiffs position is that she should only "be required to regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like, if at all, only one time," either during the "deposition of Plaintiff or through Dr. examination, but certainly not both." Id.** + +**Plaintiff cites no case law and independent research has uncovered none, to support her novel position that a Plaintiff who puts her mental, emotional and psychiatric state at issue can place a limitation on the number of times defense counsel or agents retained by him can inquire into areas relevant to these issues where the subject matter involved is "highly personal," "embarrassing," "sensitive," or otherwise "humiliating." Plaintiff is seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, "physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional** distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, (and] invasion of her privacy." 2 Based on the allegations made in Defendant's Reply,' Plaintiffs childhood was, to put it mildly, a difficult one, with numerous episodes of child abuse and sexual abuse, which in turn may of been the cause of Plaintiff's later engaging in numerous instances of substance abuse, self-mutilation, prostitution, aggravated assault, truancy, and the like. According to Defendant, in 2005 Plaintiffs mother filed a case committing for a Petition for Involuntary Assessment for substance abuse, stating in the accompanying file that has been diagnosed as "Bipoloar and Schizophrenic." + +Under these circumstances, where Plaintiff is seeking to recover medical expenses associated with these complex medical issues, full knowledge of Plaintiff's past and present medical, psychological, familial and social histories is essential. And while neither duplication nor embarrassment is desired, under the circumstances presented, where the number and scope of damages claimed are vast and Plaintiffs past history eventful, it may nonetheless be unavoidable. This is not to say that restrictions on the scope of questioning may never be put into effect. If, as the case progresses, Plaintiff can show that Defendant's invasive questioning + +2 Plaintiff, First Am. Compl., Counts I-XXX. + +(D.E. #273), pp.7-8, + +`As quoted in Defs Rep. (D.E. #273), p.8, from Palm Beach County Case #05MH1667. + +is being done in bad faith or for purposes of harassment, the Court may reconsider imposing limitations of the sort requested herein. At this point, however, the Court agrees with Defendant that to restrict the number of times defense counsel may ask Plaintiff personal and sensitive questions concerning some of the pivotal issues in this case, would work an injustice by preventing Defendant from being able to defend himself. + +The Court likewise rejects Plaintiff's request to limit the time for conducting the examination and any related testing to 6 hours. Dr..has filed an affidavit stating that he needs 6-8 hours to conduct the examination and related testing, and that anything less than that might result in compromising the test results! Considering the 31 counts alleged against Defendant, as well as Plaintiffs event-filled past, the amount of time sought does not appear unreasonable. Should the length of time prove draining, Plaintiff may take breaks as needed, of reasonable duration. Furthermore, Defense Counsel and Dr.. are hereby put on notice that while the Court has allowed the full 8 hours requested for the examination and related testing, should less time be needed, the Court expects less time will be taken, and in no event may the examination and related testing exceed a total of 8 hours. In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228) is GRANTED IN + +&#x27;Affidavit of Dr.. attached as Ex. "B" to Defendant's Rep. (D.E. #273).

ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF.

DONE AND ORDERED this September 4,2009, in , at West Palm Beach,

Florida.

QC 1---1-7 r oAnccer...---LINNEA R. JO ON UNITED STA S MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746899/EFTA02746899.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746899/EFTA02746899.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1bce74fc3598fae226914e8ad068949a3ab578ab --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746899/EFTA02746899.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,318 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746899.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 7877, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.22, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 409.6298522949219, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 409.6298522949219, + 121.17352294921875 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 121.17352294921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 286.41600000000005, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 336.8460388183594, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 336.8460388183594, + 406.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 286.41600000000005, + 406.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 83.844, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 350.1416320800781, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 350.1416320800781, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 83.844, + 102.06 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 283 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 308 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746899" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746905/EFTA02746905.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746905/EFTA02746905.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..38b9c2345d7481ea0bb84ba37154e16b52c24e2c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746905/EFTA02746905.md @@ -0,0 +1,317 @@ +## The Psychological Trauma Center + +a division of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc. + +Medical Director: Gilbert W. Kliman, M. D. + +2105 Divisadero St., San Francisco, CA 94115 + +Phone (415)292-7119 Fax (415) 749-2802 + +www.ervenchildpsychiatmcom + +Forensic Child Psychiatric Evaluations, Life Care Plans & Testimony + +Tape 1 + +Dr. Kliman w + +12.3.08 + +Transcription done by: K. Rios + +12.27.08 + +00:00:05 + +Dr. Kliman: What would you like me to call you? + +Dr. Kliman: let me just make a few announcements that my name is Dr. Gilbert Kliman. I introduced myself to you a few minutes ago and is there anybody else with us? + +a No. + +Dr. Kliman: This time did anybody come with you? + +a No. + +00:00:31 + +Dr. Kliman: It's now almost 10:30 in the morning and we're meeting at the Marriot Courtyard in a conference room and this meeting is staking place on December 3rd aid 2008. + +Dr. Kliman: I've already told you that I'm a psychiatrist and that your attorney asked me to meet with you; and I want to be sure it's clear that I am making a videotape and I have your written permission to do that. + +MN is fine. + +Okay. + +a Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: And you understand that I'll have to share this videotape with your attorney because this is a consultation that he's requested... + +Dr. Kliman: So that he can proceed with a case that you're bringing. You have a complaint that you're making in the legal system. + +Dr. Kliman: So that means the confidentiality of what we're discussing is very limited compared to what you'd expect in talking with a psychiatrist ordinarily. + +S Okay. + +00:02:02 + +Dr. Kliman: And this tape might even be shared with the attorney for the other side of the case you're bringing. It might possibly be used by a court. + +S Okay. + +Dr. Kliman: Do you have any questions about that? + +Ma. I guess not. No. + +Dr. Kliman: Well if you think of any you can interrupt at any time. + +Dr. Kliman: So first I need to get acquainted with you. Maybe you can tell me a little bit about yourself as a person. + +S Okay. My name is I recently got married...I come from... + +Dr. Kliman: There's a big sigh after that. + +S Yeah. I coae\_from a braken\_fainiLyahars. .from an abusive father and alcoholic mainly up with rn I'm 20 years old now, living with my husband. + +Dr. Kliman: How long ago did you many? + +00:03:18 + +Yes. + +Yes. + +Okay. + +About 3 months ago, going on to 3 months since we got married, which I'm very happy about. I go to school part time. + +Dr. Kliman: I want to congratulate you again. + +Dr. Kliman: I congratulated you when you walked in and told me you were recently married. + +S Yes thank you. I work full time, I go to school part time and that's pretty much about...about me. + +00:03:51 + +Dr. Kliman: That's your whole story? + +Dr. Kliman: I'm sure that's a good introduction. Now, first tell me about your recent marriage and how you met your husband and what can you tell me about him? + +a We met...we met through one of my ex-boyfriends. I saw him one time and then I found him on the internet called MySpace and we started talking for about a good couple months. I had went away to Alaska on a trip and then I came back around his birthday and we finally met in person again, for the second time and then we just started hanging out and we clicked. We dated on and off for about two and a half years and then we've always talked about you know, that we don't want to be with anyone else, that we love each other and we care about each other; that we just have that feeling of knowing that we can spend the rest our lives with each other. I was engaged for about a year, year and a half and then we had separated for a little while. + +00:05:06 + +Dr. Kliman: Why did you separate? + +Ole I was just going through a lot. I didn't know what I wanted in life. I didn't know who I was. I felt a sense of loosing control of who I am and what I've just been through and what I've gone and how I want my life to plan out for myself. I went through a stage of deep depression, anxiety. I just was unsure with whom I am, and then I started getting help and then... + +Dr. Kliman: Try to give me an idea how long ago this deep depression was? + +Dr. Kliman: When did it start? + +Thank you. + +Uh huh. + +It's been going on for a year, maybe a little bit longer. When I was in... + +SON I did not realize it until, I guess like when I was little. I've always just been, I just shut people out. I...this is hard for me. Just when I was young, I guess like when my parents got divorced, the abuse and like I just never knew how much pain there was. + +00:06:47 + +Dr. Kliman: You know I have some Kleenex here for you, if you need it. + +a Thanks. + +Dr. Kliman: So you were saying, you didn't realize how much pain there was? + +Dr. Kliman: Who is him? + +INS My husband. + +Dr. Kliman: Okay. + +00:07:30 + +a My now husband and like we was always there for me and like. + +Dr. Kliman: What is his first name again? + +Yeah. I mean I never really talked about any incidents that's ever happened in my life. I never thought that I needed to talk to anyone or like see why I get so angry or why I am the way I am with men; or people that I love that are close to me, or why I treat the ones that are close to me the way that I do. And then being with him, it brought out a lot of things. + +S + +Dr. Kliman: es Okay. + +VIM Yeah. He was always there for me and he used to treat him like crap and then we had broken up and I would just started to like...I just couldn't handle life anymore. I just started remembering a whole bunch of things that have happened to me and I tried to figure out why I am the way I am with men, especially someone that I love. + +Dr. Kliman: So you went into therapy to do that? To figure that out or did you start by yourself? + +No I needed help. I was... I've tried to commit suicide probably about five times. + +Dr. Kliman: When was the first time? + +Dr. Kliman: Do you remember how old you were? + +Dr. Kliman: How old were you then? + +ANS Probably like about 15. + +00:08:51 + +Dr. Kliman: Okay. + +Dr. Kliman: That was inside the garage, in the car with the motor running? + +S At my house, yes. I would have went through with it if my sister and my nephew wouldn't have walked in the door. + +Dr. Kliman: Both of them walked in? + +00:09:44 + +Dr. Kliman: How old are you at that point? + +S 18, 19. Getting ready to be 19. + +Dr. Kliman: And do you know what kind of pills those were? + +Dr. Kliman: Where did you get them? + +When my parents were getting a divorce, I tried to cut my wrists. + +Probably about 11 and then I tried sitting in the car in the garage and I had written a letter to my mom. + +And then... + +Yeah and when I saw my nephews face, I was like I can't. I can't leave, I wanted to see him grow up and I didn't know how my parents would feel; and then I swallowed a whole bunch of pills and then my friend was like I need to take you to the hospital and I wouldn't go, so she took me into the bathroom and made me throw up. + +No. I just took a whole bunch of pills stuck them in the bottle and just took them with me. + +My house. My parents house in the medicine cabinet; and then... + +S Uh huh... I prefer not to drive, I try not to drive. I rather take a taxi. + +Dr. Kliman: Does he usually go out with you when you go to clubs? + +0111111111 Eyes. + +00:37:53 + +Dr. Kliman: Now, I'd like to move on to another test, which I think overlaps this one some; I'm going to go to that one which is called the PDS. + +Dr. Kliman: And I see you took another one which is called the MMPI, but I'm gonna have to wait for that one to be scored so I can fully use it. + +S Okay. + +Dr. Kliman: Now you mentioned here, that you had a sexual assault by a stranger and what do you mean by that? + +MIS I was raped when I was 15. + +Dr. Kliman: And can you tell me about that? + +Dr. Kliman: Excuse me? + +Dr. Kliman: I don't need details but I do need certain aspects like who the person + +IP' Can I just give you the basics? I never talk about this...it was a graduation party. I was 15 years old. I had this guys that I just met which was my best friends boyfriends brother from Miami. He was up in West Palm...we were all hanging out we went to our friends graduation party. I was drinking beer, he was getting me the drinks which was my first mistake and then...we ended up in someone house spending the night... + +Okay. + +Do you need details? + +Do you need details? + +Dr. Kliman: Did you have a lapse of memory after one of those drinks? + +Dr. Kliman: Okay, so you couldn't remember anything until the next day? + +Dr. Kliman: So when you say he brought me the chinks and that was my first mistake... + +a Because you're never supposed to have anyone get you your drink you're supposed to get it yourself. + +Dr. Kliman: Well...do you have, have you been able to recover the memory of what happened? + +Dr. Kliman: You have? Okay...but you didn't remember anything until the next day. You saw marks on yourself... + +S I thought I had locked the bedroom door to where I was sleeping. + +00:41:00 + +Dr. Kliman: You thought you had lots of what...? + +I couldn't remember anything until the next day. I though it was a dream and then I woke up and I saw that I had marks on my body, and that's when I went to the doctors. + +Uh huh...I had no idea what happened. I don't even know what happened... + +Uh huh + +Ala I thought I had locked the door. + +Dr. Kliman: ■.. + +**Dr. Kliman: What did the doctor say about it?** + +**Of where the bedroom I was sleeping in. He came in, I couldn't move, I couldn't do anything, I couldn't talk...I was paralyzed. He came in and he ripped my pants off and then he proceeded to have intercourse with me and then he** ►eft. **I woke up the next day not knowing what happened. I was dressed, you know, wearing the clothes I went to bed with and then I got picked up from my friends house by mom. I went home and I continued to sleep because 1 was really tired and then...I thought I was having a bad dream and then I woke up and I looked at my legs and I saw the marks to where he had ripped my pants down; and then I told my mom and we immediately went to the doctor and got a rape kit. Done.** + +S That there was no semen inside. That she wanted me to get tested for any diseases and that to get blood work done to see if there's any type of drug that he used. But...she asked me if I wanted to press charges and went over, you know, everything that happens... told me that the marks, the, scratch marks would go away after a while and...she just really try to convince me to write a report. + +00:42:43 + +Dr. Kliman: She tried to get you to write a report? + +SIM Uh huh. + +Dr. Kliman: But you wouldn't? + +Uh-uh. + +Dr. Kliman: And this event is different than the event of sexual contact that you also mentioned when you were younger than IS, with somebody who was 5 or more years older? + +I was about 12. + +Dr. Kliman: You were 12? + +MEI I was about 12 years old when I first got molested. + +Dr. Kliman: By? + +MEM My best friends' brother than had gotten out of jail. He molested me and his sister and the two other friends that we were with. When we were sleeping...that we reported. + +Dr. Kliman: He molested how many children? + +A total of four. + +Dr. Kliman: That same night? + +Uh huh + +Dr. Kliman: In what manner did he do that? + +00:44:17 + +a He played with...while we were sleeping he rubbed our bottom area and our top area and our face and our hair and he never did anything more than that. + +Dr. Kliman: How did you know he did that? + +S Because we all woke up, but we just never told anyone. Until he finally raped his sister, that's when everything was laid out on the table and that's when everyone started speaking about it...and then we had to go to some safe house and get questioned. + +Dr. Kliman: How much time passed between the time that he played with your bottoms and tops and face and hair; and the time that he raped his sister? + +Dr. Kliman: How many times did he do this to you? + +Dr. Kliman: But he touched all those parts? + +Dr. Kliman: And that was at night? + +Dr. Kliman: But you remember it happened? + +Not even a month. + +Just one time. + +Uh huh. + +Yeah we had a sleep over and one of the girls was up...but she was still awake but she pretended she was sleeping and the rest of us were already knocked out. + +I remember being touched yes. But I thought it was just...I thought I was just dreaming I didn't know; and then when my friend told me, you know, this is what happened and she felt the same thing and when my other friend said this is what happened, you know, she felt like the same thing; and then when we found out that he raped his own sister, I mean it was pretty much obvious. And he would always make...we would always hangout her house would be the house to smoke pot or drink and whatnot and he would always be there and her parents were always working and they wouldn't come home until 6 o'clock at night and her brother was there; and he was the one always giving us pot, and stuff like that. He's always made, you know, smart comments but never really went through with anything or anything in that matter. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746905/EFTA02746905.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746905/EFTA02746905.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..236ca492bdfe7dff29e16f854c720414781e4327 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746905/EFTA02746905.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,358 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746905.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 12968, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.16, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "The Psychological Trauma Center", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 231.33599999999998, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 384.5216979980469, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 384.5216979980469, + 91.715087890625 + ], + [ + 231.33599999999998, + 91.715087890625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 97 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 86 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 68 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746905" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746914/EFTA02746914.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746914/EFTA02746914.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..70b18988c0544efa3bdaf0f93f30b6be5b8dec59 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746914/EFTA02746914.md @@ -0,0 +1,180 @@ +Date: 6/14/07 +Time: 15:34:18 + +PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT +Offense Report + +Page: 1 +Program: CMS301L + +Day Of Week : Thursday +Occur From Date: 4/12/01 +Dept Class : SEX OFFENSE - LEWD AND LASCIVIOUS +Street Number : COUNTER POINT ESTATES, PL 33411 +City : PALM BEACH, FL 33411 +Zone/division : Zone Three (3) (Resid. SR7/SR80) +Location Type : RES-SNGL FAMILY +Report Officer : ROBKIN, ROBERT +Supervisory Emp: PERVENECKI, DAVID 4/12/01 +Case Status Dt : 9/26/01 + +Report Date : 4/12/01 8:27 +Occur To Date : 4/12/01 + +\*\*\*\*\* C A S E M A N A G E M E N T I N F O R M A T I O N \*\*\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-01-001356 +Dept Class : SEX OFFENSE - LEWD AND LASCIVIOUS +Case Status : EXCEPTIONALLY CLEARED +Investigator : ROBKIN, R. +Case Status Dt : 9/26/01 + +\*\*\*ASSIGNMENT HISTORY\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-01-001356 +Investigator : ROBKIN, ROBERT +Assignment Date: 4/12/01 +Dept Unit : DETECTIVE +Supervisor : PERVENECKI, DAVID + +\*\*\*\*\* O F F E N S E R E P O R T # 1 \*\*\*\*\* +State Class : Sex Offenses - Forcible Rape +Attmpt/Committ : Committed +Weapon Type : Hands/Fists/Feet +Statute/Ordin : 800.04 (5C2 ) + +\*\*\*\*\* O F F E N S E R E P O R T # 2 \*\*\*\*\* +State Class : Sex Offenses - Forcible Rape +Attmpt/Committ : Committed +Weapon Type : Hands/Fists/Feet +Statute/Ordin : 800.04(4B) + +\*\*\*\*\* O F F E N S E P R I M A R Y R E L A T I O N S H I P S \*\*\*\*\* +Offense #: 001 Sex Offenses - Forcible Rape / 800.04 (5C2 ) +Name #...: 001 (SUSP) [REDACTED], KEVIN E. +Name #...: 001 (VICT) [REDACTED] +Offense #: 002 Sex Offenses - Forcible Rape / 800.04(4B) +Name #...: 001 (SUSP) HOEBEE, KEVIN E. + +\*\*\*\*\* P R O P E R T Y I N F O R M A T I O N # 1 \*\*\*\*\* +Category : PROP/EVIDENCE--NO VALUE +UCR Prop Type : MISCELLANEOUS +Name : MAXELL +Description : VIDEO TAPE HOME SAFE INTERVIEW +Value : 4.00 +Recovered Date : 4/12/01 8:27 +Recovery value : 4.00 +Quantity : 1 +Brand : T120 +Recovered by : DET. ROBKIN +Property type : MISCELLANEOUS + +\*\*\*\*\* P R O P E R T Y I N F O R M A T I O N # 2 \*\*\*\*\* +Category : PROP/EVIDENCE--NO VALUE +UCR Prop Type : MISCELLANEOUS +Description : PHOTO LINE UP DISPLAY OF SUBJ. +Value : 1.00 +Recovered Date : 4/12/01 8:27 +Quantity : +Recovered by : +Property type : + +![](_page_0_Picture_634.jpeg) + +Date: , 6/14/07 Time: 15:34:18 PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Offense Report Page: 2 Program: CMS301L + +Recovery value : 1.00 + +#### S USPECT 1-01-001356 /ARRESTEE INFO Prompt valid in: RMATION HOME, KEVIN - # 1 EDWARD + +Case Number : Street Number City County • PALM Birth Date . . Birth City . . Oper Lic No. Race Ethnic Origin Minimum Weight Juvenile . Hair Length . Complexion . . Body Marks #1 190 ADULT Short (Up to 1/2") Medium Tattoo right calf , FL 33411 Home Phone No. Maximum Age . CH, FL Birth Country FL United States Minimum Height Occupation . . Hair Color . . Eye Color . Build : United States : Male : 511 ARE WORKER : Blue SLIGHT + +Case Number Street Number City County Business Phone : Birth Country : Race Ethnic Origin PALM BEACH 561/000-0000 own omr Phone No. Birth Date . Oper Lie Cntry Sex Victim Type . : Unknown • Female : Juvenile + +#### V ICTIM 1-01-001356 I N ORMATION Prompt valid in: # 1 + +1-01-001356 (Continued) + +### OTHER PERS Case Number . : 1-01-001356 0N INFORM Last Name . . ATION # 1 au NI + +Person Type . Street Number City County • PALM BEACH Business Phone : Birth Country : Unknown Oper Lic No. Race Ethnic Origin Weight Occupation . Home P one No. Birth Date FL United States Sex Height 44 • Female 53 + +Original Report NARRATIVE # 1 Reported By: ROBKIN, ROBERT G. Entered By.: JARRETT, DAWN M. 4/12/01 4/17/01 + +CROSS REFERENCE TO CASE #01 0981, 01 1143, & 01 1314. + +WHILE THIS INVESTIGATOR WAS INVESTIGATING THE ABOVE CASE NUMBERS, WHICH INVOLVE SEXUAL ABUSE, I WAS GIVEN THE NAME OF THIS VICTIM AS POSSIBLY BEING A WITNESS TO THE OTHER CASES. ON 4/11/01 I CONTACTED THE VICTIM'S MOTHER, AND EXPLAINED TO HER THAT I + +Date: 6/14/07 +Time: 15:34:18 + +PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT +Offense Report + +Page: 3 +Program: CMS301L + +1-01-001356 (Continued) +WAS DOING THE ABOVE INVESTIGATIONS AND I BELIEVED THAT [REDACTED] MIGHT HAVE INFORMATION THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO THOSE INVESTIGATIONS. I REQUESTED THAT [REDACTED] AND [REDACTED] MEET WITH ME ON 4/12/01 AT 08:00 HOURS TO DISCUSS THE CASES, SHE AGREED. I HAD INFORMED [REDACTED] OF THE NATURE OF THE INVESTIGATIONS. ON 4/12/01 [REDACTED] AND [REDACTED] CAME TO THE POLICE STATION. AT THAT TIME THIS WRITER ASKED [REDACTED] IF SHE WAS AWARE OF WHY SHE WAS HERE? SHE STATED THAT SHE WAS. SHE THEN TOLD ME THAT SHE HAD ALSO BEEN A VICTIM OF KEVIN HOEBEE. [REDACTED] THEN STATED THAT ON THE NIGHT BEFORE, HER DAUGHTER HAD CONFIDED [REDACTED] TO HER THAT HOEBEE HAD IN FACT MOLESTED HER. THIS WAS ON THE SAME DATE AS THE OTHER VICTIMS WERE MOLESTED. I ASKED [REDACTED] IF THIS WAS TRUE AND SHE STATED THAT IT WAS AND THAT SHE WANTED TO PURSUE CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST HOEBEE, WHO SHE KNEW AS NICOLE HOEBEE'S BROTHER. I THEN ASKED [REDACTED] TO TELL ME WHAT HAPPENED. [REDACTED] (CASE #01 1143) AND [REDACTED] (CASE #01-0981), WHICH WAS AT THE HOME OF NICOLE HOEBEE, 1385 RYAN LANE. SHE WAS IN THE GARAGE WITH [REDACTED] AND [REDACTED] BOYFRIEND, JUST POUCHE (SIC). KEVIN HOEBEE WAS ALSO IN THE GARAGE AT THIS TIME. THE GARAGE HAS A BAR IN IT AND IT IS LIKE A REC ROOM. THE OTHER PEOPLE WERE SITTING AROUND THE BAR. [REDACTED] STATES THAT SHE WENT TO THE REAR OF THE GARAGE, WHICH IS LIKE A PARTY/LAUNDRY AREA TO GET SOME FOOD. THIS AREA IS BLOCKED OFF FROM THE FRONT OF THE GARAGE. WHILE SHE WAS AT THE PANTRY SHE WAS APPROACHED BY KEVIN HOEBEE. [REDACTED] STATES THAT HOEBEE THEN BEGAN TO TOUCH HER BREASTS AND VAGINAL AREA. [REDACTED] STATES THAT SHE WAS AFRAID AND TOLD HOEBEE TO STOP. HE CONTINUE TO ATTEMPT TO TOUCH HER AND GRAB HER. [REDACTED] WAS WEARING A PAIR OF CHEERLEADING SHORTS AND A T SHIRT AT THE TIME. SHE GOES ON TO STATE THAT SHE TOLD HOEBEE TO STOP SEVERAL TIMES AND HE DID STOP. HE THEN SHOWED [REDACTED] SOME MONEY AND ASKED HER TO "STRIP FOR ME AND I WILL GIVE YOU THIS". SHE REFUSED AND ATTEMPTED TO GO BACK TO WHERE THE OTHER PEOPLE WERE. [REDACTED] STATES THAT ONCE AGAIN HOEBEE GRABBED HER AND STARTED TO GROPE HER IN HER VAGINAL AREA AND HER BREASTS. SHE WAS ABLE TO GET AWAY AND REJOIN HER FRIENDS. SHE DID NOT SAY ANYTHING AT THIS TIME BECAUSE SHE WAS SCARED OF HOEBEE. + +LATER ON, ON THIS SAME DAY SHE AND THE OTHER GIRLS WENT TO BED ON THE LIVING ROOM FLOOR WHILE WATCHING "THE EXORCIST". SHE STATES THAT SHE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE OTHERS BEING MOLESTED BY HOEBEE UNTIL LATER ON. SHE STATES THAT SHE FELL ASLEEP WHILE WATCHING THE MOVIE AND DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT HOEBEE TOUCHED HER AT THAT TIME. THIS WAS FEW HOURS AFTER SHE WAS ATTACKED WHILE IN THE GARAGE. [REDACTED] CAN NOT GIVE ANY TIMES AT THIS TIME. THIS INVESTIGATOR ASKED [REDACTED] WHAT ROLE DID JUSTIN HAVE IN ANY OF THIS? [REDACTED] STATES THAT JUSTIN HAD BROUGHT HOEBEE TO THE HOUSE TO PICK UP SOMETHING. SHE FURTHER STATED THAT ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS JUSTIN TRIED TO GET HOEBEE TO LEAVE BUT HE REFUSED TO DO SO. THIS INVESTIGATOR WILL CONTACT HOME SAFE AND REQUEST THAT PAM KLINGER CONDUCT A INTERVIEW WITH THIS CHILD. MS. KLINGER HAS DONE THE INTERVIEWS WITH THE OTHER VICTIMS. + +THE ENTIRE PROCESS HAS BEEN EXPLAINED TO [REDACTED] AND [REDACTED] AND THEY ARE WILLING TO COOPERATE IN THIS INVESTIGATION. + +Date: .6/14/07 PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Page: 4 Time: 15:34:18 Offense Report Program: CMS301L + +1-01-001356 (Continued) + +ON 4/12/01 WHILE THE VICTIM WAS AT THE POLICE STATION THIS INVESTIGATOR SHOWED HER A PHOTO DISPLAY WHICH CONTAINED SIX PHOTOGRAPHS. WAS ABLE TO IDENTIFY THE PICTURE OF KEVIN HOEBEE AS THE SAME PERSON WHO HAD TOUCHED HER.AND HAD OFFERED HER MONEY TO TAKE HER CLOTHES OFF. IMMO AND HER MOTHER SIGNED AND DATED THIS DISPLAY WHICH WILL BE PLACED INTO PROPERTY/EVIDENCE. + +# INVESTIGATION TO CONTINUE: + +NARRATIVE # 2 SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT I Reported By: ROBKIN, ROBERT G. Entered By.: ROBKIN, ROBERT G. Reviewed.By: PERVENECKI, DAVID A. 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/20/01 + +# SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT + +DATE OF ORIGINAL REPORT CASE ft 04/12/01 01 1356 + +On 4/18/01 was presented to Home Safe for her interview in regards to the statements that she had made in reference to her being molested by the subject, Kevin Hoebee. + +Pam K1 nger who is the Case Worker conducted the interview with This interview was video taped and a copy has been provided for this investigator, this copy has been placed into PROPERTY/EVIDENCE. + +For details of this interview please refer to the tape and the PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT that is included in the Filing Packet for this case. + +Based on the information rovided b the victim in this statement and information provided by and this investigator is requesting warrants for Kevin Hoebee. + +This case will be referred to Jill Esty A/S/A for her review. + +PROBABLE CAUSE NARRATIVE # 3 Reported By: ROBKIN, ROBERT G. 4/19/01 Entered By.: JARRETT, DAWN M. 4/23/01 + +Det. R. G. Robkin 8119 4/19/01 + +THE VICTIM AND HER MOTHER CAME TO THE PALM BEACH POLICE STATION AT THE REQUEST OF THIS WRITER. THIS WAS IN REGARDS TO THE TAKING OF A REPORT OF SEXUAL ABUSE TO THE VICTIM WHICH OCCURRED JANUARY 2000 WHILE THE VICTIM WAS AT A SLUMBER PARTY AT THIS IS THE HOME OF NICOLE HOEBEE, SHE WAS HOSTING THIS PARTY FOR THE VICTIM AND TWO OTHER FRIENDS, + +Date:. 6/14/07 III'S PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Time: 15:34:18 Page: 5 Offense Report Program: CMS301L + +1-01-001356 (Continued) THE VICTIM STATES THAT SHE, NICOLE HOEBEE AND WERE ALL IN THE GARAGE AREA OF THE HOUSE, WHICH IS ALSO LIKE A BAR OR REC. ROOM. THEY WERE SITTING AROUND. THE DEFENDANT WHO IS NICOLE'S BROTHER CAME INTO THE GARAGE HE ES NOT LIVE AT THIS HOUSE. HE WAS WITH OUSTINS WHO IS BOYFRIEND. THE VICTIM STATS THAT SHE GOT HUNGRY AND WENT TO THE REAR OF THE GARAGE WHERE THERE IS A PANTRY WITH FOOD. WHILE SHE WAS THERE, HOEBEE APPROACHED HER. SHE WAS NOW ALONE WITH HOEBEE AND AWAY PROM THE REST OF THE GROUP. THE VICTIM STATES THAT HOEBEE CAME UP TO HER AND BEGAN TO GRAB AT HER BREASTS AND VAGINAL AREAS. SHE ATTEMPTED TO PUSH HIM AWAY AND MAKE HIM STOP. SHE ALSO TOLD HIM TO STOP. HOEBEE DID STOP BUT WHEN THE 12 YEAR OLD VICTIM BENT OVER TO GET SOMETHING, HOEBEE THEN REACHED BETWEEN HER LEGS AT LEAST TWICE WHILE SHE TRIED TO GET HIM TO STOP. THE VICTIM WAS ABLE TO BACK AWAY FROM HOEBEE. HE THEN REACHED INTO HIS POCKET AND PULLED OUT SOME MONEY AND ASKED THE VICTIM TO "STRIP" FOR HIM AND HE WOULD GIVE HER THE MONEY. THE VICTIM REFUSED AND THEN WAS ABLE TO GET AWAY AND GOT TO THE AREA WHERE HER FRIENDS WERE. ON 4/18/01 THE VICTIM WENT TO HOME SAFE AND WAS INTERVIEWED BY PAM KLINGER, WHO IS A CASE WORKER. THIS INTERVIEW WAS VIDEO TAPED. DURING THIS INTERVIEW THE VICTIM REPEATED THE INCIDENT AS STATED BEFORE, TO ME. + +BASED ON THE ST BY THE VICTIM AND INFORMATION PROVIDED BY BOTH ANDFallarillt THIS INVESTIGATOR IS FILING FOR WARRANTS R H E FOR THE ABOVE CHARGES. + +NARRATIVE # 4 SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT II Reported By: ROBKIN, ROBERT G. '9/18/01 Entered By.: ROBKIN, ROBERT G. 9/18/01 Reviewed By: PERVENECKI, DAVID A. 9/26/01 + +### SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT + +DATE OF ORIGINAL REPORT 04/12/01 CASE # 01 1356 + +This investigator met with A/S/A Jill Esty and discussed this case. The time between the reported events and the time that the victim made this report was to long to allow any evidence to be located or gathered. + +There is nothing to support the victim's claim. + +Because of the above reason the state will not file this case + +This case is EXCEPTIONALLY CLEARED. + +Det. R. G. Robkin #119 9/18/01 + +Orittr00000.4iit \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* # SUPPLEMENT Reported By: GEROULD, GLENN A. 3/27/03 Date: '6/14/07 PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Time: 15:34:18 Page: 6 Offense Report Program: CM2301L + +> 1-01-001356 (Continued) Entered By.: GEROULD, GLENN A. 3/27/03 + +The above listed evidence within these case numbers have been destroyed with appropriate entries made in the log book. + +• \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* END OP REPORT \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746914/EFTA02746914.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746914/EFTA02746914.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..035412f0cd74b3867c933a7c64b6d66b6213d762 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746914/EFTA02746914.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,404 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746914.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 12169, + "elapsed_seconds": 14.48, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_634.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Offense Report", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 183.6, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 403.9200000000001, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 403.9200000000001, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 183.6, + 110.16000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "S \nUSPECT \n1-01-001356 \n/ARRESTEE INFO \nPrompt valid in: \nRMATION \nHOME, KEVIN \n- # 1 \nEDWARD", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 45.9, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 559.98, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 559.98, + 214.64999999999998 + ], + [ + 45.9, + 214.64999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "V \nICTIM \n1-01-001356 \nI N \nORMATION \nPrompt valid in: \n# 1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 52.019999999999996, + 352.35 + ], + [ + 566.1, + 352.35 + ], + [ + 566.1, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 52.019999999999996, + 384.75 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OTHER PERS \nCase Number . : 1-01-001356 \n0N INFORM \nLast Name . . \nATION # 1\nau NI", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 58.14, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 572.22, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 572.22, + 491.9139099121094 + ], + [ + 58.14, + 491.9139099121094 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "INVESTIGATION TO CONTINUE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 113.22, + 251.10000000000002 + ], + [ + 285.9205322265625, + 251.10000000000002 + ], + [ + 285.9205322265625, + 271.35 + ], + [ + 113.22, + 271.35 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.86, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 384.4927978515625, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 384.4927978515625, + 340.2 + ], + [ + 247.86, + 340.2 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 490.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 386.769775390625, + 490.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 386.769775390625, + 506.25 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 506.25 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 469 + ], + [ + "Line", + 95 + ], + [ + "Text", + 65 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 433 + ], + [ + "Line", + 116 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 400 + ], + [ + "Line", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 481 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 74 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746914" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746914/_page_0_Picture_634.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746914/_page_0_Picture_634.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6e09684c2dac8d8aa2433910e9b81b5597e7ec0a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746914/_page_0_Picture_634.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:93f66d1595453d4c3e8c5b519712ad7a0b30a79af09a9108f71bad60abe9ac91 +size 9959 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746920/EFTA02746920.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746920/EFTA02746920.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..715c072aa6201d7ffea5900a0697471be0a20da6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746920/EFTA02746920.md @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@ +Date: 6/14/07 [REDACTED] PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Page: 1 +Time: 15:34:20 Offense Report Program: CMS301L + +Day Of Week : Monday Report Date : 3/20/00 13:53 +Occur From Date: 3/20/00 13:30 Occur To Date : 3/20/00 13:30 +Dept Class : SEX OFFENSE - LEWD AND LASCIVIOUS +Street Name : [REDACTED] +City : PALM BEACH, FL 33411 +Zone/division : Zone Three (3) (Resid. SR7/SR80) +Location Type : HIGHWAY/ROADWAY Case Status : OPEN / NOT ACTIVE +Report Officer : [REDACTED], CHARLES +Supervisory Emp: PERVENECKI, DAVID 3/21/00 +Case Status Dt : 5/03/00 + +\*\*\*\*\* C A S E [REDACTED] N T I N F O R M A T I O N \*\*\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-00-000937 +Dept Class : SEX OFFENSE - LEWD AND LASCIVIOUS +Case Status : OPEN / NOT ACTIVE Case Status Dt : 5/03/00 +Investigator : FANELLI, F. + +\*\*\*ASSIGNMENT HISTORY\*\*\* +Case Number : 1-00-000937 Dept Unit : DETECTIVE +Investigator : FANELLI, [REDACTED] Supervisor : PERVENECKI, DAVID +Assignment Date: 3/21/00 + +\*\*\*\*\* O F F E N S E R E P O R T # 1 \*\*\*\*\* +State Class : Sex Offenses - Forcible Rape +Attempt/Committ : Committed +Statute/Ordin : 800.04 (4 ) \_110A\_COMMITS LEWD/LA +Weapon Type : Hands/Fists/Feet + +\*\*\*\*\* O F F E N S E P R I M A R Y R E L A T I O N S H I P S \*\*\*\*\* +Offense #: 001 Sex Offenses - Forcible Rape / 800.04 (4 ) \_110A\_COMMITS +Name #...: 001 (SUSP) UNKNOWN, +Name #...: 001 (VICT) [REDACTED] +Name #...: 002 (VICT) [REDACTED] +Name #...: 003 (VICT) [REDACTED] + +\*\*\*\*\* V E H I C L E I N F O R M A T I O N # 1 \*\*\*\*\* +Case number : 1-00-000937 License Country: Unknown +Category : OTHER (ARSON/CRIM.MISC) +Vehicle type : LOCALLY STOLEN MOTOR VEHICLE +State Veh Type : AUTO Style : FOUR DOOR +Color - Top : [REDACTED] Color - Bottom : Gold +Stolen value : 1 + +\*\*\*\*\* S U S P E C T / A R R E S T E E I N F O R M A T I O N - # 1 \*\* +Case Number : 1-00-000937 Prompt valid in: UNKNOWN, +City : PALM BEACH, FL 33411 +Home Phone No. : 561/000-0000 Business Phone : 561/000-0000 +Race : [REDACTED] Sex : Male +Ethnic Origin : [REDACTED] Complexion : Fair +Build : MEDIUM Body Marks #1 : Pierced right ear +Shirt : WHT T SHIRT Pants : NA + +\*\*\*\*\* V I C T I M I N F O R M A T I O N - # 1 \* +Case Number : 1-00-000937 Prompt valid in: [REDACTED] + +![](_page_0_Picture_69.jpeg) + +statements. to witness 11!!!!!!sed. All three victims stated that they were riding bicycles on Thornbank at Dalmany. A w/m in aor gold 4 door vehicle stopped to ask diredtions. All three victims noticed that the w/m was exposing himself and fondling himself in front of them. They fled and went to 1308 Elmbank Way and called 911. Sgt. Pervenecki, Capt. Stepnowski and I checked the area for the suspect with negative finding. father and mother present during eve permission to me via landline fore statements. Prosecution affidavit's signed + +Date: 6/14/07 Time: 15:34:20 IIIIIIPALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Offense Report + +Page: 2 Program: CHS301L + +Street Number : City County Business Phone : Birth Country : Race Ethnic Origin PALM BEACH 561/000-0000 Unknown Home Phone No. Birth Date . . : 12 Oper Lic Cntry : Unknown Sex Female Victim Type : Juvenile + +VICTIM I N Case Number : 1-00-000937 Street Number : City County • PALM BEACH Business Phone : 561/000-0000 Birth Country : Unknown Race Ethnic Origin FORMATION - # Prompt valid in: 2 Home Phone No. : Birth Date . . : 12 Oper Lic Cntry : OWn Sex • Female Victim Type . : Juvenile + +VICTIM Case Number : 1-00-0 Street Number : City County Business Phone : Birth Country : Race Ethnic Origin PALM BEACH 561/000-0000 Unknown INFORMATION - # 3 Prompt valid in: Home Phone No. : Birth Date . . : Oper Lic Cntry Un wn Sex • Female Victim Type . : Juvenile + +Original Report NARRATIVE # 1 Reported By: NW CHARLES Entered By.: , DAWN M. K. 3/20/00 3/21/00 + +1-00-000937 (Continued) + +,,,kr.rnetra\*,0 \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* # 2 SUPPLEMENT Reported By: FANELLI, V. Entered By.: FANELLI, V. Reviewed By: PERVENECK,,WID A. 5/02/00 5/02/00 5/03/00 + +On 032400, I met with victims Ihad previously parents of the children and had permission school. and at spoken to each of the to speak to them at + +Data; 6/.14/07 PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Page: 3 Time: 15:34:20 Offense Report Program: CMS301L + +1-00-000937 (Continued) + +stated that she saw the w/m described in the report "wiggling his thing around" in the vehicle. She told me that this meant the man had his penis in his hand. She told me that she could not identify the man if she saw him again. She had nothing to add about the description of the car or suspect. + +told me that she did not see the suspect's penis. She was told by but did not personally see him touching himself. She told me t at the vehicle had a "ying/yang• decal on the vehicle's rear window and a"disco ball" (mirrored ball) hanging from the rear view mirror. stated that she could identify the suspect if she saw him age n. + +Ilater talked with victim at her home on IIIIIIPstated that he never saw the suspects penis and th!!!!!!!!Fly didn't get a good look at him. She gave asimilar physical description but stated that she probably could not identify him again if she saw him. She stated that she could identify the vehicle. + +Iprepared aBOLO with the limited information I had. I also BOLO'd the area for three consecutive nights. + +This vehicle has been seen one other time since the reported incident. To date, there have been no other sightings of this vehicle. + +This case inactive until further leads become available. + +END OF REPORT \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746920/EFTA02746920.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746920/EFTA02746920.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..91001b9506a9fbbb7ab316c3d7ef8b3d37c1db8c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746920/EFTA02746920.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,128 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746920.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 5610, + "elapsed_seconds": 10.28, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_69.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 62 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 427 + ], + [ + "Line", + 92 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 288 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746920" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746920/_page_0_Picture_69.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746920/_page_0_Picture_69.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e448fcf8a945887c88614a258cffc930894f7b9b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746920/_page_0_Picture_69.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:eb23e71eeb0aa0c06728c72e72916331cd46725568c0e01ccd5dc264271f8cc0 +size 9926 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746923/EFTA02746923.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746923/EFTA02746923.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e6157a19718b9fba4817dad4ecd582c12be1169f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746923/EFTA02746923.md @@ -0,0 +1,110 @@ +8452 + +06/14/07 + +END# + +PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PAGE 1 +OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 05081486 + +DISPOSITION: ZOLU +DIVISION: ROAD PATROL + +TRESPASSING NON CRIME CODE: 9551 DATE: 06/25/05 SATURDAY +ZONE: W51 GRID: WEL6 DEPUTY ID.: 4500 ASSIST: TIME D 2026 A 2025 C 2052 +OCCURRED BETWEEN DATE: 06/25/05, 1700 HOURS AND DATE: 06/25/05, 2040 HOURS +EXCEPTION TYPE: +INCIDENT LOCATION: [REDACTED] STATE: FL ZIP: [REDACTED] +CITY: WELLINGTON NO. OFFENSES: 00 NO. OFFENDERS: UK NO. VEH. STOLEN: 0 NO. PREM. ENTERED: 0 +LOCATION: SPECIALTY STORE +NO. VICTIMS: 00 NO. ARRESTED: 0 FORCED ENTRY: 0 + +COMPLAINANT + +SEX: F RACE: [REDACTED] +BUSINESS NAME ADDRESS: [REDACTED] +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 +OTHER MILTON W [REDACTED] DOB: 06/27/1982 +SEX: M RACE: B HT: 508 WT: 110 HR: BLACK EYE: BROWN +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 310 W 14TH ST RIVIERA BE FL 33404 +HOME PHONE: 561 000-0000 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 +OTHER GEVON G DOBY DOB: 06/24/1979 +SEX: M RACE: B HT: 510 WT: 155 HR: BLACK EYE: [REDACTED] +RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: 348 W 14 ST RIVIERA FL 33404 +HOME PHONE: 561 000-0000 +BUSINESS PHONE: 561 000-0000 + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +.. + +EFTA02746923 + +![](_page_0_Picture_57.jpeg) + +045106/14/07 ENDO PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF' SOFFICE PAGE 2 . OFFENSE REPORT CASE NO. 05081486 + +OBSERVE APPROXIMATELY FOUR SECURITY OFFICERS FOLLOWING A BLACK MALE WITH A RED SHIRT. ONE OF THE SECURITY OFFICERS ADVISED THAT THIS WAS THE INDIVIDUAL INVOLVED. I ALSO NOTICED THERE WAS A HISPANIC FEMALE FOLLOWING THE SECURITY OFFICERS, WHO WAS LATER IDENTIFIED AS YOLANDA, THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINANT. + +ONCE I MADE CONTACT WITH THE BLACK HALE, I ADVISED HIM WHAT WAS GOING ON. HE IDENTIFIED HIMSELF AS ON DORY. HE ADVISED THAT HIS COUSIN WAS MAKING STATEMENTS TOWARDS AND THAT HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON. HE SAID HE HAD TO GO CATCH A RIDE. I ADVISED HIM THAT I WAS CONDUCTING AN INVESTIGATION, A POSSIBLE CRIME, AND THAT HE WAS BEING DETAINED FOR INTERVIEW PURPOSES AND THAT IF HE NEEDED A RIDE, WE WOULD ARRANGE TRANSPORTATION BY CALLING SOMEONE OR OTHER MEANS. GEVON THEN ADVISSED THAT HIS COUSIN WAS THE ONE THAT MADE ALL THE STATEMENTS AND HE WAS JUST TRYING TO LEAVE. + +ITHEN MADE CONTACT WITH THE COMPLAINANT AGAIN, - WHO ADVISED THAT THE PERSON WE HAD DETAINED, WHO WAS GEVON, WAS ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED IN THE INCIDENT. APPROXIMATELY FIVE TO 10 MINUTES LATER, ANOTHER BLACK MALE CAME DOWN THE ESCALATOR FROM THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE JC PENNEY STORE AND WAS LATER IDENTIFIED AS MILTON WHICH IS GEVON'S COUSIN. BOTH INDIVIDUALS WERE GIVEN TRESPASS WARNINGS FOR APPROXIMATELY A YEAR FROM WELLINGTON ppli MALL SECURITY OFFICER HARRIS. DOCUMENTATION WAS FILLED OUT ON TH INFORMATION BY THE SECURITY OFFICER AND THEY WERE ADVISED BY SECURITY IN FRONT OF MYSELF THAT THEY WERE GIVEN A TRESPASS WARNING. I ADVISED THEM THAT A REPORT WILL BE ISSUED AND GENERATED THROUGH THE PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE REFERENCE TO A TRESPASS WARNING AND IF THEY RETURNED AFTER AND THEY WERE FOUND ON THE PROPERTY, THEY WOULD BE ARRES ED FOR TRESPASS AFTER WARNING. + +WAS GIVEN A CASE INFORMATION SHEET AS WELL AS WELLINGTON MALL SECURITY WAS GIVEN A CASE NUMBER IN REFERENCE TO THIS INC/DENT. + +NO FURTHER ACTION TAKEN. D/S J. HINOJOSA 4500/062705 I233/DM \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746923/EFTA02746923.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746923/EFTA02746923.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2ae0a57f8ae57b63067f4bc553af91fb924a4a53 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746923/EFTA02746923.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,90 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746923.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 3413, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.49, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_57.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 53 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 400 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746923" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746923/_page_0_Picture_57.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746923/_page_0_Picture_57.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e1328a15149c8af7247ba53d0ec510cfde1c9833 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746923/_page_0_Picture_57.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:cd5b7aa5f2bf59408ca2ab2c0f4946997e5b185fe5c51b89e43aab3bf1ca5116 +size 9440 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/EFTA02746925.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/EFTA02746925.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ffe20ddb7457a5d0ec3bd2721f45b78affe35ee6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/EFTA02746925.md @@ -0,0 +1,309 @@ +NAME + +[Redacted Name] + +DOB: + +PROGRESS NOTES + +5/30/08 + +Pt has been having auxility symptoms, lead (pushed the face away and restabilize). She broke up & her body found a mouth ago. For the past week, he's been trying to restart her which is her auxility. I'll change lexapro to persuasing gd & s/c explained. Rapid to R.P. for therapy. RTC w 2 months. + +[Signature] + +6/3/08 pt had s/c force persuasion such as BI symptoms. She decided to go back on lexapro since it did help her with the past restart lexapro song gd PLU w 5 months. + +[Signature] + +11/25/08 pt's dong well w her auxility symptoms. She reported having symptoms of anger and displacing that, feeling out of relativest members. No s/c from Meds. we discussed that she needs to discuss it & therapist to travel raping skells to express her anger. Continue lexapro. Flu w BN. + +[Signature] + +5/2/09 + +No show + +[Signature] + +"F" + +Name [Redacted] + +PROGRESS NOTES + +11/7/2007 + +PT is seen today because she has been having GI symptoms such as mouse and dorsalis after she started taking rodeft. PT DIC caused ask. She is alway back taking to her ex-backlinet. I'm always rodeft to lexopro up to laung ad. Flu in 4 wks. + +[Signature] + +11/30/07 + +W=117 + +H=5-2 + +BMI=21.4 + +PT broke up in her backlinet yesterday she's been calmer, not too full or ackingle. need was unproved recepted the 1st wkst. No 3/8 former wkst. PT used caused only three source she started in wkst. ~~RO~~ I'll continue in lexopro + tracedone. Flu in 2 months. + +[Signature] + +1/22/08 + +PT Caused. + +[Signature] + +2/13/08 PT has been sing better. she's sleeping w/in the need for tracedone. she reported no episode of anxiety and anger every 2 weeks until she is trying to work on behaviorally. PT again is back in her backlinet. I'll continue lexopro 2 weeks. Flu in 3 wkst. + +[Signature] + +NABIL KARROUM, M.D., P.A. +WELLINGTON PROFESSIONAL CENT. +10111 W. FOREST HILL BLVD. SUITE 369 +WELLINGTON, FL 33414 + +![](_page_2_Picture_17.jpeg) + +PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION + +IDENTIFYING DATA + +NAME: [REDACTED] SSN: [ ] - [ ] - [ ] DO: [REDACTED] + +PRESENTING PROBLEM + +Pt is a 19 yr old w/ 3/15 who reported would symptoms such as episodes of depression indicated by voguing speech, lungs, dawn foam and father excellent dyspneuric mood, poor normalized minimum consciousness and surreal ideas with such as certain her stern an arouse, loga etc. she took law o.d. of pits about 2 weeks ago she also well burens we her stern is a property for lighter. Pt brake up is her depression 3 months ago after being together for 2 weeks she had been lungs for the breakup and + +AMILY AND PASH PSYCHIATRIC HISTORY + +negatives to contact him because of her lungs. she has no previous hospitalization. she was in the past is cynicalty and tolerant (2M.) she was sexually merited by her friend's father at age 13 and was raped at age 15. she + +SOCIAL AND DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY + +finished H.S. and is currently working for a Bend Estate Procurement for the Bask H.H. Pt had a 23 yr old girls friend and when she was 11 yr. father has stabilized mother father has stabilized. + +SUBSTANTIAL ABUSE HISTORY + +Pt had been sworting Paulabis and dirty basis. she began at age 12-13 yr. she also abused escriber occasionally + +MEDICAL HISTORY + +None + +MEDICATIONS + +x alax o. 25mg Cector Birth Control + +ALTERGIES + +[REDACTED] + +RISK FACTORS OF SUICIDE + +- Attective disorders. + Schizophrenia. + Alcoholism. + Ages between 7 and 29. + Healthy support system unavailable. + Unemployment. + Recent death in family. + +- No friends to talk to. + Premeditated suicide. + Recent suicidal attempt. + Marital estrangement. + Impulsive lethal suicidal attempt. + Previous suicidal attempt. + Current suicidal ideas. + +- Chronic physical illness. + Family history of suicide. + Divorced / widowed. + Previous history of violence. + Other: + +NABIL KARROLIM MD PA + +PAGE 25/15 + +MENTAL STATUS DEXAM + +| APPEARANCE | | BEHAVIOR | | | | +|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| Healthy
Groomed
Anxious.
Paranoid. | Sickly
Unkempt
Depressed
Apathetic | Limp
Poised
Attentive
Playful | Relaxed
Comfortable
Guarded
Seductive | Tense
Angry
Evasive
Other: _____ | At ease
Cooperative
Hostile | + +| SPEECH | | RETARDED | | +|------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| Relaxed
Combative | Hyperactive
Gestures | Tense
Tics | Retarded
Stereotype | + +| MOOD | | SPEECH | | +|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| Productive
Pressured | Spontaneous
Slurred | Slow
Loud | Monotonous
Stuttered | + +| AFFECT | | DEREALIZATION | | +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| Euthymic
Expansive | Depressed
Angry | Hesitant
Dysarthric | Rapid
Other: _____ | + +| PERCEPTION | | DEREALIZATION | | +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| Full Range
Blunted | Restricted
Labile | Constricted
Appropriate | Inappropriate
Euphoric | + +| Depersonalization: | | Hallucinations: | | +|---------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| +| Yes No | Auditory Visual Olfactory Gustatory | Yes No | Yes No | + +| Content: | | Content: | | +|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| Logical
Circumstantial | Directed
Incoherent | Loose
Relevant | Poverty
Tangential | + +| THOUGHT PROCESS | | THOUGHT CONTENT | | +|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------| +| Logical
Circumstantial | Directed
Incoherent | Poverty
Tangential | Racing
Avoidant | + +| Obsessions: | | Delusions: | | +|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| +| Yes No | Yes No | Yes No | Yes No | +| Suicidal Ideas: Yes No | | Content: Not at this time. | | +| Homicidal Ideas: Yes No | | Content: _____ | | +| Other: _____ | | Other: _____ | | + +| COGNITIVE FUNCTION | | DIAGNOSIS | | +|------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------| +| Poor Good | Poor Good | Poor Good | Poor Good | +| Yes No | Person Time Place | Poor Good | Poor Good | + +| DIAGNOSIS | | +|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------| +| AXIS I: (2) Major Dep. Rep. Mod.
(2) Commonly absent to severe | AXIS III: 799.9
AXIS VI: _____ | +| AXIS II: 799.9 A10 APSD | AXIS V: Current 60 | + +| RECOMMENDATION | | +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| +| (1) we disposed to optimism. I should start out all collect 35mg and trithate up to 10mg as (2) 3/8 of collect explained. pt agreed to D/C creditable. (3) ATC us 3-4 weeks. | | +| [Signature]
Psychiatrist's Signature | | + +NABIL KARROLIM MD PA + +PAGE 06/16 + +NAME: + +DOB: + +| Date | Name of Medication | Dose | Frequency | Amount | Refill | +|----------|--------------------|-------|-------------|--------|--------| +| 10/26/07 | Zogloff | 5 mg | it gd | 60 | X | +| | TRazedone | 10 mg | it ls | 30 | X | +| 11/7/07 | Lexapro sample | 10 mg | up to it gd | 40 mks | X | +| 11/30/07 | Lexapro | 20 mg | it gd | 30 | 1 | +| | TRazedone | 10 mg | it ls | 30 | 1 | +| 2/13/08 | Lexapro | 8 mg | it gd | 30 | 2 | +| 5/30/08 | Pekeula (2) | 20 mg | it gd | 28 | X | +| | | 20 mg | it gd | 30 | X | +| 6/3/08 | Lexapro | 20 mg | it gd | 30 | 4 | +| | TRazedone | 10 mg | it ls | 30 | 4 | +| 11/25/08 | Lexapro | 20 mg | it gd | 30 | 5 | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | +| | | | | | | + +- PBCC. + +![](_page_5_Picture_39.jpeg) + +19410 + +- Trice +Birth control. +no pregnancy. + +Mood sweeping, +Tearying + +![](_page_5_Diagram_43.jpeg) + +- Break up 3 months ago. + +angry + +- depressed. +- O.D. an pills +2 weeks ago. +- SIB: cutting +Barring + +- cymbalta past Tuesday. +- can't concentrate +- Allergy: cector +- no medicals + +- 10-11 40 +cutting + +port divorce + +- 13410 molested + +- 15410. raped. + +- saw a psychiatrist. + +3 psychiatrists. + +- zoloff + +- therapy. + +- cannabis darleq. + +- eastasy. + +- kawak +O. 25 mg + +- real estate company. + +DR. Scaulon. +PCD. +Sabotat past +Tuesday. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/EFTA02746925.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/EFTA02746925.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8afdc4cfd51946049b77c2d3b5936d1ecb1967c0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/EFTA02746925.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,302 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 22035, + "elapsed_seconds": 147.34, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_2_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_39.jpeg", + "_page_5_Diagram_43.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "PROGRESS NOTES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 235.62, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.00800000000004, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.00800000000004, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 235.62, + 87.48 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROGRESS NOTES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.8, + 52.650000000000006 + ], + [ + 382.5, + 52.650000000000006 + ], + [ + 382.5, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 244.8, + 72.9 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MENTAL STATUS DEXAM", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 15.3, + 36.45 + ], + [ + 599.76, + 36.45 + ], + [ + 599.76, + 60.75 + ], + [ + 15.3, + 60.75 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 56 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "ListGroup", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "Form", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 50 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 8 + ], + [ + "Diagram", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746925" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/_page_2_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/_page_2_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fb6a66a64943a893c42d6db44ce558e0c4f30785 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/_page_2_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0653a033b471380bd6e841d1854894005d3b23e86e558fc5372376fff035505b +size 2778 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/_page_5_Diagram_43.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/_page_5_Diagram_43.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e01f482a7805a379f0fe57f4f3e53880b554cdcc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/_page_5_Diagram_43.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:377cfce182350d3c3c70e8b56d70bfcd4a3145d9648f7987d16d4d897e111ddb +size 32036 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/_page_5_Picture_39.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/_page_5_Picture_39.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9a875deda4a8d53e6f4a8e5e330c91c085d8724f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746925/_page_5_Picture_39.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d5d7e9f18981d8bc49c5ee8488bde9b2f67e3c727b4c7602433e3366d51b74ab +size 3707 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746931/EFTA02746931.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746931/EFTA02746931.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aba6a8f775d295196503987e572195d0784ea77e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746931/EFTA02746931.md @@ -0,0 +1,118 @@ +Jane Doe 43 + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. Ell M.D. + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W. ill M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W. ill M.D. lam over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. +- 3. L also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; AffiliateProfessor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and + +&" + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. + +Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. 1, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe #3 against Jeffrey Epstein make + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe #3 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +1L She further alleges that she suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiffs counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. 1Climan of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventative Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc, of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kliman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. laiman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #3. + +14. Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories note that she had seen atherapist in Palm Beach County at age 11. She believes that she had previously been diagnosed with depression following her parents' divorce. (Page 7) She reports that she has suffered from anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, guilt, self-blame, feelings of being degraded, feeling unattractive, adiminished sense of femininity, fluctuations in weight and appetite, sexual intimacy problems, flashbacks, disturbing memories, stress, irritability, feelings of being isolated and trapped, diminished trust, social problems, problems in personal relationships, indecisiveness, low energy, lower ambition and initiative, headaches, back pain, feels stress (particularly around men), obsessive thoughts, problems concentrating, alcohol abuse, corruption of morals and values, loss of innocence, and cries a lot. (Page 8) + +15. She reported that she had seen Mr. Epstein four times from the fall of her sophomore year in high school through her senior year, but had only had physical contact with him once, had voluntarily returned on three other occasions with other girls, and spent 30-45 minutes alone with the defendant, but remained on the premises of the estate for four or five hours. (Page 11, interrogatories) + +16. Plaintiff notes that she has recently married and is "very happy about that." She met her husband on Myspace.com. She reported that they dated for 2 12/ years, that it was a good relationship, that they click, and feel that they can spend the rest of their life with each other. (Page 1, Dr. 1Climart's contemporaneous notes). + +17. Plaintiff reports that she had a deep depression that lasted for a year and that she shut people out since the time of her parents' divorce at age 11. (Page 1, Dr. Klimants contemp notes) + +18. She reports that she attempted suicide five times, beginning at age 11, after her parents got adivorce, and attempted suicide at age 15 by running acar in aclosed garage. She reports she would have died if her sister and nephew hadn't walked in. On subsequent attempts, she swallowed "a whole bunch of pills" and afriend made her throw up. This was at age 18 or 19. She reports she took "a huge handful." (Page 1, Dr. Klirnan's con temp notes) + +19. Plaintiff reports that she had seen many psychologists and finally found one that she liked, Rhonda Perdue. (Page 1, con temp notes) + +20. She notes that she has been taking 25 mg of Lexapro prescribed by Dr. Nabel Karrum, MD, for the last year. (Page 2, contemp notes) + +21. She notes that her father was verbally abusive to her and physically abusive with her sister and her mother. On one occasion, she reports, her father took all of her mother's clothes and threw them in the front yard of her house while she (the mother) was taking ashower and that she and her sister had to leave the house with her mother. She reports that between ages 9 and 11 her father was "heavy in drinking and had a gun in the house." She reports that her mother "didn't want us there."(Page Z contemp notes) + +22. Plaintiff reports that she was the individual who found out that the father was cheating on her mother with awoman who lived around the corner. The divorce was final when she was 13 years of age. They lived in the parental home for two years, until she was 15, and then moved. The father was in the picture "here and there." He remarried, divorced, had a girlfriend, went to AA to gethelp, and was sober for four years. She wondered if he was doing pills or marijuana. Her parents are back together and she reports they have been living together for the pasteight months. She reports her father suffers from depression and that while depressed he is distant, has angry spells, and She "worrieswhat • - • Ile snaps sgmudi." (Suggesting very unstable home, fear and apprehension, concern for mother's safety.) She reports that she deals with this by "I try to keep all this out of my mind, try not to think about it..." The most distressing event was when she was awakened and had to leave the house with her mother and sister because of the father's threatening behavior. (Page 2, contemp note) She reports thatin school "I was mean" and that she would "not put up with crap or teasing." She notes that "I got teased about wearing the same jeans or shoes" and she was teased about her weight. "I was a little chunky." (Pages 2 and 3, contemp notes) + +23. Plaintiff notes that two of her friends had seen Mr. Epstein previously. tal and had done it and said it went smoothly and I didn't have to worry about anything. Don't ask, don't tell. So I felt comfortable with \$200 for ahalf hour." (Page 1, interview part 2) + +24. She reports that she lied about her age. "1 was told to tell him I was 19, which ape said we had to lie about our age." rlaintiff reportsthat after her initial corftict with Mr. Epsteinabe went back to bi\_ng other people there. "Not to do anything. I went back three times with two different girls and an/ (Page 3, interview part 2) + +25. Plaintiff reports that she had Sold anotherwommella "he might D2W,11 you b..g.t just move away and wear whatever." (Page 5, interview part 2) Although plaintiff reports she had no further physical contact with Mr. Epstein, she did voluntarily return to his estate on three separate occasions with other girls. + +26. Plaintiff reports that she is taking ph enterrnine 5 mg, an agent that can cause anxiety. (Page I, part 3) + +27. She began drinkingat age j. (Page 2, part 3) She reports that she has driven while intoxicated. (Page Z part 3) She reports that she has had blackouts "I quite afew times have been unable to remember things others say I did... that I peed on the floor in the middle of the night, that I passed out in the club, my friend's cousin drove us home, which I don't remember, and I got into an argument with somebody and I don't remember that I had an argument at the dub or that we stopped and ate on the way home and I don't remember, or falling down stain, ripping my pants." (Page 2, part 3) + +28. The plaintiff reports that she was raped at age 15. and never told anyone about it. It occurred at a graduation party. She was drinking. "I couldn't remember anything until the next day." "I saw marks on myself." "I thought I had locked the door where I was sleeping. Later I remembered I was unable to move, paralyzed, and he ripped my clothes off and raped me." "When I saw the marks and my mom took me to adoctor, who gave me arape kit, found no semen, told me the scratch marks would go away, and tried to get me to write a report, but I wouldn't." (Page 3, part 3) + +29. Plaintiff reports she was also molestedat age12 b.y bet bestfriend's brother, who had just gotten out of jail. (Page 3, part 3) "He molested four children that night by playing with our bottoms, tops, face, and hair. We all woke up and never said anything until he raped his sister amonth later. He touched me just that one night on asleepover. One of the girls was up and pretended she was sleeping. I remember being touched, but thought I was dreaming until my friend told me the same thing and we found out he raped his own sister so then it was obvious." "That house was ahouse where there was drinking and potsmoking." "lig gave zs p\_121 and made smart comments. He was in his mid 20's, about to turn 25." Plaintiff thus reports marijuana g2gat a\$e 12. She notes that in fourth grade she took her first pot when she was 10 years of age. She reports that they pressed charges concerning the molestation. (Page 3, part 3) + +30. She notes that Kevin theboy who molested her, subsequently raped his sister. "I consider what Kevin did to me was arape." (Page 3, part 3) + +31. In an interview with Dr. Minaret plaintiff reported that she has been married for three months and that she is very happy about it and going to school part time. (Page 2, tape 1) + +32. Plaintiff reports that she was depressed over her parents' divorce, that she had attemptedsuicideon five occasions the firstit approximately11 when she tied to cut her wrists. At age 15, she tried to asphyxiate herself with a running automobile in a garage. + +The next attempt was with an overdose of pills at I8 or 19. (Page 5, tape 1) + +33. She reported that her fatherwas very Abusive t. her, (Page 6, tape 1) more verbal with her, but physical with her sister and her mother. (Page 6, tape 1) "They would argue about anything he wanted, anything that was on his mind. I remember one time she was in the shower and he took all her clothes and threw them in the front yard; and they were just having ascreaming match and we were already in bed and I remember my mom had to wake us up and tell us to getdressed and put our shoes on; and we would have to walk all the way to alittle 7-11 in front of our development to get picked up because my d would justis outQf control, and we would have to stay at my aunt's house and sleep there and stay there until things got better. ThismustothaPPenerl elIMPoany limesand ..." Plaintiff was ages 9 to 11 when this would happen. (Page 7, tape 1) + +34. She noted that her father cheated on her mother and that she was the one who found out about it and that after reporting it, the parents divorced when she was 13. She had aturbulentfamily life. The thing that stands out as most distressing of the things that they had considered was being awakened and having to go to store. (Page 8, tape 1) + +35. She reports that she had afew core friends, but "I didn't have too many friends" (Page 10) and that as achild she was teased about her clothes (Page 10) and her weight. + +36. Plaintiff reports, "Rightpow r\_m okay. Lin. contentwith what I have l≥ **look forward f4 right now, and that is trying to have a good life for me and my husband; trying to have a sense of normalcy." (Page 2, tape 3)** + +**37. In her interview with Dr. Kaman (as well as her sworn statement to the police on 11/07/2005), Plaintiff claims that she was told all she would have to do was to give a massage and that Epstein would ask her to get "comfortable", that's it. This conflicts with the Probable Cause Affidavit (page 9) and the Palm Beach Police Incident Report (page 37) where she indicates she was told that a massage would be expected, possibly naked and possibly some touching. Jn addition, Tape 2, page 6-14, she claims Epstein touched her breasts and fondled her nipples, and that he touched her vagina. However, this statement conflicts with what she told police in her sworn statement where she indicated Epstein never touched her breasts or her vagina. See sworn statement at pp. 4, 7 and 8. The Plaintiffs medical records may show that the Plaintiff has a propensity to lie when it comes to explaining events allegedly involving Epstein and/or her past.** + +**38. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion** the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +39. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, alist of all medical, clinical, school, andwork records known to the attorney in the case. + +40. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation thathe will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "available important and relevant documentswhichaattbdag deliberatelysvithheld fromim." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, which we have=lead gr that Ityettave stated would ordinarily he part of medical opinion formation art the topics concerning, which 91AC inputis reauested." We request the same. + +41. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization. including the type and character of the alleged assault, plaintiff's knowledge or risk, and key alleged victim's variables such as demographics; psychological reactions at the time of the trauma; reactions post event; previous psychiatric or psychological history; previous history of victimization; current or previous psychological difficulties; general personality dynamics and coping style; sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. h is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +42. It is also essential to understand the plaintiff's level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +43. Knowledge of plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +44. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to + +him afull and complete record that includes plaintiff's medical, legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological arid psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. These, in essence, are the same or similar records that plaintiff's expert witness (Dr. Kliman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and such other similar information be made available to us so that we are able to conduct a proper and meaningful examination of the plaintiff and what, if any contribution the above alleged event may have on her current and/or future health and adjustment. + +Respectfully submitted, + +Richard C. W. + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida + +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746931/EFTA02746931.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746931/EFTA02746931.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..52259e9f4006804c82ce55c4b04a04643561f210 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746931/EFTA02746931.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,502 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746931.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 13, + "chars": 19382, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.84, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. Ell M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 453.92791748046875, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 453.92791748046875, + 217.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 217.07999999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 209 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 296 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 290 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 326 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 340 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 372 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 381 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 368 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 378 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 355 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 342 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 306 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 261 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746931" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746944/EFTA02746944.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746944/EFTA02746944.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2616d1167df3227644d3fd7c38db8adfdb2416a3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746944/EFTA02746944.md @@ -0,0 +1,233 @@ +**CURRICULUM VITAE** + +![]()“H” + +# TABLE OF CONTENTS + +| PRESENT POSITION | 2 | +|---------------------------------------------|----------| +| EDUCATION | 2 | +| MEDICAL LICENSE | 2 | +| CERTIFICATION | 3 | +| ADDITIONAL TRAINING | 3 | +| SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS , PAST AND PRESENT | 3 | +| COMMITTEES | 3 | +| HONORS | 4 | +| PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES | 4 | +| REVIEWER | 5 | +| BOOK REVIEWS | 5 | +| PUBLICATIONS | 5 | +| ABSTRACTS | 7 | +| PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL | MEETINGS | +| AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES | 9 | +| MEDIA | 12 | + +NAME: Ryan Chaloner Winton IS M.D. + +DATE OF BIRTH: May 10, 1976 + +PLACE OF BIRTH: Titusville, Florida + +MARITAL STATUS: Single + +#### PRESENT POSITION: + +07/2008 — Present Psychiatrist Richard C. W. MD, PA 2500 West Lake ary Blvd; Ste 219 Lake Mary, FL 32746 Ph: 407-322-8199 + +03/01/2008 - 07/31/2011 Affiliate Instructor University of South Florida Department of Psychiatry + +03/03/09 - Assistant Professor of Psychiatry 06/30/12 University of Central Florida College of Medicine Department of Medical Education + +#### EDUCATION: + +1995 -1999 Johns M. University Baltimore,Maryland Double Major - Biology and Psychology B.A. Degree, graduated Phi Beta Kappa with honors + +1999- 2003 Georgetown University School of Medicine Washington, DC M.D. Degree + +2003 -2004 Internal Medicine Internship Sinai Hospital of Baltimore/Johns Baltimore, Maryland + +2004 -2007 Residen Johns Hospital Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Baltimore, Maryland + +2007 - 2008 Fellow in Forensic Psychiatry Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio + +#### MEDICAL LICENSE: + +2004Maryland — D62746 - Inactive 2007 Ohio — 89483 - Inactive 2007 Florida — ME99792 + +#### CERTIFICATION: + +2008Diplomate, American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, #58286 + +### ADDITIONAL TRAINING: + +2006Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Chicago, IL + +2007Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Miami Beach, FL + +2008Florida Forensic Examiner Training University of South Florida College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, Ft. Lauderdale, FL + +# SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT: + +Member, Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine + +Member, American Psychiatric Association + +Member, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +Member, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +Member, American Medical Association + +Member, Ohio Psychiatric Association + +Member, Florida Psychiatric Society + +Member, Southern Psychiatric Association + +Member, The American College of Psychiatrists + +#### COMMITTEES: + +2005- 2007 Public Relations Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +- 2007 Legislative Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society - 2007 Disaster Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society - 2007 Resident and Fellows Committee, Maryland Psychiatry Society - present Psychopharmacology Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law - present Research Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law - 2009 Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, American Psychiatric Association - 2009 Member, New Member Task Force, Southern Psychiatric Association + +# HONORS: + +1999Phi Beta Kappa, Johns University 2004"Superior performance rating, 1st-year residency, by Sinai Hospital Department of Medicine's Clinical Competency and Evaluation Committee 2005Dorfman Award, presented by The Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine for best review article of the year for Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3):195-202, May-June 2005. 2005Rappeport Fellowship, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +# PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES: + +2008Written testimony on Elder Abuse in support of bills HB873/S8501 Criminal Law — Crimes Against the Elderly or Persons with a Disability— Penalties, presented to Maryland House Judicia Committee for Delegate Kramer, District 19 County, Maryland. Hearing arc 4. 2009Central Florida Psychiatric Society representative to Florida Psychiatric Society's Council Meeting, January 10. + +2009Testified before the Florida Senate Banking and Insurance Committee (SB 354) on Mental Health Parity. March 17. + +#### REVIEWER: + +-Archives of Internal Medicine -Clinical Geriatrics -Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness -European Psychiatry -Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience -Nature Clinical Practice Neurology -Neurology India -Psychosomatics -Social Science & Medicine -World Journal of Surgical Oncology + +# BOOK REVIEWS: + +- 1. Clark MR and Treisman GJ: Pain and Depression: An Interdisciplinary, Patient-Centered Approach. Psychosomatics, July-August 2006, 47(4)365-366. + +# PUBLICATIONS: + +- 1. ■RCW, **Dunlap PK, IIIIRCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid disease and abnormal thyroid function tests in patients with eating disorders and depression. The Journal of the Florida Medical Association, Inc. 82(3)187-192, 1995.** +- **2. RCW, MRCW: Anxiety and Endocrine Disease. In Popkin, MK, Seminars in Clinical Neuropsychiatry 4(2)72-83, 1998. RCW, 'EDE, Hall RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts. Psychosomatics 40:(1)18-27, 1999.** +- **4. RCW,. RCW: Fee-Splitting: Ethical Implications and Principles for Practice Management. Transference 20(2)14, 1999.** +- **5. RCW,. RCW: Long-term Psychological and Neurological Complications of Lindane Poisoning. Psychosomatics 40(6)513-517, 1999.** +- **6. II RCW, MRCW: False Allegations: The Role of the Forensic Psychiatrist. Journal of Psychiatric Practice 7(5)343-346, September 2001.** +- **7. RCW, RCW: Principles of Physician Recruiting. In Handbook of Mental** + +Health Administration and Management; Reid WH and Silver S (ed.): Brunner-Routledge, New York, NY; Chapter 34:440-448, 2003. + +- 'WOW, Chapman M: Identifying Geriatric Patients at Risk for Suicide and Depression. Clinical Geriatrics 11(10)36-44, October 2003. +- 9. ERCW, IIIRCW: Establishing Liaison Before Disaster Strikes. http://www.psych.org/disasterpsych/pdfs/apadisasterhandbk.pdf; Chapter 2:12-19. 2004. +- 10. IIIRCW, IIRCW, Chapman MJ: Emotional and Psychiatric Effects of Weapons of Mass Destruction in First Responders. In: Biotenotism: Psychological and Public Health Interventions; Ursano RJ, Norwood AE & Fullerton CS (eds). Cambridge University Press:Cambridge; Chapter 14:250-273; 2004. +- 11. .RCW, Appleby B, RCW: Atypical Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome Presenting as Fever of nknown Origin in the Elderly. Southern Medical Journal 1(98) 114-117, January 2005. +- 12. ■ROW, **im RCW, Chapman MJ: Exploitation of the Elderly: Undue Influence as aForm of E der Abuse. Clinical Geriatrics 13(2)28-36, February 2005.** +- **13. .RCW, ERCW, Chapman MJ: Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3)195-202, May-June 2005.** +- **14. Southern RCW: Abuse of Supraphysiologic Doses of Anabolic Steroids. outhern Me ical Journal, 98(5)550-555, May 2005.** +- **15. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Complications of Anabolic Steroid Abuse. Psychosomatics, 46(4)285-290, July-August 2005.** +- **16. RCW, IERCW, Chapman MJ: Medical and Psychiatric Casualties caused by Conventional and Radiological (Dirty) Bombs. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(3):242-248, May-June 2006.** +- **17. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Postconcussional Syndrome: A Work in Progress (Response to Dr. al Letter to the Editor. Psychosomatics, 47(3):272, May-June 2006.** +- **18. IN RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome in the Elderly: Diagnostic Criteria, Incidence, Risk Factors, Pathophysiology, and Treatment. (CME article) Clinical Geriatrics, 14(5):39-46, 2006. 19.. RCW,** ■ **RCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part I: Medical and Psychiatric Complications of Bombings and Biological, Chemical, and Nuclear Attacks. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(8):26-35, 2006.** +- **20. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part** + +- 2: Posttraumatic Stress, Acute Stress, and Affective Disorders. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(9):17-24, 2006. +- 21. IS RCM. RCW: Malingering of PTSD: forensic and diagnostic considerations, characteristics of malingerers and clinical presentations. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(6):525-535, 2006. +- 22. RCW,S RCW: A Profile of Pedophilia: Definition, Characteristics of Offenders, Recidivism, Treatment Outcomes, and Forensic Issues. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 82(4):457-471, 2007. +- 23. ROW,. RCW: Detection of Malingered PTSD: An Overview of Clinical, Psychometric, and Physiological Assessment: Where Do We Stand? Journal of Forensic Sciences, 52(3):717-725, 2007. +- 24. III RCW, Macvaugh GS ill, Merideth J: Commentary: Delving Further Into Liability for Psychotherapy Supervision. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 35(2):196-9, 2007. +- 25. **RCW,. RCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Effects of Terrorism: Medical and Societal Implications of Recent Attacks. In: Focus on Terrorism, Vol. 9; Linden EV (ed), Nova Science:New York; Chapter 11, Publication date: 3rd Quarter, 2007.** +- **26.** ■RCW: **The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak Model of virus properties on system capacity and function: A lesson for future viral epidemics. American Journal of Disaster Medicine, 2(5):270-276, 2007 27..** ■RCW, **Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part !— Causative Agents, Presentation, and Differential Diagnosis. Clinical Geriatrics, 15(12):18-25, 2007. 28..** ■RCW, **Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part II — Pathophysiology, Drug Interactions, and Treatment. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(1):24-28, 2008** +- **29. RCW, Resnick PJ: Psychotherapy Malpractice: New Pitfalls. Journal of Psychiatric Practice, 14(2):119-121, 2008 30.. ROW,. RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part I — Occurrence in Forensic/Criminal Situations, Partner Relationships, and Sexual Offenses. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(5):27-32, 2008** +- **31. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part II — Occurrence in Hospitals and PharmacologicaUBehavioral Treatment of Agitation, Aggression and Violence. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(6):28-32, 2008. 32RCW,** ■ **RCW, Chapman MJ. The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak: lessons hospitals and physicians can apply to future viral epidemics. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2008Sep-Oct;30(5):446-52. Epub 2008 Jul 23** + +- 33.. RCW, SH: Drug Diversion Program Rights. Legal Digest. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 36(4):579-580, 2008 34.. RCW, ■ **RCW, Chapman MJ: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Interventions. Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009** +- **35. Paul RK, Lockey C,Ill RCW, Bursztajn H: Practice Management: Managing Risks When Practicing in Three-Party Care Settings. Psychiatrictimes.com, 26(2), Feb. 3, 2009.** +- **36. MI RCW,Ill RCW, Chapman MJ: Letter to the Editor response re: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Interventions) Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009), Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(4):17-21, 2009.** +- **37. Hall RCW,M RCW, Myers W, Chapman M: Testamentary Capacity: History, Physicians' Role, Requirements, and Why Wills are Challenged. Clinical Geriatrics, in press.** + +**• Boldface indicates Ryan C. W.I., MD** + +# **ABSTRACTS:** + +- **1. RCW, Hazard SC, RCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid Disease in Eating Disordered and Depressed Patients. -146th Annual Meeting, American Psychiatric Association, May 25, 1993, San Francisco, CA, P.1.57 (Poster Session).** +- **2. RCW, III DE,. RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts: Evaluation of Suicide Risk in a Time of Managed Care.** + - **Psychiatric Practice and Managed Care, American Psychiatric Association, Vol. 5, No. 5, P 12, Sept-Oct 1999. IIERCW, Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J: The Role of Morphine in the Development of Acute Stress Disorder and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Severe Burn Injury.** + - **413' Annual Meeting, American Burn Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009.** +- **4. Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J, RCW: Ped-traumatic Heart Rate as a Predictor of Acute Stress Disorder and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Burn Injury.** + +- 41' Annual Meeting, American Bum Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009. + +• Boldface indicates Ryan C. W. MD PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES: + +- 1. RCW, Hazard SC, Dunlap PK,Ill RCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid disease and abnormal function tests in patients with eating disorders and depression. Poster Session - American Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, May 25, 1993 +- 2. **RCW,. RCW: Management of Hostage Situations. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **3. RCW, RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective — Part I. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999 RCW, RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective - Part II. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **5. RCW, RCW, DE: Impact of Managed Care on Suicide Risk Assessment. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 1999 Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD, October 15, 1999** +- **6. RCW, RCW: Ethical Issues in Managed Care. American Psychiatric Association, 1999 Ethics Workshop, Washington, DC, November 3, 1999** +- **7. RCW, RCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Disaster Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **8. RCW, RCW: Bloterrorism Dealing with Medical and Psychiatric Consequences of Victims and Responders. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **9. RCW, RCW: Psychiatric Consequences of Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Disaster. Rocky Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 29, 2000** +- **10. RCW, RCW: Suicide in an Era of HMO's and Managed Care. Rocky** + +Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 30, 2000 + +- 11. INRCW, IMIRCW: Psychological Response to Disasters and Terrorism. International Society of Political Psychology, 23rd Annual Scientific Meeting, Seattle, WA, July 4, 2000 +- 12. IMIRCW, CW: Biological Warfare Attack Scenarios, Response to Terrorist Attacks, and Sources of Conflict. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000 +- 13. IIIRCW, RCW, Chapman M: Workplace Violence. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000 +- 14. IIIRCW, IIIIRCW: Biological Warfare: Attack Scenarios and Public Health Issues. Grand Rounds, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, December 8, 2000 +- 15. MIRCW, Bioterrorism: A Short History of Biowarfare & Analysis of the Threat. Grand Rounds, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, August 15, 2001 +- 16. IIIRCW, RCW: Situational Suicide. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, FL, September 13, 2001 +- 17. IIIRCW, IIIRCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, FL, September 14, 2001 +- 18. IIIRCW, EIRCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Assault with Anthrax as a Biological Weapon. -Florida Psychiatric Society, Fall Meeting, Coconut Grove, FL, November 4, 2001 -Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002 +- 19. .RCW: Smallpox. Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002 +- 20. IN RCW, RCW: Psychopharmacology Forensic Risk and Clinical Practice: Things the clinician must know. Apopka Community Health Center, Apopka, FL, March 13, 2002 +- 21. **RCW, IIIRCW: Overview of Terrorism and Bioterrorism. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002** +- **22. R0W, .RCW: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002** +- **23. RCW, RCW: Smallpox as aBiological Weapon. Orlando Police** + +Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002 + +- 24. **RCW, RCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Southern Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, Loews Ventana Canyon Resort, Tucson, AZ, October 3, 2002** +- **25. III ROW". RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Mandatory Madness, Halifax Medical Center, Daytona USA, Daytona Beach, FL, December 14, 2002** +- **26. IIRCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003** +- **27. III RCW RCW: Medical and Psychological Sequelae of Bombings: Implications for First Responders and Critical Government Staff. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003** +- **28. In RCW, ROW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Florida Psychiatric Society Spring Meeting, Orlando, FL, April 5, 2003** +- **29. RCW,IIRCW: Terrorist Bombings: Medical and Psychiatric Impact. Southern Psychiatric Association's Annual Meeting, Nashville, TN, October 11, 2003 30.. RCW, RCW: Terrorism, Bombings, and Psychiatric Casualties. University of Florida, Department of Psychiatry, Visiting Professor Program, November 7, 2003** +- **31. RCW, IIRCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Tampa Bay Psychiatric Society, Tampa, FL, sponsored by Pfizer, January 29, 2004** +- **32. RCW, RCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004** +- **33. IIIRCW, RCW: Medical and Psychiatric Casualties of Terrorist Bombings. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004** +- **34. mil MIE RCW, RCW: Medical and Psychological Consequences of Bombings. Grand Rounds, Tulane University, Department of Psychiatry, New Orleans, LA, January 28, 2005** +- **35.** ■RCW, **RCW: Psychological Sequelae of Weapons of Mass Destruction on First Responders. South Central Center for Publi He Ith Preparedness/Alabama Department of Public Health, AL, Satellite Conference, May 6, 2005** +- **36. III RCW, RCW: Medical and Psychological Aspects of Terrorist Bombings. Grand Rounds, Sinai Hospital, Department of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, June 2, 2005** + +- 37. Hall RCW, RCW: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationship: The New Realities. (Abbreviated version) Forensic Psychiatry Fellows and Residents, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, January 24, 2006 +- 38. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationship: The New Realities. Presidential Address. Southern Psychiatric Association, Baltimore, MD, September 30, 2006. +- 39. III RCW, RCW: When the System is Overwhelmed: Protecting the Provider during Biodisaster. Satellite Conference, University of Alabama Birmingham South Central Center for Public Health Preparedness/Alab m Department of Public Health/Tulane University School of Public Health, AL, February 27, 2007. 40.. RCW: Testamentary Capacity from Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole . Grand Rounds, Case Western Reserve School of Medicine, Cleveland,., March 28, 2008 +- 41. RCW, RCW, Rundell JR, Winstead DK: Psychiatrists' Role in Disaster Management: Lessons Learned. Course 14, American Psychiatric Association, Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, May 3, 2008. +- 42. III RCW: Violence in the Elderly: Forensic and Treatment Concerns. Forensic Forum, Florida Psychiatric Society, ChampionsGate, FL, September 20, 2008. +- 43. II.RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole Southern Psychiatric Association, September 25, 2008. +- 44. RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole NM. Forensic Psychiatry Program, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, January 29, 2009. +- 45. RCW, InRCW: Domestic Violence as Portrayed in Film A Realistic Appraisal? Florida Psychiatric Society, St. Petersburg Beach, FL, March 20, 2009. +- 46. a RCW, Silberman E, Preven D, Weissman S (chairperson): Indications for the Use of Combined Talking Therapy and Pharmacotherapy and How to Teach in Residency. Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, CW16, American Psychiatric Association, San Francisco, CA, May 19, 2009. + +Boldface indicates Ryan C. W.I., MD + +# MEDIA: + +- 1. Time Magazine, Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome, May 16, 2005 +- 2. Reach MD Radio, Pedophilia. April 25, 2007 + +- 3. MD Consult. Doug . Joint telephone interview with Richard C. W.E, MD, Pedophilia. May 2, 2007 +- 4. The Korean Broadcasting System, KBS Special, Pedophilia. March 11, 2008. +- 5. Tony Pipitone, WKMG-TV Channel 6, Mothers Who Kill Their Children. October 28, 2008. +- 6. J. L. . Orlando Medical News. Cyberchondriacs. November 13, 2008. +- 7. Fox 35 News, Orlando. Forensic Implications of Anthony case. December 11, 2008. +- 8. Fox 35 News, Orlando. The Anthony Case: DNA Evidence. December 12, 2008. +- 9. Jessica , WKMG-TV Channel 6. The Anthony Case: Baker Act and Stressors. January 23, 2009. +- 10. Nam Nae Won and Jihyun Song. Korea Educational Broadcasting System. Pedophilia. March 30, 2009. +- 11. Keith Landry, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress and Financial Strain. June 15, 2009. +- 12. Heidi Hatch, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress on Families. June 16, 2009. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746944/EFTA02746944.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746944/EFTA02746944.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..10c8e85b30b5ec90e1ddd95361fbfa79f9e4f3f0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746944/EFTA02746944.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,965 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746944.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 23120, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.23, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "CURRICULUM VITAE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 367.812, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 367.812, + 376.65000000000003 + ], + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 376.65000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TABLE OF CONTENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.188, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 369.70867919921875, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 369.70867919921875, + 91.53 + ], + [ + 244.188, + 91.53 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRESENT POSITION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.38, + 208.98 + ], + [ + 186.82908630371094, + 208.98 + ], + [ + 186.82908630371094, + 221.20550537109375 + ], + [ + 70.38, + 221.20550537109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EDUCATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.05199999999999, + 410.6700000000001 + ], + [ + 147.2059783935547, + 410.6700000000001 + ], + [ + 147.2059783935547, + 422.6279296875 + ], + [ + 74.05199999999999, + 422.6279296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDICAL LICENSE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.156, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 177.45364379882812, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 177.45364379882812, + 107.9764404296875 + ], + [ + 69.156, + 107.9764404296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.156, + 171.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 162.8167266845703, + 171.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 162.8167266845703, + 183.919189453125 + ], + [ + 69.156, + 183.919189453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ADDITIONAL TRAINING:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.156, + 234.09 + ], + [ + 201.7060546875, + 234.09 + ], + [ + 201.7060546875, + 246.716552734375 + ], + [ + 69.156, + 246.716552734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.216, + 396.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 330.8305358886719, + 396.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 330.8305358886719, + 410.04119873046875 + ], + [ + 72.216, + 410.04119873046875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COMMITTEES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.5, + 648.0 + ], + [ + 158.20864868164062, + 648.0 + ], + [ + 158.20864868164062, + 660.1604614257812 + ], + [ + 76.5, + 660.1604614257812 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "HONORS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.44, + 332.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 132.98846435546875, + 332.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 132.98846435546875, + 346.9040222167969 + ], + [ + 73.44, + 346.9040222167969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 77.112, + 545.94 + ], + [ + 236.74090576171875, + 545.94 + ], + [ + 236.74090576171875, + 559.8240966796875 + ], + [ + 77.112, + 559.8240966796875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REVIEWER:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.768, + 147.42000000000002 + ], + [ + 138.21380615234375, + 147.42000000000002 + ], + [ + 138.21380615234375, + 159.3255615234375 + ], + [ + 69.768, + 159.3255615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BOOK REVIEWS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.216, + 323.19 + ], + [ + 168.4824981689453, + 323.19 + ], + [ + 168.4824981689453, + 336.086181640625 + ], + [ + 72.216, + 336.086181640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PUBLICATIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.216, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 164.7501220703125, + 399.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 164.7501220703125, + 412.2003173828125 + ], + [ + 72.216, + 412.2003173828125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ABSTRACTS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 392.04 + ], + [ + 149.98309326171875, + 392.04 + ], + [ + 149.98309326171875, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 405.0 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDIA:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.784, + 633.4200000000001 + ], + [ + 124.03753662109375, + 633.4200000000001 + ], + [ + 124.03753662109375, + 646.2803649902344 + ], + [ + 80.784, + 646.2803649902344 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "Line", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "TableOfContents", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 199 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 178 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 241 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 264 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 364 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 372 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 333 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 398 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 353 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 368 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 350 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 176 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746944" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746958/EFTA02746958.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746958/EFTA02746958.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5ec08fe77e7492c865cf19a562d20702a7719aa4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746958/EFTA02746958.md @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## Defendant Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion To Compel Plaintiff, Jane Doe #3's Independent Medical Examination Pursuant to Rule 35 + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his attorneys, and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 35 and other applicable rules, hereby moves this Court for an order directing that the Plaintiff, Jane Doe #3 (case #80232), submit to acompulsory psychological/psychiatric medical examination (a/k/a independent medical examination) by Ryan ■, **M.D. of Richard M.D. at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luther and Coleman, LLP. located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401. In support, Epstein states:** + +### **Background** + +**1. This Court entered an order relating to the IME of CMA, another Plaintiff seeking similar damages against Epstein. See Exhibit "A" Given the damages claimed in this matter, it is clear that Plaintiff has placed her medical condition at issue** + +and that an IME is required. Despite that fact and the fact that discovery has been consolidated, Defendant is required to file a Rule 35 Motion seeking an IME. Thus, the undersigned believes that an Omnibus Order is required relative to all Plaintiffs' IMEs in that each claim similar damages and raise similar claims. Such an order would conserve judicial resources and require that the attorneys only negotiate dates and times for said IMEs. + +2. Nonetheless, this particular Motion, pursuant to Rule 35, only addresses the IME of Jane Doe #3. + +3. Plaintiff has alleged in her action that Defendant sexually battered her and, as aresult, Plaintiff seeks millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, "confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries." See Second Amended Complaint. (DE 62) Plaintiff, Jane Doe #3, also claims Epstein "intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Jane Doe, creating reasonable fear of imminent peril. . . [and] [a]s a proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane Doe, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages." Id. at 1[1117-21. Jane Doe #3 further alleges that she suffered ". . .mental or sexual injury. . .that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. . .[and]. . .Jane Doe has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain." Id. at ¶1125-27. + +4. In addition, Jane Doe #3 informed her expert, Gilbert Kliman, M.D that she comes from a broken family and had an abusive, alcoholic father. She further states that she has been depressed for a long time, has been in therapy with various doctors + +and has tried to commit suicide several times; the first time occurring when she tried to cut her wrists at age eleven and at age fifteen (15) she was reped by her best friend's boyfriend's brother. See Exhibit "B" At age twelve, Jane Doe #3 informed Dr. Kliman that she was molested at a friend's house by Kevin Hoebee. This incident was also reported to the Palm Beach Police Department. See Exhibit "C" — all pre-Epstein. See Supra + +5. In addition, on March 20, 2000, Jane Doe #3 was confronted by amale while riding her bike with friends and the male exposed and fondled himself in front of her and the others. See Exhibit "D" On June 25, 2005, Jane Doe #3 contacted police in reference to unknown males making obscene comments to her at her booth at the Wellington Mall. See Exhibit "E" + +6. According to the notes of Dr. Korroum, one of Jane Doe #3's many doctors, she reports cutting herself at the age of ten or eleven, being molested at age thirteen, raped at age fifteen, using cannabis daily, using ecstasy, taking Zoloft, Xanax, and Lexapro, breaking up with her boyfriend and her parents divorce. However not once does she mention the alleged abuse by Epstein as described in her complaint. See Exhibit "F" + +7. Furthermore, it is important for this court to review the detailed Affidavit of Dr. ■ **attached hereto in that it delineates for the Court several experiences visited upon Jane Doe #3 which may have caused the physical, emotional and psychological trauma she claims occurred at the hands of Epstein. See Affidavit of Dr.** ■ **Attached hereto as Exhibit "G"** + +8. Based upon the foregoing, it is clear that Jane Doe #3 has placed her physical, emotional, medical and psychological conditions at issue. Therefore, an IME is warranted. Without an IME, Epstein would be severely prejudiced. The Affidavit of Dr. Illiclearly sets out the IME and scope of the examination that must be conducted. See also, the curriculum vitae of Dr. Ryan. See Exhibit "H" The examination is set to occur at the undersigned office on November 9, 10, 11, 12, or 13, 2009 (whichever is more convenient for Plaintiff or whichever date the court so orders). Plaintiff has not provided dates for the IME; however, out of abundance of caution and to comply with the applicable rule, Defendant has, on aunilateral basis, set same pending the outcome of this Motion. Obviously, if the date noticed is not sufficient or agreeable, the undersigned will renotice same for one of the four dates suggested; however, this Court must order same to occur. + +9. As this court is well aware, Plaintiff and Defendant are required to complete discovery under the Court's trial schedule. It is not the undersigned's intention to require the court additional work; however, it is imperative that discovery be timely scheduled and completed. The court's assistance is needed in this instance as to the IME. + +10. Based upon the foregoing, an IME of Plaintiff must occur in order to address her claims and the damages she seeks to recover. The IME is expected to last between 6-8 hours, and the scope of same is set forth in the Affidavit of Dr. III + +11. Pursuant to Rule 35, Fed.R.Civ.Pro, a party may move for an examination by a qualified examiner if the Plaintiffs mental/emotional and/or psychological status is at issue in a case. + +12. Defendant would be severely prejudiced unless he is able to have an examination conducted by a qualified examiner separate and apart from any psychologist/psychiatrist or similar behavioral health provider who may have or may ultimately see the Plaintiff and testify in court. + +13. Defendant's counsel has retained the services of Richard, M.D. and Ryan., M.D., of M.D., P.A. located at 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd., #219 Lake Mary, FL 32746. Ryan., M.D., will be performing the examination. Dr. Ryan Halls' specialties include forensic psychiatry, general psychiatry and medical psychiatry. See Exhibit attached outlining Ryan i, M.D.'s qualifications and the scope of the examination which he intends and is required to conduct in order to render a report. See also Affidavit of Ryan C.W.O., M.D., outlining the scope of examination and other Rule 35 requirements. Accordingly, this motion comports with Rule 35. The applicable notice has been filed simultaneously. Defendant will arrange for a videotape of the examination. + +14. The undersigned is requesting the court's assistance with regard to compelling the IME of Plaintiff along with dates for same to occur. + +# Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filinq Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff by telephone and by email; however, an agreement has not been reached. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an Order: + +a. providing adate and time for Plaintiffs IME to occur on November 9, 10, + +b. providing that the independent medical examination take place at 9:00 a.m. (on adate to be determined by the court) at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luther and Coleman, LLP. located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401 under the protocol set forth by Dr. .in his affidavit, by videotape and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +### Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this it day of , 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +moikeAbc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +515N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +### Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRNJOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 + +Brad , Esq. Rothsiligienfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssmsexabuseattornev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08- 80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhwAhotmail.com + +Jack S la, Esq. Jack P. Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsxasearcylaw.corn jghAsearcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C. M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecfAbrucereinhartlaw. .om Counsel for Defendant + +Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwardsarra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax casselloAlaw.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +j a \* a f11 , Esq. NM Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarciaObellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsbernapodhurst.com kezellnpodhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jactescAbellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +cc. Dr. Ryan ■ \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746958/EFTA02746958.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746958/EFTA02746958.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f761ead17f2810244624528029613c097cd33f96 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746958/EFTA02746958.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,447 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746958.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 11219, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.67, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 412.6757507324219, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 412.6757507324219, + 105.34490966796875 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 105.34490966796875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion To Compel Plaintiff, Jane Doe #3's \nIndependent Medical Examination Pursuant to Rule 35", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 99.144, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 525.09130859375, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 525.09130859375, + 398.2142333984375 + ], + [ + 99.144, + 398.2142333984375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 276.624, + 602.64 + ], + [ + 350.676, + 602.64 + ], + [ + 350.676, + 617.5978088378906 + ], + [ + 276.624, + 617.5978088378906 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filinq Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 170.74800000000002, + 575.91 + ], + [ + 470.2288818359375, + 575.91 + ], + [ + 470.2288818359375, + 596.16 + ], + [ + 170.74800000000002, + 596.16 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 247.86 + ], + [ + 375.4350280761719, + 247.86 + ], + [ + 375.4350280761719, + 263.42596435546875 + ], + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 263.42596435546875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 592.11 + ], + [ + 389.49041748046875, + 592.11 + ], + [ + 389.49041748046875, + 607.9209899902344 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 607.9209899902344 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 216 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 336 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 318 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 341 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 301 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 280 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 348 + ], + [ + "Line", + 82 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746958" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746966/EFTA02746966.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746966/EFTA02746966.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..31549ae92f6b02534627ee4db25ccc7a021cffd5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746966/EFTA02746966.md @@ -0,0 +1,265 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #3 (80232) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan ■, **M.D. of C.W.** ■, **M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on November 11, 2009 at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP, located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring asweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. See infra and Motion attached at DE (317) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well.** + +2. Plaintiff has not provided an available date; however, unless a timely and valid objection to this Notice is made, the Plaintiff is required by this Rule to be in attendance at the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as awitness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (317). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (317). See Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documents have been provided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient notice has en made. + +> By: MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that atrue copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 21 day of September, 2009 + +Respect .mitred, + +By: ROBE D. CRITI'ON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mennelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattornev.com + +ahorowitz®sexabuseattornev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffr + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +0840811 + +reelrhw®hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. ■ **Esq.** + +**Brad Me Esq.** + +**Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler** + +**401 East Las Olas Boulevard** + +**Suite 1650** + +**Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301** + +**Phone: 954-522-3456** + +**Fax: 954-527-8663** + +**bedwards@rra-law.com** + +**Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.** + +**08-80893** + +**Paul G. Cassell, Esq.** + +**Pro Hac Vice** + +**332 South 1400 E, Room 101** + +**Salt Lake City, UT 84112** + +**801-585-5202** + +**801-585-6833 Fax** + +**cassellp@law.utah.edu** + +**Co-counsel for Plainaff Jane Doe** + +**Isidro M. ME Esq.** + +**Law Firm, P.A.** + +**224 Datum Street, Suite 900** + +**West Palm Beach, FL 33401** + +**561-832-7732** + +**561-832-7137 F** + +**isidrogarcia®bellsouth.net** + +**Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.** + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, 08-80469 + +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isxgsearcvlaw.com + +ioh@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +.brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberiapodhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagescabellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746966/EFTA02746966.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746966/EFTA02746966.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cb4576d1293d623cb5f656da4dcbba4a60ad2602 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746966/EFTA02746966.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,265 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746966.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5340, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.94, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 412.39764404296875, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 412.39764404296875, + 105.30000000000001 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 105.30000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF \nPLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #3 (80232)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.92, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 522.81787109375, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 522.81787109375, + 395.5798034667969 + ], + [ + 97.92, + 395.5798034667969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.204, + 519.21 + ], + [ + 369.1405029296875, + 519.21 + ], + [ + 369.1405029296875, + 533.0476989746094 + ], + [ + 255.204, + 533.0476989746094 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 247.86 + ], + [ + 365.2791748046875, + 247.86 + ], + [ + 365.2791748046875, + 260.4443359375 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 260.4443359375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 205 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 292 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 291 + ], + [ + "Line", + 67 + ], + [ + "Text", + 63 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 99 + ], + [ + "Line", + 50 + ], + [ + "Text", + 47 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746966" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746970/EFTA02746970.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746970/EFTA02746970.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cad24fb308d08acb929bd234abe439d0eeeedf09 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746970/EFTA02746970.md @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@ +UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA [REDACTED] + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228). For the following reasons said Motion is granted. + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant [REDACTED], allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm beach, New York and St. [REDACTED], with the promise of money in + +"A" + +exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +By the instant Motion Epstein seeks an order compelling one of the Plaintiffs, in the case, to submit to an independent psychological/psychiatric medical examination by Ryan M.D., presently scheduled for September 8, 2009. has agreed to submit to said exam, but requests the Court impose certain restrictions. Since the filing of the Motion the parties have managed to resolve some of the issues involved, such as the proposed examination's time and date and request to have a representative from her team present at said examination. As for the latter issue, Defendant has agreed to provide, at his expense, a video feed and monitor in an adjacent room for Plaintiff's representative's use. The remaining issues involve Plaintiffs request for acourt order limiting the scope of the proposed examination by disallowing repeated questioning regarding "highly sensitive areas of inquiry including Plaintiff's medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history, substance abuse history, etc.,'and imposing certain time restraints on the examination itself. + +Plaintiffs request to limit the scope of the examination is denied. It is Dr. + +&#x27; See Pltffs Resp. to Rep.(D.E. #279), p.3. + +routine procedure when conducting psychological/psychiatric medical examinations of patients to require the patient to fill out a 10-page "Life History Questionnaire" and a 14-page "Patient Questionnaire." Both questionnaires request detailed background information regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like. Presumably Plaintiff will be asked these same questions two more times, first by defense counsel at deposition scheduled to take place shortly, and again by Drill at the upcoming examination. Plaintiff's objection is that by having to answer these same questions about the same subject matter three separate times "would only serve to embarrass, humiliate, intimidate and further victimize Plaintiff." Pltics Resp. (D.E. #254), p.6. Plaintiffs position is that she should only "be required to regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like, if at all, only one time," either during the "deposition of Plaintiff or through Dr. examination, but certainly not both." Id. + +Plaintiff cites no case law and independent research has uncovered none, to support her novel position that a Plaintiff who puts her mental, emotional and psychiatric state at issue can place alimitation on the number of times defense counsel or agents retained by him can inquire into areas relevant to these issues where the subject matter involved is "highly personal," "embarrassing," "sensitive," or otherwise "humiliating." Plaintiff is seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, "physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, [and] invasion of her privacy." 2 Based on the allegations made in Defendant's Reply,' Plaintiffs childhood was, to put it mildly, a difficult one, with numerous episodes of child abuse and sexual abuse, which in turn may of been the cause of Plaintiff's later engaging in numerous instances of substance abuse, self-mutilation, prostitution, aggravated assault, truancy, and the like. According to Defendant, in 2005 Plaintiff's mother filed a case committing for a Petition for Involuntary Assessment for substance abuse, stating in the accompanying file that Schizophrenic." ' has been diagnosed as "Bipoloar and + +Under these circumstances, where Plaintiff is seeking to recover medical expenses associated with these complex medical issues, full knowledge of Plaintiffs past and present medical, psychological, familial and social histories is essential. And while neither duplication nor embarrassment is desired, under the circumstances presented, where the number and scope of damages claimed are vast and Plaintiffs past history eventful, it may nonetheless be unavoidable. This is not to say that restrictions on the scope of questioning may never be put into effect. If, as the case progresses, Plaintiff can show that Defendant's invasive questioning + +Plaintiff, First Am. Compl., Counts I-XXX. + +&#x27; (D.E. #273), pp.7-8,

°As quoted in Defs Rep. (D.E. #273), p.8, from Palm Beach County Case #05MH1667.

is being done in bad faith or for purposes of harassment, the Court may reconsider imposing limitations of the sort requested herein. At this point, however, the Court agrees with Defendant that to restrict the number of times defense counsel may ask Plaintiff personal and sensitive questions concerning some of the pivotal issues in this case, would work an injustice by preventing Defendant from being able to defend himself.

The Court likewise rejects Plaintiff's request to limit the time for conducting the examination and any related testing to 6 hours. Dr. ■has filed an affidavit stating that he needs 6-8 hours to conduct the examination and related testing, and that anything less than that might result in compromising the test results.' Considering the 31 counts alleged against Defendant, as well as Plaintiffs event-filled past, the amount of time sought does not appear unreasonable. Should the length of time prove draining, Plaintiff may take breaks as needed, of reasonable duration. Furthermore, Defense Counsel and Dr. ■are hereby put on notice that while the Court has allowed the full 8 hours requested for the examination and related testing, should less time be needed, the Court expects less time will be taken, and in no event may the examination and related testing exceed a total of 8 hours. In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228) is GRANTED IN

Affidavit of Dr. M, attached as Ex. "B" to Defendant's Rep. (D.E. #273).

ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF.

DONE AND ORDERED this September 4, 2009, in at West Palm Beach,

Florida.

ore. -7-7 LINNEA R. JO UNITED STAT ON S MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746970/EFTA02746970.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746970/EFTA02746970.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f5118b297b3f97bb1ff54f5365216aa4914dd0c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746970/EFTA02746970.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,318 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746970.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 7976, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.79, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 403.308, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 403.308, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 119.88 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 286.41600000000005, + 392.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 331.70400000000006, + 392.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 331.70400000000006, + 406.62 + ], + [ + 286.41600000000005, + 406.62 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 79.56, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 344.67205810546875, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 344.67205810546875, + 110.97 + ], + [ + 79.56, + 110.97 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 214 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 283 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 298 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 285 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 313 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 82 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746970" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746976/EFTA02746976.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746976/EFTA02746976.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..65de4d05dc758daac19dc81248c06924d49359a0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746976/EFTA02746976.md @@ -0,0 +1,79 @@ +*Disc* + +**UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA** + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA-[REDACTED] + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. +\_\_\_\_\_/ + +**PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 7'S ANSWERS TO +DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES** + +Plaintiff, JANE DOE 7, by and through their undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 33, hereby responds to Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff as follows: + +**General Objections** + +1. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that the Interrogatories call for the disclosure of information protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product doctrine, or other applicable privilege or immunity, whether created by statute or common law. Plaintiff claims such privileges and protections to the extent implicated by each Interrogatory, and excludes privileged and protected information from any responses to Defendant's discovery. Any disclosure is inadvertent and is not intended to waive those privileges or protections, which are specifically reserved. + +2. Plaintiff objects to Defendant's Interrogatories to the extent that same are vague, ambiguous, incomprehensible and/or overly broad. + +**"B"** + +*CENER, DI* + +Dca No. 7 v. Epstein Page 9 + +> if so, state whether you were plaintiff or defendant, the nature of the action, and the date and court in which such suit was filed. + +### Answer. + +None. + +- 15. List all dates you allege you were at Mr. Epstein's home in Florida, include date, time arrived and left, the name(s) of anyone who went with you to the home when you were there, the time spent with Mr. Epstein and the name(s) and address of any individuals who were present in the house with Mr. Epstein and you. + +## Answer. + +Plaintiff went to Defendants estate approximately 8-10 times during her junior and senior years of high school, from 2004-2005. + +' • its, she recalls seeing other people working at the estate, including cooks, and other irls/wo have also been assistants o i e ii e endant. Hayley , and one of the 011. sisters were also there on at eas one occasion each. + +Plaintiff spent approximately 30 minutes alone with the Defendant on each visit. + +- 16. State in detail how you came to be at Mr. Epstein's home on each occasion, i.e. did someone bring you or ask you if you would or wanted to go; if so, state the name and address of that individual and what he/she told you and the purpose of your visit. + +# Answer: + +Plaintiff was asked to go to Defendant's estate by her classmate, Hayley who told Plaintiff she would be paid to give the Defendant a massage. accompanied her to the estate on her first visit. + +On the times she visited the Defendant alone (approx. 4-6 times), Plaintiff drove herself. On the other approx. 4 occasions, either she drove or one of her friends drove. + +- ripe,:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 319-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/22/2009 Page 3 of 3 + - 17. State the amount of monies (or anything else of value, including gifts) you claim were given or paid to you by Mr. Epstein (or someone paid/gave you on his behalf and that person's name, address and phone number) by year from 2000 — 2006 + +Doe No. 7 v. Epstein Page 10 + +### Answer: + +Plaintiff was paid \$200 per massage, as well as \$400 total for bringing 2 friends. In total, Plaintiff estimates she was paid around \$2000.00. + +- 18. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding Mr. Epstein, with whom you have had sexual activity since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual activity, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. + +### Answer. + +Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory as vague, overly broad, unduly burdensome, harassing, and not reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence. Moreover, this interrogatory Is outrageous, offensive and apparently posed for the purpose of intimidating the victim. Fed.R.Evid. 412 makes any answer to this interrogatory inadmissible, and nothing in the answer could plausibly lead to discovery of admissible evidence. + +- 19. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding your claims against Mr. Epstein, whom you have claimed (formally or informally) committed sexual assault or battery on you since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual assault or battery, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. + +### Answer: + +Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory as vague, overly broad, unduly burdensome, harassing, and not reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of adrnissible evidence. Moreover, this interrogatory is outrageous, offensive and apparently posed for the purpose of intimidating the victim. Fed.R.Evid. 412 makes any answer to this interrogatory inadmissible, and nothing in the answer could plausibly lead to discovery of admissible evidence. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746976/EFTA02746976.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746976/EFTA02746976.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d058f5086cdbcf125f3f5390e4d342ee8f0ae8e2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746976/EFTA02746976.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,362 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746976.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 5024, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.72, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 193.392, + 91.53 + ], + [ + 398.41200000000003, + 91.53 + ], + [ + 398.41200000000003, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 193.392, + 119.07 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 7'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 172.58399999999997, + 313.47 + ], + [ + 421.66799999999995, + 313.47 + ], + [ + 421.66799999999995, + 341.01 + ], + [ + 172.58399999999997, + 341.01 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "General Objections", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.74, + 432.54 + ], + [ + 354.34799999999996, + 432.54 + ], + [ + 354.34799999999996, + 446.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 241.74, + 446.31000000000006 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 63.036, + 148.42889404296875 + ], + [ + 117.75009155273438, + 148.42889404296875 + ], + [ + 117.75009155273438, + 162.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 63.036, + 162.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 99.144, + 279.45 + ], + [ + 153.71534729003906, + 279.45 + ], + [ + 153.71534729003906, + 293.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 99.144, + 293.68353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 99.144, + 528.1200000000001 + ], + [ + 153.3798065185547, + 528.1200000000001 + ], + [ + 153.3798065185547, + 543.4335174560547 + ], + [ + 99.144, + 543.4335174560547 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.384, + 162.0 + ], + [ + 164.85101318359375, + 162.0 + ], + [ + 164.85101318359375, + 174.96 + ], + [ + 111.384, + 174.96 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.384, + 319.14000000000004 + ], + [ + 166.38153076171875, + 319.14000000000004 + ], + [ + 166.38153076171875, + 332.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 111.384, + 332.09999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Answer:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 113.83200000000001, + 542.7 + ], + [ + 167.93740844726562, + 542.7 + ], + [ + 167.93740844726562, + 555.6600000000001 + ], + [ + 113.83200000000001, + 555.6600000000001 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 218 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 373 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746976" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746979/EFTA02746979.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746979/EFTA02746979.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..301b2354d3b7d307ee5f7c51d868be4f5435f2c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746979/EFTA02746979.md @@ -0,0 +1,237 @@ +IN RE: JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +![]()![]()![]()Notary Public, State of Florida + +Consor and Associates + +Phone - 561.682.0905 + +ORIGINAL + +"C" + +(Thereupon, the following interview was had:) + +BY DETECTIVE RECAREY: + +Q Today's date is October 4th, 2005. This is ID number 7915 Detective Joe Recarey of the Palm Beach Police Department. Present at 1301 (inaudible) Road is Detective Michael Dawson of the Palm Beach Police Department. + +And can you state your name for the record? + +A + +Q Show do you spell your last name? + +A + +Q Okay. How old are you? + +A I'm 18. + +Q Eighteen. Okay. You're currently in college? + +A Yeah. + +Q Okay. What college are you attending? + +A Valencia. + +Q Valencia. Okay. And your date of birth is? + +A + +Q Okay. Can you raise your right hand for me? Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God? + +A Yes. + +Q Okay.IIIIIIII if you could tell me from the + +beginning how you met Jeffrey Epstein. Iknow you have some + + here last night, spoke with your mom and dad. If you can information and we are conducting an investigation. We were just start from the beginning as to how you met him. + + A Okay. + + Q And how it came about. + +AI met him through my friend Haley. + + Q Okay. How long ago was that? + +AIt was probably about almost a year ago. + + Q Okay. Okay. + + him a massage and then she asked me if I wanted to do it and then I did it or whatever and then after that like he kind of scared me when I went there so Ijust decided not to go back. AAnd he -- I went there once with her and she gave + + go upstairs with him? Okay. The first time you went with Haley, did you + +A No, I stayed down in the kitchen. + +Q Okay. Did Haley tell you that -- what was entailed as to what had to be done? + +A Well she said the first time you go it's just like a massage and she said like well, the more you go supposedly the more he like expects and starts flirting with girls and that's what kind of like scared me. + + told me pretty much the same thing about the massage but QOkay. I've interviewed other girls and they've there's more to that. More to the massage. Okay? That's why I didn't want mom to be in here. And you can talk to me about anything. Okay? Like I said, I've interviewed other people already who have told me what transpired in that room. I know it's going to be difficult for you but... + +A Well, the first time I went there I did a massage and he was just asking me a lot of questions. He seemed like really nice. And then he kept like staring at me and stuff. And then like I did a massage and he just kept looking at me and he was like II, you're being shy and I'm like yeah. And he's like do you feel uncomfortable and I was like yeah, alittle bit. And he's like okay. And he said well do you want to stop, and I was like no, it's okay. And he was like why are you like being shy and I was like II, I don't know. And then he would like change the subject and he started talking about other things. And then when we were done he said that if like I wanted to come back and do more then he would like pay me more and then I would have to talk to Haley and I could come back. + +Q Okay. What kind of questions did he ask you as you were massaging him? + +A He was asking about -- it was a year ago. I don't remember everything but... + +Q Right. + +A He was just asking me if I had any friends that + +might want to give a massage and I said I don't know. Then he asked me about what I wanted to do when I grew up and stuff like that and I asked him what he did and he said he was like ascientist basically. + +Q Okay. Did he ever ask you how old you were? + +A No. + +Q No. Did he know that you were 17? + +A No, I don't think so. + +Q Well it would have been 16 if it was a year ago, right? + +A Well it like was almost a year ago. (Inaudible) 17. + +Q Okay. During the massage did you -- were you naked or -- + +A No. I had my clothes on. + +Q You had all your clothes on? + +A Uh-huh. + +Q Okay. Did he touch you in any way? + +A He was like kind of like leaning towards it but I was like you could tell I was shy so I think that's why he didn't try. But I heard about other girls that he -- that he got flirtatious with them and he made them take off their clothes and stuff. + +Q Okay. What -- that was the first time you went, right? + +1 A Yeah. + +2 Q Okay. + +3 A Well, no. It was the second time that I gave him 4 a massage. The first time I went up with Haley. + +5 Q Okay. You went upstairs with Haley? + +6 A No, I was in the kitchen. + +7 Q You were in the kitchen. That was -- you only had 8 two times that you went there? + +9 A Yeah. + +10 11 in the The first time you didn't do anything but just sit kitchen? + +12 A Yeah. + +13 Who did you sit in the kitchen with? + +14 A 15 was like two other girls there that live with him. He had a IIII that was there and he had -- there + +16 Q Okay. Did you massage his back? Was he naked 17 when you were massaging him? + +18 A Well, he had like a towel around his -- his upper 19 was (inaudible) but he had like a towel around him. + +20 Q Okay. Did he ever remove that towel? + +21 A No. + +22 Q When you were massaging him he never removed the 23 towel? + +24 A No. + +25 Q Okay. Did you -- did he have you touch his + +1 private area? + +2 A No. No. I wouldn't do that. + +3 Q You wouldn't do that? + +4 Okay. Did he touch you in your private area? + +5 A No. No. + +6 Q No. + +7 A He kept like staring at me and like, I don't know, + +8 I just felt uncomfortable and I left. But I heard other + +9 stories that like -- + +10 Q Right. I'm concerned with you. I know about + +11 other stories and I've interviewed other people have told me + +12 different things. That's why I'm trying to find out what + +13 happened to you. Okay? + +14 A Uh-huh. + +15 0 You're the victim in this so that's why I'm trying + +16 to find out what happens to you. + +17 A Uh-huh. + +18 Q Okay? Who took you upstairs to the room? + +19 A This girl Sarah that lives with him. + +20 0 Okay. So Sarah took you up? + +21 A Yes. + +22 Q Did she tell you anything? Did she say anything? + +23 A Huh-huh. There's a massage table and she just + +24 laid a towel down and she said that Jeffrey will be out for + +25 his massage. + +1 Q Okay. Have you received any massage training? + +2 A No. + +3 Q No. I have to ask. + +4 Was Sarah one .of the two girls that was in the 5 kitchen with you? + +6 A Yes. + +7 Q Okay. Did you ever go back to his house? + +8 A Well, I just went there twice. + +9 Q Right. + +10 A After that -- + +11 Q After that you've never come back? Never went 12 back? + +13 How much did you receive for the massage? + +14 A Two hundred. + +15 Q You received 200. + +16 17 be Okay. Did Haley explain to you what was going to involved? + +18 A She said the first time you go there you pretty 19 much just give a massage, but the more you go there like the 20 more he expects. And that's it. That scared me. + +21 Q That's what scared you? + +22 BY DETECTIVE DAWSON: + +23 Q Did she say (inaudible) or did she (inaudible -- + +24 A Say didn't have to say it exactly but she implied 25 like, you know, like taking your clothes off and stuff like \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746979/EFTA02746979.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746979/EFTA02746979.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..af68da3d7401a6962826349fce410b09c270c963 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746979/EFTA02746979.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,296 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746979.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 7075, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.71, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 230 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 312 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 358 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 280 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 72 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746979" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746987/EFTA02746987.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746987/EFTA02746987.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aa38962d49f6f958e048b5710a8914da27f989dc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746987/EFTA02746987.md @@ -0,0 +1,331 @@ +Dr. Kliman: He says why haven't you had sex? And...did you name your boyfriend? + +00:18:03 + +[REDACTED] ...Yeah. + +Dr. Kliman: And what was your boyfriends name at that time? + +[REDACTED] I was just like casually dating this guy Chris. + +Dr. Kliman: And so there's some sort of calendar that we can now establish. That you were a virgin then until you were senior in high school; and these questions came while you were a virgin? And now this is the second time and he's asking to see your bra, did you show him your bra? + +[REDACTED] Well I felt like really uncomfortable and then he said like; he asked me if like Hallie told me like how things go something like that. And I'm like no...and then he was like; [REDACTED] he's like...well he's like do you think you can take your shirt off; then kinda asked me about it again and I just remember...like taking me shirt off and like giving him a massage in my bra and... + +00:19:22 + +Dr. Kliman: Do you remember taking your shirt off? + +[REDACTED] The second time yeah. + +Dr. Kliman: The second visit? And how did that go for you? + +[REDACTED] It was just...I don't know...I just felt like wrong and like I knew I shouldn't...like do that but I kind of...I mean he kinda made it seem like it was okay; and... + +Dr. Kliman: How did he do that? + +[REDACTED] Just kinda like made it so that it wasn't like a big deal; and he knew I was like uncomfortable so he would like ask me other questions about like school; and work and then I remember...I told him that like I wanted to like get...to travel and stuff; like cause he asked me what I wanted to do when I got out of high school; and I said I wanted to travel and stuff and he would just talk about how his friends like who own boats and stuff like that and like maybe he could get me a job like on a boat, would be able to travel just talk about things like that; just to make me not as uncomfortable. + +00:21:03 + +"D" + +Dr. Kliman: So it seemed that he changed the subject when you were uncomfortable; okay now the second time you give him a massage with your shirt off but you had abra on, do you remember what you wore the second time besides the shirt and the bra? + +Dr. Kliman: You're not sure? + +Dr. Kliman: Okay now at his point do you have an idea about what time in the school year it was or what season; the second time? + +Ol e Idon't really remember...I'm guessing it was like towards the end... + +Dr. Kliman: Try not to guess, okay? + +Dr. Kliman: You can give me an estimate if you want to. + +Dr. Kliman: year? Is there areason that you think it was towards the end of your sophomore + +00:22:23 + +Dr. Kliman: And the second time you went; how long was it after the first time? + +Dr. Kliman: Would you say it was as long as half a year or shorter or longer? + +Dr. Kliman: How did it come about that you came there this second time? + +e Well Hallie asked me if I wanted to...like me to do a massage; and I...you know, I said I would so... + +00:23:28 + +Iusually just wore like skirts or shorts. + +Iwas pretty sure I was wearing askirt but I'm not like positive. + +Okay... + +Yeah I would estimate that it was like towards the end of my sophomore year of high school. + +Well...I wasn't really friends with Hallie like in the beginning so 1 remember like we made up like half way through the year....so I'm guessing it was like towards the middle or the end. + +I don't remember? + +It was shorter...maybe like a couple of weeks. + +Dr. Kliman: Well she had asked you that in the gym? + +Dr. Kliman: And the first time you went you didn't do a massage? The second time you went; did she ask you again if you could do a massage? + +S Uh huh. + +Dr. Kliman: Alright now...how long did you stay the second time? + +S Around the same time like 20 minutes or so...20 minutes I guess. + +Dr. Kliman: Alright, was there athird time? + +Dr. Kliman: Okay you don't remember the sequence but; about how many times did you visit Mr. Epstein? + +Dr. Kliman: Give me an estimate. + +Dr. Kliman: 8 times and when was the last time? + +a My senior year; or actually it was...actually around the end...around the end of my junior year. + +00:25:03 + +Dr. Kliman: Okay... of all the times you went; total being about 8. Is there atime that you remember was in any way upsetting to you at the time? + +Uh huh. + +It's hard for me to remember like ...I remember like the first like... first and second time really. Yeah there was athird time but I don't remember exactly like what I did, what times. + +Not exactly sure how many times. + +Maybe like 8 times. + +Yeah.../ mean the more that I did go; the more he would try to get me to do and...I remember one time that he was kinds like aggressive and like kinda made me feel like I wasn't doing what like he wanted; and I remember he kinds like grab me try to like feel like parts of me...like I didn't want him to and I remember that...that was like one of the last times I went because it was really like...and he just asked me to do things; Iwould never do...just...I don't know it just made me really uncomfortable. I just...felt like ashamed that was; I remember that was one of the last times I went back. + +Dr. Kliman: So there's a feeling of shame? You felt ashamed? You weren't asking him but you were ashamed? + +S [nodding her head] + +Dr. Kliman: What were you ashamed about? + +Dr. Kliman: Okay now...this is a complicated set of experiences you went through and you're as I understand it you're about 16 at this time? + +S Uh huh. + +Dr. Kliman: How old were you when you graduated? + +Dr. Kliman: Let's see I've forgotten your birthday. What is your birth date? + +00:28:08 + +Dr. Kliman: So when you graduated had you turn 17 recently or the year before? + +IIIla When I graduated I was...I was yeah 17; and then... yeah cause I had turn 18 right after I graduated that June, so 17... + +Dr. Kliman: So you graduated in May or June? + +Ilia May. + +Dr. Kliman: Okay and so...you were still 17 when you graduated and you...were 17 when you started your senior year, is that right? + +S Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: And you were 16 when you started your junior year? + +Dr. Kliman: Okay and how old were you when you first went to that house? + +I mean I just kinds realized kinda like, you know what he was doing...and just... I was just like ashamed that I would even like be submissive to somebody like... I don't know you just...that I would even like take off my shirt like just like give, I don't know...a guy that much pleasure of like seeing me; and I don't know... + +I was 17. + +June 30'h. + +Uh huh. + +S I'm guessing I was...I5. + +Dr. Kliman: 15. + +Dr. Kliman: You weren't driving yet, you don't think? + +S I mean not by myself... + +Dr. Kliman: I mean your own car? + +S No1 wasn't....1 don't think I was driving by myself... [Not audible]. + +Dr. Kliman: At any [not audible] you went as a sophomore first? + +V IM Yeah... + +Dr. Kliman: And then you went back as a sophomore still; second time and then he asked for your shirt to come off. Now...when he was grabbing parts of you that you didn't want him to grab; did that start in the second time or did it start later? + +Dr. Kaman: What's that? + +00:30:43 + +16... yeah. + +It start...well the second time he kinda... just kinda grabbed...grabbed like my butt. He like....he like did his thing under the towel and then... + +It's like; I don't know...it's like hard for me to talk about... + +Dr. Kliman: Did he masturbate under the towel? Under the second time you were there? + +S [nodding her head] + +Dr. Kliman: And that's distressing to you; to you mention now? + +Dr. Kliman: Now...okay so you're 16; and maybe 15. I'm not completely... + +Dr. Kliman: Caught up in my arithmetic here; but you're a sophomore... + +[nodding her head] + +Yeah. + +Dr. Kliman: It's hard for me to be sure...if you drove yourself it seems to me you would be 16; if you drove yourself the second time. + +S Yeah I don't really remember that, not really. + +Dr. Kliman: But you do remember you were in the gym and it was your sophomore year? When you met Hallie; and you went not long after that. + +S Uh huh. + +Dr. Kliman: So that sounds like you were still 15. + +Dr. Kliman: You would know better than I. + +S Yeah...end of my sophomore year; yeah I guess I would have been 15. + +Dr. Kliman: Now had you ever seen a boy or a man masturbate? + +00:32:28 + +Dr. Kliman: What did you see that second time? + +S I couldn't really see anything; I wasn't like really watching; just kinda like looking the opposite way and... + +Dr. Kliman: You were looking away? + +Dr. Kliman: Why did you look away? + +Dr. Kliman: You didn't want to see? + +MO Like I didn't really know, he had a towel over him... + +Dr. Kliman: But you could see there was a lot of movement; and you understood something about what was happening, I mean....I know you understand more now; but at the time did you understand something of what was happening? + +Uh huh. Yeah... + +Yeah I think I might have been 15. So...yeah. + +[shaking her head] + +Yes. + +I just...I just felt uncomfortable. + +Yeah alittle bit. + +Dr. Kliman: Okay...now at this point when he's doing this under the towel; you have your shirt off and he grabbed your butt at some point. In what way did he grab your butt? + +es He kinda like reached behind and kinda like feeling it and just like grabbing it; and I was just looking away and he like did it the whole time like and he was like... + +Dr. Kliman: He was masturbating? + +••1 [nodding her head] + +Dr. Kliman: Ijust want to be sure... + +Dr. Kliman: That I'm not confused about this. He masturbated the whole time that he was grabbed your butt and you were looking away? + +00:34:24 + +Dr. Kliman: And this entire event of the second time was about 20 minutes? + +Dr. Kliman: How much did he pay you for the second visit? + +Dr. Kliman: And he didn't say that he was gonna pay you more if you did more? + +Dr. Kliman: And did he express anything about you or your body or how he felt? + +e He just...I remember him just like always like complimenting on my body; saying that I have like a really nice body; and that I was like skinny and I was like pretty. I mean he used always say really nice things... + +Dr. Kliman: Okay... now did there come atime when something different happened? + +Okay. + +[nodding her head] + +[nodding her head] + +The same + +No. + +Yeah as I kept going there...he would just get more and more...like he would talk more like; asked me more like sexual questions just he would like...I remember like last time; that's when he really tried to do something and that's when I stop going but... + +Dr. Kliman: What did he try to do? + +want him to. He just like tried grabbing me and...and just like in places that's I didn't + +00:36:08 + +Dr. Kliman: You know, how old are you, 21? + +Uh huh. + +Dr. Kliman: I think you know...you could use adult words, you know; you were a teenager then but... + +S Yeah.... + +Dr. Kliman: It's important to use adult words now where he tried to grab you. + +00:36:25 + +110 1 Sorry...it's like hard for me to talk about. + +Dr. Kliman: Ireally don't think this is easy...I filly understand that this was avery complex and stressful experience and that's why I need to understand what you went through so that I can explain it to myself and maybe to your attorney, okay? So..-he really tried to do something the last time? + +Dr. Kliman: How did he know that he knew you were uncomfortable? + +Dr. Kliman: Now at this point he tried to pull off your underwear; now when he tried to pull off your underwear had you already removed your outer garments or had he remove it? How did it happen that you were in your underwear? + +Yeah I remember him like trying to like pull of my underwear and...and just like grab my vagina and he tried to like pull down my bra and...and like he knew that I was uncomfortable and just like did it anyways; and.... + +Because he kept asking me and I kept saying no, and then...I just like...I knew he knew and it was just...he like kept pushing it and that was like the last time I went. + +Iremember like one of the last times 1 went...like I finally like took off my skirt or whatever...and then he...and then that's when he...I took it off. + +compliments on me and stuff. He would ask.... like I'm so pretty; like I have a nice body why am I not having sex? + +Dr. Kliman: si\* And in fact you did have sex after you met Mr. Epstein? Now...had you ever considered that there might be some connection between his influence and your life? + +00:51:55 + +Dr. Kliman: Because of him? Well... What would it be if you didn't have his influence? + +Dr. Kliman: So that's a difficulty that you sort of blame him for. + +Dr. Kliman: Okay...now you blame him for your feeling ashamed and your feeling guilty at least you blame these experiences and it...I noticed that you think in one of your test here you mentioned that other women are too judgmental. How about yourself, do you find yourself passing judgment on yourself? + +Dr. Kliman: Yeah? Tell me about that? + +a + +Dr. Kliman: So it's a permanent lack of forgiveness? + +Maybe, like when I think of sex I think it as more as a not...just thing guys just want kinds thing. I don't really think of it as like love I think of it as more that's its just like something that, I don't know...like I have a different outlook on it, I think because of him. + +I mean I'm not sure; but I think I would have a better perspective of sex and like...maybe you know, be more like open more kind of...think of more as like love than things like that, I don't know maybe... + +Yeah. + +[nodding] + +I just have like a difficult time; like accepting what I did; like I blame him and I blame myself too and I mean a lot of it was just, you know...like my friends were like going. When I moved down there I didn't have like many friends; I didn't know that many people So think maybe one of the reasons why, you know... my friends were going; I mean...but still like it just like bothers me that I would do that. It just like really something I don't know, I don't think I would be able to forgive myself for it, so... + +I mean at the time I didn't really like think; [not audible] not that I understand it its...and just like lately I've been thinking about it a lot and because of all the things that came out in the news; and my parents finding out and that was like real difficult for me; its just been like always on my \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746987/EFTA02746987.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746987/EFTA02746987.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5a5c20687cf9d41efd7c4cb5a12d49e985e4e49c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746987/EFTA02746987.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,330 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746987.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 14324, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.41, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 422 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 32 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 359 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 391 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 87 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 332 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 386 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746987" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746996/EFTA02746996.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746996/EFTA02746996.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f9f245d3817b77aad762caa44a1187973e89ed5b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746996/EFTA02746996.md @@ -0,0 +1,291 @@ +00:04:10 + +[REDACTED] + +I was just worried about if...if...Jeffrey's side got a hold of it...if uhm...if it would ever be hold; be released to the public or something like that, I was worried about. + +Dr. Kliman: And that would not be good? + +[REDACTED] + +No. + +Dr. Kliman: Okay what would be the worst part for you psychologically? + +[REDACTED] + +Just everything...like my entire like life would be...I mean...I just don't...I mean my parents finding out about everything was like hard enough; so if anybody else found out about anything like, I don't know...it would just be really like hard to deal with. Sorry... + +Dr. Kliman: Right...and that makes you cry; and the...your parents have found out? + +[REDACTED] + +[nodding] + +Dr. Kliman: + +Okay...now [REDACTED] I don't know anything significant about you yet. So I'm gonna have to rely on you to tell me things about your relationship with your parents. + +00:05:37 + +[REDACTED] + +Okay. + +Dr. Kliman: So let's talk about you and your family get me a little acquainted. + +[REDACTED] + +We have a good relationship. I mean I've always told my mom and dad everything. I mean they're still together, everything I come home from school I see them and...spend as much time with them as I can. + +Dr. Kliman: Where do they live? + +[REDACTED] + +They live in West Palm Beach. + +Dr. Kliman: And where do you go to school? + +[REDACTED] + +I go to school at University of Central Florida in Orlando. + +Dr. Kliman: What are you studying? + +[REDACTED] + +I'm studying Hospitality Management and Marketing. + +"E" + +Dr. Kliman: What year are you in? + +SIS I'm a senior. + +Dr. Kliman: How are you doing? + +ISO I'm doing good; I have a 3.2 right now. I'm doing good; in almost all my classes except fot math; but I like it, I'm almost done so I'm happy about that. + +Dr. Kliman: So you'll graduate pretty soon? + +Uh huh. + +Dr. Kliman: How soon? + +Well cause of my minor I have to go to school an extra semester; semester and a half. So about fall, next fall I'll graduate. + +Dr. Kliman: Fall 2009 you will graduate? + +Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: So you go in the summer? + +Uh huh, yes. + +Dr. Kliman: And what are your plans for work? + +00:07:50 + +Dr. Kliman: There was something you said before that, I'm not sure if I caught it. Event planning, marketing...something else you said. + +a hospitality Management? + +I want to get into to the event industry; and another thing I'm studying is event planning so I wanna get into planning events for like big corporations or just kinda event planning and maybe into marketing things, in that field. + +Dr. Kaman: Okay; and what does that involve as you think of it for your fixture? + +Just working at hotels and it kinda incorporates the event planning; just getting familiar with the hotels that you hold events in; and possibly + +working at hotel and, you know... helping to manage it and I really like the hospitality field cause it relates to the events and then marketing helps... it helps with everything too, I think. So...I like it...I like learning about that; the hospitality industry....traveling. + +Dr. Kliman: Did you grow up in West Palm Beach? + +13. Igrew up in Pennsylvania. I moved down to West Palm Beach when I was + +00:09:38 + +Dr. Kliman: From Pennsylvania? + +S Uh huh. + +Dr. Kliman: What part of Pennsylvania? + +Dr. Kliman: West Midland? + +SIM West Mifflin. + +Dr. Kliman: Okay how do you spell that? + +Dr. Kliman: And where is that? + +S Its right outside of Pittsburg; maybe 20 minutes outside of Pittsburg. + +00:10:06 + +Dr. Kliman: So you did some High School there? + +S Actually, my freshman year I moved to Palm Beach and I started High School in West Palm. + +Dr. Kliman: So you never went to West Mifflin High? + +Dr. Kliman: And the name of the High School in Palm...? Was it West Palm High? + +West Mifflin. + +Its West and then Mifflin is, M-I-F-F-L-I-N. + +No. + +Palm Beach. + +Is + +Dr. Kliman: What do you remember about meeting Katie? + +00:15:37 + +Dr. Kliman: During your childhood in Pennsylvania; did you have experiences that you now consider extremely unpleasant or upsetting? + +a + +Dr. Kliman: When you say you were nervous about school, were you nervous about certain aspects of school or just school in general? + +Dr. Kliman: The newness you're emphasizing like something new to you makes you nervous. Like coming here made you nervous? + +Dr. Kliman: Being videotaped made you nervous? + +Dr. Kliman: Did taking test make you nervous? + +Dr. Kliman: New people? + +r + +Dr. Kliman: In your childhood prior to coming to Florida, were there any particularly happy events that you remember other than that move? + +> Uhm...just meeting like two of my best friends live in Pennsylvania arid I remember just...I remember one of my best friends I met in preschool and Ijust remember like how I met her and we shared a toy together and then ever since we've been friends for 13 years; our parents are best friends. My other best friend Katie lived right down the street from me; I just remember meeting her and the first time like our parents introduced us we became best friends. I remember that... + +> She was year younger than me; she lived just right down the street. It was just somebody like I hung out with like almost everyday when I lived in Pennsylvania...just like swimming in the summer together. We had a pool and just playing together, one really good memory I have. + +Not really... just school. I remember I was always nervous about school like...uh just meeting new people. I was always nervous about that... + +Just school in general, just being...like meeting new people and... + +Uh huh. + +Uh huh. + +Test I'm okay with. Its just mainly people yeah...just. + +Dr. Kliman: Some new people but that wasn't what you had in mind? The first days...? + +Dr. Kliman: How about having to give atalk in front of other people? + +Dr. Kliman: + +SIO + +Dr. Kliman: So you're still that way? + +Dr. Kliman: What happens to you? + +S + +people. + +Dr. Kliman: You said it was rough... + +S + +Dr. Kliman: Five presentations the last few days; what happens that you don't like? + +Dr. Kliman: Now these million thoughts...can you tell me the most distressing of those million thoughts? + +00:18:48 + +a + +Yes...well...Not so much new people, I remember just like nervous like the first day of school. 1 just...I guess new people sometimes. + +Yeah the first days. + +my God, I'm like scared of that. + +That's an. my God. + +Yeah, definitely. Actually I just had to give 5 presentations in the last 3 weeks from all my classes. It was rough.... + +Yeah... + +Ijust don't like; like talking in front of...in front of like large groups of + +Uh huh. The presentations. + +It's just like amillion thoughts running through my head and people...just... I just get nervous when there's like alot of people and my grade depends on it so... + +Just...you know, I just think about like how I'm doing. What my teacher thinks of me; how I'm performing...I mean what other people are thinking. Things like that. + +Dr. Kliman: So it's really thoughts about other people's minds? + +## The Psychological Trauma Center + +adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc. + +Medical Director: Gilbert W. Kliman, M. D. + +2105 Divisadero St., San Francisco, CA 94115 + +Phone (415)292-7119 Fax (415) 749-2802 + +www.expertchildasychiatrv.com + +Forensic Child Psychiatric Evaluations, Life Care Plans & Testimony + +Tape 3 + +12.5.08 + +with Dr. Kliman + +Transcription by: K. Rios + +00:00:04 + +Dr. Kliman: thank you for getting back promptly; and I' ng you back on vt eotape now its 2:51pm on December 5th 2008you've had alittle break for lunch and you'd been probably thinking about many things; now in regard to what we discussed this morning. Do you have some ideas of your own; or some observations of your own about the psychological affects on you; of these experiences that you told me, made you feel ashamed; made you fee.../ blaming of yourself and guilty. Have you noticed any effects on some of your behaviors? + +00:01:36 + +00:02:33 + +Dr. Kliman: How does it show up that you don't trust guys? + +Inoticed that...my outlook on guys is different. It's hard so for me to like trust guys now; and I just have like adifferent kind of feeling about them than I did before. Its...I mean really hard for me to trust guys and I mean its...been like...been complicating like alot of my relationships that have; have had...and !just kinda...I almost feel kinds like hurt; like I just don't trust guys; and I just...yeah I don't know... + +Just like in relationships I...I mean I've been cheated on before; but in relationships I don't feel like...I just...I always feel like their... have some kind of like motive; like interior motive. That they just want something or that they, you know... just want me for now. I just always feel kinda like being cheated on...or kinda being taken advantage of; and I...1 mean it got to the point where like 1...like my boyfriend... well... the guy I'm dating now, I like check his phone; and his emails; and I just...just to see if like... to make sure like he hasn't been like cheating on me or...I just feel like he's going to; and maybe there's something I can do to stop it; if I know what's going on and so... I mean I've been like looking at things of + +his that I probably shouldn't have; I just...I don't know...I just don't trust guys that much anymore. I just... + +00:04:05 + +Dr. Kliman: You go through his personal things? + +Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: How do you go about that? + +MOO I just.../ mean I look through his phone when he leaves it or I just check his email like when its on his computer and I...I mean just...I mean I've found stuff out and I mean...that wouldn't have known if I would have never looked at his things so... + +Dr. Kliman: Is that bad that you found that out? + +00:05:31 + +Dr. Kliman: To what extent do you blame that on Mr. Epstein? + +00:06:29 + +I mean its good in a sense and its bad in a sense I mean...I mean it's good cause I know kinda what's going on and like prepare myself and not to get like too attached because I mean...I kinda know how he is now and.../ mean, its bad in a sense that; I mean I'm never gonna be able to trust him and...I mean I really like him so its hard... I don't know...it's been hard for me to trust guys for like the last couple of years. + +1 think it does have like a connection because I do feel like kinda used from Jeffrey. I feel like he kinda used me; and when I think about that I kinda place that on all guys. Like they...I know not all guys are to that extent but I just feel like...that a lot of the times, you know... they just use you and really skeptical of, you know, relationships and guys. It just made it hard for me to kinda trust guys I think. + +Dr. Kliman: What happened during the 8 visits that you had? Is it something that's on your mind; when you don't want it to be? + +log Yeah...I mean it always comes up and; and I mean its something especially...like I, I was having like panic attacks and I was like...I couldn't sleep like when all this was on T.V. I mean I would check the news every single day; and it was just really hard for me to go through; you know...and its just kinda like reliving it is just hard, and thinking about it is hard for me and it does, you know...when I think about certain kinda like just pop up and....memories of it. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746996/EFTA02746996.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746996/EFTA02746996.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3876cc8a627e69b2583149b36f14b250a229a627 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746996/EFTA02746996.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,290 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02746996.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 11304, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.17, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "The Psychological Trauma Center", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.74, + 63.99000000000001 + ], + [ + 386.4329833984375, + 63.99000000000001 + ], + [ + 386.4329833984375, + 76.8397216796875 + ], + [ + 241.74, + 76.8397216796875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 94 + ], + [ + "Text", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 249 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 380 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 317 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 458 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02746996" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747003/EFTA02747003.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747003/EFTA02747003.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8d7aea720efd56bc7d12b580ca6fe919424537ce --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747003/EFTA02747003.md @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@ +Jane Doe 07 + +V. Jeffrey Epstein + +## M,D, + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W. Hall, M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W.Ill M.D. I am over the age of majority, and rnalce this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 19%. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and + +it + +![](_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg) + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. + +Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +' 9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and InternalMedicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe /7 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe 17 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiffs counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. laiman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kliman, MD, is the medical director. + +14. While all pertinent medical history has been withheld, on October 4, 2005, Plaintiff did provide astatement to the police, which directly conflicts with the allegations in her complaint. Medical records would assist with the veracity (or lack thereof) of her statements and the allegations in the complaint. Plaintiff told the police on October 4, 2005 that she was introduced to Epstein by essimpwhen she was approximately 17. (Police Statement, page 1) se allegedly told her that the first time you go it's just like a massage and she said "well, like, well the more you go supposedly, the more like, he expects, and like flirting with girls and that's what kind of scared her." (Police Statement, page 2) She also states that the second time she went to Epstein's, she gave him amassage and that she had her clothes on. (Police Report, pages 2 & 4) Plaintiff claims she thought Epstein might be leaning towards wanting her to take her clothes off, or touching her but Epstein never did because she was so shy. (Police Statement, pages 2 & 3) She also told police that when she massaged Epstein, he was not naked (Police Statement, page 3), he never removed his towel (Police Statement, page 3), she did not take her clothes off (Police Statement, page 4), Epstein did not touch her inappropriately (Police Statement page 3), he did not masturbate (Police Statement, page 5), and they did not touch each other's private areas (Police Statement, page 3). Further, she claims in the report not to have returned to Epstein's home after the second visit (Police Report, page 3) + +15. Her allegations in the complaint are in complete opposite when compared to the police report For instance, the complaint alleges: (a) during the first massage, Epstein sexually assaulted her and masturbated (Complaint. Paragraph 13); and (b) Plaintiff returned on many occasions to the Palm Beach mansion to provide Epstein with massages for money. On those occasions, Epstein engaged in sexual contact and activity with Plaintiff, which included, among other things, Epstein touching Jane's breasts, placing a vibrator on her vagina and masturbating himself. This sexual abuse continued over a period of approximately 18 to 24 months (Complaint Paragraph 14). In stark contrast to the statement she gave to the police, she now claims in her answers to interrogatories that she went to Epstein's home between 8-10 times (Interrogatory, #15) and that she brought friends on two separate occasions and was paid \$200 per friend (Interrogatory, #17). In fact, she denies in her answers to interrogatories that she even provided arecorded statement to the police (Interrogatory, #22). In addition, on Tape 2, pages 11,12 er\_20, she claims that Epstein was aggressive, grabbed her butt, tried to feel parts of her, masturbated under the towel and pulled her bra and exposed her nipples and touched her breasts, which is totally inconsistent with her statement to the police. + +16. For further elaboration of Jane Doe #7's history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +17. In Dr. Klirnan's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, ADA nf a medical, clinical school andmoils recordsknown to the attorney in the case. + +18. Dr. ICliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "availableimportant allii relevant documentswinch are Dieingdeliberately withheld from "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, wad:km/shave requested Qr thatwShave stated would ordinarily be part of medical opinion formation on tha topics concerning, which ourinput is requested." We request the same. + +19. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sodocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintance or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +20. It is also essential to understand the plaintiff's level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +21. Knowledge of plaintiffs relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +22. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him afun and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. These, in essence, are the same and similar records that plaintiff's expert witness (Dr. Kliman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation\_ To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories + +and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and such other similar information be made available to us to conduct our examination. + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South +Florida +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida +College of Medicine + +STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared **RICHARD C.W.** +**M.D.**, who is ( ✓ ) personally known to me or ( ) who has produced +\_\_\_\_\_ as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that +the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this 4th day of August +2009. + +![](_page_7_Picture_110.jpeg) + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747003/EFTA02747003.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747003/EFTA02747003.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b04e02fc5468f797920272c3aaecac333366ead3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747003/EFTA02747003.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,343 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747003.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 11373, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.81, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg", + "_page_7_Picture_110.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "M,D,", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 195.84, + 204.93 + ], + [ + 449.8877868652344, + 204.93 + ], + [ + 449.8877868652344, + 226.8 + ], + [ + 195.84, + 226.8 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 206 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 288 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 277 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 348 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 337 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 328 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 304 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 37 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747003" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747003/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747003/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cd8b46981c06697501ee778f965db21c62635001 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747003/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f031c43b7c23e52a1a56cfb5db972d18cdcfa38db650adfa262a86ec8c79858a +size 9679 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747003/_page_7_Picture_110.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747003/_page_7_Picture_110.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5cc24541de5d78fa63f2dae3baef811d759881e6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747003/_page_7_Picture_110.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e4296ef0e7cb28813d90ac3bf22c4923816fc2affc713fce363b5a91572c2f35 +size 10995 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747011/EFTA02747011.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747011/EFTA02747011.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..48b82a6d763c17e9099aa2eeb1f806c80dafd272 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747011/EFTA02747011.md @@ -0,0 +1,238 @@ +**CURRICULUM VITAE** + +![]()"G" + +#### TABLE OF CONTENTS + +| PRESENT POSITION | 2 | +|---------------------------------------------|----------| +| EDUCATION | 2 | +| MEDICAL LICENSE | 2 | +| CERTIFICATION | 3 | +| ADDITIONAL TRAINING | 3 | +| SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS , PAST AND PRESENT | 3 | +| COMMITTEES | 3 | +| HONORS | 4 | +| PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES | 4 | +| REVIEWER | 5 | +| BOOK REVIEWS | 5 | +| PUBLICATIONS | 5 | +| ABSTRACTS | 7 | +| PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL | MEETINGS | +| AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES | 9 | +| MEDIA | 12 | + +NAME: Ryan Chaloner Winton in M.D. + +DATE OF BIRTH: May 10, 1976 + +PLACE OF BIRTH: Titusville, Florida + +MARITAL STATUS: Single + +#### PRESENT POSITION: + +07/2008 — Present Psychiatrist Richard C. W. MD, PA 2500 West Lake ary Blvd; Ste 219 Lake Mary, FL 32746 Ph: 407-322-8199 + +03/01/2008 - 07/31/2011 Affiliate Instructor University of South Florida Department of Psychiatry + +03/03/09 — Assistant Professor of Psychiatry 06/30/12 University of Central Florida College of Medicine Department of Medical Education + +#### EDUCATION: + +1995-1999 Johns University Baltimore,Maryland Double Major - Biology and Psychology B.A. Degree, graduated Phi Beta Kappa with honors + +1999- 2003 Georgetown University School of Medicine Washington, DC M.D. Degree + +2003 -2004 Internal Medicine Internship Sinai Hospital of Baltimore/Johns Baltimore, Maryland + +2004 -2007 Resideii Johns Hospital Departmer,Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Baltimore, Maryland + +2007 - 2008 Fellow in Forensic Psychiatry Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio + +#### MEDICAL LICENSE: + +2004Maryland — D62746 - Inactive 2007 Ohio — 89483 - Inactive 2007 Florida — ME99792 + +#### CERTIFICATION: + +2008Diplomate, American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, #58286 + +# ADDITIONAL TRAINING: + +2006 Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Chicago, IL + +2007Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Miami Beach, FL + +2008 Florida Forensic Examiner Training University of South Florida College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, Ft. Lauderdale, FL + +# SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT: + +Member, Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine + +Member, American Psychiatric Association + +Member, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +Member, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +Member, American Medical Association + +Member, Ohio Psychiatric Association + +Member, Florida Psychiatric Society + +Member, Southern Psychiatric Association + +Member, The American College of Psychiatrists + +#### COMMITTEES: + +2005- 2007 Public Relations Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +2005 - 2007 2005 - 2007 2005 - 2007 2007 - present 2007 - present 2007 - 2009 2008 - 2009 Legislative Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society Disaster Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society Resident and Fellows Committee, Maryland Psychiatry Society Psychopharmacology Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Research Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, American Psychiatric Association Member, New Member Task Force, Southern Psychiatric Association + +#### HONORS: + +1999Phi Beta Kappa, Johns University 2004"Superior" performance rating, 1st-year residency, by Sinai Hospital Department of Medicine's Clinical Competency and Evaluation Committee 2005Dorfman Award, presented by The Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine for best review article of the year for Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3):195-202, May-June 2005. 2005Rappeport Fellowship, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +#### PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES: + +2008Written testimony on Elder Abuse in support of bills HB873/S8501 Criminal Law — Crimes Against the Elderly or Persons with a Disability — Penalties, pr.. Maryland House J Committee for Delegate Kramer, District 19 County, Maryland. Hearing March 4. 2009Central Florida Psychiatric Society representative to Florida Psychiatric Society's Council Meeting, January 10. + +2009Testified before the Florida Senate Banking and Insurance Committee (SB 354) on Mental Health Parity. March 17. + +#### REVIEWER: + +-Archives of Internal Medicine -Clinical Geriatrics -Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness -European Psychiatry -Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience -Nature Clinical Practice Neurology -Neurology India -Psychosomatics -Social Science & Medicine -World Journal of Surgical Oncology + +# BOOK REVIEWS: + +- 1. Clark MR and Treisman GJ: Pain and Depression: An Interdisciplinary, Patient-Centered Approach. Psychosomatics, July-August 2006, 47(4)365-366. + +#### PUBLICATIONS: + +- 1. RCW, Dunlap PK, RCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid disease and abnormal thyroid function tests in patients with eating disorders and depression. The Journal of the Florida Medical Association, Inc. 82(3)187-192, 1995. +- 2. El RCW, RCW: Anxiety and Endocrine Disease. In Popkin, MK, Seminars in Clinical Neuropsychiatry 4(2)72-83, 1998. +- 3. III RCW, DE, RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts. Psychosomatics 40:(1)18-27, 1999. +- 4. III RCW, RCW: Fee-Splitting: Ethical Implications and Principles for Practice Management. Transference 20(2)14, 1999. +- 5. RCW, RCW: Long-term Psychological and Neurological Complications of Lindane Poisoning. Psychosomatics 40(6)513-517, 1999. +- 6. RCW, RCW: False Allegations: The Role of the Forensic Psychiatrist. Journal of Psychiatric Practice 7(5)343-346, September 2001. +- 7. III RCW, RCW: Principles of Physician Recruiting. In Handbook of Mental + +Health Administration and Management; Reid WI-I and Silver S (ed.): Brunner-Routledge, New York, NY; Chapter 34:440-448, 2003. + +- 8. RCW, CW, Chapman M: Identifying Geriatric Patients at Risk for Suicide and Depress on. Clinical Geriatrics 11(10)36-44, October 2003. +- 9. IIIIRCW, RCW: Establishing Liaison Before Disaster Strikes. http://www.psyc .org/disasterpsych/pdfs/apadisasterhandbk.pdf; Chapter 2:12-19. 2004. +- 10. •RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Emotional and Psychiatric Effects of Weapons of Mass Destruction in First Responders. In: Bioterrorism: Psychological and Public Health Interventions; Ursano RJ, Norwood AE & Fullerton CS (eds). Cambridge University Press:Cambridge; Chapter 14:250-273; 2004. +- 11. IIIRCW, Appleby B, 1FRCW: Atypical Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome Presenting as Fever o nknown Origin in the Elderly. Southern Medical Journal 1(98) 114-117, January 2005. +- 12. ERCW, MRCW, Chapman MJ: Exploitation of the Elderly: Undue Influence as aForm of Elder Abuse. Clinical Geriatrics 13(2)28-36, February 2005. +- 13. -RCW, MRCW, Chapman MJ: Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications° Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3)195-202, May-June 2005. +- 14. p RCW, IIRCW: Abuse of Supraphysiologic Doses of Anabolic Steroids. outhern Me ical Journal, 98(5)550-555, May 2005. +- 15. -RCW, IIIRCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Complications of Anabolic Steroid Abuse. Psychosomatics, 46(4)285-290, July-August 2005. +- 16. F IRCW, IIIRCW, Chapman MJ: Medical and Psychiatric Casualties caused by onventiona and Radiological (Dirty) Bombs. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(3):242-248, May-June 2006. +- 17. .RCW, IIIIIRCW, Chapman MJ: Postconcussional Syndrome: A Work in Progress (Response to Dr. In. Letter to the Editor. Psychosomatics, 47(3):272, May-June 2006. +- 18. .RCW, ERCW, Chapman MJ: Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome in the Elderly: Diagnostic Criteria, Incidence, Risk Factors, Pathophysiology, and Treatment. (CME article) Clinical Geriatrics, 14(5):39-46, 2006. +- 19. .RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part I: Medical an Psychiatric Complications of Bombings and Biological, Chemical, and Nuclear Attacks. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(8):26-35, 2006. 20.. RCW, EIRCW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part + +2: Posttraumatic Stress, Acute Stress, and Affective Disorders. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(9):17-24, 2006. + +- 21. MRCW,pRCW: Malingering of PTSD: forensic and diagnostic considera ons, characteristics of malingerers and clinical presentations. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(6):525-535, 2006. +- 22. IIIRCW, IERCW: A Profile of Pedophilia: Definition, Characteristics of Offenders, Recidivism, Treatment Outcomes, and Forensic Issues. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 82(4):457-471, 2007. +- 23. .RCW, ERCW: Detection of Malingered PTSD: An Overview of Clinical, Psychometric, and Physiological Assessment: Where Do We Stand? Journal of Forensic Sciences, 52(3):717-725, 2007. +- 24. -RCW, Macvaugh GS III, Merideth P, J: Commentary: Delving Further Into Liability for Psychotherapy i . m vsion. l i The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 35(2):196-9, 2007. +- 25. ERCW, -RCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Effects of Terrorism: Medical and Societal Implications of Recent Attacks. In: Focus on Terrorism, Vol. 9; Linden EV (ed), Nova Science:New York; Chapter 11, Publication date: 31° Quarter, 2007. +- 26. .RCW, ERCW: The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak Model of virus properties on system capacity and function: A lesson for future viral epidemics. American Journal of Disaster Medicine, 2(5):270-276, 2007 +- 27. -RCW, IIIRCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part I— Causative Agents, Presentation, and Differential Diagnosis. Clinical Geriatrics, 15(12):18-25, 2007. +- 28. .RCW, ■RCW, **Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part II Pathophysiology, Drug Interactions, and Treatment. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(1):24-28, 2008 29INIRCW, Resnick PJ: Psychotherapy Malpractice: New Pitfalls. Journal of Psychiatric Practice, 14(2):119-121, 2008 30IIIRCW, IIIRCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part I — Occurrence in Forensic/Criminal Situations, Partner Relationships, and Sexual Offenses. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(5):27-32, 2008 31.. RCW,** ■ **RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part II — Occurrence in Hospitals and Pharmacological/Behavioral Treatment of Agitation, Aggression and Violence. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(6):28-32, 2008. 32.. RCW,** ■ **RCW, Chapman MJ. The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak: lessons hospitals and physicians can apply to future viral epidemics. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2008Sep-Oct;30(5):446-52. Epub 2008 Jul 23** + +- 33.. RCW, SH: Drug Diversion Program Rights. Legal Digest. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 36(4):579-580, 2008 34.. RCW, ■ **RCW, Chapman MJ: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Interventions. Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009** +- **35. Paul RK, Lockey C,. RCW, Bursztajn H: Practice Management Managing Risks When Practicing in Three-Party Care Settings. Psychiatrictimes.com, 26(2), Feb. 3, 2009.** +- **36. El RCW, I. RCW, Chapman MJ: Letter to the Editor response re: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Interventions) Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009), Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(4):17-21, 2009. 37.. RCW,** ■ **RCW, Myers W, Chapman M: Testamentary Capacity: History, Physicians' Role, Requirements, and Why Wills are Challenged. Clinical Geriatrics, in press.** + +**\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W.., MD** + +### **ABSTRACTS:** + +- **1. RCW, Hazard SC,. RCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid Disease in Eating Disordered and Depressed Patients. -146th Annual Meeting, American Psychiatric Association, May 25, 1993, San Francisco, CA, P.1.57 (Poster Session).** +- **2. RCW, DE, RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts: Evaluation of Suicide Risk in a Time of Managed Care.** + - **Psychiatric Practice and Managed Care, American Psychiatric Association, Vol. 5, No. 5, P 12, Sept-Oct 1999.** +- **3. RCW, Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J: The Role of Morphine in the Development of Acute Stress Disorder and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Severe Burn Injury.** + - **4151 Annual Meeting, American Burn Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009.** +- **4. Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J, RCW: Peri-traumatic Heart Rate as a Predictor of Acute Stress Disorder and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Burn Injury.** + +- 41" Annual Meeting, American Bum Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009. + +\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W.., MD PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES: + +- 1. RCW, Hazard SC, Dunlap PK,I. RCW,.. CA, Blakey J: Thyroid disease and abnormal function tests in patients with eating disorders and depression. Poster Session - American Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, May 25, 1993 +- 2. RCW,Ill RCW: Management of Hostage Situations. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999 +- 3. a RCW, RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective — Part I. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999 +- 4. In RCW,MI RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective - Part II. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999 +- 5. RCW,Ill RCW,. DE: Impact of Managed Care on Suicide Risk Assessment. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 1999 Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD, October 15, 1999 +- 6. El RCW,. RCW: Ethical Issues in Managed Care. American Psychiatric Association, 1999 Ethics Workshop, Washington, DC, November 3, 1999 +- 7. **RCW, RCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Disaster Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **8. III RCW, RCW: Bioterrorism Dealing with Medical and Psychiatric Consequences of Victims and Responders. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **9. RCW, RCW: Psychiatric Consequences of Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Disaster. Rocky Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 29, 2000** +- **10. III RCW, RCW: Suicide in an Era of HMO's and Managed Care. Rocky** + +Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 30, 2000 + +- 11. MIRCW, FIRCW: Psychological Response to Disasters and Terrorism. Intemationa ociety of Political Psychology, 23rd Annual Scientific Meeting, Seattle, WA, July 4, 2000 +- 12. MRCW, MRCW: Biological Warfare Attack Scenarios, Response to Terrorist Attacks, and Sources of Conflict. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000 +- 13. F RCW, IIIRCW, Chapman M: Workplace Violence. American Academy of sychiatry an the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000 +- 14. MRCW, IIIRCW: Biological Warfare: Attack Scenarios and Public Health Issues. Grand Rounds, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, December 8, 2000 +- 15. MRCW, MRCW: Bioterrorism: A Short History of Biowarfare & Analysis of the Threat. Grand Rounds, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, August 15, 2001 +- 16. PlRCW, ItIORCW: Situational Suicide. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, Septem r 13, 2001 +- 17. RCW, MRCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Halifax Medical !ter, Daytona Beach, FL, September 14, 2001 +- 18. MRCW, RCW Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Assault with Anthrax as a Biological eapon. -Florida Psychiatric Society, Fall Meeting, Coconut Grove, FL, November 4, 2001 -Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002 +- 19. .RCW: Smallpox. Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health ciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002 +- 20. MI RCW, IFRCW: Psychopharmacology Forensic Risk and Clinical Practice: T ings the clinician must know. Apopka Community Health Center, Apopka, FL, March 13, 2002 +- 21. MRCW,IFRCW: Overview of Terrorism and Bioterrorism. Orlando Police Academy, r ando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002 +- 22. MI RCW, **RCW: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002** +- **23. MI RCW, RCW: Smallpox as aBiological Weapon. Orlando Police** + +Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002 + +- 24. RCW, MRCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Southern sychiatric Association Annual Meeting, Loews Ventana Canyon Resort, Tucson, AZ, October 3, 2002 +- 25. RCW, RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Mandatory adness, aax Medical Center, Daytona USA, Daytona Beach, FL, December 14, 2002 +- 26. ERCW, MIRCW, Chapman MJ: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003 +- 27. •RCW, -RCW: Medical and Psychological Sequelae of Bombings: Implications for First Responders and Critical Government Staff. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003 +- 28. RCW, MIRCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Florida sychiatric ociety Spring Meeting, Orlando, FL, April 5, 2003 +- 29. p RCW, IIIRCW: Terrorist Bombings: Medical and Psychiatric Impact outhern Psy iatric Association's Annual Meeting, Nashville, TN, October 11, 2003 +- 30. INIRCW, IURCW: Terrorism, Bombings, and Psychiatric Casualties. University o orida, Department of Psychiatry, Visiting Professor Program, November 7, 2003 +- 31. MRCW, MRCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Tampa Bay Psychiatric Society, Tampa, FL, sponsored by Pfizer, January 29, 2004 +- 32. p RCW,uRCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Orlando olice Aca emy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004 +- 33. RCW, Medical and Psychiatric Casualties of Terrorist Bombings. rlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004 +- 34. ■RCW, **RCW: Medical and Psychological Consequences of Bombings. Grand Rounds, Tulane University, Department of Psychiatry, New Orleans, LA, January 28, 2005** +- **35. RCW, IIIRCW: Psychological Sequelae of Weapons of Mass Destruction on First Responders. South Central Center for Public Health Preparedness/Alabama Department of Public Health, MIMI AL, Satellite Conference, May 6, 2005** +- **36. F RCW, RCW: Medical and Psychological Aspects of Terrorist Bombings. rand Rounds, Sinai Hospital, Department of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, June 2, 2005** + +- 37. ERCW, EIRCW: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationship: The New Realities. (Abbreviated version) Forensic Psychiatry Fellows and Residents, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, January 24, 2006 +- 38. El RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationship: The New Realities. Presidential Address. Southern Psychiatric Association, Baltimore, MD, September 30, 2006. +- 39. ERCW, RCW: When the System is Overwhelmed: Protecting the Provider during Biodisaster. Satellite Conference, University of Alabama Birmingham South Central Center for Public Health Preparedness/Alabama Department of Public Health/Tulane University School of Public Health, Ella AL, February 27, 2007. +- 40. El RCW: Testamentary Capacity from Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole!, Grand Rounds, Case Western Reserve School of Medicine, Cleveland, arc 28, 2008 +- 41. ■RCW, **RCW, Rundell JR, Winstead DK: Psychiatrists' Role in Disaster Management: Lessons Learned. Course 14, American Psychiatric Association, Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, May 3, 2008.** +- **42. El RCW: Violence in the Elderly: Forensic and Treatment Concerns. Forensic Forum, Florida Psychiatric Society, ChampionsGate, FL, September 20, 2008.** +- **43. ERCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole ME Southern Psychiatric Association, September 25, 2008.** +- **44. MRCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole Forensic Psychiatry Program, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, January 29, 2009.** +- **45. RCW, RCW: Domestic Violence as Portrayed in Film A Realistic Appraisal? Florida Psychiatric Society, St. Petersburg Beach, FL, March 20, 2009.** +- **46. El RCW, Silberman E, Preven D, Weissman S (chairperson): Indications for the Use of Combined Talking Therapy and Pharmacotherapy and How to Teach in Residency. Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, CW16, American Psychiatric Association, San Francisco, CA, May 19, 2009.** + +**\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W.., MD** + +#### **MEDIA:** + +- **1. Time Magazine, Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome, May 16, 2005** +- **2. Reach MD Radio, Pedophilia. April 25, 2007** + +- 3. MD Consult. Doug.... Joint telephone interview with Richard C. W.I., MD, Pedophilia. May 2, 2007 +- 4. The Korean Broadcasting System, KBS Special, Pedophilia. March 11, 2008. +- 5. Tony Pipitone, WKMG-TV Channel 6, Mothers Who Kill Their Children. October 28, 2008. +- 6. J. L.S. Orlando Medical News. Cyberchondriacs. November 13, 2008. +- 7. Fox 35 News, Orlando. Forensic Implications of.. Anthony case. December 11, 2008. +- 8. Fox 35 News, Orlando. The Anthony Case: DNA Evidence. December 12, 2008. +- 9. Jessica WKMG-TV Channel 6. The Anthony Case: Baker Act and Stressors. January 23, 2009. +- 10. Nam Nae Won and Jihyun Song. Korea Educational Broadcasting System. Pedophilia. March 30, 2009. +- 11. Keith Landry, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress and Financial Strain. June 15, 2009. +- 12. Heidi Hatch, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress on Families. June 16, 2009. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747011/EFTA02747011.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747011/EFTA02747011.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b1a903bc5f5f8bbd93a409e8ba80be60bae3de4f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747011/EFTA02747011.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,969 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747011.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 23074, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.2, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "CURRICULUM VITAE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 367.74 + ], + [ + 368.424, + 367.74 + ], + [ + 368.424, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 384.75 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TABLE OF CONTENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 243.57600000000002, + 82.62 + ], + [ + 369.7461853027344, + 82.62 + ], + [ + 369.7461853027344, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 243.57600000000002, + 95.58 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRESENT POSITION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.768, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 189.4978790283203, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 189.4978790283203, + 224.37 + ], + [ + 69.768, + 224.37 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EDUCATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.05199999999999, + 413.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 149.51882934570312, + 413.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 149.51882934570312, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 74.05199999999999, + 426.06000000000006 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDICAL LICENSE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.768, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 180.11245727539062, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 180.11245727539062, + 110.1915283203125 + ], + [ + 69.768, + 110.1915283203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.768, + 173.34 + ], + [ + 164.35552978515625, + 173.34 + ], + [ + 164.35552978515625, + 186.521728515625 + ], + [ + 69.768, + 186.521728515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ADDITIONAL TRAINING:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.768, + 235.70999999999998 + ], + [ + 204.00234985351562, + 235.70999999999998 + ], + [ + 204.00234985351562, + 249.69158935546875 + ], + [ + 69.768, + 249.69158935546875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.828, + 397.71 + ], + [ + 332.37274169921875, + 397.71 + ], + [ + 332.37274169921875, + 413.1460876464844 + ], + [ + 72.828, + 413.1460876464844 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COMMITTEES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.5, + 650.4300000000001 + ], + [ + 159.00485229492188, + 650.4300000000001 + ], + [ + 159.00485229492188, + 663.5104522705078 + ], + [ + 76.5, + 663.5104522705078 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "HONORS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.216, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 128.82467651367188, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 128.82467651367188, + 346.59967041015625 + ], + [ + 72.216, + 346.59967041015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 547.5600000000001 + ], + [ + 232.96958923339844, + 547.5600000000001 + ], + [ + 232.96958923339844, + 559.8883972167969 + ], + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 559.8883972167969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REVIEWER:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.768, + 151.47 + ], + [ + 135.864, + 151.47 + ], + [ + 135.864, + 163.35113525390625 + ], + [ + 69.768, + 163.35113525390625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BOOK REVIEWS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.44, + 326.43 + ], + [ + 167.76869201660156, + 326.43 + ], + [ + 167.76869201660156, + 340.40606689453125 + ], + [ + 73.44, + 340.40606689453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PUBLICATIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 75.276, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 164.80511474609375, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 164.80511474609375, + 416.5143737792969 + ], + [ + 75.276, + 416.5143737792969 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ABSTRACTS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 72.216, + 387.18 + ], + [ + 148.5341339111328, + 387.18 + ], + [ + 148.5341339111328, + 400.5172119140625 + ], + [ + 72.216, + 400.5172119140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDIA:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.5, + 628.5600000000001 + ], + [ + 120.1902847290039, + 628.5600000000001 + ], + [ + 120.1902847290039, + 641.5696868896484 + ], + [ + 76.5, + 641.5696868896484 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "Line", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 84 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "TableOfContents", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 195 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 178 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 248 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 262 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 360 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 379 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 333 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 396 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 355 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 362 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 351 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747011" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747025/EFTA02747025.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747025/EFTA02747025.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..58f729e6181433b6a1948b3f893fdbad7076006a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747025/EFTA02747025.md @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +# Defendant Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion To Compel Plaintiff, Jane Doe #7's Independent Medical Examination Pursuant to Rule 35 + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his attorneys, and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 35 and other applicable rules, hereby moves this Court for an order directing that the Plaintiff, Jane Doe #7 (case #80993), submit to acompulsory psychological/psychiatric medical examination (a/k/a independent medical examination) by Ryan M.D. of Richard M.D. at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP. located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401. In support, Epstein states: + +#### Background + +1. This Court entered an order relating to the IME of CMA, another Plaintiff seeking similar damages against Epstein. See Exhibit "A" Given the damages claimed in this matter, it is clear that Plaintiff has placed her medical condition at issue + +and that an IME is required. Despite that fact and the fact that discovery has been consolidated, Defendant is required to file a Rule 35 Motion seeking an IME. Thus, the undersigned believes that an Omnibus Order is required relative to all Plaintiffs' IMEs in that each claim similar damages and raise similar claims. Such an order would conserve judicial resources and require that the attorneys only negotiate dates and times for said IMEs. + +2. Nonetheless, this particular Motion, pursuant to Rule 35, only addresses the IME of Jane Doe #7. + +3. Plaintiff has alleged in her action that Defendant sexually battered her and, as aresult, Plaintiff seeks millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, "confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries." See Amended Complaint. (DE 19) Plaintiff, Jane Doe #7, also claims Epstein "intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Jane Doe, creating reasonable fear of imminent peril. . . [and] [a]s a proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane Doe, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages." Id. at ¶¶ 17-21. Jane Doe #7 further alleges that she suffered ". . .mental or sexual injury. . .that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. . .[andj. . .Jane Doe has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain." Id. at ¶¶ 25-27. + +4. On October 4, 2005, Jane Doe #7 gave a sworn, taped statement to the police, and stated that Epstein was not naked and he never removed his towel. Epstein did not touch his private areas, nor did he ask her to, and Epstein never touched her + +private areas. She further stated that she did not take her clothes off and Epstein did not masturbate. See Exhibit "B" This is in complete contrast to what she alleges in her Amended Complaint. See Supra. + +5. In her answers to Interrogatories, Jane Doe #7 claims she went to Epstein's residence eight (8) to ten (10) times, brought friends on two (2) occasions, and was paid \$200.00 per friend. See Exhibit "C" Again, this is in total contrast to what Plaintiff told the police under oath. See Supra. Further she denies in her answers to interrogatories making arecorded statement with the police. See Supra. + +6. Now after obtaining a lawyer and in an attempt to recover millions of dollars, Jane Doe #7 told her expert, Dr. Kliman that during her second visit to Epstein's, she took off her shirt and gave him a massage in her bra. She then tells Dr. Kliman that either on the last time or one of the last times she went to Epstein's; he grabbed her butt and tried to feel parts of her body. See Exhibit "D" Again, this is in complete contradiction to her sworn, taped police statement and the allegations detailed in her Amended Complaint. In fact, Paragraphs 13 and 14 of her Amended Complaint allege Epstein sexually assaulted her and masturbated on the very first visit, yet she continued to return for a period of approximately 18-24 months. See Supra. + +7. In addition, Jane Doe #7 tells her expert Dr. Kliman that she "doesn't trust guys," doesn't have a good prospective on sex because of Mr. Epstein, and is "shy around people." However, in the exact same interview with Dr. Kliman, Jane Doe #7 states she is a senior at the University of Central Florida, majoring in hospitality management with a 3.2 grade point average. She also claims to be in a serious + +relationship with a boyfriend. See Exhibit "E" It is clear that Jane Doe #7 has significant problems telling the truth to even her own attorneys and experts. + +8. Furthermore, it is important for this court to review the detailed Affidavit of Dr. ■attached **hereto in that it delineates for the Court several categories that Dr.** ■ **must cover with Jane Doe #7 in order to assess her claims for damages including, but not limited to, social relationships, family, past suicide attempts, past physical and emotional experiences, criminal history, sexual history, psychiatric histories and past medical history, etc...See Affidavit of Dr.** ■Attached **hereto as Exhibit "F"** + +**9. Based upon the foregoing, it is clear that Jane Doe #7 has placed her physical, emotional, medical and psychological conditions at issue. Therefore, an IME is warranted. Without an IME, Epstein would be severely prejudiced. The Affidavit of Dr.** ■ **clearly sets out the IME and scope of the examination that must be conducted. See also the curriculum vitae of Dr. Ryan. See Exhibit "G" The examination is set to occur at the undersigned's office on November 9, 10, 11, 12, or 13, 2009 (whichever is more convenient for Plaintiff or whichever date the court so orders). Plaintiff has not provided dates for the IME; however, out of abundance of caution and to comply with the applicable rule, Defendant has, on a unilateral basis, set same pending the outcome of this Motion. Obviously, if the date noticed is not sufficient or agreeable, the undersigned will renotice same for one of the four dates suggested; however, this Court must order same to occur.** + +**10. As this court is well aware, Plaintiff and Defendant are required to complete discovery under the Court's trial schedule. It is not the undersigned's intention to require the court additional work; however, it is imperative that discovery be** + +timely scheduled and completed. The court's assistance is needed in this instance as to the IME. + +11. Based upon the foregoing, an IME of Plaintiff must occur in order to address her claims and the damages she seeks to recover. The IME is expected to last between 6-8 hours, and the scope of same is set forth in the Affidavit of Dr. + +12. Pursuant to Rule 35, Fed.R.Civ.Pro, a party may move for an examination by a qualified examiner if the Plaintiffs mental/emotional and/or psychological status is at issue in a case. + +13. Defendant would be severely prejudiced unless he is able to have an examination conducted by a qualified examiner separate and apart from any psychologist/psychiatrist or similar behavioral health provider who may have or may ultimately see the Plaintiff and testify in court. + +14. Defendant's counsel has retained the services of Richard ■, **M.D. and Ryan** ■, **M.D., of C.W.** ■, **M.D., P.A. located at 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd., #219 Lake Mary, FL 32746. Ryan** ■, **M.D., will be performing the examination. Dr. Ryan Halls' specialties include forensic psychiatry, general psychiatry and medical psychiatry. See Exhibit attached outlining Ryan M, M.D.'s qualifications and the scope of the examination which he intends and is required to conduct in order to render a report. See also Affidavit of Ryan C.W.** ■, **M.D., outlining the scope of examination and other Rule 35 requirements. Accordingly, this motion comports with Rule 35. The applicable notice has been filed simultaneously. Defendant will arrange for a videotape of the examination.** + +15. The undersigned is requesting the court's assistance with regard to compelling the IME of Plaintiff along with dates for same to occur. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff by telephone and by email; however, an agreement has not been reached. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an Order: + +a. providing adate and time for Plaintiffs IME to occur on November 9, 10, 11, 12 or 13, 2009; + +b. providing that the independent medical examination take place at 9:00 a.m. (on adate to be determined by the court) at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP. located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401 under the protocol set forth by Dr.. in his affidavit, by videotape and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +## Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foreggifig was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that he foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identifie n the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 'n day of 2009 + +Respectfully submit + +By: RO R ON, JR., ESQ" rida :ar No. 224162 rcritAbcIclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpikeAbciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +### Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRN + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattornev.com ahorowitzasexabuseattornev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08- 80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhwAhotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. n Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +Brad Esq. RothsWenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards(a,rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp@law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. e Lai., P.A. atura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidroqarciaabellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsxasearcvlaw.com jphftsearcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecfAbrucereinhartlaw. om Counsel for Defendant + +cc. Dr. Ryan III + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsberqAbodhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jaqesqAbellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747025/EFTA02747025.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747025/EFTA02747025.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c9f429f15ef1ada805e1b1f2a633a42ccde44162 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747025/EFTA02747025.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,447 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747025.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 11971, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.29, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 409.428, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 409.428, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion To Compel Plaintiff, Jane Doe #7's \nIndependent Medical Examination Pursuant to Rule 35", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 521.424, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 521.424, + 393.38775634765625 + ], + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 393.38775634765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.176, + 599.4000000000001 + ], + [ + 349.5818786621094, + 599.4000000000001 + ], + [ + 349.5818786621094, + 612.8011932373047 + ], + [ + 274.176, + 612.8011932373047 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 159.732, + 185.49 + ], + [ + 456.552, + 185.49 + ], + [ + 456.552, + 200.07 + ], + [ + 159.732, + 200.07 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 489.23999999999995 + ], + [ + 372.900390625, + 489.23999999999995 + ], + [ + 372.900390625, + 503.82 + ], + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 503.82 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 187.272, + 212.22000000000003 + ], + [ + 408.3749694824219, + 212.22000000000003 + ], + [ + 408.3749694824219, + 254.75555419921875 + ], + [ + 187.272, + 254.75555419921875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 214 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 342 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 357 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 347 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 297 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 275 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 301 + ], + [ + "Line", + 70 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 159 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747025" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747033/EFTA02747033.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747033/EFTA02747033.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..25e53823142acea1773b0c38156245c52fd0d6e8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747033/EFTA02747033.md @@ -0,0 +1,249 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #7 (80993) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +I. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan M.D. of C.W. M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on November 12, 2009 at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP, located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring asweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. See infra and Motion attached at DE (319) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well. + +2. Plaintiff has not provided an available date; however, unless a timely and valid objection to this Notice is made, the Plaintiff is required by this Rule to be in attendance at the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as awitness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (319). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (319). See Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documents have been p ided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient notice de. + +> By: MI . PIKE, ESQ. Florida B #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that atrue copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CMJECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 22 day of September, 2009 + +Respectfull + +By: ITTON, JR., ESQ. lo a BatMo. 224162 rcr Pbciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +pinike@bc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAIMIN + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomev.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +229010th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@lotmail.com + +Jack Scuola, Esq. + +Jack P. II, Esq. + +Brad EM Esq. + +Rothsteinii:Cisenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@sra-law.corn + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul O. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +casselln@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. a, Esq. + +LasTirirTn, PA + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsnuth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, 08-80469 + +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +iCounsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +sxasearcvlaw.com + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecfbrucereinl na + +Counsel for Defendant + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberg®podhurst.com + +kezellQpodhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iageso®bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747033/EFTA02747033.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747033/EFTA02747033.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7cf1f541488b050c06ee7ec53a7e0611472a570d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747033/EFTA02747033.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,265 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747033.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4971, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.18, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.18922424316406, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 408.81600000000003, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 408.81600000000003, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 198.18922424316406, + 114.20999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF \nPLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #7 (80993)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 370.98 + ], + [ + 522.0360000000001, + 370.98 + ], + [ + 522.0360000000001, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 405.0 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.204, + 526.5 + ], + [ + 368.45550537109375, + 526.5 + ], + [ + 368.45550537109375, + 540.27 + ], + [ + 255.204, + 540.27 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 249.48 + ], + [ + 365.3012390136719, + 249.48 + ], + [ + 365.3012390136719, + 263.79949951171875 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 263.79949951171875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 202 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 287 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 289 + ], + [ + "Line", + 67 + ], + [ + "Text", + 63 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 174 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 39 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747033" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747037/EFTA02747037.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747037/EFTA02747037.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..474f3253456e5b252f718ae2e00e7f812700382e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747037/EFTA02747037.md @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAJ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, (08-80811) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan ■ **M.D. of C.W.** ■, **M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on October 21, 2009 at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP, located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring a sweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. infra and Notice of Agreement Relative to IME attached at DE (278) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well.** + +**2. Plaintiff and Defendant have agreed that the IME will take place on October 21, 2009.** + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as awitness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (228). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Notice of Agreement Relative to the IME at DE (278). All of the above documents have been pjgvided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient notice has been ma + +> By: MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +HEREBY CERTIFY that atrue copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record ident on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 22 day o ember, 2009 + +Res. submitted, + +By: ROBE D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florid tar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mnike®bc1claw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTT1ER & COLEMAN 515N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARR + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattornev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.., Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Bamhart & P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 Shipley, 08-80469 + +Brad..., Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax casselltelaw.utakedu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +, Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidronarcia@ibellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 isx@searcvlaw.com inh®searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecfbrucereinhar n + +Counsel for Defendant + +Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 rjosefsberapodhurst.com kezellapodhurat.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 iageso@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747037/EFTA02747037.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747037/EFTA02747037.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..adbf2e9848510d4c53b6095e08d20d4ec8b08eae --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747037/EFTA02747037.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,265 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747037.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4767, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.95, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 410.09063720703125, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 410.09063720703125, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 102.87 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION \nOF PLAINTIFF, (08-80811)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 96.084, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 522.0360000000001, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 522.0360000000001, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 96.084, + 393.65999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 435.7800000000001 + ], + [ + 366.3741149902344, + 435.7800000000001 + ], + [ + 366.3741149902344, + 447.93 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 447.93 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARR", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 157.95 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 157.95 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 201.35302734375 + ], + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 201.35302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 226 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 271 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 145 + ], + [ + "Line", + 72 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747037" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/EFTA02747041.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/EFTA02747041.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cd3e668dfd818395e309baa1d1c4919776698b76 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/EFTA02747041.md @@ -0,0 +1,947 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-1VIARRAMIM + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +#### DEFENDANT'S, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO. 4 AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT THEREOF + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, moves this court for an order granting sanctions pursuant to Rule 30(dX2) and (3)(A) and (C) (referencing Rule 37(a)(5)), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and compelling the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4within fifteen (15) days and as grounds therefore would state: + +- 1. On August 16, 2009, the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 was noticed for September 16, 2009 to begin at 1:00 p.m. Plaintiff's counsel had advised that Jane Doe No. 4 could not appear for a deposition prior to that time of day, i.e. 1:00 p.m. +- 2. The deposition was originally set at the offices of the undersigned, but Plaintiff's counsel requested that it be moved to the court reporter's office. The court reporter is Prose Court Reporting located at 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 115, West Palm Beach, FL 33401. + +t + +3. The undersigned's office began attempting to set the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 on July 21, 2009. Because of the number of attorneys who would be attending (based on the court's consolidation order) coordinating the video deposition creates logistical problems. + +4. On August 27, 2009, the undersigned wrote aletter to counsel for the Plaintiff indicating that Mr. Epstein would be present at the deposition. A copy of that letter is attached as Exhibit 1. + +5. Some 13 days later, counsel for Jane Doe No. 4 filed amotion for protective order on September 9, 2009 attempting to prohibit Mr.Epstein's presence at the deposition. The Defendant immediately filed a response (an Emergency Motion) on September 11, 2009 requesting that the court enter an order allowing Epstein, the Defendant in this matter, to attend the deposition. This is common procedure. See Exhibit 2, without exhibits. As of the date of the deposition, the court had not ruled on these motions. + +6. On Monday, counsel for Jane Doe No. 4 and the undersigned spoke, an agreement was reached that the deposition would proceed as scheduled, and that Mr. Epstein would not be in attendance other than by telephone or other means. See Exhibit 3. + +7. The deposition was originally scheduled on the 15th Floor and moved by Prose to alarger ground floor to accommodate the number of people who were to attend + +8. The undersigned and his partner, Mark T. Luttier, had scheduled a meeting with Mr. Epstein for approximately an hour prior to the deposition. It is well known through multiple newspaper articles that Mr. Epstein's office at the Florida Science Foundation is located on the 141° Floor in the same building as the court reporter and Mr. Epstein's criminal attorney, Mr. Goldberger. As well, had the court issued an order prior to the deposition that would have allowed Mr. Epstein to attend, he was readily available. + +9. As of 1:00 p.m., no order had been received from the court, so Epstein's attorneys, in good faith, decided that Epstein would not attend the deposition (as per the agreement), if we chose to proceed, which we were doing. The undersigned and Mr. Luttier specifically waited until just after 1:00 o'clock, the time that the deposition was to start, prior to leaving with Mr. Epstein. Counsel instructed Mr. Epstein to leave the building. Clearly, Defendant and his counsel simply wish to have meaningful discovery. + +I0. The undersigned and Mr. Luttier exited the elevator heading toward the deposition room and Mr. Epstein and his driver, Igor Zinoviev exited in separate elevator at the same time and turned to depart from through the front entrance such that he could go to his home to watch the deposition and assist counsel, from avideo feed. + +11. Completely unbeknownst and unexpected by anyone, apparently the Plaintiff and her attorney(s) were at the front door where Mr. Epstein was intending to exit. Upon seeing two women, one who might be the Plaintiff, Mr. Epstein immediately made aleft turn and exited through a separate set of doors to the garage area. See affidavit of Jeffrey Epstein and Igor Zinoviev, Exhibit 4 and 5, respectively. + +12. The entire incident was completely unknown to the undersigned and Mr. Luttier until Adam Horowitz, Esq. came in and announced that the deposition was not going to take place in that Mr. Epstein and his client saw one another, she was upset and therefore the deposition was cancelled from his perspective. + +13. The undersigned and his partner, Mr. Luttier, had acourt reporter and a videographer present. Additionally, Mr. ■ **on behalf of C.M..A., Adam Langino on behalf of B.B., William Berger on behalf of three Plaintiffs were present for the deposition.** + +14. Any suggestion that the chance "visual" between Mr. Epstein and Jane Doe No. 4 was "pre-planned" would be absurd, disingenuous and false. The undersigned counsel went out of his way to make certain Mr. Epstein would not be in the building after the time the deposition was set to begin. Had the Plaintiff and her counsel been in the deposition room at the appointed time, no visual contact would have occurred. + +15. It is possible that Plaintiff's counsel, by filing their motion for protective order on September 9, 2009 and then advising the undersigned on September 14, 2009 that the deposition would not go forward unless the undersigned agreed to exclude Mr. Epstein from the deposition, were not prepared and/or did not want to proceed with the deposition. + +16. The unilateral termination of the deposition was unnecessary, inappropriate and a substantial waste of attorney time and the costs related to the deposition (court reporter and videographer). (See Affidavit of Robert D. Critton, Jr., Mark T. Luttier and Deposition Transcript, Exhibits 6, 7, and 8 respectively). + +17. Had the "visual" been premeditated, the cancellation of the deposition may have been justified, however, under these circumstances, it was grandstanding and improper. In that the Plaintiff has stated that she voluntary went to JE's home 50 plus times without trauma until she filed a lawsuit, this brief visual encounter from adistance should not have resulted in the unilateral cancellation of her deposition. + +18. The costs associated with the court reporter and videographer total \$428.80. See Exhibit'9. + +## Memorandum of Law In support of Motion + +Asubstantial amount of administrative time went into the setting up the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4. Almost two months passed from the time that the Defendant's counsel first + +requested adate for the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4. The deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 was to begin at 1:00 p.m, based on her schedule, and was moved from the undersigned's office to the office of the court reporter at her counsel's request. + +Pursuant to Rule 30(d)(2) and (3)(A) and (C) and its reference to 37(a)(5)), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court may impose an appropriate sanction, including reasonable expenses in attorneys fees incurred by any party on aperson who impedes or delays the fair examination of the deponent. In this instance, the brief visual encounter, which was completely unintended and inadvertent, should not have been grounds for Plaintiff's counsel and Plaintiff refusing to move forward with the deposition. Furthermore, pursuant to (3)(A) and (C), Plaintiff and Plaintiff's counsel had no right to unilaterally terminate/cancel the deposition and fail to move forward. Plaintiff should have continued with the deposition and filed any motion deemed appropriate postdeposition. Therefore, Defendant is asking for the costs associated with the attendance of the court reporter, her transcript and the presence of the videographer. Defendant would also request reasonable fees for 2.5 hours at \$500 per hour for being required to prepare this motion and affidavits associated with same. + +The records obtained thus far on Jane Doe No. 4, do not reflect any "emotional trauma" by her own account of some 50 plus visits to the Defendant's home prior to the time that she hired an attorney. Even in her interview with attorney's handpicked expert, Dr. Kliman, by her own comments, her significant emotional trauma relates to physical and verbal abuse by a prior boyfriend, Preston Vineyard, and deaths associated with two close friends, Chris and Jen. Therefore, the supposed "emotional trauma" caused by achance encounter resulting in a "glance" at best, should not be the basis for Plaintiff unilaterally cancelling her deposition. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff by telephone and by e-mail; however, an agreement has not been reached. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant moves this court for an order granting sanctions to include attorneys fees and costs as set forth above and costs associated with the attendance of the court reporter, the transcript and the presence of the videographer and direction that Jane Doe No. 4 appear for deposition within fifteen (15) days from the date of the court's order at the court reporter's office. If the court has not issued an order regarding Mr. Epstein's attendance at Plaintiff's deposition when Jane Doe No. 4 is to appear, the Defendant will agree that Mr. Epstein will not be present in the building on the date of her scheduled deposition such that no "inadvertent" contact will occur. + +Robert fib. Critton, Jr. Mic 1 J. Pike Attorneys for Defendant Epstein + +### Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that atrue copy of the foregoing was hand-delivered to the Clerk of the Court as required by the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida and electronically mailed to all counsel of record identified on the following Service List on this (1 y day of September, 2009. + +> Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattornev.cont ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08- 80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08- 80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. a Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsx©searcvlaw.com ivh@seartvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. Shipley, + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 + +Brad-, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@xra-law.corn Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax casselln@law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. , Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidroizarciaQbellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 dosefsberg@nodhurst.cotn kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. + +09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecfQbrucereinhartlaw. + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold-Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +08804 + +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +tleopold@siccilaw.com + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +itozesoObellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully submi + +By: + +ROBERT D. RITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar o. 224162 + +rcrit©bc1c1 .com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mnike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +303Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/213-0164 Fax + +(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +![](_page_8_Picture_2.jpeg) + +A LimmO LIABILRY PARTNERSHIP + +J. MICHAEL BURmAN. PALI OREGON' W. COLEMAN, PA ROBERT D. CRITTON. JP.. PA BERNARD LIBEDEKEP. MARK T. Luna PA. JEFFRIYC PEPIN MICHAEL ). PIKE HEATHER MCNAMARA RUDA DAVID WAWA + +IILONDA 'WAD CERTIPIED avii. num want IADmirru) TO Mono IN FLORIDA AND CoLoRADO + +August 27, 2009 + +## Sent by E.Mall and U.S. Mail + +Stuart S. Mermeistein, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd. Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 + +Re: Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein + +Dear Stuart: + +ADELcan J. BINAVINIE PAPALIOAVRAISTIGOOR IMICACADwELL BOBBIE M. MCKENNA ASHLIE STOKEN4ARINO BETTY Stags PAMI2GALS RITA H. BUDNIK. OP COViCa. ED RIOCI Mt? NSTICE + +Please be advised that Mr. Epstein plans to be in attendance at the deposition of your client. He does not intend to engage In any conversation with your client. However, it is certainly his right as aparty-defendant in the lawsuit to be present and to assist counsel In the defense of any case. + +Cordially ours, + +Robe . Critton, Jr. + +RDC/clz + +cc: Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. + +EXHIBIT / + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAS + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases' + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08.80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 0940469, + +09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +![](_page_9_Picture_14.jpeg) + +## Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion To Strike Plaintiffs Motion For Protective Order (DE 292) And Emergency Motion To Allow The Attendance Of Jeffrey Epstein At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs And Response In Opposition To Plaintiffs', Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion For Protective Order As To Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, by and through his undersigned counsel, and pursuant to all applicable rules, including Local Rule 7.1(e) and Local Rule 12, hereby files and serves his Emergency Motion To Strike Plaintiff's Motion For Protective Order (DE 292) And Emergency Motion To Allow The Attendance Of Jeffrey Epstein At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs And Response In Opposition To Plaintiffs', Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion For Protective Order As To Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs. In support, Epstein states: + +### Introduction and Background + +1. On August 19, 2009, Defendant sent a Notice for Taking the Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 for September 16, 2009. 5.m Exhibit "1" + +EXHIBIL2 + +2. Additionally, notices were sent out in other cases in connection with deposing additional Plaintiffs. + +3. No objection(s) was/were received for Jane Doe No. 4, which was the only deposition set relative to the Jane Doe 2-8 Plaintiffs. + +4. On August 27, 2009, the undersigned counsel sent aletter to counsel for Jane Doe No. 4 concerning her deposition and the scheduling of same on the above date. SheExhibit "2". + +5. No response was received until counsel for Jane Doe No. 4 called on September 8, 2009, approximately eight days prior to the scheduled deposition, to indicate that they now had an objection and would be filing amotion for protective order seeking to preventEpstein from attending the deposition. Once again, Plaintiffs are attempting to stifle this litigation through their own delay tactics during discovery. Plaintiffs wish not only to attempt to force Epstein to trial without any meaningful discovery, but now wish to ban Epstein from any depositions, thereby preventing him from assisting his attorneys in his very own defense. What's next — will Plaintiffs seek to preventEpstein from attending any of the trials that result from the lawsuits Jane Does 2-8 have initiated? Plaintiffs see millions of dollars in damages, both compensatory and punitive, against Defendant. + +6. Defendant is filing this emergency motion and his immediate response to the motion for protective order to guarantee his right to be present and assist counsel in deposing not only Jane Doe No. 4, but other plaintiffs and witnesses in these cases. To hold otherwise would violate F ein's due process rights to defend the very allegations Plaintiffs have alleged against him. Does aDefendant not have a right to be present at depositions or other court proceedings to assist counsel with the defense of his case? Does a Defendant, no matter what the charges or the allegations, have full and unbridled access to the court system and the proceedings it governs, including discovery? The short answer is unequivocally, yes. To hold otherwise would be a direct violation of Epstein's constitutional due process rights. Plaintiffs' attempts to play fast and loose with the law should not be tolerated. + +7. As the court is aware, plaintiffs and defendants routinely attend depositions of parties and other witnesses in both State and Federal court proceedings. In fact, parties have a right under the law to attend such depositions. + +8. As the court will note from Exhibit 2, counsel for the Defendant specifically stated that "Please be advised that Mr. Epstein plans to be in attendance at the deposition of your client. He does not intend to engage in any conversation with your client. However, it is certainly his right as a party-defendant in the lawsuit to be present and to assist counsel in the defense of any case." Despite this right, Plaintiffs continue to attempt to control how discovery is conducted in this case and how this court has historically governed discovery. + +9. Interestingly, in Jane Doe II, the state court case, attorney Sid took the deposition of the Defendant and his client, Jane Doe 11, was presentthroughout the deposition. This is despite her claims of "emotional trauma" set forth in her complaint. Jane Doe No. II is also aPlaintiff in the federal court proceeding Jane Doe II v. Jeffrey Epstein (Case No. 09-CIV-80469). Is this court going to start a precedent where it allows Plaintiffs to attend the depositions of Jeffrey Epstein, but not allow Epstein to attend their depositions (i.e., the very Plaintiffs that have asserted claims against him for millions of dollars)? This court should not condone such a practice. + +10. The undersigned is well aware of the court's No-Contact Order entered on July 31, 2009 (DE 238). A copy of the order is attached as Exhibit "3". In fact, the order provides that the defendant have no direct or indirect contact with the plaintiffs, nor communications with the plaintiffs either directly or indirectly. However, there is no prohibition against Mr. Epstein's attendance at a deposition where, as is reflected in the order, the communication will be made to the plaintiff solely through defense counsel with one or more of plaintiffs' counsel of record present in the room in a videotaped deposition. Obviously, any inappropriate contact or communication will certainly be flagged by the attorneys in attendance. As such, Plaintiffs really have the cart before the horse in this instance (i.e., nothing prevents Epstein from attending these depositions and, to the extent Plaintiffs believe that something improper occurs at any deposition, only then can that circumstance be addressed by amotion such as the instant one.) + +11. Next, Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-8, attempt to use the Affidavit of Dr. Kliman for every motion for protective order/objection filed to date. This also includes the two most recent motions, which attempt to prevent Defendant's investigators from doing their job, such that the Defendant and his attorneys can defend the claims asserted in these cases. Plaintiffs lose sight of the fact that the court, in diseussing the Non-Prosecution Agreement, inquired as to whether Epstein and his counsel could fully defend the case, which included discovery and investigation. All plaintiffs' counsel and the USAO responded in the affirmative. In fact, Plaintiffs universally agreed at the June 12, 2009 hearing on Defendant's Motion to Stay that regular discovery could proceed. Zee Composite Exhibit "4" at pages 26-30 & 33-34. For instance, the court asked Plaintiffs' attorneys the following questions: + +The Court: [) So again, I just want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend acase being prosecuted against him or her, that that in and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to criminal prosecution? (a "A," p.26). \*\*\* + +The Court: You agree he should be able to take the ordinary steps that a defendant in acivil action can take and not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? (Ex. "A," p.27). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: Okay. But again, you're in agreement with everyone else so far that's spoken on behalf of a plaintiff that defending the case in the normal course of conducting discovery and filing motions would not be abreach? (Ex. "A," p.30). + +Mr. Horowitz — counsel for Jane Does 2-7: Subject to your rulings, of course, yes. (Ex. "A," p.30). + +The Court But you're not taking the position that other than possibly doing something in litigation which is any other discovery, motion practice, investigations that someone would ordinarily do in the course of defending acivil case would constitute aviolation of the agreement? (Ex. "A," p.34). + +Ms. Villafana: No, your honor. I mean, civil litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take discovery is part of what civil litigation is all about.... But.. ., Mr. Epstein is entitled to take the deposition of aPlaintiff and to subpoena records, etc. (Ex. "A," p.34) + +12. It is clear from the transcript attached as Exhibit "4" that each of the Plaintiffs' attorneys, including Mr. Horowitz for Jane Does 2-8, expected and conceded that regular/traditional discovery would take place (i.e., discovery, motion practice, depositions, requests for records, and investigations). + +13. Importantly, Plaintiffs' counsel advised the undersigned that they coordinate their efforts in joint conference calls at least two times per month. At recent depositions of two witnesses, Alfredo Rodriguez and Juan Alessi, five different plaintiffs' attorneys questioned the witnesses for approximately six to eight hours, often repeating the same or similar questions that had previously been asked. + +14. Clearly, the Plaintiff? counsel wish to control discovery and how the Defendant is allowed to obtain information to defend these cases. However, the court has ruled on a number of these issues as follows: + +> A. Plaintiffs' counsels sought to preclude the Defendant from serving third party subpoenas and allowing only Plaintiffs' counsel to obtain + +depositions and those materials and "filter them" to defense counsel. That motion was denied, and the court tailored amethod such that the Defendant could obtain the records directly. + +- B. Plaintiffs' counsels sought to limit the psychiatric examination in C.M.A. v. Jeffrey Epstein an (Case No. 08- n), as to time, subject matter and scope. However, Magistrate entered an order denying the requested restrictions. +- C. Other Plaintiffs' attorneys have said that they object to requested psychological exam of their client(s), thus motions for such exams will now need to be filed; yet all seek millions of dollars in damages for alleged psychological and emotional trauma. +- D. Many Plaintiffs' object to discovery regarding current and past employment (although they are seeking loss of income, both in past and future). +- E. All Plaintiffs object to prior sexual history, consensual and forced as being irrelevant, although in many of the medical records that are now being obtained, as well as the psychiatric exams done by Dr. Kliman, there is reference to rape, molestation, abusive relationships (both physical and verbal), prior abortions, illegal drugs and alcohol abuse. + +15. Clearly, Plaintiffs wish to make allegations; however, they forget that they must meet their burden by proving same. Meeting that burden and disproving those allegations is not possible if this court allows Plaintiffs to stifle and/or control the discovery process. + +16. Specifically, with regard to Jane Doe No. 4, which is the deposition set for next week, September 16, 2009, the plaintiff has in her past(see affidavit of Richard C.W. M.D., an expert psychiatrist retained by Defendant to conduct exams on various claimants.) Ss& + +## Exhibit "5" + +- A. Sought counseling due to a dysfunctional home situation, specifically with regard to her father. She described herself as being angry, bitter, depressed and having body image problems; +- B. Had an ex-boyfriend, Preston Vinyard, who was, on information and belief, a drug dealer who she lived with; +- C. Had drug and alcohol problems herself; and + +- D. Spoke with two psychiatrists when she was sixteen or seventeen (before this lawsuit!) and did not reference Epstein, but did reference her boyfriend and family issues. + +- 17. There are police reports that reflect that: + +- A. In September 2004, a battery report was filed regarding Jane Doe No. 4 and Vinyard based on an argument where he grabbed her by the neck and began spitting on her and calling her acheater. +- B. Also in September 2004, there was adomestic violence file opened where Vinyard was physically and verbally abusive to Jane Doe No. 4, his girlfriend at the time. There is reference that the two started aserious relationship in January 2002, when she was only fourteen (14) years old. +- C. Vinyard was arrested in December 2003, and charged with reckless driving and leaving the scene of the accident with Jane Doe No. 4, when their vehicle hit atree and they fled. + +18. Moreover, an ex-boyfriend of Jane Doe No. 4 died in aDUI accident and it took her two years to get over his death, and another good friend of hers, "Jen," died in an automobile accident involving drinking. Within her Amended Complaint and Answers to Interrogatories, she indicates that she went to Epstein's house on several occasions. However, at no time did she call the police, at no time did she report any traumatic or severe emotional trauma, nor alleged coercion, force or improper behavior by Epstein until she go( a "lawyer" and is now pursuing claims for millions of dollars. Epstein's assistance to his attorneys at these depositions regarding the above issues is not only aconstitutional due process right afforded to him but essential given the fact that this court has ruled that Plaintiffs' depositions can only occur one times no "second bite" absent acourt order. + +- 19. Given the breadth of the allegations made against Epstein and the substantial damages sought, Epstein has an unequivocal and constitutional right to be present at any deposition such that he can assist his counsel with the defense of these cases. ate Infra. Dr.Ill + +also prepared affidavits regarding Jane Does 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7, which are attached to DE + +247. + +## Memorandum Of Law + +20. Plaintiffs' motion is required to be denied as they have failed to meet their burden showing the "extraordinary circumstances" necessary to establish good cause to support a protective order which would grant the extraordinarily rare relief of preventing anamed party from attending in person the deposition of another named party. Also requiring denial of Plaintiffs' motion is the fact that it seeks to exclude Epstein from all the depositions of all the Plaintiffs in actions before this Court. Such relief is unprecedented and attempts to have this Court look at the Plaintiffs' collectively as opposed to analyzing each case based on facts versus broad speculation whether "extraordinary circumstances" exist on a case by case basis. In other words, the standard is such that the Court would be required to determine whether each Plaintiff has met her burden, should the Court consider adopting such extraordinary relief. On its face, the motion does not meet the necessary burden as to Jane Doe 4, or Jane Does 2, 3, 5, 6, or 7. + +# Discussion of Law Requiring the Denial of the Requested Protective Order + +Rule 26(c)O)(E), Fed.R.Civ.P. (2009), governing protective orders, provides in relevant part that: + +(1)1n General, A party or any person from whom discovery is sought may move for aprotective order in the court where the action is pending--or as an alternative on matters relating to a deposition, in the court for the district where the deposition will be taken. The motion must include acertification that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with other affected parties in an effort to resolve the dispute without court action. The court may, for good cause, issue an order to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense, including one or more of the following: \* + +(E) designating the persons who may be present while the discovery is conducted; + +In seeking to prevent the Defendant from being present in the room where the Plaintiffs are being deposed, Plaintiffs generally rely on treatise material from ace, 8 Federal Practice & Procedure Civ.2d,§204), and cases cited therein. The case of Gaella v. Onassis 487 F.2d 986, at 997 (2d Cir. 1973), cited by Plaintiffs, makes clear that the exclusion of a party from adeposition "should be ordered rarely indeed." Unlike the Gaella case, there is no showing by each of the Plaintiffs that there has been any conduct by Epstein, in rightfully defending the actions filed against him, reflecting "an irrepressible intent to continue ... harassment" of any Plaintiff or a complete disregard of the judicial process, i.e. prior alleged conduct versus any action/conduct displayed in this or other cases that would justify extraordinary relief. There is absolutely no basis in the record to indicate that Epstein will act other than properly and with the proper decorum at the depositions of the Plaintiffs and abide in all respects with the No-Contact Order. + +Wherefore, Epstein respectfully requests that this Court enter an order denying Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order, provide that Epstein is permitted to attend the depositions of the Plaintiffs that have asserted claims against him in the related matters, and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +Robert D. Crofton, Jr. Michael]. rke Attorney for Defendant Epstein + +#### Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that atrue copy of the foregoing was hand-delivered to the Clerk of the Court as required by the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida and electronically mailed to all counsel of record identified on the following Service List on this 11th day of September, 2009. + +#### Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffredtt Case No. 08-CV-80119-MA + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mennelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com attorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cans Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08- 80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08- 80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Ste, Esq. Jack P. Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & P.A. Shipley, 80469 + +Brad Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@na-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hoc Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellperlaw.wah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Escl• MEM Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datum Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidroaarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 082139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsx@searcvlaw.com joh@searcvlaw.corn Counsel for Plaintiff + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 gef@brucereinhartlavisim Counsel for Defending + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold-Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 ,kuvin@riccilaw,com th000ld@riccilaw.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsberapodhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq©bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully submi + +By: + +ROBERT CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida No. 224162 rcrit@lbc law.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 ainikeabc1claw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LU 11 JtR & COLEMAN 303Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +Robert D. Critton Jr. + +From: Adam Horowitz rahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.corn] + +Sent Tuesday, September 15, 2009 11:43 AM + +To: Michael J. Pike; Robert D. Critton Jr. + +Cc: Stuart Mermeistein + +Subject: Jane Does v. Epstein + +Please allow this to confirm that Jeffrey Epstein will not attend tomorrow's deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 (in the absence of a Court order permitting him to attend). We understand you may wish to have your client listen in by telephone or view a videofeed of the deposition, but will not be seen by our client. + +Regards, + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +www.sexabuseattorney.com + +Mermeistein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +ahorowitzesexabuseattornev.com + +Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +From: Michael J. Pike (mailto:MPike@bc1claw.com) + +Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 10:54 AM + +To: Stuart Mermeistein; Adam Horowitz + +Cc: Robert D. Critton Jr.; Jessica Cadwell + +Subject: FW: Jane Does v. Epstein + +Gentlemen: + +Isent the e-mail below weeks ago. I have not heard back from you. I'm entitled to the questionnaires Kliman had your clients fill out and which he utilized to formulate his opinions. I need them by tomorrow since they are well over due. If not, I will have no other choice to file a motion, which I do not want to do given how we have worked together on these issues in the past. Let me know, pike. + +From: Michael J. Pike + +Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 11:37 AM + +To: Robert D. Craton Jr.; Stuart Mermeistein; Ashlle Stoken-Baring; Connie Zaguirre + +Subject Jane Does v. Epstein + +From reviewing the transcripts, it seems Dr. Kliman utilized Questionnaire's with all of your clients. I need them. Please advise of your position. I'm sure you will produce since they are + +EXHIBIT 3 emnew •SO. + +discoverable. Thanks. + +Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman 515 N. Flagler Dr., Ste. 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Telephone: (561) 842-2820 Facsimile (561) 844-6929 + +## PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION + +The information contained in this transmission is attorney/client privileged and/or attorney work product. If you are not the addressee or authorized by the addressee to receive this message, you shall not review, disclose, copy, distribute or otherwise use this message (including any attachments). If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately- notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy the message (including attachments) and all copies. Thank you. + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-Mill + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff + +JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +## AFFIDAVIT OF JEFFREY E, EPSTEIN + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Jeffrey E. Epstein having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +- 1. My office is located at 250 Australian Avenue South, 14Th Floor, West Palm Beach, Florida. Its location has been well publicized in the news. +- 2. I met with my attorneys, Robert D. Critton, Jr. and Mark T. Luttier, at 12:30 p.m. In preparation for the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 which was to take place begimfing at 1:00 p.m. on September 16, 2009. +- 3. I was aware of the motion for protective order which had been served in this case by counsel for Jane Doe No. 4 and the Emergency Motion To Strike Plaintiff's Motion For + +EXHIBIT y + +Protective Order And Emergency Motion To Allow The Attendance Of Jeffrey Epstein At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs And Response In Opposition To Plaintiffs', Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion For Protective Order As To Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law, which had been filed on my behalf such that I could attend the deposition and assist my attorneys in my defense. + +4. I also understood that as of 1:00 p.m. on September 16, after I had finished speaking with my attorneys that the court had not ruled regarding the above-referenced motions. + +5. I was instructed by my attorneys that I could not attend the deposition and therefore a video feed was set up such that I could view the deposition from my home. + +6. I also understood that my attorneys did not want me in the building after the deposition began. + +7. At 1:04 p.m. after we assumed that everyone would be in the deposition room, my lawyers went down on one elevator and I went down on another elevator with my driver, Igor Zinoviev, both exiting at approximately the same time. + +8. I asked Igor where he had parked, and he said "out front". We exited the elevator, I walked toward the front door. Near the front door, I saw a taller woman and a shorter woman who I thought might be Jane Doe No. 4 and immediately turned to my left and went out a separate exit to the garage. + +9. At no time did I speak with or attempt to interact with either women. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +![]() + +#### STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +Ihe Certify that on dig day, before me, an Pianist ilul tad admtnisbor oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Jeffrey E. Epstein known to me to be the poison described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above named person: .1•"....1 resitc. , and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this day of Sty4. , 2009. + +L + +, L. gift& 6 1(SEAL) + +NOTARY PUBLIC/STATE OF FLORIDA COMMISSION NO.: + +MY COMMISSIO MN + +![](_page_24_Picture_11.jpeg) + +4. At no time did Mr. Epstein speak or gesture to anyone, including the individuals whom I saw near the front door. + +5. At no time did I speak with the individuals at the main entrance. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +![]()STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +I hereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Igor Zinoviev known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above named person: Jeffery Epstein, and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this day of Sept. 17, 2009. + +![](_page_25_Picture_323.jpeg) + +![]() + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE 140.: OS-CV-80119-1i + +JANE DOB NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, v. + +JEFFREIEPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 0840811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +## AFFIDAVIT OF IGOR /MOVIE V + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Igor Zinoviev having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +- 1. I work for Jeffrey Epstein. I as well drive him from place to place. +- 2. At approximately 1:04 p.m., Mr. Epstein and I went down in the elevator from the 14'h floor to the ground level I was to drive Mr. Epstein to his home. His lawyers went down at approximately the same time in a separate elevator. +- 3. I parked the car at the front entrance. As I walked toward the front door and noticed that Mr. Epstein quickly turned to the left so as to exit through the door to the garage of the building rather than the front entrance. + +EXHIBIT + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA- + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +## AFFIDAVIT OF ROBERT 1). CRITTON, JR. + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Robert D. Critton, Jr., having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +- 1. lawsuits. +- 2. Iam counsel for Jeffrey Epstein in the above-styled matter and other civil The information contained in motion, paragraphs 1 through 9, 11, 13, 14 and 16 is true and accurate based on my personal knowledge. + - 3. The costs and fees set forth in the motion are true, correct and reasonable. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +Robert . Critton, Jr. + +:XHIB1T 6 + +### STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +Ihereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Robert D. Critton, Jr.. known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she exe7d,the same, that I relied upon the following form o• named person: ettft, deletifr? , and that an oath w on of the above + +W ESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this day of ITI9i tait'Vhet,2009. + +![](_page_28_Picture_6.jpeg) + +eirdVa•-•NAME: & NOTAB L.NIBLIC/STATE OF FLORIDA COMMISSION NO.: .62)8535,, MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: oia ? A3 + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MAFtRAMIIII + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +## AFFIDAVIT OF MARK T. LUTTIER + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Mark T. Luttier., having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +- 1. I am counsel for Jeffrey Epstein in the above-styled matter and other civil lawsuits. +- 2. The information contained in motion, paragraphs 1 through 10, 11, 13, 14 and 16 is true and accurate based on my personal knowledge. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +Thidt t&"is Mark T. Luttier + +EXHIBIT 7 + +### STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +Ihereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Mark T. Luttier, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she execed the same that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above named person: ege4 ", i i%/en07\_, and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITSS)5. mx. hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this /7 ' day of e a,t0C. , 2009. + +> 44/ 41-1, ---ee PRINT NAME. /C4 4,Ofghtak-NOTARY PUBLIC/STATE OF FLORIDA COMMISSION NO.: 953 501 9 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: 09/9p3 + +![](_page_30_Picture_7.jpeg) + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/. + +JANE DOE NO.2, + +Plaintiff, + +-vs- + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases; + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +/ + +## DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE #4 + +Wednesday, September 16, 2009 1:03 - 1:08 p.m. + +250Australian Avenue South Suite 115 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Reported By: Cynthia RPR, FPR Notary Public, State of Florida Prose Court Reporting EXHIBIT t + +1APPEARANCE& 2On beMIR PlintifE ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQUIRE MERMELSTOIN & HOROWITZ, PA 3 • 18203 ItigaymBormed Sub 22111 MIS. florid. 33160 5 Moor 305.5312200 6 7Oftbeho/f olds. Dandart ROBERT D. CRITTON, EL, ESQUIRE MARX 7. WITTER ESQUIRE 9BURMAN, CRYIT014, LUTTIER& COLE/RAN, LLP 303Sanyo Boulevard 10 Wit 400 West Palm Beach PUMA 33401 11Phenix 561.8422820 12041behalkOlfetY EP116h: 1.2 13SACK ALAN GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER& WEISS, PA 13 14250 Aurtatian As South Soho 1400 Is West Pam Seth, Fbrida 334014012 15 16 Phan: 56/.659.3303 3.6 17On Ixbalf of LM and EW: 17 1e WILLIAM I. BERGER, ESQUIRE ItalliSTEIN. ROSENFELDT, ADLER 1.9 401 East Las OW Bomb-Yazd 19 Sole 1650 20Fob LAKINtbb, Meth 33301 21 Met 9545211456 21 22 Onbebalf 233ACKP. ESQUIRE SEARCY. DENNEY, SCAROLA, 24BARNHART.% SHIPLEY, P.A. 24 2139Ma Bach Likes Boa:At 25Weft Pain B46414 Mari& 33409 + +#### Page 3 + +## 1APPEARNCES CONTINUED... 1 + +2 3On behalf of BB: 3 4ADAM J. LANGINO, ESQUIRE 4 5 LEOPOLD KUM 2925 PGA Boulevard Suite 200 6Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410 7 Phone: 561.515.1400 8 7 8 9 10 1113 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 + +25 + +## PROCEEDINGS + +MR. HOROWITZ: Adam Horowitz, counsel for Plaintiff, Jane Doe 4. + +MR. CR1TTON: Cindy, what time is THE COURT REPORTER It is 1:03. MR. BERGER: William J. Berger for LM and EW. + +Jack. for CMA. MR LANGINO: Adam Langino from Leopold Kuvin on behalf of BB. MR. LUITIER: Mark Luther on behalf of Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman for the Defendant. + +MR. CRITTtDN: Robert Critton on behalf of Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein. MR. HOROWITZ: This is Adam Horowitz. We're canceling today's deposition. Before appearing here today, we had a stipulation with Defense counsel that Mr. Jeffrey Epstein, the Defendant, would not be here. He would not cross paths with our client. + +And immediately as we were approaching the deposition room, he made face-to-face contact with our client. He was just feet away from + +her and intimidated her, and for that reason we're not going forward. MR. CR1TTON: I didn't see any contact because I, obviously, was not out there. We + +started at about — when you came in it was approximately 1:03. Mr. Epstein has an office here at the Florida Science Foundation. Had you been here at 1:00, your paths never would have crossed because Mr. Epstein was leaving the building. I instructed him to leave the building so that he would not be here. + +He was going to appear by way of Skype so that he could be on avideo cement so that he could see this. + +(Mr. Goldberger entered the room.) MR. CRTITON: Had you been here on time, and not faulting, I am just saying had you been here on time at I :00, as everyone else seemed to be here at least get here before you did, Adam, you and your client, your paths never would have crossed. + +Idirected Mr. Epstein to leave the building so he would not be here so that there would be no way that your paths could have crossed. It was neither my intent nor was it + +Page 6 + +1 my client's intent specifically, because I also + +2 advised him that he was not to cross paths, not + +3 to have any contact with your client, and + +4 certainly by our agreement not to be here today + +5 for the deposition. + +6 MR. HOROWITZ: And at approximately 1:00 + +7 is exactly when my client crossed paths with + +8 Jeffrey Epstein. And not only did he cross + +9 paths but he proceeded to stare her down just + +10 feet away from her. For that reason she became + +11 an emotional wreck and cannot proceed with the + +12 deposition. She's simply not in an emotional + +13 state to do so. + +14 And in addition Mr. Epstein violated the + +15 agreement between counsel that he would not + +16 cross paths or come into contact with our + +17 client. And it will be also for the criminal + +18 court judge to decide whether he has violated a + +19 no-contact order. I have nothing else to say. + +20 MR. CRITTON: Again I instructed + +21 Mr. Epstein to leave the building so absolutely + +22 no contact could occur between he and + +23 Mr. Horowitz and his client nor anyone else. + +24 Until the court, until either Judge Marra or + +25 Judge [REDACTED] ruled on the issue as to whether + +Page 7 + +1 or not he could appear at the depositions of + +2 not only Jane Doe 4 but any other individuals, + +3 so you do what you need to do. + +4 MR. HOROWITZ: Off the record. + +5 (The Deposition was concluded.) + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +Page 8 + +1 CERTIFICATE + +2 STATE OF FLORIDA + +3 COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 I, Cynthia [REDACTED] Registered Professional + +8 Reporter and Florida Professional Reporter, State of + +9 Florida at large, certify that I was authorized to + +10 and did stenographically report the foregoing + +11 proceedings and that the transcript is a true and + +12 complete record of my stenographic notes. + +13 Dated this 16th day of September, 2009. + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +![]() + +# Prose Court Reporting Agency, Inc + +One Clearlake Centre 250South Australian Avenue, Suite 1500 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 (561) 832-7500 Phone (561) 832-7506 Fax Tax ID: 264892897 www.prosecra.com + +September 17, 2009 + +Robert Critton, Esquire Burman, Craton, Luther & Coleman - WPB 303Banyan Boulevard Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Re: Jane Doe No. 2 vs. Jeffrey Epstein 9-18-09 Scheduled Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 Statement for Record + +| Description of Services | Appearance 1st Hr | 110.00 | +|-------------------------|----------------------|-----------------| +| Depo App NT - 1st Hr | Transcript Pages - 8 | 28.80 | +| Depo Trans 0&1-Reg | Complimentary | | +| E-Transcript Emailed | | | +| Invoice total: | | \$138.80 | + +Invoice Number CH 411 + +Thank you for choosing Prose Court Reporting Agency, Inc. Payment is due upon receipt. + +EXHIBIT1 + +Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 305-10 + +VEI Entered on FLSD Docket 09/27/2009 Page 2 of 2 + +![](_page_35_Picture_18.jpeg) + +**Invoice** + +| Date | Number | +|----------------|--------| +| 9/17/2009 | 28616 | +| Terms | | +| Due on receipt | | + +BURMAN, CRITTON & LUTTIER + ROBERT CRITTON + 303 BANYAN BLVD + SUITE 400 + WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401 + +| Case / Reference: | JANE DOE #2 v EPSTEIN | +|--------------------------|------------------------------| +|--------------------------|------------------------------| + +| Date | Services Rendered | Qty | Amount | +|-----------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------| +| 9/16/2009 | VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF: JANE DOE # 4
Tech Time - 1ST 2 Hours
Digital Tape [REDACTED] | 1
1 | 275.00
15.00 | +| | TAPE CONSISTS OF DISCUSSIONS BETWEEN ATTORNEYS PRIOR TO SWEARING IN REGARDING CANCELLATION OF DEPO. | | | +| 9/17/2009 | Delivery
[REDACTED] TAPES FORWARDED PER YOUR REQUEST. NO COPIES HAVE BEEN MADE OR KEPT ON FILE AT VISUAL EVIDENCE. SHOULD COPIES BE REQUIRED IN THE FUTURE PLEASE FORWARD TAPES TO OUR OFFICE FOR DUPLICATION. THANK YOU. | 1 | 0.00 | + +MORE THAN JUST VIDEO ! See ALL available presentation technology services at: [www.visualevidence.org](http://www.visualevidence.org). + +**TOTAL: \$290.00** + +Remit to: + P.O. Box 6967 + West Palm Beach, FL 33405 + Tax ID # 59-2476529 + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MAFtRAlla + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO. 4 AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT THEREOF + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion For Sanctions and to Compel Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4. Having considered Defendant's motion, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is hereby GRANTED: Plaintiff shall pay sanctions in the amount of in costs and \$ in fees directly to Burman, Critton, Luther and Coleman within 10 days, and further directs that the Plaintiff make herself available for deposition no later than October , 2009 beginning at 9:30 a.m. at the same location. Mr. Epstein shall not be present in the building on the day of the deposition absent acourt order on pending motions. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/EFTA02747041.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/EFTA02747041.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6dc1d718aa1dbe3be7c8fbd40f8ba527c2e6aa86 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/EFTA02747041.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,2325 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 38, + "chars": 55751, + "elapsed_seconds": 15.69, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_8_Picture_2.jpeg", + "_page_9_Picture_14.jpeg", + "_page_24_Picture_11.jpeg", + "_page_25_Picture_323.jpeg", + "_page_28_Picture_6.jpeg", + "_page_30_Picture_7.jpeg", + "_page_35_Picture_18.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 408.20400000000006, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 408.20400000000006, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 114.20999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND \nTO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO. 4 AND MEMORANDUM IN \nSUPPORT THEREOF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.16, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 511.02, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 511.02, + 405.81000000000006 + ], + [ + 110.16, + 405.81000000000006 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Memorandum of Law In support of Motion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 619.6500000000001 + ], + [ + 424.2069091796875, + 619.6500000000001 + ], + [ + 424.2069091796875, + 634.7773284912109 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 634.7773284912109 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 175.64399999999998, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 436.968, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 436.968, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 175.64399999999998, + 102.06 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 257.652, + 498.96 + ], + [ + 365.3670654296875, + 498.96 + ], + [ + 365.3670654296875, + 512.73 + ], + [ + 257.652, + 512.73 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Sent by E.Mall and U.S. Mail", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 96.084, + 306.99 + ], + [ + 247.33287048339844, + 306.99 + ], + [ + 247.33287048339844, + 321.7167053222656 + ], + [ + 96.084, + 321.7167053222656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 210.52799999999996, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 406.91485595703125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 406.91485595703125, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 210.52799999999996, + 127.17 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion To Strike Plaintiffs Motion For \nProtective Order (DE 292) And Emergency Motion To Allow The \nAttendance Of Jeffrey Epstein At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs And Response \nIn Opposition To Plaintiffs', Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion For Protective Order \nAs To Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs, With \nIncorporated Memorandum of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 130.356, + 345.87 + ], + [ + 501.754638671875, + 345.87 + ], + [ + 501.754638671875, + 431.0459289550781 + ], + [ + 130.356, + 431.0459289550781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Introduction and Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.02400000000003, + 594.54 + ], + [ + 392.9018859863281, + 594.54 + ], + [ + 392.9018859863281, + 608.4350891113281 + ], + [ + 246.02400000000003, + 608.4350891113281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Exhibit \"5\"", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 100.36800000000001, + 574.29 + ], + [ + 161.55865478515625, + 574.29 + ], + [ + 161.55865478515625, + 588.4300079345703 + ], + [ + 100.36800000000001, + 588.4300079345703 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 156.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 365.2629699707031, + 156.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 365.2629699707031, + 171.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 171.71999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Discussion of Law Requiring the Denial of the Requested Protective Order", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 138.924, + 456.8399999999999 + ], + [ + 499.8995056152344, + 456.8399999999999 + ], + [ + 499.8995056152344, + 482.76 + ], + [ + 138.924, + 482.76 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 276.2904052734375, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 378.828, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 378.828, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 276.2904052734375, + 119.07 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffredtt\nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.46800000000002, + 234.09 + ], + [ + 417.9960000000001, + 234.09 + ], + [ + 417.9960000000001, + 272.97 + ], + [ + 207.46800000000002, + 272.97 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 63.647999999999996, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 367.2047119140625, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 367.2047119140625, + 213.68701171875 + ], + [ + 63.647999999999996, + 213.68701171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 22, + "polygon": [ + [ + 212.97599999999997, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 409.67340087890625, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 409.67340087890625, + 130.955810546875 + ], + [ + 212.97599999999997, + 130.955810546875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF JEFFREY E, EPSTEIN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 22, + "polygon": [ + [ + 216.036, + 373.40999999999997 + ], + [ + 418.31890869140625, + 373.40999999999997 + ], + [ + 418.31890869140625, + 391.1024169921875 + ], + [ + 216.036, + 391.1024169921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "STATE OF FLORIDA \nCOUNTY OF PALM BEACH", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 24, + "polygon": [ + [ + 90.576, + 180.63 + ], + [ + 239.163818359375, + 180.63 + ], + [ + 239.163818359375, + 206.92474365234375 + ], + [ + 90.576, + 206.92474365234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 26, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 107.73000000000002 + ], + [ + 408.7176208496094, + 107.73000000000002 + ], + [ + 408.7176208496094, + 136.89000000000001 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 136.89000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF IGOR /MOVIE V", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 26, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 379.89 + ], + [ + 404.59375, + 379.89 + ], + [ + 404.59375, + 396.8700256347656 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 396.8700256347656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 27, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 96.38999999999999 + ], + [ + 408.5224914550781, + 96.38999999999999 + ], + [ + 408.5224914550781, + 125.55000000000001 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 125.55000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF ROBERT 1). CRITTON, JR.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 27, + "polygon": [ + [ + 196.452, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 430.94976806640625, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 430.94976806640625, + 379.08000000000004 + ], + [ + 196.452, + 379.08000000000004 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "STATE OF FLORIDA \nCOUNTY OF PALM BEACH", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 28, + "polygon": [ + [ + 79.56, + 149.04 + ], + [ + 231.25296020507812, + 149.04 + ], + [ + 231.25296020507812, + 176.57999999999998 + ], + [ + 79.56, + 176.57999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 29, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 411.23248291015625, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 411.23248291015625, + 128.0390625 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 128.0390625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF MARK T. LUTTIER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 29, + "polygon": [ + [ + 216.036, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 414.84442138671875, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 414.84442138671875, + 380.7 + ], + [ + 216.036, + 380.7 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "STATE OF FLORIDA \nCOUNTY OF PALM BEACH", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 30, + "polygon": [ + [ + 79.56, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 230.43789672851562, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 230.43789672851562, + 169.29 + ], + [ + 79.56, + 169.29 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 31, + "polygon": [ + [ + 187.272, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 410.123046875, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 410.123046875, + 136.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 187.272, + 136.07999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE #4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 31, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 422.82 + ], + [ + 406.5627136230469, + 422.82 + ], + [ + 406.5627136230469, + 442.26000000000005 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 442.26000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Page 3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 32, + "polygon": [ + [ + 275.4, + 400.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 314.0614013671875, + 400.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 314.0614013671875, + 413.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 275.4, + 413.09999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "1APPEARNCES CONTINUED... 1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 32, + "polygon": [ + [ + 71.49138641357422, + 418.5311279296875 + ], + [ + 340.1799621582031, + 418.5311279296875 + ], + [ + 340.1799621582031, + 437.40000000000003 + ], + [ + 71.49138641357422, + 437.40000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROCEEDINGS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 32, + "polygon": [ + [ + 379.44, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 477.36, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 477.36, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 379.44, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 32, + "polygon": [ + [ + 275.4, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 299.88, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 299.88, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 275.4, + 89.1 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Prose Court Reporting Agency, Inc", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 34, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 421.38775634765625, + 76.14 + ], + [ + 421.38775634765625, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 98.82 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Invoice", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 35, + "polygon": [ + [ + 492.65999999999997, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 563.04, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 563.04, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 492.65999999999997, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 36, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 406.7421875, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 406.7421875, + 135.27 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 135.27 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, MOTION FOR SANCTIONS \nAND TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO. 4\nAND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT THEREOF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 36, + "polygon": [ + [ + 107.1, + 379.08000000000004 + ], + [ + 522.868408203125, + 379.08000000000004 + ], + [ + 522.868408203125, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 107.1, + 429.29999999999995 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 262 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 395 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 377 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 364 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 392 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 290 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 360 + ], + [ + "Line", + 83 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 187 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 38 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 275 + ], + [ + "Line", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 287 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 412 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 420 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 445 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 420 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 432 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 444 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 443 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 321 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 360 + ], + [ + "Line", + 69 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 305 + ], + [ + "Line", + 69 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 359 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 34 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 229 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 332 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 203 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 267 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 243 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 199 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 174 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 182 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 197 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 146 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 814 + ], + [ + "Line", + 163 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 516 + ], + [ + "Line", + 99 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 183 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "Table", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 220 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747041" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_24_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_24_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..df6c17603b8eb1f0bd1320dfbd165573705cc0f8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_24_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ff281066ed4dcf0e09429e8227139da45a0248c90a11a5503fcf0b151a326a5e +size 17136 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_25_Picture_323.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_25_Picture_323.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..493dbc5e1b82f4a1981addee917b015ab5183597 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_25_Picture_323.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:5faec1a8e4caea67779a32149d8793e64ef02f8abdf350f1afe65e15c8e5a55f +size 17302 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_28_Picture_6.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_28_Picture_6.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2b474da2d7ca37f9cc1596173cdac372930d5bd4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_28_Picture_6.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:02e9492edd126d1377bf2177466c8ac7d7e1ba01fe112e738e91d4f653c4f63a +size 11468 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_30_Picture_7.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_30_Picture_7.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..22251f286af84be1b673ffc592ba1522b28afa39 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_30_Picture_7.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c3bf7c60f61d4dc8c8b59bb89fdf42f560d571ef886a3d41a8deaa9b916bed3f +size 12167 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_35_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_35_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8f6e3dd13338d253158eb58d12742b21b4dc7e18 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_35_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:730730f071cd5e55dc50dc353cb903aa10575e69c609f5f277b03a37e433edf8 +size 14538 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_8_Picture_2.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_8_Picture_2.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dc5abafaec6bc409437176fff4e5a488f2bc16c0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_8_Picture_2.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2fc3e2d7ed9d2a962cd551c52037e8d12b5d6dfc0edc8abcb2b8b679ca000173 +size 12343 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_9_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_9_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..390a6b058484ecaeb105dce9a1c5980fdd017afe --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747041/_page_9_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3777044a2b1c387fb33338df1a8d3a24fba7771d8dd7818c50d63dd20145f9b7 +size 9516 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747079/EFTA02747079.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747079/EFTA02747079.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b4d83a19183305ed4dc6a7af520ad83600141b40 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747079/EFTA02747079.md @@ -0,0 +1,156 @@ +UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/ [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/ [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/ [REDACTED] + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +"2"1 + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRAi + +JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRa + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRA + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Jane Doe. No 101 and IO2's Motion for No-Contact Order (DE 113) and Plaintiffs Jane Does' 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs' Motion (DE 145). The Court has reviewed the motions, responses, and replies (DE's 113, 127, 136, 145, + +233), and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. Plaintiffs seek a Court order prohibiting Defendant or his agents from communicating with Plaintiffs directly or indirectly. Defendant. Defendant opposes the request as "needless, unwarranted and excessive." (DE 127 at 5). Nonetheless, Defendant states in his response that "neither Mr. Epstein nor his attorneys, nor their agents intend to have any direct or indirect contact with Plaintiffs counsels' clients." (DE 127 at 4). + +The Court notes that Defendant is already under court order not to have direct or indirect contact with any victims. See Transcript of Plea Conference at 20. During the course of Defendant's state plea conference of June 30, 2009, Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillio explicitly instructed Defendant as follows: + +Court: Okay. D is, you shall not have any contact with the victim, arc there more than one victim? + +Ms. Belohlavek: There's several. + +Court: Several, all of the victims. So this should be plural. I'm making that plural. You are not to have any contact direct or indirect, and in this day and age I find it necessary to go over exactly what we mean by indirect. By indirect, we mean no text messages, no e-mail, no Face Book, no My Space, no telephone calls, no voice mails, no messages through carrier pigeon, no messages through third parties, no hey would you tell so and so for me, no having a friend, acquaintance or stranger approach any of these victims with a message of any sort from you, is that clear? + +Defendant: Yes, + +Id. at 20-21. + +In light of Defendant's response to Plaintiffs' motion for no contact order, suggesting that the state court's order only applies to some victims and that parties are always allowed to contact each other directly, the Court finds it necessary to state clearly that Defendant is under this + +court's order not to have direct or indirect contact with any plaintiffs, regardless of the intended scope of the state court's order. Accordingly, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: Plaintiffs Jane Doe. No 101 and 102's Motion for No-Contact Order (DE 113) is GRANTED. Defendant is hereby prohibited from communicating with all plaintiffs directly or indirectly, either personally or through agents, except that Defendant may communicate with plaintiffs only through plaintiffs' attorneys of record, for the duration of this Order. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 31' day of July, 2009 + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record + +&#x27;See infra, excerpt of Transcript of Plea Conference at 20-21, for examples of indirect contact. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747079/EFTA02747079.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747079/EFTA02747079.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..165f38942c6717ce58c24711a94a749bf8407b36 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747079/EFTA02747079.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,257 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747079.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 4153, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.61, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.304, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 399.6360000000001, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 399.6360000000001, + 113.4 + ], + [ + 209.304, + 113.4 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 285.192, + 589.6800000000001 + ], + [ + 332.875732421875, + 589.6800000000001 + ], + [ + 332.875732421875, + 605.1035461425781 + ], + [ + 285.192, + 605.1035461425781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 364 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 184 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747079" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747084/EFTA02747084.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747084/EFTA02747084.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b88665fa8c2b215294df77a6aa7f075de757b903 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747084/EFTA02747084.md @@ -0,0 +1,149 @@ +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +June 30, 2008 + +24 Palm Beach County Courthouse + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 25 Beginning at 8:40 o'clock, a.m. + +## 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT• + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6. + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 PRESIDING: HONORABLE DEBORAH DALE PUCILLO + +12 APPEARANCES: + +IN AND FOR PALM BEACH CRIMINAL DIVISION COUNTY, FLORIDA + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) + +) + +vs ) CASE NO. 06 CF9454AMB ) 08 9381CFAMB + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN ) + +Defendant. ) ) + +) + +## PLEA CONFERENCE + +13 ON BEHALF OF THE STATE: + +BARRY E. KRISCHER, ESQUIRE + +14 State Attorney + +401 North Dixie Highway + +15 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +By: LANNA BELOHLAVEK, ESQUIRE 16 Assistant State Attorney + +17 ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT: + +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS,P.A. + +18 250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 19 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +By: JACK GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE + +CERTIFIED COPY + +PHYLLIS A. DAMES, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER + +113 so + +regularly congregate? + +MS. BELOHLAVEK: I personally do not know. + +THE COURT: Neither do I, which is why I'm asking. Has that been investigated? + +MR. GOLDBERGER: We have done our due diligence, for what it's worth, there is a residential street. There are not children congregating on that street. We think the address applies, if it doesn't, we fully recognize that he can't live there. + +THE COURT: Okay. D is, you shall not have any contact with the victim, are there more than one victim? + +MS. BELOHLAVEK: There's several. + +THE COURT: Several, all of the victims. So this should be plural. I'm making that plural. You are not to have any contact direct or indirect, and in this day and age I find it necessary to go over exactly what we mean by indirect. By indirect, we mean no text messages, no e-mail, no Face Book, no My Space, no telephone calls, no voice mails, no + +( ; + +0 + +1 messages through carrier pigeon, no + +m'ewsa9cd t uuh—third parties, no—trey + +3 would you tell so and so for me, no having + +4 a friend, acquaintance or stranger approach + +5 any of these victims with a message of any + +6 sort from you, is that clear? + +7 THE DEFENDANT: Yes, + +8 THE COURT: And then it states, + +9 unless approved by the victim, the + +10 therapist and the sentencing court. Okay. + +11 THE DEFENDANT: I understand. + +12 THE COURT: And the sentencing court. + +13 So, if there is a desire which, I would + +14 think would be a bit strange to have + +15 contact with any of the victims the court + +16 must approve it. + +17 MS. BELOHLAVEK: Correct. + +18 THE COURT: If the victim was under + +19 the age of 18, which was the case, you + +20 shall not until you have successfully + +21 attended and completed the sex offender + +22 program. So, is this sex offender program + +23 becoming a condition of probation? + +24 MS. BELOHLAVEK: That is not. I + +25 don't believe I circled that one. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747084/EFTA02747084.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747084/EFTA02747084.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2e0219e0858d421ee0022d0bfd89fc780595c230 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747084/EFTA02747084.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,177 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747084.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2767, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.49, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE \nFIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT\u2022", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 92.41000366210938, + 62.37 + ], + [ + 452.07098388671875, + 62.37 + ], + [ + 452.07098388671875, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 92.41000366210938, + 89.1 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLEA CONFERENCE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.1400451660156, + 284.31 + ], + [ + 398.0693054199219, + 284.31 + ], + [ + 398.0693054199219, + 296.815185546875 + ], + [ + 274.1400451660156, + 296.815185546875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 111 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 51 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 232 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747084" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747087/EFTA02747087.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747087/EFTA02747087.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a7b4d83e6850eb0ddbc5c059cd393b82fd06170f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747087/EFTA02747087.md @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@ +1 + +2 3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION CASE NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE, et al., + +Plaintiffs, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +APPEARANCES: + +WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA + +JUNE 12, 2009 + +x + +TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE + +FOR THE PLAINTIFFS: + +it 1 ItTOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK FtEALTIME TRANSCRIPTION + +ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQ. Mermelstein & Horowitz 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Miami, FL 33160 305.931.2200 For Jane Doe + +J. ESQ, Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Jane Doe 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 + +954.522.3456 ISIDRO M. , ESQ. Elkins Boehringer 224 Datura Avenue West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Jane DOE II 561.832.8033 RICHARD H. WILLITS, ESQ. 2290 10th Avenue North Lake Worth, FL 33461 For C.M.A. 561.582.7600 + +1 THE COURT: That's not my concern. So, again, I just 2 want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if 3 Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend 4 a case that's being prosecuted against him or her, that that in 5 and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to 6 criminal prosecution. + +7 MR. JOSEFSBERG: I agree, Your Honor. + +8 THE COURT: Any other plaintiff's counsel want to 9 chime in? + +10 MR. WILLITS: Richard Willits on behalf of C.M.A.. I 11 would join, to weigh in on what Mr. Josefsberg said. + +12 MR. JOSEFSBERG: Your Honor, I could not hear. + +13 THE COURT: We'll get him to a microphone. 14 Mr. Willits is speaking. + +15 MR. WILLITS: On behalf of my client, C.M.A., we join 16 in what Mr. Josefsberg said, and we also want to point out 17 something to the Court. + +18 First, we want to make a representation to the Court, 19 we have no intention of complaining to the U.S. Attorney's 20 Office, never had that intention, don't have that intention in 21 the future, but, of course, subject to what occurs in the 22 future. + +23 I want to point out to the Court that Mr. Epstein went 24 into this situation with his eyes wide open, represented by 25 counsel, knowing that civil suits had to be coming. If he + +didn't know it, his lawyers knew it. + +He appears to be having second thoughts now about he could have negotiated this way or he could have negotiated that way with the U.S. Attorney's Office. And they want to impose their second thoughts on the innocent plaintiffs. We don't think that's fair. We think it's in the nature of invited error, if there was any error whatsoever. + +Thank you. + +THE COURT: You agree he should be able to take the ordinary steps that adefendant in acivil action Can take and not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? + +MR. WILLITS: Of course. And we say the same thing Mr. Josefsberg said. It's all subject to your rulings and the direction of this Court as to what is proper and what is not proper. And we're prepared to abide by the rulings of this Court, and we have no intention of running to the State's Attorney. + +THE COURT: The U.S. Attorney? + +A + +MR. WILLITS: I'm sorry. The U.S. Attorney. + +THE COURT: Mr. + +MR. : Thank you, Your Honor. + +If I may briefly, I think perhaps defense counsel forgot about this, but on pages 17 and 19 of my memorandum of law in opposition to the motion to dismiss, I did make reference to the non-prosecution agreement, and I did say that + +THE COURT: Okay. But, again, you're in agreement with everyone else so far that's spoken on behalf of a plaintiff that defending the case in the normal course of conducting discovery and filing motions would not be abreach? + +MR. HOROWITZ: Subject to your rulings, of course, yes. + +THE COURT: Thank you. + +Anyone else have anything to say from the plaintiffs? + +Ms. Villafana, if you would be so kind as to maybe help us out. I appreciate the fact that you're here, and I know you're not a party to these cases and under no obligation to respond to my inquiries. But as I indicated, it would be helpful for me to understand the Government's position. + +MS. VILLAFANA: Thank you, Your Honor. And we, of course, are always happy to try to help the Court as much as possible. But we are not a party to any of these lawsuits, and in some ways we are at a disadvantage because we don't have access. My access is limited to what's on Pacer. So I don't really know what positions Mr. Epstein may have taken either in correspondence or in discovery responses that aren't filed in the case file. + +But your first order was really just what do you think about a stay, and then the second order related to this hearing and asked amuch more specific question, which is whether we + +we had filed that response. And what we said in the response to.the motion to stay is that the reason why he wants to stay the litigation is so that the non-prosecution agreement terminates based on a period of time, as he puts it. And then afterwards he would be able to come in here and make all of these arguments that clearly violate the non-prosecution agreement but we would be without remedy. + +THE COURT: But you're not taking the position that other than possibly doing something in litigation which is a violation of an express provision of the non-prosecution agreement, any other discovery, motion practice, investigations that someone would ordinarily do in the course of defending a civil case would constitute aviolation of the agreement? + +MS. VILLAS/[NA: /14 No, Your Honor. I mean, civil litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take discovery is part of what civil litigation is about. And while there may be, for example, if someone were to try to subpoena the Government, we would obviously resist under statutory reasons, all that sort of stuff. But, no, Mr. Epstein is entitled to take the deposition of a plaintiff and to subpoena records, etc. + +THE COURT: And even if he seeks discovery from a Government agency, you have the right to resist it under the rules of procedure but that would not constitute aviolation, again unless there's aprovision in the prosecution agreement \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747087/EFTA02747087.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747087/EFTA02747087.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4dec154ca1f9a671955559edaf97736a1c929dec --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747087/EFTA02747087.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,194 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747087.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 6187, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.95, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 235 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 41 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 304 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 313 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 346 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747087" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747092/EFTA02747092.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747092/EFTA02747092.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9ba2abd2cc58ab9484c4598d8206d36ebb9ae5a1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747092/EFTA02747092.md @@ -0,0 +1,293 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA- + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +I Related Cases: 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +#### DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, ("Epstein") by and through his undersigned counsel, serves his Response In Opposition to Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order, With Incorporated Memorandum of Law In support, Epstein states: + +#### I. Introduction + +1. Prior to the above-referenced Plaintiff's Motion (DE 306), the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, served his Motion for Sanctions and to Compel Discovery of Jane Doe No. 4 and Memorandum in Support thereof (DE 305). See attached Exhibit "1" hereto. Defendant adopts and alleges his entire argument in said motion in support of his opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion. However, it is at least important to restate portions of that motion herein. The purpose of Plaintiff's Motion is to, among other things, prevent Jeffrey Epstein from attending the + +depositions of the Plaintiffs in this matter and other related matters and to sanction Epstein and find him in violation of certain No-Contact Orders for an unexpected event that occurred on September 14, 2009 wherein Epstein was exiting a building where a deposition was set to occur and unexpectedly crossed paths with Jane Doe #4 while she was accompanied by her attorneys. The remainder of the Motion attached as Exhibit "1" speaks for itself, in particular the portion of that Motion which deals specifically with the attorneys' agreement that Epstein would not appear at Jane Doe #4's deposition until the court ruled on various outstanding motions addressing same. + +### (a) The No-Contact Orders + +2. The No-Contact Orders are attached as Exhibits "2" and "3". As the Court will recognize, the relevant parts of the No-Contact Orders do not specifically state that Epstein cannot attend the depositions of the Plaintiffs that have initiated lawsuits against him seeking millions of dollars. Jane Doe #4 seeks 15 million dollars in damages in the lawsuit she filed against Epstein. + +3. In fact, Plaintiffs universally agreed at the June 12, 2009 hearing on Defendant's Motion to Stay that regular discovery could proceed. See Composite Exhibit "4" at pages 26- 30 & 33-34. For instance, the court asked Plaintiffs' attorneys the following questions: + +The Court: [] So again, I just want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend a case being prosecuted against him or her, that that in and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to criminal prosecution? (Ex. "A," p.26). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: You agree he should be able to take the ordinary steps that a defendant in a civil action can take and not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? (Ex. "A," p.27). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: Okay. But again, you're in agreement with everyone else so far that's spoken on behalf of a plaintiff that defending the case in the normal course of conducting discovery and filing motions would not be a breach? (Ex. "A," p.30). + +Mr. Horowitz — counsel for Jane Does 2-7: Subject to your rulings, of course, yes. (Ex. "A," p.30). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: But you're not taking the position that other than possibly doing something in litigation which is any other discovery, motion practice, investigations that someone would ordinarily do in the course of defending a civil case would constitute a violation of the agreement? (Ex. "A," p.34). + +Ms. Villafana: No, your honor. I mean, civil litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take discovery is part of what civil litigation is all about.... But. . . , Mr. Epstein is entitled to take the deposition of a Plaintiff and to subpoena records, etc. (Ex. "A," p.34) + +4. It is clear from the transcript attached as Exhibit "4" that each of the Plaintiffs' attorneys, including Mr. Horowitz for Jane Does 2-8, expected and conceded that regular/traditional discovery would take place (i.e., discovery, motion practice, depositions, requests for records, and investigations). Moreover, Epstein has a constitutional due process right to confront these witnesses, including Jane Doe t✓4. The purpose of the notice rule found under Fla.R.Civ.Pro. 1.310(b)(1) is clear: a party has the right to attend and cross-examine all witnesses with information relevant to the litigation. The same applies to Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 30. In fact, the Court has already ruled (DE 299) that Epstein has a right to mount a defense under the Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses and under the due process clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Moreover, the court recognized that the threat of criminal prosecution is real and present as Epstein remains under the scrutiny of the United States Attorney's Office ("USAO"), which is explained and acknowledged in the Court's Order (DE 242). Recognizing the foregoing, the court has rightfully acknowledged Epstein's due process rights to defend himself and his constitutional rights to confront witnesses. Thus, Epstein has a Sixth Amendment right to attend the depositions under the Confrontation Clause of the federal Constitution. Christian v. Rhode, 41 F.3d 461, 465-66 (C.A. Ariz. 1994). See also, Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012, 1015, 108 S.Ct. 2798, 2800, 101 L.Ed.2d 857 (1988). The Clause "guarantees the defendant a face-to-face meeting with witnesses appearing before the trier of fact." Id. at 1016, 108 S.Ct. at 2801. This physical confrontation "enhances the accuracy of fact finding by reducing the risk that a witness will wrongfully implicate an innocent person." Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836, 846, 110 S.Ct. 3157, 3164, 111 L.Ed.2d 666 (1990); see also Coy, 487 U.S. at 1019, 108 S.Ct. at 2802 ("A witness `may feel quite differently when he has to repeat his story looking at the man whom he will harm greatly by distorting or mistaking the facts.' ") (quoting Z. Chafee, The Blessings of Liberty 35 (1956)). The Confrontation Clause thus gives the defendant the right to be present and to confront witnesses giving testimony during a pretrial deposition, where the deposition is intended for use at trial. Don v. Nix, 886 F.2d 203 (8th Cir.1989); United States v. Benfield, 593 F.2d 815 (8th Cir.1979). Importantly, there are no minor Plaintiffs in this matter or the related matters. All are of age. + +5. Moroever, 1 McCormick on Evid., §19 (6th ed.) states, in pertinent part, that: "[for two centuries, common law judges and lawyers have regarded the opportunity of crossexamination as an essential safeguard of the accuracy and completeness of testimony. They have insisted that the opportunity is a right, not a mere privilege. This right is available at the taking of depositions as well as during the examination of witnesses at trial." Accordingly, Plaintiff's request that Epstein be prevented from attending her deposition and that a special be appointed should be denied. See v. 91 Conn. 404, 408, 99 A. 1032 (1917); Helfferich v. Farley, 36 Conn.Sup. 333, 334, 419 A.2d 913 (1980). If this Court excludes Defendant from deposition, Plaintiff's deposition testimony could be stricken from the record + +and Plaintiff could be prevented from testifying at trial, especially if Plaintiff's position is that Epstein cannot be present at said trial based upon her loose interpretation of the No-Contact Orders? This would afford her attorneys an opportunity to point at an empty chair? These are court proceedings that Plaintiff instituted and, therefore, she cannot prevent Epstein's access to the court(s) under the cloak of her allegations. + +6. As another example, assume a Plaintiff obtains a temporary restraining order ("TRO") on a Defendant or a final judgment of injunction against domestic violence ("IADV") that specifically prevents Defendant from coming into contact with Plaintiff. Plaintiff cannot utilize the TRO or the IADV to prevent Defendant from attending court proceedings. See Pope v. Pope 901 So.2d 352 (Fla. in DCA 2005). In fact, under Fla. Stat. §741.31 a violation of a IADV must be "willful," and the statute does not address court proceedings as part of any such willful violation because that would obviously violate a Defendant's right to access the courts, the right to be heard and other fundamental due process rights. + +7. In cases where a final restraining order is in effect, factors to be considered in assessing need to exclude or limit a party's participation in a deposition in a pending matrimonial action include: (1) history of domestic violence, including physical abuse, threats, and harassment; (2) violations of restraining order; (3) past disregard of judicial process by party sought to be excluded; (4) anticipation of misconduct during deposition, which would harass, alarm or frighten party being deposed; (5) party's fear of party sought to be excluded; (6) mental and emotional health of parties; (7) general security concerns for safety of party being deposed; (8) good faith of party being deposed in asking to exclude other party; and (9) any other factor deemed relevant by court. Mugrage v. Mugrage, 763 A.2d 347, 349-352 (N.J. 2000)(even when it is not appropriate to exclude the other party from the protected party's deposition, a protective order can be crafted which would allow the other party to be present under the least restrictive conditions possible). In Mugrage, "[a]lthough [the wife was] in fear of [her husband], and [was] in good faith in asking that he be excluded, and even though she ha[d] been the victim of domestic violence in the past, as well as protected by an existing order, the court conclude[d] that Mr. Mugrage ha[d] respected the judicial process in the past and almost certainly [would] abide by the terms of any court order regulating his attendance at the deposition. He has not violated past court orders and the court conclude[d] that security concerns for her safety can be addressed in a carefully crafted protective order. Therefore, Ms. Mugrage [did] not establish[] sufficient "exceptional circumstances" to justify excluding Mr. Mugrage from her deposition in the matrimonial action." Id. at 352. + +8. Here, this court could craft an order without taking exceptional steps to exclude Epstein from deposition, including having the deposition at the Palm Beach County Courthouse, no speaking out load by Defendant directly to Plaintiff, Defendant may confer with his counsel, seat positioning, arrival and departure times. See W. (conditions imposed in Mugrage). + +9. Here, Plaintiff has not met her burden establishing exceptional circumstances to preclude Epstein from attending her deposition. See Ferrigno v. Yoder, 495 so.2d 886, 887-888 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)(the rules do not contemplate use as a means of by which one party may gain a tactical advantage - the right of a party to be in attendance at deposition is "sacrosanct".) + +# (b) Plaintiff's Disingenuous Arguments + +10. Plaintiff makes the absurd and disingenuous argument in paragraph 1 "By now, this Court is familiar with Jeffrey Epstein's practice of intimidating and harassing his victims as well as the Plaintiffs' level of fear of Jeffrey Epstein"; and then goes on to cite four different motions all filed by Plaintiffs' attorneys, none of which assert that Epstein has undertaken any action in the civil cases that was not discussed with and approved by all Plaintiffs' attorneys (including Maria Villafana, USAO) at the June 12, 2009 hearing with Judge Marra and as set forth in the transcript (supra); and also found to be appropriate as set forth in this Court's recent order (DE 299) denying Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order (DE 226) regarding contact of third parties by private investigators retained by Defendant (DE 226 and 223 identical pleadings). + +11. Again, in the recent order dealing with Plaintiffs' attempt to limit investigators (DE 299), the Court stated: "The Court agrees with Epstein in this instance and finds that limiting Epstein's investigation of the claims asserted against him in the manner as suggested strips from Epstein the ability to mount a defense and, as such, would violate Epstein's Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses and the due process clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment. . . . To restrict Epstein in the manner described would result in Epstein having to rely only on those "handpicked" witnesses disclosed by Plaintiffs in discovery, and would thereby prejudice Epstein in mounting his defense to the claims raised against him." The Court went on to state in Footnote 4 "The Court notes that in reaching the conclusion, review and consideration was made of the various declarations filed by the Plaintiffs in support of their claim that Epstein's investigators were acting in ways which were harassing, humiliating to Plaintiffs and/or otherwise designed to intimidate and finds that allegations without foundation". Those declarations were made by Jane Does 4, 6 and 7. + +12. Rather than allow discovery to take its normal course, the Plaintiffs in this case have attempted to control exactly what the Defendant is allowed to do and when he is allowed to do it. See ¶ 14 A — D of DE 296, Defendant's Emergency Motion To Strike Plaintiff's Motion For Protective Order (DE 292) And Emergency Motion To Allow The Attendance Of Jeffrey + +Epstein At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs And Response In Opposition To Plaintiffs', Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion For Protective Order As To Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs. + +13. The Plaintiffs almost universally have objected to past sexual history (whether consensual or by force such as molestation or rape), although Jane Does 2 through 7's psychiatrist expert Dr. Kliman, had Jane Does 2 through 7 complete detailed questionnaires including past sexual history and then interviewed them on tape about their past sexual history and its impact in the cases sub judice. These documents were subpoenaed; Defendant and his attorneys have reviewed them. Plaintiffs argue a different standard to apply to them versus the Defendant by virtue of their allegation in their respective complaints. However, at this juncture, they are just that — allegations. + +14. Almost all of these Plaintiffs have significant past, psychological, psychiatric, sexual abuse (molestation, rape, etc.) as well as criminal arrest and/or convictions completely unrelated to Epstein. The Court entered an order (DE 289) specifically addressing these types of issues in addressing Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion for Independent Medical Examination and Plaintiff (C.M.A.'s) attempt to limit the exam. The Court stated in that order "Plaintiff cites no case law and independent research has uncovered none, to support her novel position that a Plaintiff who puts her mental, emotional and psychiatric state at issue can place a limitation on the number of times defense counsel or agents retained by him can inquire into areas relevant to these issues where the subject matter involve is "highly personal," "embarrassing," "sensitive" or otherwise "humiliating." + +15. Plaintiff is seeking \$15,000,000 in personal injury damages for, among other things, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental + +anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self esteem, loss of dignity and (invasion of privacy)." The Court noted: " . . . . under these circumstances, where Plaintiff is seeking to recover medical expenses associated with these complex medical issues, full knowledge of Plaintiff's past and present medical, psychological, familial and social history is essential." The Court granted the Defendant's Emergency Motion for Independent Medical Exam in accordance with that order. + +16. Additionally, Plaintiff,', sought to limit the scope of her medical examination (as set forth in paragraph 5 above, and further sought to assert a "conditional reliance" so as to prevent any and all discovery related to her current and past medical and emotional state. (DE 113)(Case No.: 80811). This Court rejected the conditional reliance. (DE 272) (Case No.: 80119). was set for deposition on September 3, 2009 and for an IME on September 8, 2009. However, based upon a medical condition that existed, both Plaintiff's counsel and defense counsel agreed to postpone both the deposition and the medical exam. Therefore that discovery has been delayed. + +17. Now, Jane Doe No.4, just as all the other Jane Does, seek to prevent meaningful discovery in this case by the Defendant or to dictate to the Defendant and this Court how discovery should be conducted. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure be "damned". Plaintiffs want the Defendant to jump through all sorts of hoops in order for his attorneys to obtain routine discovery while they continue to try their cases in the media, which serves only to prejudice Epstein's right to receive a fair trial. Now, they wish to strip him of his constitutional and due process rights to defend these cases. + +18. The Defendant is being required to defend these cases on Plaintiffs' terms, and only when this Court or the state court judge intercedes is the Defendant allowed to proceed with what would be customary, reasonable, necessary and allowable discovery. This Defendant is being denied his constitutional right to confront his accuser(s). He is being denied fundamental discovery. + +19. As stated in the Defendant's Emergency Motion to Strike the Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order and the Emergency Motion to allow the Attendance of Jeffrey Epstein at the deposition of the Plaintiff (DE 296), which included the expert affidavit of RichardM, M.D., Jane Doe No. 4's alleged "emotional condition" after seeing Epstein is absurd. Jane Doe No. 4 was physically abused, including having her head smashed into the hood of the car and the window of a car, spit upon and verbally abused by her former long term boyfriend, Preston Vineyard. Yet she kept returning to him. There is no affidavit filed by Jane Doe No. 4. So this new found, contrived emotion is just that. + +20. The Plaintiff's assertion that the court should appoint a special MI to preside at the Plaintiff's deposition and control the proceedings and for the Defendant to pay the special fee is not only groundless, but is absurd. The Plaintiffs' attorneys continue to try this case against Mr. Epstein in the media. They are the grandstanders, the first ones with the comments, opinions and release of confidential information. Yet they seek anonymity for their clients, and complete control over discovery in this case. It is this Court which exercises and directs the parties how discovery will take place, not Jane Doe No. 4 or any other Jane Doe nor the Defendant. + +WHEREFORE, Jeffrey Epstein moves this Court for an order denying Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order and granting the Defendant's Motion for Sanctions and an order compelling the Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 (DE 305). + +Page 11 + +![]()Robert D. Critton, Jr. +Michael J. Pike +Attorney for Defendant Epstein + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 27 day of Sept, 2009. + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA** [REDACTED] + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scm•la, Esq. + +Jack P.M, Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcvlaw.com + +iahasearcylaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brucereinliar n + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold-Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +08804 + +skuvin@riccilaw.com + +tleopold@riccilaw.com + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. + +09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iagesa@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectful itted, + +By: + +ROB RITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florid No. 224162 + +rcrit@bc1claw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747092/EFTA02747092.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747092/EFTA02747092.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5f1dcd64af157fe01195a5789ea7349859fa4dbc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747092/EFTA02747092.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,648 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747092.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 13, + "chars": 22814, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.35, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 412.0903625488281, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 412.0903625488281, + 102.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 102.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF \nJANE DOE NO. 4'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND \nMOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER, WITH INCORPORATED \nMEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 505.5035400390625, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 505.5035400390625, + 420.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 420.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 516.78 + ], + [ + 361.9078674316406, + 516.78 + ], + [ + 361.9078674316406, + 531.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 531.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(a) The No-Contact Orders", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 235.00799999999998, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 380.8382568359375, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 380.8382568359375, + 311.6030578613281 + ], + [ + 235.00799999999998, + 311.6030578613281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(b) Plaintiff's Disingenuous Arguments", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 211.14, + 571.8599999999999 + ], + [ + 418.5154113769531, + 571.8599999999999 + ], + [ + 418.5154113769531, + 589.8530120849609 + ], + [ + 211.14, + 589.8530120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.384, + 147.42000000000002 + ], + [ + 375.76800000000003, + 147.42000000000002 + ], + [ + 375.76800000000003, + 160.38 + ], + [ + 264.384, + 160.38 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 188.496, + 311.85 + ], + [ + 416.15999999999997, + 311.85 + ], + [ + 416.15999999999997, + 352.35 + ], + [ + 188.496, + 352.35 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 354 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 117 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 139 + ], + [ + "Line", + 69 + ], + [ + "Text", + 64 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747092" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747105/EFTA02747105.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747105/EFTA02747105.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..82949713204d82d51ff7d2fedcb6bf252141c618 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747105/EFTA02747105.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +## Adam Horowitz + +From: Adam Horowitz Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 11:43 AM To: 'Michael J. Pike'; 'Robert D. Critton Jr.' Cc: Stuart Mermelstein Subject: Jane Does v. Epstein + +Please allow this to confirm that Jeffrey Epstein will not attend tomorrow's deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 (in the absence of a Court order permitting him to attend). We understand you may wish to have your client listen In by telephone or view a videofeed of the deposition, but will not be seen by our client + +Regards, + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +vvww.sexabuseattorney.corn + +Mermeistein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +abotowItzesexabuseattorney.coln + +Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +![](_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747105/EFTA02747105.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747105/EFTA02747105.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2d51e3cff297902bfa26c22144643f5e95831432 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747105/EFTA02747105.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747105.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 743, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.82, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Adam Horowitz", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 63.647999999999996, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 157.49986267089844, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 157.49986267089844, + 102.42352294921875 + ], + [ + 63.647999999999996, + 102.42352294921875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747105" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747105/_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747105/_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c47faabcbbbe1cdd41c8f860ec02625d47bc8a30 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747105/_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ece8bdc3d42b30bfd124c4e79769d6c375a39c2de4636d8f84b5125483864708 +size 8166 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747106/EFTA02747106.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747106/EFTA02747106.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cbf3c291e85a42c13ef131dde0e204dc3b6c8ce4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747106/EFTA02747106.md @@ -0,0 +1,225 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO.2, + +Plaintiff, + +-vs- + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +/ + +DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE #4 + +Wednesday, September 16, 2009 1:03 - 1:08 p.m. + +250 Australian Avenue South Suite 115 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Reported By: Cynthia , RPR, FPR Notary Public, State of Florida Prose Court Reporting + +![](_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg) + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +APPEARANCES: + +On behalf of the Plaintiff: + +ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQUIRE MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Phone: 305.931.2200 + +On behalf of the Defendant: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE MARK T. LUTTIER, ESQUIRE BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP 303 Banyan Boulevard Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Phone: 561.842.2820 + +On behalf of Jeffrey Epstein: + +JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-5012 Phone: 561.659.8300 + +On behalf of LM and EW: + +WILLIAM J. BERGER, ESQUIRE ROTHSTEIN, ROSENFELDT, ADLER 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Phone: 954.522.3456 + +On behalf of CMA: + +JACK P. , ESQUIRE SEARCY, DENNEY, SCAROLA, BARNHART & SHIPLEY, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +APPEARNCES CONTINUED... + +On behalf of BB: + +ADAM J. LANGINO, ESQUIRE + +LEOPOLD KUVIN + +2925 PGA Boulevard + +Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, Florida + +Phone: 561.515.1400 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +## PROCEEDINGS + +- - + +MR. HOROWITZ: Adam Horowitz, counsel for Plaintiff, Jane Doe 4. + +MR. CRITTON: Cindy, what time is it? + +THE COURT REPORTER: It is 1:03. + +MR. BERGER: William J. Berger for LM and EW. + +MR. Jack for CMA. + +MR. LANGINO: Adam Langino from Leopold Kuvin on behalf of BB. + +MR. LUTTIER: Mark Luttier on behalf of Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman for the Defendant. + +MR. CRITTON: Robert Critton on behalf of Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein. + +MR. HOROWITZ: This is Adam Horowitz. We're canceling today's deposition. Before appearing here today, we had a stipulation with Defense counsel that Mr. Jeffrey Epstein, the Defendant, would not be here. He would not cross paths with our client. + +And immediately as we were approaching the deposition room, he made face-to-face contact with our client. He was just feet away from + +1 2 her and intimidated her, and for that reason we're not going forward. + +3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 MR. CRITTON: i didn't see any contact because 1, obviously, was not out there. We started at about -- when you came in it was approximately 1:03. Mr. Epstein has an office here at the Florida Science Foundation. Had you been here at 1:00, your paths never would have crossed because Mr. Epstein was leaving the building. I instructed him to leave the building so that he would not be here. + +12 13 14 He was going to appear by way of Skype so that he could be on avideo camera so that he could see this. + +15 (Mr. Goldberger entered the room.) + +16 17 18 19 20 21 MR. CRITTON: Had you been here on time, and not faulting, Iam just saying had you been here on time at 1:00, as everyone else seemed to be here at least get here before you did, Adam, you and your client, your paths never would have crossed. + +22 23 24 25 Idirected Mr. Epstein to leave the building so he would not be here so that there would be no way that your paths could have crossed. It was neither my intent nor was it + +1 2 3 4 5 my client's intent specifically, because I also advised him that he was not to cross paths, not to have any contact with your client, and certainly by our agreement not to be here today for the deposition. + +6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 MR. HOROWITZ: And at approximately 1:00 is exactly when my client crossed paths with Jeffrey Epstein. And not only did he cross paths but he proceeded to stare her down just feet away from her. For that reason she became an emotional wreck and cannot proceed with the deposition. She's simply not in an emotional state to do so. + +14 15 16 17 18 19 And in addition Mr. Epstein violated the agreement between counsel that he would not cross paths or come into contact with our client. And it will be also for the criminal court judge to decide whether he has violated a no-contact order. I have nothing else to say. + +20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. CRITTON: Again I instructed Mr. Epstein to leave the building so absolutely no contact could occur between he and Mr. Horowitz and his client nor anyone else. Until the court, until either Judge Marra or Judge ruled on the issue as to whether + +or not he could appear at the depositions of not only Jane Doe 4 but any other individuals, so you do what you need to do. + +MR. HOROWITZ: Off the record. + +(The Deposition was concluded.) + +## CERTIFICATE + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +I, Cynthia , Registered Professional Reporter and Florida Professional Reporter, State of Florida at large, certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings and that the transcript is a true and complete record of my stenographic notes. + +Dated this 16th day of September, 2009. + +Cynthia , RPR, FPR \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747106/EFTA02747106.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747106/EFTA02747106.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a1b3e5a15982cd691dd821004771e9a894002ad6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747106/EFTA02747106.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,384 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747106.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 5436, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.49, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.304, + 58.31999999999999 + ], + [ + 472.2393798828125, + 58.31999999999999 + ], + [ + 472.2393798828125, + 86.77496337890625 + ], + [ + 209.304, + 86.77496337890625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROCEEDINGS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.97999572753906, + 58.31999999999999 + ], + [ + 424.116, + 58.31999999999999 + ], + [ + 424.116, + 71.06512451171875 + ], + [ + 252.97999572753906, + 71.06512451171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.1699981689453, + 59.129999999999995 + ], + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 59.129999999999995 + ], + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 253.1699981689453, + 71.28 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 114 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 127 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 36 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 106 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 36 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 291 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 105 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 110 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747106" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747106/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747106/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..01b34a4310ddfb8286f41c94aedecaa7fdb2832d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747106/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:160dc4238d381a8f50a4a225403e644320272fa0436deada72cddbe46d7491c0 +size 7557 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747114/EFTA02747114.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747114/EFTA02747114.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4f9724ae1b75c589959858ee2e33f202387b3bc2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747114/EFTA02747114.md @@ -0,0 +1,80 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRia + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4 by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files this Response to Defendant's Motion for Sanctions, and state as follows: + +- I. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") has the gall to file a pre-emptive Motion for Sanctions against Plaintiff and her counsel following Epstein's violation of this Court's No-Contact Order (D.E. 305).1 +- 2. Them is no basis in law or fact for sanctions against the Plaintiff. It is Epstein who should be sanctioned by this Court as it was Epstein who violated the No-Contact Order and an express agreement between counsel that Epstein would not attend Jane Doe No. 4's + +Plaintiff filed her own Motion for Sanctions against Jeffrey Epstein on the same date. (D.E. 306). It appears to be Defendant's belief that an award of sanctions should be based on a race to the courthouse. Plaintiff submits that such motions should be decided on their merits and the actual conduct of the parties. + +deposition, or even be seen by her at any time relative to her deposition. These were express conditions agreed to by both parties for the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 to take place on September 16, 2009. 5t Exhibit "A". Epstein violated this express agreement and condition to the deposition, distressing and intimidating Jane Doe No. 4, and it is he who should be sanctioned. + +3. As set forth in Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions, Epstein's conduct of coming into contact with Jane Doe No. 4 at a time and place where he knew or should have known he would cross paths with Jane Doe No. 4, and then stopping to stare at and intimidate Jane Doe No. 4, is a violation of this Court's No-Contact Order (D.E. 238). It is also a violation of the No-Contact Order entered in the criminal case against Jeffrey Epstein. (D.E. 306, Exhibit B). These No-Contact Orders were written in the broadest of terms, providing that Jeffrey Epstein shall have neither direct nor indirect contact with any of his victims, including Jane Doe No. 4. Id. + +4. Nevertheless, at 1 p.m. on September 16, 2009, Jeffrey Epstein came into contact with Jane Doe No. 4 and her counsel at the site of her deposition, and stood mere feet away from the entrance to the ground-floor office where her deposition was going to be held. + +5. Jeffrey Epstein admits in his motion that he knew the time and location of Jane Doe No. 4's deposition. His counsel even attaches the aforementioned stipulation of counsel wherein it was agreed that Jane Doe No. 4's deposition would only go forward if Epstein would not be seen by the Plaintiff. Yet, Epstein flagrantly violated this agreement by traversing the lobby of the building, just feet away from where the deposition was being held at the precise moment Plaintiff was likely to be arriving at her deposition. + +6. Epstein's version of events is even contradicted by the documents he chose to attach to Defendant's Motion for Sanctions. Epstein describes a fortuitous meeting with Plaintiff at 1:04 p.m. (D.E. 305, Exhibit "4"). This is not only patently absurd, but it is contradicted by Defendant's own filings. Counsel for the parties went on the record to announce the cancellation of the deposition after the altercation in the lobby. According to the court reporter and even defense counsel, the parties went on the record at 1:03 p.m. See Exhibit "B". Thus, Mr. Epstein's version that the lobby incident occurred at 1:04 p.m. (when he thought he would not see Plaintiff) is simply an impossibility.2 + +7. There is simply no basis for the imposition of sanctions against Plaintiff or her counsel. Not only was there no bad faith, willful misconduct, or violation of a court order by Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff did precisely what the parties agreed to before the deposition. The parties agreed that she would only appear for deposition if she would not see Epstein. See Exhibit "A". This condition was unambiguous. Id. It was Epstein — and not the Plaintiff -- who chose to violate this stipulation and the No-Contact Orders.3 Accordingly, there is no basis for sanctions against Plaintiff. + +8. Jane Doe No. 4 was visibly shaken to the point of tears within seconds of being stared at by Jeffrey Epstein. She began crying uncontrollably and was in no condition for an otherwise emotional and difficult deposition. Sitting for her deposition at that moment was simply not an option. Indeed, the likelihood of emotional distress is precisely the reason that the + +2Moreover, following the incident in the lobby, Plaintiff's counsel attempted to console his visibly distraught client. He then entered the deposition room to confer with all counsel as to what had occurred. It was only after this brief discussion that Plaintiff's counsel went on the record at 1:03 p.m. to announce the termination of the deposition based on the earlier event. Accordingly, Plaintiff maintains that these incidents in the lobby occurred at approximately 1:00 p.m. + +3Epstein attempts to excuse his behavior by arguing that he works in the office building where the deposition was held. This is irrelevant. It does not vitiate the parties' stipulation or the Nocontact Order. Indeed, Epstein's familiarity with the ingresses and egresses of the office building make his reckless interaction with Jane Doe No. 4 all the more egregious. + +parties entered into the stipulation involving Epstein being unseen by Jane Doe No. 4 at her deposition. + +9. Defendant's proposal that Plaintiff re-sit for deposition in the next ten (10) days is simply untenable. Plaintiff was wounded by her encounter with Epstein and sought counseling that same evening. Before she re-appears for deposition, parameters must be in place to ensure that Epstein does not appear at the deposition or otherwise violate the No-Contact Order. Epstein is a felon and a registered sex offender. The Court should be reminded that he is a dangerous felon, who is capable, according to numerous young women, of inflicting substantial psychological damage. + +Dated: September 23, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz q se) miseattorne ys.c MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on September 23, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747114/EFTA02747114.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747114/EFTA02747114.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6ac4f1578ba17cfe21076fa82de512f0dfd7fc76 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747114/EFTA02747114.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,349 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747114.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 7721, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.16, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 100.36800000000001, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 512.4931640625, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 512.4931640625, + 403.863037109375 + ], + [ + 100.36800000000001, + 403.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 85.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747114" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747120/EFTA02747120.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747120/EFTA02747120.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4f41e9e8c85b0c4072529629ec4ad36d0de9341a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747120/EFTA02747120.md @@ -0,0 +1,175 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S NOTICE OF RELIANCE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Notice of Reliance of Supplemental Authority In Connection with Defendant's Emergency Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order and Emergency Motion to Allow the Attendance of Jeffrey Epstein at the Deposition of Plaintiffs and Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion for Protective Order as to Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance at the Deposition of Plaintiffs, with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 296). + +- 1. On September 11, 2009, Defendant filed his Emergency Motion to Strike Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order and Emergency Motion to Allow the Attendance of Jeffrey Epstein at the Deposition of Plaintiffs and Response in + +Opposition to Plaintiffs' Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion for Protective Order as to Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance at the Deposition of Plaintiffs, with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 296). + +2. On September 23, 2009, Defendant filed his Response in Opposition to Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order, with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 322). + +3. Defendant hereby incorporates the arguments set forth in (DE 322) relative to Epstein's attendance at depositions as if fully set forth herein and in (DE 296) + +4. In an effort to ease the clerk's docket, the undersigned has not attached the exhibits but has referenced them by docket number. + +![]()**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 25th day of August, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bc1claw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mvikeabc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAMOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Brad , Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +casselltAlaw.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. + +No. Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack PIS Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 imasearevlaw.com iphasearcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsberg@podhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jazesqQbellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747120/EFTA02747120.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747120/EFTA02747120.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..21437b276cfa8045c619ddab91bc814f356329f6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747120/EFTA02747120.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,273 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747120.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4931, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.94, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 76.79888916015625 + ], + [ + 415.8751220703125, + 76.79888916015625 + ], + [ + 415.8751220703125, + 105.05352783203125 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 105.05352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S NOTICE OF RELIANCE OF \nSUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.132, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 491.2900695800781, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 491.2900695800781, + 395.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 129.132, + 395.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 545.94 + ], + [ + 364.75199999999995, + 545.94 + ], + [ + 364.75199999999995, + 558.9 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 558.9 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAMOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 279.45 + ], + [ + 425.0905456542969, + 279.45 + ], + [ + 425.0905456542969, + 322.10302734375 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 322.10302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 131 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 59 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 109 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747120" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747124/EFTA02747124.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747124/EFTA02747124.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6a3d0177673db5262999937db11537a7fbefabe5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747124/EFTA02747124.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time in which to Respond to Remaining Portions of Discovery Motions Still at Issue (D.E. #316). Having reviewed the pleadings filed incident to this matter and being otherwise duly advised in the premises it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that said Motion for Extension of Time in which to Respond to Remaining Portions of Discovery Motions Still at Issue (D.E. #316) is GRANTED. Epstein may file a response to the subject motions on or before October 6, 2009. The Court notes that the subject Motion is not accompanied with a proposed order as required by the Local Rules of this Court. Accordingly, the undersigned reminds Epstein's counsel to comply with the Local Rules by filing proposed orders along with those motions requiring same in the future. + +DONE AND ORDERED this September 23, 2009, in Beach, Florida. at West Palm + +> o Soil-- LINNEA R. J93MSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747124/EFTA02747124.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747124/EFTA02747124.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a87cf850bdfb5242a6798ced35883850d6e482da --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747124/EFTA02747124.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747124.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1318, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.75, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 406.6453857421875, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 406.6453857421875, + 99.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 99.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.13200000000006, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 331.2580871582031, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 331.2580871582031, + 390.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 282.13200000000006, + 390.43353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747124" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747126/EFTA02747126.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747126/EFTA02747126.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ab5ed63694bddf6fb863ac7fa79355ff0cad7534 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747126/EFTA02747126.md @@ -0,0 +1,159 @@ +Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 322-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/23/2009 Page 1 of 5 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 238 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/31/2009 Page 1 of 5 + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAIMII + +JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRAI + +Plaintiff; + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRAMII + +JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038l -MARRA/NM + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +( + +Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 322-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/23/2009 Page 2 of 5 + +Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 238 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/31/2009 Page 2 of 5 + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 6, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRAIIM + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811 -CIV-MARRAMI + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Defendants. + +DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRA.=. + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, + +Defendants. + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARRAL=. + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Jane Doe. No 101 and 102's Motion for No-Contact Order (DE 113) and Plaintiffs Jane Does' 2-7 Notice of Joinder in Plaintiffs' Motion (DE 145). The Court has reviewed the motions, responses, and replies (DE's 113, 127, 136, 145, 233), and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. Plaintiffs seek a Court order prohibiting Defendant or his agents from communicating with Plaintiffs directly or indirectly. Defendant. Defendant opposes the request as "needless, unwarranted and excessive." (DE 127 at 5). Nonetheless, Defendant states in his response that "neither Mr. Epstein nor his attorneys, nor their agents intend to have any direct or indirect contact with Plaintiffs counsels' clients." (DE 127 at 4). + +The Court notes that Defendant is already under court order not to have direct or indirect contact with any victims. See Transcript of Plea Conference at 20. During the course of Defendant's state plea conference of June 30, 2009; Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillio explicitly instructed Defendant as follows: + +Court: Okay. D is, you shall not have any contact with the victim, are there more than one victim? + +Ms. Belohiavek: There's several. + +Court: Several, all of the victims. So this should be plural. I'm making that plural. You are not to have any contact direct or indirect, and in this day and age I find it necessary to go over exactly what we mean by indirect. By indirect, we mean no text messages, no e-mail, no Face Book, no My Space, no telephone calls, no voice mails, no messages through carrier pigeon, no messages through third parties, no hey would you tell so and so for me, no having a friend, acquaintance or stranger approach any of these victims with a message of any sort from you, is that clear? + +Defendant: Yes, + +Id. at 20-21. + +In light of Defendant's response to Plaintiffs' motion for no contact order, suggesting that the state court's order only applies to some victims and that parties are always allowed to contact each other directly, the Court finds it necessary to state clearly that Defendant is under this + +court's order not to have direct or indirect contact with any plaintiffs, regardless of the intended scope of the state court's order. Accordingly, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: Plaintiffs Jane Doe. No 101 and I02's Motion for No-Contact Order (DE 113) is GRANTED. Defendant is hereby prohibited from communicating with all plaintiffs directly or indirectly', either personally or through agents, except that Defendant may communicate with plaintiffs only through plaintiffs' attorneys of record, for the duration of this Order. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, + +Florida, this 31" day of July, 2009 + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies furnished to: all counsel of record + +&#x27;See infra excerpt of Transcript of Plea Conference at 20-21, for examples of indirect contact. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747126/EFTA02747126.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747126/EFTA02747126.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cc33dd17a1ba36b2af5e0d30151ed873fab6df57 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747126/EFTA02747126.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,257 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747126.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 4456, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.58, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 217.26, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 396.33331298828125, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 396.33331298828125, + 130.41 + ], + [ + 217.26, + 130.41 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 288.864, + 583.2 + ], + [ + 334.552001953125, + 583.2 + ], + [ + 334.552001953125, + 598.5940551757812 + ], + [ + 288.864, + 598.5940551757812 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 125 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747126" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747131/EFTA02747131.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747131/EFTA02747131.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..56bb6933eb21262b1c447be55fbce144a05fa4cf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747131/EFTA02747131.md @@ -0,0 +1,160 @@ +1 + +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE +FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT + +2 + +IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA +CRIMINAL DIVISION + +3 + +4 + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) + +5 + +vs ) CASE NO. 06 CF9454AMB +) 08 9381CFAMB + +6 + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN ) + +7 + +Defendant. ) + +8 + +9 + +PLEA CONFERENCE + +10 + +11 + +PRESIDING: HONORABLE DEBORAH DALE PUCILLO + +12 + +APPEARANCES: + +13 + +ON BEHALF OF THE STATE: +BARRY E. KRISCHER, ESQUIRE +State Attorney +401 North Dixie Highway +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 +By: LANNA BELOHLAVEK, ESQUIRE +Assistant State Attorney + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT: +ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 +By: JACK GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +June 30, 2008 +Palm Beach County Courthouse +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 +Beginning at 8:40 o'clock, a.m. + +CERTIFIED COPY + +PHYLLIS A. DAMES, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER + +"2" + +regularly congregate? + +MS. BELOHLAVEK: I personally do not know. + +THE COURT: Neither do I, which is why I'm asking. Has that been investigated? + +MR. GOLDBERGER: We have done our due diligence, for what it's worth, there is a residential street. There are not children congregating on that street. We think the address applies, if it doesn't, we fully recognize that he can't live there. + +THE COURT: Okay. D is, you shall not have any contact with the victim, are there more than one victim? + +MS. BELOHLAVEK: There's several. + +THE COURT: Several, all of the victims. So this should be plural. I'm making that plural. You are not to have any contact direct or indirect, and in this day and age I find it necessary.to go over exactly what we mean by indirect. By indirect, we mean no text messages, no e-mail, no Face Book, no My Space, no telephone calls, no voice mails, no + +• 1 messages through carrier pigeon,. no + +2 etsages— ugh-third partite, no—buy + +3 would you tell so and so for me, no having + +4 a friend, acquaintance or stranger approach + +5 any of these victims with a message of any + +6 sort from you, is that clear? + +7 THE DEFENDANT: Yes, + +8 THE COURT: And then it states, + +9 unless approved by the victim, the + +10 therapist and the sentencing court. Okay. + +11 THE DEFENDANT: I understand. + +12 THE COURT: And the sentencing court. + +13 So, if there is a desire which, I would + +14 think would be a bit strange. to have + +15 contact with any of the victims the court + +16 must approve it. + +17 MS. BELOHLAVEK: Correct. + +18 THE COURT: If the victim was under + +' 19 the age of 18, which was the case, you + +20 shall not until you have successfully + +21 attended and completed the sex offender + +22 program. So, is this sex offender program + +23 becoming a condition of probation? + +24 MS. BELOHLAVER: That is not. I + +25 don't believe I circled that one. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747131/EFTA02747131.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747131/EFTA02747131.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5eae13644619f2896544ebce43e1f554f852fe8a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747131/EFTA02747131.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,177 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747131.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2780, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.14, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 238.68, + 81.81 + ], + [ + 436.968, + 81.81 + ], + [ + 436.968, + 106.11000000000001 + ], + [ + 238.68, + 106.11000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLEA CONFERENCE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 280.296, + 289.98 + ], + [ + 390.456, + 289.98 + ], + [ + 390.456, + 300.51 + ], + [ + 280.296, + 300.51 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 122 + ], + [ + "Text", + 80 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 246 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747131" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747134/EFTA02747134.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747134/EFTA02747134.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7693047334af83aae9fb0fc38340cf7cf9949ee4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747134/EFTA02747134.md @@ -0,0 +1,115 @@ +l + +1 + +1 + +2 3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION. CASE NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE, et al., + +Plaintiffs, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +9 10 + +TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING 11BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE + +WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA + +JUNE 12, 2009 + +12 + +## APPEARANCES: + +13 + +FOR THE PLAINTIFFS: ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQ. 14Mermelatein & Horowitz 18205 Biscayne Boulevard 15Miami, FL 33160 305.931.2200 For Jane Doe + +16 + +J. ESQ, Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler East Las Olas Boulevard Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Jane Doe 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 954.522.3456 + +ISIDRO M. , ESQ. Elkins Boehringer 224 Datura Avenue West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Jane DOE II 561.832.8033 RICHARD H. WILLITS, ESQ. 10th Avenue North Lake Worth, FL 33461 For C.M.A. 561.582.7600 + +113 11 25 , + +1 2 THE COURT: That's not my concern. So, again, I just want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if 3 Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend 4 a case that's being prosecuted against him or her, that that in 5 and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to 6 criminal prosecution. + +7 MR. JOSEFSBERG: I agree, Your Honor. + +8 THE COURT: Any other plaintiff's counsel want to 9 chime in? + +10 MR. WILLITS: Richard Willits on behalf of C.M.A.. I 11 would join, to weigh in on what Mr. Josefsberg said. + +12 MR. JOSEFSBERG: Your Honor, I could not hear. + +13 THE COURT: We'll get him to a microphone. 14 Mr. Willits is speaking. + +15 MR. WILLITS: On behalf of my client, C.M.A., we join 16 in what Mr. Josefsberg said, and we also want to point out 17 something to the Court. + +18 First, we want to make a representation to the Court, 19 we have no intention of complaining to the U.S. Attorney's 20 Office, never had that intention, don't have that intention in 21 the future, but, of course, subject to what occurs in the 22 future. + +23 I want to point out to the Court that Mr. Epstein went 24 into this situation with his eyes wide open, represented by 25 counsel, knowing that civil suits had to be coming. If he + + didn't know it, his lawyers knew it. + + He appears to be having second thoughts now about he could have negotiated this way or he could have negotiated that way with the U.S. Attorney's Office. And they want to impose their second thoughts on the innocent plaintiffs. We don't think that's fair. We think it's in the nature of invited error, if there was any error whatsoever. + +Thank you. + +THE COURT: You agree he should be able to take the ordinary steps that adefendant in acivil action tan take and not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? + +MR. WILLITS: Of course. And we say the same thing Mr. Josefsberg said. It's all subject to your rulings and the direction of this Court as to what is proper and what is not proper. And we're prepared to abide by the rulings of this Court, and we have no intention of running to the State's Attorney. + +THE COURT: The U.S. Attorney? + +MR. WILLITS: I'm sorry. The U.S. Attorney. + +THE COURT: Mr. + +MR. : Thank you, Your Honor. + +If I may briefly, I think perhaps defense counsel forgot about this, but on pages 17 and 19 of my memorandum of law in opposition to the motion to dismiss, I did make reference to the non-prosecution agreement, and I did say that + +it, it doesn't relate to our clients. + +THE COURT: Okay. But, again, you're in agreement with everyone else so far that's spoken on behalf of a plaintiff that defending the case in the normal course of conducting discovery and filing motions would not be abreach? MR. HOROWITZ: Subject to your rulings, of course, yes. + +THE COURT: Thank you. + +Anyone else have anything to say from the plaintiffs? + +Ms. Villafana, if you would be so kind as to maybe help us out. I appreciate the fact that you're here, and I know you're not a party to these cases and under no obligation to respond to my inquiries. But as I indicated, it would be helpful for me to understand the Government's position. + +MS. VILLAFANA: Thank you, Your Honor. And we, of course, are always happy to try to help the Court as much as possible. But we are not a party to any of these lawsuits, and in some ways we are at adisadvantage because we dori't have access. My access is limited to what's on Pacer. So I don't' really know what positions Mr. Epstein may have taken either in correspondence or in discovery responses that aren't filed in the case file. + +But your first order was really just what do you think about a stay, and then the second order related to this hearing and asked amuch more specific question, which is whether we + +TOTALACCFcSCOURTROOMNE7WORKREALTIMETRANSCRIPTION + + we had filed that response. And what we said in the response to• the motion to stay is that the reason why he wants to stay the litigation is so that the non-prosecution agreement terminates based on a period of time, as he puts it. And then afterwards he would be able to come in here and make all of these arguments that clearly violate the non-prosecution agreement but we would be without remedy. + +THE COURT: But you're not taking the position that other than possibly doing something in litigation which is a violation of an express provision of the non-prosecution agreement, any other discovery, motion practice, investigations that someone would ordinarily do in the course of defending a civil case would constitute aviolation of the agreement? + +MS. VILLAFANA: No, Your Honor. I mean, civil litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take discovery is part of what civil litigation is about. And while there may be, for example, if someone were to try to subpoena the Government, we would obviously resist under statutory reasons, all that sort of stuff. But, no, Mr. Epstein is entitled to take the deposition of a plaintiff and to subpoena records, etc. + +THE COURT; And even if he seeks discovery from a Government agency, you have the right to resist it under the rules of procedure but that would not constitute aviolation, again unless there's a provision in the prosecution agreement \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747134/EFTA02747134.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747134/EFTA02747134.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..35df10aeb206b44f23c8c6feba68bf9c793c7558 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747134/EFTA02747134.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,222 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747134.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 6210, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.37, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "APPEARANCES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 143.20800000000003, + 381.51 + ], + [ + 234.11810302734375, + 381.51 + ], + [ + 234.11810302734375, + 392.5982666015625 + ], + [ + 143.20800000000003, + 392.5982666015625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 240 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 315 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 329 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 359 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747134" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747139/EFTA02747139.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747139/EFTA02747139.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3badce3d1faf0c5317a333011c3688238c93b63c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747139/EFTA02747139.md @@ -0,0 +1,133 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JM= + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +### DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S (80893) MOTION FOR MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER. WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, ("Epstein") by and through his undersigned counsel, serves his Response In Opposition to Plaintiff, Jane Doe's Motion for Protective Order (DE 297)(the "Motion"), With Incorporated Memorandum of Law. For the court's ease of reference, Plaintiff adopts the arguments set forth in Jane Doe 2-8 Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order (DE 306). In support, Epstein states: + +## I. Introduction + +1. The purpose of Plaintiff's Motion is to, among other things, prevent Jeffrey Epstein from attending the depositions of the Plaintiff in this matter based upon Plaintiff and her lawyers loose interpretation of certain No-Contact Orders attached below. From the outset, this Court should note that Jane Doe seeks millions of dollars in personal injury damages and has not filed any affidavits supporting the proposition that Epstein should be precluded from any deposition for any reason. As such, she has not met the exceptional burden of proving to this court that Epstein should be excluded from her deposition. Plaintiff adopts and incorporates all of Jane Doe 2-8's argument with only one additional argument (i.e., that if this court allows Epstein to attend Jane Doe's deposition it would violate the right of a state court judge to set conditions of a state criminal judgment). Without any supporting language in the No-Contact Orders, Plaintiff contends that same preclude Epstein from sitting a few feet away from Jane Doe in a deposition as that would amount to "contact." This will be addressed infra. + +# (a) The No-Contact Orders + +2. The No-Contact Orders are attached as Exhibits "1" and "2". As the Court will recognize, the relevant parts of the No-Contact Orders do not specifically state that Epstein cannot attend the depositions of the Plaintiffs that have initiated lawsuits against him seeking millions of dollars. Plaintiff's counsel contends that Defendant cannot contact Plaintiff's through third-parties, directly or indirectly. Taken literally, Defendant's attorneys cannot depose the Plaintiff's in the civil actions, which is obviously not what the No-Contact Orders or any Court anticipated. See infra. + +3. In fact, Plaintiffs universally agreed at the June 12, 2009 hearing on Defendant's Motion to Stay that regular discovery could proceed. See Composite Exhibit "3" at pages 26- 30 & 33-34. For instance, the court asked Plaintiffs' attorneys the following questions: + +The Court: [] So again, I just want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend a case being prosecuted against him or her, that that in and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to criminal prosecution? (Ex. "A," p.26). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: You agree he should be able to take the ordinary steps that a defendant in a civil action can take and not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? (Ex. "A," p.27). + +•+r + +The Court: Okay. But again, you're in agreement with everyone else so far that's spoken on behalf of a plaintiff that defending the case in the normal course of conducting discovery and filing motions would not be a breach? (Ex. "A," p.30). + +Mr. Horowitz — counsel for Jane Does 2-7: Subject to your rulings, of course, yes. (Ex. "A," p.30). + +\*\*\* + +The Court: But you're not taking the position that other than possibly doing something in litigation which is any other discovery, motion practice, investigations that someone would ordinarily do in the course of defending a civil case would constitute a violation of the agreement? (Ex. "A," p.34). + +Ms. Villafana: No, your honor. I mean, civil litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take discovery is part of what civil litigation is all about.... But. . . , Mr. Epstein is entitled to take the deposition of a Plaintiff and to subpoena records, etc. (Ex. "A," p.34) + +4. It is clear from the transcript attached as Exhibit "3" that each of the Plaintiffs' attorneys, expected and conceded that regular/traditional discovery would take place (i.e., discovery, motion practice, depositions, requests for records, and investigations). Moreover, Epstein has a constitutional due process right to confront these witnesses, including Jane Doe. The purpose of the notice rule found under FIa.R.Civ.Pro. 1.310(b)(1) is clear: a party has the right to attend and cross-examine all witnesses with information relevant to the litigation. See infra. The same applies to Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 30. In fact, the Court has already ruled (DE 299) that Epstein has a right to mount a defense under the Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses and under the due process clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Moreover, the court recognized that the threat of criminal prosecution is real and present as Epstein remains under the scrutiny of the United States Attorney's Office ("USAO"), which is explained and acknowledged in the Court's Order (DE 242). Recognizing the foregoing, the court has rightfully acknowledged Epstein's due process rights to defend himself and his constitutional rights to confront witnesses. Thus, Epstein has a Sixth Amendment right to attend the depositions under the Confrontation Clause of the Federal Constitution. Christian v. Rhode, 41 F.3d 461, 465-66 (C.A. Ariz. 1994). See also, Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012, 1015, 108 5.0. 2798, 2800, 101 L.Ed.2d 857 (1988). The Clause "guarantees the defendant a face-toface meeting with witnesses appearing before the trier of fact." Id. at 1016, 108 S.Ct. at 2801. This physical confrontation "enhances the accuracy of fact finding by reducing the risk that a witness will wrongfully implicate an innocent person." Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836, 846, 110 S.Ct. 3157, 3164, 111 L.Ed.2d 666 (1990); see also Coy, 487 U.S. at 1019, 108 S.Ct. at 2802 ("A witness `may feel quite differently when he has to repeat his story looking at the man whom he will harm greatly by distorting or mistaking the facts.' ") (quoting Z. Chafee, The Blessings of Liberty 35 (1956)). The Confrontation Clause thus gives the defendant the right to be present and to confront witnesses giving testimony during a pretrial deposition, where the deposition is intended for use at trial. Don v. Nix, 886 F.2d 203 (8th Cir.1989); United States v. Benfield, 593 F.2d 815 (8th Cir.1979). Importantly, there are no minor Plaintiffs in this matter or the related matters. All are of age. + +5. Moroever, 1 McCormick on Evid., §19 (6th ed.) states, in pertinent part, that: "[for two centuries, common law judges and lawyers have regarded the opportunity of crossexamination as an essential safeguard of the accuracy and completeness of testimony. They have insisted that the opportunity is a right, not a mere privilege. This right is available at the taking of depositions as well as during the examination of witnesses at trial." Accordingly, Plaintiff's request that Epstein be prevented from attending her deposition should be denied. See 91 Conn. 404, 408, 99 A. 1032 (1917); Helfferich v. Farley, 36 Conn.Sup. 333, 334, 419 A.2d 913 (1980). If this Court excludes Defendant from deposition, Plaintiff's deposition testimony could be stricken from the record and Plaintiff could be prevented from testifying at trial, especially if Plaintiff's position is that Epstein cannot be present at said trial based upon her loose interpretation of the No-Contact Orders? This would afford her attorneys an opportunity to point at an empty chair? These are court proceedings that Plaintiff instituted and, therefore, she cannot prevent Epstein's access to the court(s) under the cloak of her allegations. + +6. Plaintiff's counsel cites Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure, Form 8.962, in an effort to support Plaintiffs argument by relating an injunction against domestic violence to the No-Contact Orders. In short, Plaintiff's argument is that an injunction against domestic violence prevents an abusive boyfriend from walking a few feet away from the former girl friend apparently in a public place without the court entering a narrow protective order. Plaintiff does not address civil proceedings in her ill-founded analogy. Assume a Plaintiff obtains a temporary restraining order ("TRO") on a Defendant or a final judgment of injunction against domestic violence ("IADV") that specifically prevents Defendant from coming into contact with Plaintiff. Plaintiff cannot utilize the TRO or the IADV to prevent Defendant from attending court proceedings. See Pope v. Pope, 901 So.2d 352 (Fla. V' DCA 2005). In fact, under Fla. Stat. §741.31 a violation of a IADV must be "willful," and the statute does not address court proceedings as part of any such willful violation because that would obviously violate a Defendant's right to access the courts, the right to be heard and other fundamental due process rights. + +7. Using Plaintiffs ill-founded analogy, in cases where a final restraining order is in effect, factors to be considered in assessing need to exclude or limit a party's participation in a deposition in a pending matrimonial action include: (I) history of domestic violence, including physical abuse, threats, and harassment; (2) violations of restraining order; (3) past disregard of judicial process by party sought to be excluded; (4) anticipation of misconduct during deposition, which would harass, alarm or frighten party being deposed; (5) party's fear of party sought to be excluded; (6) mental and emotional health of parties; (7) general security concerns for safety of party being deposed; (8) good faith of party being deposed in asking to exclude other party; and (9) any other factor deemed relevant by court. Mugrage v. Mugrage, 763 A.2d 347, 349-352 (N.J. 2000)(even when it is not appropriate to exclude the other party from the protected party's deposition, a protective order can be crafted which would allow the other party to be present under the least restrictive conditions possible). In Mugrage, "[a)lthough [the wife was] in fear of [her husband], and [was] in good faith in asking that he be excluded, and even though she ha[d] been the victim of domestic violence in the past, as well as protected by an existing order, the court conclude[d] that Mr. Mugrage ha[d] respected the judicial process in the past and almost certainly [would] abide by the terms of any court order regulating his attendance at the deposition. He has not violated past court orders and the court conclude[d] that security concerns for her safety can be addressed in a carefully crafted protective order. Therefore, Ms. Mugrage [did] not establish[] sufficient "exceptional circumstances" to justify excluding Mr. Mugrage from her deposition in the matrimonial action." Id. at 352. + +8. Here, this court could craft an order without taking exceptional steps to exclude Epstein from deposition, including having the deposition at the Palm Beach County Courthouse, no speaking out load by Defendant directly to Plaintiff, Defendant may confer with his counsel, seat positioning, and arrival and departure times. See id. (conditions imposed in Mugrage). + +9. Here, Plaintiff has not met her burden establishing exceptional circumstances to preclude Epstein from attending her deposition. See Ferrigno v. Yoder, 495 so.2d 886, 887-888 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986Xthe rules do not contemplate use as a means of by which one party may gain a tactical advantage - the right of a party to be in attendance at deposition is "sacrosanct".) + +### (b) Plaintiff's Disingenuous Arguments, Which She Adopts From Jane Doe 2-8's Motion For Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order (DE 306 ) + +10. Plaintiff adopts the absurd and disingenuous argument in paragraph 1 of Jane Doe 2-8's Motion - 'By now, this Court is familiar with Jeffrey Epstein's practice of intimidating and harassing his victims as well as the Plaintiffs' level of fear of Jeffrey Epstein"; and then goes on to adopt four different motions all filed by Plaintiffs' attorneys, none of which assert that Epstein has undertaken any action in the civil cases that was not discussed with and approved by all Plaintiffs' attorneys (including Maria Villafana, USAO) at the June 12, 2009 hearing with Judge Marra and as set forth in the transcript (supra); and also found to be appropriate as set forth in this Court's recent order (DE 299) denying Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order (DE 226) regarding contact of third parties by private investigators retained by Defendant (DE 226 and 223 identical pleadings). + +11. Again, in the recent order dealing with Plaintiffs' attempt to limit investigators (DE 299), the Court stated: "The Court agrees with Epstein in this instance and finds that limiting Epstein's investigation of the claims asserted against him in the manner as suggested strips from Epstein the ability to mount a defense and, as such, would violate Epstein's Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses and the due process clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment. . . . To restrict Epstein in the manner described would result in Epstein having to rely only on those "handpicked" witnesses disclosed by Plaintiffs in discovery, and would thereby prejudice Epstein in mounting his defense to the claims raised against him." The Court went on to state in Footnote 4 "The Court notes that in reaching the conclusion, review and consideration was made of the various declarations filed by the Plaintiffs in support of their claim that Epstein's investigators were acting in ways which were harassing, humiliating to Plaintiffs and/or otherwise designed to intimidate and finds that allegations without foundation". Those declarations were made by Jane Does 4, 6 and 7. + +12. Rather than allow discovery to take its normal course, the Plaintiffs in this case have attempted to control exactly what the Defendant is allowed to do and when he is allowed to do it. See ¶ 14 A - D of DE 296, Defendant's Emergency Motion To Strike Plaintiff's Motion For Protective Order (DE 292) And Emergency Motion To Allow The Attendance Of Jeffrey Epstein At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs And Response In Opposition To Plaintiffs', Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion For Protective Order As To Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance At The Deposition Of Plaintiffs — all of which Jane Doe adopts in her motion found at (DE 297). + +13. The Plaintiffs almost universally have objected to past sexual history (whether consensual or by force such as molestation or rape), although Jane Does 2 through 7's psychiatrist expert Dr. Kliman, had Jane Does 2 through 7 complete detailed questionnaires including past sexual history and then interviewed them on tape about their past sexual history and its impact in the cases sub judice. These documents were subpoenaed; Defendant and his attorneys have reviewed them. Plaintiffs argue a different standard to apply to them versus the Defendant by virtue of their allegation in their respective complaints. However, at this juncture, they are just that — allegations. + +14. Almost all of these Plaintiffs have significant past, psychological, psychiatric, sexual abuse (molestation, rape, etc.) as well as criminal arrest and/or convictions completely unrelated to Epstein. The Court entered an order (DE 289) specifically addressing these types of issues in addressing Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion for Independent Medical Examination and Plaintiff (C.M.A.'s) attempt to limit the exam. Jane Doe has apparently taken a position different from that already entered by this court in that she too has objected to the independent medical examination. Nonetheless, the Court stated in that order "Plaintiff cites no case law and independent research has uncovered none, to support her novel position that a Plaintiff who puts her mental, emotional and psychiatric state at issue can place a limitation on the number of times defense counsel or agents retained by him can inquire into areas relevant to these issues where the subject matter involve is "highly personal," "embarrassing," "sensitive" or otherwise "humiliating." As such, Plaintiff's adopted argument fails. + +15. Plaintiff is seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, physical injury, pain and suffering, intentional infliction of emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self esteem, loss of dignity and invasion of privacy etc. . . . The Court noted: " . . . under these circumstances, where Plaintiff is seeking to recover medical expenses associated with these complex medical issues, full knowledge of Plaintiff's past and present medical, psychological, familial and social history is essential." The Court granted the Defendant's Emergency Motion for Independent Medical Exam in accordance with that order. + +16. Additionally, Plaintiff, sought to limit the scope of her medical examination (as set forth in paragraph 5 above, and further sought to assert a "conditional reliance" so as to prevent any and all discovery related to her current and past medical and emotional state. (DE 113)(Case No.: 80811). This Court rejected the conditional reliance. (DE 272) (Case No.: 80119). + +17. Now, Jane Doe, just as all the other Jane Does, seeks to prevent meaningful discovery in this case by the Defendant or to dictate to the Defendant and this Court how discovery should be conducted. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure be "damned". Plaintiff wants the Defendant to jump through all sorts of hoops in order for his attorneys to obtain routine discovery while they continue to try their cases in the media, which serves only to prejudice Epstein's right to receive a fair trial. Now, they wish to strip him of his constitutional and due process rights to defend these cases. + +18. The Defendant is being required to defend these cases on Plaintiffs' terms, and only when this Court or the state court judge intercedes is the Defendant allowed to proceed with what would be customary, reasonable, necessary and allowable discovery. This Defendant is being denied his constitutional right to confront his accuser(s). He is being denied fundamental discovery. + +19. The Plaintiff's adopted assertion that the court should appoint a special to preside at the Plaintiff's deposition and control the proceedings and for the Defendant to pay the special fee is not only groundless, but is absurd. The Plaintiffs' attorneys continue to try this case against Mr. Epstein in the media. They are the grandstanders, the first ones with the comments, opinions and release of confidential information. Yet they seek anonymity for their clients, and complete control over discovery in this case. It is this Court which exercises and directs the parties how discovery will take place, not Jane Doe or any other Jane Doe nor the Defendant. + +WHEREFORE, Jeffrey Epstein moves this Court for an order denying Jane Doe's Motion for Protective Order, entering an order allowing Epstein to appear at her deposition and, to the extent Jane Doe adopted Jane Doe 2-8's Motion for Sanctions, denying that as well, and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and + +. Critton, Jr. Mic J. Pike Attorneys for Defendant Epstein + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 2 day of / , 2009. + +#### Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm(asexabuseattomey.com ahorowitzasexabuseattomey.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08- 80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08- 80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10°' Avenue North Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80811 reelrhw®hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Brad MI, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp@law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. MI, Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datum Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia®bellsouth.net + +Jack P.M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & P.A. Shipley, + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsx@searcylaw.com iph@searcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold-Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 skuvin@riccilaw.com tleopold@riccilaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsberg@podhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesqQbellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully su + +By: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcriabc1claw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITFON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747139/EFTA02747139.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747139/EFTA02747139.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..410eb0974505c3dcfa482a4c94ad3880c9a971b3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747139/EFTA02747139.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,644 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747139.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 13, + "chars": 22703, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.8, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 414.3964538574219, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 414.3964538574219, + 104.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 104.9730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF \nJANE DOE'S (80893) MOTION FOR MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE \nORDER. WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.99600000000001, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 507.4097900390625, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 507.4097900390625, + 409.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 111.99600000000001, + 409.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.81599999999997, + 558.9 + ], + [ + 363.7978820800781, + 558.9 + ], + [ + 363.7978820800781, + 575.6030120849609 + ], + [ + 255.81599999999997, + 575.6030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(a) The No-Contact Orders", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 235.00799999999998, + 268.11 + ], + [ + 382.0082702636719, + 268.11 + ], + [ + 382.0082702636719, + 286.1030578613281 + ], + [ + 235.00799999999998, + 286.1030578613281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(b) Plaintiff's Disingenuous Arguments, Which She Adopts From Jane Doe 2-8's \nMotion For Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order (DE 306 )", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 107.1, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 543.4369506835938, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 543.4369506835938, + 160.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 107.1, + 160.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 381.45050048828125, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 381.45050048828125, + 101.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 267.44399999999996, + 101.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 251.91 + ], + [ + 394.4363098144531, + 251.91 + ], + [ + 394.4363098144531, + 294.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 294.7330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 123 + ], + [ + "Line", + 61 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 133 + ], + [ + "Line", + 67 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 11 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747139" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747152/EFTA02747152.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747152/EFTA02747152.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..434c2ac8932c3aada3fe0b1944f3d31f145f61c7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747152/EFTA02747152.md @@ -0,0 +1,148 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-Mill + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +v. Plaintiff, + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +DOCKET + +91 2.61 09 + +## DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his responses and objections to Plaintiffs December 9, 2008 Amended First Set Of Interrogatories To Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, attached hereto. + +## Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent by fax and U.S. Mail to the following addressees this 26th day of January, 2009: + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ahorowitzahermanlaw.com jherman hermanlaw.com Iriveraahermanlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jaqescabellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully submitted, + +By:                                  +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. +Florida Bar No. 224162 +rcrit@bclclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +mpike@bclclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax + +*(Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO +PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES** + +**Interrogatory No. 1.** Identify all employees who performed work of services inside the Palm Beach Residence. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2003 until present. Also, see "Employee" as defined in paragraph g of Plaintiff's interrogatories. + +**Interrogatory No. 2.** Identify all Employees not identified in response to interrogatory no. 1 who at any time came to Defendant's Palm Beach Residence. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for "all Employees" "who at any time" came to the residence. Also, see "Employee" as defined in paragraph g of Plaintiff's interrogatories. + +**Interrogatory No. 3.** Identify all persons who came to the Palm Beach Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +**Interrogatory No. 4.** Identify all persons who came to the New York Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +**Interrogatory No. 5.** Identify all persons who came to the New Mexico Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my + +federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +Interrogatory No. 6. Identify all persons who came to the St. and who gave a massage or were asked to give amassage to Defendant. Residence + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." + +Interrogatory No. 7. List all the time periods during which Jeffrey Epstein was present in the State of Florida, including for each the date he arrive and the date he departed. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the + +discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2003 until present. + +**Interrogatory No. 8.** Identify all of Jeffrey Epstein health care providers in the past (10) ten years, including without limitation, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, physicians, hospitals and treatment facilities. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. In addition, such information is privileged pursuant to Rule 501, Fed. Evid., and §90.503, Fla.Evid. Code. In addition, such information is protected by the provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). + +**Interrogatory No. 9.** List all items in Jeffrey Epstein's possession in Palm Beach, Florida, at any time during the period of these interrogatories, which were used or intended to be used as sexual aids, sex toys, massage aids, and/or vibrators, and for each, list the manufacturer, model number (if applicable), and its present location. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 – 2005," while Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information from + +January 1, 2003, until present. Further, the request is meant to embarrass and harass the Defendant. + +**Interrogatory No. 10.** Identify all persons who provide transportation services to Jeffrey Epstein, whether as employees or independent contractors, including without limitation, chauffeurs and aircraft crew. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff places no time limitation. + +**Interrogatory No. 11.** Identify all telephone numbers used by Epstein, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's allegations claim a time period of "in or about 2004-2005" and involve Defendant's Palm Beach residence. + +**Interrogatory No. 12.** Identify all telephone numbers of employees of Epstein, used in the course or scope of their employment, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs allegations claim a time period of "in or about 2004-2005" and involve Defendant's Palm Beach residence. + +Interrogatory No. 13. List the names and addresses of all persons who are believed or known by your, your agents, or your attorneys to have any knowledge concerning any of the issues in this lawsuit; and specify the subject matter about which the witness has knowledge. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the interrogatory seeks information that is attorney-client and work product privileged as it seeks information known by Defendant's attorneys. The interrogatory is so overbroad that Defendant cannot reasonably form a response, including the raising of additional privileges which may apply. Without waiving any objection, see Rule 26 disclosures made by Defendant's counsel in this case. + +Interrogatory No. 14. State the name and address of every person known to you, your agents, or your attorneys who has knowledge about, possession, or custody, or control of, any model, plat, map, drawing, motion picture, videotape or photograph pertaining to any fact or issue involved in this controversy; and describe as to each, what item such person has, the name and address of the person who took or prepared it, and the date it was taken or prepared. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the interrogatory seeks information that is attorney-client and work product privileged as it seeks information known by Defendant's attorneys. + +Interrogatory No. 15. Identify all persons who have made aclaim, complaint, demand or threat against you relating to alleged sexual abuse or misconduct on aminor, and for each provide the following information: + +- a. The person's full name, last known address and telephone number, +- b. The person's attorney, if represented; +- c. The date of the alleged incident(s); +- d. If a civil case has been filed by or on behalf of the person, the case number and identifying information. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges and without waiving such objection, with regard to subparagraph (d), Defendant's counsel states that such information is public record and equally attainable by Plaintiff. + +Interrogatory No. 16. State the facts upon which you intend to rely for each denial of a pleading allegation and for each affirmative defense you intend to make in these cases. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk + +losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, no answer to the Amended Complaint has been filed by defense counsel in this case; however, Defendant does not intend to waive his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination. Defendant further objects in that Plaintiff's interrogatory attempts to obtain discovery in other cases filed by her undersigned counsel. + +**Interrogatory No. 17.** Identify all witnesses from whom you have obtained or requested a written, transcribed or recorded statement relating to any issue in these cases, and for each, in addition to the witness's identifying information, state the date of the statement and identify the person taking the statement. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects to this interrogatory in that it seeks information that is attorney-client and work product privileged. In addition, the request is overbroad in that it seeks information "relating to any issue." + +![]()STATE OF Florida ) +) +COUNTY OF Palm Beach ) + +I hereby certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Jeffrey Epstein, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Interrogatories who + +acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above-named person: personally known/identification and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this day of o.,,N,-No.r,.' 2009. + +(SEAL) + +![](_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg) + +NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF FLORIDA itenN Nayanira Alan's t Et Commission tDDMI844 N", 40.1 Expires: DEC. 01, 2012 BONDED MU ATIXTC BONDING Co, DM + +X \ PR=At: Notary Public/State o Commission #: My Commission Expires: Florida \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747152/EFTA02747152.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747152/EFTA02747152.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..18f44fddd30a3a6e6b160c68432e1cfaa4ed7904 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747152/EFTA02747152.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,465 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747152.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 26475, + "elapsed_seconds": 13.5, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.677, + 84.344 + ], + [ + 413.6286926269531, + 84.344 + ], + [ + 413.6286926269531, + 112.72900000000001 + ], + [ + 201.677, + 112.72900000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS \nTO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 136.08599999999998, + 294.393 + ], + [ + 476.3587341308594, + 294.393 + ], + [ + 476.3587341308594, + 322.7811584472656 + ], + [ + 136.08599999999998, + 322.7811584472656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.203, + 417.665 + ], + [ + 381.525146484375, + 417.665 + ], + [ + 381.525146484375, + 430.92413330078125 + ], + [ + 264.203, + 430.92413330078125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 123.82600000000001, + 104.619 + ], + [ + 490.4, + 104.619 + ], + [ + 490.4, + 132.193 + ], + [ + 123.82600000000001, + 132.193 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 221 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 524 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 516 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 499 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747152" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747152/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747152/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..eab56bab662374d0147047c51657344a79d4c831 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747152/_page_10_Picture_5.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ae5f902174fd33f3b4db2bdf9183e56a98f22d72968bed8e1fda2a290e843606 +size 2692 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747163/EFTA02747163.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747163/EFTA02747163.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..da61cfa5c03be2bfdb4a4ac22358b5d39dd6519e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747163/EFTA02747163.md @@ -0,0 +1,134 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, serves his responses and objections to Plaintiffs Amended First Request For Production To Defendant, dated December 9, 2008. + +Request No. 1. The list provided to you by the U.S. Attorney of individuals whom the U.S. Attorney was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an offense by Mr. Epstein enumerated in 18 U.S.C. §2255. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference + +under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 2. All documents referring or relating to the United States' agreement with Defendant to defer federal prosecution subject to certain conditions, including without limitation, the operative agreement between Defendant and the United States and all amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 3. All documents referring or relating to Defendant's agreement with the State of Florida on his plea of guilty to violations of Florida Criminal Statutes, including without limitation, the operative plea agreement and any amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Whatever public documents exist are in the State Court file and equally accessible to Plaintiff. + +Request No.4. All documents obtained in discovery or investigation relating to either the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal Case, including without limitation, documents obtained from any federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, the State Attorney's office and the United States Attorney's office. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the + +information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Request No. 4 seeks documents that are attorney-client and work product privileged in that it seeks "all documents obtained in discovery or investigation relating either to the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal Case ... ." In addition, such documents are privileged and confidential as they are the subject of a pending investigation. + +Request No. 5. All telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone calls made by or to Defendant, including without limitation, telephone logs and message pads. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the + +Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Defendant objects as the request is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding any and all telephone records and other documents reflecting any and all telephone calls made to or by Defendant. As phrased, the request includes attorney-client and work product privileged information, as well as records and documents of calls having absolutely no relationship to any of the allegations in this action. + +Request No. 6. All telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone calls made by or to Defendant, including without limitation, telephone logs and message pads, reflecting telephone calls made by or to employees. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce + +documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, as defined by Plaintiff in paragraph g of her request, the term employee is overly broad and encompasses information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, the request seeks information pertaining to person who are not parties to this action and whose privacy rights are implicated. + +Request No. 7. All surveillance videos, slides, film, videotape, digital recording or other audio or video depiction or image of the Palm Beach Residence. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my + +Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiff's request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding "all surveillance videos, etc., or image of the Palm Beach Residence." + +Request No. 8. All documents referring or relating to Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2, including without limitation, web pages, social networking site pages, correspondence, videotapes and audiotapes. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my + +Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. + +Request No. 9. All statements taken, transcribed or recorded from any person referring or relating to Defendant's sexual conduct, massages given to Defendant or any issue in these cases. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the + +Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. + +Request No. 10. All documents referring to or relating to air travel and aircraft used by Defendant, including without limitation, flight logs and flight manifests. + +time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding air travel and aircraft used by Defendant. + +Request No. 11. Any and all documents referring to or relating to modeling agencies, including but not limited to documents relating to or reflecting communications with female models. + +Request No. 12. All photographs, videotapes, digital images and other documents depicting or showing females who, at the time thereof, were under the age of 21, which were taken or created by or for Defendant and not intended for sale commercially to the public. + +Request No. 13. All photographs and painting of females which were displayed in any of Defendant's homes or residences in the time frame of these requests, including without limitation, photographs in standing or sitting frames or wall frames. + +Request No. 14. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 15. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and , including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 16. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and , including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 17. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. + +Request No. 18. Any and all documents and photographs placed by Defendant at any time in the period of these requests on a social networking website, including without limitation, Facebook.com and MySpace.com. + +Request No. 19. Any and all documents reflecting or consisting of communications between Jeffrey Epstein and MC2 Models or Jean-Luc Brunel, relating or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries to pursue a career in modeling, including, but not limited to, letters, notes and emails. + +2005." In addition, the request seeks documents pertaining to females who are not non-parties, and who possess privacy rights. + +Request No. 20. Any and all documents referring or relating to gifts or loans to females under the age of 21, including, but not limited to, notes, receipts and car rental agreements. + +Request No. 21. Any and all personal calendars or schedules of or for Jeffrey Epstein from January 1, 2003 to the present. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." In addition, the request encompasses attorney-client privileged material. + +Request No. 22. All documents written by Jeffrey Epstein consisting of personal thoughts, feelings or descriptions of events, incidents or occurrences in Defendant's life, including without limitation, any diaries of Jeffrey Epstein. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 - 2005." On its fact, the request goes beyond the scope of allowable discovery and is meant to harass, embarrass and overburden the Defendant. Further, the request is so overly broad that it includes attorney-client and work product privileged materials. + +Request No. 23. All documents referring to or relating to Jeffrey Epstein's purchase or consumption of prescription medicine. + +**Certificate of Service** + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 26th day of January, 2009. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) +[jherman@hermanlaw.com](mailto:jherman@hermanlaw.com) +[lrivera@hermanlaw.com](mailto:lrivera@hermanlaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()*(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747163/EFTA02747163.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747163/EFTA02747163.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cf9b705a15041e77ecb67339b697c77ef0863784 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747163/EFTA02747163.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,910 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747163.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 24, + "chars": 22667, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.12, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.999, + 68.124 + ], + [ + 409.2296142578125, + 68.124 + ], + [ + 409.2296142578125, + 95.40216064453125 + ], + [ + 197.999, + 95.40216064453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS \nTO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 114.01799999999999, + 272.496 + ], + [ + 491.13372802734375, + 272.496 + ], + [ + 491.13372802734375, + 302.9609680175781 + ], + [ + 114.01799999999999, + 302.9609680175781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 23, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.522, + 65.691 + ], + [ + 365.34799999999996, + 65.691 + ], + [ + 365.34799999999996, + 80.289 + ], + [ + 241.522, + 80.289 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 232 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747163" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747187/EFTA02747187.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747187/EFTA02747187.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..371ed13ff0d1b82be5346fd3500d9e88abeac919 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747187/EFTA02747187.md @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +### PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' APPEAL AND OBJECTIONS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S DISCOVERY ORDER ENTERED SEPTEMBER 10, 2009 (DE 293), AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 ("Plaintiffs"), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby file this Appeal and Objections to Magistrate Judge's Discovery Order Entered September 10, 2009 (DE 293), and Memorandum of Law in Support, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(bX1) and S.D.Fla.L.Mag.R. 4, on grounds that the Magistrate Judge's Order is clearly erroneous and contrary to law, and state as follows: + +# Background + +Plaintiffs served interrogatories and document requests on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, who responded by asserting a blanket objection to every discovery request on Fifth Amendment grounds. Defendant produced no documents and provided no information in response to Plaintiffs' discovery requests. (Copies of Defendant's Response and Objections to Plaintiffs Interrogatories and Response to Request for Production are attached hereto as Exhibits "A" and "B" respectively). Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Compel, challenging the foundation and predicate of the Defendant's assertions of the Fifth Amendment privilege as inadequate. (DE 57). + +The Magistrate Judge initially granted in part and denied in part the Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel, by Order entered on August 4, 2009. (DE 242). This Order granted the Motion as to Interrogatories 7, 8 and 11, and Document Request nos. 17 and 23. The Magistrate deferred ruling on Plaintiffs Motion as to Document Request nos. 10, 11, 18, 19 and 21, pending a supplemental submission by Defendant, in which he was directed to make "a particularized showing, by in camera submission or otherwise, demonstrating how the Fifth Amendment may validly be asserted in response to these requests." I (DE 242, pp. 21-22). + +In response to the Magistrate's August 4, 2009 Order, Defendant filed on August 31, 2009, a Motion for Reconsideration and/or Request for Rule 4 Review and Appeal of Portions of the Magistrate's Order, et at (DE 282). Separately, the Defendant filed a Supplementary Brief Pursuant to the Magistrate's Order (DE 242) Requesting a More Particularized Showing et al. (DE 283). The copies of both of these August 31, 2009 filings served on Plaintiffs' counsel and made available on PACER are replete with redactions. These redactions are in the Memoranda themselves, not in any documents submitted for in camera inspection. Indeed, it does not appear that any documents were submitted for in camera review. To Plaintiffs' counsel's knowledge, Defendant's counsel at no time sought leave of court to redact the filed versions of his Memoranda. + +In Defendant's subsequent filings, he does not challenge the August 4, 2009 Order as to Interrogatory no. 8 and Document Request nos. 17, 18 and 23. + +Before Plaintiffs even had an opportunity to timely respond to the Defendants August 31, 2009 filings,2 the Magistrate entered an Omnibus Order, on September 10, 2009, which granted the Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration in full and reversed, for the most part, that portion of the Magistrate's August 4, 2009 Order that was adverse to Defendant. Specifically, the Court vacated and reversed the August 4, 2009 Order to the extent that it granted Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories 7 and 11. The Court further denied Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel responses to document requests nos. 10, 11, 19 and 21 on Fifth Amendment grounds, after previously deferring decision pending a "particularized showing" by Defendant. The Magistrate did so apparently in reliance upon the substantially redacted Supplementary Brief filed by Defendant. + +Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs appeal the Magistrate's September 10, 2009 Order, and ask that (i) the Magistrate's August 4, 2009 Order be reinstated; (ii) Defendant be ordered to answer interrogatory nos. 7 and 11; (iii) Defendant be ordered to produce documents in response to document request nos. 10, 11, 19 and 21 or alternatively, demonstrate in camera why each document at issue is protected by the act of production doctrine; (iv) unredacted versions be filed of Defendant's August 31, 2009, Supplemental Brief (DE 283) and Motion for Reconsideration and Memorandum of Law (DE 282); and/or (v) such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +2 Pursuant to S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1(C), Plaintiffs should have had until September 18, 2009 to file a responsive Memorandum. The Magistrate, however, issued her Order of September 10, 2009, reversing the August 4, 2009 Order and denying relief to Plaintiffs well before Plaintiffs' due date to file a response. + +#### Areument + +#### I. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN HAS NOT MET HIS BURDEN OF DEMONSTRATING THAT THE ACT OF PRODUCTION DOCTRINE APPLIES TO ALL DOCUMENTS AT ISSUE + +It is well established that the Fifth Amendment privilege may not apply to specific documents "even though they contain incriminating assertions of fact or belief because the creation of those documents was not 'compelled' within the meaning of the privilege." United States v. Hubbell. 530 U.S. 27, 35-36 (2000). Accordingly, a party cannot avoid discovery merely because demanded documents contain incriminating evidence, "whether written by others or voluntarily prepared by himself." Id. + +Nonetheless, the act of procuring documents may be considered testimonial and protected by the Fifth Amendment privilege in two instances: (1) if the existence and location of the documents are unknown; or (2) where production would "implicitly authenticate" the documents. In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 1 F.3d 87, 93 (2d Cir. 1993); see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391, 410 (1976) (issue expressed as whether compliance with a document request or subpoena "tacitly conceded" the item's authenticity, existence or possession by the defendant). It is the Defendant's burden to demonstrate that the act of producing any particular responsive documents would entail testimonial self-incrimination. United States v. Wujkowski, 929 F.2d 981, 984 (4th Cir. 1991). + +The party asserting the Fifth Amendment privilege must demonstrate that the act of production implicitly authenticates each document claimed to be protected, "and in so doing, provides a 'link in the chain of incrimination.' " In re Schick 215 B.R. 4, 9 (Banks. S.D.N.Y, 1997) (quoting United States v. Fox 721 F.2d 32, 36 (2d Cir. 1983)). "Conversely, there is no + +privilege if the existence, location or authenticity is a `foregone conclusion.' " Id. (quoting Fisher, 425 U.S. at 411,96 S. Ct. at 1581). + +Accordingly, the act of production doctrine asserted by Defendant Epstein requires a twopart inquiry: "(1) the court must determine whether the production of documents is testimonial, and (2) the party asserting the privilege must show that it is incriminating i.e., that it provides a 'link in the chain of incrimination.' " Id. at 9. This inquiry is highly fact intensive. In re MB 188 F.3d 1259, 1270 (10th Cir. 1999). In conducting this inquiry, it is appropriate for the Court to require some level of in camera review, where the party asserting the privilege explains, "as to each document, in general and circumstantial terms why production is incriminating." Schick, 215 B.R. at 9-10 (emphasis supplied). See also=, 188 F.3d at 1270-1277 (remanding to the bankruptcy court because it did not conduct an in camera review; appellate court could not determine whether party was entitled to the act of production privilege without an adequate record and fact specific analysis). + +In this case, it appears that the Magistrate considered the elements of the federal statute, along with the document requests at issue, and concluded that the act of production doctrine applied. It does not appear that Defendant submitted to the Magistrate any fact specific explanations, particular to each document sought to be protected, demonstrating both implicit authentication and that the contents of the document would provide a link in the chain of incrimination. Plaintiffs, however, do not know what was presented and argued by Defendant in much of his Supplemental Brief because of the redactions of large portions of this Brief.3 + +3 The redactions include footnote 1 on page 6, much of page 7, and the entirety of pages 8 through 13. To the extent that the redactions concern the Non-Prosecution Agreement, that Agreement has now been unsealed pursuant to state court order, and would not, therefore, provide a reasonable basis to avoid a public filing in these cases. + +The Local Rules of this Court expressly set forth a procedure for filing documents that are not to be included in the public record. See S.D.FIa.L.R. 5.4(A). Under Local Rule 5.4, a party is required to file a motion to seal when he seeks to prevent public disclosure of a document. That motion is required to state a reasonable basis for departing from the general policy of public filing. Rule 5.4(B)(2). To Plaintiffs' knowledge, no motion to seal or comparable motion was filed by Defendant with regard to his August 31, 2009 filings.4 + +In her Order dated August 4, 2009, the Magistrate Judge found that Defendant had not sufficiently demonstrated the application of the act of production doctrine as to document request nos. 10, II, 18 19 and 21, but granted Defendant leave to supplement his response, "by making a particularized showing, by in camera submission or otherwise. . . ." (DE 242, p. 20). As discussed above, in camera review may be appropriate in evaluating the act of production doctrine with respect to each document sought to be protected from disclosure. It does not appear, however, that Defendant filed documents, or a log or summary describing particular documents, for in camera review. Instead, Defendant redacted his Supplemental Brief for in camera review. (DE 283). A party should not be allowed to redact unilaterally large portions of his brief. The Magistrate Judge, in accepting the Defendant's redacted submission, and relying upon it to rule in Defendant's favor, denied the Plaintiffs due process. This lack of due process was exacerbated by the Magistrate's issuance of her Order before the Plaintiff had an opportunity to respond within the time period for briefing set forth in the Local Rules. + +For the foregoing reasons, the Magistrate's Order denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel production of documents in response to Request nos. 10, 11, 19 and 21 should be reversed, and + +4No such motion was served on Plaintiffs' counsel. + +Defendant should be required to make an appropriate factual showing under the act of production doctrine. + +## IL THE MAGISTRATE FAILS TO EXPLAIN THE REVERSAL OF HER DECISION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORY NOS. 7 AND 11 + +In the Magistrate's August 4, 2009 decision, she found that interrogatory nos. 7 and 11 did not implicate the Fifth Amendment, and that Defendant's objections to these Interrogatories amount to nothing more than blanket assertions of the privilege: + +> These interrogatories ask for general, identification-type information, which neither on their face nor by implication implicate Epstein's rights under the Fifth Amendment. In this regard, the Court is left with only Epstein's blanket assertion of the privilege in which the claims that require him to identify his health care providers, his various telephone numbers and his dates of Florida travel, "would be a link in the chain of evidence needed to convict him of a crime." See Epstein's Resp. Brief, pp. 18-20. Unfortunately for Epstein, this objection is so general and sweeping in nature it amounts to a blanket assertion of the privilege. + +(Order of August 4, 2009, p. 11). Accordingly, the Magistrate granted Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel answers to these Interrogatories. In subsequently reversing this decision, the Magistrate set forth contrary, vague conclusions: + +> In the instant Motion for Reconsideration, Epstein has set forth additional facts and detailed reasoning successfully demonstrating how forcing him to answer these requests would realistically and necessarily furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prove a crime against him and would require him to provide selfincriminating evidence relative to this case and to the other related cases that could result in a specific hazard of self-incrimination. In light of the additional information provided, the Court is now persuaded that Epstein's whereabouts and telephone numbers are crucial issues in this case and other related cases and that if he is forced to reveal this information, these testimonial disclosures could subsequently be used to incriminate him and/or prosecute him for a criminal offense. + +(Order of September 10, 2009, p. 5). + +The Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration and incorporated Memorandum of Law, upon which the Magistrate's September 10, 2009 Order is based, contains extensive redactions? This redacted version was filed without authorization or leave of court. As a result of these redactions, Plaintiffs are unaware of the "additional facts" upon which the Magistrate's reversal is based, or if there were indeed additional facts submitted in support of the Defendant's position. Plaintiffs thus are unable to respond. As a result, Plaintiffs have been denied due process. While an in camera review of documents may be appropriate, it should be done on notice, with court authorization, in a separate submission. See S.D.Fla.L.R. 5.4. Unauthorized redactions of substantial portions of a motion and memorandum of law are improper and should not be condoned. Plaintiffs should, in accordance with due process, have a fair opportunity to respond under the circumstances. Plaintiffs were not provided such an opportunity with regard to the Motion to Compel responses to Interrogatory nos. 7 and 11.6 + +## Conclusion + +Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Magistrate Judge's September 10, 2009 Omnibus Order (DE 293) be reversed, on the grounds that it is clearly erroneous and contrary to law, and that (i) the Magistrate's August 4, 2009 Order be reinstated; (ii) Defendant be ordered to answer interrogatory nos. 7 and 11; (iii) Defendant be ordered to + +5 The version of Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration filed on PACER and served on Plaintiffs redacts most of page 4; all of pages 5 though 7; most of page 8; portions of pages 10 and 11; all of page 12; most of page 13; and portions of pages 14 through 16. + +6As was the case with Defendant's Supplemental Brief, the Court's Order of September 10, 2009 was issued before Plaintiffs had an opportunity to respond in accordance with S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1 to Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration with Incorporated Objections and Memorandum of Law. footnote 2 supra, and surrounding text.) + +produce documents in response to document request nos. 10, 11, 19 and 21 or alternatively, demonstrate in camera why each document at issue is protected by the act of production doctrine; (iv) unredacted versions be filed of Defendant's August 31, 2009, Supplemental Brief (DE 283) and Motion for Reconsideration and Memorandum of Law (DE 282); and/or (v) such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +Dated: September 24, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on September 24, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. + +rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack U + +jph@searcylaw.com + +Katherine Warthen Ezell + +KEzell@vodhurst.com + +Michael James Pike + +MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits + +lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg + +rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747187/EFTA02747187.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747187/EFTA02747187.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..39176d918fd8622322f513648c91840784e11408 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747187/EFTA02747187.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,650 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747187.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 16955, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.96, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' APPEAL \nAND OBJECTIONS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S \nDISCOVERY ORDER ENTERED SEPTEMBER 10, 2009 \n(DE 293), AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 153.0, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 460.19183349609375, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 460.19183349609375, + 445.10302734375 + ], + [ + 153.0, + 445.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 271.728, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 340.43109130859375, + 595.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 340.43109130859375, + 610.1030120849609 + ], + [ + 271.728, + 610.1030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Areument", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 276.624, + 72.7315673828125 + ], + [ + 335.1580505371094, + 72.7315673828125 + ], + [ + 335.1580505371094, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 276.624, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN HAS NOT MET HIS BURDEN \nOF DEMONSTRATING THAT THE ACT OF PRODUCTION \nDOCTRINE APPLIES TO ALL DOCUMENTS AT ISSUE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 138.312, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 490.4683837890625, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 490.4683837890625, + 141.363037109375 + ], + [ + 138.312, + 141.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IL THE MAGISTRATE FAILS TO EXPLAIN THE \nREVERSAL OF HER DECISION TO COMPEL \nANSWERS TO INTERROGATORY NOS. 7 AND 11", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 464.5550231933594, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 464.5550231933594, + 169.10302734375 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 169.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 275.4, + 430.11 + ], + [ + 338.2673645019531, + 430.11 + ], + [ + 338.2673645019531, + 444.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 275.4, + 444.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 85.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.06, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.06, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 74 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747187" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747198/EFTA02747198.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747198/EFTA02747198.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ad703e048af3ca2186fa8d4491eb6e255951f475 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747198/EFTA02747198.md @@ -0,0 +1,51 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 0840811, 08-80893, 09.80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 0940802, 09-81092 + +/ + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228). For the following reasons said Motion is granted. + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes In Palm beach, New York and St. , with the promise of money in + +![](_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg) + +exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +By the instant Motion Epstein seeks an order compelling , one of the Plaintiffs, In the case, to submit to an independent psychological/psychiatric medical examination by Ryan •, M.D., presently scheduled for September 8,2009. has agreed to submit to said exam, but requests the Court impose certain restrictions. Since the filing of the Motion the parties have managed to resolve some of the Issues involved, such as the proposed examination's time and date and request to have a representative from her team present at said examination. As for the latter issue, Defendant has agreed to provide, at his expense, a video feed and monitor In an adjacent room for Plaintiff's representative's use. The remaining issues involve Plaintiffs request for acourt order limiting the scope of the proposed examination by disallowing repeated questioning regarding "highly sensitive areas of inquiry including Plaintiff's medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history, substance abuse history, etc.,'and imposing certain time restraints on the examination itself. + +Plaintiff's request to limit the scope of the examination is denied. It is Dr. + +&#x27; See Pltff's Resp. to Rep.(D.E. #279), p.3. + +MI routine procedure when conducting psychological/psychiatric medical examinations of patients to require the patient to fill out a 10-page "Life History Questionnaire" and a 14-page "Patient Questionnaire." Both questionnaires request detailed background information regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like. Presumably Plaintiff will be asked these same questions two more times, first by defense counsel at deposition scheduled to take place shortly, and again by at the upcoming examination. Plaintiffs objection is that by having to answer these same questions about the same subject matter three separate times "would only serve to embarrass, humiliate, intimidate and further victimize Plaintiff." Pltffs Resp. (D.E. #254), p.6. Plaintiff's position is that she should only 'be required to regarding past medical history, psychiatric history, social history, work history, and the like, if at all, only one time," either during the "deposition of Plaintiff or through Dr. examination, but certainly not both." Id. + +Plaintiff cites no case law and independent research has uncovered none, to support her novel position that a Plaintiff who puts her mental, emotional and psychiatric state at issue can place alimitation on the number of times defense counsel or agents retained by him can inquire into areas relevant to these issues where the subject matter involved is "highly personal," "embarrassing," "sensitive," or otherwise "humiliating." Plaintiff is seeking millions of dollars in personal Injury damages for, among other things, "physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, [and] invasion of her privacy." 2 Based on the allegations made In Defendant's Reply' Plaintiff's childhood was, to put It mildly, a difficult one, with numerous episodes of child abuse and sexual abuse, which in turn may of been the cause of Plaintiff's later engaging in numerous instances of substance abuse, self-mutilation, prostitution, aggravated assault, truancy, and the like. According to Defendant, in 2005 Plaintiff's mother filed a case committing Me for a Petition for Involuntary Assessment for substance abuse, stating in the accompanying file that MI has been diagnosed as 'Bipoloar and Schizophrenic."' + +Under these circumstances, where Plaintiff is seeking to recover medical expenses associated with these complex medical issues, full knowledge of Plaintiffs past and present medical, psychological, familial and social histories is essential. And while neither duplication nor embarrassment is desired, under the circumstances presented, where the number and scope of damages claimed are vast and Plaintiffs past history eventful, it may nonetheless be unavoidable. This is not to say that restrictions on the scope of questioning may never be put into effect. If, as the case progresses, Plaintiff can show that Defendant's invasive questioning + +2Plaintiff, First Am. Compl., Counts I-XXX. + +(D.E. #273), pp.7-B, + +&#x27;As quoted in Def s Rep. (D.E. #273), p.8, from Palm Beach County Case #05MH1667.

is being done in bad faith or for purposes of harassment, the Court may reconsider imposing limitations of the sort requested herein. At this point, however, the Court agrees with Defendant that to restrict the number of times defense counsel may ask Plaintiff personal and sensitive questions concerning some of the pivotal issues in this case, would work an Injustice by preventing Defendant from being able to defend himself.

The Court likewise rejects Plaintiff's request to limit the time for conducting the examination and any related testing to 6 hours. Dr. Elias filed an affidavit stating that he needs 6-8 hours to conduct the examination and related testing, and that anything less than that might result in compromising the test results.' Considering the 31 counts alleged against Defendant, as well as Plaintiffs event-filled past, the amount of time sought does not appear unreasonable. Should the length of time prove draining, Plaintiff may take breaks as needed, of reasonable duration. Furthermore, Defense Counsel and Dr. ■are hereby put on notice that while the Court has allowed the full 8 hours requested for the examination and related testing, should less time be needed, the Court expects less time will be taken, and in no event may the examination and related testing exceed a total of 8 hours. In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion For Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (D.E. # 228) is GRANTED IN

Affidavit of Dr. S attached as Ex. "B" to Defendant's Rep. (D.E. #273).

ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF.

DONE AND ORDERED this September 4, 2009, in , at West Palm Beach,

Florida.

67efer, ./(1050"..\_.--• LINNEA R. JO ON UNITED STA S MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747198/EFTA02747198.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747198/EFTA02747198.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e61aad23d8d4ce992a0be22f0594c51c40fc88d5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747198/EFTA02747198.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,324 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747198.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 8001, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.28, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 211.75199999999995, + 107.73000000000002 + ], + [ + 399.89422607421875, + 107.73000000000002 + ], + [ + 399.89422607421875, + 133.65 + ], + [ + 211.75199999999995, + 133.65 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 289.476, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 334.6726379394531, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 334.6726379394531, + 403.38 + ], + [ + 289.476, + 403.38 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS HEREOF.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.86, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 345.61016845703125, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 345.61016845703125, + 118.8170166015625 + ], + [ + 94.86, + 118.8170166015625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 238 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 298 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 313 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 300 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747198" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747198/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747198/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1708c6cbd20e6d87833656f5a05aa08fd5fc705c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747198/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:5d6507c3196d66cfab1173d20ead6c5fc4e9cb388847cf1a8e3500256871bba8 +size 14452 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747204/EFTA02747204.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747204/EFTA02747204.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fd0e91a8b60f865edf5c566ef49014b99761aff5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747204/EFTA02747204.md @@ -0,0 +1,125 @@ +I'm reading unless I'm like very focused. + +Dr. Kliman: Well, I'm glad that it helps you. + +a Yeah. + +08:17 + +Dr. Kliman: I'd like to get a general acquaintance with you. Tell me about yourself as a person. + +Dr. Kliman: Yeah, as a person. + +a My personality, or— + +Dr. Kliman: Yeah, that'd be fine. + +08:35 + +ale Urn, I'm actually a very depressed person inside. I try to make it seem like, you know, in front of people when I first meet people, happy, excited, but on the inside I'm really depressed. I have really low self-esteem, I'm very self-conscious. I do have a problem with thinking that people are speaking about me. Like when people are talking amongst themselves, I always put it as they're talking about me. Urn, I do have a very kind heart. I'll do anything for anybody, but through so many years of being hurt by people, I've built up a wall where I've created an attitude that I basically give the impression that I push people away from me before they come too close to hurt me. So basically, inside I'm very kind but on the outside I have this front, I guess I just have this look to just don't mess with me because I don't want you to come too close. And that's affected a lot of my lifestyle with family and friends and you know, my husband especially. + +09:50 + +Dr. Kliman: Really? + +S Yes. He's in the military. Right now he's going May 12th, I think, he's going on a seven month deployment. He just came recently to visit for two weeks, and he mentioned a divorce. Because he, you know, said that you know, he said that he knows I'm a great mother and I'll do anything for him, but he can't stand this attitude and edge that I have all the time. l'm always on edge, I'm always saying people are talking about me, and I always take offense to everything. So, you know, he wanted me to go seek help for this problem that I have. Because I don't see it, I have been told by multiple people that I have this problem. And I don't see that I speak with an attitude and I don't see any of it, so I don't know how to fix it. I don't see it. That's about it, for right now. + +10:54 + +Dr. Kliman: Well you seem to have described it as if you do see some of it. + +Asa person? • + +![](_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg) + +S People makeme realize, you know they'll sit down and speak to me and go over certain scenarios that I've done in the past. And I'll sit there and I'll think about it and I'li be like, "You know what? You're right. I shouldn't have said that" or "I do act like that." I mean, that part where I push people away, I know I do that. It's not intentionally, but I guess it's just happened throughout the years. But the attitude, when I speak with an attitude a lot of people say, I don't hear myself speak with an attitude. But, I guess I do, from what people have said. + +11:39 + +Dr. Kliman: Could you give me an example of a scenario of when people have gone over it with you? + +12:55 + +Dr. Kliman: So, she came to visit. And when was that one, that visit? + +Dr. Kliman: It was before you were on Adderall? + +ISM + +Dr. Kliman: Did you take it before December? + +%Ma 13:36 + +Dr. Kliman: So, this is new, this medication. + +Urn, for instance, my mother-in-law. She came to Virginia to visit us, because that's where my husband's base is at. Urn, she came over and she just said that, she took me away from my husband and she's just like, "You airuys are arguing because of you." And I was all upset and I was like, "No, ifs 'cause o , w • ' m husband. I was like, "He's the one that started the fight" And she's e,' you're not understanding. But the way you speak to him, it's not in a tone voice, you know, like a monotone, very calm voice." I was like, "Yes it was!" And she's like, "Noalli. It wasn't." I was like, "I just said, 'Take out the trash."' And she's like, "That's not ow you said it. You said, 'You need to take out the trash, now."' And she showed me the way I did say it, but in my mind, I don't see that I said it like that. So then we get in a fight and then she would point out basically how I actually did say it, and then I would realize I'd have to sit down for a while and think about it, and I'd be like, you know what, I did say it in a wrong way. 'Cause that's from what you know, what she's telling me. You know, that'd be like a scenario. That's actually something that has happened though. + +That's when I went to New York...I honestly, I cannot remember. + +Yes, I just started, I started pre—recently taking Adderall because I'm going to school again. And I don't take it unless I'm in school to focus. That's why I'm taking it. I don't take it unless I need to concentrate. + +No. + +21:47 + +Urn, because I didn't want to amount to nothing in life, and I felt that if I did not get my diploma, that I wouldn't be able to do anything in life. That's basically it, I just, I felt that if I didn't I would be a nobody. I don't know. It's just how I felt. + +22:22 + +Dr. Kliman: Do you remember what was going on when you were so depressed? + +S As in what? + +Dr. Kliman: Well you said the eleventh and twelfth grade you'd never skipped a day of school. And suddenly, things are very different. + +S Um...why I was depressed, basically? + +IPS Basically, it was a combination of a lot together. Of course, a little bit had to do with the Jeffrey Epstein. + +Dr. Kliman: That would be one question, yeah. + +Dr. Kliman: Why do you say that? + +23:08 + +Urn, honestly, I felt like I...I did it to myself. Like, I was a slut. Like I put myself in that position to do, you know...I didn't know, I thought it was a massage, but it became more and I felt like it's my fault anyways, because I should never put myself in a situation as I'm going to give a guy a massage for two-hundred dollars. And, that took a little toll on me, as in I felt sort of, like disgusting, slutty, like taken advantage of in a way. It was that, and it was also, you know, just a lot. I moved from my mom's house and I was very close, very close to my mother. + +24:05 + +My stepfather and I didn't get along, so I ended up moving in with my father. Cause they moved to South Carolina. I went there for a little while. Then I moved back. And urn, I went through a lot with my stepfather and my school. A lot of the girls didn't like me, so I moved to Florida, back to Florida. I was from Florida. And um, my father just, I guess he didn't understand how to do it, how to be a father towards me. And um, he was really—I love my father, but he was really not there for me a lot. And it was very hard for me to go away from my mom. Like, I was very depressed from that also, but I got over it and I started clinging to my friends, a lot. Like, very close. My friends were like my family. My father wasn't really there, and he always worked. + +25:07 + +like he doesn't want it to work." She's like—and then I told her about how he said the attitude-thing, and I was speaking to her about our fights. And that's when she said, you know, about the ninth grade, "When I first met you, you were the most shy, quiet, person." Which I was. You know, I've had girls want to stick gum in my hair in middle school, and cut my hair off in South Carolina, and you know, also scenarios where, a rumor, you know, they wanted to slice my throat. And I would just sit there quietly, and I wouldn't say anything. I would just, you know, I'd be very quiet. And now, Fm to the point that if somebody tried to do that, I'd you know, freak out. Fd show my front, which is being a bitch and acting hard, I guess you could say. You know? + +48l09 + +Dr. !Oman: So even if people rumored they were going to slice your throat or put bubblegum in your hair, you didn't retaliate? + +S No. The gum in my hair, like that wasn't a rumor. They were doing it, I was really, they were doing it. + +Dr. Kliman: They were really doing it? + +e Yeah, like I was on a bus, driving. We were on like a charter bus. It was like the class trip to Orlando. And the girls behind me, I don't remember their names, but you know, I could hear them of course. And they were going to put the gum in my hair. And actually one of the guys was like, "What are you doing?" You know, "Don't do that to her." And I knew they were doing it, I could hear everything they were saying, but I just sat there, and I was going to, I didn't want any conflict, I just was quiet...So, I don't know. + +48:59 + +Dr. Kliman: Well, you were different. + +1.1401.0. Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: In the way you behaved. + +Dr. Kliman: And sounded. + +NIES Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: Now, coming back to this situation where you and Ill.eare together. + +Yes. + +web Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: And this guy you've never met before pays a taxi. By the way, how much did he pay the taxi? + +Um, I don't know. I know I gave him a big tip, because I remember there was change \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747204/EFTA02747204.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747204/EFTA02747204.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4923b7c77199a38dead59f3f63566cbda09c0914 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747204/EFTA02747204.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,166 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747204.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 8706, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.29, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 106 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 90 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 88 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747204" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747204/_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747204/_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..383da6c76223a66860b08f1e1ba54c587a33b155 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747204/_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e1130af2b4e408a1d0a5a1865649a21ad1f0192a27505ee64443b1b6edc1accc +size 13064 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747208/EFTA02747208.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747208/EFTA02747208.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..33ab0d6c54efed06f4d39ec912a83a1842f104eb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747208/EFTA02747208.md @@ -0,0 +1,245 @@ +can you take me?' And my stepfather stayed home that day. So he's like, "No, you can't take her. She needs to walk to work." And I was like, "Well, this is only like my second day. And you know, mom said she was going to take me to work by car. So I had been, like, getting ready and not, you know, I didn't leave, you know, so many hours prior to be at work 'cause I didn't have to walk there. And he's like, "No. That's your problem. You're going to end up walking there. So if you're late that's your fault. That's not our problem at all." So I got upset, and I was like, whatever. So I ended up walking to work. And of course I was late, 'cause I had to walk two miles. And urn, I got fired because it was my like second, third day of work. And uh, they just said—you know, I explained to them exactly what had happened, that I didn't have transportation, and what I just told you. And urn, basically, Ilost my job. So he got upset that I had no responsibilities and ended up saying that, you know, "You need to be kicked out." Which I thought was very absurd and stupid, but those are his rules. He's very strict. Like, he has acertain standard. + +07:00 + +Dr. Kliman: Okay. Now, you also liked to be out alot. Was he upset about you being out alot? + +e Um, yes. He got upset about that also. But when I went out, it wasn't like I went out and partied. I just wanted to be with my friends. 'Cause like I said also, when I was with my friends, I put them so much as like my family, that I grew so close to them, that when I'm with my friends, like my close friends, I feel just comfortable and stressful—like, stress-relieved, I guess. Like all my stress is gone. And comfortable. + +07:36 + +Dr. Kliman: Now again. Following up things that you listed in various questionnaires. You mentioned one time you caught your mother and stepfather having sex. And that seemed to be your first knowledge, or first understanding of sex. Could you explain to me what that reference is? + +08:08 + +Dr. Kliman: Well, sure. + +Dr. Kliman: This was at afriend's house? + +08:38 + +Yeah, well I, I've you know, I mean, don't get me wrong. I've heard of, you know, about sex when I was younger from people. But I was never, you know, knowledged of what is was exactly. And I caught—do you want me to give you the exact scenario of what happened? + +Um, my stepfather grounded me and put me in my room at one of their friend's houses, like, "Stay here. Don't go anywhere." And I was like, "Okay." So I had to use the restroom, you know, at some point when I was sitting in the room. So I want— + +Not my friend. Like their friend's. They were watching their house or whatever they + +![](_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg) + +3' + +were doing. + +Dr. Kliman: I see. + +Yeah. They were house-sitting. And you know, I had to use the restroom. So I wanted to ask him before, "Can I use the restroom?" 'cause he'd said, "Don't go anywhere." So I walked in the pool room, where they play pool. And she was on the table with her legs open, with no clothes on. And he was on his knees. And it just like really grossed me out. Extremely, ugh, just grossed me out. And um, you know, of course, they were embarrassed. But she, you know, bought me like alittle video for akids. Like, acartoon video that explained sex. And what guys and girls have and stuff like that. + +09:31 + +Dr. Kliman: So was this oral sex they were having? + +S Ididn't see them in the act. But you know, she was on the table butt naked. And he was on his knees. So basically it was going to become oral sex I guess. + +Dr. Kliman: So you didn't see very much of what he was doing? + +No. + +Dr. Kliman: But you figured it out at some point. + +Dr. Kliman: Did you immediately understand? + +a-Pretty much. They tried to lie to me at first. And say that you know, he was checking her down there 'cause she had a bump or something. Like, uh, cancer or whatever. And I was just like, I'm not stupid. You know, I'm not that unaware of sex. Like, I know about it. I know what happens. + +10:16 + +Yeah. + +Dr. Kliman: So they made some effort then to educate you through afilm? + +Mae Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: Now, were you very upsetby seeing this event? + +as. Iwas. Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: Tell me about your upset + +alto + +Ijust felt like, very like. I don't know what it was, but I was very jealous of like, my mom. Not like jealous of her, but like, I didn't like other guys talking to her or touching her. Like, it really made me like, angry inside. Like very angry. Like when they would hold hands and stuff, it made me like, getreally like- + +4 + +Dr. Kliman: Even if your stepfather held her hand?. .. + +Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: Did you become more jealous after that? Or were you already jealous? + +10:53 + +Dr. Kliman: Was he naked at that time? + +aldn No. + +Dr. Kliman: Had you seen him naked at times? + +Dr. Kliman: So you've never walked in on him and found him in the shower, + +S No. + +Dr. Kliman: Or anything like that. You mentioned that your mother suffers from depression and stress. + +Dr. Kliman: Sure. + +11:48 + +Iwas jealous before that of like, the holding hands. And I didn't want them to be naked together. I didn't want them to see each other naked. I have no idea why I was like that.... But 1 was. I didn't like guys trying to flirt with her. I was very overprotective of her, I guess. And when I saw that, it just like, like, really grossed me out. + +No. + +Yes. She had a really bad childhood. When she was growing up, urn, do you want me to get into that? + +Basically, her mother, my grandmother, um, had four kids. And basically put men first. And basically found this guy named Dick. And took off with Dick and left all the kids with my mom's father. So there was four babies, like four kids, with my mom's dad. My mom's dad was very lenient, and didn't really care about school, didn't give them any discipline, and didn't care what they did. He had, you know, one of the type of parents that, "Do whatever you want. I don't care." There was no guidelines. And then my mom caught him with another guy. And her older sisters...she's not a twin, but she has aset of twin sisters that are probably like five years older than her. And they used to like, stick her in closets and spray Windex in her eyes, and hit her over the head with the phone, and abuse her, basically. And they've gotten her raped at school. She also got molested by her uncle. And now she's around forty-three to forty-four. Pm really bad with remembering ages. And she has, including me, she has four kids. But I'm never there, because you know, I have my own life. So right now she has three kids. And she also has aone-year-old like 1 do. And she has afour-year-old and anine-year-old. So she + +just, she stresses out about little stuff and is very like, for instance, I was there yesterday. And my little brother dropped a bowl of cereal all over the floor. And I was like, "Mom,. calm down." 'Cause she just— + +Dr. Kliman: Gets agitated. + +13:28 + +S. Very. + +Dr. Kliman: Let me go back to these abuse experiences that your mother had, if I understand them. First, she was abandoned by— + +4. 111 By her mom. + +Dr. Kliman: By her mom. Do you think it was a total abandonment? + +Dr. Kliman: Okay. But then your mom caught your grandfather, that her father. + +S Her real father. + +Dr. Kliman: With another guy. + +Age" Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: And how did she catch him? + +Dr. Kliman: Well, were they having sex? + +S Mmhmm. + +Dr. Kliman: And what did she see? + +14:09 + +S She said she saw everything. Like him, I think he, I don't know who was on who, but a guy and a guy. And she just freaked out, 'cause she never even knew about stuff like that, you know. + +Dr. Kliman: How old was she? + +From what my mom says, it was. And then my grandmother of course always defends herself. + +She said she went down to the basement and another guy was with him. + +She said she was young. I cannot give you a specific age 'cause I have no idea. Um, she was probably anywhere from around eight to fifteen years of age, I have no idea. Honestly, I don't know. But I know she was young. + +Dr. Kliman: Okay. You mentioned also, I think you mentioned, that she was raped in school. + +S0 + +15:10 + +Dr. Kliman: sis ... ..\_ During her childhood, or? + +Dr. Kliman: How old do you think she was when closet effort at raping her occurred? + +a + +Dr. Kliman: And did the rape actually occur? That her sisters paid a guy to do? + +Dr. Kliman: But you do think she's been raped three times, according to what she's told you? + +a + +16:17 + +Dr. Kliman: Which uncle is that? + +S + +Dr. Kliman: Pm glad. + +S. + +Dr. Kliman: So that would be your mom's dad's brother, probably? + +as + +Dr. Um= Okay. + +ANS + +Dr. Kliman: So he could be a cousin? + +Yeah, her sisters—something about her sisters paid this guy to try to rape her in a closet at school. Um, I don't know how far it went. She didn't get into it with me. If it got far or not. But I know that her sisters paid a guy to rape her in a closet at school. She's actually been raped three times. + +Twice during her childhood and once as like an adult, on a date. + +She was either in the beginning of high school or the end of middle school. Pm not a hundred percent sure. She never gave me really facts. She said she was young. + +Urn, I don't know exactly if it did. She didn't get into that. I'm not sure. + +Yes. She got raped by her uncle. And then a rape, like a roofie. They slipped something in her drink when she was an adult. And then the closet thing. But I don't know if that necessarily went through. But I know her uncle and the other one. I know the whole stories. + +I've never met him in my entire life. Urn, + +Urn, yeah. It makes me sick. But um, he, I guess he lives in New York. Urn, I think ifs my mom's dad's side of the family somehow. + +Probably, but I don't think it's that close. I don't know how— + +I don't know if they just call him "uncle", but I know that he's a part of the family. He's like a cousin. A second cousin or something, I don't know. + +7 + +IOW Yeah, but he's definitely, he was definitely older than her. + +Dr. Kliman: And how old was she? + +17:05 + +She was young. She was like, she said she was around like five to seven years old I think. She was really young. And you know, he was like married I think, with kids. Or he had like a family, and he uh, was like, was touching her. + +Dr. Kliman: How about her sisters? Did they get touched also? + +Agfre; She's never told me that. No. + +Dr. Kliman: Has she told you that he raped her? Or that he touched her? Or both? + +Dr. Kliman: And then she was raped once on a date? + +18:08 + +s Yeah, I don't know the exact age or time. But I know she was older. And she went on a date with this guy. And he basically slipped something in her drink. And she said she was conscious of what was going on, but she couldn't like scream or move. And him and his friend took her back to a place and raped her. + +Urn, I don't think that he used his penis. But he used his forgers on her. + +So two guys raped her? + +Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: When did your mother tell you the first of anything about this at first. Let me put it better because I didn't ask it well. What was the first thing you learned about your mother's misfortunes of being sexually abused? + +18:49 + +a leb Like how old was I? + +Dr. Kliman: Yeah. How old were you is a good way to put it. + +AMOS Urn. I was probably in my young teens. She told me I think. + +Dr. Kliman: Was it before Mr. Epstein or after Mr. Epstein? + +4 1411P Before. + +Dr. Kliman: And what did she first tell you? \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747208/EFTA02747208.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747208/EFTA02747208.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a3a749a9b9c3bb60dfa1428df19612cf25c5aef8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747208/EFTA02747208.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,234 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747208.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 11506, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.24, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 633 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 431 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 487 + ], + [ + "Line", + 44 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 94 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 101 + ], + [ + "Line", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747208" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747208/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747208/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1ebca4ae540ea3ad17a6501e981b55f08842afc9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747208/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7f9a356ce5ccadaa38b69425eb81cd7d0c2314fd1a9a79ba01ffc00baf44436b +size 11725 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747214/EFTA02747214.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747214/EFTA02747214.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9dfc793947bdcaa95dc15469516c3a9db62dbbac --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747214/EFTA02747214.md @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@ +M itt Urn, I think he was around like three or four.. . + +Dr. Kliman: And how old do you think that would make them? + +me Um. Who, the twins? + +Kliman: Yeah. If he's three or four. + +Dr. Kliman: They're five years older than your mother. + +a. Yeah. My morn is in the middle. I don't know how much younger my uncle is from my mom. + +Dr. Kliman: So one of the things that I think would be pretty clear is that you fmd this history disgusting. + +26:20 + +Sm Mmhm. + +Dr. Kliman: And it did not help you. That is, this history was not used in a way that helped you, but rather made your mother very vulnerable to being mistreated herself. + +Dr. Kliman: Now, you've mentioned that your father. I think you called him, was that he neglected you, or...irresponsible. That was the word you used. + +Are Yeah. Irresponsible. + +Dr. Kliman: So your mother married an irresponsible man. + +27:02 + +S They actually got married 'cause she was three months pregnant with me. You ow, she, in the beginning she told me she didn't want to date him. But my cons' which is my dad's cousin, was friends with my mom. And she hooked my mom my dad up when they first met. And my mom at first thought he was too cocky and into himself. And um, I guess my morn fell for him. And urn, she ended up getting pregnant. And then they got married when she was around two or three months pregnant. And she just said—I don't know how much is true, 'cause there's always two different sides. But from her story, he always used to go and sleep with other women and go do all these drugs and have drugs all in the house, 'cause he was adrug dealer when she was pregnant with me. And uh, you know, he sold cocaine. And you know, she said she's had so much crap that when I got, like I was playing with a bag of coke, basically, when I was ababy. And that's when she was like, "Pm done." And she ended up leaving him. And my father was on drugs for awhile. This is just from hearsay, you know. I don't, + +Urn, see I don't know their ages right now, so. + +Yes. + +![](_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg) + +you know, I don't know. And um, you know, he, I mean, now he's not doing drugs that I know of. You know, he works six.days aweek and he has alot of money. And urn, + +28:32 + +Kliman: What does he do? 40 . He's afmancial director at a car dealership. But urn, he's really high up there. He's been there for a long time. And urn, you know, I don't think he could be capable of doing that many drugs and keeping a job. + +Dr. Kliman: Good. + +So, when I was living with him, he just didn't know how to say things to me. And he would say things to me like, "You f—ing pig," you know, "you need to learn how to l ing clean your room," you know, "You little slut." You know, I have, I'm going to amount to nothing. My brother is going to become this immaculate lawyer, I'm going to become abum on the street. Just alot of harsh, harsh words that put me down. And he was never there for me. Like, he never stood up for me. He always, just like, I was just there. Like as a roommate. You know, I remember one instance. I really don't say anything about this, but I went to hug him and he just pushed me away. Affectionate, not at all. Like he doesn't show any affection. + +29:38 + +Dr. Klirnan: How long ago was that? + +Mall The hugging thing? + +Dr. Kliman: Yeah. + +S Uh...it was probably when I first moved with him. So I was probably like twelve or thirteen. And uh, you know, I went to go give him a hug and he just sorts like freaked out. But I know he has like an emotional side, 'cause I've seen him break down. But I think that he's similar to what I have. He's very kind inside but he shows this cocky attitude, you know? But, he just, you know, he said alot of hurtful things to me through my years in high school. And I understand you get upset, but you know, it really affected me also. Just made like really, like, I'm not going to amount to anything. + +30:28 + +Dr. Kliman: Ifs interesting that you found it so clearly distressing that Epstein behaved that way. That he seemed so self-centered. + +Air Mmhm. + +Dr. Kliman: So it's like your nightmare. + +S Yeah. Dr. Kliman: Now, only it came true. + +a — Yeah. + +Dr. Kliman: Now, following up things that you have mentioned in your questionnaires...You mentioned that your stepfather hit you so hard on one occasion that you lost hearing in your ear for two weeks. + +SIP Yes. + +e iman: . me about.that. + +31:42 + +Sr Urn, well he ended up fracturing my eardrum. So I couldn't hear, I think it was, out of my right ear. Urn, basically, I was grounded as usual. With my stepfather, I was always grounded. 'Cause he expected such high standards. Like if you were in the military, you know. And I was just so fed up and I was on the phone with my friend in my bedroom. + +Dr. Kliman: Your age now, at that point? + +32:08 + +Urn, I was probably like ten or eleven. I'm just approximating 'cause I don't, it has to be around ten or eleven though 'cause that's when I was in Fort Lauderdale. Urn, I was on the phone with my friend. I was on the phone, speaking to her privately, just you know, "I don't like him. I can't stand this anymore." You know, just talking about my feelings to my friend. Well, I didn't know, but he was on the other line listening. And he flipped out. And he like pounded on my door to come in 'cause my door was locked. And you know, I let him in. And then he literally like, lost it. He was like, "I'm bad to you, and you don't like me." He took my T.V. and threw it down the stairs. He ripped my phone out of the wall. Like, out of the jack, literally. And then he like, he just started like, I don't remember 'cause it was so fast. But he was like hitting me really hard. I don't think it was punches 'cause like I don't remember having black and blue marks. But he was ilieshack:ng me with both hands really hard. And my mom came in and was like, op! Stop! What are you doing?!" And he just kept going and he just kept freaking out. Like, he has a bad temper. Like scary. And you how, my mom got to the point where she was like, "Do you want me to leave him?'"Cause he just left the house after that scenario. And I was crying my eyes out. And I was like, "I just, I don't care. Whatever you want to do. I don't care. Whatever." And um, she ended up staying with him still. So, that was that scenario. And then I went to the doctors to find out, 'cause I couldn't hear. And she told me, basically, "Don't tell them what happened." You know, "Just make up a story" or whatever. So I did. And they just said I fractured my eardrum. But I can hear now from, it was just like for two weeks. + +34:00 + +Dr. Kliman: I think the word is probably ruptured. implor Ruptured? Okay, that's— + +. + +Dr. Kliman: Fractured is a good word. He did something to hurt your eardrum. + +Oaf It might have been ruptured. 'Cause I just think fractured, but... + +Dr. Kliman: How about your skull? Did he break your skull? + +34:20 + +35:29 + +Dr. Kliman: You had told a teacher or a teacher's aid? + +SS A teacher. I was like the teacher's aid. Like helping her like do the tests. + +Dr. Kliman: Right. + +as So, I basically had to lie and just say, "No. I made it all up." + +Dr. Kliman: So what was it that you had said though? + +Dr. Kliman: Yeah. + +No...I was in South Carolina. When I moved to South Carolina with them, which is, we went from Fort.Lauderdak to South Carolina, you know, there was instances where, you know, he would hit me or throw like the butter at me. And I just, I got to the point where I couldn't take it anymore, so I'd throw something back at hint 'Cause I've taken it, you know, a lot. And um, you know, I was going to school and I was like the teacher's aid or something. You know, where I help her grade tests of younger students, was one of my classes. And I had like nobody to talk to 'cause I'd just moved there. And I couldn't talk to my mom. And I couldn't talk to my stepfather 'cause you know, of course, he was the problem. So I spoke to my teacher. And I didn't know, but any teacher that hears anything about abuse has to report it. So basically the child services came to the school to go get my stepfather. And when they took me in the office, I told them that I was lying. 'Cause I didn't want to start all that drama between my mom and my stepfather. + +Urn, I think I was just telling her things that have happened. About how he hit me and stuff like that. I don't recall exactly what it was about. You know, to this day, they still swear that he didn't hit me that much. And I have a, you know, I have a memory that remembers certain things. + +So it's like, I swear I remember him hitting me a lot. But I think they've talked me out of it so much, that it's like, I see that he didn't really hit me that much. Do you understand what I'm saying? + +36:15 + +Dr. Kliman: But you remember he did. + +at I remember he did, yeah. I remember occasions that he's hit me. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747214/EFTA02747214.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747214/EFTA02747214.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..59313489ed42a034003b7bd520c84b8535e24641 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747214/EFTA02747214.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,166 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747214.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 8886, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.37, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 473 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 476 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 98 + ], + [ + "Line", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747214" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747214/_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747214/_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2723fbc0360ec35236239bc1c65af33ff1ae5125 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747214/_page_0_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:450b6e5a6d66c9e14c8cf11b403e245cb68e54332634d4bc856432a8e2f5538f +size 11810 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747218/EFTA02747218.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747218/EFTA02747218.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..051088b635a7b649e62d60f233ed95b74bee1352 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747218/EFTA02747218.md @@ -0,0 +1,261 @@ +SW Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: And he exposed himself to you. + +4 111° . Mmhm. + +Dt Kliman: So all of those things you might define them as sexual abuse because they don't involve intercourse. + +All. Yeah, I guess sexual abuse to me was like being raped. As in intercourse. You know? Does that make sense? \_ . + +41:20 + +Dr. Kliman: Mmlun. + +Sat Because I just see, you know, I don't know. Like, yeah. What he did was considered, now that I understand sexual abuse, but, I guess, that question I meant being raped, like intercourse. With intercourse. + +Dr. Kliman: So these were sexual things that he did. You would agree with that? + +a ", Jeffrey Epstein?'" yes. 'just didn't, intercourse I did not have with him. No intercourse. + +Dr. Kliman: I understand that, yes. + +41:55 + +a Yeah. + +Dr. Kliman: Now, I just wanted to clarify that. Not only for myself, but for anybody who is studying these records. + +Si Okay. + +Dr. Kliman: Ijust want to be sure that we're diligent. + +Dr. Kliman: It's alright. You're not expected to understand all this. Now you mentioned that you had been sexually active since age thirteen. + +AS\* Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: And could you tell me when you first had intercourse. + +42:32 + +Yeah, no no no. Ifs just I didn't, you know, understand. + +It was actually with m husband when I was thirteen years of age. Um, basically we + +![](_page_0_Picture_23.jpeg) + +were dating on and off. I guess I started too young, but um, I guess I was looking—my father never showed me love. Ever. You know, like I was always left at my daycare. This will lead up to my point. But I was always left at my daycare when he was supposed to pick me up. Or 'cause he was supposed to take me, so he wouldn't. So, through sex, I found that "love" that I was missing. Through sex. Like an emotional, by a man. Do you understand what I'm saying? + +43:16 + +Dr. Kliman: I do. + +• . + +Um, so I guess I did it to get like, the feeling, like when I first lost my virginity. But it wasn't exactly like I wanted to do it. It was sort of like, pressured on me. You kntnQy people that were there. I was at my dad's house. And you know, people were like, II, it's not a big deal. Blah, blah, blab. Just do it." + +Dr. Kliman: Who were those people? + +S + +Dr. Kliman: That's of your husband's old friends. + +43:53 + +at\* + +Dr. Kliman: Your current husband then as a boy had old friends. + +a + +Dr. Kliman: And they were saying then, it's not a big deal." + +Dr. Kliman: How long did you not talk? + +44:23 + +Dr. Kliman: So you didn't date. + +S + +My old friends and his old friends. Back in, you know, the summer of going into high school. + +Yeah. But we weren't hus—we were just like— + +Yeah. + +Yes. You know, we were both immature and stupid. And it happened. And I didn't really enjoy it, to be honest. It hurt. After that we actually didn't talk for a white. My husband and I. But at that point, we were just friends. + +Urn, we didn't talk 'til probably junior year in high school. Like, we always went to the same school, but we didn't talk again—I mean, we talked here and then through sophomore year, but it was like, "Hi. Bye." But we actually started talking, and like having an actual friendship again junior year. + +No. We were on and off. Like we never had the title of a relationship and we were just like, either together or we weren't together, together or we weren't together. And that's + +from doctors that you need to let her scream to let her know that you're not going to come to her every cry. And that kills me inside because I don't want her to feel like she's being\_neglected or left alone. Urn, so, like from what I was saying, last night you know, after my mother-in-law went to sleep, at twelve in the morning I went and got my daughter. And you know, I started feeding her. And she was like hungry. She was eating. 'Cause my daughter, she's not hungry. She'll, no. But she was like eating. And then that made me feel guilty because okay so she's been up here crying for like two hours because she's been hungry. But you know, my mother-in-laws you know, she's like, "The best thing is to leave her up there crying." But I mean it kills me. + +04:33 + +Dr. Kliman: So you're having trouble with structuring her life? + +/NM Mmhm. I just want—I mean, what I'm doing might not be the best thing to do, but I just don't want her to feel neglected, like she's doing something. + +Dr. Kliman: Would you feel that it's correct to say that you're over-anxious? + +a Over-anxious? + +Dr. Kliman: Yes. + +Alit\* Yeah. Nhnlun. + +Dr. Kliman: You mentioned that in the past, your drug use had included marijuana. + +lir Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: When was the last time? + +05:13 + +IWO That was a long time ago. Probably like my junior year in high school. + +Dr. Kliman: When was the last time you took pain pills without a prescription? + +As s Urn, probably my senior year in high school. + +Dr. Kliman: When did it start with the pain pills? + +iffitigf I started all my drinking—like don't get me wrong, I had, of course I had like wine, but when I started getting drunk was around you know, sophomore, junior year is when I started getting drunk on weekends. Urn, that's when I started. Drugs? I've never got like into them, I've tried them. I did take, I liked Xanax. The one that makes you just carefree. I didn't abuse—I mean, don't get me wrong, I abused it because I wasn't prescribed to it, but I didn't like pop them over and over. Like, I would take one at night to like calm down, or something like that. + +06:23 + +Dr. Kliman: When was the last time you did that? + +Mat + +Dr. Kliman: A Percocet? + +06:55 + +Urn, the, it wasn't a Xanax. It was urn, a pain pill to help you sleep at night. And that was actually after high school. I just remembered that. + +Yes. It was a Percocet. I was a Percocet. I took half of it, and I just stayed home and I passed out. And it was like the best sleep. Just made me go to sleep really easily, be relaxed. + +Dr. Kliman: Now, again. Just following up things you wrote about. You said your illegal use is never, and am I correct that that's nowadays? Never nowadays? + +Allifr No. I don't do any drugs. + +Dr. Kliman: Nowadays. Okay. Your current self-image is a little overweight. You regard yourself as a little overweight? + +Dr. Kliman: Now. You mentioned to me that you don't eat except once a day. + +a + +Dr. Kliman: Are you binging? + +SW + +07:45 + +Dr. Kliman: Well, that's bulimia. Do you overeat and then throw up? + +S + +Dr. Kliman: When did you stop doing that? + +410. + +Dr. Kliman: How many weeks or months did you do it? + +S + +Dr. Kliman: Okay. Have you ever been very overweight? + +08:28 + +a + +Yeah. + +Not everyday. But yeah, most likely I eat after I get home from school, which is eleven thirty at night. Unless I feel nauseous, and then 1 have to eat something. + +Throwing up, purging? + +No. I, I uh, used to. + +Probably I stopped my junior year in high school. I only did if for a little bit. + +Probably like four to five months. It wasn't that long. + +When I was pregnant. When I was nine months pregnant, I weighed two hundred and + +a Urn, I just, I mean basically I was mentally, physically abused, sexually abused now that I know the definition, um, just...you know, I was very shy and timid so a lot of people walked all over me when I was young. + +Dr. Kliman: Okay. So that would be peers. Peers walked all over you + +Dr. Kliman: mentally. + +Yeah. + +ell. When I was younger. Yeah. /Cause after middle school, when I got into high school, and I told you like my sophomore year, I started like changing my whole personality. + +13:40 + +Dr. Kliman: So until you were about thirteen, fourteen, fifteen? + +IIIIII: Yeah because when my husband first met me, he even knew how I was. He even said, "You've changed so much. You used to be so nice and innocent and shy. Like, why have you changed to being, acting like such a bitch when I know how your heart really is? How do you put on such an attitude and a front towards people?" + +14:10 + +Dr. Kliman: Okay. But for now we're trying to make a list of everything. Now, when your grandma recently had this amputation. Do you regard that as a severe stress on you? + +S Yes. I was very stressed when she was going through the surgery. + +Dr. Kliman: Any other things like that? + +14:44 + +15:17 + +Dr. Kliman: Okay, that's a fear that you have. + +Dr. Kliman: Did she threaten to kill herself? + +Dr. Kliman: Now, you said at one time you had suicidal thoughts. + +Um, my mom probably about three weeks ago, she said uh, she couldn't take it anymore. She wants out. She wants to go on vacation and get away. And I'm so scared of my mom ince cracking. Like losing it. Like going into a mental institution. 'Cause she, I've never seen her so like uptight and stressed in my entire life. She's always had a little bit, but now it's like even my stepfather says it's the worst he's ever seen her. + +Mmhm. It's a fear. + +No. + +a Yes. + +Dr. Kliman: When was that? + +AMP I was living with my father, and uh, it must have been ninth or tenth grade. I'm not sure exactly when. But I remember I was, while I was in high school. And my mom and my dad were on the phone, you know, together. And I was downstairs and I saw, you know, he, earlier he brought home papers for like a boarding school. And um, he was on the phone with my mom. And I was just overhearing them talk about how they both didn't want me. She's like, "Well, you have her now. It's your turn." He's like, "Well, I don't .want her. anymore. Blah blah blah."And then, they basically werejust talking about me as if they both, you know, didn't want me. And I basically took a knife out of the kitchen. And I was going to, you know, but my dad's girlfriend, the one I actually don't like, is the one that stopped me at that time. + +16:28 + +Dr. Kliman: What did she do? + +Dr. Kliman: So she didn't deny that parents can really talk very rejecting talk. + +17:09 + +a No, she didn't deny it. She just said that you get stressed. + +• Dr. Kliman: She protected you. + +Arfig. Yeah. + +Dr. Kliman: Did you cut yourself with that knife? + +a No. + +Dr. Kliman: Did you do anything else to hurt yourself? + +S No. + +Dr. Kliman: Did you plan anything else? + +She just like grabbed the phone out of my hand, because I was listening, and I was crying my eyes out with a knife in my hand. And she just talked to me. And you know, as much as we didn't get along, that was one thing that she, I can give her great credit for, for being a great person. Because she talked to me, and she's like, "Listen, you know. It's just hard for parents." And spoke to me about how it's difficult. And you know, they don't mean what they say and they're just really stressed out. So that was one experience that I had. + +No. I mean, don't get me wrong. Like, I've had thoughts. Like, you know, rye had—this isn't recently. This was awhile ago. I had thoughts like what's the point of me being here? Why am I here? Like, there's no point. Like, nobody loves me and cares about me, \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747218/EFTA02747218.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747218/EFTA02747218.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8a02fe66b055002e9cf274c59fc8f22833f7b103 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747218/EFTA02747218.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,234 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747218.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 10854, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.37, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_23.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 322 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 91 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 88 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 94 + ], + [ + "Line", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 33 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 97 + ], + [ + "Line", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747218" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747218/_page_0_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747218/_page_0_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6a349b6388374b853e5d4d2bd7e382b422c2bf0d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747218/_page_0_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:de67b1aec666bcf36b51e9c1068da4cf58a0aac15bfa5c8ec2ac2194953b4279 +size 11425 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747224/EFTA02747224.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747224/EFTA02747224.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4a6fd3f215fbab698476a4945c61ab37271a45b6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747224/EFTA02747224.md @@ -0,0 +1,108 @@ +Jan + +e + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. aM.D. + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard CW. III M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W. M.D. Ian over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns aniversity and + +![](_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg) + +![](_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg) + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochernical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's Gout Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. + +Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe #5 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon a minor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe #5 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiffs counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. laiman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kliman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #5. + +14. Plaintiff reports she went to three different schools in the eighth grade. (Page 3, GK Contemp note) + +15. Plaintiff reports "I have had girls be mean to me and even rumor that they would slice my throat when I was younger." (Page 4, GK Contemp note) + +16. Plaintiff noted that she had caught her mother and stepfather having sex. (Page 7, GK Contemp note) + +17. "I got kicked out when I was 18 (by both parerits). (Page 7, GK Contemp note) + +18. Plaintiff noted that her mother suffers from depression/stress. (Page 7, GK + +Contemp note) + +19. Plaintiff noted that during her sophomore and junior years of high school she + +drank every weekend and started trying drugs. (Page 7, GK Contemp note) + +20. "Her problems began during adolescence." (Page 7, GK Contemp note) + +21. Family psychiatric history includes a history of ablood relative having been sexually abused, plaintiffs mother was physically abused by sisters, and plaintiffs father "was very irresponsible as afather figure when I was growing up' and used drugs. (Pages 7and 8, GK Contemp note) + +22. Plaintiff noted "My stepfather hit me on afew occasions. But on one occasion, I lost hearing in my ear for two weeks." (Page 8, GK Contemp note) + +23. Plaintiff reported that she has been sexually active since age 13 and had 8-10 partners. (Page 8, GK Contemp note) + +24. Plaintiff reported that she had been raised by her fatherbetween ages 12 to 18 and that she found her childhood hard to remember, unhappy and painful. (Page 8, GK Contemp note) + +25. Plaintiff reports that her drug use has included marijuana and pain pills without prescription and that on several occasions she has drunk too much alcohol. (Page + +## 9, GK Contemp note) + +26. Plaintiff reported that her mother's sisters had paid amale to rape her (the mother) in acloset at school She had been raped three times, twice in childhood and once on adate. Also, an uncle raped the mother. (Page 1, GK Follow-up note) + +27. Plaintiff reported having suicidal thoughts in the 9th or 106 grade. (Page 4, GK Follow-up note) (Pre-Epstein) + +28. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +29. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, g ligQf amedical, clinical, shoo],and work records known to the attorney in the case. + +30. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "availableimportant and relevant documentswhichare being deliberatelywithheld ro(1122.." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, Ablativehave requestedat that Lig have stated would ordinarily be ;NZ 21medical opinion formation nthe topics concerning, which ox input kk requested," We request the same. + +31. It is critical for an 1MB examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous "sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +32. It is also essential to understand the plaintiffs level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +33. Knowledge of plaintiffs relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +34. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. These, in essence, are the same and similar records that plaintiffs expert witness (Dr. Kliman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct We would concur and request of the court that the same and such other similar information be made available to us to conduct our examination. + +Respectfully submitted, + +(./asiti r dotiet Richa C. W. + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine + +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psydulatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida + +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida + +College of Medicine \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747224/EFTA02747224.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747224/EFTA02747224.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..19b276e875bb7e03970791888ba76c0d0688a8b3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747224/EFTA02747224.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,366 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747224.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 10305, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.53, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. aM.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 436.62298583984375, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 436.62298583984375, + 200.88 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 200.88 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "9, GK Contemp note)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 93.96000000000001 + ], + [ + 194.0615692138672, + 93.96000000000001 + ], + [ + 194.0615692138672, + 109.77313232421875 + ], + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 109.77313232421875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 215 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 291 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 270 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 291 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 313 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 333 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 297 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747224" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747224/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747224/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d555c40c3c72114832426a4aaa1bdf0c7719c10e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747224/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6200770dd3571225bd1b60c6602f9ce7b23daf54b298764fc340b723e8878287 +size 14820 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747224/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747224/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..56361386679bffb6eafa198281d92edca66e6584 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747224/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:126daaf73d151fdc7653172967c7e6bca536b887ac7c5c2f80984cdf31db7362 +size 4915 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747232/EFTA02747232.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747232/EFTA02747232.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ce6eaf898f1c994f5cffb7d242d5113ec7095bea --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747232/EFTA02747232.md @@ -0,0 +1,236 @@ +## CURRICULUM VITAE + +Ryan C. W.E, M.D. + +![](_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg) + +Updated 06/17/09 + +#### TABLE OF CONTENTS + +| PRESENT POSITION | 2 | +|---------------------------------------------|----------| +| EDUCATION | 2 | +| MEDICAL LICENSE | 2 | +| CERTIFICATION | 3 | +| ADDITIONAL TRAINING | 3 | +| SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS , PAST AND PRESENT | | +| COMMITTEES | 3 | +| HONORS | 4 | +| PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES | 4 | +| REVIEWER | 5 | +| BOOK REVIEWS | 5 | +| PUBLICATIONS | 5 | +| ABSTRACTS | 7 | +| PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL | MEETINGS | +| AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES | 9 | +| MEDIA | 12 | + +NAME: Ryan Chaloner Winton., M.D. + +DATE OF BIRTH: May 10, 1976 + +PLACE OF BIRTH: Titusville, Florida + +MARITAL STATUS: Single + +#### PRESENT POSITION: + +07/2008 — Psychiatrist Present Richard C. W. MI, MD, PA 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd; Ste 219 Lake Mary, FL 32746 Ph: 407-322-8199 + +03/01/2008 - 07/31/2011 Affiliate Instructor University of South Florida Department of Psychiatry + +03/03/09 — Assistant Professor of Psychiatry 06/30/12 University of Central Florida College of Medicine Department of Medical Education + +#### EDUCATION: + +1995 - 1999 Johns University Baltimore, Maryland Double Major - Biology and Psychology B.A. Degree, graduated Phi Beta Kappa with honors + +1999- 2003 Georgetown University School of Medicine Washington, DC M.D. Degree + +2003 -2004 Internal Medicine Internship Sinai Hospital of Baltimore/Johns Baltimore, Maryland + +2004 -2007 Resid Johns". Hospital Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Baltimore, Maryland + +2007 — 2008 Fellow in Forensic Psychiatry Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio + +## MEDICAL LICENSE: + +2004 Maryland — D62746 - Inactive 2007 Ohio — 89483 - Inactive 2007 Florida — ME99792 + +### CERTIFICATION: + +2008 Diplomate, American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, #58286 + +# ADDITIONAL TRAINING: + +2006 Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Chicago, IL + +2007 Forensic Psychiatry Review Course American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Miami Beach, FL + +2008 Florida Forensic Examiner Training University of South Florida College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, Ft. Lauderdale, FL + +# SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT: + +Member, Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine + +Member, American Psychiatric Association + +Member, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +Member, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +Member, American Medical Association + +Member, Ohio Psychiatric Association + +Member, Florida Psychiatric Society + +Member, Southern Psychiatric Association + +Member, The American College of Psychiatrists + +### COMMITTEES: + +2005 - 2007 Public Relations Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society + +2005 - 2007 Legislative Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society 2005 - 2007 Disaster Committee, Maryland Psychiatric Society 2005 - 2007 Resident and Fellows Committee, Maryland Psychiatry Society 2007 - present Psychopharmacology Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 2007 - present Research Committee, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 2007 - 2009 Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, American Psychiatric Association 2008 - 2009 Member, New Member Task Force, Southern Psychiatric Association + +# HONORS: + +1999 Phi Beta Kappa, Johns University 2004 "Superior" performance rating, 1st-year residency, by Sinai Hospital Department of Medicine's Clinical Competency and Evaluation Committee 2005 Dorfman Award, presented by The Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine for best review article of the year for Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome. Psychosomatics, 46(3):195-202, May-June 2005. 2005 Rappeport Fellowship, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law + +## PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES: + +2008 Written testimony on Elder Abuse in support of bills HB8731SB501 Criminal Law — Crimes Against the Elderly or Persons with a Disability— Penalties, pr Maryland House Jud' • Committee for Delegate Kramer, District 19 County, Maryland. Hearing March 4. 2009 Central Florida Psychiatric Society representative to Florida Psychiatric Society's Council Meeting, January 10. + +2009 Testified before the Florida Senate Banking and Insurance Committee (SB 354) on Mental Health Parity. March 17. + +### REVIEWER: + +-Archives of Internal Medicine -Clinical Geriatrics -Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness -European Psychiatry -Journal of Neuropsychlatry and Clinical Neuroscience -Nature Clinical Practice Neurology -Neurology India -Psychosomatics -Social Science & Medicine -World Journal of Surgical Oncology + +### BOOK REVIEWS: + +- 1. Clark MR and Treisman GJ: Pain and Depression: An Interdisciplinary, Patient-Centered Approach. Psychosomatics, July-August 2006, 47(4)365-366. + +### PUBLICATIONS: + +- 1. **RCW, Dunlap PK, RCW, CA, Blakey RE, J: Thyroid disease and abnormal thyroid function tests in patients with disorders and depression. The Journal of the Florida Medical Association, Inc. 82(3)187-192, 1995.** +- **2. RCW, RCW: Anxiety and Endocrine Disease. In Popkin, MK, Seminars in Ica' Neuropsychiatry 4(2)72-83, 1998.** +- **3. RCW,. DE, RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts. Psychosomatics 40:(1)18-27, 1999.** +- **4. In RCW, RCW: Fee-Splitting: Ethical Implications and Principles for Practice Management. Transference 20(2)14, 1999.** +- **5. RCW, RCW: Long-term Psychological and Neurological Complications ii iMindane oisoning. Psychosomatics 40(6)513-517, 1999.** +- **6. RCW, RCW: False Allegations: The Role of the Forensic Psychiatrist. Journal of Psychiatric Practice 7(5)343-346, September 2001.** + +1. 7. ████ RCW, ████ RCW: **Principles of Physician Recruiting.** In *Handbook of Mental Health Administration and Management*; Reid WH and Silver S (ed.): Brunner-Routledge, New York, NY; Chapter 34:440-448, 2003. +2. 8. ████ RCW, ████ RCW, Chapman M: **Identifying Geriatric Patients at Risk for Suicide and Depression.** Clinical Geriatrics 11(10):36-44, October 2003. +3. 9. Hall RCW, ████ RCW: **Establishing Liaison Before Disaster Strikes.** ; Chapter 2:12-19. 2004. +4. 10. ████ RCW, Hall RCW, Chapman MJ: **Emotional and Psychiatric Effects of Weapons of Mass Destruction in First Responders.** In: *Bioterrorism: Psychological and Public Health Interventions*; Ursano RJ, Norwood AE & Fullerton CS (eds). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge; Chapter 14:250-273; 2004. +5. 11. ████ RCW, Appleby B, ████ RCW: **Atypical Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome Presenting as Fever of Unknown Origin in the Elderly.** Southern Medical Journal 1(98) 114-117, January 2005. +6. 12. ████ RCW, ████ RCW, Chapman MJ: **Exploitation of the Elderly: Undue Influence as a Form of Elder Abuse.** Clinical Geriatrics 13(2):28-36, February 2005. +7. 13. ████ RCW, ████ RCW, Chapman MJ: **Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of Postconcussional Syndrome.** Psychosomatics, 46(3):195-202, May-June 2005. +8. 14. ████ RCW, Hall RCW: **Abuse of Supraphysiologic Doses of Anabolic Steroids.** Southern Medical Journal, 98(5):550-555, May 2005. +9. 15. ████ RCW, ████ RCW, Chapman MJ: **Psychiatric Complications of Anabolic Steroid Abuse.** Psychosomatics, 46(4):285-290, July-August 2005. +10. 16. ████ RCW, Hall RCW, Chapman MJ: **Medical and Psychiatric Casualties caused by Conventional and Radiological (Dirty) Bombs.** General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(3):242-248, May-June 2006. +11. 17. ████ RCW, ████ RCW, Chapman MJ: **Postconcussional Syndrome: A Work in Progress (Response to Dr. ██████████).** Letter to the Editor. Psychosomatics, 47(3):272, May-June 2006. +12. 18. Hall RCW, ████ RCW, Chapman MJ: **Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome in the Elderly: Diagnostic Criteria, Incidence, Risk Factors, Pathophysiology, and Treatment.** (CME article) Clinical Geriatrics, 14(5):39-46, 2006. +13. 19. ████ RCW, ████ RCW, Chapman MJ: **Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part I: Medical and Psychiatric Complications of Bombings and Biological, Chemical, and Nuclear Attacks.** Clinical Geriatrics, 14(8):26-35, 2006. + +- 20. ERCW, CROW, Chapman MJ: Effects of Terrorist Attacks on the Elderly, Part 2: Posttraumatic Stress, Acute Stress, and Affective Disorders. Clinical Geriatrics, 14(9):17-24, 2006. +- 21. ERCW, IIIRCW: Malingering of PTSD: forensic and diagnostic considerations, characteristics of malingerers and clinical presentations. General Hospital Psychiatry, 28(6):525-535, 2006. +- 22. RCW, pRCW: A Profile of Pedophilia: Definition, Characteristics of 1Lders, ecidivism, Treatment Outcomes, and Forensic Issues. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 82(4):457-471, 2007. +- 23. ERCW, RCW: Detection of Malingered PTSD: An Overview of Clinical, Psychome c, and Physiological Assessment: Where Do We Stand? Journal of Forensic Sciences, 52(3):717-725, 2007. +- 24. IMIRCW, Macvaugh GS III, Merideth P, J: Commentary: Delving Further Into Liability for PsychotherapyR,In. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 35(2):196-9, 2007. +- 25. p RCW, up RCW, Chapman MJ: Psychiatric Effects of Terrorism: Medical and ocietal Imp cations of Recent Attacks. In: Focus on Terrorism, Vol. 9; Linden EV (ed), Nova Science:New York; Chapter 11, Publication date: 3f° Quarter, 2007. +- 26. ERCW, ERCW: The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak Model of virus properties on system capacity and function: A lesson for future viral epidemics. American Journal of Disaster Medicine, 2(5):270-276, 2007 +- 27. .RCW, ERCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part (— Causative Agents, Presentation, and Differential Diagnosis. Clinical Geriatrics, 15(12):18-25, 2007. +- 28. .RCW, pp RCW, Chapman MJ: Central Serotonin Syndrome: Part II Pathophys o ogy, Drug Interactions, and Treatment. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(1):24- 28, 2008 +- 29. p RCW, Resnick PJ: Psychotherapy Malpractice: New Pitfalls. Journal of sychiatric Practice, 14(2):119-121, 2008 +- 30. RCW, IlRCW, Chapman MJ: Violence in Older Persons: Part I cc urrence n Forensic/Criminal Situations, Partner Relationships, and Sexual Offenses. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(5):27-32, 2008 +- 31. **RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Violence In Older Persons: Part II — Occurrence in Hospitals and Pharmacological/Behavioral Treatment of Agitation, Aggression and Violence. Clinical Geriatrics, 16(6):28-32, 2008.** + +- 32. **RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ. The 1996 Kikwit Ebola outbreak: lessons hospitals an physicians can apply to future viral epidemics. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2008 Sep-Oct;30(5):446-52. Epub 2008 Jul 23** +- **33. RCW, SH: Drug Diversion Program Rights. Legal Digest. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 36(4):579-580, 2008** +- **34. RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Nursing Home Violence: Occurrence, Risks, and Intervent ons. Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009** +- **35. Paul RK, Lockey C, RCW, Bursztajn H: Practice Management: Managing Risks When Practicing in Three-Party Care Settings. Psychlatrictimes.com, 26(2), Feb. 3, 2009.** +- **36. Hall RCW, RCW, Chapman MJ: Letter to the Editor response re: Nursing Home Violence: ccurrence, Risks, and Interventions) Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(1):25-31, 2009). Annals of Long-Term Care, 17(4):17-21, 2009.** +- **37. ERCW, RCW, Myers W, Chapman M: Testamentary Capacity: History, Physicians' Role, Requirements, and Why Wills are Challenged. Clinical Geriatrics, in press.** + +**Boldface Indicates Ryan C. W. MD** + +# **ABSTRACTS:** + +- **1. RCW, Hazard SC, RCW, CA, Blakey RE, Disease in Eating Disordered and Depressed Patients. J: Thyroid -146th Annual Meeting, American Psychiatric Association, May 25, 1993, San Francisco, CA, P.1.57 (Poster Session).** +- **2. RCW, DE, RCW: Suicide Risk Assessment: A Review of Risk Factors for Suicide in 100 Patients Who Made Severe Suicide Attempts: Evaluation of Suicide Risk in a Time of Managed Care.** + - **Psychiatric Practice and Managed Care, American Psychiatric Association, Vol. 5, No. 5, P 12, Sept-Oct 1999.** +- **3. RCW, Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J: The Role of Morphine in the evelopment of Acute Stress Disorder and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Severe Burn Injury.** + - **41m Annual Meeting, American Burn Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009.** + +- 4. Gould N, McCann U, McKibben J,ERCW: Peri-traumatic Heart Rate as a Predictor of Acute Stress Disorder and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Patients with Burn Injury. + +- 41° Annual Meeting, American Bum Association. San Antonio, TX, Mar 25, 2009. + +• Boldface indicates Ryan C. W. I., MD PRESENTATIONS AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS AND INVITATIONAL ACADEMIC LECTURES: + +- 1. Thyroid RCW, Hazard SC, Dunlap PK, RCW, =CA, Blakey RE, IJ: disease abnormal function tests in patients witheatingdisorders ea and depression. Poster Session - American Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, May 25, 1993 +- 2. RCW, RCW: Management of Hostage Situations. Psychiatric Responses P rauma, rnational Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services . University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999 +- 3. RCW, **RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective -- Part I. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. State Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C.. April 28, 1999** +- **4. RCW, RCW: Terrorism: Its Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors - A Consultation-Liaison Perspective - Part II. Psychiatric Responses to Trauma, U.S. Slate Department Conference on International Terrorism, hosted by Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1999** +- **5. ERCW, RCW, DE: Impact of Managed Care on Suicide Risk Assessment American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 1999 Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD, October 15, 1999** +- **6. RCW, RCW: Ethical issues In Managed Care. American Psychiatric Association, 99 Ethics Workshop, Washington, DC, November 3, 1999** +- **7. RCW, RCW: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Disaster Aftermath and Long-term Effects on Survivors. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulare University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **8. RCW, RCW: Bioterrorism Dealing with Medical and Psychiatric Consequences of Victims and Responders. Cycle of Violence: Assessment and Management of Aggression - A Mardi Gras Symposium, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, February 26, 2000** +- **9. RCW, RCW: Psychiatric Consequences of Terrorism, Bioterrorism and** + +Disaster. Rocky Mountain Emotional Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT, June 29, 2000 + +- 10. u RCW, EIRCW: Suicide in an Era of HMO's and Managed Care. Rocky ountain Emo onal Trauma Symposium, Pathways Treatment Center, Kalispell, MT. June 30, 2000 +- 11. RCW, Hall RCW: Psychological Response to Disasters and Terrorism. n emational Society of Political Psychology, 23rd Annual Scientific Meeting, Seattle, WA, July 4, 2000 +- 12. RCW, ROW: Biological Warfare Attack Scenarios, Response to errorist A ac s, and Sources of Conflict. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000 +- 13. F RCW, BROW, Chapman M: Workplace Violence. American Academy of sychiatry he Law, Pre-AAPL meeting, Ireland, September 16-26, 2000 +- 14. IMIRCW, IRROW: Biological Warfare: Attack Scenarios and Public Health Issues. Gran ounds, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, December 8, 2000 +- 15. pr w, ROW: Bioterrorism: A Short History of Biowarfare & Analysis of e hreat. rand Rounds, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, August 15, 2001 +- 16. IIRCW, FRCW: Situational Suicide. Halifax Medical Center, Daytona Beach, eptem er 13, 2001 +- 17. enter, ROW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Halifax Medical Da ona Beach, FL, September 14, 2001 +- 18. RCW, !FIRM: Terrorism, Bioterrorism and Assault with Anthrax as a ologlca eapon. -Florida Psychiatric Society, Fall Meeting, Coconut Grove, FL, November 4, 2001 -Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, January 30, 2002 +- 19. IF RCW,L.RCW: Smallpox. Grand Rounds, Louisiana State University Health ciences en er, Shreveport, LA, January 30. 2002 +- 20. p nw i ROW: Psychopharmacology - Forensic Risk and Clinical ractice: ngs the clinician must know. Apopka Community Health Center, Apopka, FL, March 13, 2002 +- 21. i Rcw,miRCW: Overview of Terrorism and Bioterrorism. Orlando Police cademy, ando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002 + +- 22.. RCW,MI RCW: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002 +- 23. El RCW,MI RCW: Smallpox as a Biological Weapon. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 2, 2002 24.. RCW,IMI RCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Southern Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, Loews Ventana Canyon Resort, Tucson, AZ, October 3, 2002 +- 25. ile RCW,IIII RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Mandatory Madness, Halifax Medical Center, Daytona USA, Daytona Beach, FL, December 14, 2002 26.. RCW,. RCW, Chapman MJ: Workplace Violence, School Shootings and Occupations at Risk: Analysis of current data and psychological profiles. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003 27.. RCW,I. RCW: Medical and Psychological Sequelae of Bombings: Implications for First Responders and Critical Government Staff. Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, February 11, 2003 28.. RCW, Hall RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Florida Psychiatric Society Spring Meeting, Orlando, FL, April 5, 2003 +- 29. El RCW,Ill RCW: Terrorist Bombings: Medical and Psychiatric Impact. Southern Psychiatric Association's Annual Meeting, Nashville, TN, October 11, 2003 30.. RCW, Hall RCW: Terrorism, Bombings, and Psychiatric Casualties. University of Florida, Department of Psychiatry, Visiting Professor Program, November 7, 2003 31.. RCW,M RCW: Domestic Violence: The Physician's Role. Tampa Bay Psychiatric Society, Tampa, FL, sponsored by Pfizer, January 29, 2004 32.. RCW,. RCW: Smallpox as an Agent for Biological Warfare. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004 33 El ROW,. RCW: Medical and Psychiatric Casualties of Terrorist Bombings. Orlando Police Academy, Orlando Police Department, Orlando, FL, August 13, 2004 +- 34. El RCW,Ill RCW: Medical and Psychological Consequences of Bombings. Grand Rounds, Tulane University, Department of Psychiatry, New Orleans, LA, January 28, 2005 35.. RCW,Ill RCW: Psychological Sequoias of Weapons of Mass Destruction on First Responders. South Central Center for Public Health + +Preparedness/Alabama Department of Public Health,MM, AL, Satellite Conference, May 6, 2005 + +- 36.■ **RCW: Medical and Psychological Aspects of Terrorist Bombings. Grand Rounds, Sinai Hospital, Department of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, June 2, 2005** +- **37. In RCW: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationship: The New Realities. (Abbreviated version) Forensic Psychiatry Fellows and Residents, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, January 24, 2006** +- **38. ID RCW, Chapman MJ: Managed Care Disrupting the Physician-Patient Relationship: The New Realities. Presidential Address. Southern Psychiatric Association, Baltimore, MD, September 30, 2006.** +- **39. El RCW,i RCW: When the System Is Overwhelmed: Protecting the Provider during Biodisaster. Satellite Conference, University of Alabama Birmingham South Central Center for Public Health Preparedness/Alab Department of Public Health/Tulane University School of Public Health, AL, February 27, 2007.** +- **40. i RCW: Testamentary Capacity from Isaac Ray to Anna Nifialella. Grand Rounds, Case Western Reserve School of Medicine, Cleveland,M, March 28, 2008** +- **41. El RCW,Ill RCW, Rundell JR, Winstead DK: Psychiatrists' Role in Disaster Management: Lessons Learned. Course 14, American Psychiatric Association, Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, May 3, 2008.** +- **42. a RCW: Violence In the Elderly: Forensic and Treatment Concerns. Forensic Forum, Florida Psychiatric Society, ChampionsGate, FL, September 20, 2008.** +- **43. In RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole Southern Psychiatric Association, September 25, 2008.** +- **44. MI RCW: Testamentary Capacity: From Isaac Ray to Anna Nicole Forensic Psychiatry Program, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, January 29, 2009.** +- **45. IN** ■RCW: **Domestic Violence as Portrayed in Film A Realistic Appraisal? Florida Psychiatric Society, St. Petersburg Beach, FL, March 20, 2009.** +- **46. RCW, Silberman E, Preven O, Weissman S (chairperson): Indications for the Use of Combined Talking Therapy and Pharmacotherapy and How to Teach in Residency. Corresponding Committee on Graduate Education, CW16, American Psychiatric Association, San Francisco, CA, May 19, 2009.** + +**\* Boldface indicates Ryan C. W. M, MD** + +### MEDIA: + +- 1. Time Magazine, Definition, Diagnosis, and Forensic Implications of PostconcussIonal Syndrome, May 16, 2005 +- 2. Reach MD Radio, Pedophilia. April 25, 2007 +- 3. MD Consult. Doug Joint telephone Interview with Richard C. W. M, MD, Pedophilia. May 2, 2007 +- 4. The Korean Broadcasting System, KBS Special, Pedophilia. March 11, 2008. +- 5. Tony Pipitone, WKMG-TV Channel 6, Mothers Who Kill Their Children. October 28, 2008. +- 6. J. L. . Orlando Medical News. Cyberchondriacs. November 13, 2008. +- 7. Fox 35 News, Orlando. Forensic Implications of Anthony case. December 11, 2008. +- 8. Fox 35 News, Orlando. The Anthony Case: DNA Evidence. December 12, 2008. +- 9. Jessica WKMG-TV Channel 6. The Anthony Case: Baker Act and Stressors. January 23, 2009. +- 10. Nam Nae Won and Jihyun Song. Korea Educational Broadcasting System. Pedophilia. March 30, 2009. +- 11. Keith Landry, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress and Financial Strain. June 15, 2009. +- 12. Heidi Hatch, Fox 35 News, Orlando. Effects of Stress on Families. June 16, 2009. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747232/EFTA02747232.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747232/EFTA02747232.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bbb645b738bc638cb3cdbbcdbb85c93168cfe5ee --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747232/EFTA02747232.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,955 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747232.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 22653, + "elapsed_seconds": 10.06, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "CURRICULUM VITAE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.1, + 370.98 + ], + [ + 363.8070983886719, + 370.98 + ], + [ + 363.8070983886719, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 260.1, + 384.75 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "TABLE OF CONTENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 117.44999999999999 + ], + [ + 362.916, + 117.44999999999999 + ], + [ + 362.916, + 129.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 129.60000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRESENT POSITION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.024, + 223.56000000000003 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 223.56000000000003 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 234.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 93.024, + 234.89999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EDUCATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 95.47200000000001, + 407.43 + ], + [ + 162.96929931640625, + 407.43 + ], + [ + 162.96929931640625, + 419.58000000000004 + ], + [ + 95.47200000000001, + 419.58000000000004 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDICAL LICENSE:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.636, + 115.01999999999998 + ], + [ + 193.6934051513672, + 115.01999999999998 + ], + [ + 193.6934051513672, + 128.714111328125 + ], + [ + 93.636, + 128.714111328125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.636, + 184.68 + ], + [ + 179.44602966308594, + 184.68 + ], + [ + 179.44602966308594, + 198.0841064453125 + ], + [ + 93.636, + 198.0841064453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ADDITIONAL TRAINING:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.636, + 241.38 + ], + [ + 215.45339965820312, + 241.38 + ], + [ + 215.45339965820312, + 255.4541015625 + ], + [ + 93.636, + 255.4541015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SOCIETY MEMBERSHIPS, PAST AND PRESENT:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.636, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 329.805419921875, + 390.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 329.805419921875, + 404.7140808105469 + ], + [ + 93.636, + 404.7140808105469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COMMITTEES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.636, + 620.46 + ], + [ + 169.30569458007812, + 620.46 + ], + [ + 169.30569458007812, + 633.4540710449219 + ], + [ + 93.636, + 633.4540710449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "HONORS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.248, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 146.80581665039062, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 146.80581665039062, + 347.7140808105469 + ], + [ + 94.248, + 347.7140808105469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.248, + 528.9300000000001 + ], + [ + 239.82110595703125, + 528.9300000000001 + ], + [ + 239.82110595703125, + 542.7140808105469 + ], + [ + 94.248, + 542.7140808105469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REVIEWER:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.248, + 163.62 + ], + [ + 155.80938720703125, + 163.62 + ], + [ + 155.80938720703125, + 177.0841064453125 + ], + [ + 94.248, + 177.0841064453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BOOK REVIEWS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.248, + 324.81000000000006 + ], + [ + 181.30303955078125, + 324.81000000000006 + ], + [ + 181.30303955078125, + 338.3340759277344 + ], + [ + 94.248, + 338.3340759277344 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PUBLICATIONS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.248, + 395.28 + ], + [ + 177.58050537109375, + 395.28 + ], + [ + 177.58050537109375, + 408.4540710449219 + ], + [ + 94.248, + 408.4540710449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ABSTRACTS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.024, + 416.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 164.24569702148438, + 416.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 164.24569702148438, + 431.10333251953125 + ], + [ + 93.024, + 431.10333251953125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDIA:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.636, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 134.06698608398438, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 134.06698608398438, + 141.8341064453125 + ], + [ + 93.636, + 141.8341064453125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Line", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 101 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "TableOfContents", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 212 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 84 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 112 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 114 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 100 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747232" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747232/_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747232/_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b724681636c7153e7283b842b6a880b029d61946 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747232/_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0a48d4089b5df61896fb5820e83ca655f8b6d27971e333671964269b88133202 +size 13057 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747246/EFTA02747246.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747246/EFTA02747246.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..877998648e05970b2bb2c50d6458a302bd26d004 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747246/EFTA02747246.md @@ -0,0 +1,204 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRal + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## Defendant, Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion To Compel Plaintiff, Jane Doe #5's Independent Medical Examination Pursuant to Rule 35 + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his attorneys, and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 35 and other applicable rules, hereby moves this Court for an order directing that the Plaintiff, Jane Doe #5 (case #80381), submit to a compulsory psychological/psychiatric medical examination (a/k/a independent medical examination) by Ryan M, M.D. of Richard In, M.D. at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP. located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, WPB, FL 33401. In support, Epstein states: + +## Background + +1. This Court entered an order relating to the IME of CMA, another Plaintiff seeking similar damages against Epstein. See Exhibit "A" Given the damages claimed in this matter, it is clear that Plaintiff has placed her medical condition at issue + +and that an IME is required. Despite that fact and the fact that discovery has been consolidated, Defendant is required to file a Rule 35 Motion seeking an IME. Thus, the undersigned believes that an Omnibus Order is required relative to all Plaintiffs' IMEs in that each claim similar damages and raise similar claims. Such an order would conserve judicial resources and require that the attorneys only negotiate dates and times for said IMEs. + +2. Nonetheless, this particular Motion, pursuant to Rule 35, only addresses the IME of Jane Doe #5. + +3. Plaintiff has alleged in her action that Defendant sexually battered her and, as a result, Plaintiff seeks millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, "confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries." See Second Amended Complaint. (DE 60) Plaintiff, Jane Doe #5, also claims Epstein "intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Jane Doe, creating reasonable fear of imminent peril. . [and] [a]s a proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane Doe, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages." Id. at 111117-21. Jane Doe #5 further alleges that she suffered ". . .mental or sexual injury. . .that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. . .[and). . .Jane Doe has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain." Id. at ¶¶ 25-27. + +4. In addition, Jane Doe #5 informed her expert, Gilbert Kliman, M.D. that she is a "very depressed person inside" and is always "on edge." She indicates that as a child while in school, girls wanted and/or attempted to put gum in her hair, cut her hair + +off, and threatened to slit her throat. In fact, in her own words, Jane Doe #5 admits that her depression is caused by a combination of "a lot together...a little bit had to do with Epstein." See Exhibit "B" + +5. Prior to any contact with Epstein, Jane Doe #5, while in her young teens, admits to her expert, Dr. Kliman, that her mother told her that she (the mother) was molested by an uncle, raped twice, and caught her father (Jane Doe #5's grandfather) having sex with another man in the basement. She further told her daughter (Jane Doe #5) that her own sisters paid someone to rape her while in school. Jane Doe #5 also described an incident in which she walked in on her mother and step-father having sex and that she was "very upset" and "disgusted" by this event. See Exhibit "C" + +6. Also, Jane Doe #5, in her interview with Dr. Kliman, describes her father as being a drug dealer who sold cocaine when she was a child. In fact, as a young child she was found playing with bags of cocaine. At the age of thirteen (13), while living with her father, she described him father as not being affectionate and calling her a "f-ing pig" and a "little slut." Further, Jane Doe #5 details an incident in which her step-father hit her in the head so hard it resulted in a ruptured eardrum and that she subsequently lied to authorities about the abuse. See Exhibit "D" + +7. Jane Doe #5 admits to her expert, Dr. Kliman that she became sexually active at the age of twelve or thirteen, taking pain pills without a prescription, smoking marijuana, and being bulimic for a period of time. She also admits to having suicidal thoughts. See Exhibit "E" — all pre-Epstein. See Supra + +8. Furthermore, it is important for this court to review the detailed Affidavit of Dr. ■ **attached hereto in that it delineates for the Court several experiences visited** + +upon Jane Doe #5 which may have caused the physical, emotional and psychological trauma she claims occurred at the hands of Epstein. See Affidavit of Dr. MAttached hereto as Exhibit "F" + +9. Based upon the foregoing, it is clear that Jane Doe #5 has placed her physical, emotional, medical and psychological conditions at issue. Therefore, an IME is warranted. Without an IME, Epstein would be severely prejudiced. The Affidavit of Dr. ■clearly **sets out the IME and scope of the examination that must be conducted. See also, the curriculum vitae of Dr. Ryan. See Exhibit "G" The examination is set to occur at the undersigned office on November 9, 10, 11, 12, or 13, 2009 (whichever is more convenient for Plaintiff or whichever date the court so orders). Plaintiff has not provided dates for the IME; however, out of abundance of caution and to comply with the applicable rule, Defendant has, on a unilateral basis, set same pending the outcome of this Motion. Obviously, if the date noticed is not sufficient or agreeable, the undersigned will renotice same for one of the four dates suggested; however, this Court must order same to occur.** + +**10. As this court is well aware, Plaintiff and Defendant are required to complete discovery under the Court's trial schedule. It is not the undersigned's intention to require the court additional work; however, it is imperative that discovery be timely scheduled and completed. The court's assistance is needed in this instance as to the IME.** + +**11. Based upon the foregoing, an IME of Plaintiff must occur in order to address her claims and the damages she seeks to recover. The IME is expected to last between 6-8 hours, and the scope of same is set forth in the Affidavit of Dr...** + +12. Pursuant to Rule 35, Fed.R.Civ.Pro, a party may move for an examination by a qualified examiner if the Plaintiffs mental/emotional and/or psychological status is at issue in a case. + +13. Defendant would be severely prejudiced unless he is able to have an examination conducted by a qualified examiner separate and apart from any psychologist/psychiatrist or similar behavioral health provider who may have or may ultimately see the Plaintiff and testify in court. + +14. Defendant's counsel has retained the services of Richard M.D. and Ryan ■ **M.D., of C.W.** ■ **M.D., P.A. located at 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd., #219 Lake Mary, FL 32746. Ryan** ■ **M.D., will be performing the examination. Dr. Ryan Halls' specialties include forensic psychiatry, general psychiatry and medical psychiatry. See Exhibit attached outlining Ryan** ■ **M.D.'s qualifications and the scope of the examination which he intends and is required to conduct in order to render a report. See also Affidavit of Ryan C.W. • M.D., outlining the scope of examination and other Rule 35 requirements. Accordingly, this motion comports with Rule 35. The applicable notice has been filed simultaneously. Defendant will arrange for a videotape of the examination.** + +**15. The undersigned is requesting the court's assistance with regard to compelling the IME of Plaintiff along with dates for same to occur.** + +# **Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference** + +**Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff by telephone and by email; however, an agreement has not been reached.** + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an Order: + +- a. providing a date and time for Plaintiff's IME to occur on November 9, 10, 11, 12 or 13, 2009; +- b. providing that the independent medical examination take place at 9:00 a.m. (on a date to be determined by the court) at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP. located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, WPB, Fl. 33401 under the protocol set forth by Dr. ■ **in his affidavit, by videotape and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper.** + +## **Certificate of Service** + +**I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 2e day of Se tember, 2009** + +**Respe itted,** + +**By:** + +**RO ON, JR., ESQ.** + +**Florida car No. .24162** + +**rcrit@bciclaw.co** + +**MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ.** + +**Florida Bar #617296** + +**mclike bcIclaw.com** + +**BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN** + +**515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400** + +**West Palm Beach, FL 33401** + +**561/842-2820 Phone** + +**561/515-3148 Fax** + +**(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)** + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +cc. Dr. Ryan [REDACTED] \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747246/EFTA02747246.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747246/EFTA02747246.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f53cb4943224b0298998a1b9ae4a5e519c5d3e1f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747246/EFTA02747246.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,443 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747246.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 12302, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.13, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 415.7853698730469, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 415.7853698730469, + 104.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 104.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant, Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion To Compel Plaintiff, Jane Doe #5's \nIndependent Medical Examination Pursuant to Rule 35", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 98.53200000000001, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 524.235107421875, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 524.235107421875, + 394.66998291015625 + ], + [ + 98.53200000000001, + 394.66998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.788, + 599.4000000000001 + ], + [ + 350.20989990234375, + 599.4000000000001 + ], + [ + 350.20989990234375, + 615.1699981689453 + ], + [ + 274.788, + 615.1699981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 162.18, + 643.95 + ], + [ + 460.23272705078125, + 643.95 + ], + [ + 460.23272705078125, + 662.0874938964844 + ], + [ + 162.18, + 662.0874938964844 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 314.28000000000003 + ], + [ + 372.84881591796875, + 314.28000000000003 + ], + [ + 372.84881591796875, + 329.8374938964844 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 329.8374938964844 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.66, + 93.96000000000001 + ], + [ + 428.4, + 93.96000000000001 + ], + [ + 428.4, + 136.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 186.66, + 136.07999999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747246" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747254/EFTA02747254.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747254/EFTA02747254.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dabce39b0fa841a9c98897fa17f444ad9f41bec9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747254/EFTA02747254.md @@ -0,0 +1,252 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #5 (80381) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan a M.D. of C.W. S M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on November 13, 2009 at the law firm of Burman, Critton, Luttier and Coleman, LLP, located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, Ste. 400, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring a sweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. ale infra and Motion attached at DE (328) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well. + +2. Plaintiff has not provided an available date; however, unless a timely and valid objection to this Notice is made, the Plaintiff is required by this Rule to be in attendance at the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as a witness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (328). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (328). + +See Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documents have been provided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient notice h been made. + +By: + +MI AE . PIKE, ESQ. Fl. da Bar 4617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 25 day of September, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: + +ROBERT RITTON JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 22416 hit@belclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) + +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* + +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* + +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80811* + +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +*Pro Hac Vice* + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. + +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +Seamy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, 08-80469 + +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isx@searcvlaw.com + +jph@searcylaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brucereirthartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659.8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesq@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747254/EFTA02747254.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747254/EFTA02747254.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3d0a664559c7cd65a392fc7d1aad67f5031e0a03 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747254/EFTA02747254.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,257 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747254.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5282, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.17, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 415.1364440917969, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 415.1364440917969, + 104.60302734375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 104.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF \nPLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #5 (80381)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 96.696, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 522.424072265625, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 522.424072265625, + 394.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 96.696, + 394.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 515.16 + ], + [ + 368.34051513671875, + 515.16 + ], + [ + 368.34051513671875, + 532.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 532.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 389.84400000000005, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 389.84400000000005, + 280.26 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 280.26 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 122 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 38 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747254" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747258/EFTA02747258.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747258/EFTA02747258.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..46b715e3ec10aa1d8a88231130a7f00e6213825f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747258/EFTA02747258.md @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## PLAINTIFFS, JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' RESPONSE TO EMERGENCY MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND EMERGENCY MOTION TO ALLOW THE ATTENDANCE OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN AT THE DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFFS + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby file this Response to Emergency Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order and Emergency Motion to Allow the Attendance of Jeffrey Epstein at the Deposition of Plaintiffs, and state as follows: + +I. Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") argues that he should be permitted to attend the depositions of Plaintiffs' Jane Doe Nos. 2-8. Epstein's altercation with Jane Doe No. 4 immediately prior to her deposition on September 16, 2009, when there was a stipulation between counsel that he would not be in attendance, illustrates why Epstein should not be permitted to be physically present at any of the depositions. + +2. Prior to the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, the parties stipulated that Jeffrey Epstein would not attend the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, or even be seen by her at the deposition. Nevertheless, Mr. Epstein was just a few feet away from the conference room where the deposition was being held, at the exact time the deposition was set to begin. When Epstein saw Jane Doe No. 4, he immediately stopped in his tracks and proceeded to stare at Jane Doe No. 4 until she was intimidated and began to cry. + +3. Let there be no doubt in the Court's mind that when Epstein stopped just a few feet away from Jane Doe No. 4, he purposefully stared at Jane Doe No. 4. Epstein held his stare at Jane Doe No. 4 until she became distraught and fled from the building. (D.E. 306, Exhibit "A"). He did all of this despite a No-Contact Order and a stipulation between counsel that he would not be seen by Jane Doe No. 4 at her deposition. + +4. Notably, this identical issue of whether Epstein should be permitted to attend the deposition of one of the plaintiffs was recently before Judge Haefle in a state court case, EW v. Jeffrey Epstein, Palm Beach County Circuit Court Case No. 502008CP003626. The same arguments Epstein makes here were rejected by Judge Hafele, who prohibited Epstein from physically attending the deposition of the plaintiff, but allowed Epstein to view a live video feed of the deposition from a separate room. The Court determined that this was an appropriate balance between the parties' interests. + +5. As the Plaintiffs have noted before, these are not garden-variety cases. Epstein is a convicted felon and registered sex offender who has proven capable of re-victimizing the Plaintiffs and inflicting substantial psychological harm. At this point, judicial oversight is needed to preclude Jeffrey Epstein from attending the depositions for the same reasons that the No-Contact Orders were entered in the civil and criminal cases. + +6. Epstein argues that Plaintiffs are attempting to prevent Epstein and his attorneys from assisting in the defense of his case. This is simply untrue. Indeed, Plaintiffs specifically offered to allow Epstein to view a live feed of the depositions which are being videotaped, and suggested that Mr. Epstein could confer with his counsel outside the presence of the plaintiffs during breaks in the depositions if he so desired. Similarly, Epstein can email or text message any of his three attorneys who attend the depositions with additional input. + +7. Epstein's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order devotes considerable time to mischaracterizing the relief requested by Plaintiff. For instance, in paragraphs 16 through 18, Epstein rambles on about plaintiff's ex-boyfriends, alleged drug and alcohol use, and police records. Epstein then contends that "disproving those allegations is not possible" if this Court grants the relief requested by Plaintiffs. The Motion for Protective Order does not seek to prevent Epstein from examining Plaintiffs at deposition about their home lives, ex-boyfriends,' alleged drug use, or police records. + +8. In an attempt to distract the Court, Epstein also repeatedly refers to Defendant's "right" to attend depositions and other court proceedings, including trial. Yet, the only issue before the Court is whether Jeffrey Epstein should be allowed to attend the depositions of the Plaintiffs. No other proceedings are at issue in Plaintiffs' Motion. + +9. When it is convenient for Epstein, he also confuses Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 with other plaintiffs represented by other counsel. For instance, Epstein argues that the plaintiff in the pending state court case of Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein attended the deposition of Jeffrey Epstein. + +&#x27; There is a separate pending Motion regarding discovery as to the Plaintiffs' sexual contacts with individuals other than Epstein. (ate Plaintiffs' Response in Opposition, D.E. 93). + +That Jane Doe No. 2 is represented by a different counsel, and her personal choice to attend Epstein's deposition is irrelevant and immaterial to the issue before this Court. Epstein also attempts to confuse the issue by citing various other discovery objections and motions for protective order filed by various Plaintiffs.2 Those issues have no place in the present briefing, particularly since here them is no attempt to preclude any substantive discovery. + +10. Similarly, Epstein attempts to confuse the Court by citing to the transcript of the June 12, 2009 hearing on Epstein's Motion to Stay and argues that all Plaintiffs' counsel as well as the Assistant United States Attorney; — agreed that Epstein could conduct unrestricted discovery in these cases. This is simply untrue. The narrow issue before the Court on June 12, 2009 was whether a stay should be issued if Epstein's discovery conduct violates the nonprosecution agreement. Epstein even misrepresents the statements made by the undersigned to the Court on June 12, 2009. In actuality, the undersigned stated to the Court that he felt Epstein could conduct discovery "(s]ubject to your rulings, of course." (D.E. 296, Exhibit "3"). At no point did Plaintiffs' counsel authorize unfettered discovery or announce an intention to waive all future objections to discovery misconduct. Any attempt to suggest otherwise is absurd and is nothing more than an attempt to confuse this Court. + +2 Again, any objections, motions, or other actions by other plaintiffs has nothing to do with these Plaintiffs or the present issue before the Court. + +&#x27;Epstein cites to the same language from the Assistant United States Attorney in virtually every discovery motion or response he files. Conspicuously absent from all of these filings is an explanation by Epstein as to why these Plaintiffs or their counsel could (or should) be bound in their civil lawsuit by anything said by the Assistant United States Attorney (or even counsel for other plaintiffs).

Dated: September 25, 2009. Respectfully submitted,

By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Smart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on September 25, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing.

/s/ Adam D. Horowitz

SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida

Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. jzoldberger@agwpa.com

Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com

James bedwards@rra-law.com

Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net

Jack jph@searcylaw.com

Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com

Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com

Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu

Richard Horace Willits lawverwillits@aol.com

Robert C. Josefsberg riosefsberg@podhurst.com

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747258/EFTA02747258.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747258/EFTA02747258.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cc0027afd1c7b4f7421437875c8ed5267b28d9d1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747258/EFTA02747258.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,375 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747258.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 8936, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.23, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 99.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 99.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS, JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' RESPONSE TO EMERGENCY \nMOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE \nORDER AND EMERGENCY MOTION TO ALLOW THE ATTENDANCE \nOF JEFFREY EPSTEIN AT THE DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFFS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 106.48799999999999, + 397.71 + ], + [ + 505.802001953125, + 397.71 + ], + [ + 505.802001953125, + 454.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 106.48799999999999, + 454.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 85.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 166.46400000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 445.149169921875, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 445.149169921875, + 113.60302734375 + ], + [ + 166.46400000000003, + 113.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747258" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747265/EFTA02747265.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747265/EFTA02747265.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d0880914b2737b697e2ae806ae72baee39dd749a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747265/EFTA02747265.md @@ -0,0 +1,119 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-CIV-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 98-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## PLAINTIFF, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, ATTENDANCE AT PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION + +Plaintiff, by and through her undersigned attorneys, and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(1) and Local Rule 7.1, hereby files this Motion for Protective Order as to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's, Attendance at Deposition of Plaintiff, and in support thereof states as follows: + +1. Presently pending before this Court are two motions for protective orders seeking to preclude Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, from being physically present in the room while Plaintiffs' depositions are being taken. Specifically, Jane Does 2-8 have filed their Motion For Protective Order as to Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance at Deposition of Plaintiffs, And Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Case No. 08-CV-80119, D.E. 292) and Plaintiff Jane Doe has filed her Motion For a Protective Order Enforcing No Contact Order and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Case No. 08-CV-80119, D.E. 297). + +2. Essentially, these motions for protective orders seek to prevent Plaintiffs from suffering further victimization, harm, and mental trauma by having Jeffrey Epstein present in the room during their depositions while they recount the most intimate details of their lives, including the sexual offenses committed against them by Jeffrey Epstein while they were minors. Plaintiffs propose having a video feed linked to a monitor in another room where Mr. Epstein can view same and have contemporaneous contact with his attorneys in the deposition room. + +3. Plaintiff, deposition has been set for October 29, 2009. Based on correspondence received from counsel for Mr. Epstein, it is Mr. Epstein's intention to be physically present in the room during Plaintiffs deposition. + +4. Plaintiff, joins, incorporates by reference, and adopts the arguments made in support of Plaintiffs Jane Doe (D.E. 297) and Jane Does 2-8 (D.E. 292) as if fully set forth herein. + +5. Additionally, as this Court is already aware, the deposition of Jane Doe #4 had to be cancelled after she "encountered" Mr. Epstein in the lobby immediately adjacent to the deposition room, notwithstanding the apparent agreement of counsel for Mr. Epstein that he would not be present for same. Plaintiff respectfully suggests that the requested protective order seeks to prevent Plaintiff from suffering from the psychological trauma as a result of a similar "encounter with Jeffrey Epstein at her deposition. + +6. Lastly, it appears that Judge Hafele in a pending state court case (E.W. v. Jeffrey Epstein, Palm Beach County Circuit Court Case No. 502008CP003626) has agreed that allowing Defendant to view a live video feed, rather than be physically present in the deposition room, was an appropriate balance between the parties' interests. (See Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 Response to Emergency Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order and Emergency Motion to Allow the Attendance of Jeffery Epstein at the Deposition of Plaintiff, D.E. 330, paragraph 4). While Judge Hafele's determination is certainly not binding on this Court, it is illustrative. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, , respectfully requests that this Court enter a protective order preventing Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, from attending the deposition of Plaintiff, , but permitting him to view a live video feed of the deposition from a remote location. + +## CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1 + +Counsel for the movant has conferred with counsel for the Defendant regarding his position on the instant motion and has been informed that counsel for Defendant is not in agreement with any of the relief requested herein. + +/s/ Jack P. + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 29th day of September, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of electronic filing to all counsel of record on the attached service list. + +/s/Jack P ■ + +**Jack Scarola** + +**Florida Bar No.: 169440** + +**Jack P.** + +**Florida Bar No.: 0547808** + +**Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A.** + +**2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard** + +**West Palm Beach, Florida 33409** + +**Phone: (561) 686-6300** + +**Fax: (561) 383-9424** + +**Attorneys for Plaintiff** + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Robert Critton, Esquire +Michael J. Pike, Esquire +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 South Australian Ave., Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esquire +Adam D. Horowitz, Esquire +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +Brad [REDACTED], Esquire +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +Paul G. Cassell, Esquire +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +MI, Esquire Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 isidrogarciaabellsouth.net + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esquire Katherine W. Ezell, Esquire Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 riosefsbercanodhurst.com kezellapodhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747265/EFTA02747265.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747265/EFTA02747265.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..727ac3fcbc6bffc8e52e81bdc08a196d08c8be01 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747265/EFTA02747265.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,352 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747265.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 6244, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.16, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 407.8914489746094, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 407.8914489746094, + 129.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 129.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE \nORDER AS TO DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, ATTENDANCE AT \nPLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.172, + 417.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 530.631103515625, + 417.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 530.631103515625, + 459.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 80.172, + 459.91998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 169.524, + 472.23 + ], + [ + 496.5626220703125, + 472.23 + ], + [ + 496.5626220703125, + 487.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 169.524, + 487.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 384.3754577636719, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 384.3754577636719, + 100.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 100.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 347.00399999999996, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 99.63 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 36 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747265" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747271/EFTA02747271.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747271/EFTA02747271.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d95fd1f4d3b1f69c70c4a716d99238dc05516b1f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747271/EFTA02747271.md @@ -0,0 +1,256 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAJJOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS, JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' RESPONSE TO EMERGENCY MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND EMERGENCY MOTION TO ALLOW THE ATTENDANCE OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN AT THE DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFFS (DE 330) AND NOTICE OF INCORPORATION + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Reply to Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2-8' Response to Emergency Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order and Emergency Motion to Allow the Attendance of Jeffrey Epstein at the Deposition of Plaintiffs and Notice of Incorporation of Notice of Reliance of Supplemental Authority (DE 324). + +- I. On September 9, 2009, Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Protective Order as to Epstein's Attendance at the Depositions of Plaintiffs, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law. +- 2. On September 11, 2009, Defendant filed his Emergency Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order and Emergency Motion to Allow the Attendance + +of Jeffrey Epstein at the Deposition of Plaintiffs and Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, Motion for Protective Order as to Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance at the Deposition of Plaintiffs, with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 2%). + +3. On September 11, 2009, Plaintiff Jane Doe (08-80893) filed her Motion for Protective Order Enforcing No Contact Order and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 297 and DE 298). + +4. On September 17, 2009, Defendant filed his Motion for Sanctions and Motion to Compel the Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 and Memorandum in Support Thereof (DE 305) and Plaintiff filed her Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 306). + +5. On September 23, 2009, Defendant filed his Response in Opposition to Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order, with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 322) and Plaintiff filed her Response to Defendant's Motion for Sanctions and Defendant's Motion to Compel the Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 and Memorandum in Support thereof (323) + +6. On September 23, 2009, Defendant filed his Notice of Reliance of Supplemental Authority (DE 324) + +7. Defendant hereby incorporates the arguments set forth in DE 322 and DE 324 relative to Epstein's attendance at depositions as if fully set forth herein and in DE 296. + +8. In an effort to ease the clerk's docket, th rsigned has not attached the exhibits but has referenced them by docket number. + +> By M PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 0t day of August, 2009 + +Respectf + +By: ROB T D. CRI ON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +moike@bc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-NIARRai + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitzasexabuseattomey.com + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstei nfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards©rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, +08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80811* + +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. [REDACTED] Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) + +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* + +[REDACTED] + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +*Pro Hac Vice* + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED] Esq. + +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) + +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747271/EFTA02747271.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747271/EFTA02747271.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6e9efe33f7d42d65e38d641c94e9a2eeffa48897 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747271/EFTA02747271.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,472 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747271.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 6106, + "elapsed_seconds": 12.11, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 414.7564392089844, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 414.7564392089844, + 104.60302734375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 104.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS, JANE DOE \nNOS. 2-8' RESPONSE TO EMERGENCY MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF'S \nMOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND EMERGENCY MOTION TO \nALLOW THE ATTENDANCE OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN AT THE DEPOSITION \nOF PLAINTIFFS (DE 330) AND NOTICE OF INCORPORATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.86, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 523.5050048828125, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 523.5050048828125, + 436.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 94.86, + 436.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 365.70050048828125, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 365.70050048828125, + 143.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 143.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 500.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 366.7979431152344, + 500.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 366.7979431152344, + 515.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 515.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Counsel for Plaintiffs", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.74, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 196.452, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 196.452, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 88.74, + 89.1 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.74, + 239.76 + ], + [ + 307.836, + 239.76 + ], + [ + 307.836, + 254.34 + ], + [ + 88.74, + 254.34 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.74, + 447.12000000000006 + ], + [ + 232.56, + 447.12000000000006 + ], + [ + 232.56, + 460.89 + ], + [ + 88.74, + 460.89 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Counsel for Defendant", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.74, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 611.55 + ], + [ + 88.74, + 611.55 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Pro Hac Vice", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 313.956, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 383.724, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 383.724, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 313.956, + 128.79 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 313.956, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 482.86800000000005, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 482.86800000000005, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 313.956, + 211.41 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 313.956, + 321.57000000000005 + ], + [ + 527.544, + 321.57000000000005 + ], + [ + 527.544, + 335.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 313.956, + 335.34000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 313.956, + 488.43 + ], + [ + 529.38, + 488.43 + ], + [ + 529.38, + 515.16 + ], + [ + 313.956, + 515.16 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 313.956, + 639.09 + ], + [ + 506.124, + 639.09 + ], + [ + 506.124, + 652.86 + ], + [ + 313.956, + 652.86 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 97 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 36 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 125 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747271" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747275/EFTA02747275.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747275/EFTA02747275.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4d5db0b84b49fbdc8faaa88de9710e0e0ca079d3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747275/EFTA02747275.md @@ -0,0 +1,148 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF NET WORTH DOCUMENTS DATED JUNE 29, 2009 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his Responses and Objections to the Request for Production of Net Worth Documents and states: + +Request No. 1: All Federal and State income tax returns, including all W-2 forms, 1099 forms and schedules, for tax years 2003-2008. + +Response and Objections to Request Number 1: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for + +all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense, however responding to this and other relating inquiries have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information that would be protected. More specifically, the act of producing the above information may implicitly communicate statements of fact in that they would implicitly authenticate the requested information, require Epstein to admit that the requested information exists and admit that same were in his possession, custody and control. The very act of production itself may therefore provide a link in the chain of evidence adverse to Epstein, see generally United States v Hubbell 520 US 27, 36 (2000) + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the request for production as unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The specific information requested as to tax returns also seeks information that is confidential and protected by federal law, 26 USC 6103. Further, Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's request seeks information for a time period from 2003-2008. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be produced, it should not be produced without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be produced at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Request No. 2:** All documents relating to the assets, liabilities, income, expenses and net worth of Defendant, including without limitation, the following for each of the past five (5) years. + +- a. annual financial reports; +- b. balance sheets; +- c. income statements; +- d. cash flow statements; +- e. quarterly financial reports; +- f. budget reports; and +- g. financial analysis + +**Response and Objections to Request Number 2:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments + +as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense, however responding to this and other relating inquiries have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information that would be protected. More specifically, the act of producing the above information may implicitly communicate statements of fact in that they would implicitly authenticate the requested information, require Epstein to admit that the requested information exists and admit that same were in his possession, custody and control. The very act of production itself may therefore provide a link in the chain of evidence adverse to Epstein, see generally United States v Hubbell 520 US 27, 36 (2000) + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the request for production as unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's request seeks information for a time period of the past five (5) years. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be produced, it should not be produced without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be produced at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Request No. 3:** All documentation which refer or relate to financing or loans requested or applied for by the Defendant, including loan applications, appraisals, financial spreadsheets, etc. + +**Response and Objections to Request Number 3:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments + +as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense, however responding to this and other relating inquiries have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information that would be protected. More specifically, the act of producing the above information may implicitly communicate statements of fact in that they would implicitly authenticate the requested information, require Epstein to admit that the requested information exists and admit that same were in his possession, custody and control. The very act of production itself may therefore provide a link in the chain of evidence adverse to Epstein, see generally United States v Hubbell 520 US 27, 36 (2000) + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the request for production as unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2002 to present. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be produced, it should not be produced without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be produced at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Request No. 4:** Any and all appraisals indicating fair market value of real estate or other property of Defendant. + +**Response and Objections to Request Number 4:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference + +under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense, however responding to this and other relating inquiries have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information that would be protected. More specifically, the act of producing the above information may implicitly communicate statements of fact in that they would implicitly authenticate the requested information, require Epstein to admit that the requested information exists and admit that same were in his possession, custody and control. The very act of production itself may therefore provide a link in the chain of evidence adverse to Epstein, see generally United States v Hubbell 520 US 27, 36 (2000) + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the request for production as unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2002 to present. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be produced, it should not be produced without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be produced at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Request No. 5:** Any and all documents referring or relating to investment or savings accounts, including without limitation, account statements and summaries. + +**Response and Objections to Request Number 5:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference + +under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense, however responding to this and other relating inquiries have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information that would be protected. More specifically, the act of producing the above information may implicitly communicate statements of fact in that they would implicitly authenticate the requested information, require Epstein to admit that the requested information exists and admit that same were in his possession, custody and control. The very act of production itself may therefore provide a link in the chain of evidence adverse to Epstein, see generally United States v Hubbell 520 US 27, 36 (2000) + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the request for production as unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2002 to present. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be produced, it should not be produced without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be produced at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +### Certificate of Service + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 31 day of Jan, 2009. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) + +[iherman@hermanlaw.com](mailto:iherman@hermanlaw.com) + +[lrivera@hermanlaw.com](mailto:lrivera@hermanlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey* + +*Epstein* + +![]()By: + +![]()Florida Bar No. 224162 + +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-842-2820 + +Fax: 561-515-3148 + +*(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747275/EFTA02747275.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747275/EFTA02747275.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..88f1fe7f09cca7019e571c9f48b9d91dd15c19b9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747275/EFTA02747275.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,296 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747275.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 16916, + "elapsed_seconds": 13.09, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 416.1453552246094, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 416.1453552246094, + 104.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 104.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO \nPLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF NET WORTH \nDOCUMENTS DATED JUNE 29, 2009", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 115.66799999999999, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 506.7888488769531, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 506.7888488769531, + 325.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 115.66799999999999, + 325.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.86, + 530.55 + ], + [ + 373.32, + 530.55 + ], + [ + 373.32, + 545.13 + ], + [ + 247.86, + 545.13 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 50 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747275" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747282/EFTA02747282.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747282/EFTA02747282.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2e7c16cd6ecb7c306740dabda83744f5973ec4c6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747282/EFTA02747282.md @@ -0,0 +1,206 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S NET WORTH INTERROGATORIES DATED JUNE 29, 2009 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his answers and objections to Plaintiffs Net Worth Interrogatories, dated June 29, 2009 and states: + +Interrogatory No. 1: State the fair market value of all assets in which Defendant has an ownership interest. + +Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 1: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional \_privilpqesi Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time + +period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2002 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 2:** Identify all financial statements or other documents from which net worth Interrogatory No. 1 was calculated. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 2:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to + +lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2002 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 3:** State gross liabilities, expenses, and other offsets to net worth, and identify all documents from which such items were calculated or determined. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 3:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, + +proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2002 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 4:** List all real property, by legal description and/or street address, in which Defendant holds an ownership interest, and state for each the title holder of the property shown in the public records, and identify the nature and extent of Defendant's ownership. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 4:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2002 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 5:** List all corporations, partnerships and other business entities in which Defendant has an ownership interest or had no ownership in the past five (5) years. As to each entity, list the address and nature of the business, and the Defendant's ownership interest. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 5:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference + +under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for the past five (5) years. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 6:** Identify all firms or companies which have performed property appraisals of Defendant's assets in the past five (5) years. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 6:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments + +as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for the past five (5) years. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 7:** List all cars, boats, airplanes and other modes of transportation in which Defendant has an ownership interest. As to each, list the year, make and model, the appraised value, and the percent of Defendant's ownership interest. + +--- + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 7:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition + +without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2002 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 8:** Identify all persons, firms and companies which have performed tax or accounting related functions for Defendant in the past ten (10) years. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 8:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for + +production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiffs interrogatory seeks information for the past ten (10) years. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in asupplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +Interrogatory No. 9: Identify all employees of Defendant whose duties or functions include accounting, bookkeeping or financial planning. + +Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 9: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain + +U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiffs interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2002 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in asupplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +Interrogatory No. 10: Identify any and all transfers of assets or property made by you or for which you signed any document or otherwise authorized, from January 1, 2006 to present. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 10:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2006 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 11:** Identify all foreign firms, companies and trusts in which you have an ownership interest. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 11:** : Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2002 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +--- + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 12:** Identify all firms or institutions in which Defendant has maintained an investment, brokerage, savings and/or trust account in the past five (5) years. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 12:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for the past five (5) years. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +--- + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but + +before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +Interrogatory No. 13: Identify all current employment and other sources of income from 2008 to present. + +Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 13: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information from 2008to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in asupplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein'.s constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including + +confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +![]()STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +I hereby certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared JEFFRY E. EPSTEIN, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Interrogatories who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above-named person: personally known/identification, and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this 31 day of August, 2009. + +![]()PRINT JESSICA CADWELL + +Notary Public/State of Florida +Commission #: DD853529 + +Expires: 04/19/2013 + +My Commission + +![](_page_14_Picture_244.jpeg) + +## Certificate of Service + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the for via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 2009. ing has day of een sent + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ahorowitzehermanlaw.com jherman@hermanlaw.com Iriverae herma n law.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jactesq(bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully sub + +By: ROBERT D. RITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar o. 224162 rcritabcIclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-842-2820 Fax: 561-515-3148 + +(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747282/EFTA02747282.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747282/EFTA02747282.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1753375bb0bdf13c17e582cd053c0875d84d2dac --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747282/EFTA02747282.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,572 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747282.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 16, + "chars": 42777, + "elapsed_seconds": 15.81, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_14_Picture_244.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 72.9375 + ], + [ + 421.4235534667969, + 72.9375 + ], + [ + 421.4235534667969, + 101.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 101.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS \nTO PLAINTIFF'S NET WORTH INTERROGATORIES \nDATED JUNE 29, 2009", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 117.50399999999999, + 280.26 + ], + [ + 513.2879028320312, + 280.26 + ], + [ + 513.2879028320312, + 322.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 117.50399999999999, + 322.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 377.78790283203125, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 377.78790283203125, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 114.20999999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 515 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 522 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 514 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 198 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 212 + ], + [ + "Line", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747282" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747282/_page_14_Picture_244.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747282/_page_14_Picture_244.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..77edef0018ba8f333af193c30bce0804d416df50 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747282/_page_14_Picture_244.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a2f38ebe7e3e5cd83f2543a71ef2a9854558577b0570b6b32b9ad7d6b03c80ba +size 12668 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747298/EFTA02747298.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747298/EFTA02747298.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1a4d48873967c0a29c5b1f95b8db04f6a50fef4d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747298/EFTA02747298.md @@ -0,0 +1,127 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +#### PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES NOS. 2-8' MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR NET WORTH DISCOVERY AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does Nos. 2-8 ("Plaintiffs"), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby file this Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, and state as follows: + +### BACKGROUND + +On June 29, 2009, Plaintiffs served their Request for Production of Net Worth Documents upon counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein. There were five (5) basic requests, as follows: + +- I. All Federal and State income tax returns, including all W-2 forms, 1099 forms and schedules, for tax years 2003-2008. +- 2. All documents relating to the assets, liabilities, income, expenses, and net worth of Defendant, including without limitations, the following for each of the past five (5) years: + - a. Annual financial reports; + - b. Balance sheets; + - c. Income statements; + - d. Cash flow statements; + +- e. Quarterly financial reports; +- f. Budget reports; and +- g. Financial analysis. +- 3. All documentation which refer or relate to financing or loans requested or applied for by the Defendant, including loan applications, appraisals, financial spreadsheets, etc. +- 4. Any and all appraisals indicating fair market value of real estate or other property of Defendant. +- 5. Any and all documents referring to or relating to investment or savings accounts, including, without limitations, account statements and summaries. + +Additionally, Plaintiffs served Epstein with thirteen (13) Net Worth Interrogatories. All of these Interrogatories were limited to Epstein's financial assets, investments, financial accounts, liabilities, and employment. The Plaintiffs' requests were limited to a reasonable time period, seeking no information before January 1, 2002. + +On August 31, 2009, Defendant Epstein served his responses to Plaintiffs' discovery requests. Defendant Epstein made identical blanket objections to all of the requests and interrogatories, asserting the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.' He also asserts that the requests are premature as the Plaintiffs should have the documents and information, if at all, only at the very end of the litigation, on the eve of trial. A copy of Defendant's Responses to Plaintiffs' Request for Net Worth Documents is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". A copy of Defendant's Responses to Plaintiffs' Net Worth Interrogatories is attached here to as Exhibit "B". + +&#x27; Defendant also contends that forcing him to provide the requested information will compromise his Sixth Amendment right to effective counsel and his Fourteenth Amendment rights. These assertions of privilege are derivative of Defendant's claim to the Fifth Amendment privilege. Because, as discussed below, Fifth Amendment concerns do not arise from the net worth discovery sought by Plaintiffs, all of Defendant's privilege claims fail. + +There is no phased discovery in these cases, nor is there any reason to delay net worth discovery. This discovery should be treated the same as any other damages discovery. Plaintiffs will be prejudiced if they are not provided this discovery until the eve of trial. The Defendant's objections and privilege assertions, as discussed below, are meritless. Plaintiffs, accordingly, request an order compelling Epstein to provide them with all requested documents and information. + +## ARGUMENT + +#### I. THE PLAINTIFF IS PRESENTLY ENTITLED TO DISCOVERY OF EPSTEIN'S NET WORTH + +Defendant Epstein objects to the Plaintiffs' net worth discovery as premature, contending that Plaintiffs have the burden of showing that punitive damages are available in this case. Plaintiffs have no such burden under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Specifically, Epstein asserts the following objection: + +> To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be produced, it should not be produced without limitations (including confidentiality), and it should only be produced at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +A Complaint must include "a demand for the relief sought, which may include relief in the alternative or different types of relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(aX3). A plaintiff in a federal action may plead punitive damages in her initial complaint. v. Estaleiro Ita'ai S/A, 541 F.Supp.2d 1344 (S.D. Fla. 2008). ("Thus, in line with Erie and =, Rule 8(a)(3) is applicable in diversity actions and litigants are to include claims for relief, including punitive damages, in their initial pleadings. They do not seek leave of court or make a showing before doing so.") Once a plaintiff's demand for punitive damages is set forth in her pleading, discovery of the defendant's net worth is within the scope of permissible and normal discovery. Pantages v. Cardinal Health 200, Inc., 2009 WL 1011048 (M.D. Fla. 2009). A defendant must respond to those discovery requests in accord with Rules 33 and 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including the timing requirements. Id. + +To be sure, Florida state procedure allows for net worth discovery only after a plaintiff has successfully moved to amend a complaint to add a claim for punitive damages. Fla. Stat. § 768.72. However, the state statute does not apply in this case. Where state law claims are brought in federal court, and a state rule conflicts with a federal rule, the Court must apply the federal rule unless it is beyond the scope of the Rules Enabling Act or is unconstitutional. + +v. Estaleiro Itajai S/A, 541 F.Supp. 2d at 1347 (citing v. Plumer, 380 U.S. 460 (1965)). See also Pantages v. Cardinal Health 200. Inc., 2009 WL 101048 ("...under an Erie analysis, there is no doubt that the federal discovery rules trump § 768.72."). Fla. Stat. § 768.72 is a procedural rule that conflicts with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(3), and thus does not apply in the federal courts. See =v. Office Depot. Inc., 184 F.3d 1292 (11th Cir. 1999) (vacated in part on other grounds by v. Office Depot. Inc., 204 F.3d 1069 (11th Cir. 2000)). See also Pantages v. Cardinal Health 200, Inc., 2009 WL 1011048, v. Estaleiro Itajai S/A 541 F.Supp. 2d at 1351. + +Plaintiffs include punitive damages in their prayers for relief in their Complaints. Therefore, under federal law and procedure, they are presently entitled to discovery relating to Epstein's net worth. Moreover, Plaintiffs will be prejudiced if they are required to wait until the eve of trial for this damages discovery. This discovery has implications in the retention and preparation of a punitive damages expert, and Defendant's responses to the Request for Production and Interrogatories may give rise to the need for additional discovery, e.g., nonparty + +subpoenas on accountants, appraisers and financial institutions. Plaintiffs are in need of this discovery now, prior to the discovery cutoff, to adequately prepare their cases. + +### II. THE PLAINTIFFS ARE ENTITLED TO NET WORTH DISCOVERY BECAUSE EPSTEIN HAS NO VALID CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS OR PRIVILEGES THAT WOULD PREVENT SUCH DISCOVERY + +Epstein responds to each of Plaintiffs' document requests and interrogatories with the same blanket objection, as follows: + +> Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. + +The Fifth Amendment Privilege extends to answers to questions that would furnish a "link in the chain of evidence" needed to prosecute the person asserting the privilege. Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951). This protection "must be confined to instances where the witness has reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer." M. (emphasis added). "The witness is not exonerated from answering merely because he declares that in so doing he would incriminate himself — his say-so does not of itself establish the hazard of incrimination." Id. A "blanket refusal" to provide testimony or information is unacceptable. See Anglada v. Sprague, 822 F.2d 1035, 1037 (11th Cir. 1987). A witness bears the burden of justifying the invocation of the privilege. In re J.M.V., Inc., 90 B.R. 737 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1988). + +Epstein falls far short of the "reasonable cause" standard required by Hoffman. It is not apparent from the Plaintiffs' discovery requests how he is being compelled to offer testimonial evidence against himself in a criminal case. For example, it is not evident from the Plaintiffs' requests how Epstein's property values tend to incriminate him, or are related to any pending criminal matter or may give rise to a future criminal investigation. None of the financial information requested by Plaintiffs suggests underlying criminal activity. Epstein therefore has failed to demonstrate reasonable cause to believe that providing the requested information responsive to Plaintiffs' Net Worth Interrogatories will incriminate him. Failing such a showing, Epstein's blanket Fifth Amendment assertion must be rejected. + +The documents requested by Plaintiffs likewise do not give rise to reasonable cause to believe that their production will incriminate Defendant Epstein. Even if there were such reasonable cause, the act of producing documents may be considered testimonial, and thus encompassed within the Fifth Amendment privilege, only in two instances: (1) if the existence and location of the documents are unknown; and (2) where production "implicitly authenticates" documents. In re Grand Jury Subpoena, I F.3d 87, 93 (2d Cir. 1993). It is the burden of the defendant to show that the act of producing responsive documents would entail testimonial selfincrimination. United States v. Wujkowski, 929 F.2d 981, 984 (4th Cir. 1991). In many cases, the existence and location of papers are a foregone conclusion and the defendant adds little or nothing to the sum total of the prosecutor's information by conceding that he in fact has the papers. Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391, 96 S.Ct. 1569 (1976), + +In Fisher the United States Internal Revenue Service subpoenaed the accounting records in the possession of several taxpayers' attorneys. 425 U.S. at 391. The taxpayers were under investigation by the IRS for criminal and civil violations of the federal income tax code. Id. The Supreme Court held that the mere production of the documents did not compel the taxpayers to become witnesses against themselves, and ordered compliance with the subpoenas. Id. at 414. While a subpoena demonstrates a measure of compulsion, the production of the documents alone, even if the documents contain potentially incriminating information, is neither "testimonial" nor "incriminating" for purposes of the Fifth Amendment. Id. at 411-412, 414. Tacit admission of their existence and their presence in the defendant's possession is not testimonial self-incrimination. Id. at 412. Under such circumstances, "no constitutional rights are touched. The question is not of testimony, but of surrender." Id. (citing In re Harris 221 U.S. 274, 279 (1911)). Likewise, in the instant case constitutional rights are not even remotely implicated in the Defendant's production of net worth records. + +The scope of the Plaintiffs' document requests at issue is limited to Defendant's net worth. They are unrelated to Defendant's inducement of minors to sexual activity. As a result, compelling Defendant to provide net worth discovery does not concern his Fifth Amendment rights. + +# CONCLUSION + +Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs respectfully request that Defendant's assertions of privilege and objections be denied and overruled, and that an Order be entered directing Defendant to produce documents responsive to the Plaintiffs' Requests for Production of Net Worth Documents and answer Plaintiffs' Net Worth Interrogatories. Plaintiffs further request such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +## CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.I.A.3 + +Undersigned counsel has conferred with Defendant's counsel in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this motion, and has been unable to do so. + +Dated: September 30, 2009 Respectfully Submitted, + +By: /s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattomey.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on September 30, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +#### SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. iaoldberaer@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bc1claw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidroaarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcvlaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawverwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsbera@oodhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747298/EFTA02747298.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747298/EFTA02747298.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..28c246c6cdb4e9235985b24326e9e3f302adae28 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747298/EFTA02747298.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,605 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747298.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 14336, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.47, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES NOS. 2-8' MOTION TO \nCOMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR NET WORTH \nDISCOVERY AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.29599999999999, + 318.33 + ], + [ + 484.7612609863281, + 318.33 + ], + [ + 484.7612609863281, + 360.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 127.29599999999999, + 360.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BACKGROUND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 276.624, + 456.8399999999999 + ], + [ + 371.03448486328125, + 456.8399999999999 + ], + [ + 371.03448486328125, + 471.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 276.624, + 471.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ARGUMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 285.192, + 236.51999999999998 + ], + [ + 362.63134765625, + 236.51999999999998 + ], + [ + 362.63134765625, + 251.60302734375 + ], + [ + 285.192, + 251.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. THE PLAINTIFF IS PRESENTLY ENTITLED \nTO DISCOVERY OF EPSTEIN'S NET WORTH", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 161.568, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 454.5622253417969, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 454.5622253417969, + 293.2330627441406 + ], + [ + 161.568, + 293.2330627441406 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. THE PLAINTIFFS ARE ENTITLED TO NET WORTH DISCOVERY BECAUSE \nEPSTEIN HAS NO VALID CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS OR \nPRIVILEGES THAT WOULD PREVENT SUCH DISCOVERY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 89.964, + 124.74 + ], + [ + 540.3040771484375, + 124.74 + ], + [ + 540.3040771484375, + 169.10302734375 + ], + [ + 89.964, + 169.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.548, + 373.40999999999997 + ], + [ + 349.8291320800781, + 373.40999999999997 + ], + [ + 349.8291320800781, + 389.60302734375 + ], + [ + 262.548, + 389.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.I.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.744, + 539.46 + ], + [ + 483.43212890625, + 539.46 + ], + [ + 483.43212890625, + 555.363037109375 + ], + [ + 129.744, + 555.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 208.98 + ], + [ + 388.9223937988281, + 208.98 + ], + [ + 388.9223937988281, + 224.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 224.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 167.07600000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 445.149169921875, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 445.149169921875, + 113.60302734375 + ], + [ + 167.07600000000002, + 113.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 68 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 74 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 33 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747298" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747307/EFTA02747307.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747307/EFTA02747307.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f62a04320771d663b13b7b9e373222aa3284bfb4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747307/EFTA02747307.md @@ -0,0 +1,162 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE 2-8'S APPEAL IDE 327) AS UNTIMELY + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein" or Defendant), by and through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an order Striking Plaintiff, Jane Doe 2-8's Appeal at DE 327. Local Rule 12 allows for this court to strike same. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: + +- 1. On August 31, 2009, Defendant filed his Motion for Reconsideration and/or Request for Rule 4 Appeal (DE 282) and his Supplementary Brief Providing For a More Particularized Showing (DE 282)("Defendant's Motion/Appeal and Supplementary Brief"). +- 2. On September 9, 2009, the Magistrate Judge entered her order on Defendant's Motion/Appeal and Supplementary Brief (DE 292). + +3. On September 24, 2009, 15 days after the Magistrate's Order had been entered, Plaintiff finally filed her Rule 4 Appeal - unfortunately too late. No matter which way Plaintiff attempts to calculate the ten (10) day period under Rule 4, Plaintiff remains untimely. Local Rule 7.1 does not apply to Court orders, but clearly distinguishes business days and legal holidays as exclusions in calculating due dates for responses and replies. Local Rule 4 clearly states that an Appeal of A Magistrate's Order must be made within 10 days after being served with said order. Thus, weekends are included in the calculation and, as a result, Plaintiff is untimely. See Cornelius v. Home Comings Financial Network, 293 Fed.Appx. 723, 7282009 WL 4230197 (C.A.11 (Ga.))(granting motion to strike for failing to timely file responses and objections to magistrate's order) + +4. The Rule is clear — a Rule 4 Appeal must be filed within the ten (10) day time period allowed under Local Rule 4, Review and Appeal, U.S. District Court — Southern District. Again, Plaintiff failed to timely comply. Therefore, Plaintiff's Rule 4 Appeal should be stricken as untimely in accordance with the Rule and the above case law. + +Wherefore, Defendant respectfully requests that this court enter an order: + +- a. striking Plaintiffs Rule 4 Appeal (DE 327); and +- b. for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +B MICHAE IKE, Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing ment is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of + +, 2009 + +Respec mitted, + +By: RO ON, JR., ESQ. + +ar No. 224162 + +rcritabcIclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpikeabcIclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey ' + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARK + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattornev.com + +ahorowitz(&sexa buseattornev.com Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08- 80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Brad Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwardsarra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +isx@searcylaw.com +jph@searcylaw.com +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 +Fax: 561-515-2610 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-08804* + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +cassellp@law.utah.edu +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case* +*No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +rjosefsberg@podhurst.com +kezell@podhurst.com +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +jagesq@bellsouth.net +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747307/EFTA02747307.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747307/EFTA02747307.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bb2502e6779f0969281f677573505a8a8de4e0aa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747307/EFTA02747307.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,273 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747307.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5727, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.88, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 406.6828918457031, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 406.6828918457031, + 107.73000000000002 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 107.73000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE 2-8'S APPEAL \nIDE 327) AS UNTIMELY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.024, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 520.2, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 520.2, + 398.32855224609375 + ], + [ + 93.024, + 398.32855224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 702.27 + ], + [ + 373.9154052734375, + 702.27 + ], + [ + 373.9154052734375, + 719.7900085449219 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 719.7900085449219 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.412, + 439.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 369.7350158691406, + 439.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 369.7350158691406, + 452.79 + ], + [ + 245.412, + 452.79 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 185 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 263 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 80 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747307" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747311/EFTA02747311.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747311/EFTA02747311.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e8fe08ed32611a8e6590a82dab528bdb58907d82 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747311/EFTA02747311.md @@ -0,0 +1,40 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-801I9-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE + +This cause is before the Court upon Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiff, Jane Doe 2- 8's Appeal (DE 327) as Untimely, filed October I, 2009. See DE 334. Defendant's motion argues that Plaintiff's September 24, 2009 Appeal of the Magistrate Judge's September 9, 2009 Order should be stricken as untimely filed. Accordingly, it is + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: + +- I. Plaintiffs Jane Doe 2-8 shall respond to Defendant's motion to strike on or before October 9, 2009. Plaintiff's response shall be limited to providing the Court with authority to support the position that the appeal was timely filed. + - 2. Defendant need not respond to Plaintiff's appeal until Defendant's motion to strike has + +been resolved by the Court. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, + +Florida, this 2s day of October, 2009. + +Copies to: + +all counsel of record + +e- 2.\_ + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747311/EFTA02747311.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747311/EFTA02747311.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bc3f6b17bb5b7aafd20f0d28b96cf07909bcab3b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747311/EFTA02747311.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,155 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747311.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1236, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.79, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.8953857421875, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.8953857421875, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 229.5, + 383.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 383.48626708984375, + 383.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 383.48626708984375, + 397.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 397.93353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 28 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747311" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747313/EFTA02747313.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747313/EFTA02747313.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..91f0d4e0f819f0221704b9e97b0f2e399e458c42 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747313/EFTA02747313.md @@ -0,0 +1,90 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +/ + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4'S REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files this Reply Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order, and states as follows: + +- I. In his Response to Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order (D.E. 322), Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") makes no attempt to excuse his reckless behavior immediately before the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4. +- 2. Instead, Epstein chooses to focus on his purported "right" to attend the depositions of the Plaintiffs in these civil lawsuits' and urges this Court to adopt a narrow + +i As detailed in Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order as to Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance at Deposition of Plaintiffs (D.E. 292), no such "right" exists as the Court is authorized by + +interpretation of the broadly-phrased No-Contact Orders. In doing so, Epstein disregards the fact that before the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 the parties entered into a specific stipulation ("the Stipulation") that Epstein would not attend the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 or even be seen by her on the date of the deposition. (D.E. 306, Ex. C; D.E. 305, Ex. 3). + +3. Epstein's own admissions in his Affidavit demonstrate that, at a minimum, Epstein recklessly violated the Stipulation. (D.E. 305, Ex. 4).2 Epstein admits he knew exactly when and where the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 was being held. Id. at 12. Epstein also knew of the Stipulation providing that the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 would only go forward if Epstein did not attend and was not seen by Jane Doe No. 4. (D.E. 305, Ex. 3; D.E. 305, Ex. 4). In addition, Epstein was "explicitly instructed" by the judge in his criminal case as to the broad language of the No-Contact Orders prohibiting "direct or indirect" contact with Jane Doe No. 4 and his other victims. (D.E. 238, p. 4). + +4. It is undisputed that Jeffrey Epstein stood just feet away from Jane Doe No. 4 and crossed paths with her immediately before she was entering the room where her deposition was to be held. The parties differ as to precisely what occurred during this encounter. In particular, Epstein does not admit to staring at and intimidating Jane Doe No. 4 to the point of tears. In resolving this factual dispute, the Court may consider that Jeffrey Epstein is a convicted felon and find that his credibility should be accordingly diminished. See Federal Rule of Evidence 609(a)(1) (allowing impeachment by a + +Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(1) to enter an Order "designating the persons who may be present while the discovery is conducted." + +2 The Affidavit submitted on behalf of Plaintiff demonstrates that Epstein purposefully violated the Stipulation and No-Contact Orders by staring down Jane Doe No. 4 from a few away. + +• conviction of a qualifying crime).' Additionally, Epstein's version of events is contradicted by an exhibit he filed with this Court. Compare D.E. 305, Ex. 4-5 with D.E. 305, Ex. 8. In his Affidavit, Epstein states that his encounter with Jane No. 4 occurred no earlier than 1:04 p.m.° (D.E. 305, Ex. 4). Yet, the deposition transcript itself reveals that Epstein's Affidavit is a sham because Plaintiff's counsel went on the record to announce the cancellation of the deposition at 1:03 p.m. (D.E. 305, Ex. 4). The time was announced by a court reporter, and even Epstein's counsel agreed that was the correct time. Id. This occurred after the altercation in the lobby between Jane Doe No. 4 and Epstein, and after Plaintiff's counsel attempted to console his client. (D.E. 306, 16).5 Thus, Epstein's contention that his encounter with Jane Doe No. 4 occurred no earlier than 1:04 p.m. is refuted not only by Plaintiff, but also by his own filings in this Court, including the statements of his counsel and a neutral court reporter. + +5. At a minimum, Epstein recklessly violated a good-faith Stipulation between counsel and two no-contact Orders which broadly prohibit Epstein from having any "direct or indirect" contact with his abuse victims, including Jane Doe No. 4. (D.E. 238). Epstein's egregious misconduct is compounded by his filing of a sham Affidavit designed to conceal his reckless behavior. + +3 It is well-settled that Federal Rule of Evidence 609 is applicable to all witnesses in civil cases. See e.g., Shingleton v. Armor Velvet Corp.,621 F.2d 180 (5th Cir. 1980). + +4 Epstein attaches significance to 1:04 p.m. because he "assumed" by that time that Jane Doe No. 4 would have been in the deposition room for her 1:00 p.m. deposition. + +5 Following the incident in the lobby, Plaintiff's counsel exited the building with his client and attempted to console his visibly distraught client. (D.E. 306, Ex. A11 5-6). He then entered the deposition room to confer with all counsel as to what had occurred. (D.E. 306, 16). It was only after this brief discussion that Plaintiff's counsel went on the record at 1:03 p.m. to announce the termination of the deposition based on the earlier event. Id. Accordingly, Plaintiff maintains that these incidents in the lobby occurred at approximately 1:00 p.m. (D.E. 306, Ex. A,13). + +6. The issues in the present Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order substantially overlap with the facts and legal arguments in Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8' Motion for Protective Order as to Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance at Deposition (D.E. 292), which was filed before Jane Doe No. 4's depositions.° Accordingly, Plaintiff adopts and incorporates the remaining facts and arguments set forth in Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4, respectfully requests (1) an award of sanctions, including attorneys' fees and costs reasonably and necessarily incurred by Plaintiff due to Defendant's non-compliance with the Court's No-Contact Order, (2) an Order excusing Jane Doe No. 4 from her deposition on September 16, 2009, due to Defendant's violation of the No-Contact Order and defense counsel's breach of his promise to Plaintiff's counsel that Defendant would not be seen at Plaintiff's deposition; (3) an order directing that any depositions of Plaintiffs in the future be at a court reporter's office selected by Plaintiffs' counsel; (4) appointment of a special to preside at Plaintiffs' depositions and control the proceeding, to be paid for by Defendant; and (5) all other relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. + +Dated: October 2, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs + +6 Indeed, the Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order as to Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance at Depositions was filed to prevent the precise harm that occurred at the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4. (D.E. 292, 11). + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on October 2, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bc1claw.com + +James bedwards @ rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bcIclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747313/EFTA02747313.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747313/EFTA02747313.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dd85af14a9822d735b7391068d39be693b4abe7f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747313/EFTA02747313.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,357 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747313.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 8512, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.3, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.63200000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 205.63200000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4'S REPLY MEMORANDUM \nIN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4'S MOTION \nFOR SANCTIONS AND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 134.02800000000002, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 478.5133361816406, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 478.5133361816406, + 430.863037109375 + ], + [ + 134.02800000000002, + 430.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.44, + 179.01 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 179.01 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 193.863037109375 + ], + [ + 226.44, + 193.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 72 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 3 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747313" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747319/EFTA02747319.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747319/EFTA02747319.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7edfac39fd74c89945a597ce9bc7a91545086eed --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747319/EFTA02747319.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## ORDER + +Upon Plaintiffs' Jane Doe Nos. 2-7' Unopposed Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motions to Compel Independent Medical Examination, and good cause being shown, it is hereby + +ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs shall have an enlargement of time until October 13, 2009, to respond to the Defendant's Motions to Compel Independent Medical Examinations of Jane Does 2-7. + +DONE AND ORDERED in in Ft. Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this day of 2009. + +DISTRICT COURT JUDGE \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747319/EFTA02747319.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747319/EFTA02747319.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7a887eb5a00364bd3064458c09577e225cff3b53 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747319/EFTA02747319.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747319.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 813, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.73, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 280.296, + 375.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 330.7633361816406, + 375.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 330.7633361816406, + 389.60302734375 + ], + [ + 280.296, + 389.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747319" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747320/EFTA02747320.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747320/EFTA02747320.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aec3a274c4b13a94ed4c4795a791fce8fd0b6a09 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747320/EFTA02747320.md @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-7' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does No. 2-7, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby file this Unopposed Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motions to Compel Independent Medical Examination, and state as follows: + +1. Between September 16, 2009 and September 25, 2009, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein filed similar Motions to Compel Independent Medical Examination directed toward Jane Doe Nos. 2 through 7. The Response to the earliest-filed Motions to Compel Independent Medical Examination are presently due on October 5, 2009 in the Jane Doe No. 2, Jane Doe No. 4 and Jane Doe No. 6 cases. Other Response dates are October 8th (Jane Doe No. 3), October 9ih (Jane Doe No. 7), and October 13th (Jane Doe No. 5). + +2. Plaintiffs seek an enlargement of time until October 13, 2009, to file a combined Response to the Motions to Compel on behalf of all of the above-referenced Plaintiffs. This enlargement of time will allow Plaintiffs to synchronize the Response deadlines for all cases and address the issues in a single filing. + +3. This Motion seeks a brief enlargement of time and is not bmught for purposes of undue delay. + +4. Plaintiffs' counsel has conferred with Defendant's counsel, regarding this request for enlargement of time, and he has no objection to this request. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2-7, respectfully request an Order granting an enlargement of time until October 13, 2009, to file Plaintiffs' Response to the Motions to Compel Independent Medical Examination. + +Dated: October 5, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on October 5, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldbergereagwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bcIclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747320/EFTA02747320.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747320/EFTA02747320.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8d3cd0308b24743c8533281c9e5f00214b68021b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747320/EFTA02747320.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,265 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747320.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3330, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.87, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-7' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR \nENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S \nMOTIONS TO COMPEL INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 114.44400000000002, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 497.53411865234375, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 497.53411865234375, + 430.863037109375 + ], + [ + 114.44400000000002, + 430.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 85.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747320" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747324/EFTA02747324.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747324/EFTA02747324.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..67649aeb8eae28143cd396e28d7c4e1ec251a315 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747324/EFTA02747324.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/J.= + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion to Exceed Page Limitation in Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production with Incorporated Memorandum of Law. Having considered Defendant's motion to exceed page limitation by one (1) page, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant's Response to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Response to Request for Production with Incorporated Memorandum of Law may exceed 20 pages by one (1) additional page. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747324/EFTA02747324.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747324/EFTA02747324.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c6bc1141ad9ccfa6d37195ea8bd0c32dd05d511a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747324/EFTA02747324.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747324.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1176, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.76, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.24566650390625, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.24566650390625, + 102.35302734375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 102.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE \nLIMITATION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO \nCOMPEL RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION \nWITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.636, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 528.0032348632812, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 528.0032348632812, + 419.60302734375 + ], + [ + 93.636, + 419.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 9 + ], + [ + "Line", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747324" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747326/EFTA02747326.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747326/EFTA02747326.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..34f6d677b5e37a06bea9d7536df564ff849ec52d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747326/EFTA02747326.md @@ -0,0 +1,136 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRe + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S, JANE DOE, MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION DE (194). WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves to exceed the page limitation of 20 pages imposed by Loc. Gen. Rule 7.1. C. 2. (S.D. Fla.), in his supporting memorandum of law in Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Response to Plaintiff's Request for Production, with Incorporated Memorandum of Law. In support of his motion, Defendant states: + +- 1. Local Gen. Rule 7.1 C. 2. provides in part that "absent prior permission of the court, no party shall file any legal memorandum exceeding twenty pages in length." +- 2. In order to present Defendant's response in an organized and understandable manner, the 20 page limitation is required to be exceeded by one (1) page. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court grant Defendant's motion, and enter an order allowing the Response in Opposition, to exceed the maximum limit of 20 pages by one (1) page, making the total number of • twenty-one (21). + +> By: MICHAE Florida B 17296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 6th day of October, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: ROBE ITION, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 moikea,bc1claw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf brucereinhar v.com Counsel for Defendant + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jazesoa,bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747326/EFTA02747326.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747326/EFTA02747326.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..df62b5334f7cbc6837e4f58e1d030e67c94756f7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747326/EFTA02747326.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,265 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747326.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4864, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.91, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 411.876, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 411.876, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN \nRESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S, JANE DOE, MOTION TO \nCOMPEL RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION \nDE (194). WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 107.1, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 512.856, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 512.856, + 420.1023254394531 + ], + [ + 107.1, + 420.1023254394531 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 250.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 366.7979431152344, + 250.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 366.7979431152344, + 266.2230224609375 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 266.2230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 112.59 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 229 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747326" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747330/EFTA02747330.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747330/EFTA02747330.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f114418489a34d426f14b571d89aa5c3ec8f4051 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747330/EFTA02747330.md @@ -0,0 +1,468 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S, JANE DOE, MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION IDE 971, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, hereby files his Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's, JANE DOE, Motion to Compel Response to Plaintiff's Request for Production IDE 97J (Consolidated Case No. 08-CIV-80119 IDE 194J). + +#### I. Procedural Background + +Plaintiff's Motion to Compel is filed at DE (97). The Motion to Compel was voluminous and orders had been entered by this court (DE 242 and 293) addressing other 5th Amendment issues; therefore, the undersigned counsel endeavored to eliminate certain requests outlined in Plaintiffs Motion to Compel. As a result, a Joint Notice of Agreement was entered advising the court that several of the requests had been addressed by counsel alleviating the court from having to rule on same. (DE 316). + +Defendant filed his Rule 4 Appeal (DE 282) and his Supplementary Brief (DE 283), which address several of the .5111 Amendment arguments applicable to the requests outlined + +Page No. 2 + +herein. Portions of DE 282 and 283 were provided to the court in camera pursuant to the court's order (DE 242). Therefore, for the Court's ease of reference and in an attempt to maintain brevity, Defendant hereby incorporates those arguments and case law as if fully set forth herein. + +Significantly, these cases have been consolidated for discovery. Therefore, consistent rulings should apply. In making those rulings, this Court must continue to recognize that the allegations in the related cases cannot be forgotten. (E;g., see DE 242 and 293, p.5-6). Production of information in one case could provide a link in the chain of evidence used to prosecute Epstein for a crime or provide an indirect link to incriminating evidence in another case. Id. and infra. + +The Request for Production and the responses thereto are attached as Composite Exhibit "A". + +# I. The Requests For Production, Argument And Memorandum Of Law + +# a. Request Number 5 + +Request No. 5: Photos of the inside of your home located at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, Florida, that depict the room(s) where the massages took place (including massage table). + +Response: Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit without waiving my Fifth Amendment rights and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein, Case No. 80119, the Magistrate Judge found, "[lin 2008, Epstein entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") with the United States Attorney General's Office for the Federal Southern District of Florida ("USAO") and the State Attorney's + +Office for Palm Beach County. Under the terms of the NPA, any criminal prosecution against Epstein is deferred as long as he abides by the certain terms and conditions contained therein. If at any time the USAO's Office has reason to believe Epstein is in breach of the Agreement, it need only provide Epstein's counsel with notice of the breach and then move forward with Epstein's prosecution. Accordingly, the undersigned would agree with Epstein ... that the fact there exists a NPA does not mean that Epstein is free from future criminal prosecution, and that in fact, `the threat of prosecution is real, substantial and present.'" See August 4, 2009 Order (DE 242) and September 9, 2009 Omnibus Order (DE 293); and Manson v. United States 244 U.S. 362, 365 (1917). Moreover, as this court knows, the NPA only defers prosecution in the Southern District of Florida, not other districts. Therefore, Epstein is "confronted by a substantial and `real,' and not merely trifling or imaginary, hazard[] of incrimination" when it comes to Plaintiff's discovery requests. United States v. Anfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 128 (1980). + +The Fifth Amendment serves as a guarantee against testimonial compulsion and provides, in relevant part, that "[n]t) person...shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against himself." (DE 242, p.5); see also Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985) (citing Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973)). The privilege is accorded liberal construction in favor of the right and extends not only to answers that would support a criminal conviction, but extends also to those answers which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a crime. See Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951). Information is protected by the privilege not only if it would support a criminal conviction, but also in those instances where "the responses would merely `provide a lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate." See United States v. Neff, 315 F.2d 1235, + +1239(9th Cir.), cert denied, 447U.S. 925 (1980); Blau v. United States 340U.S. 159 (1950); SEC v Leach, 156F.Supp.2d 491, 494 (ED. PA. 2001). + +Moreover, the act of production itself may implicitly communicate statements and, for this reason, the Fifth Amendment privilege also encompasses the circumstances where the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena or production request has a compelled testimonial aspect. See United States v. Hubbell, 530U.S. 27, 35-36 (2000). Thus, where the existence or location of the requested documents are unknown, or where production would "implicitly authenticate" the requested documents (as requested by Plaintiff here), the act of producing responsive documents is considered testimonial and is protected by the Fifth Amendment. 5e.e In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 1F.3d 87, 93 (2nd Cir. 1993). + +Here, Plaintiffs overly broad request seeks photos of the inside of Epstein's home. Moreover, it seeks to compel Epstein into implicitly admitting that there were rooms within his house where "the massages took place" and into selecting such rooms and even the alleged massage table. Any compelled "production" by Epstein would violate his Fifth Amendment rights in that he is implicitly being asked to authenticate same i.e., given the nature of the request, Epstein's selection and production of photos would constitute compelled testimonial admissions that "the massages" took place in a given room on agiven table etc. . . . The requested information could potentially provide a`lead or clue' or alink in the chain of evidence having a tendency to incriminate Epstein and would threaten to invade his privilege against being required to produce and/or testify. Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232F.3d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir. 2000)(the "privilege" against self-incrimination does not depend upon the likelihood, but upon the possibility of prosecution and also covers those circumstances where the disclosures + +would not be directly incriminating, but could provide an indirect link to incriminating evidence). + +In Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein, the Court sustained Epstein's Fifth Amendment objections to interrogatories: asking Epstein to identify all employees who performed work inside his Palm Beach residence and all other employees who came to the residence, asking Epstein to identify any who gave or were asked to give him massages, requesting information regarding the identity of persons who provided transportation services, seeking a list of Epstein's employees' telephone numbers, asking Epstein to identify any persons or witnesses who have knowledge or are in possession of physical evidence pertaining to the events in question, seeking information related to alleged sexual abuse or misconduct on a minor, and seeking the facts on upon which Epstein relies to support pleading denials and affirmative defenses. See (DE 242). + +If the Fifth Amendment protects Epstein from disclosing the identity of any person who has knowledge or are in possession of physical evidence (i.e. photographs, videos, written statements, etc.) pertaining the alleged events in question, it follows that Epstein's production himself of photographs of the same or related subjects would also violate his Fifth Amendment rights. Stated differently, if Epstein can properly invoke his Fifth Amendment right to not identify a person who may have a photograph or physical evidence pertaining to the alleged events, how can Epstein be required to produce the requested photographs? He cannot. + +For these reasons, Epstein's justified concern with regard to answering the above request and the resulting waiver of his Fifth Amendment Privilege in this regard and/or providing selfincriminating information is substantial, real and not merely imaginative. Accordingly, based on the facts and circumstances of this case, and under applicable law, Defendant's accertion of the + +Page No. 6 + +protections afforded under the 5th, e h, and 14'h Amendments of the United States Constitution are required to be upheld. + +# b. Requests Numbers 7, 9 and 10 + +Request No. 7: All discovery information obtained by you or your attorneys as a result of the exchange of discovery in the State criminal case against you or the Federal investigation against you. + +Request No. 9: Any documents or other evidentiary materials provided to local, state, or federal law enforcement investigators or local, state or federal prosecutors investigating your sexual activities with minors. + +Request No. 10: All correspondence between you and your attorneys and state or federal law enforcement or prosecutors (includes, but not limited to, letters to and from the State Attorney's office or any agents thereof). + +Response to Request Numbers 7, 9 and 10: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Ha. Stat. Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege. + +As discussed in the supporting memorandum herein, it is well settled that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination also encompasses situations as here where the act of production itself involves a testimonial compulsion. Hubbell, supra. In responding to each request, Epstein would be compelled admit that such documents existed, admit that the documents were in his possession or control, and were authentic. In other words, the very act of production of the category of documents requested would implicitly communicate "statements of fact." Hubbell, supra; Hoffman, supra. The act of production might not only provide evidence + +to support a conviction, but also a link in the chain of evidence for prosecution. See supra. Such compulsion to produce is the same as being compelled to testify. The acts of Epstein in being required to produce the requested documents imply assertions of fact — admitting the documents exist, admitting the documents are in his possession or control, and admitting the documents are authentic. Again, in reading each of the production requests, it is clear that the very act of production of such documents could implicate Epstein of a crime. See supra, same argument on Sth Amendment applies. + +Moreover, the production of such discovery information may lead to the identity of witnesses that could testify against Epstein and those that may have knowledge or are in possession of evidence that could be used against Epstein. This court has already ruled that Epstein can properly invoke his Fifth Amendment right to aq identify a person who may have a photograph or physical evidence pertaining to the alleged events. (DE 242). Moroever, the requested information could encompass documents identifying Epstein's whereabouts, schedules, calendars etc . . . Requiring Epstein to provide responses would in essence be compelling him to provide assertions of fact that could incriminate him under 18 U.S.C. §2422(b) and 18 U.S.C. §2423(b) and other federal violations discussed, in camera, at DE 282 and 283. As stated infra, the court has already ruled on this issue. See DE 242 and 293. Epstein should not be required to produce information in any State or Federal Agencies' possession, especially when doing so would violate his constitutional rights. + +Notably, this court has already ruled on a similar request in 80119 whereby the Plaintiffs, Jane Doe 2-7, asked the following: + +Request No. I. The list provided to you by the U.S. Attorney of individuals whom the U.S. Attorney was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an offense by Mr. Epstein enumerated in 18 U.S.C. §2255. + +> Request No. 2. All documents referring or relating to the United States' agreement with Defendant to defer federal prosecution subject to certain conditions, including without limitation, the operative agreement between Defendant and the United States and all amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +> Request No. 3. All documents referring or relating to Defendant's agreement with the State of Florida on his plea of guilty to violations of Florida Criminal Statutes, including without limitation, the operative plea agreement and any amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +> Request No.4. All documents obtained in discovery or investigation relating to either the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal Case, including without limitation, documents obtained from any federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, the State Attorney's office and the United States Attorney's office. + +The court specifically held at p.17 of its Order at DE 242 that "[defendant's Motion as it relates to Production request number(s) 1, 2, 3, 4. . . is [granted]. The very act of producing documents in response to these requests is testimonial in nature, in that by production, Epstein would be implicitly communicating 'statements of fact,' to which the fifth Amendment privilege may be validly asserted . Hubbell, 530 U.S. at 35-36. Not only do the subject requests involve 'statements of fact,' given the nature of the allegations against Epstein, they could also serve as links in the chain of evidence needed for prosecution. As such, Epstein's fifth Amendment Privilege assertion as it relates to these requests is sustained." That same ruling should apply to the above requests. + +## The Requests Seek Attorney-Client And Work-Product Privileged Material And Rules 408 And 410, Fed. Evid. And \$90.410, Fla. Stat., Preclude Production of the Material + +Next, a reading of the particular discovery requests reveals that they encompass attorneyclient and work-product privileged material. As this court has already ruled (DE 242), Epstein cannot be compelled to create a privilege log because that would be tantamount to compelled testimony to which Defendant's constitutional protections apply. Any exchange of information with federal authorities was done in the context of discussions that are in essence immunized under the provisions of FRE 410 in order to encourage the resolution of pending investigations + +without trials. FRE 410(4) is particularly directed to communications in matters which, like Epstein's, did not result in a plea of guilty to any federal charge. Fla. Stat. §90.410 provides parallel protections in state criminal matters. To the extent Epstein's counsel provided the authorities with any information it cannot, by the terms of that rule, be used in subsequent litigation as same is work-product. Likewise, the information received from the federal authorities, if any, as part of a give and take, is also subject to FRE 410. Finally, the purposes of FRE 408 provide further protection for both state and federal interchanges of information. If Epstein is compelled to produce this information, not only will it violate his Fifth Amendment privilege, but it will also result in an open-ended waiver of his attorney-client and work-product privileges. + +Additionally, Request Numbers 7, 9 and 10 all pertain to the State Criminal Proceeding and the Federal Investigation by the USAO. Therefore, the requests concern the negotiation(s) and eventual entering into of aPlea and the negotiation(s) and eventual entering into the NPA. Request Numbers 9 and 10 are so broad that production would encompass am information, assuming it exists, provided by Epstein's attorneys to local, state or federal prosecutors in the Southern District and/or outside of the Southern District in connection with Epstein's alleged sexual activities. Likewise, all the requests, as worded, seek production of information in connection with "compromise negotiations." Federal Evidence Rules 408 and 410 and Florida Statute §90.410 prevent the production of such material. The full text of Federal Evidence Rules 408and 410, and Florida Statute §90.410 is found at footnote 1 and is incorporated herein. + +Relevancy and Its Limits + +Clearly, discovery in criminal cases is not congruent with discovery in civil cases. Here, the information requested involves negotiations with the State and the USAO and their investigation. + +If the USAO cannot be compelled to release its investigation(s) and related work-product, how + +(a) Prohibited uses.--Evidence of the following is not admissible on behalf of any party, when offered to prove liability for, invalidity of, or amount of a claim that was disputed as to validity or amount, or to impeach through a prior inconsistent statement or contradiction: + +(1) furnishing or offering or promising to furnish--or accepting or offering or promising to accept--a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise the claim; and + +(2) conduct or statements made in compromise negotiations regarding the claim, except when offered in a criminal case and the negotiations related to a claim by a public office or agency in the exercise of regulatory, investigative, or enforcement authority. + +(b) Permitted uses.--This rule does not require exclusion if the evidence is offered for purposes not prohibited by subdivision (a). Examples of permissible purposes include proving a witness's bias or prejudice; negating a contention of undue delay; and proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution. + +#### CREDIT(S) + +(Pub.L. 93.595, § I, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1933; Apr. 12, 2006, eff. Dec. 1, 2006). + +# Rule 410. Inadmissibility of Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements + +Except as otherwise provided in this rule, evidence of the following is not, in any civil or criminal proceeding, admissible against the defendant who made the plea or was a participant in the plea discussions: + +(I) a plea of guilty which was later withdrawn; + +(2) a plea of nolo contendere; + +(3) any statement made in the course of any proceedings under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure or comparable state procedure regarding either of the foregoing pleas; or + +(4) any statement made in the course of plea discussions with an attorney for the prosecuting authority which do not result in a plea of guilty or which result in a plea of guilty later withdrawn. + +However, such a statement is admissible (i) in any proceeding wherein another statement made in the course of the same plea or plea discussions has been introduced and the statement ought in fairness be considered contemporaneously with it, or (ii) in a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement if the statement was made by the defendant under oath, on the record and in the presence of counsel. + +#### Florida Evidence Code + +# 90.410. Offer to plead guilty; nolo contendere; withdrawn pleas of guilty + +Evidence of a plea of guilty, later withdrawn; a plea of nob contendere; or an offer to plead guilty or nolo contendere to the crime charged or any other crime is inadmissible in any civil or criminal proceeding. Evidence of statements made in connection with any of the pleas or offers is inadmissible, except when such statements are offered in a prosecution under chapter 837. + +can Epstein be compelled to disclose same in violation of his constitutional rights and his attorney-client and work-product privileges? He cannot. The protections afforded by these evidentiary rules provide that such documents are not subject to discovery. + +Moreover, any information exchanged by Epstein's attorneys and the State was exchanged pursuant to Fla.R.Crim.P. §3.220 and is therefore protected under that Rule. Further, the information is "work-product" information. See id. and 14B Fla. Jur.2d Criminal Law §1412. + +# Third Party Privacy Rights + +Here, the requests also seek information that may violate others third-party privacy rights. As noted by the United States Supreme Court in Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438, 454, 92 S.Ct. 1029, 1038, at fn. 10 (1972): + +In Stanley, 394 U.S., at 564, 89 S.Ct., at 1247, the Court stated:'(A)Iso fundamental is the right to be free, except in very limited circumstances, from unwanted governmental intrusions into one's privacy." The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man's spiritual nature, of his feelings and of his intellect. They knew that only a part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions, and their sensations. They conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone-the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized man.' [Citations omitted]. + +The fundamental right of privacy is not only guaranteed under by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, but also under the Constitution of the State of Florida, Art. I, Sect. 23. As summarized by the Florida Supreme Court in Shaktman v. State, 553 So.2d 148, 150-51 (Fla. 1989): + +The right of privacy, assured to Florida's citizens, demands that individuals be free from uninvited observation of or interference in those aspects of their lives which fall within the ambit of this zone of privacy unless the intrusion is warranted by the necessity of a compelling state interest. In an opinion which predated the adoption of section 23, the First District aptly characterized the nature of this right. + +> Afundamental aspect of personhood's integrity is the power to control what we shall reveal about our intimate selves, to whom, and for what purpose. + +> Bryon. Hades& Schaffer. Reid & Assocs.. Inc. v. State ex rel, Schellenberg, 360 So.2d 83, 92 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), quashed and remanded on other grounds, 379 So.2d 633 (Ha.1980). Because this power is exercised in varying degrees by differing individuals, the parameters of an individual's privacy can be dictated only by that individual. The central concern is the inviolability of one's own thought, person, and personal action. The inviolability of that right assures its preeminence over "majoritarian sentiment" and thus cannot be universally defined by consensus. + +(Emphasis added). + +Clearly, the nature of the questions and production requests identified would require Epstein to produce information that may identify third parties (that could also testify against him) and necessarily thwart such individuals' rights to assert their constitutional right of privacy as guaranteed under the United States and Florida Constitutions. See generally Eisenstadt v. Baird, supra at 454-455 (the right encompasses privacy in one's sexual matters and is not limited to the marital relationship). + +Accordingly, based on the facts and circumstances of this case, and under applicable law, Defendant's assertion of the protections afforded under the 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments of the United States Constitution are required to be upheld. + +# c. Requests Numbers 8, 11, 12, 14 and 15 + +Request No. 8: All financial documents evidencing asset transfers from 2005to the present for you personally or any company or corporation owned by you. + +Request No. 11: Any and all documents reflecting your current net worth. + +Request No. 12: present. Personal tax returns for all years from 2002 through the + +Request No. 14: Asworn statement of your net worth (including adetailed financial statement depicting all current assets and liabilities). + +Page No. 13 + +Request No. 15: All financial statements or affidavits produced by you for any reason, to any person, company, entity or corporation since 2005. + +Response to Request Numbers : Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit without waiving my Fifth Amendment constitutional rightsand I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution; overly broad. + +As set forth in more detail in DE 282 and 283, which were provided to the court in camera, Epstein cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to his financial history and condition without waiving his Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. The requests are unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seek information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. See supra for argument. + +Responding to the above financial requests would require Epstein to identify information regarding matters as set forth in more detail in DE 282 and 283, which were provided to the Court in camera. Producing the specified information would result in testimonial disclosures that would communicate statements of fact. Again, the information sought relates to potential federal claims of violations. See DE 282 and 283, in camera. Production would therefore constitute a testimonial admission of the genuineness, the existence, and Epstein's control of such records, + +and thus presents areal and substantial danger of self-incrimination in this case, in other related cases and as well in areas that could result in criminal prosecution. See generally Hoffman v United States, 341U.S. 479, 486 (1951) and United States v. Hubbell, 530U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000). + +The Fifth Amendment is asafe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This request, if answered, may result in compelled production and/or testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other related inquiries would have the potential to provide alink in achain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +Accordingly, any compelled testimony that provides a"lead or clue to a source of evidence of such [a] crime" is protected by Fifth Amendment. SEC v Leach, 156F.Supp.2d 491, 494(E.D. PA. 2001). See supra. Questions seeking "testimony" regarding names of witnesses, leads to phone or travel records, or financial records that would provide leads to tax or money laundering or unlicensed money transmittal investigations are protected. See also Hoffman v United States, 341U.S. 479, 486 (1951)("the right against self-incrimination may be invoked if the answer would furnish alink in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute for a crime"). + +In addition to the above argument, the specific information requested in request number 12as to personal tax returns also seeks information that is confidential and protected by federal law, 26 U.S.C. §6103. + +To the extent Plaintiff claims she needs the requested information concerning asset transfers based on her unsupported presumption that Epstein is fraudulently transferring assets, same is premature and unsupported by the law for the reasons set forth in Epstein's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets (DE 198). + +#### d. Requests Numbers 13 and 16 + +Request No. 13: Aphotocopy of your passport, including any supplemental pages reflecting travel to locations outside the 50 United States between 2002 and 2008, including any documents or records regarding plane tickets, hotel receipts, or transportation arrangements. + +Response: Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit without risking waiver of my Fifth Amendment rights and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional protections and privileges, the scope of information is so overbroad that it seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence; compiling such information over a six year period would be unduly burdensome and time consuming. + +Request No. 16: Alexander. All medical records of Defendant Epstein from Dr. Stephan + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my + +> constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +As to Request Number 13, Defendant has already provided this court with sufficient argument at DE 282 and DE 283 detailing why the production of information showing Epstein's whereabouts could provide a link in the chain of evidence regarding: (a) Epstein's air travel within the United States and Foreign Territories; (b) Epstein's communications with others relating to or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries; and (c) Epstein's personal calendars and schedules. Given that the essential proof of an allegation of 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) would include travel records, schedules regarding trips and locations, flight records, calendars, and transportation arrangements, the court found that Epstein had made a more particularized showing because producing such information "could reveal the availability to him and/or use by him of interstate facilities and thus would constitute a link in the chain of evidence that could potentially expose [Epstein) to the dangers of self incrimination." (DE 293, p.6) + +Here, Plaintiff's request for Epstein's passport "reflecting travel to locations outside the 50 United States between 2002 and 2008, including any documents or records regarding plane tickets, hotel receipts, or transportation arrangements" is no different from the requests this Court has already ruled upon and sustained Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege in response thereto. (DE 292). In summary, this court reasoned that: + +"[i]n this and the other civil actions, Plaintiff's allege that Epstein violated certain federal and state criminal statutes in an attempt to make claims against Epstein ranging from sexual battery to intentional infliction of emotional distress. The lynchpin for the exercise of federal criminal jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. §2422(b), which figures in some of the complaints filed, is `the use of any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce' and the analogous essential element of 18 U.S.C. §2423(b), which also figures in some of the Complaints, is `travel[s] in interstate commerce or travels into the United States or . . . travels in foreign commerce.' Accordingly, requiring Epstein to provide responses. . .would in + +> essence be compelling him to provide assertions of fact, thereby admitting that such documents existed and further admitting that the documents in his possession or control were authentic. + +Based upon the arguments set forth in DE 283 (which is incorporated herein), this Court sustained Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege. That same ruling should apply here as Jane Doe's request is identical to the requests already ruled on by this court. (DE 293). + +As to Plaintiff's request for Epstein's medical records, Dr. Stephen Alexander was hired as an expert consultant by Epstein's attorneys in the underlying criminal matter. Therefore, any information provided to Dr. Stephen Alexander or any information provided by the experts to Epstein's attorneys is protected by the attorney-work product and attorney-client privileges, Fla.R.Civ.P.1.280, 19 Fla. Jur.2d, Discovery and Depositions, §89, and Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(3). + +19A Fla. Jur.2d, Discovery and Depositions, §89, provides: + +[a] party may discover facts known or opinions held by an expert who has been retained or specially employed by another party in anticipation of litigation or preparation for trial and who is not expected to be called as awitness at trial, only as provided in...Rule of Civil Procedure 11.360 (b)(1)1, governing the report of an examining physician" !which is not applicable in the instant matted, "or upon ashowing of exceptional circumstances under which it is impracticable for the party seeking discovery to obtain facts or opinions on the same subject by other means. The statutory protection has been extended both to the facts known or opinions held by non-witness experts retained or specially employed by a party in anticipation of litigation and to their identities. Thus, absent a showing of exceptional circumstances, a litigant is not required to disclose the names and specialties of experts retained but not expected to testify at trial. Accordingly, a discovery order ordering adefendant to disclose the names of any persons who have examined, evaluated, or reviewed the defendant's records improperly compels the defendant to divulge the names of experts consulted for trial but not intended to be called to testify at trial where such information is protected by the work-product privilege and where the state makes no showing of exceptional circumstances. + +Id.; see also Carrero v. Homes. Inc. 667 So. 2d 1011 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Myron By and Through Brock v. Doctors General, Ltd., 573 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 4th DCA1990); see also 14B Fla.Jur.2d , Criminal Law §1412. + +Page No. 18 + +In addition to the foregoing privileges, in the Court's prior order (DE 242), it found that Epstein's Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ("HIPAA") objections were "unfounded as the requests [i.e., the interrogatory] seek only the identification of Epstein's healthcare providers." Here, however, a request for production is at issue, not an interrogatory. Therefore, Epstein's HIPAA rights should be upheld. a v. Woodford, 2007 WL 309485 (E.D. Cal. 2007), (p. 9)(HIPPA institutes procedural safeguards to protect the privacy of an individual's medical information and history). In the context of HIPAA, Courts have recognized three methods of health care discovery (assuming it's relevant) in civil litigation: (1) Obtaining a patient authorization that complies with the requirements and criteria, tailored to the specific case, of HIPAA as set forth in 45 C.F.R. §164.508; (2) Court Order, which also complies with the requirements of HIPAA ensuring that the privacy and confidentiality of the information is protected; and (3) Subpoena or discovery request, which again comply with the strictures of HIPAA, including that the person whose records are being sought has been given proper notice. Ss& Handbook of Federal Civil Discovery And Disclosure (2d Edition), Chap. 18, Sect. A - Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), §18.3 — Discovery of health care information in civil litigation; and Graham v. Dacheikh, 991 So.2d 932, at fn. 3 (2d DCA Fla. 2008)("Even under HIPAA, ..., if the records are produced during normal discovery they are typically produced in a manner that restricts the persons who may access the documents and requires their return at the end of the litigation. See 45 C.F.R. §164.512(e)."). + +Federal Rule of Evidence 401 provides that - "'Relevant evidence" means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence." Pursuant to Rule 26(b)(1), the scope of discovery is as follows — + +Unless otherwise limited by court order, the scope of discovery is as follows: Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense--including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any documents or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons who know of any discoverable matter. For good cause, the court may order discovery of any matter relevant to the subject matter involved in the action. Relevant information need not be admissible at the trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. All discovery is subject to the limitations imposed by Rule 26(bX2XC). + +Plaintiff's requests is further barred by under Fed. Evid. Rule 501 and §90.503, Fla.R.Evid. Rule 501 provides — + +Except as otherwise required by the Constitution of the United States or provided by Act of Congress or in rules prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority, the privilege of a witness, person, government, State, or political subdivision thereof shall be governed by the principles of the common law as they may be interpreted by the courts of the United States in the light of reason and experience. However, in civil actions and proceedings. with respect to an element of a claim or defense as to which State law supplies the rule of decision, the privilege of a witness, person. government, State, or political subdivision thereof shall be determined in accordance with State law. + +(Emphasis added). + +Plaintiff alleges diversity jurisdiction, and thus, state law of Florida controls application of the privilege. Plaintiff claims - Count —"Sexual Battery Upon a Minor," Count II — "Cause of Action Pursuant to 18 USC §2255," Count III — "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress," Count IV — "Civil Remedy for Criminal Practices" and Count VI — "Cause of Action Pursuant to Florida Statute 796.09 Against Defendant Jeffity Epstein". Erie R.Co. v. Tompkins, 58 S.Q. 817 (1938). Accordingly, the privileges recognized under state law apply to this action under Rule 501. See, es., 1550 Brickell Associates v. O.B.E. Ins. Co. 253 F.R.D. 697, 699 (S.D. Fla. 2008)("Attorney-client privilege is governed by state law in diversity actions."). + +§90.503(2), Fla. Stat., provides — + +(2) A patient has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent any other person from disclosing, confidential communications or records made for the purpose of diagnosis or treatment of the patient's mental or emotional condition, including alcoholism and other drug addiction, between the patient and the psychotherapist, or persons who are participating in the diagnosis or treatment under the direction of the psychotherapist. This privilege includes any diagnosis made, and advice given, by the psychotherapist in the course of that relationship. + +As summarized in C.L. v. Judd, 993 So.2d 991, 995 (2d DCA Ha. 2007): + +Under the psychotherapist-patient privilege, a patient has a privilege to refuse to disclose confidential information or records made for the purpose of diagnosis or treatment of mental conditions, including any diagnoses made by the psychotherapist. § 90.503(2), Fla. Stat. (2005); see Pauker v. Olson, 834 So.2d 198, 200 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). The psychotherapist-patient privilege does not apply: (1) during involuntary commitment proceedings, (2) when there is a court-ordered mental examination, or (3) when the patient raises and relies on the issue of his or her mental condition in litigation as part of any claim or defense. § 90.503(4); Roberson, 884 So.2d at 980; State v. Famiglietti, 817 So.2d 901, 903 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). The privilege does not allow the invasion of a patient's privileged communications with his or her psychotherapist. Roberson, 884 So.2d at 979. + +Significantly, Epstein has not placed his medical history at issue. In Breeden v. , 859 So. 2d 1276 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003), the court quashed an order compelling production of mental health records in a medical malpractice suit involving a failed ankle surgery finding that patient's mental health was irrelevant to claims asserted. See also Pusateri v. Fernandez, 707 So. 2d 892, 893 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (quashing order directing physicians to produce patient's medical record as the records were not relevant to any pending claim or defense nor were reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence); Fla. Dept. of Corrections v. Abril, 969 So. 2d 201, 205-06 (Fla. 2007) (noting that "Florida has a long tradition of recognizing the privacy interests of patients in confidential medical records."); and State v. Cashner 819 So. 2d 227, 229 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (holding that since "the compelled disclosure of a patient's medical records encroaches upon a patient's right to privacy, the state must demonstrate it has a compelling interest in the information contained in those records."). Plaintiff must also show + +that the requested information is relevant to the disputed issues of the underlying action. ate Young Circle Garage, LLC. v. Koppel, 916 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); see also Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States v. Daisy Worldwide, Inc., 702 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). Plaintiff has failed to meet this burden and, in doing so, has also failed to show any substantial need for the documents + +If this court orders production of the requested information (which it should not), an in camera inspection should be had to determine, as to each document, whether Fla. Stat. §39.204 is applicable. See DE 242, p.15; Carson v. a 466 So.2d 1188, 1192 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); and Doherty v. John Doe No. 22, 957 So.2d 1267 (411' DCA 2007). A reading of these cases clearly establishes that Fla. Stat. §39.204 does not provide Plaintiff with a carte blanche access to Defendant's medical history, especially those of non-testifying consulting experts. + +Wherefore, Epstein respectfully requests that this Court issue and order: + +- a. finding that the danger Epstein faces by being forced to respond to the above requests is substantial and real, and not merely trifling or imaginary; +- b. sustaining Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege and other delineated constitutional privileges as it relates to the above requests and denying Plaintiff's Motion in that regard; and + - c. for such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +Respect ?'emitted, + +B + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this + +day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this \_\_\_ day of October, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Page No. 23 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. a Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isxAsearcylaw.com + +iph@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 + +Isidro M. sp. Esq. + +=Law irm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberg@nodhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. + +09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesq@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747330/EFTA02747330.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747330/EFTA02747330.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bfee979f4221ce56602497dcdba212899b0b8584 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747330/EFTA02747330.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1219 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747330.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 23, + "chars": 49826, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.49, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 414.7564392089844, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 414.7564392089844, + 99.363037109375 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 99.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION \nTO PLAINTIFF'S, JANE DOE, MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE TO \nPLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION IDE 971, WITH INCORPORATED \nMEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 108.32399999999998, + 331.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 512.0829467773438, + 331.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 512.0829467773438, + 384.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 108.32399999999998, + 384.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Procedural Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 231.948, + 479.52 + ], + [ + 386.7258605957031, + 479.52 + ], + [ + 386.7258605957031, + 493.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 231.948, + 493.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. The Requests For Production, Argument And Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 122.4, + 380.7 + ], + [ + 498.18060302734375, + 380.7 + ], + [ + 498.18060302734375, + 398.60302734375 + ], + [ + 122.4, + 398.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. Request Number 5", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.8, + 409.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 376.4938049316406, + 409.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 376.4938049316406, + 424.85302734375 + ], + [ + 244.8, + 424.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "b. Requests Numbers 7, 9 and 10", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 216.036, + 132.84 + ], + [ + 402.6606750488281, + 132.84 + ], + [ + 402.6606750488281, + 150.35302734375 + ], + [ + 216.036, + 150.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Requests Seek Attorney-Client And Work-Product Privileged Material And Rules 408 \nAnd 410, Fed. Evid. And $90.410, Fla. Stat., Preclude Production of the Material", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.5, + 517.59 + ], + [ + 509.748291015625, + 517.59 + ], + [ + 509.748291015625, + 547.3205718994141 + ], + [ + 76.5, + 547.3205718994141 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CREDIT(S)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.38, + 353.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 128.77029418945312, + 353.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 128.77029418945312, + 367.08758544921875 + ], + [ + 70.38, + 367.08758544921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 410. Inadmissibility of Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.38, + 386.37 + ], + [ + 402.5423583984375, + 386.37 + ], + [ + 402.5423583984375, + 401.96759033203125 + ], + [ + 70.38, + 401.96759033203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Florida Evidence Code", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.38, + 618.03 + ], + [ + 172.28089904785156, + 618.03 + ], + [ + 172.28089904785156, + 632.2075958251953 + ], + [ + 70.38, + 632.2075958251953 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "90.410. Offer to plead guilty; nolo contendere; withdrawn pleas of guilty", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 70.38, + 628.5600000000001 + ], + [ + 387.9298095703125, + 628.5600000000001 + ], + [ + 387.9298095703125, + 643.8376007080078 + ], + [ + 70.38, + 643.8376007080078 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Third Party Privacy Rights", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 245.43 + ], + [ + 387.85711669921875, + 245.43 + ], + [ + 387.85711669921875, + 261.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 261.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "c. Requests Numbers 8, 11, 12, 14 and 15", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 520.83 + ], + [ + 430.536865234375, + 520.83 + ], + [ + 430.536865234375, + 535.9982299804688 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 535.9982299804688 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "d. Requests Numbers 13 and 16", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 212.97599999999997, + 217.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 402.08400000000006, + 217.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 402.08400000000006, + 231.1549072265625 + ], + [ + 212.97599999999997, + 231.1549072265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 655.29 + ], + [ + 367.20050048828125, + 655.29 + ], + [ + 367.20050048828125, + 670.1030120849609 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 670.1030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 393.51599999999996, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 393.51599999999996, + 405.81000000000006 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 405.81000000000006 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 74 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 395 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 93 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 367 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 77 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 403 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 436 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 382 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 443 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 514 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 78 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 75 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 135 + ], + [ + "Line", + 67 + ], + [ + "Text", + 63 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747330" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747353/EFTA02747353.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747353/EFTA02747353.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..babc7fef7ebcd929bfd7eca5ba2e4d624752d970 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747353/EFTA02747353.md @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@ +From: Sent: To: Subject: cmecfautosender@flsd.uscourts.gov Thursday, September 10, 2009 8:36 AM flsd\_cmecf notice©fisd.uscourts.gov Activity in Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Doe v. Epstein Order + +This is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system. Please DO NOT RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended.\*\*•NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS••\* Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not apply. U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida + +Notice of Electronic Filing The following transaction was entered on 9/10/2009 8:35 AM EDT and filed on 9/9/2009 + +Case Name: Doe v. Epstein Case Number: 9:08-cv-80119 https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?309403 + +Filer: + +Document Number: 293 Copy the URL address from the line below into the location bar of your Web browser to view the document: Document: https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/doc1/05107019280?magic\_num=88037879 4de\_seq\_numa9124caseid.309403 + +Docket Text: OMNIBUS ORDER GRANTING [283] Supplement, filed by Jeffrey Epstein, GRANTING (282] Appeal of Magistrate Judge Decision to District Court filed by Jeffrey Epstein. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linnea R. on 9/9/2009. (sa) 9:08-cv-80119 Notice has been electronically mailed to: Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Ann C. Villafana + +James bedwardsOrra-law.com, bwilliamson@rra-law.com, radlerWrra-law.com, sstirlingerra-law.com, wbergerOrra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia0bellsouth.net + +Jack Alan Goldberger nalanis@agwpa.com jagesq@bellsouth.net, + +Jack clw@searcylaw.com, kmc@searcylaw.com, vat@searcylaw.com jph@searcylaw.com, s. slater@searcylaw.com, sas@searcylaw.com, + +Jeffrey Marc Herman jhermanWhennanlaw.corn + +![](_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg) + +Paul G. Cassell + +Richard Horace Willits reelrhwehotmail.com + +cassellpelaw.utah.edu + +lawyerwillitseaol.com, + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsbergepodhurst.com, + +amannepodhurst.com, bertpattonepodhurst.com, mestrada@podhurst.com + +Robert Deweese Critton , Jr rcritebc1claw.com, + +bobbieftciclaw.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssmesexabuseattorney.com, + +jarbouresexabuseattorney.com, lriveraesexabuseattorney.com + +9:08-cv-80119 Notice has not been delivered electronically to those listed below and will be provided by other means. For further assistance, please contact our Help Desk at 1-888-318-2260.: + +=MI G. Weinberg 20 Park Plaza Boston, • 02116 + +The following document(s) are associated with this transaction: + +Document description: Main Document + +Original filename: n/a + +Electronic document Stamp: + +(STAMP dcecfStamp\_ID=1105629215 (Date=9/10/2009) (FileNumber=6736378-0] + +(642743c33dfb971adb73cf00ala3abe8c18bd140ddafSd472216591edfelb0b0459e4cdd9da190bcf837d5d3c 9c72a1dfd798264b8c71ceb154087d88ad9a379]] \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747353/EFTA02747353.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747353/EFTA02747353.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4b791b0247c5bcda3151b2051e142b5963ad9ecd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747353/EFTA02747353.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,126 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747353.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 3142, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.18, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Stuart Mermelstein", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 33.470001220703125, + 49.41 + ], + [ + 147.441162109375, + 49.41 + ], + [ + 147.441162109375, + 63.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 33.470001220703125, + 63.80352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 113 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747353" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747353/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747353/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..188b65e487bb37ea66385fb41f8632c4a3f1e419 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747353/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:49417664cb7f21786fc5f16127e9661a290be3757dc7e031aca014a5d8562703 +size 5935 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747355/EFTA02747355.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747355/EFTA02747355.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..81b6f2fdfefdd7efd13ef6ac6eba29533066370b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747355/EFTA02747355.md @@ -0,0 +1,93 @@ +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +# PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE APPEAL OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S ORDER AS UNTIMELY, RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE, AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §1927 + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does No. 2-8 ("Plaintiffs"), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby file this Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Strike Appeal of Magistrate Judge's Order as Untimely, Response to Order to Show Cause, and Request for Sanctions Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927, and state as follows: + +### I. Introduction and Summary + +Plaintiffs filed their appeal of the Magistrate Judge's Order (DE 293) on September 24, 2009. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") incorrectly contends that this appeal was untimely filed based on two flawed assertions, one of fact and one of law: + +Incorrect Fact. Defendant asserts that the Magistrate Judge's Order was entered on September 9, 2009. According to Defendant, Plaintiffs failed to file their Local Mag. R. 4 appeal within ten (10) days, as required by that Rule, because the September 24, 2009 filing of the appeal was II business days (excluding Saturdays and Sundays), and 15 calendar days, after entry of the Order. + +Incorrect Law. According to Defendant, the calculation of the ten day period for appeal provided by Local Mag. R. 4 includes Saturdays and Sundays. The Plaintiffs' appeal of the Magistrate Judge's Order becomes untimely by including those days in the calculation of time. + +Both of these assertions are plainly and obviously wrong. Plaintiffs' appeal of the Magistrate's Order was timely for the following reasons: + +Correct Fact. The Magistrate's Order may have been signed on September 9, 2009, but it was undeniably entered and served on September 10, 2009. + +Correct Law. In calculating the ten day period for appeal, Saturdays and Sundays are excluded. The date the appeal was filed, September 24, 2009, is the tenth day after the Magistrates Judge's Order was entered and served. + +Local Mag. R. 4 expressly provides that an appeal shall be filed "within ten days of being served with the Magistrate Judge's Order. . ."I (Emphasis supplied). Rule 6(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states, plainly and clearly, that in computing the time period under any local rule, intermediate Saturdays, Sunday and legal holidays are excluded when the prescribed period is less than 11 days, as it is here. + +Defendant's assertion that the Plaintiffs' appeal is untimely filed is, therefore, patently frivolous. Epstein's counsel must know that the Magistrate's Order was entered + +&#x27; This language mirrors that of 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(l)(c), which provides that a party shall have ten days after service of a magistrate's order to file objections. + +and served on September 10, 2009. Epstein's counsel would have received from the Court an email of the Order on that date. Printed on top of page one of the copy of the Order served on counsel is "Document 293 . . . Entered on FLSD Docket 09/10/200r.2 Yet, inexplicably, Epstein's counsel states in his Motion to Strike, "[o]n September 9, 2009, the Magistrate Judge entered her Order on Defendant's Motion/Appeal and Supplemental Brief (DE 292)."3 (Motion to Strike (DE 334),12). + +Epstein's counsel, in his Motion to Strike, compounds the error of his misstatement of fact by egregiously misstating the law. The Motion to Strike incorrectly asserts that weekends and holidays are included in the ten day calculation, never once even mentioning the contrary provision of Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a). A practitioner in federal court should know that Fed.R.Civ.P. 6 is the first place to look in calculating a time period provided under the rules of court. As discussed below, Epstein's Motion to Strike is unreasonable and vexatious, and has unnecessarily multiplied the proceedings in this action. Sanctions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1927 are therefore warranted against Epstein and his counsel. + +2A copy of the email received from the Court by Plaintiffs' counsel, attached hereto as Exhibit "A", plainly shows that the Magistrate's Order was entered and served on September 10, 2009. + +3 Defendant incorrectly identifies the docket entry no. as 292. The Magistrate's Order is in fact docket entry no. 293. + +### Discussion + +# I. PLAINTIFFS' APPEAL OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S ORDER IS TIMELY + +Local Mag. J. R. 4 provides in relevant part as follows: + +Any party may appeal from a Magistrate Judge's order determining a motion or matter under subsection 1(c) of these rules, supra, within ten days after being served with the Magistrate Judge's order, unless a different time is prescribed by the Magistrate Judge or District Judge. (Emphasis supplied). + +This ten day time period after service must be read in conjunction with Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a) in computing the time for appeal: + +> The following rules apply in computing any time period specified in these rules or in any local rule, court order, or statute: + +(2) Exclusions from Brief Periods. Exclude intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays when the period is less than 11 days. + +As discussed above, there should be no dispute that the Magistrate Judge's Order was served on September 10, 2009. Calculating ten days from that date, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, the due date was September 24, 2009. By filing on that date, Plaintiffs' appeal is timely.4 See Ad Vance Coating Technology. Inc. v. + +Nothing in Epstein's Motion to Strike indicates a reasonable argument to the contrary. Defendant notes that S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1 does not apply to action in response to court orders. Plaintiffs, however, do not rely on Local Rule 7.1. Rather, Plaintiffs rely on Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a), which extends well beyond motions to encompass any time period for a party to act under local rule, court order or statute. Epstein's Motion fails to discuss or even mention Rule 6(a). The only case authority cited by Defendant is an unpublished opinion, Cornelius v. Home Comings Financial Network. Inc., 293 Fed. Appx. 723, 2008 WL 4230197 (1 I th Cir. 2008). In Cornelius the Court did not address the issue of the calculation of the ten day appeal period under the Rules. Rather, the Court only found + +LEP Chemical Ltd., 142 F.R.D. 91, 94 (S.D.N.Y. 1991) (holding that party's filing of objections to magistrate's order was timely, noting that "the court must take into consideration" the exclusion of Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays under Fed.R.Civ.P. 6 in computing the time to appeal). + +Moreover, it would appear that Plaintiffs' appeal, if anything, was early under the Rules, when one factors in service of the Magistrate's Order by electronic means. Rule 6(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides three (3) additional days when action is required after service, as follows: + +> When a party may or must act within a specified time after service and service is made under Rule 5(bX2)(C), (D), (E), or (F), 3 days are added after the period would otherwise expire under Rule 6(a). + +Local Mag. J. R. 4, like 28 U.S.C. §636(b), expressly ties the ten day appeal period to service of the order. In this regard, it appears that the drafters of Local Mag. J. R. 4 and 28 U.S.C. §636(b), by referring to service instead of entry of a magistrate's order as triggering the ten day period, intended that Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(d) apply. In this case, therefore, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 5(bX2)(E) and 6(d), three additional days are added after the prescribed period would otherwise expire to appeal, given that service was by electronic means. See also S.D. Fla. CM/ECF R. 3(K)(4) (noting that Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(d) (formerly 6(e)) applies to service by electronic means). Plaintiffs therefore in fact had until Monday, September 29, 2009 to file their appeal. Their filing on September 24, 2009 is unquestionably timely. + +that objections filed 21 and 36 days after the magistrate judge's order were "well after the deadline." Id. at 728. It provides no authority, one way or the other, on the issue of whether intermediate Saturdays and Sundays are included in calculating the time to file an appeal of a magistrate's order. + +# II. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN AND HIS COUNSEL SHOULD BE SANCTIONED UNDER 28 U.S.C. §1927 FOR FILING A FRIVOLOUS MOTION TO STRIKES + +Attorneys practicing in the federal courts of this District are expected to know, among other things, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules.6 The calculation of time periods under these Rules is objective and straightforward — except in extraordinary circumstances, it should not be the subject of motion practice. In this case, no extraordinary circumstances are present. The calculation of the time to appeal the Magistrate's Order under Fed.R.Civ.P. 6 is simple and should not be a matter of controversy. It is obvious under the plain meaning and application of Local Mag. R. 4 and Fed.R.Civ.P. 6 that Plaintiffs' appeal of the Magistrate's Order is timely. + +In arguing to the contrary, Epstein's counsel misstates a critical fact - the date of service and entry of the Magistrate's Order - which is a readily ascertainable matter of public record, and should have been apparent from the Court's email to all counsel in the case. Epstein's counsel further misstates the law by failing to recognize the application of Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a). As a result, the proceedings have been multiplied and valuable time + +s Plaintiffs' counsel is aware that the Order to Show Cause issued by this Court (DE 335) states that Plaintiffs' response shall be limited to providing the Court with authority to support the Plaintiffs' position that the appeal is timely filed. Plaintiffs understand this to mean that the Court does not want to hear argument on the merits of the appeal until such time as the timeliness issue is resolved in Plaintiffs' favor. Plaintiffs include in this Response a request for sanctions under 28 U.S.C. §1927 only because this relief pertains directly and entirely to the Motion to Strike and the timeliness issue. As discussed below, the separate round of briefing created by the Motion to Strike would not have been necessary if Epstein and his counsel had acted reasonably. Defendant's position is not supported under the facts or a fair reading of the applicable Rules. + +&#x27;Qualification for admission as an attorney in this District requires that the attorney pass an examination demonstrating proficiency in the Federal Rules and the Local Rules. S.D.Fla. Rules of Attorney Admission no. 1.

and effort have been wasted. Indeed, as a result of the Defendant's Motion to Strike, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause on October 2, 2009 (DE 335), which directed a response to the Motion to Strike on or before October 9, 2009, and stayed proceedings on the Plaintiffs' appeal of the Magistrate's Order pending resolution of the issue of timeliness. The additional judicial effort and briefing arising from Epstein's Motion to Strike could have been avoided by the reasonable effort and diligence of his counsel.? The Motion to Strike has resulted in unnecessary delay, prejudicing Plaintiffs, as the relief sought by Plaintiffs underlying the appeal is to compel discovery that Plaintiffs have been seeking for well over six months. The conduct of Epstein's counsel in filing the Motion to Strike without a factual or legal basis should not be condoned.

Section 1927 of Title 28 provides for sanctions, as follows:

Any attorney or other person admitted to conduct cases in any court of the United States or any Territory thereof who so multiplies the proceedings in any case unreasonably and vexatiously may be required by the court to satisfy personally the excess costs, expenses, and attorneys' fees reasonably incurred because of such conduct.

&#x27; Plaintiffs further note that Epstein's counsel failed to comply with the pre-motion conference requirement of S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1(A)(3). No certificate of counsel is included in the Motion, as required by the Rule. Epstein's counsel contacted Plaintiffs' counsel the evening before he filed the Motion to Strike, but only to request an enlargement of time for Defendant to respond to the Plaintiffs' appeal of the Magistrate's Order, to which Plaintiffs' counsel agreed. No mention was made that Defendant would be filing a separate motion on the timeliness issue. If it had been, and if Epstein's counsel had thereby complied with the pre-motion conference requirement, then Plaintiffs' counsel could have explained to Epstein's counsel why the appeal is timely, and perhaps have avoided the unnecessary motion practice Epstein's counsel created by filing the Motion to Strike.

In this case, §1927 provides authority for an award of sanctions against Defendant and his counse1.8 The Motion to Strike created an unnecessary and wasteful round of motion practice. Plaintiffs should be allowed to recover attorneys' fees as a result of this conduct.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs respectfully request that (i) Defendant's Motion to Strike Appeal as Untimely be denied, and Defendant be directed to respond to the appeal on its merits; (ii) the Court's Order to Show Cause be discharged; (iii) sanctions be made against Defendant and his counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1927; and (iv) such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

Dated: October 6, 2009. Respectfully submitted,

By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877

The Defendant's Motion to Strike is also in violation of Fed.R.Civ.P. 11. It is unsupported factually and its legal contention on the calculation of time is not warranted by existing law or any nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying or reversing existing law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 11(b). However, given the 21 day "safe harbor" requirement for a motion under Fed.R.Civ.P. 11(c)(2), there is insufficient time in this instance, as a practical matter, for Plaintiffs to serve and file a Rule 11 motion. Plaintiffs note that the Court, on its own initiative, may by order to show cause direct Epstein and his counsel to show why the Motion to Strike does not violate Fed.R.Civ.P. 11(b). See Fed.R.Civ.P. 11(c)(3).

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on October 6, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing.

/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein

SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida

Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com

Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bc1claw.com

James bedwards@rra-law.com

Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net

Jack jph@searcylaw.com U

Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com

Michael James Pike MPike@bcIclaw.com

Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu

Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com

Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747355/EFTA02747355.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747355/EFTA02747355.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1b71aad7d13594072180558d8eb019a52eef603c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747355/EFTA02747355.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,624 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747355.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 16401, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.69, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 99.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 99.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' MEMORANDUM IN \nOPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE \nAPPEAL OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S ORDER AS UNTIMELY, \nRESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE, AND REQUEST \nFOR SANCTIONS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. \u00a71927", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 131.57999999999998, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 481.1587219238281, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 481.1587219238281, + 431.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 131.57999999999998, + 431.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction and Summary", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 214.2, + 554.85 + ], + [ + 397.72491455078125, + 554.85 + ], + [ + 397.72491455078125, + 568.863037109375 + ], + [ + 214.2, + 568.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Discussion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 277.236, + 71.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 336.7409362792969, + 71.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 336.7409362792969, + 85.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 277.236, + 85.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. PLAINTIFFS' APPEAL OF THE \nMAGISTRATE JUDGE'S ORDER IS TIMELY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 196.452, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 451.2032165527344, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 451.2032165527344, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 196.452, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN AND HIS COUNSEL \nSHOULD BE SANCTIONED UNDER 28 U.S.C. \u00a71927 \nFOR FILING A FRIVOLOUS MOTION TO STRIKES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 164.62800000000001, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 470.10699462890625, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 470.10699462890625, + 113.60302734375 + ], + [ + 164.62800000000001, + 113.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 274.788, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 337.7822265625, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 337.7822265625, + 196.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 274.788, + 196.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.44, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 112.10302734375 + ], + [ + 226.44, + 112.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747355" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747365/EFTA02747365.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747365/EFTA02747365.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e67757b593ca61b6398c738a33459eda478d6489 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747365/EFTA02747365.md @@ -0,0 +1,213 @@ +5(23 + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80893-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +# PLAINTIFFS FIRST REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO DEFENDANT + +COMES NOW the Plaintiff, JANE DOE, by and through her undersigned counsel, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 34 and S.D. Fla. 26.1G., and requests the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, to produce the original or best copy of the items listed hereinbelow, at the offices of the Plaintiffs undersigned counsel, for inspection and/or copying within thirty (30) days of service. + +## PRELIMINARY STATEMENT + +1. These requests for production are deemed continuing. Pursuant to Rule 26(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and applicable law, if any information sought by said requests for production is not learned until after they are answered, or if any answers for any reason should later become incorrect, there shall be a continuing duty on the party answering said requests to supplement or change answers previously submitted. + +## DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS + +- 1. Communication. The term "communication" means the transmittal of information (in the form of facts, ideas, inquiries or otherwise). +- 2. Document. The term "document" is defined to be synonymous in meaning and equal in scope to the usage of this term in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34(a), including, without limitation, electronic or computerized data compilations. A draft or non-identical copy is a separate document within the meaning of this term. + +EFTA02747365 + +- 3. Identify (with respect to person). When referring to a person, "to identify" means to give, to the extent known, the person's full name, present or last known address, and when referring to anatural person, additionally, the present or last known place of employment. Once aperson has been identified in accordance with this subparagraph, only the name of the person need be listed in response to subsequent discovery requesting the identification of that person. +- 4. Identify (with respect to documents). When referring to documents, "to identify" means to give, to the extent known, the (i) type of documents; (ii) general subject matter; (iii) date of the document; and (iv) author(s), addressee(s) and recipient(s). +- 5. Parties. The terms "plaintiff' and "defendant" as. well as aparty's full or abbreviated name or apronoun referring to a party means the party and, where applicable, its officers, directors, employees, partners, corporate parent, subsidiaries or affiliates. This definition is not intended to impose a discovery obligation on any person who is not a party to the litigation. +- 6. Person. The term "person" is defined as any natural person or any business, legal or governmental entity or association. +- 7. Concerning. The term "concerning" means relating to, referring to, describing, evidencing or constituting. +- 8. All/Each. The terms "all" and "each" shall be construed as all and each. +- 9. And/Or. The connectives "and" and "or" shall be construed either disjunctively or conjunctively as necessary to bring within the scope of the discovery request all responses that might otherwise be construed to be outside of its scope. +- 10. Number. The use of the singular form of any word includes the plural and vice versa. +- 11. Refer/Relate to. "Refer" or "relate to" means to make astatement about, discuss, describe, reflect, constitute, identify, deal with, consist of, establish, comprise, list, evidence, substantiate or in any way pertain, in whole to in part, to the subject. +- 12. As used herein the singular shall include the plural, the plural shall include the singular, and the masculine, feminine and neuter shall include each of the other genders. + +## DOCUMENTS REOUESTED + +- 1. Copies of all telephone records in your or your attorneys' possession from 2002 2005that in any way relate to you (including all phone lines owned by you or that were used to contact girls for the purposes of scheduling massages for you). + +2. All massage appointment books, diaries, computer calendars or scheduling entries, scheduling books or any other writing or correspondence that contains the names of any of the girls that were called, contacted, scheduled, or who otherwise went to your home located at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, Florida, for the purpose of giving you amassage. + +3. Any and all documentation in your possession that contains Plaintiff's name or that refers to Plaintiff, directly or indirectly, (includes emails, letters, message pads, diaries, appointment books, computer print outs). + +4. Any and all photos, videos, downloaded digital prints or any other visual depiction of Plaintiff, or of any other known or suspected minor females introduced to you, directly or indirectly, by Plaintiff. + +5. Photos of the inside of your home located at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, Florida, that depict the room(s) where the massages took place (including massage table). + +6. Any and all documentation of cancelled checks or evidence of payment to Plaintiff of any kind and for any reason whatsoever. + +7. All discovery information obtained by you or your attorneys as aresult of the exchange of discovery in the State criminal case against you or the Federal investigation against you. + +8. All financial documents evidencing asset transfers from 2005 to the present for you personally or any company or corporation owned by you. + +9. Any documents or other evidentiary materials provided to local, state, or federal law enforcement investigators or local, state or federal prosecutors investigating your sexual activities with minors. + +10. All correspondence between you or your attorneys and state or federal law enforcement or prosecutors (includes, but is not limited to, letters to and from the State Attorney's office or any agents thereof). + +11. Any and all documents reflecting your current net worth. + +12. Personal tax returns for all years from 2002 through the present + +13. A photocopy of your passport, including any supplemental pages reflecting travel to locations outside the 50 United States between 2002 and 2008, including any documents or records regarding plane tickets, hotel receipts, or transportation arrangements. + +14. A sworn statement of your net worth (including adetailed financial statement depicting all current assets and liabilities). + +15. All financial statements or affidavits produced by you for any reason, to any person, company, entity or corporation since 2005. + +16. All medical records of Defendant Epstein from Dr. Stephan Alexander. + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that atrue and correct copy of the above and foregoing has been provided via United States mail to the following addressees, this Z3day of March, 2009. + +Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esquire Michael J. Pike, Esquire Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman, LLP 515 North Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 rcrit®bc1claw.com mpike®bciclaw.com + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esquire Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 jagesa@bellsouth.net + +Michael R. Tein, Esquire Tein, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue Suite 340 Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 tein@Jewistein.com + +Respectfully Submitted, + +THE LAW OFFICE OF BRAD ASSOCIATES, LLC + +By: + +Brad Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff Florida Bar No. 542075 2028 Street Suite 202 Hollywood, Florida 33020 Telephone: 954-414-8033 Facsimile: 954-924-1530 E-Mail: be©bradedwardslaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell Attorney for Plaintiff Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellu@law.utah.edu + +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV- 80893 - MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### DEFENDANTS RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION (dated 03/23/09) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, ('EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P., 34, and S.D. Fla. 26.1.G., serves his response to Plaintiff JANE DOE's First Request For Production, dated March 23, 2009. + +Request No. 1: Copies of all telephone records in your or your attorneys' possession from 2002 through 2005 that in any way relate to you (including all phone lines owned by you or that were used to contact girls for the purposes of scheduling massages for you.) + +Response: Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 2: All massage appointment books, diaries, computer calendars or scheduling entities, scheduling books or any other writing or correspondence that contains the names of any of the girls that were called, contacted, scheduled or who + +otherwise went to your home located at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, Florida, for the purpose of giving you a massage. + +**Response:** Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +**Request No. 3:** Any and all documentation in your possession that contains Plaintiff's name or that refers to Plaintiff, directly or indirectly, (includes e-mails, letters, message pads, diaries, appointment books, computer print outs). + +**Response:** Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +**Request No. 4:** Any and all photos, videos, downloaded digital prints or any other visual depiction of Plaintiff, or of any other known or suspected minor females introduced to you, directly or indirectly, by Plaintiff. + +**Response:** Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +**Request No. 5:** Photos of the inside of your home located at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, Florida, that depict the room(s) where the massages took place (including massage table). + +**Response:** Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +**Request No. 6:** Any and all documentation of cancelled checks or evidence of payment to Plaintiff of any kind and for any reason whatsoever. + +**Response:** Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +**Request No. 7:** All discovery information obtained by you or your attorneys as a result of the exchange of discovery in the State criminal case against you or the Federal investigation against you. + +**Response:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible + +Page 4 + +pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege. + +Request No. 8: All financial documents evidencing asset transfers from 2005 to the present for you personally or any company or corporation owned by you. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 9: Any documents or other evidentiary materials provided to local, state, or federal law enforcement investigators or local, state or federal prosecutors investigating your sexual activities with minors. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege. + +Request No. 10: All correspondence between you and your attorneys and state or federal law enforcement or prosecutors (includes, but not limited to, letters to and from the State Attorney's office or any agents thereof). + +**Response:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege. + +**Request No. 11:** Any and all documents reflecting your current net worth. + +**Response:** Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +**Request No. 12:** Personal tax returns for all years from 2002 through the present. + +**Response:** Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution; overly broad. + +**Request No. 13:** A photocopy of your passport, including any supplemental pages reflecting travel to locations outside the 50 United States between 2020 and 2008, + +including any documents or records regarding plane tickets, hotel receipts, or transportation arrangements. + +**Response:** Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional protections and privileges, the scope of information is so overbroad that it seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence; compiling such information over a six year period would be unduly burdensome and time consuming. + +**Request No. 14:** A sworn statement of your net worth (including a detailed financial statement depicting all current assets and liabilities). + +**Response:** Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +**Request No. 15:** All financial statements or affidavits produced by you for any reason, to any person, company, entity or corporation since 2005. + +**Response:** Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution; overly broad. + +Request No. 16: All medical records of Defendant Epstein from Dr. Stephan Alexander. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +#### Certificate of Service + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the f Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this regoing has been sent via U.S. day of Mav, 2009. + +Brad , Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards(&sra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 561-835-8691 Fax jaqesq bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully subm + +By: ROBERT D. RITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcritabcIclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747365/EFTA02747365.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747365/EFTA02747365.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aa75f79691dc775cbed8647cd11be67f12a95c4f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747365/EFTA02747365.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,674 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747365.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 13, + "chars": 25799, + "elapsed_seconds": 12.75, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 413.61566162109375, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 413.61566162109375, + 113.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 113.9730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS FIRST REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO DEFENDANT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 112.608, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 503.9769287109375, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 503.9769287109375, + 320.60302734375 + ], + [ + 112.608, + 320.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRELIMINARY STATEMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 468.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 394.1185302734375, + 468.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 394.1185302734375, + 485.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 222.15599999999998, + 485.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 580.77 + ], + [ + 413.09124755859375, + 580.77 + ], + [ + 413.09124755859375, + 595.8530120849609 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 595.8530120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DOCUMENTS REOUESTED", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 230.724, + 596.16 + ], + [ + 392.185791015625, + 596.16 + ], + [ + 392.185791015625, + 611.1730804443359 + ], + [ + 230.724, + 611.1730804443359 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 228.276, + 475.4699999999999 + ], + [ + 391.0892639160156, + 475.4699999999999 + ], + [ + 391.0892639160156, + 489.23999999999995 + ], + [ + 228.276, + 489.23999999999995 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 414.6553649902344, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 414.6553649902344, + 99.16998291015625 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 99.16998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANTS RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S \nFIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION (dated 03/23/09)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 146.88, + 334.53 + ], + [ + 474.6412353515625, + 334.53 + ], + [ + 474.6412353515625, + 363.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 146.88, + 363.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.86, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 373.837890625, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 373.837890625, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 247.86, + 333.71999999999997 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 475 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 312 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 258 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 144 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 478 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 326 + ], + [ + "Line", + 51 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747365" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747378/EFTA02747378.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747378/EFTA02747378.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..07cf387390e734f36a3d8d5b671ff80f89de7355 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747378/EFTA02747378.md @@ -0,0 +1,242 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRS + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## NOTICE OF FILING EXHIBIT "A" AS CITED IN DE 339 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, hereby gives Notice of Filing Exhibit A, cited in Defendant's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Response to Plaintiff's Request for Production with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 194) and in support thereof : + +- 1. Plaintiff's First Request for Production to Defendant and Defendant's Response & Objections to Plaintiff's First Request for Production (Exhibit A). + +J. PIKE, ESQ. F fl da Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of arida 2009 + +Respectfully sub + +By: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit®bc1claw.corn + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bc1claw.corn + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffiey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MAFtRA/JOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) + +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, +08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80811* + +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) + +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +*Pro Hac Vice* + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. + +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) + +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* + +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747378/EFTA02747378.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747378/EFTA02747378.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b7cf45615e6c272644a9156e0629655b5350510c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747378/EFTA02747378.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,227 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747378.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 4171, + "elapsed_seconds": 12.52, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 416.2664489746094, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 416.2664489746094, + 104.60302734375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 104.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF FILING EXHIBIT \"A\" AS CITED IN DE 339", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 152.388, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 468.32598876953125, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 468.32598876953125, + 380.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 152.388, + 380.9730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 116.63999999999999 + ], + [ + 367.24224853515625, + 116.63999999999999 + ], + [ + 367.24224853515625, + 133.23248291015625 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 133.23248291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 543.51 + ], + [ + 368.3380126953125, + 543.51 + ], + [ + 368.3380126953125, + 560.3625030517578 + ], + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 560.3625030517578 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 150 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747378" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747381/EFTA02747381.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747381/EFTA02747381.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ca9f7452ae0ec1845b7a79575e29782c0a0a8d6b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747381/EFTA02747381.md @@ -0,0 +1,226 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80893-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +# PLAINTIFFS FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO DEFENDANT + +COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Jane Doe, by and through her undersigned counsel, and files this her First Request for Admissions to the Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, and requests said Defendant admit or deny the following facts, in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: + +## DEFINITIONS + +The term "you" means and refers to the Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN. + +#### ADMISSIONS + +- 1. Your net worth is greater than \$10 million. +- 2. Your net worth is greater than \$50 million. +- 3. Your net worth is greater than \$100 million. +- 4. Your net worth is greater than \$500 million. + +EFTA02747381 + +5. Your net worth is greater than \$1 billion. + +6. Since being incarcerated you have, directly or indirectly (through the services or assistance of other persons), conveyed money or assets in an attempt to insulate or protect your money or assets from being captured in any civil lawsuits filed against you. + +7. You own or control, directly or indirectly, real estate property in the Caribbean. + +8. You own or control, directly or indirectly, real estate property in foreign countries. + +9. In the last 2 years you have transferred assets and/or money and/or financial instruments to countries outside the United States. + +10. You have provided financial support to the modeling agency MC2. + +11. You committed sexual assault against Plaintiff, aminor. + +12. You committed battery against Plaintiff. + +13. You digitally penetrated Plaintiff when she was aminor. + +14. You offered Plaintiff more money contingent upon her having sex with you or giving you oral sex. + +15. You intended to harm Plaintiff when you committed these sexual acts against her. + +16. You knew Plaintiff was under the age of 16 when you sexually touched and fondled her. + +17. You intend to hire investigators to intimidate and harass Plaintiff during this litigation. + +18. You were engaged in the act of trafficking minors across state or country borders for the purposes of sex or prostitution between 2000 and the present. + +19. You coerced Plaintiff into being a prostitute and remaining in prostitution. + +- 20. You are guilty of the following offenses against Jane Doe: + - A. Procuring aminor for the purpose of prostitution as defined in F.S. 796.03 + - B. Battery as defined by Florida Statutes + - C. Sexual Battery +- 21. You are moving significant financial assets overseas, outside of the direct territorial reach of the U.S. and Florida Courts. +- 22. You are making asset transfers with the intent to defeat any judgment that might be entered against you in this or similar cases. +- 23. You currently have the ability to post abond of \$15 million to satisfy a judgment in this case without financial or other difficulty. + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that atrue and correct copy of the above and foregoing has been provided via United States mail to the following addressees, this wday of March, 2009. + +Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esquire Michael J. Pike, Esquire Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman, LLP 515 North Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 rcrit@bciclaw.com mpike@bciclaw.com + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esquire Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 iagesq@bellsouth.net + +Michael R. Tein, Esquire +██████ Tein, P.L. +3059 Grand Avenue +Suite 340 +Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 +[tein@lewistein.com](mailto:tein@lewistein.com) + +Respectfully Submitted, + +THE LAW OFFICE OF BRAD ██████ & +ASSOCIATES, LLC + +By: + +![]()Brad ██████ Esquire +Attorney for Plaintiff +Florida Bar No. 542075 +2028 ██████ Street +Suite 202 +Hollywood, Florida 33020 +Telephone: 954-414-8033 +Facsimile: 954-924-1530 +E-Mail: [be@bradedwardslaw.com](mailto:be@bradedwardslaw.com) + +Paul G. Cassell +Attorney for Plaintiff +Pro Hac Vice +332 S. 1400 E. +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +Telephone: 801-585-5202 +Facsimile: 801-585-6833 +E-Mail: [cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +J 57)8 + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV- 80893 — MARRal + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS (dated 03/23/09) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, ('EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his response to Plaintiffs First Request for Admission, dated March 23, 2009. + +1. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +2. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my + +6(9- 11 121 + +attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +3. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +4. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +5. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to + +effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +6. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +7. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +8. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States + +Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +9. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +10. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +11. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would + +unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +12. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +13. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +14. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +15. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +16. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +17. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +18. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my + +attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +19. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +20. In response to 20 A, B, and C, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +21. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to + +effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +22. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +23. In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +## Certificate of Service + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the fsregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 41 n-"clay of May, 2009. + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +561-835-8691 Fax +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff* + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747381/EFTA02747381.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747381/EFTA02747381.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1a642383f1df0f28bfdfdb31a999e7ca9c767155 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747381/EFTA02747381.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,675 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747381.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 13, + "chars": 22253, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.55, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 412.48800000000006, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 412.48800000000006, + 115.01999999999998 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 115.01999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO DEFENDANT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 119.34, + 319.14000000000004 + ], + [ + 501.84000000000003, + 319.14000000000004 + ], + [ + 501.84000000000003, + 335.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 119.34, + 335.34000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFINITIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 270.504, + 498.96 + ], + [ + 354.07501220703125, + 498.96 + ], + [ + 354.07501220703125, + 512.73 + ], + [ + 270.504, + 512.73 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ADMISSIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 272.952, + 581.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 353.3044128417969, + 581.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 353.3044128417969, + 594.54 + ], + [ + 272.952, + 594.54 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 229.5, + 392.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 392.8980712890625, + 392.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 392.8980712890625, + 405.81000000000006 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 405.81000000000006 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 410.2378845214844, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 410.2378845214844, + 124.1148681640625 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 124.1148681640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S \nFIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS (dated 03/23/09)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 133.416, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 484.7332458496094, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 484.7332458496094, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 133.416, + 387.98999999999995 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 618.84 + ], + [ + 374.53753662109375, + 618.84 + ], + [ + 374.53753662109375, + 632.61 + ], + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 632.61 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 157 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 292 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 237 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 115 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 236 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 389 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 374 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 382 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 392 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 402 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 341 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747381" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747394/EFTA02747394.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747394/EFTA02747394.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..03213620452ba95265ca9654bf4b9c19c46b3397 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747394/EFTA02747394.md @@ -0,0 +1,250 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### DEFENDANT'S, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S, JANE DOE, MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS IDE 981 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, hereby files his Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's, JANE DOE, Motion to Compel Response to Plaintiff's Request for Admissions dated July 10, 2009 [DE 98] (Consolidated Case No. 08-CIV-80119 [DE 195]). + +# I. Procedural Background + +Plaintiff's Motion to Compel is filed at DE (98). The Motion to Compel was voluminous and orders had been entered by this court (DE 242 and 293) addressing other 51h Amendment issues; therefore, the undersigned counsel endeavored to eliminate certain Request outlined in Plaintiff's a Motion to Compel. As a result, a Joint Notice of Agreement was entered advising the court that several of the Requests had been addressed by counsel alleviating the court from having to rule on same. (DE 316). + +Defendant filed his Rule 4 Appeal (DE 282) and his Supplementary Brief (DE 283), which address several of the 5th Amendment arguments applicable to the Request outlined herein. Portions of DE 282 and 283 were provided to the court in camera pursuant to the court's order (DE 242). Therefore, for the Court's ease of reference and in an attempt to maintain brevity, Defendant hereby incorporates those arguments and case law as if fully set forth herein. + +Significantly, these cases have been consolidated for discovery. Therefore, consistent rulings should apply. In making those rulings, this Court must continue to recognize that the allegations in the related cases cannot be forgotten. (E.g., see DE 242 and 293, p.5-6). Answers/Admissions/Denials to discovery Request in one case could provide a link in the chain of evidence used to prosecute Epstein for a crime or provide an indirect link to incriminating evidence in another case. Id. and infra. Here, Admissions or denials to the Request for Admissions is the equivalent of compelled testimonial disclosures affirming or denying the very existence of the evidence sought, which may result in a global subject-matter waiver of Epstein's 5th Amendment privilege relative to the topics addressed in these and other discovery Request. + +From the outset, Plaintiff Motion to Compel incorrectly states that Epstein has only asserted objections relating to the Fifth Amendment. However, Epstein has asserted objections under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. age Request for Admissions and responses thereto attached as Composite Exhibit + +### II. The Request for Admissions, Argument And Memorandum Of Law + +# a. Request for Admissions Numbers 1-9 & 21-23 + +Request Number 1 - Your net worth is greater than \$10 million. + +Request Number 2 - Your net worth is great than \$50 million. + +Request Number 3 - Your net worth is greater than \$100 million. + +Request Number 4 - Your net worth is greater than \$500 million. + +Request Number 5 - Your net worth is greater than \$1 billion. + +Request Number 6 - Since being incarcerated you have, directly or indirectly (through the services or assistance of other person), conveyed money or assets in an attempt to insulate or protect your money or assets from being captured in any civil lawsuits filed against you. + +Request Number 7 - You own or control, directly or indirectly, real estate property in the Caribbean. + +Request Number 8 - You own or control, directly or indirectly, real estate property in foreign countries. + +Request Number 9 - In the last 2 years you have transferred assets and/or money and/or financial instruments to countries outside the United States. + +Request Number 21 - You are moving significant financial assets overseas, outside of the direct territorial reach of the U.S. and Florida Courts. + +Request Number 22 - You are making asset transfers with the intent to defeat any judgment that might be entered against you in this or similar cases. + +Request Number 23 - You currently have the ability to post a bond of \$15 million to satisfy a judgment in this case without financial or other difficulty. + +Response To Request for Admissions Numbers 1-9 & 21-23: In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk waiving my Fifth Amendment rights as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +# The Fifth Amendment + +As set forth in more detail in DE 282 and 283, which were provided to the court in camera, Epstein cannot admit or deny the Request for Admissions relating to his financial history + +and condition without waiving his Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. The Request are unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seek information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. These Request for Admissions, if answered, may result in compelled testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subiect matter in this case, the related cases and those matters outlined for the Court in DE 282 and 283, on camera. Responding to this and other related inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or lead to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +Accordingly, any compelled testimony that provides a "lead or clue to a source of evidence of such [a] crime" is protected by Fifth Amendment. SEC v Leach, 156 F.Supp.2d 491, 494 (E.D. PA. 2001). See supra. Questions seeking "testimony" regarding financial assets or transactions would, if answered, risk waiving Epstein's constitutional privilege to decline to answer other related inquiries into his financial assets and past and current and intended future transactions thus he must respectfully decline to answer any inquiry even if the insinuation in the question is erroneous and unwarranted. See also Hoffman v United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951)("the right against self-incrimination may be invoked if the answer would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute for a crime"). + +Page No. 5 + +While the Fifth Amendment states only that "[n]o person ... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself," U.S. Const. amend. V, there is no question that an individual is entitled to invoke the privilege against self-incrimination during a civil proceeding. ce, g., Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973) (explaining that the Fifth Amendment permits an individual "not to answer official questions put to him in any ... proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answer might incriminate him"). And this means that a civil litigant may legitimately use the Fifth Amendment to avoid having to answer inquiries during any phase of the discovery process. See 8 Charles A. =, Arthur R. and Richard L. Marcus, Federal Practice and Procedure § 2018, at 273 (2d ed. 1994) ("[C]ourts have repeatedly held that the privilege against self-incrimination justifie[s] a person in refusing to answer questions at a deposition, or to respond to interrogatories, or Request for Admissions, or to produce documents." (footnotes omitted)). + +To the extent Plaintiff claims she needs the information concerning financial worth and/or asset transfers based on her unsupported presumption that Epstein is fraudulently transferring assets, same is premature and unsupported by the law for the reasons set forth in Epstein's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets (DE 198). + +Responding to the above financial requests would require Epstein to admit or deny the very existence of the information sought. As discussed infra, if compelled to respond to Plaintiff's Request for Admissions, Plaintiff will allege a subject-matter waiver of Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege regarding the information sought here and in other discovery requests. See infra. Admitting, denying and/or identifying the existence of the information sought by virtue of an admission or denial is tantamount to testimonial disclosures that would communicate + +Page No. 6 + +statements of fact. Such Admissions or denials present a real and substantial danger of selfincrimination in this case, in other related cases and as well in areas that could result in criminal prosecution. See generally Hoffman v United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951) and United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000). Again, the information sought also relates to potential federal claims of violations. See DE 282 and 283, in camera. + +While these Request for Admissions appear to be general-identification type information, which on their face may not appear to infringe upon Epstein's rights under the 5th Amendment, responding to same would allow Plaintiff to argue that Epstein has waived his 5th Amendment privilege relative to the Request for Admissions and, thus, a global waiver has occurred relative to the similar requests made by Plaintiff in her Request for Production and Interrogatories dealing with Epstein's financial condition, ownership of assets and alleged asset transfers. Therefore, Plaintiff is setting the stage to attempt to force a waiver of the 5th Amendment in hopes that such a waiver will then require Epstein to disclose the information sought in Plaintiff's Request for Production and Interrogatories. If successful, Plaintiff will then serve subpoenas on certain institutions, entities, and possibly individuals that Plaintiff would not know about but for Epstein being compelled to testify about same, which is a direct violation of his 5th Amendment privilege. Such an erroneous result may furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to convict Epstein of a crime. See (DE 282 and 293, in camera) Epstein cannot be required to waive his privileges under the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and provide compelled testimony and information that may, directly or indirectly, furnish Plaintiff a clue or link in the chain of evidence used to prosecute him. Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer 232 F.3d at 1263(the "privilege" against self-incrimination does not depend upon the likelihood, but upon the possibility of prosecution and also covers those circumstances + +Page No. 7 + +where the disclosures would not be directly incriminating, but could provide an indirect link to incriminating evidence). Essentially, Plaintiff's Request for Admissions seek to have Epstein be a witness against himself by admitting or denying that certain evidence exists, assist with Plaintiff's investigation and identify areas that could result in future prosecution of Epstein. + +The court will note that, as worded, the Request for Admissions seek information regarding Epstein's assets, ownership of assets and transfer of assets in locations inside and outside the United States. Defendant has already provided this court with sufficient argument at DE 282 and DE 283 detailing why the production of such information s could provide a link in the chain of evidence regarding various allegations that were the subject of the investigation that resulted in the NPA. Here, Plaintiff's Request for Admissions regarding Epstein's financial information, ownership of assets and transfers of assets inside and outside the United States "could reveal the availability to him and/or use by him of interstate facilities and thus would constitute a link in the chain of evidence that could potentially expose [Epstein] to the dangers of self incrimination." (DE 293, p.6). Plaintiff wishes to obtain this information to corroborate her request for Epstein's passport and pages attached thereto identifying the locations Epstein has traveled outside of the United States, which is no different from the Request this Court has already ruled upon and sustained Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege in response thereto. (DE 292). In summary, this court reasoned that: + +"[i]n this and the other civil actions, Plaintiff's allege that Epstein violated certain federal and state criminal statutes in an attempt to make claims against Epstein ranging from sexual battery to intentional infliction of emotional distress. The lynchpin for the exercise of federal criminal jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. §2422(b), which figures in some of the complaints filed, is `the use of any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce' and the analogous essential element of 18 U.S.C. §2423(b), which also figures in some of the Complaints, is `travel[s] in interstate commerce or travels into the United States or . . . travels in foreign commerce.' Accordingly, requiring Epstein to provide responses. . .would in essence be compelling him to provide assertions of fact + +Page No. 8 + +The court recognizes that: "[i]n light of the additional information provided [in DE 282], the court is now persuaded that Epstein's whereabouts. . .are crucial issues in this case and other related cases and that if he is forced to reveal this information, these testimonial disclosures could subsequently be used to incriminate him and/or prosecute him for a criminal offense." (DE 293, p.4-5) Accordingly, Epstein's financial information is also protected from disclosure as revealing same (or admitting or denying same) may require him to identify the asset transferred or other financial information which would waive his 5th Amendment privilege not to testify about all assets and his financial condition. If such a subject-matter waiver occurred, subsequent subpoenas for information and the corresponding information may identify his whereabouts on a particular day and time and may also lead to the identity of witnesses that may have knowledge of the alleged events. Moroever, the information sought relates to potential federal claims violations that are not the subject of this action and, thus, a waiver in this regard could expose Epstein to future criminal prosecution. See DE 282 and 283, in camera. Plaintiff's attempt to backdoor this information though Epstein by virtue of her artfully phrased Request for Admissions (coupled with her Request for Production and Interrogatories) must fail. + +Clearly, this court has already ruled that Epstein can properly invoke his Fifth Amendment right to not identify a person who may have information pertaining to the alleged events. Stated differently, Epstein cannot be compelled to provide information that would lead to the identity of witnesses that may have knowledge of the alleged events or information concerning potential federal claims violations that are not the subject of this action because it could expose Epstein to future criminal prosecution and self-incrimination. See DE 282 and 283, in camera. In sum, Epstein cannot be required to be a witness against himself or provide information that may incriminate him and lead to future prosecution. + +Page No. 9 + +For these reasons, Epstein's justified concern with regard to admitting and/or denying the above Request and the resulting waiver of his Fifth Amendment Privilege in this regard and/or providing self-incriminating information is substantial, real and not merely imaginative. Accordingly, based on the facts and circumstances of this case, and under applicable law, Defendant's assertion of the protections afforded under the 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments of the United States Constitution are required to be upheld. + +### The Requests For Admissions Seek Attorney-Client And Work-Product Privileged Material And Rules 408 And 410, Fed. Evid. And 890.410, Fla. Stat., Preclude Responses + +Next, a reading of the particular discovery requests reveals that they encompass attorneyclient and work-product privileged material. See infra. As this court has already ruled (DE 242), Epstein cannot be compelled to create a privilege log because that would be tantamount to compelled testimony to which Defendant's constitutional protections apply. + +This requests also seek the identification of information that was exchanged with federal authorities in the context of discussions that are in essence immunized under the provisions of FRE 410 in order to encourage the resolution of pending investigations without trials including, but not limited to, the potential federal claims violations provided to this court, in camera. (DE 282 and 282) FRE 410(4) is particularly directed to communications in matters which, like Epstein's, did not result in a plea of guilty to any federal charge. Fla. Stat. §90.410 provides parallel protections in state criminal matters. To the extent Epstein's counsel provided the authorities with any information it cannot, by the terms of that rule, be used in subsequent litigation as same is work-product. Likewise, the information received from the federal authorities, if any, as part of a give and take, is also subject to FRE 410. Finally, the purposes of FRE 408 provide further protection for both state and federal interchanges of information. If Epstein is compelled to respond to the requests for admissions or produce this information, not + +Page No. 10 + +only will it violate his Fifth Amendment privilege, but it will also result in an open-ended waiver of his attorney-client and work-product privileges. + +Additionally, the requests may pertain to the State Criminal Proceeding and the Federal Investigation by the USAO. Therefore, the requests may concern information relating to the negotiation(s) and eventual entering into of a Plea and the negotiation(s) and eventual entering into the NPA. Likewise, all the requests, as worded, seek an admission or denial of the existence of information in connection with "compromise negotiations." That alone is compelled disclosure. Federal Evidence Rules 408 and 410 and Florida Statute §90.410 prevent the production (or, in this case, the identification) of such material. The full text of Federal Evidence Rules 408 and 410, and Florida Statute §90.410 is found at footnote 1 and is incorporated herein'. Clearly, discovery in criminal cases is not congruent with discovery in + +### Rule 408. Compromise and Offers to Compromise + +- (a) Prohibited uses.--Evidence of the following is not admissible on behalf of any party, when offered to prove liability for, invalidity of, or amount of a claim that was disputed as to validity or amount, or to impeach through a prior inconsistent statement or contradiction: +- (I) furnishing or offering or promising to furnish--or accepting or offering or promising to accept—a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise the claim; and +- (2) conduct or statements made in compromise negotiations regarding the claim, except when offered in a criminal case and the negotiations related to a claim by a public office or agency in the exercise of regulatory, investigative, or enforcement authority. +- (b) Permitted uses.--This rule does not require exclusion if the evidence is offered for purposes not prohibited by subdivision (a). Examples of permissible purposes include proving a witness's bias or prejudice; negating a contention of undue delay; and proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution. + +#### CREDIT(S) + +(Pub.L. 93-595, § I, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1933; Apr. 12, 2006, eff. Dec. 1, 2006). + +### Rule 410. Inadmissibility of Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements + +Except as otherwise provided in this rule, evidence of the following is not, in any civil or criminal proceeding, admissible against the defendant who made the plea or was a participant in the plea discussions: + +- (I) a plea of guilty which was later withdrawn; + +&#x27; Relevancy and Its Limits + +Page No. 11 + +civil cases. Here, the information requested involves negotiations with the State and the USAO and their investigation. If the USAO cannot be compelled to release its investigation(s) and related work-product, how can Epstein be compelled to disclose or identify same in violation of his constitutional rights and his attorney-client and work-product privileges? He cannot. + +Moreover, any information exchanged by Epstein's attorneys and the State was exchanged pursuant to Fla.R.Crim.P. §3.220 and is therefore protected under that Rule. Further, the information is "work-product" information. See id. and 14B Fla. Jur.2d Criminal Law §1412. Epstein cannot be compelled to admit or deny the existence of same. + +Wherefore, Epstein respectfully Request that this Court issue and order: + +- a. finding that the danger Epstein faces by being forced to testify in this case relative to the above Request for Admissions is substantial and real, and not merely trifling or imaginary; +- b. sustaining Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege and other delineated constitutional privileges as it relates to the above Request for Admissions and denying Plaintiff's Motion in that regard; and + +(2) a plea of nolo contendere; + +(3) any statement made in the course of any proceedings under Rule II of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure or comparable state procedure regarding either of the foregoing pleas; or + +(4) any statement made in the course of plea discussions with an attorney for the prosecuting authority which do not result in a plea of guilty or which result in a plea of guilty later withdrawn. + +However, such a statement is admissible (i) in any proceeding wherein another statement made in the course of the same plea or plea discussions has been introduced and the statement ought in fairness be considered contemporaneously with it, or (ii) in a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement if the statement was made by the defendant under oath, on the record and in the presence of counsel. + +Florida Evidence Code + +90.410. Offer to plead guilty; nob contendere; withdrawn pleas of guilty + +Evidence of a plea of guilty, later withdrawn; a plea of nolo contendere; or an offer to plead guilty or nolo contendere to the crime charged or any other crime is inadmissible in any civil or criminal proceeding. Evidence of statements made in connection with any of the pleas or offers is inadmissible, except when such statements are offered in a prosecution under chapter 837. + +Page No. 12 + +c. for such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +![]()By: +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 7 day of October, 2009 + +![]()By: +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. +Florida Bar No. 224162 +[fcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:fcrit@bclclaw.com) + +![]()MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 + +Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomey.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08- 80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08- 80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plainly in Related Case No. 08- 80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. 1. Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 isx@searcylaw.com inh@searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecfbni reinhar n Counsel for Defendant + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax casselln®law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. Lavilln, P.A. li llitura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsberg@nodhurst.com kezell@podhurst.corri + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 + +Page No. 14 + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +08804 + +iagesqe.bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747394/EFTA02747394.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747394/EFTA02747394.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d80632e0db38b8cccc02ef4d8dae2a62c78ec56e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747394/EFTA02747394.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,825 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747394.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 26833, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.95, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 413.636474609375, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 413.636474609375, + 104.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 104.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION \nTO PLAINTIFF'S, JANE DOE, MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE TO \nPLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS IDE 981", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 113.22, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 502.9478454589844, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 502.9478454589844, + 409.10302734375 + ], + [ + 113.22, + 409.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Procedural Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.99200000000002, + 503.01 + ], + [ + 391.1230163574219, + 503.01 + ], + [ + 391.1230163574219, + 519.7230224609375 + ], + [ + 223.99200000000002, + 519.7230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. The Request for Admissions, Argument And Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 120.56400000000001, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 492.1706237792969, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 492.1706237792969, + 613.8630218505859 + ], + [ + 120.56400000000001, + 613.8630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. Request for Admissions Numbers 1-9 & 21-23", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 168.3, + 624.51 + ], + [ + 444.9129638671875, + 624.51 + ], + [ + 444.9129638671875, + 641.2330169677734 + ], + [ + 168.3, + 641.2330169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Fifth Amendment", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.86, + 640.71 + ], + [ + 368.4344787597656, + 640.71 + ], + [ + 368.4344787597656, + 657.3630218505859 + ], + [ + 247.86, + 657.3630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Requests For Admissions Seek Attorney-Client And Work-Product Privileged Material \nAnd Rules 408 And 410, Fed. Evid. And 890.410, Fla. Stat., Preclude Responses", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 67.932, + 243.0 + ], + [ + 506.89422607421875, + 243.0 + ], + [ + 506.89422607421875, + 272.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 67.932, + 272.9730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 408. Compromise and Offers to Compromise", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.156, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 291.9563903808594, + 426.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 291.9563903808594, + 440.96759033203125 + ], + [ + 69.156, + 440.96759033203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CREDIT(S)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.156, + 623.7 + ], + [ + 127.28131866455078, + 623.7 + ], + [ + 127.28131866455078, + 637.4676055908203 + ], + [ + 69.156, + 637.4676055908203 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 410. Inadmissibility of Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.156, + 656.9100000000001 + ], + [ + 400.2923583984375, + 656.9100000000001 + ], + [ + 400.2923583984375, + 671.9675979614258 + ], + [ + 69.156, + 671.9675979614258 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.86, + 232.46999999999997 + ], + [ + 359.856, + 232.46999999999997 + ], + [ + 359.856, + 245.43 + ], + [ + 247.86, + 245.43 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 589.6800000000001 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 589.6800000000001 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 631.8 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 631.8 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 177 + ], + [ + "Line", + 84 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 30 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747394" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747408/EFTA02747408.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747408/EFTA02747408.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0c25e3d07587830ee3218ae2e004b2959f98f8a6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747408/EFTA02747408.md @@ -0,0 +1,322 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MAFtRA/...= + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### DEFENDANT'S, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S, JANE DOE, MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTIFF'S INTERROGATORIES IDE 991 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, hereby files his Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's, JANE DOE, Motion to Compel Answers to Plaintiff's Interrogatories dated July 10, 2009 IDE 99] (Consolidated Case No. 08-CIV-80119 IDE 196]. + +# I. Procedural Background + +Plaintiff's Motion to Compel is filed at DE (99). The Motion to Compel was voluminous and orders had been entered by this court (DE 242 and 293) addressing other 5th Amendment issues; therefore, the undersigned counsel endeavored to eliminate certain requests outlined in Plaintiffs a Motion to Compel. As a result, a Joint Notice of Agreement was entered advising the court that several of the requests had been addressed by counsel alleviating the court from having to rule on same. (DE 316). + +Doe v. Epstein 08-CIV-80119 Page No. 2 + +Defendant filed his Rule 4 Appeal (DE 282) and his Supplementary Brief (DE 283), which address several of the 51h Amendment arguments applicable to the requests outlined herein. Portions of DE 282 and 283 were provided to the court in camera pursuant to the court's order (DE 242). Therefore, for the Court's ease of reference and in an attempt to maintain brevity, Defendant hereby incorporates those arguments and case law as if fully set forth herein. + +Significantly, these cases have been consolidated for discovery. Therefore, consistent rulings should apply. In making those rulings, this Court must continue to recognize that the allegations in the related cases cannot be forgotten. (Lg., see DE 242 and 293, p.5-6). Answers to discovery requests in one case could provide a link in the chain of evidence used to prosecute Epstein for a crime or provide an indirect link to incriminating evidence in another case. Id. and infra. + +The Interrogatories and the responses thereto are attached as Composite Exhibit "A". + +# II. The Interrogatories, Argument And Memorandum Of Law + +# a. Interrogatory Numbers 12, 17 & 23 + +Interrogatory No. 12. Do you intend to elicit testimony of witnesses other than Plaintiff regarding any statements she has ever made? If so, what statements do you intend to produce through testimony? Through which witness do you intend to elicit such statement? And for what purpose do you intend to admit such statement? + +Interrogatory No. 17. Provide the names, addresses, and phone numbers of all your current accountants, financial planners or money managers handling, or assisting in the handling, of your money or assets.' + +Interrogatory No. 23. State the facts upon which you rely for each affirmative defense in your answer. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant + +The only difference between the response to Interrogatory Number 12 is that it raises the attorney-client workproduct privileges at the conclusion of the answer. Otherwise, the responses to Interrogatory Numbers 17 and 23 are identical to the response to Interrogatory Number 12. + +Doe v. Epstein 08-CIV-80119 Page No. 3 + +> questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk waiving my Fifth Amendment rights and losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Additionally, work-product and attorney-client. + +In Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein, Case No. 80119, the Magistrate Judge found, "[i]n 2008, Epstein entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") with the United States Attorney General's Office for the Federal Southern District of Florida ("USAO") and the State Attorney's Office for Palm Beach County. Under the terms of the NPA, any criminal prosecution against Epstein is deferred as long as he abides by the certain terms and conditions contained therein. If at any time the USAO's Office has reason to believe Epstein is in breach of the Agreement, it need only provide Epstein's counsel with notice of the breach and then move forward with Epstein's prosecution. Accordingly, the undersigned would agree with Epstein ... that the fact there exists a NPA does not mean that Epstein is free from future criminal prosecution, and that in fact, 'the threat of prosecution is real, substantial and present.' See August 4, 2009 Order (DE 242) and September 9, 2009 Omnibus Order (DE 293); and Manson v. United States, 244 U.S. 362, 365 (1917). Moreover, as this court knows, the NPA only defers prosecution in the Southern District of Florida, not other districts. Therefore, Epstein is "confronted by a substantial and `real,' and not merely trifling or imaginary, hazard[] of incrimination" when it comes to Plaintiff's discovery requests. United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 128 (1980). + +Page No. 4 + +The Fifth Amendment serves as a guarantee against testimonial compulsion and provides, in relevant part, that "[n]o person...shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against himself." (DE 242, p.5); Les also Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985) (citing Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973)). The privilege is accorded liberal construction in favor of the right and extends not only to answers that would support a criminal conviction, but extends also to those answers which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a crime. See Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951). Information is protected by the privilege not only if it would support a criminal conviction, but also in those instances where "the responses would merely `provide a lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate." See United States v. Neff, 315 F.2d 1235, 1239 (9th Cir.), cert denied, 447 U.S. 925 (1980); Blau v. United States, 340 U.S. 159 (1950); SEC v Leach, 156 F.Supp.2d 491, 494 (E.D. PA. 2001). + +The Court has already ruled on questions similar to the ones posed by Jane Doe (i.e., Interrogatory Numbers 12, 17 and 23) and which seek similar identifying information that could be used to incriminate Epstein, would furnish a link in the chain of evidence used to prosecute him and would require Epstein, if answers were provided, to be a witness against himself. For instance, Jane Doe #2-7, asked the following: + +No. 13.List the names and addresses of all persons who are believed or known by you, your agents, or your attorneys to have any knowledge concerning any of the issues in this lawsuit; and specify the subject matter about which the witness has knowledge. + +No. 14.State the name and address of every person known to you, your agents, or your attorneys who has knowledge about, possession, or custody, or control of, any model, plat, map, drawing, motion picture, videotape or photograph pertaining to any fact or issue involved in this controversy; and describe as to each, what item such person has, the name and address of the person who took or prepared it, and the date it was taken or prepared. + +Page No. 5 + +No. 15.Identify all persons who have made a claim, complaint, demand or threat against you relating to alleged sexual abuse or misconduct on a minor, and for each provide the following information: + +- a. The person's full name, last known address and telephone number; +- b. The person's attorney, if represented; +- c. The date of the alleged incident(s); +- d. If a civil case has been filed by or on behalf of the person, the case number and identifying information. + +No. 16.State the facts upon which you intend to rely for each denial of a pleading allegation and for each affirmative defense you intend to make in these cases. + +No. 17.Identify all witnesses from whom you have obtained or requested a written, transcribed or recorded statement relating to any issue in these cases, and for each, in addition to the witness's identifying information, state the date of the statement and identify the person taking the statement. + +The court sustained Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege as it related to the above interrogatories. (DE 242, p.7-11). Here, Jane Doe's Interrogatory No. 12 is the same as Jane Doe #s 2-7 Interrogatory Numbers 13, 14 and 15 in that Interrogatory No. 12 seeks compelled statements that could reasonably "furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute Epstein in future criminal proceedings or even support a criminal conviction." Interrogatory Numbers 12 and 17, ask Epstein to identify "persons or witnesses who [may]have knowledge" of the events in question. WE 242) Asking Epstein to identify those individuals that may have information or that will provide a statement on his behalf, including the identity of his "accountants, financial planners or money managers" will "...implicate the Fifth Amendment, in that by requiring Epstein to list such persons or witnesses, Epstein is being forced to incriminate himself in the commission of crimes" and is further forcing Epstein to provide compelled information as to his version of the facts (e.g., witness statements which, at this juncture, are also protected by the attorney-client and work-product privileges). See infra and DE 242. Asking Epstein to identify his accountants, financial planners or money managers, is the same thing as + +Page No. 6 + +asking him to identify and provide alist of his employees, which the court has already ruled would implicate Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege as it is be tantamount to asking Epstein to ". . .identify potential witnesses against him. . ."2 (DE 242, p. 9-11) + +In addition, Interrogatory Number 17 and the information sought relates to potential federal claims of violations. See infra for more detailed and incorporated argument and DE 282 and 283, in camera. + +Next, Interrogatory Number 23 seeks an answer delineating the facts upon which Epstein relies for each affirmative defense in his answer. First, an answer has not yet been filed in this matter as Defendant's Motion to Dismiss remains pending. Second, this court has also ruled that such an interrogatory ". . . is acontention interrogatory seeking the facts upon which Epstein relies to support each of his pleading allegation denials and for each affirmative defense." (DE 242, p8.) The court reasoned: "[a]s Epstein correctly observes, forcing him to answer this [contention) interrogatory unconstitutionally places him in the position of being compelled to testify as to his version of the facts, and, in asserting affirmative defenses, being compelled to admit to Plaintiff's version of the facts." De 242, p.8). That same ruling must apply here, and may also be applied to Interrogatory Number 12. + +Requiring Epstein to list these individuals would constitute compelled testimonial admissions that could potentially provide a'lead or clue' or alink in the chain of evidence having a tendency to incriminate Epstein and would threaten to invade his privilege against being + +In )ane Doe No, 2 v. Epstein, the Court sustained Epstein's Fifth Amendment objections to interrogatories: asking Epstein to identify all employees who performed work inside his Palm Beach residence and all other employees who came to the residence, asking Epstein to identify any who gave or were asked to give him massages, requesting information regarding the identity of persons who provided transportation services, seeking alist of Epstein's employees' telephone numbers, asking Epstein to identify any persons or witnesses who have knowledge or are in possession of physical evidence pertaining to the events in question, seeking information related to alleged sexual abuse or misconduct on aminor, and seeking the facts on upon which Epstein relies to support pleading denials and affirmative defenses. (DE 242). + +Page No. 7 + +required to produce and/or testify. Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232F.3d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir. 2000)(the "privilege" against self-incrimination does not depend upon the likelihood, but upon the possibility of prosecution and also covers those circumstances where the disclosures would not be directly incriminating, but could provide an indirect link to incriminating evidence). + +Clearly, this court has already ruled that Epstein can properly invoke his Fifth Amendment right to not identify a person who may have information pertaining to the alleged events. For these reasons, Epstein's justified concern with regard to answering the above interrogatories and the resulting waiver of his Fifth Amendment Privilege in this regard and/or providing self-incriminating information is substantial, real and not merely imaginative. Accordingly, based on the facts and circumstances of this case, and under applicable law, Defendant's assertion of the protections afforded under the 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments of the United States Constitution are required to be upheld. + +## b. Interrogatory Numbers 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13, 14 and 15 + +Interrogatory No. 2. Describe financial assets that are under your control, directly or indirectly, including interests in corporations or other business entities. + +Interrogatory No. 3. Describe which financial assets listed in your answer to interrogatory #2 that are located outside the 50 states of the United States and where they are located. + +Interrogatory No. 4. Describe your net worth, including income and expenses for 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. + +Interrogatory No. 5. Describe any real property in which you have atotal or partial ownership interest, either directly or indirectly. + +Interrogatory No. 6. Describe which real properties listed in your answer to interrogatory #5 are located outside the 50 United States and where the properties are located. + +Interrogatory No. 7. Describe any transfer of assets under your control, either directly or indirectly, to locations outside the 50 United States in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. + +Interrogatory No. 13. Are you transferring, or do you plan to, or might you transfer money or assets out of the country during the course of this litigation? + +Page No. 8 + +Interrogatory No. 14. Describe each property owned by you, including location, approximate value, and whether there is a mortgage on the property and the amount of any such mortgage. + +Interrogatory No. 15. Describe with specificity the amount of money available to you in cash or that can be readily liquidated as such. Include the bank, financial institution, holding company, or other location of this money and the name of the account. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk waiving my Fifth Amendment rights and losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +## The Fifth Amendment + +As set forth in more detail in DE 282 and 283, which were provided to the court in camera, Epstein cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to his financial history and condition without waiving his Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. The requests are unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seek information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Responding to the above financial requests would require Epstein to identify information regarding matters as set forth in more detail in DE 282 and 283, which were provided to the Court in camera. Identifying the specified information would result in testimonial disclosures that would communicate statements of fact. Again, the information sought relates to potential federal claims of violations. See DE 282 and 283, in camera. + +Page No. 9 + +Responding would therefore constitute a testimonial admission and thus presents a real and substantial danger of self-incrimination in this case, in other related cases and as well in areas that could result in criminal prosecution. See generally Hoffman v United States 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951) and United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000). + +The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. These interrogatories, if answered, may result in compelled testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other related inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +Accordingly, any compelled testimony that provides a "lead or clue to a source of evidence of such [a] crime" is protected by Fifth Amendment. SEC v Leach, 156 F.Supp.2d 491, 494 (E.D. PA. 2001). les supra. Questions seeking "testimony" regarding names of witnesses, leads to phone or travel records, or financial records that would provide leads to tax or money laundering or unlicensed money transmittal investigations are protected. See also Hoffman v United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951)("the right against self-incrimination may be invoked if the answer would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute for a crime"). ate also Hoffman v United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951)("the right against self-incrimination may be invoked if the answer would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute for a crime"). + +Page No. 10 + +To the extent Plaintiff claims she needs the information concerning asset transfers based on her unsupported presumption that Epstein is fraudulently transferring assets, same is premature and unsupported by the law for the reasons set forth in Epstein's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets (DE 198). + +The court will note that, as worded, that similar interrogatories seek information regarding Epstein's assets, ownership of assets and transfer of assets in locations inside and outside the 50 United States. Defendant has already provided this court with sufficient argument at DE 282 and DE 283 detailing why the production or identification of information showing or providing aclue as to Epstein's whereabouts could provide alink in the chain of evidence regarding: (a) Epstein's air travel within the United States and Foreign Territories; (b) Epstein's communications with others relating to or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries; and (c) Epstein's personal calendars and schedules. Given that the essential proof of an allegation of 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) would include travel records, schedules regarding trips and locations, flight records, calendars, and transportation arrangements, the court found that Epstein had made amore particularized showing because producing such information "could reveal the availability to him and/or use by him of interstate facilities and thus would constitute alink in the chain of evidence that could potentially expose [Epstein] to the dangers of self incrimination." (DE 293, p.6) + +Here, Plaintiff's request that Epstein's identify his financial information, ownership of assets and transfers of assets inside and outside the 50 United States of assets "could reveal the availability to him and/or use by him of interstate facilities and thus would constitute alink in the chain of evidence that could potentially expose [Epstein] to the dangers of self incrimination." + +Page No. 11 + +(DE 293, p.6). Plaintiff wishes to obtain this information to corroborate her request for Epstein's passport and pages attached thereto identifying the locations Epstein has traveled outside of the United States, which is no different from the requests this Court has already ruled upon and sustained Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege in response thereto. (DE 292). In summary, this court reasoned that: + +"[i]n this and the other civil actions, Plaintiff's allege that Epstein violated certain federal and state criminal statutes in an attempt to make claims against Epstein ranging from sexual battery to intentional infliction of emotional distress. The lynchpin for the exercise of federal criminal jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. §2422(b), which figures in some of the complaints filed, is `the use of any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce' and the analogous essential element of 18 U.S.C. §2423(b), which also figures in some of the Complaints, is `travel[s] in interstate commerce or travels into the United States or . . . travels in foreign commerce.' Accordingly, requiring Epstein to provide responses. . .would in essence be compelling him to provide assertions of fact + +While these interrogatories appear to be general-identification type information, which on their face may not appear to infringe upon Epstein's rights under the 5th Amendment, responding to same would furnish Plaintiff with the ability to serve subpoenas on certain institutions, entities, and possibly individuals that may furnish alink in the chain of evidence needed to convict Epstein of acrime. See (DE 282 and 293, in camera) Epstein cannot be required to waive his privileges under the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and provide compelled testimony and information that may, directly or indirectly, furnish Plaintiff aclue or link in the chain of evidence used to prosecute him. Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232F.3d at 1263(the "privilege" against self-incrimination does not depend upon the likelihood, but upon the possibility of prosecution and also covers those circumstances where the disclosures would not be directly incriminating, but could provide an indirect link to incriminating evidence). Essentially, Plaintiff's interrogatories seek to have Epstein be awitness + +Page No. 12 + +against himself, assist with Plaintiff's investigation and identify areas that could result in future prosecution of Epstein. + +As an example, Jane Doe #s 2-7, asked the following question: + +No. 11. Identify all telephone numbers used by Epstein, including cellular phones and land lines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider. + +After making a more particularized showing, this court reasoned: "[flit light of the additional information provided [in DE 2821, the court is now persuaded that Epstein's whereabouts. . .are crucial issues in this case and other related cases and that if he is forced to reveal this information, these testimonial disclosures could subsequently be used to incriminate him and/or prosecute him for a criminal offense." (DE 293, p.4-5) The court has correctly recognized that "the lynchpin for the exercise of federal criminal jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. §2422(b), which figures in some of the complaints filed, is `the use of any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce' and the analogous essential element of 18 U.S.C. §2423(b), which also figures in some of the Complaints, is `travel[s] in interstate commerce or travels into the United States or . . . travels in foreign commerce." Accordingly, if Epstein's telephone records are protected from disclosure under the Fifth Amendment it goes without saying that his financial information is also protected from disclosure as revealing same could result in subsequent subpoenas for information that may identify his whereabouts on a particular day and time and may also lead to the identity of witnesses that may have knowledge of the alleged events. Plaintiff's attempt to backdoor this information though Epstein by virtue of her artfully phrased interrogatories must fail. + +Clearly, this court has already ruled that Epstein can properly invoke his Fifth Amendment right to not identify a person who may have information pertaining to the alleged events. Stated differently, Epstein cannot be compelled to provide information that would lead + +Page No. 13 + +to the identity of witnesses that may have knowledge of the alleged events. In sum, Epstein cannot be required to be awitness against himself or provide information that may incriminate him and lead to future prosecution. + +For these reasons, Epstein's justified concern with regard to answering the above interrogatories and the resulting waiver of his Fifth Amendment Privilege in this regard and/or providing self-incriminating information is substantial, real and not merely imaginative. Accordingly, based on the facts and circumstances of this case, and under applicable law, Defendant's assertion of the protections afforded under the 5th, 6'h, and 14th Amendments of the United States Constitution are required to be upheld. + +Wherefore, Epstein respectfully requests that this Court issue and order: + +- a. finding that the danger Epstein faces by being forced to testify in this case relative to the above interrogatories is substantial and real, and not merely trifling or imaginary; +- b. sustaining Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege and other delineated constitutional privileges as it relates to the above interrogatories and denying Plaintiff's Motion in that regard; and + - c. for such other and further relief as this Co d t and proper. + +Respectfull + +By: MICHAE IKE, SQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +#### Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that atrue copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel ocord identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this ay of October, 2009 + +Page No. 14 + +Respectfull + +By: + +ROBE . CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattonev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08- + +80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08- + +80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +Brad , Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwardsarra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +\* V1.ilM, Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +Doe v. Epstein 08-CIV-80119 Page No. 15 + +80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.. Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsx(asearcylaw.com iph@searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff; C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 + +224 Datum Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 rjosefsbenz@nodhurst.com kezell@podhurstcom + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesqebellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747408/EFTA02747408.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747408/EFTA02747408.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8012902113a3c020e91221bb10531c50f76f838d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747408/EFTA02747408.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,790 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747408.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 15, + "chars": 30567, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.17, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 413.646484375, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 413.646484375, + 103.10302734375 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 103.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION \nTO PLAINTIFF'S, JANE DOE, MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO \nPLAINTIFF'S INTERROGATORIES IDE 991", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 115.66799999999999, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 501.4578552246094, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 501.4578552246094, + 407.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 115.66799999999999, + 407.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Procedural Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 500.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 391.10516357421875, + 500.5799999999999 + ], + [ + 391.10516357421875, + 517.85302734375 + ], + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 517.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. The Interrogatories, Argument And Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 143.20800000000003, + 406.62 + ], + [ + 473.361083984375, + 406.62 + ], + [ + 473.361083984375, + 423.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 143.20800000000003, + 423.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. Interrogatory Numbers 12, 17 & 23", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 195.84, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 422.2480773925781, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 422.2480773925781, + 451.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 195.84, + 451.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "b. Interrogatory Numbers 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13, 14 and 15", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 155.448, + 408.24 + ], + [ + 460.22399999999993, + 408.24 + ], + [ + 460.22399999999993, + 424.7793884277344 + ], + [ + 155.448, + 424.7793884277344 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Fifth Amendment", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 369.1724548339844, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 369.1724548339844, + 400.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 400.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 605.88 + ], + [ + 365.856689453125, + 605.88 + ], + [ + 365.856689453125, + 619.6500000000001 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 619.6500000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 328.05 + ], + [ + 367.5579528808594, + 328.05 + ], + [ + 367.5579528808594, + 344.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 344.9730224609375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 80 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 470 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 422 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 376 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 435 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 332 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 132 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 59 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 125 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747408" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747423/EFTA02747423.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747423/EFTA02747423.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0990c993f74b35b53e7f5f854b2b15a4da433ca9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747423/EFTA02747423.md @@ -0,0 +1,326 @@ +*Pledge +3/23* + +**UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA** + +**CASE NO: 08-CV-80893-MARRA/JOHNSON** + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +**PLAINTIFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO DEFENDANT** + +COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Jane Doe, by and through her undersigned counsel, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 33 and S.D. Fla. 26.1.G., and propounds unto the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, her First Set of Interrogatories, numbered 1 through 23, inclusive, to be answered separately, fully and under oath, within thirty (30) days of service. + +**PRELIMINARY STATEMENT** + +These interrogatories are deemed continuing. Pursuant to Rule 26(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and applicable law, if any information sought by said interrogatories is not learned until after they are answered, or if any answers for any reason should later become incorrect, there shall be a continuing duty on the party answering said interrogatories to supplement or change answers previously submitted. + +**DEFINITIONS** + +1. The term "document" as used herein means and includes, without limitation, all writings of any kind, including the originals and all non-identical copies or drafts, whether different from the original by reason of any notation made on such copy or draft or otherwise including, without limitation, correspondence, memoranda, notes, diaries, statistics, letters, e-mail, electronic computer files, telegrams, minutes, contracts, reports, studies, checks, statements, receipts, returns, summaries, pamphlets, books, prospectuses, interoffice communications, offers, notations of any sort of conversation, telephone calls, meetings or other communications, bulletins, printed matter, computer print-outs, teletypes, facsimiles, invoices, work sheets and all drafts, alterations, modifications, changes, and amendments of any of the foregoing, graphic or aural writs, records or representations of any kind including, without + +*(A)* +*CC: IF (Rec'd) +Rec'd 3/20/08 +4/26* + +![](_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg) + +limitation, photographs, charts, graphs, microfiche, microfilm, videotape, recordings, motion pictures; and electronic, mechanical or electric records or representations of any kind including, without limitation, tapes, cassettes and disc recordings, and writings and printed material of every kind, whether or not the document is out of your possession, custody or control. + +2. The term "correspondence" as used herein is defined to mean any tangible object that conveys information or memorializes information that was conveyed in tangible or oral form including, but not limited to, writings, letters, memoranda, reports, notes, telegrams and interoffice communication. + +3. The term "relating to" as used herein is defined to mean evidencing, referring to, pertaining to, consisting of, reflecting, concerning, or in any way logically or factually connected with the matter discussed. + +4. The phrase "describe and explain" and the term "state" as used herein are intended to and shall be interpreted to request afull and fair statement of the fact or matter being described and explained, including astatement of all facts, statements, events and circumstances necessary to understand and evaluate the fact or matter being described and explained. + +5. The term "identify" as used in each of the following Interrogatories requesting an identification of documents is intended to be interpreted to request and require: + +- A. The date of the document; +- B. The originator of the document; +- C. The type of document; +- D. The addressee of the document, if any; +- E. Identification of persons to whom copies of the documents were furnished; +- F. Details as to the custody of the document on the date the Interrogatories + +are answered; + +G. Specific page numbers where the information requested may be found, if appropriate; or, alternatively, documents may be identified by numbering each such document and referring to the number in the answer and providing atrue copy of each such numbered document with the Answers to Interrogatories. + +6. The term "identify" as used in each of the following Interrogatories requesting the identification of persons is intended to be interpreted to request and require for each witness known: + +- A. The full name of the individual; + +B. The last known address and phone number of the individual; + +C. The last known place, address and phone number of employment of the individual; + +D. The substance of the witness' knowledge or information relating to the information requested. + +# PLAINTIFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO DEFENDANT + +(If answering for another person or entity, answer with respect to that person or entity, unless otherwise stated.) + +- 1. What is the full name and Florida address of the person answering these interrogatories, and, if applicable, the person's official position or relationship with the party to whom the interrogatories are directed? +- 2. Describe financial assets that are under your control, directly or indirectly, including interests in corporations or other business entities. +- 3. Describe which financial assets listed in your answer to Interrogatory #2 that are located outside the 50 states of the United States and where they are located. + +- 4. Describe your net worth, including income and expenses for 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008. +- 5. Describe any real property in which you have atotal or partial ownership interest, either directly or indirectly. +- 6. Describe which real properties listed in your answer to Interrogatory #5 are located outside the 50 United States and where the properties are located. + +- 7. Describe any transfer of assets under your control, either directly or indirectly, to locations outside the 50 United States in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008. +- 8. Describe, with specificity, your travel to locations outside the 50 states of the United States in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008, including your dates of travel, location to which you traveled and persons that accompanied you in each such travel. +- 9. List each telephone number used by you or your assistants to call minor females directly, or indirectly, for the purpose of scheduling a massage to take place at your house located at 358 El Brillo Way, West Palm Beach (includes landlines, cell phones, and private jet or airplane lines). For each cell phone, list the provider. + +- 10. List the last known name, address, and telephone numbers of all persons that may have any knowledge about any of the allegations in the Complaint, including, but not limited to, friends, acquaintances, employees, or others to whom you have spoken about the subject matter which forms the basis of this Complaint or who have observed such activity. +- 11. Have you heard or do you know about any statement or remark (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of any party to this lawsuit, other than yourself, concerning any issue in this lawsuit? If so, state the name and address of each person who made the statement or remark, the name and address of each person who heard or read it, and the date, time, place and substance of each statement or remark. +- 12. Do you intend to elicit testimony of witnesses other than Plaintiff regarding any statements she has ever made? If so, what statements do you intend to produce through testimony? Through which witness do you intend to elicit such statement? And for what purpose do you intend to admit such statement? + +- 13. Are you transferring, or do you plan to, or might you transfer money or assets out of the country during the course of this litigation? +- 14. Describe each property owned by you, including location, approximate value, and whether there is a mortgage on the property and the amount of any such mortgage. +- 15. Describe with specificity the amount of money available to you in cash or that can be readily liquidated as such. Include the bank, financial institution, holding company, or other location of this money and the name on the account. + +16. State with as much specificity as possible when you met the Plaintiff, and include in your answer the following: (a) the circumstances and location of how and where you met, (b) describe the nature of your relationship; (c) describe how many occasions she was with you at your residence located at 358 El Brillo Way in Palm Beach, Florida. + +17. Provide the names, addresses, and phone numbers of all your current accountants, financial planners or money managers handling, or assisting in the handling, of your money or assets. + +18. Did you ever ask the Plaintiff to introduce you to minor females and/or to bring minor females to your house in Palm Beach, Florida and if so, when did this occur, and what was she asked by you to do, and what did you tell her about the reason for her to bring these other minor girls? + +- 19. Did you ever engage in sexual activity of any kind whatsoever with the Plaintiff, and include in your answer what type of sexual activity took place, where it took place, and the dates or general timeframe when this activity occurred. +- 20. Were there parameters or instructions by you to the Plaintiff as to the types of girls to bring to your Palm Beach, Florida house, including age range, what they would be asked to do, body type or socio-economic background? +- 21. Describe any words or actions that you made to assure the Plaintiff that sexual activity with you was proper or appropriate? + +- 22. Describe what age you thought the Plaintiff was when you first had sexual activity with her, including your reasons for that belief. +- 23. State the facts upon which you rely for each affirmative defense in your answer. + +I have read the foregoing Answers to Interrogatories and do swear that they are true and correct. + +Jeffrey Epstein, Defendant + +STATE OF FLORIDA : ss. COUNTY OF + +The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2008, by JEFFREY EPSTEIN, who is personally known to me or who has produced as identification and who did did not take an oath. + +My Commission Expires: + +Signature of Acknowledger + +Typed/Printed Name of Acknowledger + +Title or Rank + +Serial Number, if any + +**CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE** + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing has been provided via United States mail to the following addressees, this 23 day of March, 2009. + +Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esquire +Michael J. Pike, Esquire +Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman, LLP +515 North Flagler Drive +Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esquire +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +Michael R. Tein, Esquire +██████ Tein, P.L. +3059 Grand Avenue +Suite 340 +Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 +[tein@lewistein.com](mailto:tein@lewistein.com) + +Respectfully Submitted, + +THE LAW OFFICE OF BRAD ██████ & +ASSOCIATES, LLC + +By: + +![]()Brad ██████, Esquire +Attorney for Plaintiff +Florida Bar No. 542075 +2028 ██████ Street +Suite 202 +Hollywood, Florida 33020 +Telephone: 954-414-8033 +Facsimile: 954-924-1530 +E-Mail: [be@bradedwardslaw.com](mailto:be@bradedwardslaw.com) + +Paul G. Cassell Attorney for Plaintiff Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp©law.utaltedu + +Pi) + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV- 80893 — MARRABM + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S ANSWER & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES (dated 03/23/09) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, ('EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his answers to Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories, dated March 23, 2009. Rules 33 and 26.1, Fed.R.Civ.P. (2009), attached hereto. + +# Certificate of Service + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of thei2regoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this rday of Mav, 2009. + +Brad 1.15 Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-622-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards©rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 561-835-8691 Fax jaciesq©bellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff + +Respectfully subm" ed, + +By: ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar N 224162 + +rcrit bciclaw corn BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +# DEFENDANT'S ANSWERS TO FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES + +Interrogatory No. 1. What is the full name and Florida address of the person answering these interrogatories, and, if applicable, the person's official position or relationship with the party to whom the interrogatories are directed? + +Answer: Jeffery Epstein, Defendant 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, Florida + +> Robert D. Critton, Jr., Attorney for Defendant (if RDC only answers "RDC") 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (objections other than constitutional, are made by RDC on behalf of Defendant) + +Interrogatory No. 2. Describe financial assets that are under your control, directly or indirectly, including interests in corporations or other business entities. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +Interrogatory No. 3. Describe which financial assets listed in your answer to interrogatory #2 that are located outside the 50 states of the United States and where they are located. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under + +these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +**Interrogatory No. 4.** Describe your net worth, including income and expenses for 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +**Interrogatory No. 5.** Describe any real property in which you have a total or partial ownership interest, either directly or indirectly. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +**Interrogatory No. 6.** Describe which real properties listed in your answer to interrogatory #5 are located outside the 50 United States and where the properties are located. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +**Interrogatory No. 7.** Describe any transfer of assets under our control, either directly or indirectly, to locations outside the 50 United States in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +**Interrogatory No. 8.** Describe, with specificity, your travel to locations outside the 50 states of the United States in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008, including your dates of travel, location to which you traveled and persons that accompanied you in each such travel. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +**Interrogatory No. 9.** List each telephone number used by you or your assistants to call minor females directly, or indirectly, for the purpose of scheduling a massage to take place at your house located at 358 El Brillo Way, West Palm Beach (includes landlines, cell phones, and private jet or airplane lines). For each cell phone, list the provider. + +**Answer:** Defendant asserts specific U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +**Interrogatory No. 10.** List the last known name, address and telephone numbers of all persons that may have any knowledge about any of the allegations in the Complaint, including, but not limited to, friends, acquaintances, employees, or others to whom you have spoken about the subject matter which forms the basis of this Complaint or who have observed such activity. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as + +guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The scope of the information is so overbroad that it also includes information that is attorney-client and work-product privileged. + +**Interrogatory No. 11.** Have you heard or do you know about any statement or remark (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of any party to this lawsuit, other than yourself, concerning any issue in this lawsuit? If so, state the name and address of each person who made the statement or remark, the name and address of each person who heard or read it, and the date, time, place and substance of each statement or remark. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The scope of the information is so overbroad that it also includes information that is attorney-client and work-product privileged. + +**Interrogatory No. 12.** Do you intend to elicit testimony of witnesses other than Plaintiff regarding any statements she has ever made? If so, what statements do you intend to produce through testimony? Through which witness do you intend to elicit such statement? And for what purpose do you intend to admit such statement? + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as + +guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Additionally, work-product and attorney-client. + +**Interrogatory No. 13.** Are you transferring, or do you plan to, or might you transfer money or assets out of the country during the course of this litigation? + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +**Interrogatory No. 14.** Describe each property owned by you, including location, approximate value, and whether there is a mortgage on the property and the amount of any such mortgage. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +Interrogatory No. 15. Describe with specificity the amount of money available to you in cash or that can be readily liquidated as such. Include the bank, financial institution, holding company, or other location of this money and the name of the account. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +Interrogatory No. 16. State with as much specificity as possible when you met the Plaintiff, and include in your answer the following: (a) the circumstances and location of how and where you met (b) describe the nature of your relationship, (c) describe how many occasions she was with you at your residence located at 358 El Brillo Way in Palm Beach, Florida. + +Answer: Defendant asserts specific U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Interrogatory No. 17. Provide the names, addresses, and phone numbers of all your current accountants, financial planners or money managers handling, or assisting in the handling, of your money or assets. + +Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions + +regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +**Interrogatory No. 18.** Did you ever ask the Plaintiff to introduce you to minor females and/or to bring minor females to your house in Palm Beach, Florida and if so, when did this occur, and what was she asked by you to do, and what did you tell her about the reason for her to bring these other minor girls? + +**Answer:** Defendant asserts specific U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +**Interrogatory No. 19.** Did you ever engage in sexual activity of any kind whatsoever with the Plaintiff, and include in your answer what type of sexual activity took place, where it took place, and the dates or general timeframe when this activity occurred. + +**Answer:** Defendant asserts specific U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Interrogatory No. 20. Were there parameters or instructions by you to the Plaintiff as to the types of girls to bring to your Palm Beach, Florida house, including age range, what they would be asked to do, body type or socio-economic background? + +Answer: Defendant asserts specific U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Interrogatory No. 21. Describe any words or actions that you made to assure the Plaintiff that sexual activity with you was property or appropriate? + +Answer: Defendant asserts specific U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Interrogatory No. 22. Describe what age you thought the Plaintiff was when you first had sexual activity with her, including your reasons for that belief. + +Answer: Defendant asserts specific U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +**Interrogatory No. 23.** State the facts upon which you rely for each affirmative defense in your answer. + +**Answer:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. No answer has yet been filed, so not applicable (RDC) + +I have read the foregoing answers to Interrogatories and do swear that they are true and correct. + +![]()STATE OF FLORIDA ) +) ss +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 18 day of May, 2009 by Jeffrey Epstein, who is personally known to me or has produced the following identification \_\_\_\_\_ which is current or has been issued within the past five years and bears a serial or other identifying number. + +![](_page_25_Picture_404.jpeg) + +![]()P\* sIi + +Commission Number: My commission expires: + +(Notary Seal) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747423/EFTA02747423.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747423/EFTA02747423.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b9995f69c4d5fa1bc170db4a8b1a01c70277cc7c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747423/EFTA02747423.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1196 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747423.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 27, + "chars": 40586, + "elapsed_seconds": 15.83, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg", + "_page_25_Picture_404.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 411.26400000000007, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 411.26400000000007, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 109.35000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO DEFENDANT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 118.116, + 302.94 + ], + [ + 500.0039999999999, + 302.94 + ], + [ + 500.0039999999999, + 315.9 + ], + [ + 118.116, + 315.9 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRELIMINARY STATEMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.99200000000002, + 440.6400000000001 + ], + [ + 391.68, + 440.6400000000001 + ], + [ + 391.68, + 453.6 + ], + [ + 223.99200000000002, + 453.6 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFINITIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 268.05600000000004, + 551.61 + ], + [ + 349.452, + 551.61 + ], + [ + 349.452, + 563.76 + ], + [ + 268.05600000000004, + 563.76 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO DEFENDANT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 116.28, + 81.81 + ], + [ + 498.5077209472656, + 81.81 + ], + [ + 498.5077209472656, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 116.28, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.99200000000002, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 386.784, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 386.784, + 117.44999999999999 + ], + [ + 223.99200000000002, + 117.44999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 66.42 + ], + [ + 415.7897033691406, + 66.42 + ], + [ + 415.7897033691406, + 96.05352783203125 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 96.05352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S ANSWER & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S \nFIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES (dated 03/23/09)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 130.356, + 330.48 + ], + [ + 492.5001525878906, + 330.48 + ], + [ + 492.5001525878906, + 361.17352294921875 + ], + [ + 130.356, + 361.17352294921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.86, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 374.6313781738281, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 374.6313781738281, + 470.67352294921875 + ], + [ + 247.86, + 470.67352294921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S ANSWERS TO FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 67.932, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 451.1971130371094, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 451.1971130371094, + 133.08856201171875 + ], + [ + 67.932, + 133.08856201171875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 418 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 137 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 82 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 155 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 221 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 120 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 178 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 132 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 33 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 185 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 97 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 444 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 475 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 448 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 345 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 13 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747423" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747423/_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747423/_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a1b42dc86216e0be1de0594056345b3b568cc211 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747423/_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:911edc7db83660e4ddf2cdb7a8094ad987885e6d253b970cc264324cddc583f9 +size 873 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747423/_page_25_Picture_404.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747423/_page_25_Picture_404.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..79ede216735c89a59ec5d766c806c4d558e203b3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747423/_page_25_Picture_404.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:dc2fc339b6bf57f60bdacdb05f95679e28db39dcfcc4c8da4746a396c3490893 +size 17320 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747450/EFTA02747450.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747450/EFTA02747450.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b1017bcfeac94be36a622edec7c117e39c259255 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747450/EFTA02747450.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION PURUSANT TO RULE 35 + +Upon Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motions to Compel Plaintiff Jane Doe Nos. 2-8' Independent Medical Examination Pursuant to Rule 35, it is hereby + +ORDERED that Defendant's Motion is Granted, subject to the following conditions: Defendant may conduct an Independent Medical Examination (IME) Pursuant to Rule 35 of Jane Doe Nos. 2-8. The IME may be videotaped. A live videofeed of the IME shall be available to counsel in an adjacent room. All videotaping expenses shall be shared equally by the Plaintiff and Defendant. Plaintiffs' counsel may instruct their clients not to answer questions that concern sexual history with persons other than Defendant Epstein or other privileges. Absent further court order, each IME shall last no longer than eight (8) hours, including all testing and interviewing. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein will not attend the IMEs or make himself seen by + +Plaintiffs on the date of their IMEs. The IME shall be conducted at a mutually agreeable location, not the office of Defendant's counsel. + +DONE AND ORDERED in in West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this day of , 2009. + +DISTRICT COURT JUDGE \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747450/EFTA02747450.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747450/EFTA02747450.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..389aa5ccca5e9d2e5d3373bfc4bea4b36b037e55 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747450/EFTA02747450.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747450.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1565, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.72, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S \nMOTIONS TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' \nINDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION PURUSANT TO RULE 35", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 113.22, + 375.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 499.8038635253906, + 375.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 499.8038635253906, + 417.363037109375 + ], + [ + 113.22, + 417.363037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747450" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747452/EFTA02747452.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747452/EFTA02747452.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0205b33692ecb02fc652e535db43bb9f8d1d31d8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747452/EFTA02747452.md @@ -0,0 +1,104 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' MEMORANDUM IN RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does No. 2-8, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby file this Memorandum in Response to Defendant's Motions to Compel Independent Medical Examinations, and state as follows: + +- I. Between September 16, 2009 and September 25, 2009, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") filed similar Motions to Compel Independent Medical Examination (IME) directed toward Jane Doe Nos. 2 through 8. +- 2. Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 note at the outset that they do not object to an IME being conducted, provided that reasonable parameters are in place to protect the + +integrity of the IMEs and preserve applicable objections and privileges.' + +3. With one notable exception discussed below which requires court intervention, the parties have stipulated to the terms on which the IME may be conducted, as follows: + +The Defendant may conduct an Independent Medical Examination (IME) pursuant to Rule 35 of Jane Doe Nos. 2-8. The IME may be videotaped. A live videofeed of the IME shall be available to counsel in an adjacent room. All videotaping expenses shall be shared equally by the Plaintiff and Defendant. Absent further Court Order, each IME shall last no longer than eight (8) hours, including all testing and interviewing. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein will not attend the IMEs or make himself seen by Plaintiffs on the date of their IMEs.2 + +(See proposed Order, submitted herewith). + +4. The remaining issue is whether and to what extent Epstein's expert, Dr. M, may inquire about each abuse victim's sexual history with persons other than Epstein.3 The Plaintiffs have already briefed this issue in the context of Objections to Interrogatories. (DE 93, Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Opposition to Epstein's Motion to Compel Answers to First Set of Interrogatories). + +5. Unlike other discovery devices in the federal rules, Fed.R.Civ.P. 35 provides that medical examinations are to be conducted by court order for "good cause". + +Plaintiffs' counsel notes that they have always taken the position that IMEs of Plaintiffs can be conducted subject to reasonable parameters. Defendant's counsel began filing their IME Motions as to Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 before there was any real opportunity for counsel to discuss and work out those parameters. + +2 Epstein also initially set the IMEs to take place at his counsel's office. The parties have now agreed that the IMEs should be reset for a different mutually agreeable location in Palm Beach County. + +3 Contrary to Epstein's suggestion, this issue was not before the Court in the CMA Order (DE 289). In CMA, the only issue before the Court was the length of the proposed IME. The parties did not brief or contemplate whether Epstein's expert could take a detailed sexual history from the victim. Id. + +See Fed.R.Civ.P. 35(a)(2). It is the movant's burden to show that each condition for which an examination is sought "is genuinely in controversy and that good cause exists for ordering each particular examination." Schlangenhauf v. Holder, 37 U.S. 104, 118, 85 S. Ct. 234, 242-243 (1964). Once the Court determines that a Rule 35 examination may proceed, it may subject this examination to appropriate protective restrictions, in the Court's discretion. Bodnar v. Bodnar, 441 F.2d 1103, 1104 (5th Cir. 1971); Swift v. Swift, 64 F.R.D. 440, 443 (E.D.N.Y. 1974) + +6. The Plaintiffs' sexual history not involving Epstein is not relevant. See Fed.R.Evid. 412. Just as it would be inappropriate for Defendant's counsel to ask questions regarding unrelated sexual history at a Plaintiffs deposition or in interrogatories, the same is true at an IME. + +7. The Motions to Compel fail to set forth adequate reasons why Dr. should be allowed to inquire into a Plaintiffs sexual conduct with men other than Defendant Epstein. Dr. has already received the video interviews of Plaintiffs by Dr. Gilbert Kliman, and is thus armed with a wealth of information about each Plaintiffs' psychological condition and history, before the IME even begins. Indeed, the subject Motions refer to the details of these interviews, yet fail to state specifically why further inquiry on an particular topic is necessary. Plaintiffs, nonetheless, do not contest further interviews by Dr. generally, but do object to interrogations of the Plaintiffs about their sexual conduct with men other than Epstein. Such interrogations could only be for the purpose of harassment, intimidation and/or psychological manipulation of the Plaintiffs. + +8. Accordingly, Plaintiffs request an order providing that Plaintiffs' counsel + +may instruct their client not to answer any question at the IME that concerns sexual conduct with persons other than Epstein or otherwise implicates a privilege. A proposed Order, which also incorporates the matters stipulated by counsel, is submitted herewith. + +9. It is well-settled that Fed.R.Evid. 412 is not merely a rule of evidence, but must also "inform the discovery process." Barta v. City and County of Honolulu 169 F.R.D. 132 (D. Haw. 1996). The Rule 412 Committee Notes state, in relevant part, as follows: + +> Courts should presumptively issue protective orders barring discovery unless the party seeking discovery makes a showing that the evidence sought to be discovered would be relevant under the facts and theories of the particular case and cannot be obtained except through discovery. + +10. Nowhere in Defendant's Motion to Compel IMEs is it explained how or why this presumption should be overcome. It is well established under Fed.R.Evid. 412 that a victim's past sexual behavior is wholly irrelevant to the credibility of her testimony, and that her prior and subsequent sexual activity with third parties has no bearing on the issue of whether she consented to or complied with the sexual acts charged. See United States v. 472 F.2d 909, 919 (5th Cir. 1973); Virgin Islands v. 634 F.Supp. 933, 936-37 (D. V.I. 1986) (policy of rule disallowing evidence to show character of assault victim); Dept. of Professional Regulation v. Wise 575 So.2d 713 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (holding that evidence of sexual relations with a person other than an accused is not relevant). One commentator has noted that once the identity of persons and similarity of circumstances are removed, "probative value all but disappears." See Ordover, Admissibility of Patterns of Similar Sexual Conduct: The Unlamented Death of Character for Chastity, 63 Cornell L. Rev. 96, 106 (1977). The sexual histories of the Plaintiff are lacking in probative value. + +II. The argument that Rule 412 is merely an evidentiary rule that should be disregarded in discovery disputes has been routinely rejected in federal courts. Barta v. City and County of Honolulu, 169 F.R.D. 132 (D. Haw. 1996) (granting protective order pursuant to Rule 412 to prevent a sexual battery and harassment victim from having to disclose off-duty sexual contacts with persons other than defendant in discovery); Herron v. Eastern Industries, Inc., 2007 WL 2781211 (N.D. Fla. Sept. 19, 2007); Gibbons v. Food Lion, Inc. 1999 WL 33226474 (M.D. Ha. Feb. 19, 1999)• P.J. Herchenroeder v. John Univ. Applied Physical Lab, 171 F.RD. 179 (D. Md. 1997) (looking at both Rule 26 and Rule 412 in resolving discovery motion); v. Zabihi 166 F.R.D. 500 (D. N.M. 1996) (explaining that "[a]lthough the present motion arises in the context of discovery under Rule 26, the Court must remain mindful of Rule 412 and its implications)• Stalnaker v. Kmart Corp., 1996 WL 397563 (D. Kan. 1996) (noting that Rule 412 "is applicable and has significance in deciding certain discovery motions"). + +12. As the above-referenced cases make abundantly clear, childhood sexual abuse cases are not garden-variety litigation subject to traditional broad discovery concerning a victim's sexual history. Rule 412 is designed to protect victims of sexual misconduct from undue embarrassment and intrusion into their private affairs. See Fed.R.Evid. 412. The Committee Notes explain that the Rule is also intended to prevent "sexual stereotyping that is associated with public disclosure of intimate sexual details and the infusion of sexual innuendo into the factfinding process." Rule 412, Advisory Committee Notes to 1994 Amendments. Common sense dictates that requiring a sexual abuse victim to disclose the intimate details of sexual history would be at least as embarrassing and intrusive in an IME conducted by Epstein's chosen physician as it would be if the victim were interrogated about these facts at trial, if not more. Thus, in order to carry out its purpose, Rule 412 "must inform the discovery process" and the Court "must impose certain restriction on discovery to preclude inquiry into areas which will clearly fail to satisfy the balancing test" set forth in Rule 412. See Barta v. City and County of Honolulu, 169 F.R.D. at 135. In the present context, this means a protective order restricting Dr. questioning of the Plaintiffs concerning their sexual histories with persons other than Epstein. + +13. In Barta the Court confronted this issue in the context of a discovery motion in a civil case. 169 F.R.D. at 133. A former employee brought a sexual harassment and battery claim against her former employer and individual employees. Id. The defendants asked questions at deposition which delved into the plaintiff's sexual conduct outside the workplace. Id. at 134. The Court did not allow these questions and the wait until trial to determine admissibility. Id. at 135. Instead, the Court sustained the plaintiff's objections. Id. The Court based its decision on Fed.R.Evid. 412. Id. Although noting that Rule 412 controls the admissibility of evidence, the Court explained that it must also apply Rule 412 to "impose certain restrictions on discovery to preclude inquiry into areas which will clearly satisfy the balancing test of 412(b)(2)..." Id. Thus, the Court concluded that the defendants should not be permitted to inquire into the plaintiff's sexual conduct while she was off-duty, outside the workplace, and which did not involve the same defendants. The identical rationale should apply here. The IME should not involve intimate details of the Plaintiff's sexual conduct with persons other than Epstein, + +particularly where such conduct does not involve similar criminal circumstances such as those involving Epstein. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, respectfully request an Order which will allow Dr. to conduct an IME of each Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, subject to the following agreed conditions: (i) a live videofeed of the IME will be available to counsel in an adjacent room, with videotape expenses to be shared equally between Plaintiff and Defendant; (ii) the IME shall be no longer than eight (8) hours in length, including all testing and interviews; (iii) Jeffrey Epstein will not attend the IMEs or be in a location where he could be seen by the Plaintiff on the day of her IME; and (iv) the IME will be conducted at a place and time mutually agreeable to both parties, not at the office of Defendant's counsel. In addition, Plaintiffs' request that the Court order that Plaintiffs' counsel be allowed during the course of the IME to instruct the Plaintiff not to answer any question that concerns her sexual conduct with persons other than Epstein or otherwise implicates a privilege. Plaintiffs further request such other and further relief this Court deems just and proper. + +Dated: October 9, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROW117, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on October 9, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bc1claw.com + +James bedwards @ rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bcIclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747452/EFTA02747452.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747452/EFTA02747452.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6b42958ef7f134eda1acbbf1a2e62280a0d85e85 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747452/EFTA02747452.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,447 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747452.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 13203, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.32, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' MEMORANDUM IN \nRESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL \nINDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 148.71599999999998, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 463.54583740234375, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 463.54583740234375, + 430.863037109375 + ], + [ + 148.71599999999998, + 430.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 85.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 80 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747452" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747461/EFTA02747461.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747461/EFTA02747461.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2bee39a451dd33464aa17f783f7fcc8b773afb05 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747461/EFTA02747461.md @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CV-80119-CIV-MARRAi + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +(CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRia + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## [Proposed] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR ORDER PERMITTING LEGAL COUNSELTO ATTEND INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motion for Order Permitting Legal Counsel to Attend Independent Medical Examination filed herein on October 13, 2009. [DE- 1. The Court has carefully considered the Motion and is otherwise fully advised in the premises it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that: + +- 1) Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motion for Order Permitting Legal Counsel to Attend Independent Medical Examination [DE- j is hereby GRANTED. +- 2) Plaintiff Jane Doe is permitted to have legal counsel in attendance at her Independent Medical Examination. + +DONE AND ORDERED this day of October 2009. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA j + +Linnea R. United States Magistrate Judge + +Copies Furnished to: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747461/EFTA02747461.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747461/EFTA02747461.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..626c110d6669b256af3aca413900fb853b187776 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747461/EFTA02747461.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,151 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747461.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1185, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.81, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "[Proposed] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR ORDER \nPERMITTING LEGAL COUNSELTO ATTEND \nINDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.784, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 531.6105346679688, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 531.6105346679688, + 444.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 80.784, + 444.54998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747461" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747463/EFTA02747463.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747463/EFTA02747463.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4fe972dbf84bbc63fb95e0577e3bb0142321fca2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747463/EFTA02747463.md @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR ORDER PERMITTING LEGAL COUNSELTO ATTEND INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff Jane Doe (Case #80893), hereby files this Motion for an Order permitting her legal counsel to attend her upcoming Independent Medical Examination (a psychiatric examination) per Defendant's Notice of Independent Medical Examination [DE 302]. Many of the questions that will be asked at the examination will raise questions of privilege. Accordingly, Jane Doe is entitled to the assistance of legal counsel when answering each of the questions. Jane Doe is familiar with previous Orders by this Court regarding IME's in the case and has no intention to delay or substantially interfere with same. Jane Doe only seeks an order ensuring that her legal counsel can attend the examination to protect her legal and constitutional rights. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +### BACKGROUND + +1. On September 15, 2009, Defendant Epstein filed a Motion for an Independent Medical Examination [DE 301] ("IME") of Jane Doe. + +2. Epstein's proposed IME of Jane Doe will involve extensive questioning about a broad range of Jane Doe's experiences and past activities. In particular, the examiner proposes to ask Jane Doe about her previous "medical, . . . legal, social, criminal, [and] academic" background." Affidavit of Ryan M, Attachment "D" to Defendant Epstein's Motion to Compel Independent Medical Examination, [DE 301-4] Case 9:08-CV-80119- KAM. In addition, the examiner plans to ask Jane Doe about her "psychological and psychiatric records" as well as her "clinical, hospital, [and] physician records." Id. Further, the examiner plans to ask about Jane Doe's "medical history, past psychiatric history, . . . legal history, . . .. substance use history, [and] sexual history." Id. + +3. Epstein's proposed IME will also involve follow-up questions to a Life History Questionnaire that has been sent to Jane Doe's legal counsel. See Life History Questionnaire, Attachment "B" to Plaintiff C.M.A.'s Motion for a Protective Order, [DE 254-2] Case 9:08-CV-80119-KAM. That questionnaire includes questions about "drug abuse" (question 6) and use of "marijuana," "narcotics," "LSD or other hallucinogen" (question 15). The questionnaire further includes questions about "problems" with "gambling" and "trouble with police" (question 28) + +4. Epstein's proposed IME will further involve follow-up questions to Patient Questionnaire. See Patient Questionnaire, Attachment B to Plaintiff C.M.A.'s Motion for a Protective Order, [DE 254-2], Case 9:08-CV-80119-KAM. That questionnaire asks + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +such questions as "Have you ever used illegal drugs (i.e., marijuana, cocaine, uppers, downers, crack, etc.)" and "have you ever used illegal intravenous drugs (IV drugs)" as well as specific dates of the use of such substances. Id. at 5. The questionnaire further asks whether Jane has ever "shot, stabbed, or beaten another person," id. at 8, as well as for a full "legal history," id. at 9. + +### MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +5. As is readily apparent from the questions that will be asked during Jane Doe's IME, many legal issues will arise. In particular, Jane Doe will have to determine whether to assert various privileges with regard to some of the sensitive information that is requested. For example, with regard to questions regarding alleged previous criminal behavior, Jane Doe may be required to determine whether to assert a Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination (U.S. Const. amend. V). As another example, many of the questions raise issues with regard to whether to waive various privileges for doctor-patient information and records (e.g., Fla. Stat. Ann. § 456.057), and various privileges for psychotherapist-patient information and records (e.g., Fla. Stat. Ann. § 90.503) and attorney-client privilege information (which was asked of her in her deposition and will undoubtedly be asked again in IME, despite the clear rule against such questioning). Jane Doe may also have the right to enforce various limits that exist on discovery in this case as well. + +6. The legal issues surrounding whether to waive these privileges or enforce those limits are complex. The mere fact that Jane Doe has chosen to file a civil lawsuit against the man who repeatedly sexually abused her does not require her to forfeit a + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +right to assistance of counsel during this IME. Accordingly, her legal counsel should be permitted to attend the IME with her. + +7. In his affidavit regarding the IME, the proposed examiner asserts that "[t]jhe IME requires the presence of only [Jane Doe] and the examiner." Affidavit of Ryan supra, at 6. To the extent that the examiner is trying to assert that there is no basis for the presence of legal counsel, the proposed examiner has no basis for reaching this conclusion. The proposed examiner, who has no legal training, does not understand the legal issues that surround many of the questions that he plans to ask during the IME. Indeed, if anything, his assertion that no other person need be involved suggests that legal counsel should be present to ensure that legal boundaries are respected. + +8. In his affidavit, the proposed examiner also asserts that the presence of another person in the room "changes the testing environment considerably by introducing extraneous variables that may distract the examinee and alter the results of the IME." Affidavit of Ryan M, supra, at 6. Here again, the basis for this conclusion is unexplained. To the extent that it is asserting that legal advice from Jane Doe's counsel not to answer a particular question is somehow "distracting," the affidavit should be ignored. Jane Doe has a legal right to assert various privileges, if she chooses to do so, and these legal rights must take precedence over any alleged "distraction." + +9. Epstein has proposed that Jane Doe's counsel could observe the IME from another room via video. This proposal is no solution to the problem of Jane Doe needing legal advice. Jane Doe is entitled to have legal counsel advise her before she + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA, + +answers every single question whether answering such a question might waive a legal privilege. The only realistic way to ensure protection of her rights is to have her legal counsel present with her. The only other option — Jane Doe stepping outside the examination room after each and every question to confer — will be an unnecessary waste of time for all concerned. + +10. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure plainly authorize the Court, if allowing an IME, to set the "manner" and "conditions" of the examination. Fed. R. Civ. P. (a)(2)(B). The Court should therefore use its power to permit Jane Doe's counsel to attend the examination. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Jane Doe, respectfully request this Court Grant Plaintiff's Motion and enter an Order allowing Plaintiff's legal counsel to attend the Independent Medical Examination. + +DATED October 13, 2009 + +Respectfully Submitted, + +s/ J. J. + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +and + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA, + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 13, 2009 I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +J. + +# SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberaer@aawpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +Jack ioh@searcvlaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@oodhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassello@bciclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawverswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747463/EFTA02747463.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747463/EFTA02747463.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ca7f355e2cfbcb43e3d7477c69f0af7e7192de46 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747463/EFTA02747463.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,394 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747463.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 8909, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.27, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BACKGROUND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 277.848, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 371.64556884765625, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 371.64556884765625, + 125.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 277.848, + 125.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 233.17200000000003, + 247.86 + ], + [ + 379.7854309082031, + 247.86 + ], + [ + 379.7854309082031, + 262.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 233.17200000000003, + 262.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 261.63 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 261.63 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 276.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 276.91998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 523.26 + ], + [ + 350.1988220214844, + 523.26 + ], + [ + 350.1988220214844, + 538.6800079345703 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 538.6800079345703 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747463" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747470/EFTA02747470.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747470/EFTA02747470.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fb863d3c004ce355bfa0eb851f7b57bf65955a20 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747470/EFTA02747470.md @@ -0,0 +1,145 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +### NOTICE OF NINETY DAYS EXPIRING + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein"), pursuant to Local Rule 7.1.B.3, gives notice of ninety days expiring on the following motions: + +| Docket # | Title | Service Date | Filing Date | +|----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------|-------------| +| 67 | Defendant's Motion to Compel Response to 1st RTP 1 | 4/02/2009 | 04/02/2009 | +| 94 | Response in Opposition re 67 Defendant's Motion to Compel Response to 1st RTP, Overrule Objections and for an Award of Reasonable Expenses | 05/06/2009 | 05/06/2009 | +| 118 | Notice of Supplemental Authority re 67 Defendant's Motion to Compel Response to 1st RTP, 68 Defendant's Motion to Compel Answers to 1st Interrogatories | 5/28/2009 | 5/28/2009 | +| | | | | +| 68 | Defendant's Motion to Compel Answers to 1st Interrogatories | 04/02/2009 | 04/02/2009 | + +Identical Motions to Compel were filed in Case Nos. 08-80893, 08-80232, 08.80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08- 80993 and 08-80811, all of which were filed and served on 04/02/09. The Court consolidated the cases for discovery on 5/14/09 (DE #98 in Case No. 08-80119). + +| 93 | Response in Opposition to 68 Defendant's Motion to Compel Answers to 1st Interrogatories and for an Award of Reasonable Expenses | 05/06/2009 | 05/06/2009 | +|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------|------------| +| 110 | Response/Reply to 93 Response in Opposition to Motion to Compel Answers to Discovery by Jeffrey Epstein | 05/20/2009 | 05/20/2009 | +| 118 | Notice of Supplemental Authority re 67 Defendant's Motion to Compel Response to 1st RTP, 68 Defendant's Motion to Compel Answers to 1st Interrogatories | 5/28/2009 | 5/28/2009 | +| | | | | +| 165 | Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets, Appointment of Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein and to Post a \$15 Million Bond to security Potential Judgment | 6/19/2009 | 6/19/2009 | +| 198 | Memorandum in Opposition re 165 Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets, Appointment of Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein and to Post a \$15 Million Bond to security Potential Judgment | 7/13/2009 | 7/13/2009 | +| 217 | Reply to Response to Plaintiff's Motion re 165 Preliminary Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets, Appointment of Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein and to Post a \$15 Million Bond to security Potential Judgment | 7/23/2009 | 7/23/2009 | + +- I. Epstein gives notice to the Court that the above-cited Motions to Compel (DE #s 67 and 68) have been pending for over 90 days and Epstein respectfully requests the Court rule on said motions for the reasons cited herein. +- 2. Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction (DE # 165) has been pending for 82 days as of the date of this notice. +- 3. Epstein's Motion to Compel Response to First Request to Produce (DE #67) relates to: + +# Production Requests Nos. 10, 11, 17, & 18 + +10. All photographs, movies, dvds, and videotapes in which you performed sexual acts or simulated sexual acts. + +11. All photographs, movies, dvds, and videotapes in which you performed sexual acts or simulated sexual acts in exchange for money or other consideration. + +17. All documents reflecting the names and addresses of other individuals with whom you have had sexual activity from January 1, 2000 — December 31, 2005. + +IS. All documents reflecting the names and addresses of other individuals with whom you have had sexual activity from January 1, 2006 through November 30, 2008. + +4. Similarly, Epstein's Motion to Compel Answers to First Set of Interrogatories seeks answers to the following interrogatories: + +# Interrogatories Nos. 18, 19, 20, and 21 + +- 18. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding Mr. Epstein, with whom you have had sexual activity since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual activity, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. +- 19. List separately the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding your claims against Mr. Epstein, whom you have claimed (formally or informally) committed sexual assault or battery on you since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the nature of sexual assault or battery, the date(s) and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. +- 20. State the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding your claims against Mr. Epstein, whom you have claimed (formally or informally) committed lewd or lascivious conduct to you since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the lewd or lascivious conduct, the date and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. +- 21. State the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding your claims against Mr. Epstein, whom you have claimed (formally or informally) committed lewd or lascivious exhibition to you since age 10 (by year) up through your current age. Describe the lewd or lascivious exhibition, the date and whether you received money or other consideration from the person. + +5. The foregoing discovery requests generally relate to the Plaintiffs' past sexual history. Epstein's Motions to Compel said discovery significantly affect upcoming depositions and Independent Medical Examinations. + +6. Epstein is concerned that if Plaintiffs are deposed or examined by a medical doctor before the Court rules on the above-cited motions, Plaintiffs will object and refuse to answer any questions related to past sexual history and will also disrupt the Independent Medical Examination process. Indeed, Jane Doe refused to answer such questions in her deposition. Under those circumstances, if the Court grants Epstein's Motions to Compel, Epstein will have to re-depose each Plaintiff who refuses to answer such questions. + +7. In its Order on Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion for Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff (DE #289), the Court indicated this line of questioning will be permitted. In denying Plaintiff's request to limit the scope of the examination, specifically as to questions regarding "highly sensitive areas of inquiry including Plaintiff's medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history, substance abuse history, etc.," the Court noted: + +> Presumably Plaintiff will be asked these same questions [regarding past medical history, past psychiatric history, past sexual histo etc.] two more times, first by defense counsel at deposition scheduled to take place shortly, and again by Dr. at the upcoming examination. + +> Under these circumstances, where Plaintiff is seeking to recover medical expenses associated with these complex medical issues, full knowledge of Plaintiff's past and present medical, psychological, familial and social histories is essential. And while neither duplication nor embarrassment is desired, under the circumstances presented, where the number and scope of damages claimed are vast and Plaintiff's past history eventful, it may nonetheless be unavoidable. + +See DE #289 at 2-4. + +8. Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2 — 8, have since filed a response (DE #345) to Epstein's Motion to Compel Plaintiffs' Independent Medical Exams Pursuant to Rule 35 (DE #s 303, 308, 310, 317, 319, 328). In their response (DE #345), Plaintiffs seek to prevent this line of relevant questioning at their respective IMEs. Therefore, once again, Plaintiffs seek to delay the matters and attempt to dictate how discovery will take place and the questions they will answer. If a ruling is made consistent with DE #289 referenced above, Plaintiffs will not be able to delay the IMEs and depositions in these cases. + +9. Thus, it would promote judicial economy, save the parties time and expense and expedite discovery if the Court determines Epstein's Motions to Compel (DE #s 67 and 68) as well as the identical Motions to Compel filed in Case Nos. 08-80893, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08- 80381, 08-80994, 08-80993 and 08-80811. The parties have various trial schedules to comply with pursuant to this Court's orders. If Plaintiffs continue to delay this matter based upon their belief that they can object to certain topics and questions at their IMEs because the Court (according to Plaintiffs) has not ruled on issues such as discoverability of "past sexual history," not only will Epstein be unable to comply with the Court's trial orders, but any IME will be fruitless because Plaintiffs' counsel will object to any questions regarding past sexual history (DE #345). Therefore, Epstein respectfully submits that rulings on these outstanding discovery issues must be made. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, respectfully requests the Court rule on Epstein's Motion to Compel Response to First Request to Produce, Motion to Compel Answers to First Set of Interrogatories, Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets, Appointment of Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein + +and to Post a \$15 Million Bond to security Potential Judgmppt and grant any additional relief the Court deems just and proper. + +By: + +MIC L J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +#### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of October, 2009 + +Respectful itted, + +By: + +ROB T D. CRI ON, JR., ESQ. + +Flo( a Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bcIclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@belclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +#### Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08- 80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08- 80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80811 reelrhwfahotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. E, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Bamhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsxasearcylaw.com inhasearcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Brad Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp®law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plain:¶Jane Doe + +Isidro M. =, Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 rjosefsberg@podhurst.com kezell@podhurstcom Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 + +09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq®bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747470/EFTA02747470.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747470/EFTA02747470.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ae2440c4c3836101a6afc4fc8e7482a395f1d267 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747470/EFTA02747470.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,479 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747470.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 14159, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.49, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.676, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 409.85565185546875, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 409.85565185546875, + 98.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 197.676, + 98.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF NINETY DAYS EXPIRING", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 193.392, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 415.17779541015625, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 415.17779541015625, + 374.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 193.392, + 374.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Production Requests Nos. 10, 11, 17, & 18", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.78000000000003, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 413.15869140625, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 413.15869140625, + 87.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 192.78000000000003, + 87.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Interrogatories Nos. 18, 19, 20, and 21", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 330.48 + ], + [ + 403.98382568359375, + 330.48 + ], + [ + 403.98382568359375, + 346.10302734375 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 346.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.02400000000003, + 210.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 360.04791259765625, + 210.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 360.04791259765625, + 224.60302734375 + ], + [ + 246.02400000000003, + 224.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.048, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 414.324, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 414.324, + 114.363037109375 + ], + [ + 186.048, + 114.363037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "TableGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 42 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 159 + ], + [ + "Line", + 79 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747470" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747478/EFTA02747478.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747478/EFTA02747478.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..63c8cfb8778535e0f197b66e48ce9c663b6ae00c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747478/EFTA02747478.md @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' RESPONSE AND MOTION TO STRIKE ARGUMENT PORTION OF DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF NINETY DAYS EXPIRING + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does Nos. 2-8, by and through undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Southern District of Florida Local Rule 7.1.B.3, hereby file this Response and Motion to Strike Argument Portion of Defendant's Notice of Ninety Days Expiring, and state as follows: + +- 1. On October 14, 2009, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") filed a Notice of Ninety Days Expiring (D.E. 347) (the "Notice"), alerting this Court to the passage of ninety days since various motions have been fully briefed. +- 2. While Plaintiffs share Epstein's interest in having these motions decided so that discovery in these cases can move forward efficiently, Plaintiffs object and move to strike the argument portion of the Notice. Epstein improperly uses the Notice as a vehicle to make additional legal arguments on motions that have been fully briefed, and + +thereby attempt to prejudice the Plaintiffs. In particular, in paragraphs 6-9, Epstein argues his Motions to Compel, and seeks to attack the Plaintiffs' arguments and approach to discovery. This is inappropriate and unauthorized by S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1.B.3. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, respectfully request an Order striking the argument portion of Jeffrey Epstein's "Notice of Ninety Days Expiring" (D.E. 347) in its entirety, and all other and further relief this Court deems just and proper. + +Dated: October 14, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Telephone: (305) 931-2200 Facsimile: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on October 14, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bcIclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747478/EFTA02747478.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747478/EFTA02747478.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ae352c6f7e16e6adf33817da87e9d48e0f7bfaa0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747478/EFTA02747478.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,273 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747478.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3164, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.83, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.63200000000003, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 99.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 205.63200000000003, + 99.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' RESPONSE AND \nMOTION TO STRIKE ARGUMENT PORTION OF \nDEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF NINETY DAYS EXPIRING", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 151.776, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 460.9482421875, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 460.9482421875, + 403.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 151.776, + 403.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 85.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747478" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747482/EFTA02747482.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747482/EFTA02747482.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..54544bbb6e59a9c6f51f638e263c2947b045f0ae --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747482/EFTA02747482.md @@ -0,0 +1,401 @@ +0001 + +1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +2 CASE NO. 502008CA028051XXXXMB AB + +3 + +4 L.M., +5 Plaintiff, + +6 -vs- + +7 JEFFREY EPSTEIN, +8 Defendant. + +9 + +10 HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE +DONALD HAFELE + +11 + +12 Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion for +Psychological Examination + +13 + +14 Thursday, October 15, 2009 +Palm Beach County Courthouse +15 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 +9:15 - 9:27 a.m. + +16 + +17 + +18 Reported By: +19 Cynthia [REDACTED], RPR, FPR +20 Notary Public, State of Florida +21 Prose Court Reporting + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +26 + +27 + +28 0002 + +1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +2 + +3 CASE NO. 502008CA028058XXXXMB AB + +4 + +5 E.W., +6 Plaintiff, + +7 -vs- + +8 JEFFREY EPSTEIN, +9 Defendant. + +11 + +12 HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE +DONALD HAFELE + +13 + +14 Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion for + +*EXHIBIT* +"A" + +13 Psychological Examination + +14 15 16 Thursday, October 15, 2009 + +Palm Beach County Courthouse 17 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 9:15 - 9:27 a.m. + +18 + +19 20 Reporteclis + +Cynthia RPR, FPR 21 Notary Public, State of Florida Prose Court Reporting + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +0003 + +1 APPEARANCES: + +2 On behalf of the Plaintiff: 3 SCOTT A. ESQUIRE ROTHSTEIN, ROSENFELDT, ADLER + +4 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 + +5 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Phone: 954.522.3456 + +6 + +7 + +On behalf of the Defendant: + +8 + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQUIRE 9 BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN, LLP + +303 Banyan Boulevard 10 Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 11 Phone: 561.842.2820 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +0004 + +1 PROCEEDINGS + +2 + +4 through this quickly because I do have the jury 5 waiting and I have other matters. + +6 MR.' Your Honor, before counsel 7 starts, can I approach and give you the case 8 law that I have, the one Supreme Court case. I 9 believe it is on point. I took the liberty of 10 highlighting the portions that 1 have applied. + +11 MR. PIKE: Judge, if I may approach with 12 some affidavits from the IMES,. + +13 MR. Scott for 14 Plaintiff. + +15 MR. PIKE: Michael Pike for Jeffrey 16 Epstein. + +17 Judge, we're here today on our motion to 18 compel pursuant to Rule 1.360, a 19 neuropsychological examination of the 20 Plaintiffs E.W. and L.M. + +21 THE COURT: Neuropsychological? 22 MR. PIKE: Psychological. + +23 THE COURT: That's two different things. + +24 MR. PIKE: Correct. We're here today 25 because the Federal court in the companion + +0005 1 cases have ruled that Plaintiffs' counsel can 2 be present in an adjacent room with the video 3 feed monitoring the happenings in the room with 4 regard to our psychologist. + +5 Today it's my understanding, and I don't 6 know if Plaintiff& motion had been noticed but 7 Plaintiffs filed a motion for an order 8 permitting legal counsel to attend the 9 independent medical examination. So it might 10 conserve judicial resources to hear both our 11 motion and their motion. + +12 It's my understanding that counsel does 13 not have an objection to the time, the hours 14 involved in these psych exams. They just want 15 their attorney to be present. + +16 The case law is, the case law that was 17 provided to me today anticipates that there 18 shall be someone present for the Plaintiff or 19 it shall be videotaped. That's what the 20 Supreme Court case says. + +21 And it's on page, it's actually on Page 5 22 of the opinion that counsel provided me today. + +23 The problem is is we filed affidavits from 24 Dr. Ryan stating that if there is a court 25 reporter and if there is a lawyer in the room + +0006 while the psych examination is moving forward, + +2 it is going to interrupt the natural flow of 3 questioning and the natural process of the 4 examination. + +5 If you look on Pages 6 through 12 of the + +document that I provided to you, Dr.. provides his opinion as to how and why it would interrupt and conflict with the examination process. + +Yesterday we were in front of Your Honor, and we -- this is an example of how the Plaintiffs want all, each and every piece of discovery they can get from Jeffrey Epstein, but they don't want to follow other orders that were similar in nature with regard to doing discovery in their case. Judge has already entered an order, like I said, Judge, not limiting the scope of the examination and providing for avideo feed into an adjacent room so counsel can be present and can monitor the happenings in the examination. + +I don't see a reason why counsel needs to be present with the exception of what counsel has told me himself, Mr. who is not here today, is to make objections during the + + psychological examination in order to preserve the attorney-client, work product, and other privileges that he may see fit to raise. + +Well, the only thing that I can compare that to is when you have aclient on the stand or you have awitness on the stand, and they have been convicted of acrime of dishonesty or false statement, the lawyer can't get up and object while the questioning is happening because that would disrupt the flow of the answer and may prevent you from getting certified records in. + +THE COURT: Not to cut you off -- MR. PIKE: Yes. + +THE COURT: -- but I do have to move on and I have had these motions thousands of times to deal with, so it's nothing terribly new but I thank you for your courtesy. + +MR. PIKE: Thank you, Judge. + +MR. : Your Honor, keeping that in mind it is our position, first of all the order has to deal with another Plaintiff in another case. It has nothing do with these Plaintiffs and they have rights. + +Two, Rule 1.360 specifically provides for + +and the Supreme Court case provides for a Plaintiff has a right to have acourt reporter, a videographer, and an attorney in the room if that's what they want. The case -- + +THE COURT: Do you concede that unless it's disruptive or it can compromise the nature and sensitivity of this type of process, and in + +8 the affidavit of the doctor, the doctor +9 indicates the presence of third parties often +10 affects the examinees' response to examination +11 items that may alter or distract the stream of +12 thought that he poses having third parties +13 present in the examination room, and that the +14 test may be invalid as a result -- + +15 MR. [REDACTED] N: Well -- I'm sorry, Your +16 Honor. + +17 THE COURT: That's okay -- and that the +18 presence of a videographer or court reporter +19 and attorney in the examination room during my +20 performance of an independent medical +21 examination will create an artificial +22 environment, distraction, and would compromise +23 the integrity of my psychiatric examination, +24 and we strenuously object to the allowance of +25 same. The video camera in the room connected +0009 + +1 by a monitor by cable outside the room would be +2 acceptable. + +3 You know, I think that in a situation like +4 this, and I thank both parties for their +5 presentation, is that since there are +6 significant claims being made for mental +7 anguish and distress and the like, and +8 primarily all of the claims here are +9 psychiatric and psychological in nature, I +10 think that in this type of situation and using +11 broad discretion which is afforded to the +12 courts at the trial level by our appellate +13 courts, I am not going to permit an attorney, a +14 videographer, or court reporter within the +15 room. + +16 At the Plaintiffs' expense a videographer +17 feed can be utilized in an adjacent room as +18 outlined by the physician. And the attorney, +19 videographer, and court reporter can be in that +20 adjacent room with the live feed to take down +21 any such information. + +22 But in this particular case, and in these +23 cases that are before this Court, I believe +24 based upon the doctor's affidavit that the +25 integrity of the examination could well be +0010 + +1 compromised by any third parties being in the +2 room with the physician and the doctor. + +3 I will, however, require that a female +4 assistant to the physician be present in the +5 room. She shall have no active participation +6 in the examination. She will solely be present +7 for the comfort of the patients similar to many +8 physician's practices, whether it be +9 psychiatric or otherwise, to alleviate any + +10 discomfort relative to the lack of another +11 female in the room. + +12 Again, the safeguards are also in place +13 relative to the examination by virtue of the +14 Court's allowance of a videographer, attorney, +15 and court reporter in an adjacent room with a +16 live feed. + +17 But again, for the comfort of the +18 examinee, I am going to require that a female +19 assistant to the physician be present unless +20 waved by the Plaintiffs. + +21 MR. [REDACTED]: If I may, Your Honor, just +22 to clarify something: Two points, one, on +23 Page 4 of the case I did provide, which was 754 +24 So.2nd 697, U.S. Security versus Cimino, the +25 court dealt with an issue with an affidavit. + +0011 + +1 The court did state that even when a doctor +2 submits an affidavit which I got today, that +3 the insurer must prove, and that case it was an +4 insurer seeking the exam at an evidentiary +5 hearing conducted by the trial court that no +6 other qualified physician will be willing to +7 perform the exam with a third party present. +8 And that's specifically stated by the court and +9 it cites several cases. And that's on Page 4. + +10 MR. PIKE: That's not an expert case, +11 Judge. This is our expert that we have hired. + +12 MR. [REDACTED]: Yes, it is Your Honor. +13 It's a physician's examination. + +14 MR. PIKE: It's an IME. + +15 MR. [REDACTED]: Which is what this is, +16 Your Honor. This is a 1.360 IME and this is +17 all addressed by the Supreme Court in this +18 case. And my concern would be what do we do +19 if, procedurally if the attorney feels that a +20 question is privileged and the patient does not +21 know whether or not they should answer the +22 question, how -- there are going to be +23 interruptions. People are going to be in and +24 out of the room. + +25 THE COURT: It can be done + +0012 + +1 post-examination before the Court. I will not +2 let anything in that I believe is prejudicial +3 or the prejudice outweighs the probative value. + +4 MR. [REDACTED]: How about if we have a +5 court reporter at least to make a record? + +6 THE COURT: As I said, I find it to be +7 distracting and I don't think that it is +8 necessary to go through an evidentiary hearing +9 under these circumstances. There is nothing to +10 suggest to this Court that the doctor that has +11 been chosen to do the CME is otherwise + +unacceptable. And it's, again, I am providing the necessary safeguards and do not want to prolong this any further. I thank you for your argument, both sides' presentation. The Court's ruling stan as stated in the record. MR. : Can we get a stay, Your Honor? + +THE COURT: Not at this time, not without written motion. + +MR. PIKE: Judge, within the motion we filed a requirement or arequest for relief that counsel provide L.M. and E.W. next week, October 22nd and 23rd. We have our, we have our expert scheduled. So, that is part of the + +relief of th m • . + + MR. : That's why we are seeking the stay based on the Court's ruling today. + +THE COURT: You will have to file a motion, unse + + MR. : We or the defense, Your Honor? + +THE RT. on me? + +MR. : Us or the defense? + +THE COURT: Yes, you. At this point the examinations are set without an objection to the dates otherwise -- + +MR. : In light -- + +THE COURT: -- there is no objection to the court's or + + MR. : In light of the ruling today, we would like to have a stay so we can weigh our options. + +THE COURT: You can file amotion in writing and w. Ihear it next week. + +MR. : Thank you, Your Honor. + +MR. PIKE: Thank you, Your Honor. + +THE COURT: Thank you. (The hearing was concluded.) + +## + +## CERTIFICATE + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +I, Cynthia Registered Professional Reporter and Florida Professional Reporter, State of Florida at large, certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings and that the transcript is atrue and complete record of my stenographic notes. + +Dated this 15th day of October, 2009. + +Cynthia RPR, FPR \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747482/EFTA02747482.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747482/EFTA02747482.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a0aa2e6e3b55411d8dd1e32be7ab585471226736 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747482/EFTA02747482.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,331 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747482.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 12276, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.0, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "0014", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 28.763999999999996, + 561.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 63.647999999999996, + 561.3299999999999 + ], + [ + 63.647999999999996, + 574.6527709960938 + ], + [ + 28.763999999999996, + 574.6527709960938 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "1 CERTIFICATE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 40.256813049316406, + 574.29 + ], + [ + 216.01730346679688, + 574.29 + ], + [ + 216.01730346679688, + 587.958740234375 + ], + [ + 40.256813049316406, + 587.958740234375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 108 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 49 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 113 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 40 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 113 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 549 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 455 + ], + [ + "Line", + 61 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747482" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747490/EFTA02747490.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747490/EFTA02747490.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d18405074bc3d1a5c71f9385d15d973407ddf579 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747490/EFTA02747490.md @@ -0,0 +1,129 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## JOINT NOTICE OF AGREEMENT AND PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S (#08-80893) MOTION TO WITHDRAW PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S, MOTION FOR ORDER PERMITTING LEGAL COUNSEL TO ATTEND INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW (DE 3461 PURSUANT TO THE AGREEMENT HERETO + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Joint Notice of Agreement and Plaintiff, Jane Doe's, Motion to Withdraw Plaintiff, Jane Doe's, Motion for Leave to Appear/Attend Independent Medical Examination: + +- 1. On September 15, 2009, Defendant filed his Motion for Independent Medical Examination as to Jane Doe (DE 302) +- 2. On October 13, 2009, Plaintiff, Jane Doe (#08-80893), filed her Motion for Order Permitting Legal Counsel to Attend Independent Medical Examination and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 346) + +3. Plaintiff, Jane Doe's, Independent Medical Examination is currently scheduled for November 10, 2009. + +4. The parties have reached an agreement related to Jane Doe's Independent Medical Examination subject to the State Court Order attached hereto as Exhibit A. + +5. Therefore, Plaintiff, Jane Doe's, Motion for Order Permitting Legal Counsel to Attend Independent Medical Examination and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 346) is hereby moot. + +6. Moreover, Defendant's Rule 35 Motion to Compel Independent Medical Examination (DE 302) is moot as it specifically pertains to J n oe. + +> By , ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 16th day of October, 2009 + +Respectfully sub + +By: ROBER ON, JR., ESQ. Florida.aarN 2.4162 rcrit MICHAEL J. PI E, ESQ. Florida Bar #617 96 moike@bc1claw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +(*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein*) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/...** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED] Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED] Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +Fax: 561-383-9424 jsx®searcylaw.com iph®searcylaw.com Counsel for Plaint& C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf brucereinhartlaw.com Counsellor Defendant + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 rjosefsberg@podhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 iageso@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747490/EFTA02747490.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747490/EFTA02747490.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..47f298e6a2a4ffb439be291357fd0a8aebfcba6d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747490/EFTA02747490.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,265 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747490.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4954, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.98, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 415.86566162109375, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 415.86566162109375, + 102.35302734375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 102.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JOINT NOTICE OF AGREEMENT AND PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S (#08-80893) \nMOTION TO WITHDRAW PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE'S, MOTION FOR ORDER \nPERMITTING LEGAL COUNSEL TO ATTEND INDEPENDENT MEDICAL \nEXAMINATION AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW (DE 3461 \nPURSUANT TO THE AGREEMENT HERETO", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.024, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 526.359130859375, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 526.359130859375, + 433.85302734375 + ], + [ + 93.024, + 433.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 430.9200000000001 + ], + [ + 366.4279479980469, + 430.9200000000001 + ], + [ + 366.4279479980469, + 447.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 447.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/...", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 169.29 + ], + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 169.29 + ], + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 210.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 210.60000000000002 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747490" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747494/EFTA02747494.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747494/EFTA02747494.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cdaa79cc30dabf5af07c23e08199a7b0e301e197 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747494/EFTA02747494.md @@ -0,0 +1,185 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF, + +### MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, ATTENDANCE AT PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION (DE 331) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Response to Plaintiff, Motion for Protective Order as to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's, Attendance at Plaintiff's Deposition and Notice of Incorporation of Notice of Reliance of Supplemental Authority (DE 324). + +- 1. On September 29, 2009, Plaintiff filed her Motion for Protective Order as to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's, Attendance at Deposition (DE 331). +- 2. At Paragraph 4 of Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order, Plaintiff incorporated DE 292 and DE 297 as her arguments supporting the relief sought (i.e. to + +prevent Epstein from attending Disposition). DE 292 and 297 were filed by Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-8. + +3. On September 11, 20009, Epstein filed his Emergency Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order (DE 292) and Emergency Motion to Allow the Attendance of Jeffrey Epstein at the Deposition of Plaintiffs and Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's, Jane Does Nos. 2-8, Motion for Protective Order as to Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance at the Deposition of Plaintiffs with Incorporated Memorandum of Law. + +4. The arguments set forth in DE 296 are incorporated herein by reference in response to Motion for Protective Order filed at DE 331. + +5. The arguments set forth in Epstein's Motion at DE 296 apply equally in response to the arguments set forth by Plaintiff, , at DE 331. + +WHEREFORE, Epstein respectfully requests that this Court enter an order denying Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order, provide that Epstein is permitted to attend the depositions of the Plaintiffs that have asserted claims against him in the related matters, and for such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +> B MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +# Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 16th day of October 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: \_\_\_\_\_ + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/** [REDACTED] + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, +08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. +08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +08-80811 +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747494/EFTA02747494.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747494/EFTA02747494.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..40cb7e33cbc737377dd607d09a9e3fa4f85a3869 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747494/EFTA02747494.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,280 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747494.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5809, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.46, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 413.23565673828125, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 413.23565673828125, + 100.863037109375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 100.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF,", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 94.86, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 458.7316589355469, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 458.7316589355469, + 390.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 94.86, + 390.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO \nDEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, ATTENDANCE AT PLAINTIFF'S \nDEPOSITION (DE 331)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.99600000000001, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 514.6605224609375, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 514.6605224609375, + 432.363037109375 + ], + [ + 111.99600000000001, + 432.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 596.16 + ], + [ + 364.9179382324219, + 596.16 + ], + [ + 364.9179382324219, + 611.6030120849609 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 611.6030120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 389.84400000000005, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 389.84400000000005, + 375.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 375.03000000000003 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 71 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 60 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747494" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747498/EFTA02747498.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747498/EFTA02747498.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..56476a6705279cd13df6dc71f2c5282fce659b3f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747498/EFTA02747498.md @@ -0,0 +1,232 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/MM + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S REPLY TO RESPONSE [DE 339] TO MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION + +Plaintiff Jane Doe, hereby replies to defendant Jeffrey Epstein's response (DE 339 in consolidated case no. 08-CIV-80119) to her motion to compel answers to her first request for production. Epstein should be compelled to provide the requested information, because it is not properly subject to a Fifth Amendment invocation. + +# SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION + +# Request No. 5. + +Jane Doe withdraws this request. + +# Requests No. 7, 9 and 10 + +Request No. 7: All discovery information obtained by you or your attorneys as a result of the exchange of discovery in the State criminal case against you or the Federal investigation against you. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED] + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Federal Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and § 90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege. + +Request No. 9: Any documents or other evidentiary materials provided to local, state, or federal law enforcement investigators or local, state or federal prosecutors investigating your sexual activities with minors. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and § 90.410, Fla. Stat.1 Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorney-client privilege. + +Request No. 10: All correspondence between you and your attorneys and state or federal law enforcement or prosecutors (includes, but not limited to, letters to and from the States Attorney's office or any agents thereof). + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and § 90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request may include information subject to work product or an attorneyclient privilege. + +#### Reply to Epstein's Response: + +These requests simply seek information that the federal government gave to Epstein in the course of its plea discussions with him. Remarkably, Epstein claims that these materials — which started in the government's possession -- are now somehow transformed and given Fifth Amendment protection by his mere receipt of them. The Fifth Amendment does not work such alchemy. + +It is true, of course, that the Fifth Amendment covers situations where the act of producing documents has "communicative aspects of its own, wholly aside from the contents of the papers produced." Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391, 410 (1976). But this "act of production" doctrine has stringent limits. It does not extend, for example, to a claim by a taxpayer that he would incriminate himself by producing his accountant's work papers. As the Supreme Court has explained, the government's awareness of these documents was "a foregone conclusion" and therefore their production could be required: + +It is doubtful that implicitly admitting the existence and possession of the papers rises to level of testimony within the protection of the Fifth Amendment. The papers belong to the accountant, were prepared by him, and are the kind usually prepared by an accountant working on the tax returns of his client. Surely the Government is in no way relying on the "truthtelling" of the taxpayer to prove the existence of . . . the documents. The existence and location of the papers are a foregone conclusion. + +Fisher, 425 U.S. at 410 (emphasis added). + +Courts applying this "foregone conclusion" standard to various fact patterns have asked whether the government was aware of the documents' existence apart from any actions of the defendant. Thus, United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27 (2000), rejected the Government's argument that it was a foregone conclusion that the defendant possessed "ordinary business records." The Court noted that the government had no "prior knowledge" of these records: + +Whatever the scope of this "foregone conclusion" rationale, the facts of this case plainly fall outside of it. While in Fisher the Government already knew that the documents were in the attorney's possession and could independently confirm their existence and authenticity through the accountants who created them, here the Government has not shown that it had any prior knowledge of either the existence or the whereabouts of the 13,120 pages of documents ultimately produced by respondent. + +Id. at 44 (emphasis added). + +In this case, of course, the government's "prior knowledge" of the documents that Jane Doe seeks is obviously and undeniably a foregone conclusion. The government itself gave Epstein the documents! Therefore, there is no plausible argument that, in producing these documents to Jane Doe, Epstein will somehow be incriminating himself by disclosing to the government something that it does not already know. The government clearly has prior knowledge of documents that it gave to Epstein. Here, + +then, the "existence and location of the documents . . . are a 'foregone conclusion' and [Epstein] . . . adds little or nothing to the sum total of the Government's information by conceding that he in fact has the documents." In re Grand Jury Subpoena, Dated April 18, 2003, 383 F.3d 905, 910 (9th Cir. 2004). + +The D.C. Circuit has recently refused to extend the act of production doctrine to facts very similar to those here. In United States v. Ponds, 454 F.3d 313 (D.C. Cir. 2006), federal prosecutors sought information about possible crimes committed by a defense attorney in the course of representing a defendant in a federal case. The prosecutors subpoenaed the attorney to produce all correspondence between him and courts and prosecutors in that case. In summarily rejecting an argument that producing the documents would somehow fall within the act of production doctrine of the Fifth Amendment, the D.C. Circuit explained that "the government must have known of the existence of documents . . . because it was a party to that correspondence." Id. at 325. The Circuit further explained that the government's subpoena need not "name every scrap of paper that is produced. Because the government already had sufficient knowledge about the . . . [case-related] documents, . . . [the defense attorney] was simply surrendering them, not testifying, by complying with those demands in the subpoena." Id. Other cases similarly reject attempts to use an act of production shield to turning over documents whose existence is known to the government or is a foregone conclusion. See, e.g. In re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated Oct 29, 199Z 1 F.3d 87, 93 (2d Cir. 1993) (rejecting act of production argument because compliance with subpoena requiring production of a personal calendar "would require mere + +surrender of the calendar, and not testimony" (internal quotation omitted)); United States v. Clark, 847 F.2d 1467, 1473 (10th Cir. 1988) (accounting records not subject to act of production protection; in producing records the defendant would not "authenticate the documents as being his own or being accurate"); Securities and Exchange Commission v. First Jersey Securities, Inc., 843 F.2d 74, 76 (2d Cir. 1988) (rejecting act of production argument regarding bank records because "everybody knew that they existed"); ]"); United States v. Lang, 792 F.2d 1235, 1242 (4th Cir. 1986) (rejecting act of production argument regarding bank records because an IRS agent "had been given access to and has examined some or all of the records" and thus the defendants "act of producing those records would add little or nothing to the sum total of the Government's knowledge of the existence and location of the summoned records"). + +Rather than discuss specific case law about the act of production doctrine, Epstein retreats into mere generalities. Thus, he asserts that giving to Jane Doe the discovery produced by the government might disclose witnesses helpful to Jane Doe. Epstein's Resp. at 7. But this assertion badly confuses how the Fifth Amendment works. Of course, the government's documents have information that might be harmful to Epstein's claims of innocence; presumably that is why the government was showing him the documents in the first place to convince him to plead guilty to a crime. But it is a "settled proposition that a person may be required to produce specific documents even though they contain incriminating assertions of fact or belief . . . ." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 35 (2000). The only question here is whether turning over the government's own documents to Jane Doe somehow forces Epstein to provide + +"testimony" to the government — something forbidden by the Fifth Amendment. Epstein has no such viable claim here. + +Epstein also argues that the magistrate judge's earlier omnibus order (doc. # 339 in case no. 9:08-CV-80119) requires that request for production be denied. This is untrue for several reasons. First, the earlier requests that were apparently denied2 were broader than the narrow requests made by Jane Doe. The earlier requests included, for example, a request for all documents "relating to" the federal non-prosecution agreement (Production Request No. 2), all documents "relating to" Epstein's Florida guilty plea (Production Request No. 3), and all documents obtained in "investigation relating to" either the federal or state criminal investigations. See Epstein's Resp. at 8 (quoting those requests). Such overbroad requests might require Epstein to effectively make "use of the content of his mind" in identifying which documents were responsive. See Hubbell, 530 U.S. at 43. But here Jane Doe has propounded far narrower requests that do not require any mind to pick and choose. Indeed, Jane Doe's request is significantly narrower that other requests that the United States Supreme Court and other courts have upheld. See, e.g., Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391, 394 (1976) (rejecting Fifth Amendment challenge to subpoena requesting "accountant's workpapers pertaining to Dr. E.J. Mason's books and records of 1969, 1970, and 1971); United States v. Ponds, 454 F.3d 313, 325 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (rejecting Fifth Amendment challenge to subpoena requesting "[a]ny and all correspondence between the Law + +2 The magistrate judge's order on this point actually states that it was Epstein's motion to quash that was "denied." See Order at 17 ("Defendant's Motion as it relates to Pnxluction Requests 1, 2. 3. 4. 6. R. 14. 15. 16. 17. and 20 is denied." (emphasis added)). Read in context, it appears that the magistrate judge intended to state that the defendant's motion was granted. + +Offices of Navron Ponds [the defendant] and courts and prosecutors in the matter of U.S. v. Jerome Harris" (internal bracketing omitted)); United States v. Clark, 847 F.2d 1467, 1473 (10th Cir. 1988) (rejecting Fifth Amendment challenge to subpoena requesting "all records pertaining to the performance of any accounting service by [one named person to another named person. + +The magistrate judge's earlier order is also not controlling here for a second reason. That order was entered in a case that has been consolidated with Jane Doe's case for discovery purposes. But Jane Doe was not a party to the earlier ruling and did not have the opportunity to provide briefing and argument before the magistrate judge ruled. In this case, of course, Jane Doe has had that opportunity and has now provided recent precedents clearly dictating that her specific motion should be granted. See, e.g., United States v. Ponds, 454 F.3d 313, 325 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (Fifth Amendment privilege does not extend to correspondence to which the government was a party). + +Epstein also argues some sort of attorney-client or work-product privilege bars production of the documents. This argument is frivolous. The attorney-client privilege, for example, extends only to a "confidential communication" made in the course of "rendition of legal services to the client." Fla. Stat. Ann. § 90.502(2). Documents given by the government to Epstein are obviously not confidential communications within the sense of the attorney client privilege. Similarly, the documents are not work product, because they do not involve any creation by Epstein's attorneys. See, e.g., Balboa v. State, 446 So.2d 1134, 1135 (Fla. App. 1984) ("opinions, theories, or conclusions of attorneys are privileged, but statements of witnesses to attorneys are not"). + +Epstein finally claims that the information is protected by Federal Rules of Evidence 408 and 410, regarding settlement discussions and plea negotiations. Those federal rules3 have no bearing Jane Doe's requests for production number 7 and 9, which seek respectively discovery provided by the government and "evidentiary materials" provided by the government. These are simply not "offers to compromise," Fed. R. Evid. 408, or "plea discussions," Fed. R. Evid. 410, to which the rules apply. + +While Rules 408 and 410 do not covers requests number 7 and 9, they potentially cover Jane Doe's request number 10, seeking correspondence regarding the plea discussions in this case. These rules, however, provide no valid basis for resisting Jane Doe's discovery requests. Discovery is, of course, permitted "regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant" to Jane Doe's claims. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1) (emphasis added). The Rules of Evidence regarding settlement discussions do not create any privileges. It is possible that Epstein may argue that these rules ultimately bar the use of certain evidence at trial. If these arguments are made, Jane Doe will respond in due course.4 But under the discovery rules "[r]elevant information need not be admissible at the trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b). Thus, discovery is "construed broadly to encompass any matter that bears on, or that reasonably could lead to + +3 Epstein also cites several analogous state rules of evidence, which are likewise inapplicable for the reasons explained regarding the federal rule. + +Both rules contains exemptions, allowing such evidence to be used to prove such things as "state of mind," "bias and prejudice," or other things apart from mere liability for the matter under discussion. See, e.g., United States v. Peed, 714 F.2d 7, 9-10 (4th Cir. 1983) (admitting defendant's offer to return missing properly because it appeared motivated by purpose of persuading victim to drop criminal charges rather than to compromise civil claim). The Florida rules that Epstein cites, even though not applicable in this federal case, are also subject to similar exemptions. + +another matter that could bear on any issue that is or may be in the case." Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 352 (1978). The correspondence with the government agencies may well point Jane Doe in the direction of admissible evidence, and therefore Epstein should be compelled to provide the correspondence sought in request number 10. + +In a last desperate attempt to thwart production, Epstein appeals to "third-party privacy rights." Epstein's Resp. at 11. Given the extent to which Epstein's hired investigators have concluded interrogations of anyone even remotely connected with this case, this appeal to privacy interests rings rather hollow. In any event, it is odd to think that the privacy rights of these third persons do not interfere with Epstein himself (a convicted sex offender) reviewing these materials but forbid equal viewing by attorneys for a victim who was victimized by him. In any event, none of the authorities cited by Epstein are remotely similar to the case at hand. Epstein's argument should therefore be rejected summarily. + +# Requests No. 8, 11, 14, and 15 + +Request No. 8: All financial documents evidencing asset transfers from 2005 to present for you personally or any company or corporation owned by you. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED] + +Request No. 11: Any and all documents reflecting your current net worth. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 14: A sworn statement of your net worth (including a detailed financial statement depicting all current assets and liabilities). + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Request No. 15: All financial statements or affidavits produced by you for any reason, to any person, company, entity or corporation since 2005. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my + +constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution; overly broad. + +# Reply to Epstein's Response: + +Epstein's main argument to turning over financial records is that he has explained in two sealed documents (doc. #282 and doc. #283) why producing financial records would incriminate him. Of course, because these documents are sealed, Jane Doe has no way of determining one way or other whether Epstein's assertions are true. Jane Doe therefore respectfully asks the Court to make its determination of the issue, mindful of the fact that it is proceeding without the benefit of an adversarial presentation from Jane Doe. + +If the Court concludes that the materials in DE 282 and DE 283 do demonstrate that Epstein would incriminate himself by discussing his assets — and, in particular, his recent transfers of assets to overseas locations and elsewhere — then the Court should consider the information in deciding whether to grant Jane Doe's motion for Preliminary Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets [DE165], for reasons that Jane Doe explains in her concurrently-filed Notice that Additional Evidence of Epstein's Fraudulent Asset Transfers Will Be Filed shortly and Motion for Consideration by the Court of Materials in DE 282 and DE 283 in Determining Motion for Appointment of a Receiver. + +Epstein's other generic objections are makeweight and should be rejected. The financial records are relevant to a variety of issues in the case, including Jane Doe's efforts to show a conspiracy and to obtain punitive damages. + +### Request No. 12: + +Request No. 12: Personal tax returns for all years from 2002 through the present. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution; overly broad. + +# Reply to Epstein's Response: + +Epstein's refusal to turn over his filed tax returns is absurd. For all the reasons explained earlier in connection with Requests 7, 9 and 10, the government (i.e., the IRS) already has a copy of these returns. Therefore, it can hardly be incriminating for Epstein to produce them. + +There is an additional, independent reason for rejecting Epstein's refusal to produce his tax returns. Tax records, including in particular filed tax returns, are "required records" that are not covered by the Fifth Amendment. See, e.g., Rajah v. Mukasey, 544 F.3d 427, 442 (2nd Cir. 2008) (". . . a taxpayer's W-2 forms are required records not subject to the Fifth Amendment because they are a mandatory part of a civil regulatory regime . . "); In re Doe, 711 F.2d 1187, 1191 (2d Cir. 1983) ('We have little difficulty applying the required records exception to the W-2 . . . forms" and ordering production of W-2 forms over Fifth Amendment objection); In re Doe, 97 F.R.D. 640, 644-45 (S.D.N.Y. 1982) (ordering production of physician's W-2 forms as required + +records); In re Grand Jury Empanelled March 19, 1989, 541 F.Supp. 1, 3 (D.N.J. 1981). (ordering the production of tax returns and W-2 statements to a grand jury), aff'd, 680 F.2d 327, 336 n. 15 (3rd Cir. 1982) ("[W]e affirm that those subpoenaed documents in the appellee's possession which are required either to be kept by law or to be disclosed to a public agency should be produced for the grand jury's inspection."), aff'd in part, rev'd in part on other grounds sub nom. United States v. Doe, 465 U.S. 605, 608 n.3 (1984). Of course, in all these cases, tax returns were ordered produced even though a federal statute (cited by Epstein) makes tax returns "confidential." See 26 U.S.C. § 6103. In all these cases, the confidentiality of provided by the IRS statute was obviously and properly overridden by the discovery procedures found in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26. + +Request No. 13: A photocopy of your passport, including any supplemental pages reflecting travel to locations outside the 50 United States between 2002 and 2008, including any documents or records regarding plane tickets, hotel receipts, or transportation arrangements. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional protections and privileges, the scope of information is so overbroad that it seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead + +to the discovery of admissible evidence; compiling such information over a six year period would be unduly burdensome and time consuming.5 + +# Reply to Epstein's Response: + +Here again, Epstein has no good basis for refusing to turn over something that the government is aware of and has inspected. Epstein has had to produce his passport to government immigration agents whenever he leaves or enters the United States. There is no valid Fifth Amendment basis for refusing the same opportunity to Jane Doe. + +In addition, like income tax records, a passport is a "required record" for which no Fifth Amendment privilege is available. See Rajah v. Mukasey, 544 F.3d 427, 442 (2nd Cir. 2008) ("Just as a taxpayer's W-2 forms are required records not subject to the Fifth Amendment because they are a mandatory part of a civil regulatory regime, so too are the passports . . at issue in the current case"). + +# Request No. 16. + +Request No. 16: All medical records of Defendant Epstein from Dr. Stephan Alexander. + +Defendant is asserting his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that at the present time I cannot select authenticate, and produce documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my + +5 Jane Doe believes that Epstein used overseas travel as a means of obtaining underage girls for sexual purposes and for avoiding criminal prosecution for such activities. Also, providing a copy of a passport is hardly "burdensome." Also, given the fact that Epstein is likely to have used the services of a travel agent or another intermediary, it should not be difficult for him to provide evidence of his overseas travels from such intermediaries. + +constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +# Reply to Epstein's Response: + +Epstein claims, but does not prove, that he has hired Dr. Stephen Alexander as an expert witness in this case. He contends that he is therefore no obligated to turn over Dr. Alexander's records. + +Jane Doe understands that Dr. Alexander was Epstein's physician before this litigation ever started. Therefore, as to all records before such hiring, there is no protection. Even after such hiring, it would be Epstein's burden to show that certain medical examinations were done for purposes of litigation to prove work-product protection — a burden Epstein has not attempted to meet. + +Epstein also notes that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ("HIPAA") requires that records be disclosed in civil discovery only under an order insuring confidentiality. Jane Doe has no objection to such a confidentiality order. Finally, Epstein argues that some of the records may be protected by the Florida doctorpatient privilege. Fla. Stat. § 90.503(2). Epstein, however, is required to demonstrate that the elements of the privilege are satisfied on a document-by-document basis. Epstein has failed to do this and the documents should therefore be produced (or, in the alternative, Epstein should make an in camera submission showing how each document is privileged). + +# CONCLUSION + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to answer the requests for production discussed above. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED] + +DATED October 16, 2009 + +Respectfully Submitted, + +s/ [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] +[REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER +Las Olas City Centre +401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 +Telephone (954) 522-3456 +Facsimile (954) 527-8663 +Florida Bar No.: 542075 +E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +*and* + +Paul G. Cassell +Pro Hac Vice +332 S. 1400 E. +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +Telephone: 801-585-5202 +Facsimile: 801-585-6833 +E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +**CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 16, 2009 I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +s/ [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] +[REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] + +### SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberaer@aawpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell casselloPbcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberq@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747498/EFTA02747498.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747498/EFTA02747498.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..db31e02cf48606a0398add6af0eb479a609aab2f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747498/EFTA02747498.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1029 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747498.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 18, + "chars": 32930, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.15, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S REPLY TO RESPONSE [DE 339] TO MOTION TO \nCOMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.024, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 520.0159912109375, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 520.0159912109375, + 416.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 93.024, + 416.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 539.46 + ], + [ + 428.1395568847656, + 539.46 + ], + [ + 428.1395568847656, + 555.1800079345703 + ], + [ + 184.82399999999998, + 555.1800079345703 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Request No. 5.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 567.81 + ], + [ + 195.1156768798828, + 567.81 + ], + [ + 195.1156768798828, + 582.9199981689453 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 582.9199981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Requests No. 7, 9 and 10", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 622.89 + ], + [ + 252.709716796875, + 622.89 + ], + [ + 252.709716796875, + 638.0500030517578 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 638.0500030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Reply to Epstein's Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 345.06 + ], + [ + 280.02923583984375, + 345.06 + ], + [ + 280.02923583984375, + 359.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 359.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Requests No. 8, 11, 14, and 15", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 495.72 + ], + [ + 283.1067810058594, + 495.72 + ], + [ + 283.1067810058594, + 511.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 511.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Reply to Epstein's Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 151.47 + ], + [ + 280.43017578125, + 151.47 + ], + [ + 280.43017578125, + 166.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 166.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Request No. 12:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 69.156, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 166.50381469726562, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 166.50381469726562, + 125.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 69.156, + 125.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Reply to Epstein's Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 330.48 + ], + [ + 280.43017578125, + 330.48 + ], + [ + 280.43017578125, + 345.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 345.91998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Reply to Epstein's Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 151.47 + ], + [ + 280.02923583984375, + 151.47 + ], + [ + 280.02923583984375, + 166.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 166.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Request No. 16.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 201.92250061035156, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 201.92250061035156, + 470.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 470.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Reply to Epstein's Response:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 151.47 + ], + [ + 280.02923583984375, + 151.47 + ], + [ + 280.02923583984375, + 166.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 166.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.384, + 648.0 + ], + [ + 350.1524353027344, + 648.0 + ], + [ + 350.1524353027344, + 663.1800079345703 + ], + [ + 264.384, + 663.1800079345703 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 509.49 + ], + [ + 384.336, + 509.49 + ], + [ + 384.336, + 524.0699999999999 + ], + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 524.0699999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.324, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 350.56756591796875, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 350.56756591796875, + 124.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 261.324, + 124.93353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747498" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747516/EFTA02747516.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747516/EFTA02747516.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..907f629b30df39c1a08290f6bb95046e08ccc241 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747516/EFTA02747516.md @@ -0,0 +1,116 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE [DE 342] TO MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe, hereby files her reply to defendant Jeffrey Epstein's response (DE 342 in consolidated case no. 08-CIV-80119) to her motion to compel answers to her first request for admissions. Epstein should be compelled to provide the requested information because it is not properly subject to a Fifth Amendment invocation as explained in Jane Doe's opening submission. + +Jane Doe will stand on her opening submission, but briefly replies to Epstein's response with regard to one subject: Epstein's current net worth. + +# Requests Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 23 + +- 1. Your net worth is greater than \$10 million. +- 2. Your net worth is greater than \$50 million. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA, + +- 3. Your net worth is greater than \$100 million. +- 4. Your net worth is greater than \$500 million. +- 5. Your net worth is greater than \$1 billion. +- 23. You currently have the ability to post a bond of \$15 million to satisfy a judgment in this case without financial or other difficulty. + +Response: In response, Defendant asserts his U.S. constitutional privileges as specified herein. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk waiving my Fifth Amendment rights as guaranteed by the Untied States Constitution and losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Reply to Epstein's Response: Epstein argues that disclosing information about his current financial status is somehow incriminating. The reasons for this claim are obscure, because Epstein relies on sealed submissions (DE 282 and DE 293) that Jane Doe has not had the opportunity to review. Of course, because these documents are sealed, Jane Doe has no way of determining one way or other whether Epstein's assertions are true. Jane Doe therefore respectfully asks the Court to make its determination of the issue, mindful of the fact that it is proceeding without the benefit of an adversarial presentation from Jane Doe. + +If the Court concludes that the materials in DE 282 and DE 283 do demonstrate that Epstein would incriminate himself by discussing his current net worth, then the Court should consider the information in deciding whether to grant Jane Doe's motion for Preliminary Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets [DE 165], for + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAi l + +reasons that Jane Doe explains in her concurrently-filed Notice that Additional Evidence of Epstein's Fraudulent Asset Transfers Will Be Filed shortly and Motion for Consideration by the Court of Materials in DE 282 and DE 283 in Determining Motion for Appointment of a Receiver. + +In any event, it appears far-fetched that answering Jane Doe's requests for admissions about net worth would be incriminating. The above-listed questions ask for a current "snapshot" of Epstein's current net wealth. They do not ask for how Epstein obtained that net wealth, what sorts of asset transfers underlie that net wealth, or any other questions that could even conceivably provide a basis for criminal prosecution. For example, if Epstein admits that he has a net worth of more than \$1 billion, that does not provide a link to any crime. It is not a crime in the United States to have immense wealth. Similarly, if Epstein were to admit that he could easily post a \$15 million bond to secure any judgment in this case, that admission would not be relevant to any possible criminal prosecution. + +Accordingly, Epstein should be compelled to answer these requests for admission about his current net worth, as well as all of the other requests Jane Doe has propounded. + +## CONCLUSION + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to answer the requests for admission Jane Doe has propounded. + +DATED October 16, 2009 + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED] + +Respectfully Submitted, + +s/ [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] +[REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER +Las Olas City Centre +401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 +Telephone (954) 522-3456 +Facsimile (954) 527-8663 +Florida Bar No.: 542075 +E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +*and* + +Paul G. Cassell +Pro Hac Vice +332 S. 1400 E. +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +Telephone: 801-585-5202 +Facsimile: 801-585-6833 +E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +**CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 16, 2009 I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +s/ [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] +[REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +# SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jooldbercier@aawoa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell casselloPbcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberq@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747516/EFTA02747516.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747516/EFTA02747516.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dce45f57a44f32748e1375910c4cc3ca48a16ccd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747516/EFTA02747516.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,357 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747516.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 6371, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.01, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE [DE 342] TO \nMOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S FIRST \nREQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 524.398193359375, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 524.398193359375, + 430.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 430.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Requests Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 23", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 635.85 + ], + [ + 302.9665832519531, + 635.85 + ], + [ + 302.9665832519531, + 651.9199981689453 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 651.9199981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 579.15 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 579.15 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 594.1800079345703 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 594.1800079345703 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 453.6 + ], + [ + 385.56000000000006, + 453.6 + ], + [ + 385.56000000000006, + 469.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 469.79999999999995 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.548, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 350.57220458984375, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 350.57220458984375, + 125.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 262.548, + 125.04998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747516" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747521/EFTA02747521.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747521/EFTA02747521.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..24d572e0f432d9a32b119dcb487bbb0c92fc71b5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747521/EFTA02747521.md @@ -0,0 +1,124 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE [DE 343] TO MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S INTERROGATORIES + +Plaintiff Jane Doe, hereby files her reply to defendant Jeffrey Epstein's response (DE 343 in consolidated case no. 08-CIV-80119) to her motion to compel answers to her interrogatories. Epstein should be compelled to provide the requested information, because it is not properly subject to a Fifth Amendment invocation as explained in Jane Doe's opening submission. + +Jane Doe will stand on her opening submission, but briefly replies to Epstein's response with regard to two subjects: the names of Epstein's accountants and Epstein's property holdings. + +## Interrogatory No. 17: + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Provide the names, addresses, and phone numbers of all your current accountants, financial planners or money managers handling, or assisting in the handling, of your money or assets. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. Constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk waiving my Fifth Amendment rights as guaranteed by the Untied States Constitution and losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Additionally, workproduct and attorney-client. + +Reply to Epstein's Response: Epstein argues that disclosing information about his accountants is somehow incriminating. The reasons for this claim are obscure, because Epstein relies on sealed submissions (doc. #282 and #293) that Jane Doe has not had the opportunity to review. Jane Doe therefore respectfully asks the Court to make its determination of the issue, mindful of the fact that it is proceeding without the benefit of an adversarial presentation from Jane Doe. + +In any event, it appears far-fetched that answering Jane Doe's interrogatories about the names of his accountants is incriminating. It is clear that "[d]iscovery requests that seek background information on events and experiences of the witness for which he cannot realistically or genuinely be expected to be charged with a crime are not subject to Fifth Amendment protection." Doc. No. 242 at p. 12. The mere names of financial planners do not disclose anything for which Epstein can be prosecuted. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +A good illustration of this conclusion comes from Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976), where the government subpoenaed records that Fisher (a taxpayer) had provided to his accountants. In rejecting Fisher's Fifth Amendment argument, the Court explained: "[A]ssuming that these aspects of producing the accountant's papers have some minimal testimonial significance, surely it is not illegal to seek accounting help in connection with one's tax returns or for the accountant to prepare workpapers and deliver them to the taxpayer." Id. at 412. The situation here is even one step more removed from any risk of incrimination. Jane Doe is not asking for papers that Epstein delivered to his accountants (as the government obtained in Fisher), but the mere names of accountants. Under Fisher, Jane Doe is entitled to this information. + +Accordingly, Epstein should be compelled to answer Interrogatory No. 17. + +# Interrogatory No. 5: + +Describe any real property in which you have a total or partial ownership interest, either directly or indirectly. + +Interrogatory No. 15: Describe with specificity the amount of money available to you in cash or that can be readily liquidated as such. Include the bank, financial institution, holding company, or other location of this money and the name of the account. + +Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatories as well as his U.S. Constitutional privileges. I intend to respond to all relevant discovery regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any discovery relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk waiving my Fifth Amendment rights as guaranteed by the Untied States Constitution and losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant objects as the + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAi l + +interrogatory is so overbroad and, thus, seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +Reply to Epstein's Response: Here again, Epstein's basis for contending that this information is somehow incriminating is obscure. For example, how is it even possibly incriminating to state something along the lines of "I have \$1,000,000 in account number 12345 in the Acme National Bank." That does not admit a crime or anything remotely connected to a crime. + +A Fifth Amendment privilege can only be properly asserted with respect to "genuinely threatening questions." United States v. Goodwin, 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir. 1980). Epstein's concern appears to be not that he will be prosecuted for having money in a bank, but rather that this fact may prove useful to Jane Doe. But "the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination 'does not extent to consequences of a noncriminal nature, such as threats of liability in civil suits.'" United States v. Conces, 507 F.3d 1028, 1040 (6th Cir. 2007) (quoting United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 125 (1980)). It is Epstein's burden to "demonstrate a real danger of incrimination if he were to respond to any particular discovery request." Conces, 507 F.3d at 1040. Epstein has utterly failed to do so. These questions are not genuinely threatening and Epstein should be compelled to answer. + +## CONCLUSION + +For all these reasons, the Court should compel Epstein to answer the interrogatories Jane Doe has propounded. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED] + +DATED October 16, 2009 + +Respectfully Submitted, + +s/ [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] +[REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER +Las Olas City Centre +401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 +Telephone (954) 522-3456 +Facsimile (954) 527-8663 +Florida Bar No.: 542075 +E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +*and* + +Paul G. Cassell +Pro Hac Vice +332 S. 1400 E. +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +Telephone: 801-585-5202 +Facsimile: 801-585-6833 +E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +**CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 16, 2009 I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +s/ [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] +[REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +# SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberaer@aawpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell casselln@bciclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberq@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747521/EFTA02747521.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747521/EFTA02747521.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dbc073a4d94cb30b96fb2f845488174522205120 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747521/EFTA02747521.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,402 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747521.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 9059, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.29, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 202.572, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 202.572, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE [DE 343] TO \nMOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO PLAINTFF'S INTERROGATORIES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 388.6875 + ], + [ + 524.398193359375, + 388.6875 + ], + [ + 524.398193359375, + 416.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 416.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Interrogatory No. 17:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 650.8074951171875 + ], + [ + 229.40298461914062, + 650.8074951171875 + ], + [ + 229.40298461914062, + 665.4199981689453 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 665.4199981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Interrogatory No. 5:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 413.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 222.61355590820312, + 413.09999999999997 + ], + [ + 222.61355590820312, + 428.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 428.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.772, + 606.6899999999999 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 606.6899999999999 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 621.5500030517578 + ], + [ + 263.772, + 621.5500030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 482.76 + ], + [ + 384.336, + 482.76 + ], + [ + 384.336, + 496.53 + ], + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 496.53 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 350.56756591796875, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 350.56756591796875, + 124.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 124.93353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 68 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747521" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747527/EFTA02747527.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747527/EFTA02747527.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..01f990d6a7cafc79f8516454f3f25429a973a40b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747527/EFTA02747527.md @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S NOTICE THAT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OF EPSTEIN'S FRAUDULENT ASSET TRANSFERS WILL BE FILED SHORTLY AND MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COURT OF MATERIALS IN DOCKET NUMBERS 282 AND 283 IN DETERMINING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER RESTRAINING FRAUDULENT ASSETS TRANSFERS AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff Jane Doe (Case #80893), hereby gives notice to the Court that she will shortly be filing additional evidence of fraudulent asset transfers by Jeffrey Epstein and to move the court to consider these materials and all of the materials found in Docket Numbers 282 and 283 in determining whether to grant Jane Doe's Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets (DE 165 in case no. 9:08-CV-80119). + +## ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OF EPSTEIN'S FRAUDULENT ASSET TRANSFERS WILL BE FILED SHORTLY + +As the Court knows, on June 19, 2009, Jane Doe filed a motion asking for appointment of a receiver to take control of defendant Jeffrey Epstein's assets and to + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +post a \$15 million bond to secure any potential judgment in this case (DE 165 in case no. 9:08-CV-80119). The motion alleged that Epstein was hiding hundreds of millions of dollars in assets in an effort to defeat any judgment that Jane Doe (and many other victims of his child sexual abuse) might obtain against him. On July 13, 2009, Epstein filed his response. Without specifically denying any of Jane Doe's allegations of fraudulent transfers, Epstein essentially argued that Jane Doe lacked any proof of such transfers [DE 198]. + +Jane Doe filed a reply to Epstein's response on July 23, 2009 [DE 217]. But, in addition to the information and arguments provided there, Jane Doe now wants to alert the Court to newly-discovered evidence bolstering her arguments regarding Epstein's fraudulent concealment of his assets. Yesterday (October 15, 2009) counsel for Jane Doe took the deposition of Larry Visoski, who has been Jeffrey Epstein's personal pilot for approximately 18 years, flying (for example) Epstein's Boeing 727 jet. Visoski declared that, in the last year, Epstein has transferred to him four very valuable cars and a boat and registered them in his (Visoski's) name. A transcript of the deposition will not be available until October 22, 2009. But in view of the extreme relevance of this information to Jane Doe's pending-motion, she wanted to advise the Court of the substance of this testimony immediately — and will provide precise quotations from the deposition as soon as it is available. + +While a precise transcript is not yet available, counsel represents that during the deposition, Visoski testified that the four cars and the boat were Epstein's, but that they were registered in his (i.e., Visoski's) name. The cars are a Land Rover/Range Rover + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA, + +Sport 2008 that Epstein purchased in the last year; a Mercedes Benz CLK 2005; Jaguar X 2005; and a F250 2008. The F250 is apparently being kept on St. Island. Visoski was not aware that the F250 was registered in his name, although he was aware of the other vehicles that Epstein registered in his (Visoski's) name. + +In addition, Visoski now has a 35-foot JVC Powerboat. Visoski indicated that the owner of the boat is LSJ LLC. "LSJ" stands for "Little St. John's" Island and the LLC is controlled by Epstein. The boat is now registered in Visoski's name. + +In addition, Visoski, admitted that a 2003 Ferrari 575M, owned by Epstein, is currently being sold in his name for an asking price of \$159,000. The Ferrari is being sold in New York, where Epstein maintains a residence. See http://www.dthoontregistry.com/autos/search/DRau Search Details.asox?item id=437771 website visited on Oct. 15, 2009). Visoski did not know why the car was being sold in his name, and although he found it curious and strange that all these title conveyances were taking place, he did not question Defendant Epstein's motives. + +Visoski also testified that he received a Hummer automobile recently from Epstein. + +Jane Doe will provide the relevant parts of Visoski's testimony to the Court when it becomes available next week and will ask the Court to consider this newly-discovered information in ruling on her motion for appointment of receiver to take control of Jeffrey's Epstein's assets. Because Epstein has recently given notice to the Court that the motion for appointment of a receiver has been pending for roughly 90 days [DE 347] and has asked for a prompt ruling on the motion, Jane Doe wanted to promptly alert the + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA j + +Court to this new information. Because this new information also provides additional evidence of on-going fraudulent transfers, Jane Doe would join Epstein and respectfully request a ruling on her motion for appointment of a receiver as quickly as the Court believes that it has the necessary information to rule. A quick ruling is necessary to avoid further concealment of assets by Epstein. + +### THE COURT SHOULD REVIEW MATERIALS FILED IN DOCKET NUMBERS 282 AND 283 IN DETERMINING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO RESTRAIN FRAUDULENT ASSETS TRANSFERS + +In ruling on Jane Doe's motion for appointment of a receiver, the Court should also consider additional evidence not available at the time that Jane Doe filed her motion — materials provided by Epstein in camera in DE 282 and DE 283. + +As the Court is aware, Jane Doe propounded requests for production, requests for admission, and interrogatories to Epstein to confess his fraudulent transfer of assets. Epstein refused to answer any questions about his asset transfers on Fifth Amendment grounds. Jane Doe then filed motions to compel answers to these questions. See DE 194, DE 195 and DE 196. + +Epstein filed responses to the motions to compel, asserting that he was confronted with a "substantial and real" threat of criminal prosecution if he answered the questions (among others). See DE 339, DE 342 and DE 343. In connection with his responses, Epstein cross-referenced sealed, ex parte submissions he had made in other pleadings in consolidated cases. Epstein represented that "as set forth in more detail in DE 282 and 283" responding to the requests from information about his asset transfers would reveal incriminating information. See DE 339 at 13. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Jane Doe now asks the Court to consider these two sealed submissions not only in connection with Epstein's argument that he need not respond, but also in connection with Jane Doe's motion for appointment of a receiver. If it is true — as Epstein represents — that these sealed submissions truly demonstrates that responding to questions about asset transfers poses a real risk of criminal prosecution, then that same information is obviously relevant to Jane Doe's motion for appointment of a receiver. + +There is, of course, no barrier to the Court considering that information in ruling on Jane Doe's motion. Epstein filed the documents under seal not to keep them from the Court, but to keep them from Jane Doe. Moreover, there is no Fifth Amendment prohibition to considering the information. Epstein has chosen to voluntarily reveal the information for his purposes in prevailing on his arguments on his motion to compel. The Court should be consider the information not only on that motion but on other motions as well. And, in any event, "the Fifth Amendment does not apply in civil cases . . . ." United States v. Scrivner, 167 F.3d 525, 535 (9th Cir. 1999). See U.S. Const. amend. V ("No person . . . shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself . .") (emphasis added). + +Finally, common sense suggests that the Court should consider the information in ruling on Jane Doe's motion for appointment of a receiver. Any other conclusion would essentially mean that the Court would have to turn a blind eye to a defendant who explains (in a sealed submission) how he is perpetrating an on-going fraud. The Court should not bless Epstein's effort to hide his assets. Instead, it should consider all + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA, + +of the information in the sealed submission and, after doing so, should promptly grant Jane Doe's motion for appointment of a receiver to prevent fraudulent transfer of assets. + +# CONCLUSION + +For all these reasons, the Court should consider the additional information described in this pleading in support of Jane Doe's motion for appointment of a receiver to prevent fraudulent transfers of assets. + +DATED October 16, 2009 + +Respectfully Submitted, + +s/ J. J. + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA, + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 16, 2009 I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> /s/ J. J. + +## SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberaer@aawpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bcIclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidroaarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcvlaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bcIclaw.com + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAi + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747527/EFTA02747527.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747527/EFTA02747527.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..af3af45c2210e757891754bf564d47bb874b15f9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747527/EFTA02747527.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,474 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747527.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 10406, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.27, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S NOTICE THAT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OF EPSTEIN'S \nFRAUDULENT ASSET TRANSFERS WILL BE FILED SHORTLY AND MOTION FOR \nCONSIDERATION BY THE COURT OF MATERIALS IN DOCKET NUMBERS 282 \nAND 283 IN DETERMINING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER \nRESTRAINING FRAUDULENT ASSETS TRANSFERS AND INCORPORATED \nMEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 71.60400000000001, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 540.61669921875, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 540.61669921875, + 471.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 71.60400000000001, + 471.91998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OF EPSTEIN'S FRAUDULENT ASSET TRANSFERS \nWILL BE FILED SHORTLY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 622.08 + ], + [ + 524.5311279296875, + 622.08 + ], + [ + 524.5311279296875, + 651.5500030517578 + ], + [ + 88.12799999999999, + 651.5500030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "THE COURT SHOULD REVIEW MATERIALS FILED IN DOCKET NUMBERS 282 \nAND 283 IN DETERMINING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO \nRESTRAIN FRAUDULENT ASSETS TRANSFERS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 83.23200000000001, + 247.86 + ], + [ + 530.5193481445312, + 247.86 + ], + [ + 530.5193481445312, + 290.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 83.23200000000001, + 290.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 165.24 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 165.24 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 180.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 180.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 125.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 125.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 372.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 350.57220458984375, + 372.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 350.57220458984375, + 387.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 387.17999267578125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747527" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747535/EFTA02747535.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747535/EFTA02747535.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3ee5008eaef3348b0d2f384b61c8ba5c07e0593b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747535/EFTA02747535.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/a= + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S Unopposed Motion For Extension of Time in Which to File a Response to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-8' Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, having considered Defendant's Unopposed Motion and Plaintiffs counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall file a Response to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-8' Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery and Incorporated Memorandum of Law on or before November 2, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009 + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies all counsel \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747535/EFTA02747535.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747535/EFTA02747535.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c36d640ab21cd59f66f455e96c8a29b96346efae --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747535/EFTA02747535.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747535.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1069, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.77, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 415.49566650390625, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 415.49566650390625, + 104.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 104.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 283.968, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 334.8778991699219, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 334.8778991699219, + 380.60302734375 + ], + [ + 283.968, + 380.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747535" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747536/EFTA02747536.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747536/EFTA02747536.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a096d999f2b839b2fa3b37e59b58480cf8a97187 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747536/EFTA02747536.md @@ -0,0 +1,190 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRal + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +# DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2 -8' MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR NET WORTH DISCOVERY AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, (hereinafter "Epstein") by and through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which to Respond to Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8' Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery and Incorporated Memorandum of Law dated September 30, 2009. Defendant seeks an extension until November 2, 2009, to file his Response. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: + +1. Defendant's Reply to the Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery and Incorporated Memorandum of Law is due on October 20, 2009. As certified below, Plaintiff's counsel is in agreement with the requested extension of November 2, 2009. + +2. The requested extension is fair in reasonable under the circumstances as it will provide time to allow the Defendant, EPSTEIN, to fully and adequately Respond to this Motion to Compel. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter an Order granting the Defendant an extension until November 2, 2009, in which to Respond to Plaintiffs Jane Does Nos. 2-8' Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery and Incorporated Memorandum of Law. + +# Local Rule 7.1 Certification + +Counsel for the movant conferred by electronic mail with counsel for the Plaintiffs and Counsel for the Plaintiffs is in agreement with the requested extension until November 2, 2009 for Defendant to Respond to the Motion to C 1 + +> Robert on, Jr. Michael Pi Attorneys for ►efendant **Epstein** + +# **Certificate of Service** + +**I HEREBY** CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 19th day of S. to 2009 + +Respect mitted, + +By: R E D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/...** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80469* + +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcylaw.com + +iplasearcylaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs. in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesq@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747536/EFTA02747536.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747536/EFTA02747536.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3c623b168986a688ca6da5dbb7c99bf5144f2c2d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747536/EFTA02747536.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,280 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747536.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5300, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.2, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 416.99566650390625, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 416.99566650390625, + 103.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 103.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME \nTO FILE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2 -8' \nMOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR NET WORTH \nDISCOVERY AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.16, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 511.9422302246094, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 511.9422302246094, + 421.10302734375 + ], + [ + 110.16, + 421.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Local Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.74, + 263.25 + ], + [ + 376.6190490722656, + 263.25 + ], + [ + 376.6190490722656, + 278.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 241.74, + 278.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 495.72 + ], + [ + 366.747314453125, + 495.72 + ], + [ + 366.747314453125, + 511.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 511.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/...", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 223.56000000000003 + ], + [ + 422.892, + 223.56000000000003 + ], + [ + 422.892, + 264.87 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 264.87 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 72 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 78 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 37 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747536" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747540/EFTA02747540.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747540/EFTA02747540.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3840e09f9ea6521e2ab604a2049f09bc513b03aa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747540/EFTA02747540.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRe + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, Notice of Withdrawal of Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-8' Appeal (DE 292) as Untimely (DE 334) and Plaintiffs' Notice of Withdrawal of their Response in Opposition to the Motion to Strike (DE 340). Having considered Defendant's Notice of Withdrawal and Plaintiffs' Notice of Withdrawal, and both counsel being in agreement with the requested , it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant shall serve his Response in Opposition to the Rule 4 Appeal filed by Jane Does 2-8 on or before November 3, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747540/EFTA02747540.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747540/EFTA02747540.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1dd3870138de7abc533c54d5a6e80d61df1906a2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747540/EFTA02747540.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747540.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1031, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.81, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 411.876, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 411.876, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 100.44 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 285.804, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 332.9678649902344, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 332.9678649902344, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 285.804, + 375.84000000000003 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 194 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747540" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747541/EFTA02747541.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747541/EFTA02747541.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b96c92aeb4782a25e6ff78ace07f7c10306c0a35 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747541/EFTA02747541.md @@ -0,0 +1,154 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAMM + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE 2-8'S APPEAL (DE 327) AS UNTIMELY (DE 334) AND PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF THEIR RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION TO STRIKE (DE 340) WITH ATTACHED ORDER + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein" or Defendant) and Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-8 hereby withdraw the above motions found at (DE 334 and DE 340), and state: + +1. On August 31, 2009, Defendant filed his Motion for Reconsideration and/or Request for Rule 4 Appeal (DE 282) and his Supplementary Brief Providing for a More Particularized Showing (DE 282) ("Defendant's Motion/Appeal and Supplementary Brief). + +2. On September 9, 2009, the Magistrate Judge entered her order on Defendant's Motion/Appeal and Supplementary Brief (DE 292). + +3. On September 24, 2009, Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-8 filed their Appeal of Magistrate Judge Decision (DE 327). + +4. On October 1, 2009, Defendant filed his Motion to Strike (DE334). + +5. Thereafter, on October 6, 2009, Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-8, filed their Response in Opposition (DE 340) to the Motion to Strike. + +6. Since the filing of DE 334 and DE 340, the undersigned lawyers have discussed same and each have agreed to withdraw the above Motion and Response. + +7. The undersigned lawyers have agreed that a Response In Opposition to the Rule 4 Appeal filed by Jane Does 2-8 shall be served on November 3, 2009. Attached as Exhibit "A" is an agreed order. + +8. On October 19, 2009, Defendant's counsel conferred with Plaintiffs' counsel and was given authority by Plaintiffs' counsel to make the representations outlined herein. + +Wherefore, Defendant hereby requests that the Court enter the attached Agreed Order and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +> By: MICHAEL! PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the + +following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 19th day of October, 2009 + +![]()![]()**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax + +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & +Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C. [REDACTED].* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case* +No. *08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +Nos. *09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747541/EFTA02747541.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747541/EFTA02747541.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ff5b57fcfc7116310b8e54e237f1cace427120bb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747541/EFTA02747541.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,249 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747541.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5315, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.44, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 410.04, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 410.04, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 98.82 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO \nSTRIKE PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE 2-8'S APPEAL (DE 327) AS UNTIMELY (DE \n334) AND PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF THEIR RESPONSE IN \nOPPOSITION TO THE MOTION TO STRIKE (DE 340) WITH ATTACHED \nORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 527.544, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 527.544, + 430.11 + ], + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 430.11 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 622.89 + ], + [ + 374.6654052734375, + 622.89 + ], + [ + 374.6654052734375, + 639.1699981689453 + ], + [ + 249.08399999999997, + 639.1699981689453 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 188.496, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 407.592, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 407.592, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 188.496, + 429.29999999999995 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 194 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 56 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747541" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747545/EFTA02747545.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747545/EFTA02747545.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..16a7a2f33b3605264060da9c9050639cb2574ef5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747545/EFTA02747545.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA.aa7 + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S, Notice of Withdrawal of Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiffs, Jane Does 2-8' Appeal (DE 292) as Untimely (DE 334) and Plaintiffs' Notice of Withdrawal of their Response in Opposition to the Motion to Strike (DE 340). Having considered Defendant's Notice of Withdrawal and Plaintiffs' Notice of Withdrawal, and both counsel being in agreement with the requested , it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant shall serve his Response in Opposition to the Rule 4 Appeal filed by Jane Does 2-8 on or before November 3, 2009. + +. DONE and ORDERED tluss day of 0 Ottge\_4.\_ , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747545/EFTA02747545.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747545/EFTA02747545.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bedcaeb09deab14dc91ae85ead1f418a0c3a604d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747545/EFTA02747545.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747545.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1063, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.8, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.40086364746094, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 401.595, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 401.595, + 113.4 + ], + [ + 199.40086364746094, + 113.4 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.055, + 367.74 + ], + [ + 325.95000000000005, + 367.74 + ], + [ + 325.95000000000005, + 379.89 + ], + [ + 281.055, + 379.89 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 197 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747545" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747546/EFTA02747546.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747546/EFTA02747546.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c4b13fdf8978c45d86fc7958518249248cf2b62d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747546/EFTA02747546.md @@ -0,0 +1,68 @@ +UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT +SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED] + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +**PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' RESPONSE AND +MOTION TO STRIKE ARGUMENT PORTION OF +DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF NINETY DAYS EXPIRING** + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does Nos. 2-8, by and through undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Southern District of Florida Local Rule 7.1.B.3, hereby file this Response and Motion to Strike Argument Portion of Defendant's Notice of Ninety Days Expiring, and state as follows: + +1. On October 14, 2009, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") filed a Notice of Ninety Days Expiring (D.E. 347) (the "Notice"), alerting this Court to the passage of ninety days since various motions have been fully briefed. + +2. While Plaintiffs share Epstein's interest in having these motions decided so that discovery in these cases can move forward efficiently, Plaintiffs object and move to strike the argument portion of the Notice. Epstein improperly uses the Notice as a vehicle to make additional legal arguments on motions that have been fully briefed, and + +"EXHIBIT A" + +thereby attempt to prejudice the Plaintiffs. In particular, in paragraphs 6-9, Epstein argues his Motions to Compel, and seeks to attack the Plaintiffs' arguments and approach to discovery. This is inappropriate and unauthorized by S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1.B.3. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2-8, respectfully request an Order striking the argument portion of Jeffrey Epstein's "Notice of Ninety Days Expiring" (D.E. 347) in its entirety, and all other and further relief this Court deems just and proper. + +Dated: October 14, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssmsexabuseattornev.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitzasexabuseattornev.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Telephone: (305) 931-2200 Facsimile: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on October 14, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwva.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. reritton belclaw.com + +James bedwardsairra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarciaabellsouth.net + +Jack Mh@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzelkapodhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPikeQbelclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassello@law.titah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyenvillits®aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg riosefsberg@podhurst.coM \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747546/EFTA02747546.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747546/EFTA02747546.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ef2a42f3d13f25986c8b3b6c1b6987feba503896 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747546/EFTA02747546.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,269 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747546.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3195, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.8, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 211.75199999999995, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 402.08400000000006, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 402.08400000000006, + 111.78000000000002 + ], + [ + 211.75199999999995, + 111.78000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' RESPONSE AND MOTION TO STRIKE ARGUMENT PORTION OF DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF NINETY DAYS EXPIRING", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 160.344, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 457.164, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 457.164, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 160.344, + 405.0 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 232.56, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 387.04547119140625, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 387.04547119140625, + 100.43701171875 + ], + [ + 232.56, + 100.43701171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 165.24, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 452.7210693359375, + 84.24 + ], + [ + 452.7210693359375, + 126.2335205078125 + ], + [ + 165.24, + 126.2335205078125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747546" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747550/EFTA02747550.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747550/EFTA02747550.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4bb29dd622150e834716246e9ee06e864cab3e4f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747550/EFTA02747550.md @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRal + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLETE TRIAL DEADLINES + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time to complete trial deadlines, and as good cause in support of granting the motion, states as follows: + +- 1. This case is currently set on a two week trial docket commencing on February 22, 2010. +- 2. The Amended Complaint filed by the Plaintiff is still the subject of a Motion to Dismiss filed on June 12, 2009 (DE 87). Thus, an Answer has not yet been filed. +- 3. The deposition of Plaintiff has occurred; however, several witness depositions have yet to occur. Moreover, several discovery requests remain outstanding and the subject of Motions to Compel and Responses and Replies thereto. ate Notice of 90 Day Extension + +attached hereto as Exhibit "A". Moreover, the Independent Medical Examination of Jane Doe is set to occur between November 9 and 11. + +4. The scheduling of depositions in this matter has become much more difficult since the case was consolidated on May 14, 2009, due to the number of attorneys involved and the fact that witnesses, plaintiffs and the defendant may only be deposed once. (See Order Consolidating Cases for Purpose of Discovery and Procedural Motions That Relate to Multiple Cases). + +5. Due the fact that depositions are still being scheduled, there is technically not an operative compliant in this matter since same is subject to Motion to Dismiss, it is premature to mediate, complete all substantive pretrial motions by today October 20, 2009, disclose expert and exchange expert reports and complete discovery by November 28, 2009. + +6. In fact, earlier this year, Defendant filed an Unopposed Motion requesting that the court extend the deadlines for the above reasons. Based upon these delays, there may be a need to postpone the trial date if these delays continue. + +7. The proposed new dates are as follows: + +- A. New deadline to disclose experts and exchange expert reports: 11/29/2009 +- B. New deadline to complete discovery: 12/28/2009 +- C. New deadline to complete substantive pretrial motions: 1/29/2010 +- D. New deadline to complete mediation: 02/12/2010 + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff and Defendant request that this Court enter an order granting the Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Trial Deadlines. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1 + +Counsel for the movant conferred via telephone with counsel for the Defendant and counsel for the Defendant is in agreement with moving the above dates; however, counsel for the Defendant is in deposition and has not agreed to the specific dates outlined above. The undersigned has a good faith belief that Mr... will not object to the proposed dates and will ask Mr..= to file a Notice of Agreement regarding same an expeditious basis. + +> By: MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 20th day of October, 2009 + +Respectful! + +By: ROBE D. CRI\$TON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mnike@bc1claw.com BURMAN, CR1TTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax + +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. ██████, Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +Brad ██████████, Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. ██████, Esq. +██████████ Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +jsx@searcylaw.com inhasearcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf brucereh n Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 + +Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsberapodhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 iagesqAbellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747550/EFTA02747550.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747550/EFTA02747550.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..99da5e6c69857737d95ab89f510aca23eedad07a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747550/EFTA02747550.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,330 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747550.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 6565, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.77, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 202.572, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 417.74566650390625, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 417.74566650390625, + 118.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 202.572, + 118.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME \nTO COMPLETE TRIAL DEADLINES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 148.71599999999998, + 376.65000000000003 + ], + [ + 474.5016174316406, + 376.65000000000003 + ], + [ + 474.5016174316406, + 408.35302734375 + ], + [ + 148.71599999999998, + 408.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 161.568, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 495.8711242675781, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 495.8711242675781, + 123.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 161.568, + 123.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 369.05792236328125, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 369.05792236328125, + 400.10302734375 + ], + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 400.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 422.892, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 422.892, + 190.35 + ], + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 190.35 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747550" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747555/EFTA02747555.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747555/EFTA02747555.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b13cd65bfb2c93015c515f0c27bc0c72e2f643dc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747555/EFTA02747555.md @@ -0,0 +1,152 @@ +Jane Doe #2 + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. M.D. + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W.. M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W. in M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. 1 have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 19%. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. +- 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +1A + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. + +MEICancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe P2 against Jeffrey Epstein makes sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe 42 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiffs counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventative Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kliman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kliman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe 42. + +14. The records available in this case at this time show that during the winter of 2003, plaintiff spent approximately one hour in defendant's house and 30-45 minutes alone with the defendant (Page 11, interrogatories). She denied that she was suffering from any physical infirmity, disability, disease, sickness, or psychiatric/psychological condition at the time of the incident (Answers to defendant's first interrogatories, page 7). + +15. Plaintiff reports that she moved repetitively during her childhood. She reports she was born in Buffalo, New York; lived there until one year, family then moved to Florida, a long process of moving back and forth twice to Virginia, twice to Florida, once to Tennessee (Page 1, transcript 12/4/08). "I was moving from Buffalo to Florida, then seven years in Florida til fourth grade til seventh grade in Virginia, then eighth to graduate high school, I was back in Florida, West Palm Beach.. Palm Beach High School. Then after high school, I moved back to Virginia myself because I knew my parents were moving to Tennessee and I didn't want to. My friends were in Virginia. Virginia for two years, then Midlothian, Virginia for two years..." (Page 2, transcript 12/4/08). + +16. Plaintiff reports that she currently has a good relationship with her boyfriend and that she is living with two other couples in ahouse in Richmond. "I am hanging out and having fun . . .." "Now I am having more fun, bike riding with boyfriend and roommates and half pipe skateyard ramp in back yard, not just staying in the house, which Ido if I am not working." (Page 2, transcript) + +17. Plaintiff reports that her mom and dad were always talking about her, putting pressure on her, "so I shut myself away from the world." "I asked them if they want me to fail in Virginia and come home.. . I don't want to give them the satisfaction: "My family argues too much. It gives me headaches. (Page 2, transcript) + +18. Prior to her meeting Mr. Epstein, she reports, "My family made me the person I am, not being paid attention to. . ." (Page 2, transcript). + +19. Plaintiff reports that prior to seeing Mr. Epstein,S the friend who took + +her, told her that she would be giving massages for money, didn't need experience, and told her to lie about her age. She reports that she was 17+ at the time, but it was clear that she had to be 18. "She said if anybody asks, you have to be 18? (Page 4, transcript) "I'll vouch for you that you are 18" (Page 4, transcript). + +20. She reports she didn't advise her mother or her boyfriend of any distress (Pages 4 and 5, transcript). She notes that her parents divorced when she was three years of age. "I didn't have afather figure and this guy comes into my life and is totally weird and I had nobody to tell that to." (Page 6, transcript) + +21. She reports that her father struck her little brothers and that her father had assaulted her mother and her stepfather then assaulted her father (Page 6, transcript). She notes that her stepfather was "a little violent with my mom. He had three kids of his own and mom had four and our whole life was whose kids did what, which were good and which were bad. It was so annoying ... and he would get mad at me for random things, like if I told my sister something, he told me not to. He would spank me... and smack me across the face and kicked me out of the house when I was 17. This was before the Epstein. thing, when I was about 16, almost 17, and then Epstein, when I was about to be 18" (Page 6, transcript 1). + +22. Plaintiff reports that she is afraid of flying, that hurricanes scare her, and that her "property was torn up during ahurricane" (page 1, transcript 2,12/4/08). + +23. (Part 1, question 5 of Dr. Kliman's interrogatory and Page 1, transcript 2) Plaintiff reports that she was sexually harassed by her stepbrother. "My stepbrother wanted me to sit on his lap when his friend left us alone. I'm not going to do anything. I said 'no, that's weird.' I had grown up with him and I think of him as abrother. That night, Iforgot to lock one of my doors, which was achain lock to the bathroom...I was about 16." (Prior to Epstein) "I was sleeping and felt something at the end of my bed, shins, grazing my leg, cracked my eyes open and I freaked out and he pretended to be confused 'where am I.' Then he walked between two doors and I had aweird feeling he didn't leave. .. I guess he ducked down and crawled around... I heard someone breathing and he tried to do it again... I said 'get out, get out of my room please.' I told my parents and they kicked him out for a day. He snuck back in the house and wasn't punished. . . Once I found him in my room naked under the covers...I had a feeling someone was in my room. ..Iran in and he was trying to get out of my bed to my closet . . and he was naked... My pink sandals were out of place and my see-through underwear was missing for months...I told my parents and they kicked him out for a couple of days. I was distressed, scared of him. He was always running after me and no one could stop him... He is three years older than me, taller than me, and he has cerebral palsy, which they blame it on, that he doesn't know what he is doing." (Page 1, transcript 2) "He did something to my sister, touching her neck and hair when she was on the computer. She told me, which this was after he did that to me." ")•ie is a big part of why I am the way I am, too. He has beat up my mom and my sister and me. He has been in jail for hitting my mom. He threw her on the ground and kicked her in the face. The police got him. I was 16." (Pre-Epstein) (Page 2, transcript 2) + +24. "I am so overprotective of everything and freaked out all the time. Always looking behind me. Someone will steal me. I am always paranoid now." (Page 2, transcript 2) + +25. "I have been thinking of hurting myself three or four years, feeling like I was nobody and getting angry." (Page 2, transcript 2) "A good thing I started doing was writing poems. I was 15. It was about my family problems. I want to lock people out and have them come and find me." (Page 3, transcript 2) + +26. Plaintiff reports she saw acounselor, Cathy Sloan, who was aprivate counselor that her mother had seen. "She talked to my mother about her problems because my stepdad was not as nice and mellow as he is now. He used to be angry and when he came home you would know you had to go in your room or go with your friends." Plaintiff reports that afemale psychiatrist wished to prescribed medications for her, but that medicines made her face break out and that she didn't wish to take them. (Page 3, transcript 2) "Beginning when I first went to Cathy Sloan at age 18, they said I was bipolar. They said I have BPD (bipolar disorder) or OO1" (Page 3, transcript 2) + +27. Plaintiff reports that before meeting Epstein, "I had two boyfriends that I had + +sex with." (Page .& transcript 2) + +28. Plaintiff reports that she tried marijuana in the 12th grade and that it calms her down. (Page 5, transcript 2) + +29. She notes that her mother would give her Xanax to calm her down and that a friend gave her amphetamines (Adderall) and that she could concentrate more and get things done easier. "I lived life more and had more energy." (Page 5, transcript 2) Dr. Kliman notes she has had no evaluation for attention deficit disorder, acondition that would have existed pre-Epstein. The plaintiff had to read things several times while in school to comprehend. (Page 5, transcript 2) + +30. (Page 9, Tape 1, Dr. Kliman, 12/4/08) Plaintiff currently reports "I'm just hanging out right now, I'm having fun and I kind of like it" ... "I feel free." + +31. Plaintiff reports, "I just let people do whatever. I don't know what going through my mind actually at the time. So much is going through my mind. I'm not even thinking about what I should be doing." (Page 18, Tape 1) + +32. Plaintiff reports that she had some understanding of what would happen when she saw Mr. Epstein. She notes that aschool friend told her "I go to this place and I give people massages for money; and you don't have to have any experience. I was like 'wow... that sounds really weird. That sounds awesome, you know? What do you have to do?' And she basically told me in anote... She was like 'well if you show anybody this or if you tell anybody...I'll beat your ass' and I was like thinking to myself; why would she get that mad about me telling somebody? What's wrong with what I'm going to do if she wants to beat me up if I say something to somebody?. .. So she wrote me that note and then she's like 'yea... the only thing is that everybody makes fun of me for it is that, it's like older guys.' I was like S... that's not a problem. It's just an older person that you give a massage to;' and she was like 'yea, that's it' and then she picked me up from work one day and that's when I was working at Publix and she took me in her car down to Palm Beach City and we're; and she slowly started unraveling everythingas everything That was summed, So happen,she started actually kind of telling me alittle bit as soon as we got to his house or alittle bit before it and she told me, you know," (at this point, plaintiff was interrupted by Dr. Kliman, who changed the subject). (Page 21, Tape 1) + +33. Plaintiff reports that she knew that Mr. Epstein did not want anyone younger than 18. "She was like . .. 'a llright, well if anybody asks you're 18 because you have to be 18to be here; and they are going to ask probably for like name and your number or whatever just give that to them; but I'll vouch for you and say that you're 18.'" (Page 22, Tape 1) + +34. (Tape 2, Dr. Kliman) Question, Dr. Kliman: "And did you tell her that you were 18?" Plaintiff" "I don't .. . I don't remember if I told her I was 18 or if she already assumed because that's what the age of the girls that had been brought there are always that age. Have to be that certain age, so I think Yolanda told her that I was 18 cause like I said I'm not really a good liar." (Page 1) + +35. Plaintiff reported that her parents divorced when she was three. She reports that she could remember what was happening around the time of the divorce. "Just like all the violence kind of going on all around and my dad like running away from us and just moving to another state and not seeing him for a long period of time. So it's ... it's already that I didn't have like afather figure. . 7 (Page 9, tape 2) Dr. Klirnan: "You did have a stepfather?" Plaintiff: "Yea, but he was more of always just yelling at me so I always in my room by myself or I was hanging out with my friends." (Page 9, tape 2) + +36. Plaintiff reports that her father would hit her two brothers and that after the mother had found that he had significantly beaten one of the brothers on "his back and butt," the mother got angry. Her father hit her mother and the stepdad then hit her father. (Page 10, tape 2) She reports that her stepfather was also violent with her mother and that she grew up in a family of seven children (three of the stepfather's and four of her mother's). (Page 10, tape 2) She reports that the stepfather would spank her or hit her or send her to her room without dinner to punish her. On one occasion, she remembers, "he just came at me and smacked me across the face and then kicked me out of the house." [16+1(Page 11, tape 2) She believes this was about a year before the Epstein incident, when she was "almost 18." (Page 11, tape 2) + +37. Plaintiff reports that while living in Loxahatchee, Florida, she was frightened during Hurricane Katrina and then another hurricane when she was approximately 18 or 19. She notes it was "a frightening, crazy time apparently." She reports that the hurricane scared her and that it was "really scary because our property was torn up... Huge tree that landed on our house, that broke our screen enclosure to our pool." (Pages 13 & 14, Tape 2) + +38. Plaintiff reported (Part 1, question 5, Dr. Kliman's interrogatory) thatshe had asexual assault by a family member or someone she knew. (Page 14, tape 2) She reported that "my stepbrother Cody, he wanted me to sit on his lap like when his friend, which was my boyfriend, had left us alone and we were like outside some kid's house waiting in the van, and I was outside on the ground and my stepbrother was sitting in the passenger's side with the door wide open talking to me and he was like 'why are you sitting on the floor, why don't you come sit on my lap?' and I was like 'because I'm fine right here; and he was like...'., I'm not going to do anything, it's okay, you can sit on my lap.' Iwas like 'no, that's weird cause you're my brother' and I've grown up with these boy since I was three. Since my dad left, so it's pretty much like they are my brothers and I think of them as that; and then it was the same night that he asked me to sit on his lap. That it was like 3:00 or 4:00 in the morning and I was sleeping and I forgot to lock one of my doors. I have two doors, one door that goes to the bathroom of my room and one that goes to the hallway where everyone else's rooms are; and I always have like achain lock on my bathroom door and I forgotten to lock that one because I always lock my room, everywhere Iam always lock everything for some reason. I think because I'm scared that somebody is going to get to me while I'm asleep." (Fear of assault preceded encounter with Epstein) Plaintiff reported that she was 16 at this time. (Page 15, tape 2) She again describes the episode reported earlier about her brother being in her bedroom and notes that she did tell her parents and they put him out of the house. Subsequently, he was again found in her room, as noted earlier, naked under her covers and she believes that he was using her clothing. (Page 16, tape 2) Dr. Kliman asked if she experienced emotional distress that lasted more than that day and her reply was "yea, of course, dwasscared of. him." (Page 17, tape 2) "He was always like running after me and like he was always like the terror of my house and nobody could everstopWm, nobody could ever do anything. He pretty much just got fucked up all the time. Excuse me." She noted that her stepbrother is three years older than her, making him 19 at the time of these episodes. Plaintiff reports, "He did something to my sister. I guess he like I don't think he did anything sexual to her, but he was like touching her... she freaked out..." (Page 17, tape 2) + +39. Plaintiff expressed her dissatisfaction at not being listened to by the sister, but after the stepbrother touched the sister she felt the sister paid attention. "Now you actually pay attention because it happens to you; but when I said something happened to me, you + +know, nothing right? So I flank that s a big pad. whylam fl waylam sometimestto, just because they're ... he's always been like that and he's always beat up my ... he's like beat up my mom before a couple of times; he's beat up my sister; he'sbeat pu mhe's been to jail a couple of times." (Again demonstrating plaintiff's fear of physical harm and inappropriate sexual contact prior to meeting Epstein.) Plaintiff reports that he was sent to jail for "hitting my mom; he like threw her on the ground and started kicking her in the face and stuff and then she called the cops on him and the police came and got him and then I think . .." She reports she was around 16 at that time. (Prior to meeting Epstein) (Page 18, tape 2) + +40. Dr. Kliman inquired that since the stepbrother seemed to have asexual interest in her and that he was found naked, did she think that had something to do with the way she was now. Her response was "a little bit of it." (Page 18, tape 2) + +41. Dr. Kliman inquired about "why alittle bit?" and her response was "well, just because a 1,2 g€ things has\_re happened too that have made me who Iam, pot necessarily just that one person. It just might be everything that has happened to me and I'm just so overprotective of everything and I'm just really freaked out most of the time... Like I am always looking behind me just because nobody ever looks behind them." (Page 18, tape 2) + +42. Plaintiff reported that she does not have bad dreams or nightmares of the traumatic event with Epstein. (Page 20, tape 2) She reports that her bad dreams are what is going on in her life at the moment (Page 20, tape 2) In her dreams, she sees herself as angry at somebody and her beating them up in her dreams and that alot of her dreams are about the boys that she is with. (Page 20, tape 2) In her dreams, she reports that she always beats up the girls who may be having a relationship with her boyfriend as well. (Page 21, tape 2) She reports that most of the dreams that she remembers are good dreams. (Page 1, Tape 3) + +43. When questioned by Dr. Kliman about feeling that she is ahorrible person and asked how long she had had those feelings, plaintiffs response was "when I started to get them... I don't ... like I didn't really notice it at first until you started like reminding me of all these things and that everything that put into place . . ." [Indicating she is suggestible.] (Page 1, Tape 3) + +44. In a response to a question about how long she had had trouble thinking about hurting herself, plaintiff responded "for three or four years probably." (Age 16 or 17) At that time, she felt she was a nobody and when she would get angry she would write poems. She notes that she began doing that when she was in the ninth grade at about age 15, that she would write about her family problems, and she would lock her doors and lock everyone out She felt like she wanted someone to talk to her, but that nobody really would... "Nobody really ever wanted to because I had brothers and stuff and my mom was always too busy." "So I never really had anybody to talk to besides my friends. . . I can't talk to my family when I'm mad because they don't understand because they don't even know me." (Page 2, tape 3) + +45. She notes that when she saw atherapist, Cathy Sloan, who was seeing her mother because of problems with the stepfather, that they wanted her to confront the issues with the stepfather's anger. "... when he would come home from work, you would just; you know that you'd have to go to your room; like everybody would just disburse, leave and go and hide. . ." "They wanted her to talk to me because of the Epstein thing and because of my stepbrother and so I talked to her about all that... Then she wanted to go and get me on medication, and then . I'm not really about medications so I just never tookthe medication that they would prescribe tome..." "Lys neverreallyto= help but I've always wanted to get help. But I've just never fully gone 100% through with it I guess you could say." (Page 3, tape 3) + +46. Dr. ICliman asked plaintiff, "All right, and you have thoughts of killing yourself?" Plaintiff: "I used to and that is why I started to write poems, cause I would just feel like there was nothing else that I do; and I would just feel like it is better if I wasn't around, then I wouldn't be causing anybody any problems. . ." "It's hard to be who everybody wants you to be all the time .. " (Page 6, tape 3)(The poem writing began prior to Epstein, at approximately age 15.) + +47. Plaintiff reports that she had had sex with two boyfriends prior to Epstein. + +(Page 9, tape 3) Plaintiff is easily influenced. ... "I just have so much going on I just can't putthings together unless people start talking to me and then I'm like.. S yea." (Page 10, tape 3) + +48. Plaintiff reports that she is currently happy with her life and has met someone who she loves and whom she feels loves her. "I finally found somebody; now I'm kind of .. . really happy." "I met him in Virginia. His name is Josh. .. Like love at first sight kind of thing." "He's so adorable, he's like ... he talks to me and he looks at me different; and he looks at me like he cares about what I'm saying and he is listening and he really likes me. And that's the thing that I've never gotten out of any boyfriend is that they liked me for the way I am and the way that I will always be cause I'm always going to be the same person.. . I think I love him too..." (Pages 11 & 12, tape 3) + +49. Question: "When you have sex with Josh, do you have any interference from thoughts about Epstein." Reply: "No, no." (Pages 11 and 12, tape 3) + +50. Plaintiff notes that she drank prior to the episode with Epstein. (Page 14, tape 3) She continued to drink afterward and increased her drinking. She reported that she blacked out a couple of times. She notes at times that her amnesia was not simply due to alcohol, but that she didn't remember some parts of what she did because "I didn't want to remember some of it." [Volitional] (Page 14, tape 3) + +51. Plaintiff reports that she has used cocaine and marijuana, with her first + +marijuana use at age 18 or 19. (Page 16, tape 3) She notes that her mother had given her Xanax, afriend gave her Adderall, and her mother gave her Strattera. (Pages 18 and 19, tape 3) + +52. She noted that she had difficulty in school. "I can't read something and actually understand it." "I actually have to like read it like at least twice." (Page 20, tape 3) She notes that she had difficulty in math and had to repeatalgebra II while in the 12th grade. (Page 20, tape 3) + +53. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +54. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, a 1st cif amedical, clinical,school, and work records known to the attorney in the case. + +55. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "availableimportant andrelevant documentswhich erg beingdeliberatelywithheld fromo." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, whichwe haverequested or thatwell= stated would ordinarily be part of medical opinion formation oa thg topics concerning, which outinput is requested." We request the same. + +56. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric wuclition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +57. It is also essential to understand the plaintiff's level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +58. Knowledge of plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +59. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. These, in essence, are the same and similar records that plaintiffs expert witness (Dr. Kliman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories + +and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and such other similar information be made available to us to conduct our examination. + +Atiti Respectfully submi + +Richard C. W.I.., MD + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida + +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College of Medicine \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747555/EFTA02747555.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747555/EFTA02747555.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..35e5bd6ae2e3b1b855e2145fada9b391e6b797ff --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747555/EFTA02747555.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,740 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747555.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 20, + "chars": 29835, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.3, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 175.76999999999998 + ], + [ + 442.02606201171875, + 175.76999999999998 + ], + [ + 442.02606201171875, + 191.16 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 191.16 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 220 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 293 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 287 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 348 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 360 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 404 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 363 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 333 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 401 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 376 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 382 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 385 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 395 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 373 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 359 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 363 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 335 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 328 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 300 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 115 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747555" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747575/EFTA02747575.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747575/EFTA02747575.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ed313b5d0e2be4386b0212b71128644a8eef3cc0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747575/EFTA02747575.md @@ -0,0 +1,114 @@ +Jane Doe #3 + +v. Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. all M.D. + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W. al M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W. MI M.D. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. +- 3. L also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and + +medical degree fLoui the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as alept esentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. + +Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe /13 against Jeffrey Epstein make + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe it3 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiff's counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventative Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc, of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. KLirnan, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kaman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe 43. + +14. Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories note that she had seen atherapist in Palm Beach County at age 11. She believes that she had previously been diagnosed with depression following her parents' divorce. (Page 7) She reports that she has suffered anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, guilt, self-blame, feelings of being degraded, feeling unattractive, adiminished sense of femininity, fluctuations in weight and appetite, sexual intimacy problems, flashbacks, disturbing memories, stress, irritability, feelings of being isolated and trapped, diminished trust, social problems, problems in personal relationships, indecisiveness, low energy, lower ambition and initiative, headaches, back pain, feels stress (particularly around men), obsessive thoughts, problems concentrating, alcohol abuse, corruption of morals and values, loss of innocence, and cries a lot. (Page 8) + +15. She reported that she had seen Mr. Epstein four times from the fall of her sophomore year in high school through her senior year, but had only had physical contact with hint once, had voluntarily returned on three other occasions with other girls, and spent 30-45 minutes alone with the defendant, but remained on the premises of the estate for four or five hours. (Page 11, interrogatories) + +16. Plaintiff notes that she has recently married and is "very happy about that" She met her husband on Myspace.com. She reported that they dated for 2'/e years, that it was a good relationship, that they click, and feel that they can spend the rest of their life with each other. (Page 1, Dr. Kliman's contemporaneous notes). + +17. Plaintiff reports that she had a deep depression that lasted for a year and that she shut people out since the time of her parents' divorce at age 11. (Page 1, Dr. Kliman's contemp notes) + +18. She reports that she attempted suicide five times, beginning at age 11, after her parents got a divorce, and attempted suicide at age 15 by running acar in aclosed garage. She reports she would have died if her sister and nephew hadn't walked in. On subsequent attempts, she swallowed "a whole bunch of pills" and afriend made her throw up. This was at age 18 or 19. She reports she took "a huge handful." (Page 1, Dr. Kliman's contemp notes) + +19. Plaintiff reports that she had seen many psychologists and finally found one that she liked, Rhonda Perdue. (Page 1, contemp notes) + +20. She notes that she has been taking 25 mg of Lexapro prescribed by Dr. Nabel Karrum, MD, for the last year. (Page 2, contemp notes) + +21. She notes that her father was verbally abusive to her and physically abusive with her sister and her mother. On one occasion, she reports, her father took all of her mother's clothes and threw them in the front yard of her house while she (the mother) was taking ashower and that she and her sister had to leave the house with her mother. She reports that between ages 9 and 11 her father was "heavy in drinking and had a gun in the house." She reports that her mother "didn't want us there." (Page 2, contemp notes) + +22. Plaintiff el,o, to that she was the individual who found out that the father was cheating on her mother with awoman who lived around the corner. The divorce was final when she was 13 years of age. They lived in the parental home for two years, until she was 15, and then moved. The father was in the picture "here and there." He remarried, divorced, had a girlfriend, went to AA to gethelp, and was sober for four years. She wondered if he was doing pills or marijuana. Her parents are back together and she reports they have been living together for the pasteight months. She reports her father suffers from depression and that while depressed he is distant, has angry spells, and she "wordo3yhatheSIdQ ... ke snapsMmjath." (Suggesting very unstable home, fear and apprehension, concern for mother's safety.) She reports that she deals with this by "I try to keep all this out of my mind, try not to think about it..:' The most distressing event was when she was awakened and had to leave the house with her mother and sister because of the father's threatening behavior. (Page 2, contemp note) She reports that in school "I was mean" and that she would "not put up with crap or teasing." She notes that "I got teased about wearing the same jeans or shoes" and she was teased about her weight. "I was a little chunky." (Pages 2 and 3, contemp notes) + +23. Plaintiff notes that two of her friends had seen Mr. Epstein previously. ell andalhad done it and said it went smoothly and I didn't have to worry about anything. Don't ask, don't tell. So I felt comfortable with \$200 for ahall hour." (Page 1, interview part 2) + +24. She reports that she lied about her age. "I was told to tell kiln I was 19, which de said we had to lie about our age." Plaintiff reportsthat after her initialcontact with Mr. Epsteinshe wentka,thjandupthes people tIsre. "Not to do anything. I went back three times with two different girls and aime (Page 3, interview part 2) + +25. Plaintiff reports that she had anotherwomgaillia boi chiyou bid JiltSt move awayamid wear whatever." (Page 5, interview part 2) Although plaintiff reports she had no further physical contact with Mr. Epstein, she did voluntarily return to his estate on three separate occasions with other girls. + +26. Plaintiff reports that she is taking phentermine 5 mg, an agent that can cause anxiety. (Page 1, part 3) + +27. She began drinkingat at az. (Page 2, part 3) She reports that she has driven while intoxicated. (Page 2, part 3) She reports that she has had blackouts "I quite afew times have been unable to remember things others say I did... that I peed on the floor in the middle of the night, that I passed out in the dub, my friend's cousin drove us home, which I don't remember, and I got into an argument with somebody and I don't remember that I had art argument at the dub or that we stopped and ate on the way home and I don't remember, or falling down stairs, ripping my pants." (Page 2, part 3) + +28. The plaintiff reports that she was raped, at agg 15 and never told anyone about it. It occurred at a graduation party. She was drinking. "I couldn't remember anything until the next day." "I saw marks on myself." "I thought I had locked the door where I was sleeping. Later I remembered I was unable to move, paralyzed, and he ripped my clothes off and raped me." "When I saw the marks and my mom took me to adoctor, who gave me arape kit, found no semen, told me the scratch marks would go away, and tried to get me to write a report, but I wouldn't" (Page 3, part 3) + +29. Plaintiff reports she was also IndesW, at age 12 by her bestfriend's brother who had just gotten out of jail. (Page 3, part 3) "He molested four children that night by playing with our bottoms, tops, face, and hair. We all woke up and never said anything until he raped his sister amonth later. He touched me just that one night on asleepover. One of the girls was up and pretended she was sleeping. I remember being touched, but thought I was dreaming until my friend told me the same thing and we found out he raped his own sister so then it was obvious." "That house was ahouse where there was drinking and potsmoking." "He gave usi2gt and made smart comments. He was in his mid 20's, about to turn 25." Plaintiff thus reports marijuanaLUSA/A=1i She notes that in fourth grade she took her first pot when she was 10 years of age. She reports that they pressed charges concerning the molestation. (Page 3, part 3) + +30. She notes that Kevin the boy who molested her, subsequently raped his sister. "I consider what Kevin did to me was arape." (Page 3, part 3) + +31. In an interview with Dr. Kliman, plaintiff reported that she has been married for three months and that she is very happy about it and going to school part time. (Page 2, tape 1) + +32. Plaintiff reports that she was depressed over her parents' divorce, that she had attempted suicideQta five orristirries, the Am at approximately1.1 when she tried to cut her wrists. At age 15, she tried to asphyxiate herself with a running automobile in a garage. + +The next attempt was with an overdose of pills at 18 or 19. (Page 5, tape 1) + +33. She reported that her father wasvery abusive wtier, (Page 6, tape 1) more verbal with her, but physical with her sister and her mother. (Page 6, tape 1) "They would argue about anything he wanted, anything that was on his mind. I remember one time she was in the shower and he took all her clothes and threw them in the flout yard; and they were just having a screaming match and we were already in bed and I remember my mom had to wake us up and tell us to get dressed and put our shoes on; and we would have to walk all the way to alittle 7-11 in front of our development to get picked up because my day-1 wouldima kg mit 91 control, and we would have to stay at my aunt's house and sleep there and stay there until things got better. Thismust of happenedkikeWincian\_y ft es and .." Plaintiff was ages 9 to 11 when this would happen\_ (Page 7, tape 1) + +34. She noted that her father cheated on her mother and that she was the one who found out about it and that after reporting it the parents divorced when she was 13. She had aturbulentfamily life. The thing that stands out as most distressing of the things that they had considered was being awakened and having to go to store. (Page 8, tape 1) + +35. She reports that she had afew core friends, but didn't have too many friends" (Page 10) and that as achild she was teased about her clothes (Page 10) and her weight. + +36. Plaintiff reports, "Rightnow I'm okay.tin contentwith what I have to look forward to right pow and that is trying to have a good life for me and my husband; hying to have asense of normalcy." (Page Z tape 3) + +37. In her interview with Dr. Kliman (aswell as her sworn statement to the police on 11/07/2005), Plaintiff claims that she was told all she would have to do was to give a massage and that Epstein would ask her to get "comfortable", that's it. This conflicts with the Probable Cause Affidavit (page 9) and the Palm Beach Police Incident Repurt (page 37) where she indicates she was told that a massage would be expected, possibly naked and possibly some touching. In addition, Tape 2, page 6-14, she claims Epstein touched her breasts and fondled her nipples, and that he touched her vagina. However, this statement conflicts with what she told police in her sworn statement where she indicated Epstein never touched her breasts or her vagina. ace sworn statement at pp. 4, 7 and 8. The Plaintiffs medical records ;may show that the Plaintiff has a propensity to lie when it comes to explaining events allegedly involving Epstein and/or her past. + +38. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +39. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure!' Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, A list of all medical, clinical School, ad work recordsknown to the attorney in the case. + +40. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "availableAmportant And relevantdocumentswhich lacing deliberatelywithheld farm MC "We define such as documents in poscescion of retaining attorney, whichwe have requestedathatwehave Stated would ordinarily kg Rattof moisai opinion formation on the topics concerning. whicho» input i§ requested." We request the same. + +41. It is critical for an IMR examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, plaintiffs knowledge or risk, and key alleged victim's variables such as demographics; psychological reactions at the time of the trauma; reactions post event previous psychiatric or psycholoFftal history; previous history of victimization; current or previous psychological difficulties; general personality dynamics and coping style; sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individ alcwere abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +42. It is also essential to understand the plaintiff's level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +43. Knowledge of plaintiffs relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical + +44. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to + +him afull and complete record that includes plaintiff's medical, legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. These, in essence, are the same or similar records that plaintiffs expert witness (Dr. KLiman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the sante and such other similar information be made available to us so that we are able to conduct a proper and meaningful examination of the plaintiff and what, if any contribution the above alleged event may have on her current and/or future health and adjustment. + +Respectfully submitted, + +pg. 4-Iti ( Gs Richard C. W.., + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida + +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747575/EFTA02747575.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747575/EFTA02747575.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3321994e213e6c50dfcf905a3d9eb6710c9cc83d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747575/EFTA02747575.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,502 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747575.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 13, + "chars": 19280, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.99, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. all M.D.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 194.00400000000002, + 195.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 448.2025451660156, + 195.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 448.2025451660156, + 213.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 194.00400000000002, + 213.03000000000003 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 209 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 289 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 293 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 319 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 347 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 355 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 380 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 362 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 390 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 363 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 342 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 305 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 269 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747575" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747588/EFTA02747588.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747588/EFTA02747588.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..014a4ccdc88ce0a0caebe10507dfca7d4354e98e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747588/EFTA02747588.md @@ -0,0 +1,101 @@ +Jane Doe I/4 + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## APE/DAVIT OP RICHARD C.Willnala3\_, + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W.MI, M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W. Hall, M.D. lain over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 19%. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as a Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as a Lieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as a representative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as a medical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am a former member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. 1, also, have served as a Professor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as a Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe #4 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe if4 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epsteirt's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiff's counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. ICliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kliman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kliman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #4. + +14. Plaintiff reports a history of alcohol use and an ex-boyfriend who drank alcohol and used pills that were "a form of oxycodine [sic] aform of heroine [sic]." (Page 18, tape 1) + +15. Plaintiff reports obtaining a restraining order against her ex-boyfriend, stating that he would spit in her face, push her, and was abusive. (Page 20, tape 1) + +16. Plaintiff reports talking with two psychiatrists at age 16 or 17 due to family + +issues and boyfriend issues. (Pages 2 and 3, tape 3). In the tapes, she makes no mention of telling the psychiatrists of her alleged encounters with Epstein. Moreover, while Plaintiff denies recruiting other girls, on page 24 of the Palm Beach Police Report, Plaintiff said she left anote for Epstein that indicated "for a good time call [Plaintiff] and [friend]" and left the girls' phone numbers. + +17. Plaintiff noted that while in high school a friend, Chris, died in amotor vehicle accident, that she was in shock from his death, and that she got over it after about/ IA to 2 years, but that it still bothers her. (Page 4, GK Contemp notes) + +18. Plaintiff noted that aclose friend, Jen, died in amotor vehicle accident and that she was in shock for two months. (Page 4, GK Contemp notes) + +19. Plaintiff reported, "I probably went there over 50 times." (Page 3, tape 4) + +20. Plaintiff was arrested at age 17 for DUI on 3/09/05. (Police Offense Report) + +21. On 10/31/04, fight occurred between plaintiff and PrestonMinbackof cab. Plaintiff (age 17) had been drinking. Police were called for theft of cab fare. Upon arriving at residence, police found plaintiff in home with no shirt on. Plaintiff refused to cooperate with police and threatened to kill herself...was arrested for violation of protective order. (Police Offense Report) + +22. On 2/28/02, plaintiff was charged with shoplifting bras ftUnn Burdines and was issued a juvenile referral form. (Police Offense Report) + +23. On 9/21/04, a protective order was filed against Preston after an incident on 9/20/04 in which he accused her of cheating on him. He then began choking her, threw her against a wall, and yelled at plaintiff. He dumped beer on her, threw cigarettes in her face, and slammed her into the ground. On a previous incident in August 2004, plaintiff reported they agued and Mr.egrabbed her by her arms and threw her to the ground outside her house. Plaintiff noted she was in fear because he has a violent history and has verbally threatened her friends, family and herself. (Petition for Injunction for Protection) + +24. AU of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +25. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. ICliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, dedarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, lig pf all rrtedicgclinical,schooladd work records known to the attorney in the case. + +26. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "availableimportant relevant documentswhich are being deliberatelywithheldfrom Ile "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, which=haverequested or thatsire hue gated would ordinarily be law of medical opinion formation SM tb.e topic ramming, whichmg inputIA requested? We request the same. + +27. It is critical for an MO examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are a number of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization; including the type and character of the alleged assault and key victim variables such as demographics; psychological reactions at the time of the trauma; previous psychiatric or psychological history, history of previous victimization; current or previous psychological difficulties; general personality dynamics and coping style; sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate sodal support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +28. It is also essential to understand the plaintiff's level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescrthed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +29. Knowledge of plaintiff's relationships to her family and fanulial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +30. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician rds. + +31. These, in essence, are the same or similar records that plaintiff's expert witness (Dr. 'aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree ft au the Johns \_University and + +![](_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg) + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. + +Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe #5 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe #5 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiffs counsel has retained an expert witness Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kliman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kliman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #5. + +14. Plaintiff reports she went to three different schools in the eighth grade. (Page 3, GK Contemp note) + +15. Plaintiff reports "I have had girls be mean to me and even rumor that they would slice my throat when I was younger." (Page 4, GK Contemp note) + +16. Plaintiff noted that she had caught her mother and stepfather having sex. (Page 7, GK Contemp note) + +17. "I got kicked out when I was 18 (by both parents). (Page 7, GK Contemp note) + +18. Plaintiff noted that her mother suffers from depression/stress. (Page 7, GK + +Contemp note) + +19. Plaintiff noted that during her sophomore and junior years of high school she drank every weekend and started trying drugs. (Page 7, GK Contemp note) + +20. "Her problems began during adolescence." (Page 7, GK Contemp note) + +21. Family psychiatric history includes: a history of ablood relative having been sexually abused, plaintiffs mother was physically abused by sisters, and plaintiff's father "was very irresponsible as afather figure when I was growing up" and used drugs. (Pages 7 and 8, GK Contemp note) + +22. Plaintiff noted "My stepfather hit me on afew occasions. But on one occasion, I lost hearing in my ear for two weeks." (Page 8, GK Contemp note) + +23. Plaintiff reported that she has been sexually active since age 13 and had 8-10 partners. (Page 8, GK Contemp note) + +24. Plaintiff reported that she had been raised by her father between ages 12 to 18 and that she found her childhood hard to remember, unhappy and painful. (Page 8, GK Contemp note) + +25. Plaintiff reports that her drug use has included marijuana and pain pills without prescription and that on several occasions she has drunk too much alcohol. (Page 9, GK Contemp note) + +26. Plaintiff reported that her mother's sisters had paid amale to rape her (the mother) in acloset at school. She had been raped three times, twice in childhood and once on adate. Also, an uncle raped the mother. (Page 1, GK Follow-up note) + +27. Plaintiff reported having suicidal thoughts in the 9th or 10th grade. (Page 4, GK Follow-up note) (Pre-Epstein) + +28. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful, isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +29. In Dr. Kliurtan's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, akt gf all medical clinical, scliSoo and work records known to the attorney in the case. + +30. Dr. Kliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "availableimportant w\_ci relevantdocumentswhich ire being deliberatelywithheld fromus." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, whichsv hue re gati sx thatwehave stated would ordinarily be part 21medical opinion formation Qn he topics concernipg, which our input krequested." We request the same. + +31. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, • acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had + +been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +32. It is also essential to understand the plaintiff's level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +33. Knowledge of plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +34. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. These, in essence, are the same and similar records that plaintiffs expert witness (Dr. Kliman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and such other similar information be made available to us to conduct our examination. + +Respectfully submitted, + +Richard C. W , + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine + +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South + +Florida + +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida + +College of Medicine \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747596/EFTA02747596.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747596/EFTA02747596.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a68f6e5dee8c9e5c5418e0f8a21c23d704bdb7c0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747596/EFTA02747596.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,338 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747596.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 10349, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.34, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. illEnD'", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.676, + 187.92000000000002 + ], + [ + 440.64, + 187.92000000000002 + ], + [ + 440.64, + 204.93 + ], + [ + 197.676, + 204.93 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 204 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 288 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 272 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 292 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 316 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 342 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 297 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747596" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747596/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747596/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7cdaa5c098f09c3deedf3227361c97b0ac91348e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747596/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0b14886eb5118ee5dea48e5227f9a16c1ddb6157233994a6426c2f2bea0435fa +size 3559 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747604/EFTA02747604.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747604/EFTA02747604.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e5ce0830bde14488a8909d19b435396dfee8c9ed --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747604/EFTA02747604.md @@ -0,0 +1,117 @@ +Jane Doe #6 + +V. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OP RICHARD + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W.S" M.D., who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard CW.M, M.D. I arn over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochernical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am aformer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research, Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. + +Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint filed by Jane Doe #6 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe 06 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12. She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiff's counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. Kliman, MD, is the medical director. Dr. Kliman's initial records indicate the following concerning Jane Doe #6. + +14. Plaintiff's interrogatories note a diagnosis of Pt U following an auto accident in 2003. (Pre-Epstein) (Page 5, Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatories) + +15. Plaintiff noted "nervous about driving here. Hit by asemi June 2003.Iwasn't hurt but Mom was." (Page 1, GK Contemp notes, Interview Part 1) + +16. "Seroquel.. . for bad dreams after the car accident... longest therapy six months court ordered. I am on probation for stupid stuff I did 2-3 years ago. . . really dumb, I got in trouble, arrested." (Page 2, GK Contemp notes) + +17. A Petition for \*Involuntary Assessment for Substance Abuse, dated July 19, 2006, noted adomestic disturbance at plaintiff's home with "threats to several family members as well as threats of suicide... appeared to be under the influence of Zanax [sic) bars... She found her grandmother dead three weeks ago, may have pushed her over the edge." (Page 1, Petition for Involuntary Assessment for Substance Abuse, Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida). On January 31, 2007, Plaintiff pled guilty to grand theft and burglary, and was sentenced to a30-day substance abuse program, 9 months community control, and 2 years probation. On February 25, 2007, Plaintiff cutoff her monitoring bracelet and fled her residence violating probation. She was arrested on March 9, 2007 and April 2, 2007 and was ordered to undergo amental health evaluation. On August 8, 2007, she was arrested for possession of drug paraphernalia and violated her probation again. She was in jail for a period of 30 daysuntil September 6, 2007 when she was found guilty of the violation of probation and sentenced to remain in jail for evaluation and treatment and then outpatient treatment as well as parenting classes. + +18. A Notice of Related Case reports an incident of the plaintiff being charged with possession of a weapon on school property in November 2004. (Page 2, Notice of Related Case, Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida) + +19. On 4/13/06, in response to acall of child abuse, an officer received a report from DCF noting that "since the age of 13, Plaintiff has been smoking marijuana with her father every other day... Mom is aware of (blacked out) smoking marijuana with dad... She placed her daughter in Growing Together Treatment Center on 3/10/06. Then Baker Acted her on 4/ 7/06 to (blacked out)." (Police Offense Report) + +20. On 4/12/05, police responded to adomestic violence call, which involved plaintiff and her brother kicking and hitting each other at their residence. (Police Offense Report) + +21. A police report of 5/24/04 notes that police responded to a delayed battery charge, in which the plaintiff was involved in averbal argument with afriend who then punched the plaintiff with aclosed fist to the forehead area. (Police Offense Report) + +22. A police report of 11/22/03 noted a physical altercation involving the plaintiff and another individual, which resulted in the plaintiff being struck in her left eye with a closed fist. (Police Offense Report) + +23. On 3/02/03, police responded to acall of a suspicious person at the plaintiff s residence. The plaintiff reported that when she entered her shed to do her laundry, she came in contact with an unknown male, who had some of her underwear inside his mouth. She reported that the male took the underwear out of his mouth, put them in the dryer, and then ran away. (Police Offense Report) + +24. A police report notes an incident of 8/27/02 in which plaintiff was followed home from school by four girls and allegedly battered by two of the girls subsequent to a verbal conflict at school. (Police Offense Report) + +25. "I met Mr. Jeffrey August 2004.. . I was between repeating sixth grade. . . was not yet 14. came to my house to get me to go and we called acab to go to Jeffrey's. She told me I had to tell him adifferent age, 16 or over because I wouldn't get paid." (Page 1, GK notes) + +26. Plaintiff reported, wasn't a virgin. I might have had sex with one person. I was around 13 or 14 that I lost my virginity with alittle kid, achildhood friend." (Page 2, GK notes) + +27. "I smoked some weed during the Xanax... drank alittle but not into it"(Page 2, V wi GK 12/6/0B) + +28. Plaintiff reported "Cause I don't like the way it made me feel and I'd fall asleep on it and yea . . . that's alittle bit after I got into that car accident, that's 2006. I started getting bad dreams and they started taking me to therapists and I started getting like anxiety attacks in the car .. It was bad... that's the longest therapist I've ever seen and that was because it was court ordered." "I went to her like six months." (Page 9, Tape 1) + +29. Question: "Have you been more irritable since this happened to you?" + +Plaintiff response, "I don't Icnow."(Page 12, Tape 3). + +30. Plaintiff failed to report to Dr. Kaman that on Apri110, 2005 she witnessed a friend getelectrocuted. On December 22, 2006, Plaintiff got into afight with her thenboyfriend, who had been out all night, and the boyfriend went out in the street in front of their house and put agun to his head and killed himself. + +31. All of the above show that this plaintiff came from an unstable and disturbed home, had been subject to previous physical and sexual abuse, was fearful isolated, and had had suicidal ideation prior to meeting Mr. Epstein. For further elaboration of her history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +32. In Dr. Klirnan's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Roman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, alit gi amedical, c1inicaj,scho21" and work records known to the attorney in the case. + +33. Dr. Klirnan notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not + +form opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "a/aable important and relevantdocumentswhich eb.... .4 deliberately withheldfromLie." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, whichwe have requestedex that w€ ave stated would ordinarily be pa of medical opinion formation en the topics concerning, whichOm input k requested." We request the same. + +34. It is critical for an ME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, sodal, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate soda/ support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug + +use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +35. It is also essential to understand the plaintiff's level of emotional support whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescnbed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +Respectfully submitted, + +Richard C. W. [REDACTED], MD + +Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South +Florida + +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida +College of Medicine + +STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared RICHARD C.W. [REDACTED], M.D., who is ( ) personally known to me or ( ) who has produced as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this 4th day of August, 2009. + +![](_page_9_Picture_23.jpeg) + +Marcia J. Chapman +Notary Public +Printed Name: MARCIA CHAPMAN +My Commission Expires: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747604/EFTA02747604.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747604/EFTA02747604.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c839042e88d268a60e4e5b50ab32aca5958cb355 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747604/EFTA02747604.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,425 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747604.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 10, + "chars": 12894, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.72, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_9_Picture_23.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OP RICHARD", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 195.21961975097656, + 207.36 + ], + [ + 444.31199999999995, + 207.36 + ], + [ + 444.31199999999995, + 221.13000000000002 + ], + [ + 195.21961975097656, + 221.13000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF SEMINOLE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 80.784, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 220.32, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 220.32, + 433.35 + ], + [ + 80.784, + 433.35 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 208 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 289 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 291 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 334 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 318 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 330 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 337 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 336 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 103 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747604" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747604/_page_9_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747604/_page_9_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..926f99234d208662fe36e43f43d40037a5fe6f13 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747604/_page_9_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b1c169e5238a03bce90ccc87b9e0dc2a5d5af1a82f72be31853516442bb8e975 +size 11764 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747614/EFTA02747614.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747614/EFTA02747614.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d34dfb8fde1e754cc052760928872329c9e3af28 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747614/EFTA02747614.md @@ -0,0 +1,82 @@ +Jane Doe 07 + +v. + +Jeffrey Epstein + +## AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. M.D, + +STATE OP FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +On this day personalty appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Richard C.W. who, being by me first duly sworn under oath deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Richard C.W. al MD. I am over the age of majority, and make this affidavit and declaration upon the basis of personal knowledge of the factual matters contained herein. +- 2. I have maintained a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry since 1996. +- 3. I, also, currently serve as aCourtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida; Affiliate Professor, Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida; and Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida College Medicine. + - 4. I received my undergraduate degree from the Johns University and + +medical degree from the University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. + +5. I served as aLieutenant Commander in the United States Navy, where I researched and evaluated biological and neurochemical factors associated with the onset of psychiatric disorders and served as arepresentative to the Joint Services Task Force planning Operation Homecoming, the return of POW's from Vietnam. + +6. I have previously served as an assistant clinical professor at the University of South Florida College of Medicine, directed one of the ten model mental health centers in the United States, and served as amedical consultant to the Kennedy Space Center. + +7. I am afouaer member of the academic faculty at the University of Texas, in Houston, Texas where I served as Assistant Professor and then Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine, Director of Clinical Research. Director of Residency Training, Chief of the Consultation/Liaison Service, and Chief Psychiatrist at the M.D. Cancer Hospital in Houston. + +8. I, also, have served as aProfessor of Internal Medicine and Psychiatry at the Medical College of Wisconsin where I was appointed Chief of Psychiatry at the Milwaukee County and Froedtert Hospitals. + +9. In addition, I have served as aProfessor of Psychiatry and Internal Medicine and Associate at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Memphis. + +10. The amended complaint Sled by Jane Doe #7 against Jeffrey Epstein makes + +sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon aminor and seek damages in excess of \$50 million. Jane Doe 4.7 alleges confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that she suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. + +11. She alleges the intentional infliction of emotional distress and that Mr. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. + +12She further alleges that she has suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. + +13. Plaintiffs counsel has retained an expert witness, Dr. Kliman of the Psychological Trauma Center, adivision of Preventive Psychiatry Associates Medical Group, Inc., of San Francisco, California, of which Gilbert W. ICliman, MD, is the medical director. + +14. While all pertinent medical history has been withheld, on October 4, 2005, Plaintiff did provide astatement to the police, which directly conflicts with the allegations in her complaint. Medical records would assist with the veracity (or lack thereof) of her statements and the allegations in the complaint. Plaintiff told the police on October 4, 2005 that she was introduced to Epstein by ellellpwhen she was approximately 17. (Police Statement, page 1) allegedly told her that the first time you go it's just like a massage and she said "well, like, well the more you go supposedly, the more like, he expects, and like flirting with girls and that's what kind of scared her." (Police Statement, page 2) She also states that the second time she went to Epstein's, she gave him amassage and that she had her clothes on. (Police Report, pages 2 & 4) Plaintiff claims she thought Epstein might be leaning towards wanting her to take her clothes off, or touching her but Epstein never did because she was so shy. (Police Statement, pages 2 & 3) She also told police that when she massaged Epstein, he was not naked (Police Statement, page 3), he never removed his towel (Police Statement, page 3), she did not take her clothes off (Police Statement, page 4), Epstein did not touch her inappropriately (Police Statement, page 3), he did not masturbate (Police Statement, page 5), and they did not touch each other's private areas (Police Statement, page 3). Further, she claims in the report not to have returned to Epstein's home after the second visit (Police Report, page 3) + +15. Her allegations in the complaint are in complete opposite when compared to the police report For instance, the complaint alleges: (a) during the first massage, Epstein sexually assaulted her and masturbated (Complaint Paragraph 13); and (b) Plaintiff returned on many occasions to the Palm Beach mansion to provide Epstein with massages for money. On those occasions, Epstein engaged in sexual contact and activity with Plaintiff, which included, among other things, Epstein touching Jane's breasts, placing a vibrator on her vagina and masturbating himself. This sexual abuse continued over a period of approximately 18 to 24 months (Complaint, Paragraph 14). In stark contrast to the statement she gave to the police, she now claims in her answers to interrogatories that she went to Epstein's home between 8-10 times (Interrogatory, #15) and that she brought friends on two separate occasions and was paid \$200 per friend (Interrogatory, #17). In fact, she denies in her answers to interrogatories that she even provided arecorded statement to the police (Interrogatory, #22). In addition, on Tape Z pages 11,12 tr20, she claims that Epstein was aggressive, grabbed her butt, tried to feel parts of her, masturbated under the towel and pulled her bra and exposed her nipples and touched her breasts, which is totally inconsistent with her statement to the police. + +16. For further elaboration of Jane Doe #7's history and background, access to all available records is crucial if one is to fully understand the impact of any of these events on her subsequent behavior and proportion the impact of specific events, if any, or her current and future level of function. + +17. In Dr. Kliman's initial replenishment retainer agreement and fee schedule (date 7/18/08), in a heading entitled "Regarding Full Disclosure," Dr. Kliman notes that prior to deposition, counsel will make every effort necessary to provide experts with information requested by the experts including: 1) alist of all depositions, statements, declarations, and motions in the case, 2) a copy of any requested items, and 3) most importantly, alig Qf Ailmedical clinicalschool, andwork records known to the attorney in the case. + +18. Dr. ICliman notes on page 8 of his contract opinion formation that he will not Mit opinions, give reports, or testify in certain circumstances. These include circumstances where he has reason to believe a retaining attorney has "availableimportant and relevant documentswhich ars being deliberatelywithheld fromIa." "We define such as documents in possession of retaining attorney, wUch we have=questedor thatwe have gated would ordinarily ke part of, medical opinion formation eli The Wigs concerning, which m itinput is requested." We request the same. + +19. It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. There are anumber of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. + +20. It is also essential to understand the plaintiff's level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. + +21. Knowledge of plaintiff's relationships to her family and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. + +22. It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available ho him afull and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. These, in essence, are the same and similar records that plaintiff's expert witness (Dr. Kliman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories + +and conduct. We would concur and request of the court that the same and such other similar information be made available to us to conduct our examination. + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()Courtesy Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Florida, College of Medicine +Affiliate Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, University of South Florida +Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida +College of Medicine + +STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF SEMINOLE + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared **RICHARD C.W.** +[REDACTED] M.D., who is (✓) personally known to me or ( ) who has produced +\_\_\_\_\_ as identification, and who did take an oath, deposes and says that +the attached Affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this 4th day of August +2009. + +![](_page_7_Picture_131.jpeg) + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747614/EFTA02747614.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747614/EFTA02747614.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..42a06cd846dbe61254224314e56b8d857f9f54c4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747614/EFTA02747614.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,338 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747614.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 11381, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.62, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_7_Picture_131.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD C.W. M.D,", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 194.61599999999999, + 208.17000000000002 + ], + [ + 447.8025207519531, + 208.17000000000002 + ], + [ + 447.8025207519531, + 229.03253173828125 + ], + [ + 194.61599999999999, + 229.03253173828125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 205 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 285 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 284 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 347 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 344 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 340 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 315 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747614" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747614/_page_7_Picture_131.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747614/_page_7_Picture_131.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e66cc56c32f13f90f613585c7797e9841887575d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747614/_page_7_Picture_131.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8d4fa6e84c25bc36e73f6c7b52d3893420bdcf24ec6d2281ac2a836a674141f9 +size 11101 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747622/EFTA02747622.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747622/EFTA02747622.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e4450d6e23934c4e4f8bc398898e4f9199c11f19 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747622/EFTA02747622.md @@ -0,0 +1,268 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Reply to Plaintiff, Jane Doe 2-8, Response In Opposition To Defendant's Motions For Independent Examination Of Plaintiffs, With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Reply to Plaintiffs' Memorandum In Response To Defendant's Motion For Independent Examination Of Plaintiffs, With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law, and in support, states as follows: + +1. Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Response is docketed at DE 345. Plaintiffs' counsel is correct with regard to the agreement reached regarding the IMEs as delineated in DE 345 with the exception of the questions that involve Plaintiffs' past sexual histories, which must be timely ruled upon by this court before the Independent Medical Examinations occur in November 2009. + +2. On September 9, 2009, this court entered an order on CMAs scope and questioning of the IME. DE 289. In the Order, the court acknowledged the allegations made by CMA and the damages sought. Jane Doe's 2-8 make similar allegations of Sexual Assault and Battery, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress and Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. 2422. See es., Amended Complaints at DE 56 and 62.i + +3. Plaintiffs seek millions of dollars for sexual contact, harmful or offensive contact, sexual assault and battery, and unlawful, offensive and harmful touching. See Amended Complaints at DEs 1, 18, 19, 50, 56, 60 and 62. Plaintiffs allege a plan and scheme to willfully and intentionally commit the above acts. Id. Plaintiffs claim that the above acts resulted in severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including, mental, psychological, mental anguish and pain and emotional damages/distress. Id. Plaintiffs do not allege that any of the alleged acts were consensual. + +4. Plaintiffs seek to prevent questioning of their past sexual histories in order to prevent the Defendant and a jury from properly analyzing their damages as it pertains to Epstein while, at the same time, blinding the jury from instances in each of the Plaintiffs' lives where psychological, mental, physical and sexual trauma may have been caused by the acts of others and not Epstein. See Affidavits of Dr. ■ **attached hereto which clearly delineate prior instances in each of the Plaintiff's lives where psychological, mental, emotional, physical and sexual trauma was visited upon them. See Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, and F. Those acts have and/or may have caused the damages they seek to recover solely from Epstein. Therefore, Plaintiffs' social, medical and psychological histories are discoverable, all of which directly relate to some sexual history component which, at this juncture, is discoverable. The sexual history component is inextricably** + +&#x27; Jane Does 2-8 are all represented by the same counsel and each of their Amended Complaints is for the most part, identical. See also DEs 1,18,19,50 and 60. + +woven into Plaintiffs" past social, medical and psychological histories and cannot be excluded from the IME. See infra. + +5. Plaintiffs seek to recover complex medical expenses. Therefore, as this court has recognized, " . . . full knowledge of Plaintiff's past and present medical, psychological, familial, and social histories is essential." DE 289. This Court has already ruled that ". . . defense counsel may ask. . .personal and sensitive questions concerning some of the pivotal issues in this case would work an injustice by preventing Defendant from being able to defend himself." DE 289. Obviously, if Plaintiff was a prostitute or was molested or sexually battered and suffered the same exact emotional or physical damages as a result of the acts of others (i.e., a prior injury), the jury is permitted to weigh this evidence. Even so, at this juncture, it is without question that same is discoverable. Admissibility can be handled on another date. See Faiardo v. Pierce County, 2009 WL 1765756 (W.D. Wash. 2009)(allegations of specific disorders amount to more than garden variety disorders and thus Plaintiff waived physician-patient privilege as it involved a complex medical issue); Alexander v. City of Bellingham, 2008 WL 2077970 (W.D. Wash. 2008); Grit v. Target Coro., 2008 WL 1777744 (M.D. Fla. 2008); Trenary v. Bush Entertainment Corp., 2006 WL 3333621 (M.D. Fla. 2006)(responses to interrogatories placed plaintiff's mental condition at issue); Tracey P. v. Sarasota County, 2006 WL 1678908 (M.D. Fla. 2006)(responses to interrogatories delineating depression and bipolar disorder are more than simple allegations of emotional distress thus placing plaintiff's mental condition at issue). See also United States v. Bear Stops, 997 F.2d 451 (8th Cir. 1993)(dealing with "admissibility of other acts of sexual abuse by individuals other than the defendant to explain why a victim of abuse exhibited behavioral manifestations of a sexually abused child. Fed.R.Evid. 403, 412 and 412(6)(1). + +6. Here, the information sought by way of IME questions may show that Plaintiffs suffered from the injuries she alleges as a result of other life events or sexual activity prior to, during or after the acts alleged in the Amended Complaints. Did other life events and/or other sexual activity with others, which may be similar to alleged Epstein conduct, cause "emotional distress, psychological trauma, loss of dignity, humiliation or embarrassment", and if so or not, why? Accordingly, the probative value of obtaining full answers to the past sexual history questions is relevant, is basic personal injury discovery and goes to the heart of Plaintiffs' damages or lack thereof, including medical, psychiatric, psychological and the coupled sexual history component related to all of the foregoing. Significantly, Plaintiffs' past sexual histories and experiences may have caused the injuries for which they seek to recover from Epstein. Therefore, it is virtually impossible to separate Plaintiffs' past sexual histories from the psychological, emotional, mental, physical and sexual injuries each Plaintiff seeks to recover. Doing so would hold Epstein accountable for several of the Plaintiffs" preexisting conditions. See attached affidavits of Dill. Based on Plaintiffs' allegations in this civil suit, full knowledge of Plaintiff's past and present medical and psychological histories (which will include sexual histories) is not only permitted under the law, but is necessary to arrive at a full level of damages. To hold otherwise will result in reversible error, and will prevent Epstein from defending himself and this case, thereby violating his due process rights. + +## The Law and Federal Rule Of Evidence 412 + +7. It is well settled that relevant information is discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the discovery is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P.; Donahay v. Palm Beach Tours & trans Inc. 242 F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). Rule 412 does j A automatically result in a determination that such sexual history and sexual activity/behavior information is never admissible. In fact, written into the Rule are the procedures to follow in determining when such information is admissible at trial. The Advisory Committee Notes to Rule 412, Fed.R.Evid, makes clear that the procedures to determine admissibility of an alleged victim's/plaintiff's sexual conduct or activity in civil cases does not apply to discovery of such information. Rather, discoverability of such information is governed by Rule 26, Fed.R.Civ.P., pursuant to which the scope of discovery is broad. Donahay,supra, at 686, and cases cited therein. "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claims or defense of any party involved in the pending action." Id. + +8. Rule 412, entitled "Sex Offense Cases; Relevance of Alleged Victim's Past Sexual Behavior or Alleged Sexual Predisposition," provides in relevant part — + +- (a) Evidence generally inadmissible.--The following evidence is not admissible in any civil ... proceeding involving alleged sexual misconduct except as provided in subdivisions (b) and (c): +- (I) Evidence offered to prove that any alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior. + - (2) Evidence offered to prove any alleged victim's sexual predisposition. +- (b) Exceptions.— + +(2) In a civil case, evidence offered to prove the sexual behavior or sexual predisposition of any alleged victim is admissible if it is otherwise admissible under these rules and its probative value substantially outweighs the danger of harm to any victim and of unfair prejudice to any party. Evidence of an alleged victim's reputation is admissible only if it has been placed in controversy by the alleged victim. + +**(c) Procedure to determine admissibility.--** + +(1) A party intending to offer evidence under subdivision (b) must— + +(A) file a written motion at least 14 days before trial specifically describing the evidence and stating the purpose for which it is offered unless the court, for good cause requires a different time for filing or permits filing during trial; and + +(B) serve the motion on all parties and notify the alleged victim or, when appropriate, the alleged victim's guardian or representative. + +(2) Before admitting evidence under this rule the court must conduct a hearing in camera and afford the victim and parties a right to attend and be heard. The motion, related papers, and the record of the hearing must be sealed and remain under seal unless the court orders otherwise. + +9. In confirming that Rule 412 does not control the discoverability of such information, the Advisory Committee Notes (1994 Amendments) state – + +The procedures set forth in subdivision (c) do not apply to discovery of a victim's past sexual conduct or predisposition in civil cases, which will be continued to be governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26. In order not to undermine the rationale of Rule 412, however, courts should enter appropriate orders pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 (c) to protect the victim against unwarranted inquiries and to ensure confidentiality. Courts should presumptively issue protective orders barring discovery unless **the party seeking discovery makes a showing that the evidence sought to be discovered would be relevant under the facts and theories of the particular case, and cannot be obtained except through discovery.** In an action for sexual harassment, for instance, while some evidence of the alleged victim's sexual behavior and/or predisposition in the workplace may perhaps be relevant, non-work place conduct will usually be irrelevant. *Cf.* ██████████ v. *McGregor Electronic Industries, Inc.*, 989 F.2d 959, 962-63 (8th Cir. 1993) (posing for a nude magazine outside work hours is irrelevant to issue of unwelcomeness of sexual advances at work). **Confidentiality orders should be presumptively granted as well.** + +(Emphasis added). + +10. In accordance with Rule 412 and Rule 26, the discovery sought regarding Plaintiff's sexual activity with males, whether she claims other males committed sexual assault or battery on her, whether she claims other males committed lewd and lascivious conduct to her, and whether other males committed lewd or lascivious exhibition to her in, are all relevant to Plaintiffs' damages claims and the type of injuries they claim has suffered. Defendant has no other means of obtaining such information and obtaining such information through Plaintiff will better protect the confidentiality until the Court can make a determination in accordance with the procedures under Rule 412(c) whether such information will be admissible at trial. See Rule 412(c) quoted above. Defendant will agree to an order keeping the confidentiality of the information obtained through discovery. However, the Defendant cannot agree to waive his due process right to defend himself in these civil cases. + +11. The information sought is relevant based on the facts and theories of this action. See Second Amended Complaints. As an example, Jane Doe 2 alleges, that she ". . . suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages," and "severe mental anguish and pain." In her answers to interrogatories nos. 9 and 10, Jane Doe 2 further states that: + +Plaintiff has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries, including without limitation, anxiety, low self-esteem, feelings of guilt, self-blame, distrustfulness, burdened often by sadness and depression, suicidal thoughts, difficulty trusting others (particularly men), irritability, anger, feeling helpless and powerless, escapism through excessive partying, lack of confidence, loss of innocence. (Interrog. No. 9). + +... she seeks damages arising from her psychological and emotional injuries. These damages include pain and suffering, costs of psychological care and treatment, and loss of earning capacity. ... (Interrog. No. 10). + +12. Jane Doe 2 also alleges that " Epstein's assistant" was a part of "Epstein's plan and scheme (which) reflected a particular pattern and method" in the alleged recruiting of girl's to come to EPSTEIN's Palm Beach mansion and give him "massages" in exchange for money. 2nd Am. Complaint, ¶11-12. According to the complaint allegations — "Upon information and belief Epstein has a sexual preference and obsession for underage minor girls." ¶8. `I' would "bring the girl up a flight of stairs to a bedroom that contained a massage table ... ." The girl would be alone with EPSTEIN. EPSTEIN would "lie naked on the massage table, and direct the girl to remove her clothes." "Epstein would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, including masturbation and touching the girl's vagina." 2" Am. Complaint, ¶11, Exhibit B. Plaintiff alleges that "in 2004-2005," she, "then approximately 16 years old, fell into Epstein's trap and became one of his victims." ¶8. Plaintiff alleges that Epstein exposed himself to her and "sexually assaulted" her. ¶12 Plaintiff further alleges that "Epstein committed willful acts of child sexual abuse" on her, which resulted in "mental or sexual injury," and "caused or likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired." 2d Am. Complaint, ¶25. + +13. As set forth in Defendant's Motions to Compel Interrogatory Responses, Jane Doe 2-8 allege similar injuries, which include, but are not limted to, "psychological and emotional injuries, including without limitation, anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, guilt, self-blame, feelings of being degraded, feeling unattractive, diminished sense of femininity, fluctuations in weight/appetite, sexual intimacy problems, flashbacks, disturbing memories, stress, irritability, feelings of being isolated and trapped, diminished trust, social problems, problems in personal relationships, indecisiveness, + +lower energy, lower ambition and initiative, headaches, back pain, feels stress (particularly around men), obsessive thoughts, problems concentrating, alcohol abuse, corruption of morals and values, loss of innocence, and cries a lot." See Motions to Compel DEs 68, 60, 75, 70, 25 and 27 in each case respectively. Those arguments are incorporated herein by reference. To the extent the Court wishes to review Jane Does' Responses to Interrogatories, those responses can be found at the above docket entries. at§ also Composite Exhibits attached to the Motions to Compel at Des 68, 60, 75, 70, 25, and 27, in each case respectively, and the argument set forth therein. The information sought is clearly relevant to the injuries and damages claimed by Plaintiff. See United States v. Bear Stops, 997 F.2d 451 (8th Cir. 1993)(Defendant charged with sexual abuse of six year old boy was entitled to admission of evidence relating to victim's sexual assault by 3 older boys to establish alternative explanation for why victim exhibited behavioral manifestations of sexually abused child.). + +14. In further support of Defendant's motion, See Balas v. Ruzzo, 703 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1998), as it is on point to the discovery issues in this action, and the relevancy and discoverability of Plaintiffs' histories of sexual activity and any payment therefore. + +WHEREFORE, Epstein, through his counsel, requests that this court enter an Order: + +- a. allowing Dr. Defendant expert psychiatrist, to question Plaintiffs on their past sexulistories; +- b. requiring that Plaintiff answer those questions; and +- c. for such other and further relief as this court deem, just and proper. + +By: MICH J. 1 , ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +# Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 11 day of 03, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/** [REDACTED] + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, +08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. +08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. a Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx®searcylaw.com + +iph@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf@bnicereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +casselln@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiflane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. + +P.A. illitura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberit®Dodhurst.com + +kezell(apodhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagegabellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747622/EFTA02747622.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747622/EFTA02747622.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..85b409c2b627eb343ee1caf97f5a9e36eedc58bc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747622/EFTA02747622.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,561 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747622.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 11, + "chars": 20010, + "elapsed_seconds": 12.41, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.6003723144531, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.6003723144531, + 102.35302734375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 102.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Reply to Plaintiff, Jane Doe 2-8, Response In \nOpposition To Defendant's Motions For Independent Examination Of Plaintiffs, \nWith Incorporated Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 101.59200000000001, + 347.49 + ], + [ + 520.9550170898438, + 347.49 + ], + [ + 520.9550170898438, + 391.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 101.59200000000001, + 391.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Law and Federal Rule Of Evidence 412", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 424.8010559082031, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 424.8010559082031, + 90.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 90.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(c) Procedure to determine admissibility.--", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.16, + 166.04999999999998 + ], + [ + 331.092, + 166.04999999999998 + ], + [ + 331.092, + 180.63 + ], + [ + 110.16, + 180.63 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 690.9300000000001 + ], + [ + 367.54791259765625, + 690.9300000000001 + ], + [ + 367.54791259765625, + 707.2230224609375 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 707.2230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.78000000000003, + 417.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 425.34000000000003, + 417.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 425.34000000000003, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 192.78000000000003, + 457.65 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 371 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 149 + ], + [ + "Line", + 72 + ], + [ + "Text", + 69 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747622" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747633/EFTA02747633.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747633/EFTA02747633.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2950ec2fda7f1afcb8748db8b35cc5490e9b3139 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747633/EFTA02747633.md @@ -0,0 +1,145 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 98-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +### NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL PLAINTIFF, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS ATTENDANCE AT PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION (DE 3311 + +The Plaintiff, , by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files this Notice of Withdrawal of Plaintiff, Motion for Protective Order as to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's, Attendance at Plaintiffs Deposition (DE 331). + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1 + +Counsel for the movant conferred via telephone with counsel for the Defendant regarding the filing of the instance Notice and he has no objection to Plaintiff filing same. + +Respectfully submitted, + +*/s/Jack P.* [REDACTED] + +JACK SCAROLA + +Florida Bar No. 169440 + +JACK P. [REDACTED] + +Florida Bar No.: 0547808 + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +Phone: (561) 686-6300 + +Fax: (561) 383-9456 + +Attorneys for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +**CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 21, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached counsel list via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. + +*/s/Jack P.* [REDACTED] + +JACK SCAROLA + +Florida Bar No. 169440 + +JACK P. [REDACTED] + +Florida Bar No.: 0547808 + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 + +Phone: (561) 686-6300 + +Fax: (561) 383-9456 + +Attorneys for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +**COUNSEL LIST** + +Richard H. Willits, Esquire +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Robert Critton, Esquire +Michael J. Pike, Esquire +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman LLP +515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33414 +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire +Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +Bruce E. Reinhart, Esquire +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 South Australian Ave., Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esquire +Adam D. Horowitz, Esquire +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +Brad [REDACTED], Esquire +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +Paul G. Cassell, Esquire +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +Esquire + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +isidrogarciaabellsouth.net + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esquire + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esquire + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +riosefsbercapodhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747633/EFTA02747633.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747633/EFTA02747633.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e8e9de9438e3e0730dc9a704e790c9d9fb2f3a96 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747633/EFTA02747633.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,272 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747633.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3529, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.39, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 406.0168151855469, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 406.0168151855469, + 114.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 114.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL PLAINTIFF, \nMOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS \nATTENDANCE AT PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION (DE 3311", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 402.57 + ], + [ + 530.604, + 402.57 + ], + [ + 530.604, + 445.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 445.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 160.344, + 567.81 + ], + [ + 485.9021911621094, + 567.81 + ], + [ + 485.9021911621094, + 583.6800079345703 + ], + [ + 160.344, + 583.6800079345703 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 400.248, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 400.248, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 241.12800000000001, + 333.71999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "COUNSEL LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 257.03999999999996, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 342.72, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 342.72, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 257.03999999999996, + 85.85999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 48 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 27 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747633" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747637/EFTA02747637.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747637/EFTA02747637.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..74517e2011292750ac755508093a0b76f803da73 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747637/EFTA02747637.md @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@ +## Adam Horowitz + +From: Robert D. Critton Jr. ircrit@bcIclaw.corn] + +Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 5:43 PM + +To: Adam Horowitz; Jessica Cadwell + +Cc: Stuart Mermelstein + +Subject: RE: Notice of Deposition + +So file a prot order I tried to work this out and you response was unacceptable, bob + +From: Adam Horowitz [mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com] + +Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 5:31 PM + +To: Jessica Cadwell + +Cc: Robert D. Critton Jr.; Stuart Mermelstein + +Subject: Re: Notice of Deposition + +Bob- + +Not only is the location not agreeable, but neither is the 11 pm start time. + +Adam + +From: Jessica Cadwell + +To: J. ; reelrhw@hotrnall.com ; Jack P. I; Bruce Reinhart; Isidro rjosefsberg@podhurstscom ; KATHERINE W. EZELL ; Jack oldberger ; Adam Horowitz; Mermelstein; Robert D. Critton Jr. ; Michael J. Pike + +Cc: Jacquie ; Kikka M. Claudio ; jtn@bellsouth.net ; Margaret Berk + +Sent: Wed Oct 14 17:26:42 2009 + +Subject: Notice of Deposition + +Please see attached Notice of Deposition. + +leerafra ezrz611•11; e9, .729 + +Certified Paralegal + +Florida Registered Paralegal + +BURMAN CRITTON LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP + +303 Banyan Boulevard + +Suite #400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Tel: (561) 842-2820 / Fax: (561) 844.6929 + +Email: jcadwellAbctclaw.com + +![](_page_0_Picture_32.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747637/EFTA02747637.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747637/EFTA02747637.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c7743e5ec775c8d50a8291c83ba8bc9a0f71f91c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747637/EFTA02747637.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747637.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1267, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.58, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_32.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Adam Horowitz", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 60.58800000000001, + 63.17999999999999 + ], + [ + 158.1110076904297, + 63.17999999999999 + ], + [ + 158.1110076904297, + 77.25958251953125 + ], + [ + 60.58800000000001, + 77.25958251953125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 237 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747637" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747637/_page_0_Picture_32.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747637/_page_0_Picture_32.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bde862461dd074bb8d736869abb4221ab6d0922f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747637/_page_0_Picture_32.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:55125d26236adf8c2856e1e7c6c6ef14f82f719a830f39205a936e7b8ad1832e +size 6725 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747638/EFTA02747638.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747638/EFTA02747638.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d1ac0af1ced71d3367c36eadaac0c130402df894 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747638/EFTA02747638.md @@ -0,0 +1,85 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4'S SECOND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files this Second Motion for Protective Order and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, and states as follows: + +- I. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") has scheduled the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 for October 27, 2009 at 11 p.m. +- 2. Jane Doe No. 4 does not oppose the taking of her deposition, but instead objects to her deposition taking place without adequate precautions to ensure that Jeffrey Epstein does not repeat the offensive conduct he engaged in on September 16, 2009 when Jane Doe No. 4 first appeared for her deposition. (D.E. 306). +- 3. Jeffrey Epstein crossed paths with Jane Doe No. 4 and terrorized her immediately before her last scheduled deposition on September 16, 2009, despite a prior written stipulation between the parties that Epstein would not attend the depositions, nor be seen by the Plaintiffs, including Jane Doe No. 4, at their depositions. (D.E. 306, Ex. 3). + +4. Jane Doe No. 4 now seeks an Order in advance of the deposition directing that Jeffrey Epstein not attend the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 or make himself seen by Jane Doe No. 4 at her deposition, or else automatic sanctions will be entered against Epstein. Epstein has refused such an order. + +5. Prior to the last scheduled deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 on September 16, 2009, the Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Protective Order to preclude Jeffrey Epstein from attending the depositions of the Plaintiffs. (D.E. 292). The Motion was filed for the specific purpose of preventing Epstein from intimidating or harassing the Plaintiffs as he has repeatedly done in the past. (D.E. 292). As the Motion had not been adjudicated prior to the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, Plaintiff's counsel stipulated with defense counsel that "Jeffrey Epstein will not attend the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4." (D.E. 306). It was further stipulated under no circumstances was Epstein to be seen by Jane Doe No. 4 at her deposition. (D.E. 306). These were express conditions agreed to by Epstein's counsel before Jane Doe No. 4 appeared for deposition on September 16, 2009 at 1:00 p.m. (D.E. 306). + +6. At approximately 1:00 p.m. on September 16, 2009, Jane Doe No. 4 and her counsel were walking in the lobby of 250 Australian Ave South, Suite 115, West Palm Beach, Florida, toward the ground-floor conference room where her deposition was to be held. Just a few feet away from this conference room, Epstein crossed paths with Jane Doe No. 4. Epstein stopped walking and began staring at her. He intimidated her until she began to cry. Jeffrey Epstein made no immediate attempt to walk away from the Plaintiff. Instead, he stopped and continued to stare at her until she ran away. Jane Doe No. 4 became an emotional wreck upon this encounter. As a result of her distress, Jane Doe No. 4 did not sit for deposition and left the + +building, but only after her counsel assured her that Epstein was not waiting for her in the parking ramp. (D.E. 306). + +7. In addition to violating the Stipulation between the parties, Jeffrey Epstein's contact with and intimidation of Jane Doe No. 4 is a clear violation of this Court's No-Contact Order dated July 31, 2009. In that Order, this Court stated that Jeffrey Epstein shall have no "direct or indirect contact" with the Plaintiffs. (D.E. 238). The July 31, 2009 Order mirrored the June 30, 2008 criminal court order entered by Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillio, wherein she ordered Epstein to have "no direct or indirect contact" with the Plaintiffs. (D.E. 238). + +8. The Motions for Protective Order and Motion for Sanctions that resulted from Jeffrey Epstein's reckless conduct remain pending before this Court. (D.E. 306). In the Motion for Protective Order, Plaintiff requested an Order preventing Jeffrey Epstein from attending in person the depositions of all Plaintiffs, directing that any depositions of Plaintiffs in the future be at a court reporter's office selected by Plaintiffs' counsel, and that a special be appointed to preside at Plaintiffs' depositions and control the proceedings, at Epstein's expense. (D.E. 306). + +9. Although these motions remain pending, Epstein has insisted on scheduling the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 for October 27, 2009. Plaintiffs' counsel advised Defendant's counsel that since the motions for protective order were still pending, counsel would only produce Jane Doe No. 4 and other Plaintiffs for deposition upon an agreed order directing that (1) Epstein not attend the depositions of the Plaintiffs; (2) a sanction be entered against Epstein if he does attend any deposition of a Plaintiff which provides that Epstein may not take that Plaintiff's deposition, and (3) the depositions will be held in a neutral location, which does not include Epstein's office building. + +10. Epstein refuses to allow the deposition to take place anywhere other than in his office building. Attorneys for Jane Doe No. 4 suggested using a court reporter's office in the same building where Epstein's defense counsel is located. He refused. Yet Epstein has not shown why he is prejudiced by holding the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 in any West Palm Beach location other than his very own office building. If anything, Jane Doe No. 4 will be traumatized by being forced to go to the same location where she was already re-victimized by Illstein. + +II. Epstein also refused to agree to a self-executing sanction in the event he again appears at Jane Doe No. 4's deposition, despite the fact that it is entirely within his control whether to make himself seen by the plaintiff at her deposition. Thus, Epstein should have little to worry about unless he plans to terrorize Jane Doe No. 4 before her deposition again. Without a self-executing sanction, the parties are in the same place they were before the September 16, 2009 deposition of Jane Doe No. 4: in agreement on a stipulation that Epstein clearly deems worthless. As has been well-documented, Epstein flagrantly violated that stipulation. Given Jeffrey Epstein's status as a felon and registered sex offender, as well as his prior violations of two No-Contact Orders and the written stipulation of the parties, a protective order with selfexecuting sanctions is absolutely necessary in advance of the scheduled deposition to ensure Epstein does not repeat his reckless and abusive behavior. His blatant refusal to let the deposition take place anywhere other than in his office building makes it even more apparent that he has every intention of terrorizing Jane Doe No. 4 yet again.' + +Under his community control conditions, Epstein is only allowed to leave his home to go to his office building. + +12. Finally, Epstein has scheduled the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 to start at 11 p.m. This is wholly unacceptable. Nevertheless, Epstein refused to change the starting time even when specifically requested by Plaintiff's counsel. On October 14, 2009, Plaintiffs counsel sent an email to defendant's counsel that stated, "Not only is the location not agreeable, but neither is the II pm start time." See Exhibit "A". In response, Epstein's counsel wrote the following terse response: "So file a prot order I tried to work this out and your response was unacceptable, bob". Id. No explanation was offered as why an 11 p.m. starting time was necessary or appropriate. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4, respectfully requests that her deposition be set for a mutually agreeable time, date and location with the aforementioned precautions in place before the deposition. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A.3 + +Undersigned counsel has conferred with Defendant's counsel in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this motion, and has been unable to do so. + +Dated: October 21, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz @sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd.. Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on October 21 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747638/EFTA02747638.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747638/EFTA02747638.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f30edb22a56d15fb6b020c32ec574563f775bad4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747638/EFTA02747638.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,406 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747638.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 9560, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.38, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 99.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 99.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4'S SECOND MOTION FOR \nPROTECTIVE ORDER AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 100.36800000000001, + 346.68 + ], + [ + 511.2996520996094, + 346.68 + ], + [ + 511.2996520996094, + 375.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 100.36800000000001, + 375.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.744, + 346.68 + ], + [ + 483.1954345703125, + 346.68 + ], + [ + 483.1954345703125, + 362.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 129.744, + 362.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 85.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747638" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747645/EFTA02747645.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747645/EFTA02747645.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..44ec1c781ae281821bb9e9d0043f8312cf0a2a77 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747645/EFTA02747645.md @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +![](_page_0_Picture_7.jpeg) + +Related Cases: 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Emergency + +Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs, Jane 2-8', Second Motion for Protection Order, with DMA i)ert • 7 - 8 Sc tev,44 co- linen AV- + +Incorporated Memorandum of Law.' Having considered Defendant's is HEREBY PC:lei' At el e, cif\ C-C) + +ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: • + +- a. The deposition shall go forward on October 27, 2009. +- b. Epstein will not be in attendance at the deposition. +- c. Epstein will view the deposition from a video-feed in a separate room on the 14th + +floor of the building located at 250 Australian Ave., South, Suite 115, West Palm Beach, Florida. Plaintiff will be responsible for the associated costs of the video-feed (as another Plaintiff agreed to do without incident) + +d. Epstein will arrive at the building 1 hour before the deposition is set to begin at 11:00 a.m. on the above date. + +Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein Page 2 + +e. Jane Doe 4's attorney will contact Epstein attorney by cellular telephone upon their arrival and, at that time, Epstein will be in the room where the video-feed monitor is located. + +Once the deposition is over, Epstein will remain located in the room where the videofeed monitor is located until such time as Jane Doe 4 and her attorney have exited the building, + +which her attorney will confirm by cellular telephone with the undersigned. + +toff p xkiii-41,; (Tek-ni,d d ono t- r,\$) .-E-77r Pro le\_ c- 0Y-2 I 0.1e -3m to &, c.c.)• + +DONE and ORDERED this e;)'g day of (2.64 -0kL )---' , 2009. + +A1-7-% 62rStates Magistra udge ••••••b.". + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747645/EFTA02747645.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747645/EFTA02747645.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..317de64686371e10e032dce43de5b01f5f08d787 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747645/EFTA02747645.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,157 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747645.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1926, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.92, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_7.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.49, + 68.17889404296875 + ], + [ + 414.78399658203125, + 68.17889404296875 + ], + [ + 414.78399658203125, + 96.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 200.49, + 96.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.07500000000002, + 359.55889892578125 + ], + [ + 367.302734375, + 359.55889892578125 + ], + [ + 367.302734375, + 376.65000000000003 + ], + [ + 249.07500000000002, + 376.65000000000003 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747645" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747645/_page_0_Picture_7.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747645/_page_0_Picture_7.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aa2bffcbc6cbec21099e462ccb72f89b29b414c4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747645/_page_0_Picture_7.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a27928ce959d4e1a7ed721c2b373fea8e801e4cf84a8f4db3a60b13ba7cc6709 +size 11103 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747647/EFTA02747647.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747647/EFTA02747647.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b918dc2482112b627df765b3145d9b40c682cf43 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747647/EFTA02747647.md @@ -0,0 +1,208 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV401 I 9-MARRA-. 1 + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, FILED by D C IOCT 2 2 2009 S.D. OF FLA. • W.V.B. + +Defendant. Related Cases: STEVEN M. LKIDNIORE 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08.80994, CLERK U.S. DIST. CT. 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +### DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S EMERGENCY RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS', JANE DOE 24, SECOND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, by and through his undersigned counsel, and pursuant to all applicable rules, including Local Rule 7.1(e), hereby files and serves his Response In Opposition To Plaintiffs' Second Motion For Protective Order (DE 364), With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law. In support, Epstein states: + +### Introduction and Background + +- 1. As this Court is well aware, Plaintiffs continue to prevent discovery. As such, several Motions, Responses and Replies have been unnecessarily litigated, and these cases have been unnecessarily delayed by Plaintiffs. +- 2. One of the Plaintiffs has taken various positions only to abandon those positions after extensive briefing, thereby resulting in substantial delay. Other Plaintiffs have taken the + +position that Independent Medical Exams must be limited in scope, which is contrary to what this court has already ruled. DE 289. + +3. In this particular case, Jane Doe 4 requests that this Court enter an order preventing Epstein from being in attendance at her deposition set for October 27, 2009) Without jeopardizing the substance of certain Motions, Responses and Replies currently pending before this Court on the same subject matter, Jeffrey Epstein will agree to the following in an effort to move this particular case forward: + +- a. That Epstein will not be in attendance at the deposition. +- b. That Epstein will view the deposition from a video-feed in a separate room on the 14th floor of the building located at 250 Australian Ave., South, Suite 115, West Palm Beach, Florida. Plaintiff will be responsible for the associated costs of the video-feed (as another Plaintiff agreed to do without incident) + +- c. That Epstein will arrive at the building t hour before the deposition is set to begin at 11:00 a.m. on the above date. +- d. That Jane Doe 4's attorney will contact Epstein attorney by cellular telephone upon their arrival and, at that time, Epstein will be in the room where the video-feed monitor is located. +- e. That once the deposition is over, Epstein will remain located in the room where the video-feed monitor is located until such time as Jane Doe 4 and her attorney have exited the building, which her attorney will confirm by cellular telephone with the undersigned. + +4. Plaintiffs' counsel offers an absurd sanction (i.e., if Jeffrey Epstein ever comes within sight of Jane Doe 4, Epstein waives the right to take her deposition in this lawsuit where + +Plaintiff, CMA, recently withdrew her Motion for Protective Order seeking to prevent Jeffrey Epstein from appearing at deposition. + +Plaintiffs seek to recover millions of dollars.) Again, a proposal that was offered by Plaintiff only to prevent and/or delay discovery. The deposition is set to occur at the office of Prose Court Reporting located at 250 Australian Ave., South, Suite 115. Jeffrey Epstein's office is located on an entirely separate floor from Prose Court Reporting. The location is neutral and convenient. If Plaintiff wishes to absorb the costs of renting another room and paying for the video-feed costs, Jeffrey Epstein will not object to same. Epstein simply desires to move these cases forward and complete meaningful discovery. + +5. In Mugrage v. Mugrage, 763 A.2d 347, 349-352 (N.J. 2000), the court reasoned that "[a]lthough [the wife was] in fear of [her husband], and [was] in good faith in asking that he be excluded, and even though she ha[d] been the victim of domestic violence in the past, as well as protected by an existing order, the court conclude[d] that Mr. Mugrage ha[d] respected the judicial process in the past and almost certainly [would] abide by the terms of any court order regulating his attendance at the deposition. He has not violated past court orders and the court conclude[d] that security concerns for her safety can be addressed in a carefully crafted protective order. Therefore, Ms. Mugrage [did] not establish[] sufficient "exceptional circumstances" to justify excluding Mr. Mugrage from her deposition in the matrimonial action." Id. at 352 (even when it is not appropriate to exclude the other party from the protected party's deposition, a protective order can be crafted which would allow the other party to be present under the least restrictive conditions possible). In an effort to move this case forward, Epstein offers Jane Doe 4 an even more restrictive setting for her deposition than what Mugrage provides.2 + +2In addition, Epstein offers a more restrictive setting than what is permitted under the law. See g. Christian v. Rhode, 41 F.3d 461, 465-66 (C.A. Ariz. 1994). ags gu Coy v. Iowa 487 U.S. 1012, 1015, 108 S.Ct. 2798, 2800, 101 L.Ed.2d 857 (1988). The Clause "guarantees the defendant a face-to-face meeting with witnesses appearing before the trier of fact." Id. at 1016, 108 S.Ct. at 2801. This physical confrontation "enhances the accuracy of fact + +Wherefore, Epstein respectfully requests that this Court enter an order denying Plaintiffs' Second Motion for Protective Order, entering an order allowing for the above relief, and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +**Certificate of Service** + +![]()I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF and hand delivery. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 22nd day of October, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: + +![]()Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bclclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bclclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +--- + +finding by reducing the risk that a witness will wrongfully implicate an innocent person." Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836, 846, 110 S.Ct. 3157, 3164, 111 L.Ed.2d 666 (1990); see also Coy, 487 U.S. at 1019, 108 S.Ct. at 2802 ("A witness 'may feel quite differently when he has to repeat his story looking at the man whom he will harm greatly by distorting or mistaking the facts.' ") (quoting Z. Chafee, The Blessings of Liberty 35 (1956)). The Confrontation Clause thus gives the defendant the right to be present and to confront witnesses giving testimony during a pretrial deposition, where the deposition is intended for use at trial. Don v. Nix, 886 F.2d 203 (8th Cir.1989); United States v. Benfield, 593 F.2d 815 (8th Cir.1979). Moreover, 1 McCormick on Evid., §19 (6th ed.) states, in pertinent part, that: "[f]or two centuries, common law judges and lawyers have regarded the opportunity of cross-examination as an essential safeguard of the accuracy and completeness of testimony. They have insisted that the opportunity is a right, not a mere privilege. This right is available at the taking of depositions as well as during the examination of witnesses at trial." See [redacted] v. [redacted], 91 Conn. 404, 408, 99 A. 1032 (1917); Helfferich v. Farley, 36 Conn.Sup. 333, 334, 419 A.2d 913 (1980). + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 + +Counsel for Plaintiffi in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 iaaesa©bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +0840993, 08-80811, 0840893, 0940469, + +09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +# PROPOSED ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Emergency Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs, Jane Doe 2-8', Second Motion for Protection Order, with Incorporated Memorandum of Law. Having considered Defendant's motion, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +- a. The deposition shall go forward on October 27, 2009. +- b. Epstein will not be in attendance at the deposition. +- c. Epstein will view the deposition from a video-feed in a separate room on the 14i° floor of the building located at 250 Australian Ave., South, Suite 115, West Palm Beach, Florida. Plaintiff will be responsible for the associated costs of the video-feed (as another Plaintiff agreed to do without incident) +- d. Epstein will arrive at the building 1 hour before the deposition is set to begin at 11:00 a.m. on the above date. + +Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein Page 2 + +e. Jane Doe 4's attorney will contact Epstein attorney by cellular telephone upon their arrival and, at that time, Epstein will be in the room where the video-feed monitor is located. + +f. Once the deposition is over, Epstein will remain located in the room where the videofeed monitor is located until such time as Jane Doe 4 and her attorney have exited the building, which her attorney will confirm by cellular telephone with the undersigned. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +United States Magistrate Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747647/EFTA02747647.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747647/EFTA02747647.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4f74aaeccbf09275fe91968ddf02779466a9a88b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747647/EFTA02747647.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,494 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747647.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 12294, + "elapsed_seconds": 12.28, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 204.18, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.6364440917969, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.6364440917969, + 102.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 204.18, + 102.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S EMERGENCY RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION \nTO PLAINTIFFS', JANE DOE 24, SECOND MOTION FOR \nPROTECTIVE ORDER, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF \nLAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 115.62, + 338.58 + ], + [ + 506.009033203125, + 338.58 + ], + [ + 506.009033203125, + 395.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 115.62, + 395.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Introduction and Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 230.625, + 520.02 + ], + [ + 389.19500732421875, + 520.02 + ], + [ + 389.19500732421875, + 534.363037109375 + ], + [ + 230.625, + 534.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.38, + 212.22000000000003 + ], + [ + 365.92499999999995, + 212.22000000000003 + ], + [ + 365.92499999999995, + 225.99000000000004 + ], + [ + 253.38, + 225.99000000000004 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 193.11, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 422.505, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 422.505, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 193.11, + 128.79 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.87, + 74.89501953125 + ], + [ + 419.30059814453125, + 74.89501953125 + ], + [ + 419.30059814453125, + 103.23248291015625 + ], + [ + 207.87, + 103.23248291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROPOSED ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.22500000000002, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 371.2630920410156, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 371.2630920410156, + 378.85247802734375 + ], + [ + 255.22500000000002, + 378.85247802734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 35 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 77 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747647" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747655/EFTA02747655.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747655/EFTA02747655.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2fd7bf8295a4f911325e748ee77567106f4fc73f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747655/EFTA02747655.md @@ -0,0 +1,226 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAMM + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE # 6 (80994) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan III, M.D. of C.W. III, M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on November 23, 2009 at Prose Court Reporting located at One Clearlake Centre, 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite #1500, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring a sweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. ace infra and Motion attached at DE (308) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well. + +2. Plaintiff has not provided an available date; however, unless a timely and valid objection to this Notice is made, the Plaintiff is required by this Rule to be in attendance at the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as a witness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (308). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (308). See Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documen have been provided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient not been made. + +> By: MICHAE E, ESQ. Florida Bar 17 96 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 26th day of October, 2009 + +> Respectful g sub itted, + +By: ROBERT ON, JR., ESQ. Florida B 62 rcri bcl law.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +moike@belclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/a + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P.fl Esq. + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@ilaw.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. + +No. —Law P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidroaarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, 08-80469 +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant* + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 +Fax: 561-515-2610 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +08-08804 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747655/EFTA02747655.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747655/EFTA02747655.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7a5dcafff740db847d5769c1bde3bf0691eb14a4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747655/EFTA02747655.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,257 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747655.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5398, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.51, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.99566650390625, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.99566650390625, + 102.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 102.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT \nMEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE # 6 (80994)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 517.5028076171875, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 517.5028076171875, + 393.35302734375 + ], + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 393.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 367.58050537109375, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 367.58050537109375, + 529.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 529.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 236.51999999999998 + ], + [ + 365.6679382324219, + 236.51999999999998 + ], + [ + 365.6679382324219, + 251.60302734375 + ], + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 251.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 137 + ], + [ + "Line", + 67 + ], + [ + "Text", + 63 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 55 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747655" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747659/EFTA02747659.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747659/EFTA02747659.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..841a27b3d440ad8bd9e4bb7a773f7912e89523d4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747659/EFTA02747659.md @@ -0,0 +1,250 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +/ + +## DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #7 (80993) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan M.D. of C.W. IN, M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on November 13, 2009 at Prose Court Reporting, One Clearlake Centre, 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite #1500, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring asweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. infra and Motion attached at DE (319) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well. + +2. Plaintiff has not provided an available date; however, unless a timely and valid objection to this Notice is made, the Plaintiff is required by this Rule to be in attendance at the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as awitness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (319). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (319). + +See Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documents have been provided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient notice ade. + +> By: MIC ,ESQ. FI. 'da B 6172'6 + +## Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that atrue copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CNVECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 261" day of October, 2009 + +Respectfully subm ed, + +By: ROBE ON, JR., ESQ. Flori 4162 rcr + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) + +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* + +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* + +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80811* + +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +*Pro Hac Vice* + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED] Esq. + +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, 08-80469 + +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsxasearcvlaw.com + +iph@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecfabrucereinhartlaw + +Counsel for Defendant + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberg®podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iagescabellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747659/EFTA02747659.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747659/EFTA02747659.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..31c219017d0c85a7b49462ac3ea358e438c0f98c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747659/EFTA02747659.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,257 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747659.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5263, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.48, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 412.3394470214844, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 412.3394470214844, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 102.06 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT \nMEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #7 (80993)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 514.8223876953125, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 514.8223876953125, + 392.04 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 392.04 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 516.78 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 516.78 + ], + [ + 367.2, + 530.55 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 530.55 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 388.00800000000004, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 388.00800000000004, + 281.07 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 281.07 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 203 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 288 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 123 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 38 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747659" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747663/EFTA02747663.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747663/EFTA02747663.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..63f662284a1f4908440c6f0a8a4eef6a388c6892 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747663/EFTA02747663.md @@ -0,0 +1,195 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE # 4 (803801 + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan `M.D. of C.W. M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on November 12, 2009 at Prose Court Reporting, One Clearlake Centre, 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite #1500, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring a sweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. See infra and Motion attached at DE (303) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well. + +2. Plaintiff has not provided an available date; however, unless a timely and valid objection to this Notice is made, the Plaintiff is required by this Rule to be in attendance at the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as a witness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (303). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (303). + +See Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documents ve een provided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient notice h be made. + +> By: MICH . PIKE, ESQ. Flo i a Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 26th day of October, 2009 + +Respectfull submi ted, + +By: ROB CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Flo " a Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/...** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. ... Esq. + +Brad ... Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. ... Esq. +... Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, 08-80469 + +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) + +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) + +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* + +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747663/EFTA02747663.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747663/EFTA02747663.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e4972648a1ccf8e6b01ea45f60e024d5df0e3629 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747663/EFTA02747663.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,249 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747663.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5497, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.97, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 415.86566162109375, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 415.86566162109375, + 103.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 103.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT \nMEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE # 4 (803801", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.652, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 516.372802734375, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 516.372802734375, + 392.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 104.652, + 392.9730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 368.67791748046875, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 368.67791748046875, + 530.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 530.9730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/...", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 235.70999999999998 + ], + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 235.70999999999998 + ], + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 276.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 276.21000000000004 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 71 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 76 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747663" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747667/EFTA02747667.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747667/EFTA02747667.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..60ac83b86005fd2fc5c0016272581032ab8b781e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747667/EFTA02747667.md @@ -0,0 +1,172 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #2 (80119) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan a M.D. of C.W. S M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on November 17, 2009 at Prose Court Reporting, One Clearlake Centre, 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite #1500, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring a sweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. See infra and Motion attached at DE (310) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well. + +2. Plaintiff has not provided an available date; however, unless a timely and valid objection to this Notice is made, the Plaintiff is required by this Rule to be in attendance at the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as a witness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (310). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (310). See Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documents have been provided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient notice s be made. + +> By: MICHA KE, ESQ. Florida 17296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 29" day of October. 2009 + +Respectfully sub itted + +By: ROBERT N, JR., ESQ. Florid o. 22 162 rcrit® Iclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. ██████████, Esq. + +Brad ██████████, Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. ██████████, Esq. +██████████ Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, 08-80469 +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[isx@searcylaw.com](mailto:isx@searcylaw.com) +[iph@searcylaw.com](mailto:iph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 +Fax: 561-515-2610 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +08-08804 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747667/EFTA02747667.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747667/EFTA02747667.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e9080c26b3df60324cf27c613216c8e8b7a1cf38 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747667/EFTA02747667.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,249 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747667.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5782, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.3, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.61566162109375, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.61566162109375, + 103.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 103.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT \nMEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #2 (80119)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.652, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 516.7528076171875, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 516.7528076171875, + 393.35302734375 + ], + [ + 104.652, + 393.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 367.16790771484375, + 514.3499999999999 + ], + [ + 367.16790771484375, + 530.60302734375 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 530.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.168, + 237.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 423.5039999999999, + 237.32999999999998 + ], + [ + 423.5039999999999, + 277.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 192.168, + 277.83000000000004 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 71 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 55 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747667" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747671/EFTA02747671.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747671/EFTA02747671.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6bcb6275376a5617176adb767671066325d57570 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747671/EFTA02747671.md @@ -0,0 +1,193 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE (808931 + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan a M.D. of C.W. M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on November 9, 2009 at Prose Court Reporting, One Clearlake Centre, 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite #1500, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring a sweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. See infra and Motion attached at DE (301) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well. + +2. Plaintiff has not agreed to this date; however, unless a timely and valid objection to this Notice is made, the Plaintiff is required by this Rule to be in attendance at the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as a witness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (301). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE 1). See Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documents rovided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient notice + +> By: MICI Flo • a B..'#61729 ESQ. + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the followi g Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 26th day of October, 2009 + +Respectfully + +By: ROBE' CRIT ON, JR., ESQ. Florid Bar No. 2 162 rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +(*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein*) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, 08-80469 + +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isx@searcylaw.com + +iph@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesqAbellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747671/EFTA02747671.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747671/EFTA02747671.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f88a625d3d10ef4d88e098586664745426e4acae --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747671/EFTA02747671.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,257 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747671.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5291, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.75, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 417.3964538574219, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 417.3964538574219, + 104.60302734375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 104.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT \nMEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE (808931", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.652, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 517.1227416992188, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 517.1227416992188, + 394.85302734375 + ], + [ + 104.652, + 394.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 515.16 + ], + [ + 368.271484375, + 515.16 + ], + [ + 368.271484375, + 530.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 530.9730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.168, + 235.70999999999998 + ], + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 235.70999999999998 + ], + [ + 424.72799999999995, + 277.02 + ], + [ + 192.168, + 277.02 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 71 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 38 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747671" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747675/EFTA02747675.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747675/EFTA02747675.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a0b1a723cfd1d6309484a7b1a8c857597171d0dc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747675/EFTA02747675.md @@ -0,0 +1,104 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S NOTICE OF CORRECTION/AGREEMENT AS TO INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS OF JANE DOE, JANE DOE #2, JANE DOE #4, JANE DOE #6, AND JANE DOE #7 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Notice of Correction/Agreement as to Independent Medical Examinations of Jane Doe, Jane Doe #2, Jane Doe #4, Jane Doe #6, and Jane Doe #7. + +- 1. On October 26, 2009, Defendant filed his Re-Notices of Independent Medical Examinations of Plaintiffs, Jane Doe, Jane Doe #2, Jane Doe #4, Jane Doe #6 and Jane Doe #7 (DEs 372-375) +- 2. Paragraph 2 of each Re-Notice states that Plaintiffs did not provide Defendant with available dates. This is a scrivener's error. The dates specified within + +each Re-Notice were provided by Plaintiffs and agreed to by Epstein and his expert, Dr. + +B + +ICHAEL P E, ESQ. + +Florida Bar t 7296 + +## Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that atrue copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 26th day of October 2009 + +Respectfully sub + +By: + +ROBERT ra. C 4N, JR., ESQ. + +Florida 4162 + +rcri + +MICHAEL J ICE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar .17296 + +mpike@bcIclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRM'ON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E • + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +Brad Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssmasexabuseattomey.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 0840811 reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P.M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 isx@searcvlaw.com iphasearcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp@law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +M. , Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia®bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsberszaoodhurst.com kezell@modhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +Counsel for Defendant 561-659-8300 + +![](_page_3_Picture_2.jpeg) + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iarzesg®bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747675/EFTA02747675.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747675/EFTA02747675.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..49f80da78e172abc2db00f252007c4222edf49db --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747675/EFTA02747675.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,275 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747675.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4039, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.53, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_3_Picture_2.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 417.0164489746094, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 417.0164489746094, + 105.35302734375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 105.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S NOTICE OF \nCORRECTION/AGREEMENT AS TO INDEPENDENT MEDICAL \nEXAMINATIONS OF JANE DOE, JANE DOE #2, \nJANE DOE #4, JANE DOE #6, AND JANE DOE #7", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.132, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 492.37164306640625, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 492.37164306640625, + 422.60302734375 + ], + [ + 129.132, + 422.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 241.38 + ], + [ + 362.9254150390625, + 241.38 + ], + [ + 362.9254150390625, + 254.34 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 254.34 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.204, + 613.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 367.7654113769531, + 613.1700000000001 + ], + [ + 367.7654113769531, + 626.13 + ], + [ + 255.204, + 626.13 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 211 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 170 + ], + [ + "Line", + 84 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 12 + ], + [ + "Line", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747675" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747675/_page_3_Picture_2.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747675/_page_3_Picture_2.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..03595dd54f2b0549bd17b8fcbdaf4b54380d24bb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747675/_page_3_Picture_2.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:9df4388472f27fb91d76fcbb6aae383e5c3e0371a2e1129ce00fb4b62b542ccd +size 1194 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747679/EFTA02747679.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747679/EFTA02747679.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bd3780aa114e5471cd266a58215d0ed451bf7c8e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747679/EFTA02747679.md @@ -0,0 +1,75 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## OMNIBUS ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the following motions: (1) Defendant Epstein's Motion to Compel Plaintiff Jane Doe 2 to Respond to Defendant's First Request to Produce and to Overrule Objections and For an Award of Defendant's Reasonable Expenses (D.E. #67); and (2) Defendant Epstein's Motion to Compel Plaintiff Jane Doe 2 to Respond to Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories and to Overrule Objections and For an Award of Defendant's Reasonable Expenses (D.E. #68). For the following reasons, except for Defendant's request for fees and costs, both motions are granted. + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm beach, New York and St. with the promise of money in exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +In an effort to mount a defense to the claims asserted against him in this case, Epstein has propounded several interrogatory and production requests seeking, among other information, income information and past sexual act information from the Plaintiff Jane Doe 2 as well as from the other Plaintiffs in this case. Plaintiffs have objected arguing the requests, in whole or in part, seek information that is irrelevant, not reasonably calculated to the discovery of admissible evidence, overly broad, unduly burdensome, propounded only for purposes of harassment, or are otherwise impermissibly vague as framed. Each of the requests at issue and the respective objections that go along with them shall be addressed in turn. The Court notes that the ruling issued herein with respect to D.E. #s 67 and 68 applies equally to those identical motions to compel filed in Case Nos. 08-80893, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993 and 08-80811. + +First, however, a word about the general standard applicable to issues of discovery + +in federal court. Rules 33 and 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allow any party to serve on any other party interrogatories, requests to produce, inspect and copy, test or sample any documents or tangible things which constitute or contain matters within the scope of Federal Rule Civil Procedure 26(b). The scope of discovery under Rule 26(b) is broad: "[p]arties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the claim or defense of any party involved in the pending action. Relevant information need not be admissible at trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." Id.; see also Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 507-508 (1947); Farnsworth v. Proctor and Gamble Co., 758 F.2d 1545, 1547 (11th Cir. 1985)(the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure "strongly favor full discovery whenever possible"); Canal Authority v. Froehlke, 81 F.R.D. 609, 611 (M.D. Fla. 1979). Thus, under Rule 26, relevancy is "construed broadly to encompass any matter that bears on, or that reasonably could lead to another matter that could bear on any issue that is or may be in the case." Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders,437 U.S. 340, 352 (1978). Discovery is not limited to the issues raised by the pleadings because "discovery itself is designed to help define and clarify the issues." Id. at 352. In short, information can be relevant and therefore discoverable, even if not admissible at trial, so long as the information is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Dunbar v. United States, 502 F.2d 206 (5th Cir. 1974). + +While the scope of discovery is broad, it is not without limits. Washington v.= & Williamson Tobacco, 959 F.2d 1566, 1570 (11th Cir. 1992). Indeed the 2000 Amendment to Rule 26 has effectively limited the scope of discoverable information to those matters which are relevant to a claim or defense in the lawsuit. Dellacasa, LLC v. John Moriarty & Ass. Of Florida, Inc., 2007 WL 4117261 at \*3 (S.D. Fla. 2007). Courts have long held that "[w]hile the standard of relevancy [in discovery] is a liberal one, it is not so liberal as to allow a party to 'roam in the shadow zones of relevancy and to explore matter which does not presently appear germane on the theory that it might conceivably become so.' " Food Lion, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Intern. Union, 103 F.3d 1007, 1012-13 (C.A. D.C. 1997)(quoting Broadway and Ninety Sixth Street Realty Co. v. Loew's Inc., 21 F.R.D. 347, 352 (S.D. N.Y. 1958)); Donahay v. Palm Beach Tours & Transp., Inc., 2007 W.L. 1119206 at \*1 (S.D. Fla. 2007). + +Under Fed. R. Civ. P., 26(b)(1) a court may limit discovery of relevant material if it determines the discovery sought is unreasonably cumulative or duplicitive, or obtainable from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive, or the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs the likely benefit. Id. The party resisting discovery has a heavy burden of showing why the requested discovery should not be permitted. Rossbach v. Rundle, 128 F. Supp. 2d 1348, 1354 (S.D. Fla. 2000) ("The onus is on the party resisting discovery to demonstrate specifically how the objectedto information is unnecessary, unreasonable or otherwise unduly burdensome."); Dunkin Donuts, Inc. v. Mary's Donuts, Inc., 2001 WL 34079319 (S.D. Fla. 2001)("the burden of showing that the requested information is not relevant to the issues in the case is on the party resisting discovery")(citation omitted); Gober v. City of Leesberg,197 F.R.D. 519, 521 (M.D. Fla. 2000)("The party resisting production of information bears the burden of establishing lack of relevancy or undue burden in supplying the requested information"). To meet this burden, the party resisting discovery must demonstrate specifically how the objected-to request is unreasonable or otherwise unduly burdensome. See Fed. R. Civ. + +P. 33(b)(4); Panda Land Buyers Ass'n v. Shuman, 762 F.2d 1550, 1559 (11th Cir. 1985); Rossbach, 128 F.Supp.2d at 1353. Thus, to even merit consideration, "an objection must show specifically how a discovery request is overly broad, burdensome or oppressive, by submitting evidence or offering evidence which reveals the nature of the burden." Coker v. & Co., 1777 F.R.D. 682, 686 (M.D. Ala. 1998). Once the resisting party meets its burden, the burden shifts to the moving party to show the information is relevant and necessary. Gober, 197 F.R.D. at 521; see also Hunter's Ridge Golf Co. Inc. v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., 233 F.R.D. 678, 680 (M.D. Fla. 2006). + +Production Request No. 1 seeks all individual and/or joint income tax returns and supporting documentation including W-2 and 1099 forms for 2002-2007, as well as all records or documentation relative to the Plaintiffs earnings for the current year. Plaintiff objects to the request as "overbroad, unduly burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." Without waiving the above objections, Plaintiff has provided Epstein with a copy of her 2006 and 2007 1040 forms. + +The Court finds the information sought by Defendant in Request No. 1 directly relevant to the claims and defenses raised herein and in no way overly broad or unduly burdensome as claimed. Like the rest of the Plaintiffs in these consolidated actions, the Plaintiff in this case, Jane Doe 2, is seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, and invasion of her privacy. These damages stem from allegations relating to her claims of sexual assault, sexual battery, coercion and enticement to sexual activity. The sought after tax returns and supporting information will provide direct evidence as to Plaintiff's claimed damages, both with regard to her loss of earning capacity damage claim as well as her emotional psychological/mental health type damage claims. + +Furthermore, the six-year time period of 2002-2007 is reasonable on its face and not in any way overly broad or unduly burdensome as claimed, considering that Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint alleges the alleged sexual abuse and exploitation occurred in 2004-2005. The two-year period on either side of the dates the abuse is alleged to occur will allow Defendant to show Plaintiff's employment and earning history, as well as provide evidence as to how Plaintiff has been able to function in her daily life before, during and after the alleged incident. Accordingly, Plaintiff's objections to Production Request No. 1 are denied and Defendant's Motion to Compel as it relates to Production Request No. 1 is granted. Plaintiffs are ordered to produce any and all documents responsive to the subject request within ten (10) days from the date hereof. The Court notes, however, in light of the inherent privacy concerns which attach to income tax returns, the information provided shall be subject to a mutually agreeable protective order which shall ensure the information provided shall not be disseminated to anyone other than the parties to this action or their attorneys and/or agents and only for purposes of this case. + +The remainder of the contested Production Requests (10, 11, 17, and 18) and the entirety of the contested Interrogatory Requests (18, 19, 20, and 21), being similar in nature, are accorded a nearly identical analysis and shall therefore be discussed together. Production Requests 10, 11, 17 and 18 relate to past sexual act information and seek all photos, movies, dvds, and videotapes in which Plaintiffs performed sexual acts or simulated sexual acts, whether in exchange for money or other consideration (Request 11), or not (Request 10), as well as all documents reflecting the names and addresses of other individuals with whom Plaintiffs have engaged in sexual activity from January 1, 2000- December 31, 2005 (Request 17) and from January 1, 2006-November 30, 2008 (Request 18). Plaintiffs asserted the identical objections to each of these requests arguing the requests are "harassing and not reasonably calculated to lead to discoverable evidence," are "outrageous, offensive and...apparently posed for the purpose of intimidating the Plaintiff," inadmissible under Fed. R. Evid. 412, and "[w]ithout waiving this objection, none to Plaintiffs knowledge." + +As a preliminary matter the Court agrees with Defendant that Plaintiff's response in which she begins by setting forth objections followed by the statement, "[w]ithout waiving this objection, none to Plaintiff's knowledge," is evasive. Defendant is entitled to know whether or not such items exist, and if so whether such items are in the care, custody or control of Plaintiff or someone other than Plaintiff. As for Plaintiff's concerns that to the extent any such recordings of the Plaintiff engaged in sexual or simulated sexual activity since the year 2000 did exist, such recordings would be unlawful for anyone to possess, particularly a registered sex offender such as Epstein, the Court is sensitive to same and to the extent any such recordings are ordered to be turned over, the Court specifically orders these recordings be for "attomey's eyes" only and not be given or otherwise shown to Defendant Epstein. + +Interrogatories 18, 19, 20 and 21 also relate to past sexual act information and seek the names, addresses and phone numbers of all males, excluding Epstein, with whom Plaintiff has had sexual activity from the age of 10 up through the present (Interrogatory 18), whom Plaintiff has claimed committed sexual assault or battery on her from the age of 10 up through the present (Interrogatory 19), whom Plaintiff has claimed committed lewd or lascivious conduct to her from the age of 10 up through the present (Interrogatory 20), and whom Plaintiff has claimed committed lewd or lascivious exhibition to her from the age of 10 and up through the present (Interrogatory 21), and as to each describe the nature of the act or cond uct, the date(s), and whether Plaintiff received money or other consideration from that person. Plaintiff asserted the identical objections as to each, namely, that the interrogatories are "vague, overly broad, unduly burdensome, harassing and not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. Moreover, [these interrogatories are] outrageous, offensive and apparently posed for the purpose of intimidating the victim. Fed. R. Evid. 412 makes any answer to [these interrogatories] inadmissible, and nothing in the answer could plausibly lead to discovery of admissible evidence." + +The primary thrust of Plaintiff's objection is her contention that the information sought is not discoverable in that it is not admissible under Fed. R. Evid. 412, which governs the admissibility of a victim's sexual activity. Fed. R. Evid. 412 provides that a victim's past sexual behavior is irrelevant to the credibility of the victim's testimony, and that a victim's prior and subsequent sexual activity with third parties has no bearing on the issue of whether the victim consented to or complied with the sexual acts charged. Putting aside for the moment the fact the information sought is not being sought for the purposes of establishing the victim's consent or otherwise undermining her credibility, the fact remains Rule 412 is an evidentiary rule that while under some circumstances may be held to prevent mere discovery, is not applicable in this instance, where Plaintiff has placed her past sexual history at issue. Balas v. Ruzzo, 703 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied,719 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1998)(allowing discovery of plaintiffs employment history which included prostitution, employment records, electronic recording of the conduct which was the subject of the complaint, and a description of plaintiff's damages). See also US v. Bear Stops, 997 F.2d 451 (81" Cir. 1993)(defendant entitled to admission of evidence relating to a victim's (a six-year old boy) sexual assault by 3 older boys to establish alternative explanation for why victim exhibited behavioral manifestations of a sexually abused child). + +Under the circumstances of this case, where Plaintiff has alleged that Epstein exposed himself to her, "sexually assaulted her," "committed willful acts of child sexual abuse" on her, which resulted in "mental or sexual injury," and "caused" or is "likely to cause [Plaintiff's] mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired," 2d Am. Comp., ¶25, Plaintiff has put the nature of her claimed injuries and source and extent of her damages at issue, such that Epstein is entitled to discover evidence which would show the nature of Plaintiff's relationship with males, whether she has suffered other acts of sexual misconduct as alleged in her Complaint, and whether she suffered injury and/or damages as a result of the other claimed sexual misconduct with males. + +In support of her position that Rule 412 prevents the discovery of Plaintiff's sexual activities, Plaintiff cites to a string of employment related cases, Barta v. City and County of Honolulu, 169 F.R.D. 132 (D. Haw. 1996); Herron v. Eastern Industries, Inc., 2007 WL 2781211 (N.D. Fla. Sept. 19, 2007); Gibbons v. Food Lion, Inc., 1999 WL 33226474 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 19, 1999); P.J. Herchenroeder v. John Univ. Applied Physical Lab, 171 F.R.D. 179 (D. Mad. 1997); v. Zabihi, 166 F.R.D. 500 (D. N.M. 1996); and Stalnaker v. Kmart Corp., 1996 WL 397563 (D. Kan 1996). Plaintiffs reliance on these cases in support of her position, however, is misplaced in that each of these cases deal specifically with employer liability for workplace sexual harassment claims, a factual scenario not present in this case. + +Here, the requests at issue go to the very heart of Plaintiffs damage claims, requesting not only general information relating to Plaintiff's sexual history, but inquiring as to specific instances wherein Plaintiff received compensation or consideration for sex acts, claim other males sexually assaulted, battered, or abused her, and/or claim other males committed lewd or lascivious acts on her. As a global matter, Plaintiffs clearly and unequivocally place their sexual history in issue by their allegations that Epstein's actions in this case has negatively affected their relationships by, among other things, "distrust in men," "sexual intimacy problems," "diminished trust," "social problems," "problems in personal relationships," "feelings of stress around men," "premature teenage pregnancy," "antisocial behaviors," and "hyper-sexuality and promiscuity." See Composite Exh. "A" attached to Def's Reply. Considering these allegations, there simply can be no question that Epstein is entitled to know whether Plaintiffs were molested or the subject of other "sexual activity" or "lewd and lascivious conduct" in order to determine whether there is an alternative basis for the psychological disorders Plaintiffs claim to have sustained, whether Plaintiffs engaged in prostitution or other similar type acts and how certain acts alleged in the Complaint materially affected Plaintiffs' relationships with others or how those acts did not have such an affect on those relationships and/or whether Plaintiffs suffered from the alleged emotional and psychological disorders as a result of other sexual acts prior to the acts alleged in the Complaint. To deny Epstein this discovery, would be tantamount to barring him from mounting a defense. + +The Court also rejects Plaintiff's contention that inquiring of instances from the age of 10 is unreasonable. In the instant case, Plaintiffs allege they were between the ages of 13 and 16 at the time of the alleged contacts with Epstein. As such, it is not unreasonable to fix the inquiry start date at age10. All of the Plaintiffs in the Epstein related matters have alleged that Epstein's actions caused their damages. + +It stands to reason that a 10 year old child who had a sexual experience of one kind or another could have been profoundly psychologically affected by this experience, and this experience may or may not be relevant to gauging the extent of any damages caused by a later sexual encounter. In light of the foregoing, the Court finds that fixing 10 years old as the start date to any inquiry is not overbroad as claimed, but under the circumstances reasonable and justifiable. + +Accordingly, the Court rejects Plaintiffs' objections to Production Requests 10, 11, 17, and 18 and to Interrogatory Requests 18, 19, 20, and 21, and Defendant's Motions as they relate to these requests are granted. Plaintiffs are ordered to fully and completely respond to the subject requests within fifteen (15) days from the date hereof. The Court notes, however, in light of the highly personal and sensitive nature of the information sought by these Motions, that the information provided shall be subject to a mutually agreeable protective order which shall ensure the information provided shall not be disseminated to anyone other than the parties to this action or to their attorneys and/or agents and only for purposes of this case. In this regard, the attomeys for the parties to this matter shall confer and reach agreement on the terms of such protective order and file same with the Court for signature within five (5) days from the date hereof. In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: + +- (1) Defendant Epstein's Motion to Compel Plaintiff Jane Doe 2 to Respond to + +of Award an For and Objections Overrule to and Produce to Request First Defendant's IN DENIED AND PART IN GRANTED is #67) (D.E. Expenses Reasonable Defendant's conditions and terms the to subject granted is Motion the matter, substantive a As PART. and denied; is costs and fees for request Defendant's herein. earlier noted + +to Respond to 2 Doe Jane Plaintiff Compel to Motion Epstein's Defendant (2) of Award an For and Objections Overrule to and Interrogatories of Set First Defendant's IN DENIED AND PART IN GRANTED is #68) (D.E. Expenses Reasonable Defendant's conditions and terms the to subject granted is Motion the matter, substantive a As PART. denied. is costs and fees for request Defendant's herein. earlier noted Beach, Palm West at in 2009, 28, October this ORDERED AND DONE + +Florida. + +2.5en\_ 1 /1- + +JOH,•1 R. LINNEA JUDGE MAGISTRATE STATES UNITED Marra A. Kenneth Honorable The CC: Record of Counsel All 12 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747679/EFTA02747679.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747679/EFTA02747679.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d3b34f0d201e53dfbaa4f581acd9bd666e0127aa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747679/EFTA02747679.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,487 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747679.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 12, + "chars": 21341, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.49, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 71.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 406.6453857421875, + 71.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 406.6453857421875, + 99.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 99.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OMNIBUS ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 459.2699999999999 + ], + [ + 360.8534240722656, + 459.2699999999999 + ], + [ + 360.8534240722656, + 474.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 474.06353759765625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747679" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747691/EFTA02747691.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747691/EFTA02747691.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e042fb31c078bc85251b35f981bff12171cee3ee --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747691/EFTA02747691.md @@ -0,0 +1,203 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 4, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 5, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 6. + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 7, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80381-MARRA, + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80811-MARRA + +C.M.A., + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +DOE II, + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendants. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80893-MARRA + +CASE NO: 09-CV-80469-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO: 09-CV-80591-MARRAi + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO: 09-CV-80656-MARRa + +Plaintiff + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant + +#### PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER BARRING SECOND DEPOSITION SCHEDULED IN VIOLATION OF CONSOLIDATION ORDER AND FOR SANCTIONS + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe, hereby moves this Court for protective order barring a second deposition of her by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein. The Consolidation Order [DE 98] in this case clearly allows Epstein to depose her only a single time. Epstein has absolutely no basis for unilaterally setting her for a second deposition. Therefore, the + +Court should enter a protective order and should sanction Epstein for forcing Jane Doe to seek such an order. + +### BACKGROUND FACTS + +1. On May 14, 2009, this Court entered a consolidation order providing: "Defendant is limited to a single deposition of each Plaintiff, during which Defendant may depose the Plaintiff as both a party and a witness." [DE 98 at 4]. + +2. On September 20, 2009, Epstein took Jane Doe's videotaped deposition from 9:37 a.m. until 6:10 p.m. (approximately eight hours). + +3. On October 20, 2009, Epstein sent notice to Jane Doe's counsel that he was setting Jane Doe for another videotaped deposition, on November 13, 2009, at 9:30 a.m. No limit on the length of the deposition was indicated. Epstein did not seek leave of Court to set this deposition. + +### ANALYSIS + +4. Epstein's act of selling Jane Doe for a second, videotaped deposition in violation of the Court's consolidation order is (yet another) act of harassment and abuse by him. The Court's order could not be clearer, limiting Epstein to a "single deposition of each Plaintiff." Epstein is willfully flouting that order. + +5. The only basis that Epstein's counsel has indicated for this gross disregard of the Court's order is that the order also waives the seven-hour limit "so as to allow each party an adequate opportunity to develop fully the record as it may relate to that party." [DE 98 at 4]. But this waiver of the time limit can hardly provide a basis for Epstein subjecting her to protracted questioning. Instead, this waiver was designed to + +insure that each individual plaintiff would have an opportunity to pursue issues as needed in the deposition of a single witness. This waiver can hardly be reasonably thought to provide a basis for subjecting a plaintiff who has been sexually assaulted by the defendant to endure even longer questioning at his hands. The intent of the Court's waiver provision related to the seven hour time limit was drafted after thoughtfully recognizing that with multiple Plaintiffs and thus multiple attorneys, each party should have an opportunity to question each witness. Epstein has extrapolated an absurd meaning to this waiver in an attempt to harass Plaintiff Jane Doe. + +6. Indeed, the matter is so clear-cut that Epstein should be sanctioned for forcing Jane Doe to file a motion for a protective order. Jane Doe's counsel respectfully requests an award of attorney's fees for having to file this pleading to enforce the Court's order. The Court's consolidation order specifically warns that "[a]ny abuses of this waiver [of the seven-hour limit] shall result in the imposition of appropriate sanctions against the offending party." [DE 98 at 4-5]. The sanction of an attorneys' fee award is appropriate here. + +# CONCLUSION + +For all these reasons, the Court should enforce its consolidation order and bar any further deposition of Jane Doe by Epstein. The Court should also award attorney's fees to Jane Doe's counsel for being forced to file this pleading to enforce the Court's previously-entered order. + +DATED October 29, 2009 + +Respectfully Submitted, + +/s/ J. J. + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: casselloPlaw.utah.edu + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 29, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +J. + +## SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court - Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberaer@aawpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassello@bcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawverswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747691/EFTA02747691.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747691/EFTA02747691.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..da10d4b1f2f354580694a4d9f2fad1f3f954c0de --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747691/EFTA02747691.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,482 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747691.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 6147, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.55, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 410.47198486328125, + 99.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 99.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER \nBARRING SECOND DEPOSITION SCHEDULED IN VIOLATION OF \nCONSOLIDATION ORDER AND FOR SANCTIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 118.116, + 511.9200000000001 + ], + [ + 494.74554443359375, + 511.9200000000001 + ], + [ + 494.74554443359375, + 554.8000030517578 + ], + [ + 118.116, + 554.8000030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "BACKGROUND FACTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 238.06800000000004, + 167.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 375.2890930175781, + 167.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 375.2890930175781, + 182.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 238.06800000000004, + 182.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ANALYSIS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 273.564, + 443.88 + ], + [ + 340.04791259765625, + 443.88 + ], + [ + 340.04791259765625, + 458.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 273.564, + 458.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.772, + 525.69 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 525.69 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 541.3000030517578 + ], + [ + 263.772, + 541.3000030517578 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 470.6099999999999 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 470.6099999999999 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 486.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 486.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 125.55000000000001 + ], + [ + 350.57220458984375, + 125.55000000000001 + ], + [ + 350.57220458984375, + 140.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 140.79998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747691" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747699/EFTA02747699.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747699/EFTA02747699.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..07382cfe79d690415aa6810fe712a688f42c3490 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747699/EFTA02747699.md @@ -0,0 +1,40 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAMI + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## JOINT AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS FOR IMEs, PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS AND DEFENDANT'S REPLY + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, Epstein, and Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8' Joint Agreed Order on Defendant's Motion for IME, Plaintiffs' Response, and Defendant's Reply, and the Court having considered Motions, Response and Reply, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: + +- 1. Pursuant to Federal Rule 35, Defendant filed various Motions for IMEs of Plaintiffs at DEs 303-304, 308-309, 310-311, 317-318, 319-320 and 328-329, with attached Affidavits from Dr. Ryon a Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Response is docketed at DE 345. Defendant's Reply is docketed at DE 362. Based upon the agreement set forth herein, the above Motions, Response, and Reply are moot. +- 2. On October 28, 2009, the Court entered an Omnibus Order (DE 377), relative to Plaintiffs' sexual history. Questions that involve Plaintiffs' sexual histories at + +the IMEs will be permitted and governed by the Omnibus Order at DE 377. Information provided by the Plaintiffs shall remain confidential and used for litigation purposes only. + +3. The parties further agree that the Defendant may conduct an Independent IME pursuant to rule 35 of Jane Doe Nos. 2-8. The IME may be videotaped. A live video-feed of the IME shall be available to counsel in an adjacent room. All videotaping expensing shall be shared equally by the Plaintiff and Defendant. + +4. Absent further court order, each IME shall last no longer than eight (8) hours, including all testing and interviewing. + +5. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein will not attend the IMEs or make himself seen by Plaintiffs on the date of their IMEs. + +6. The IME shall not take place at Epstein's counsel's office but will take place at a mutually agreeable location in Palm Beach County, Florida. The fees for an additional room for the video feed will be split equally among Plaintiffs and Defendant. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Linnea R. Magistrate Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747699/EFTA02747699.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747699/EFTA02747699.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4c854862dfee787f117e4e749ad50c1eb4c8a89a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747699/EFTA02747699.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,151 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747699.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2343, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.99, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 415.86566162109375, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 415.86566162109375, + 102.35302734375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 102.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JOINT AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS FOR IMEs, \nPLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS AND DEFENDANT'S \nREPLY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 91.8, + 348.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 528.6358032226562, + 348.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 528.6358032226562, + 392.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 91.8, + 392.2330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747699" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747701/EFTA02747701.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747701/EFTA02747701.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c97433f1b750cb578dbabdfb93b0962ec1fd9bd8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747701/EFTA02747701.md @@ -0,0 +1,242 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAMOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## NOTICE TO STRIKE + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Notice to Strike: + +- 1. On October 29, 2009, Defendant filed his Joint Agreed Order on Defendant's Motions for IMEs, Plaintiffs' Response to Defendant's Motions and Defendant's Reply (DE 379). +- 2. Pursuant to Clerk's instructions on October 30, 2009, Defendant hereby filed his Notice to Strike DE 379. + +By: + +MICHAEL'. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +Respectfully su itted, + +By: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAMOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssmAsexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Brad , Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellpAlaw.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P.. Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isx@searcvlaw.com + +iph@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf rucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Isidro M. =, Esq. + +Law Finn, P.A. + +224 Datum Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberg®podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jasteso@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747701/EFTA02747701.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747701/EFTA02747701.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dc41a89f97b50dd83695bf8478c79d4b8d814235 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747701/EFTA02747701.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,216 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747701.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3337, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.66, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 73.4815673828125 + ], + [ + 413.636474609375, + 73.4815673828125 + ], + [ + 413.636474609375, + 101.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 101.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE TO STRIKE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.63600000000002, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 369.44970703125, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 369.44970703125, + 376.863037109375 + ], + [ + 246.63600000000002, + 376.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 365.29791259765625, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 365.29791259765625, + 374.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 374.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 115 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 54 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 111 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 53 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747701" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747704/EFTA02747704.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747704/EFTA02747704.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5b57d711cad187741eb0018435566ec368d7631b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747704/EFTA02747704.md @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## JOINT AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS FOR IMEs, PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS AND DEFENDANT'S REPLY + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, Epstein, and Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8' Joint Agreed Order on Defendant's Motion for IME, Plaintiffs' Response, and Defendant's Reply, and the Court having considered Motions, Response and Reply, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: + +1. Pursuant to Federal Rule 35, Defendant filed various Motions for 1MEs of Plaintiffs at DEs 303-304, 308-309, 310-311, 317-318, 319-320 and 328-329, with attached Affidavits from Dr. Ryon M. Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Response is docketed at DE 345. Defendant's Reply is docketed at DE 362. Based upon the agreement set forth herein, the above Motions, Response, and Reply are moot. + +2. On October 28, 2009, the Court entered an Omnibus Order (DE 377), relative to Plaintiffs' sexual history. Questions that involve Plaintiffs' sexual histories at + +> O1444,1 "A" + +the IMEs will be permitted and governed by the Omnibus Order at DE 377. Information provided by the Plaintiffs shall remain confidential and used for litigation purposes only. + +3. The parties further agree that the Defendant may conduct an Independent IME pursuant to rule 35 of Jane Doe Nos. 2-8. The IME may be videotaped. A live video-feed of the IME shall be available to counsel in an adjacent room. All videotaping expensing shall be shared equally by the Plaintiff and Defendant. + +4. Absent further court order, each IME shall last no longer than eight (8) hours, including all testing and interviewing. + +5. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein will not attend the IMEs or make himself seen by Plaintiffs on the date of their IMEs. + +6. The IME shall not take place at Epstein's counsel's office but will take place at a mutually agreeable location in Palm Beach County, Florida. The fees for an additional room for the video feed will be split equally among Plaintiffs and Defendant. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Linnea R. Magistrate Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747704/EFTA02747704.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747704/EFTA02747704.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..856aafc755a9cdf64239d865b8549079a338e873 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747704/EFTA02747704.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747704.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2353, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.78, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 411.876, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 411.876, + 100.44 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 100.44 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JOINT AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS FOR IMEs, \nPLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS AND DEFENDANT'S \nREPLY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 91.8, + 348.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 527.544, + 348.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 527.544, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 91.8, + 389.61 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 227 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 39 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747704" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747706/EFTA02747706.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747706/EFTA02747706.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d9dedf247fdf7546c20f244c274d7795ef875275 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747706/EFTA02747706.md @@ -0,0 +1,187 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAMII + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +I + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## NOTICE OF FILING JOINT AGREED ORDER + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, hereby gives Notice of Filing his Joint Agreed Order on Defendanr't Motions for IMEs, Plaintiffs' Response to Defendant's Motions and Defendant's Reply and in support thereof : + +- 1. Joint Agreed Order on Defendant's Motions for IMEs, Plaintiffs' Response to Defendant's Motions and Defendant's Reply (EXHIBIT A). + +By: + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that atrue copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this S iday l of October, 2009 + +Respectfully su mitted, + +By: ROBERT RITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar N . 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 muike@bcIclaw.com BURMAN, CRAYON, LUTHER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mennelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattomev.com + +Brad ME, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@.holmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P.ft Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@-searcvlaw.com + +iphQsearcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecllgtbrucereinhartlaw.ciim + +Counsel for Defendant + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassello©law.utalLedu + +Co-counsel for PlaintiffIane Doe + +Isidro M. MIE, Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsbertArtodhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 0940591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jarmso@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747706/EFTA02747706.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747706/EFTA02747706.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..33bfeb30a6fd14d9426f01c7066f9746f39f30eb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747706/EFTA02747706.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,265 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747706.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3653, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.11, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 411.26400000000007, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 411.26400000000007, + 104.49 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 104.49 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF FILING JOINT AGREED ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 179.928, + 366.93 + ], + [ + 438.03082275390625, + 366.93 + ], + [ + 438.03082275390625, + 380.7 + ], + [ + 179.928, + 380.7 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 361.48175048828125, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 361.48175048828125, + 107.73000000000002 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 107.73000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 521.64 + ], + [ + 366.87677001953125, + 521.64 + ], + [ + 366.87677001953125, + 533.79 + ], + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 533.79 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 135 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 235 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 313 + ], + [ + "Line", + 75 + ], + [ + "Text", + 73 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 3 + ], + [ + "Line", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747706" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747710/EFTA02747710.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747710/EFTA02747710.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8defddde2d88a1d6113a7be79907ba2a1e99d436 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747710/EFTA02747710.md @@ -0,0 +1,184 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #3 (80232) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +I. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan M.D. of C.W. s M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on November 24, 2009 at Prose Court Reporting, One Clearlake Centre, 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite #1500, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring a sweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. Sm. infra and Motion attached at DE (317) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well. + +2. Plaintiff and Defendant have agreed to the date, time and location of the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as a witness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the RAE at DE (317). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (317). + +Sic Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documents have been provided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient noti e s been made. + +> By: MICH J. IKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 30th day of October, 2009 + +Respect mitted, + +By: ROBER ITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida 24162 rent bciclaw.c. MICHAEL J. PIK ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +jsx@searcylaw.com + +ivh@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesq@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747710/EFTA02747710.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747710/EFTA02747710.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..14c2fe56820fcf7e904dc7cb251d7926a8cca937 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747710/EFTA02747710.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,257 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747710.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5184, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.84, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 414.73565673828125, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 414.73565673828125, + 100.85302734375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 100.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT \nMEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #3 (80232)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.03999999999999, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 514.10498046875, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 514.10498046875, + 390.7230224609375 + ], + [ + 104.03999999999999, + 390.7230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 430.9200000000001 + ], + [ + 366.41790771484375, + 430.9200000000001 + ], + [ + 366.41790771484375, + 445.863037109375 + ], + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 445.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 155.52 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 155.52 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 196.82999999999998 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 196.82999999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747710" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747714/EFTA02747714.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747714/EFTA02747714.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..878b31cdd76ccbe1de4a6d8e01134d5eff6329dd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747714/EFTA02747714.md @@ -0,0 +1,84 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/MM + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S NOTICE OF NINETY DAYS EXPIRING ON MOTION FOR INJUNCTION RESTRAINING FRAUDULENT TRANSFER OF ASSETS, APPOINTMENT OF A RECIEVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN, AND TO POST A \$15 MILLION BOND TO SECURE POTENTIAL JUDGMENT [DE 1651 + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1.6.3, hereby gives notice her Motion for Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein has been pending for more than 90 days. + +- 1. On June 19, 2009, Jane Doe filed her Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein, and to Post a \$15 Million Bond to Secure Potential Judgment [DE 165]. +- 2. On July 13, 2009, after Epstein was granted a continuance, he filed a response in opposition [DE 198]. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA., + +3. On July 20, 2009, Jane Doe filed a motion for leave to file an affidavit in support of her motion [DE 213]. (Epstein filed a response to this particular motion on August 5, 2009 [DE 244]) + +4. On July 23, 2009, Jane Doe filed a reply in support of her motion [DE 217]. + +5. Today, contemporaneously with the filing of this notice, Jane Doe also filed a Motion for Leave to Provide Recently-Obtained Deposition Testimony and Affidavit Demonstrating Fraudulent Transfers by Epstein in Support of Motion for Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein. + +6. For the reasons outlined in her pleadings — including in particular her opening pleading outlining the protections of the Florida Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act and her recent pleading demonstrating that fraudulent transfers by Epstein are on-going — Jane Doe respectfully requests that the Court grant her motion promptly and appoint a receiver to take charge of Epstein's assets and provide the other requested relief. Jane Doe respectfully requests that the Court act on her motion as soon as possible, to prevent Epstein from completing his fraud and hiding all of his substantial assets before the appointment of a receiver. + +DATED October 30, 2009 + +Respectfully Submitted, + +/ / J. J. + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 30, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> /s/ J. J. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA I + +## SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court - Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jeoldberner@aqwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidroqarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsbero@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattornev.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747714/EFTA02747714.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747714/EFTA02747714.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bb8c6f731b092ef30528c02a3a002fb94b0ace3d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747714/EFTA02747714.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,273 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747714.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3974, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.97, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S NOTICE OF NINETY DAYS EXPIRING ON \nMOTION FOR INJUNCTION RESTRAINING FRAUDULENT TRANSFER \nOF ASSETS, APPOINTMENT OF A RECIEVER TO TAKE CHARGE \nOF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN, AND TO POST A $15 MILLION BOND \nTO SECURE POTENTIAL JUDGMENT [DE 1651", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 106.48799999999999, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 505.749267578125, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 505.749267578125, + 472.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 106.48799999999999, + 472.29998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 325.62 + ], + [ + 387.3754577636719, + 325.62 + ], + [ + 387.3754577636719, + 341.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 341.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 118.25999999999999 + ], + [ + 350.56756591796875, + 118.25999999999999 + ], + [ + 350.56756591796875, + 134.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 134.30352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747714" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/EFTA02747718.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/EFTA02747718.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fce2394e4db8d418d14eda8043db0c9f519664fb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/EFTA02747718.md @@ -0,0 +1,2485 @@ +PLAINTIFF JANE DOES MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROVIDE RECENTLY-OBTAINED DEPOSITION TESTIMONY AND AFFIDAVIT DEMONSTRATING FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS BY EPSTEIN IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN AND INCORPORATED SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRAa + +![](_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg) + +# EXHIBIT A-1 (1 of 4) + +## Certified Copy + +### IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE k.11.1LENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +L.M., + +Plaintiff, + +CASE NO. -vs- 502008CA028051 XXXXMB AD + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### DEPOSITION OF + +LARRY VLSOSKI + +October 15, 2009 10:18 p.m. + +515 N. Flagler Drive Suite P200 West Palm Beach, Florida + +Reported By: Wendy Beath + +![](_page_1_Picture_14.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE Altastdit Calle Compaq + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 502008CA028051XXXXMB AD + +L.M., + +Plaintiff, + +-vs- + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +#### DEPOSITION OF LARRY VISOSKI + +Thursday, October 15, 2009 10:18 - 3:37 p.m. + +515 N. Flagler Drive Suite P200 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Reported By: + +Wendy Beath , RPR, CRR, FPR Notary Public, State of Florida Esquire Deposition Services West Palm Beach Office Job #127542 + +![](_page_2_Picture_12.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 + +4 + +9 + +10 11 12 + +13 + +14 15 16 + +17 18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +2 + +APPEARANCES: + +On behalf of the Plaintiff: + +J. INIIIII ESQUIRE ROTHSTEIN, ROSENFELDT, ADLER 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33394 + +On behalf of the Defendant: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE BURMAN, CRITTON & LUTTIER 303 Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +On behalf of the Witness: + +BRUCE REINHART, ESQUIRE 250 South Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +ALSO PRESENT: + +CARA L. UIRE + +ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQUIRE MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 + +RICHARD H. WILLITS, ESQUIRE (VIA TELEPHONE) RICHARD H. WILLITS, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404 Lake Worth, Florida 33461 + +![](_page_3_Picture_15.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE .""..\_ + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +WITNESS: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS + +LARRY VISOSKI + +BY MR. 6 + +BY MR. CRITTON: + +BY MR. 220 + +BY MR. CRITTON: 221 + +3 + +INDEX + +214 + +EXHIBITS + +NUMBER DESCRIPTION PAGE + +PLAINTIFF'S EX. 1 FLIGHT LOG BOOK (MARKED IN PREVIOUS DEPO) + +PLAINTIFF'S EX. 2 MESSAGE PAD 119 + +PLAINTIFF'S EX. 3 MESSAGE PAD 119 + +PLAINTIFF'S EX. 4 COMPLAINT 139 + +PLAINTIFF'S EX. 5 INMATE VISITOR LOG 161 + +![](_page_4_Picture_21.jpeg) + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +4 + +#### PROCEEDINGS + +Deposition taken before Wendy Beath Certified Realtime Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of Florida at Large, in the above cause. + +MR. We're going to put something on the record about -- well, we'll do it this way -- + +MR. REINHART: Do it at the end, after we get him -- whatever you want. It's your show. + +MR. : Okay. There were -- I don't even think Mr. Willits is aware of this. There was asubpoena duces tecum for this witness, as well as the previous witness, which was another pilot, Dave Rogers, and that duces tecum was to bring the flight logs related from 1998 through 2005. What was produced at the previous deposition were flight logs from 2002 through 2005, and now Mr. Reinhart has agreed to produce the remainder of the flight logs requested, those going from 1998 through 2002. + +MR. REINHART: Correct. They're pilot logs, not flight logs. There are other records we indicated are corporate records, and with those you have to deal with Mr. Critton. + +MR. CRITTON: However, with the proviso, too, + +![](_page_5_Picture_13.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 that we're going to work out that these records are to be used within the confines of this litigation and not to be spread to the press or anyone else, because they do contain confidential information as to who may have been on the plane and other records of Mr. Rogers, which but for the subpoena would have been only available to the FAA or some other law enforcement agencies. + +9 10 MR. : Okay. Is that all you want to put on? + +11 MR. CRITTON: Yes. + +12 13 14 MR. : I'm not saying I necessarily agree or disagree with you. That's something that we'll deal with some other day. + +15 16 17 MR. CRITTON: Bruce, you'd better produce these records, but there has to be some sort of understanding before + +18 MR. REINHART: Correct. + +19 20 21 22 23 MR. : I won't do anything until you file whatever you -- until we work whatever it is out in court. I'll say that on the record, that I'm not doing anything with the records outside of my office until some judge deals with it. + +24 25 MR. REINHART: And for the record, I'll adopt what Mr. Critton said on this one limited occasion. + +![](_page_6_Picture_12.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +6 + +MR. : All right. + +Thereupon, + +(LARRY VISOSKI) + +having been first duly sworn or affirmed, was examined and testified as follows: + +THE WITNESS: Yes, i do. + +DIRECT EXAMINATION + +BY MR. -: + +Q. Can you tell us your name for the record. + +A. Visoski, Jr. + +Q. And Mr. Visoski, have you ever had your deposition taken before? + +A. No. + +Q. Okay. Here's the process: I'm going to ask you questions. You're going to give us answers. Try to give us answers that we all understand and that the court reporter can take down, such as yes, no, or some other verbal answer that we can understand. It's easy when we get in acasual conversation to nod or shake your head, and the court reporter is not writing pictures or anything else. + +A. I understand. + +Q. The other thing is, and I've been accused of this in other depositions -- I don't know if it's true or not -- but I need to wait until you finish answering + +![](_page_7_Picture_33.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +2 the question and you need to wait until I finish asking the question. + +3 A. So you're not allowed to interrupt me? + +4 Q. And you're not allowed to interrupt me. + +6 Q. Right. + +8 9 MR. CRITTON: Cara just snickered when you said you've been accused because she recognizes it's true. + +10 11 MR. : I don't know what the meaning of her snickering was. + +12 BY MR. + +13 14 15 16 17 Q. But for what it's worth, if you don't understand the question or I've asked a bad question, I don't want you to guess. Give me the best answer to the best of your knowledge and if you need me to rephrase it, I will. + +18 A. Okay. + +19 Q. Okay. Tell me your current address. + +20 21 A. Riviera Beach, Florida 33404. + +22 Q. How long have you lived there? + +23 A. Approximately nine years. + +24 Q. Okay. Who do you live there with? + +25 A. My wife and one child at this time. + +A. Like I just did? + +![](_page_8_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE Ainsadu Gasle Cospaar + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. All right. How many children do you have? + +2 A. Two. + +3 Q. How old are they? + +4 A. Fifteen and eighteen. + +5 6 Q. And is the 18-year-old, is not living with you? + +7 A. She's off in school. + +8 Q. Okay. What school is that? + +9 A. Syracuse. + +10 Q. Who's your employer right now? + +11 A. NES, LLC. + +12 Q. How long has NES, LLC been your employer? + +13 14 A. I'm guessing. I'd say back 1991. I have to do the math, but 17, 18 years. + +15 Q. Has that been your only employer since 1991? + +16 A. Yes. + +17 18 Q. And has that been your only source of income since 1991? + +19 A. Yes. + +20 Q. And what is NES, LLC? + +21 22 A. I don't really know. I mean, it's the company that my check comes from. + +23 24 Q. What do you do for NES, LLC that results in them paying you? + +25 A. I am chief pilot for the aircraft and + +![](_page_9_Picture_24.jpeg) + +8 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 helicopters. + +2 3 Q. And do you have a specific boss or somebody you answer to at NES, LLC? + +4 5 6 7 A. Several people would call to schedule flights from the office, being it either Mr. Epstein or, you know, I would just get a phone call and they would schedule a trip. + +8 9 Q. Okay. Aside from Mr. Epstein, who else would there be that would call to schedule flights? + +10 A. Leslie. + +11 Q. Leslie who? + +12 A. Leslie Gruff. + +13 14 Q. When's the last time you talked to Leslie Gruff? + +15 A. Probably two weeks ago, three weeks ago. + +16 Q. And where is she currently? + +17 18 A. I believe in New York, is where I spoke to her on the phone last. + +19 20 Q. What's the telephone number you call to reach Leslie Gruff? + +21 A. (212)750-9895. + +22 Q. And what address is Leslie Gruff at? + +23 A. Do you mean where the office is located? + +24 Q. Correct. + +25 A. 301 East 66th Street. + +![](_page_10_Picture_22.jpeg) + +ESQ1)Ingc. + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 Q. And it's my understanding from other depositions that there are also apartments in that 301 East 66th Street building? + +4 A. Yes. + +5 6 7 Q. And Mr. Epstein either owns or leases or rents certain of those apartments. Is that your understanding? + +8 MR. CRITTON: Form; speculation. + +9 10 THE WITNESS: I'm only speculating. I don't -- to my understanding, I don't know. + +11 BY MR. + +12 13 Q. Do you know other people that live in that building? + +14 15 A. Well, it would be myself, Dave Rogers -- well, when you say "live," explain. + +16 Q. When you're saying yourself and Dave Rogers -- + +17 18 A. See, we don't live there. I mean, we have - we would stay there when we would have atrip. + +19 20 21 Q. Okay. When you would fly up to New York and land in New York, the place where you would stay, is that 301 East 66th Street? + +22 A. Yes, that's correct. + +23 24 Q. That's also a location you've indicated in this deposition that is the office for NES, LLC? + +25 A. Yes. + +10 + +![](_page_11_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE nm..t "," + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. What floor or suite number is NES, LLC in? + +2 3 4 5 A. I believe -- well, I don't know that NES, LLC has an office there. I know that's where Leslie has the phone number where I call. So I don't know for a fact if NES, LLC has an office there. + +6 7 8 Q. And what suite number, then, would Leslie Gruff sit in to answer that telephone number at 750-9895? + +9 A. I think it's 10F. + +10 11 12 Q. And when you stay at 301 East 66th Street, what suite number or what apartment number do you stay in? + +13 A. 12C. + +14 Q. And how about Dave Rogers, where does he stay? + +15 16 A. I'm guessing, because it's been some time since we've been there, 10B, but don't quote me on it. + +17 18 19 Q. Who are the other people in that building that you know to stay there on a regular -- fairly regular basis? + +20 21 22 23 A. I've seen people in the elevator that, you know, have been on the airplane. Case in point, maybe , but I don't know for a fact that she lives there, or anybody else for that matter. + +24 25 Q. Okay. When you say you've seen on the elevator -- + +11 + +![](_page_12_Picture_16.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 4 A. I only assume she lives there. I don't know for a fact. I'm trying to be honest and factual for you. So I couldn't honestly say if I knew she lived there or not. + +5 Q. Where do you think lives? + +6 A. I would think she lives there. + +7 Q. You don't have abetter location? + +8 A. I don't have another location. + +9 Q. Anybody else? + +10 11 12 13 A. Not to my knowledge. Imean, I'd only be guessing that people live in that building that -- you know, I don't have any facts to prove that they actually live there. I mean, I don't think you want me to guess. + +14 15 Q. Well, NES, LLC, would you say that the owner or controller of that company is Jeffrey Epstein? + +16 + +17 + +18 BY MR. : + +19 20 Q. Jeffrey Epstein is somebody you've indicated that you've worked for for 17 or 18 years, right? + +21 A. Yes. + +22 23 Q. And over the 17 or 18 years you've become personally close with him as well, correct? + +24 + +25 + +12 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: I don't know that for afact. + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: I don't understand how you mean + +![](_page_13_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE •C Al•••04.• Odle COMPIZY + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 "close." Define that. + +2 BY MR. a + +3 4 Q. Well, more so than just a pilot that takes him from Point A to Point B? + +5 A. That is my job. + +6 7 8 9 Q. Right. But you know him on a personal level and that you've had personal conversations that don't necessarily deal with flying from Point A to Point B; isn't that right? + +10 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +11 12 13 THE WITNESS: More specific, meaning we talk about cars. I mean, does that make you a personal friends? + +14 BY MR. + +15 Q. Have you ever gone to his house to eat? + +16 A. No. + +17 Q. Have you been to his New York home? + +18 A. Yes. + +19 20 Q. How many occasions have you been to his New York home? + +21 MR. CRITTON: Object to form. + +22 23 THE WITNESS: We normally pick up luggage in the lobby, so it would probably be quite often. + +24 25 Any time we depart out of New York, we stop by the house and pick up luggage and head to the aircraft. + +13 + +![](_page_14_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE ia Menai, Golle Coen., + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR. + +2 3 Q. Other than picking up luggage, have you been to his home to visit or socialize with him? + +4 A. Not to socialize, no. + +5 Q. Have you been to his Palm Beach home? + +6 A. To? + +7 Q. To Mr. Epstein's Palm Beach house? + +8 A. Right. + +9 Q. Have you been there? + +10 A. Yes. + +11 Q. Have you been inside? + +12 A. Yes. + +13 14 Q. And how many occasions have you been inside that home? + +15 16 17 18 19 A. The same, as far as picking up luggage, and that would be on aregular basis, you know, for a departure. We wouldn't always go to the house to pick up luggage, but it made it easier for loading the aircraft, getting it done prior to departure. + +20 21 22 Q. Is that the only reason that you have ever gone to the Palm Beach home over the last 18 years, is to pick up luggage? + +23 A. No. + +24 Q. What other reasons have you gone there? + +25 A. I've set up several home theater equipments, + +![](_page_15_Picture_21.jpeg) + +14 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 you know, televisions and such. + +2 3 Q. Is that another hobby or job or something of yours? + +4 A. Both. + +5 Q. Does he pay you for that? + +6 A. Not any more than my salary. + +7 Q. What's your current salary? + +8 A. At this time, 180,000. + +9 Q. And what are you paid \$180,000 to do? + +10 A. To manage his aircraft. + +11 Q. What does that entail? + +12 13 14 15 16 A. Scheduling maintenance. Anything that has to do with any flight, whether it be weather, flight planning, time and distance to and from alocation, any logistics involved in running an operation that has aircraft. + +17 18 Q. In addition to the 180,000, does he give you bonuses as well? + +19 A. There have been Christmas bonuses. + +20 21 Q. Over the years, you mean, there have been Christmas bonuses? + +22 A. Yes. + +23 Q. Is 180,000 the most he's ever paid you? + +24 A. No. + +25 Q. All right. Were you making -- when was the + +15 + +![](_page_16_Picture_23.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE aa .:..,m.. c.. Com WI + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 last time that you were making an amount different than 180,000? + +3 A. Last year. + +4 Q. That would be 2008? + +5 6 7 8 A. That would be correct. Yeah, we all took a salary cut, I don't know the exact date. It might have been 2008, last year. It was last Christmas we all took a10 percent salary cut. + +9 Q. Do you know why? + +10 A. Economic reasons. + +11 12 Q. And who told you that you were going to have to take the salary cut? + +13 A. Darren Indyke. + +14 Q. And did you ask for an explanation? + +15 16 A. He explained it was due to economic reasons throughout the country. + +17 18 Q. Okay. So in 2008, how much was -- were you being paid by NES, LLC? + +19 A. 200,000. + +20 21 Q. And is 200,000 the most that you've ever made from NES, LLC? + +22 A. Yes, sir. + +23 24 Q. And on top of that \$200,000, did you get a bonus that year as well? + +25 MR. REINHART: Which year are you talking + +![](_page_17_Picture_20.jpeg) + +16 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 about? + +2 2008. + +3 4 5 THE WITNESS: That year, I think we skipped Christmas bonuses that year. The last bonus might have been 2007. + +6 BY MR. =In + +7 8 9 Q. If you ever got a bonus from Mr. Epstein and I'm only deriving this from you using the term "Christmas bonus." + +10 A. Holiday bonus. + +11 12 13 14 Q. -- am I correct to assume sorry. Am I correct to assume that if you got a bonus, there was only one and it was at the end of the year, around the holidays? + +15 A. Yes. + +16 17 Q. Okay. And how much was the 2007 holiday bonus? + +18 19 20 A. I'd have to ask my wife, to be honest. I haven't seen my paycheck in 27 years, so I believe it was \$10,000. + +21 Q. And in 2007 you also made \$200,000? + +22 A. Yes. + +23 Q. Okay. + +24 25 A. With aquestion mark. I'm trying to be as accurate as I can, but yes. + +![](_page_18_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQ•A:san1J1BC. , + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquIresolutIons.com + +1 Q. Something pretty close to that? + +2 A. Yes, sir. + +3 4 Q. Okay. So with the bonus it was 210,000, roughly? + +5 A. Right. + +6 7 Q. Okay. And how long were you making that salary? + +8 9 10 11 12 A. Probably -- he was very religious about giving annual increases, so I would probably say 2006, you know, it was -- we would get increment -- increases of five or \$10,000 each year. So I would say 2006. So it graduated, you know, progressive. + +13 14 15 16 Q. Okay. Do you remember the progression if we start at 1991? Do you remember roughly what the progression was up through 2007/2008, when you were making \$200,000? + +17 A. No, I wouldn't know the progression. + +18 19 20 Q. Okay. Do you remember what you were making from -- and was NES, LLC the company paying you back in 1991? + +21 22 A. I don't know. I don't remember. Let me say it that way. I don't remember. + +23 24 Q. Okay. When -- how long do you remember NES, LLC being the payer of your check? + +25 A. Personally, two years, because I've never seen + +![](_page_19_Picture_16.jpeg) + +18 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 my paycheck. So I don't even know what's written on the top of it. + +3 4 Q. That would be something that only your wife would see, I'm assuming? + +5 6 7 A. You're right, since she probably wouldn't know the answer either, because she's looking at the right column and not the top column. + +8 9 Q. Right. When is the first time that you had heard the name NES, LLC, that company? + +10 11 12 A. Five, six years, and even questioned what it stood for. And I think to this day I couldn't answer that honestly, what it stands for. + +13 14 15 Q. Okay. But it's your understanding that the NES, LLC is paying you for the work that you do as a pilot or maintain the planes for Jeffrey Epstein? + +16 A. To my understanding, yes. + +17 18 19 Q. And back in 1991, do you know if it was a different company that was paying you or if it was Jeffrey Epstein directly paying you? + +20 A. I don't remember. I mean, I don't. + +21 22 23 24 Q. Okay. Throughout your career with -- as a pilot for Jeffrey Epstein, since 1991, has there ever been a time when you believe you were paid directly from Jeffrey Epstein personally versus some company? + +25 A. Not to my knowledge, no. + +![](_page_20_Picture_15.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE vv Atatand,r Gage Campasy + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +1 2 3 Q. Okay. So whether it was NES, LLC or some other company, it was all of asudden acompany name, to the best of your knowledge? + +4 A. Exactly, yes. + +5 6 Q. And back in 1991, do you remember approximately how much you were being paid that year? + +7 A. Fifty-five or 60,000, is maybe what I started. + +8 Q. Okay. + +9 A. You're going back along ways. + +10 Q. Yes. + +11 A. I'm trying. + +12 13 Q. Your relationship goes back that far. That's why I chose that year. + +14 A. Right. + +15 Q. Okay. Did you get bonuses even back that far? + +16 A. Yes, sir. + +17 18 Q. And do you remember what your bonuses were approximately? + +19 20 A. 5,000. I mean, that was kind of the -- the starting point. + +21 22 23 Q. Okay. In addition to monitary bonuses, were there ever gifts or any other type of compensation that NES, LLC or Jeffrey Epstein provided you? + +24 A. Yes. + +25 Q. And is that over the span of the 18 years? + +20 + +![](_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +A. Yes. + +5 A. A pool heater. + +6 Q. When was that? + +8 Q. Okay. Why did you get that? + +10 11 12 A. I had built apool and I didn't have aheater and he kind of laughed at me saying, "How can you have a pool without a heater?" So he says, "You ought to get a heater." + +13 Q. Where were you when you had that conversation? + +14 A. In the airplane. + +15 Q. How did he know that you had built apool? + +16 A. Just in general conversation. + +17 18 Q. You were having a conversation with Jeffrey Epstein? + +19 A. Yes. + +20 21 Q. And this is something that was happening on the airplane, this conversation? + +22 23 A. During the flight. Yeah, it would have been like on cruise or something. + +24 25 Q. that Okay. When you say "during the flight," does + +![](_page_22_Picture_22.jpeg) + +Q. Okay. Tell me what some of those items are. + +A. I remember one specifically was apool heater. + +Q. Excuse me? + +A. 1995-ish. + +ESQUIRE "mm...."..."" + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +1 A. Again, you're going back along ways. + +2 3 Q. I understand. We're talking about 1995 right now. + +4 A. Yes. + +5 6 Q. You're having a conversation with Jeffrey Epstein. Who is flying the airplane? + +7 A. The auto pilot and there's two crew. + +8 9 Q. Okay. So are you back in the back portion or is he up in the cockpit? + +10 A. Up in the cockpit. + +11 12 Q. Okay. Jeffrey Epstein sometimes comes up there? + +13 A. Just, yeah, in between the two pilot seats. + +14 15 Q. All right. Is that something that was typical, to have conversations like that? + +16 A. Mm-hmm. + +17 Q. Yes? + +18 A. Yes. No nodding. + +19 20 Q. And would those conversations be directed mainly with you or with the other pilots as well? + +21 A. Mainly with me. + +22 23 24 Q. I mean, you've kind of been described as the main guy or the main pilot. Wouldn't you consider that pretty much your role, right? + +25 A. Well, that's chief pilot. + +![](_page_23_Picture_21.jpeg) + +22 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +6 THE WITNESS: Right. + +8 9 Q. Okay. And you feel like over the years your relationship with Jeffrey Epstein has been pretty good? + +10 A. Yes. + +11 12 Q. And you have been closer to him over the years as you've grown to know him? + +13 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +14 15 16 17 18 THE WITNESS: The same throughout the same year. We never got any closer than 1991 than I am with him now. I'm very professional.at what I do and know the line between being professional and thinking you're somebody's buddy. + +19 BY MR. + +20 21 Q. Okay. So that's not something that you think you are? You don't think you're his buddy? + +22 A. No, sir. + +23 Q. Do you consider yourself his friend? + +24 A. I believe so. + +25 Q. Do you think he considers you his friend? + +![](_page_24_Picture_19.jpeg) + +Q. But more so than that, if there's going to be a casual conversation about a pool or a pool heater or whatever, it's going to be with you most likely if he's going to be talking to pilots, right? + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +BY MR. + +ESQUIBE, + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. I think so. + +2 Q. All right. What makes you think that? + +3 MR. CRITTON: Speculation. + +4 5 THE WITNESS: He's always been kind and respectful. + +6 BY MR. + +7 Q. Ever invited you to dinner? + +8 A. No, sir. + +9 10 Q. Have you ever associated or socialized with him during the day at any of his homes? + +11 A. Only during a business reason. + +12 13 14 Q. Okay. What are the other -- are the places that you believe that Mr. Epstein owns? I know we've talked about this Manhattan -- the Manhattan house. + +15 I've read the articles about it, the Palm Beach mansion. + +16 17 But what other places are you familiar with that Mr. Epstein owns? + +18 MR. CRITTON: Form; predicate, speculation. + +19 20 21 22 23 THE WITNESS: To answer it honestly, I don't know specifically that he owns any of the residences, to be honest. I would only assume that he owns. So if you want me to answer honestly, I don't know that he owns any of the other. + +24 BY MR. + +25 Q. Okay. Well, what would be the basis for your + +![](_page_25_Picture_20.jpeg) + +24 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +3 A. He goes there, but I don't assume -- you don't have to own ahouse to go to it. + +5 6 Q. And not only does he go there, you're aware that he spends the night there; he resides there sometimes, correct? + +8 Q. When he's in Palm Beach, that's where he -- + +10 11 Q. -- sleeps? Right. When he's in New York, do you know where he sleeps? + +12 A. No. + +13 14 15 Q. But you've been to aparticular house in New York that's avery large house that we've all read about that you picked up luggage at, right? + +16 A. Yes, sir. + +17 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +18 BY MR. + +19 20 21 Q. And that home, do you know that -- I know that you're saying that you haven't done apublic record search to make sure that Jeffrey Epstein owns it. + +22 A. Yeah. + +23 Q. But you assume that he does? + +24 A. Assuming. + +25 Q. That's where he sleeps when he's in New York? + +assumption that he owns the home in Palm Beach? + +A. Yes. + +A. He sleeps. + +![](_page_26_Picture_21.jpeg) + +EsQuejseBE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +26 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: I assume. + +BY MR. + +Q. That's where his luggage is when you pick it up? + +A. Doesn't mean he owns it. + +Q. Right. But that's where it is? + +A. Yes, sir. + +Q. Do you know of anybody else who owns that home in New York? + +A. No. + +Q. Okay. Have you been to his ranch in New Mexico? + +A. Yes. + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +BY MR. + +Q. How many times have you been to his ranch in New Mexico? + +MR. CRITTON: Form; predicate. + +THE WITNESS: A guesstimate, fifty times, only due to the fact that we would fly there. + +BY MR. + +Q. And where would you land? + +A. Depending upon the aircraft, either Albuquerque or Santa Fe. + +![](_page_27_Picture_23.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +2 A. Public. + +3 Q. Public, okay. Are there any private landing places where you would land any airplanes in New Mexico? + +6 Q. That you have landed -- + +8 Q. -- his airplane? + +9 A. Yes. + +10 Q. Where? + +11 A. We have a 4500-foot strip on the ranch. + +12 Q. When you say "we," yourself and somebody? + +13 A. The company. + +14 Q. What company? + +15 16 A. Well, I should say -- I see where you're going with that. The ranch owns -- whoever owns the ranch. + +17 The ranch has a runway on it. + +18 19 Q. Okay. And you've landed an airplane on that runway? + +20 A. That ranch, yes. + +21 22 Q. How many times do you think you've landed there? + +23 A. Ten. + +24 25 Q. ranch? All right. And have you been inside his + +![](_page_28_Picture_24.jpeg) + +Q. Are those private airports? + +A. There are. + +A. That I have. + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +1 A. Yes. + +2 MR. CRITTON: Form to the last question. + +3 4 5 MR. REINHART: Can you clarify, the physical ranch or the residences or the structures on the ranch? + +6 7 MR. al I don't have a good visual appreciation for it. + +8 BY MR. + +9 10 11 12 Q. Why don't you describe it in your words what this ranch that we are talking about looks like. And I've heard it referred to as the Zorro Ranch. Have you heard that? + +13 A. I've heard that. + +14 15 16 Q. That's the ranch we're all familiar with, we're talking about where the runway is and everything else? + +17 A. Yes. + +18 19 Q. Describe it in your own words, the landscaping of this ranch. What do we have on it? + +20 21 A. There is ahouse up on the , alarge house. + +22 Q. How big? + +23 24 A. Big. I've read 40,000 square feet in the paper. + +25 Q. Have you been to it? + +28 + +![](_page_29_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE AN[•Nlr 01110 COaryal + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +2 Q. Does that seem like it's feasible, approximately 40,000 -- + +5 Q. What else do we have on it? + +6 A. There is a compound that has kind of motel room type -- they call it bunkhouse. + +10 Q. Okay. And what is that primarily used for? + +11 12 13 14 A. For the people that work on the ranch, they reside there. It's also aplace where anybody that traveled on the airplane would stay. It's kind of like, you know, a hotel room. + +15 16 Q. And how far is that from the first house that you described, the 40,000 square foot house? + +17 A. It's probably 4 miles. + +18 19 Q. Okay. So the Zorro Ranch is arather large area of property? + +20 A. Yes. + +21 22 23 24 Q. And how many times -- I know we just talked about how many times you've been in the house, but how many times have you been on that ranch in New Mexico, the Zorro Ranch? + +25 A. Thirty to fifty times over the years. That's + +A. Yes. + +A. I think so, yes. + +Q. Where's the bunkhouse located? + +A. At the entrance to the ranch. + +![](_page_30_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 aguesstimate. + +2 3 Q. Is that over -- when was the first time that you went to that ranch? + +4 5 A. A guess, I don't know when it was, actually, our first trip, but 1995/'94. + +6 7 8 Q. Okay. And do you believe Jeffrey Epstein and/or a corporation owned or controlled by him to be the sole owner of that ranch? + +9 A. I don't know any of those details. + +10 11 Q. Have you ever talked to Jeffrey Epstein about who owns that ranch? + +12 A. No. + +13 14 Q. Do you know of anybody else who may own that ranch? + +15 A. Not to my knowledge. + +16 17 18 Q. Other than Jeffrey Epstein, do you know of anybody else who regularly stays there when they're in New Mexico? + +19 A. Not to my knowledge. + +20 21 Q. Does Jeffrey Epstein stay there when you're in New Mexico? + +22 A. He has. + +23 Q. And he has a key to the place? + +24 A. I don't know if there's akey. + +25 Q. One way or another, he gets in, right? + +30 + +![](_page_31_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE "......".. + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +6 Q. You assume he sleeps? + +8 Q. Okay. + +9 MR. CRITTON: This is really + +10 BY MR. + +11 12 13 Q. Other than the pool heater in 1995, have you ever received any other gifts on top of the compensation from Mr. Epstein? + +14 A. I did get land on the ranch to build a house. + +15 Q. What do you mean you got land on the ranch? + +16 A. He deeded me land to build a home. + +17 Q. When was that? + +18 A. Ten years ago at least. + +19 20 Q. Do you know if he's ever deeded anyone else in this world land on the ranch to build a home? + +21 A. Not to my knowledge. + +22 Q. Why did he do that? + +23 24 25 A. We would vacation out there and my wife fell in love with New Mexico and we were looking for property. + +A. Yes, sir. + +Q. And he sleeps there? + +A. Yes. + +Q. Okay. + +A. I assume he does. + +A. I do. I think. + +ESQUIRE + +![](_page_32_Picture_24.jpeg) + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. And did you talk to him about that? + +2 3 4 5 A. Yes. He knew I -- he was aware I was looking for a home and he says, "Well, I have so much land, I could give you a spot to build ahome on." So I built a house. + +6 7 Q. So how long has ahome actually been on that property? + +8 A. Nine years. + +9 Q. And that's a home that you own? + +10 A. Yes, sir. + +11 12 13 Q. And that's a home that was -- when I say "you own it," is there amortgage on it or did he give it to you free and clear? + +14 15 A. No, no, I paid for the house. I made payments on it. + +16 Q. All right. So what did he actually give you? + +17 A. 40-acres of land. + +18 Q. That you did not have to pay for? + +19 20 21 A. You know, I'd have to go back and look. I think it was -- I had to pay something for it. I don't remember. + +22 23 Q. How often have you visited that piece that home that you own? + +24 25 A. My wife would spend summers out there with the kids. + +32 + +![](_page_33_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. Okay. But that's on the Zorro Ranch? + +2 A. Yes. + +3 4 5 Q. So in addition to the 50 or so times you've been to the Zorro Ranch, you've been to your property that's on the Zorro Ranch? + +6 7 8 A. Yes, which over the years, it's once-a-year visits. So I mean, it is included in the 50 times that I've been there. + +9 10 11 Q. Okay. And did you have aconversation with him that led to him giving you or gifting you 40-acres of land? + +12 13 A. We talked about it because he knew I was looking for a home out there. + +14 15 16 Q. Okay. In gifting you that land, did you consider yourself at that point in time to be more than just his pilot, as more of afriend? + +17 18 19 20 A. No. You're using the word "gifting." I paid for the land. I don't recall what it was. But you use the word "friend." I don't know that a-- sure, he was afriend. I mean... + +21 22 Q. Well, did he give Dave Rogers any land out on the New Mexico ranch? + +23 A. No. + +24 25 Q. Okay. When you say you paid for it, I thought that I asked that question, "Did you pay for the + +![](_page_34_Picture_15.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE ea Aland.: OMIO COMPU7 + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 40-acres?" I thought your answer was, "I don't know, I'd have to go back and look." + +3 4 Are you saying now that you did pay for that land? + +5 6 7 A. I don't remember. If there was a sum of money, it was just for, you know, the legal purpose of a transfer of ownership of the land. + +8 9 Q. Okay. If it was asubstantial amount of money, that's something that you would have remembered? + +10 11 A. exactly. No, it was not asubstantial amount. + +12 13 Q. Okay. Do you remember approximately how much money you had to give Jeffrey Epstein for that land? + +14 15 A. I would only be guessing. It might have been five dollars. To my knowledge, I don't remember. + +16 17 Q. Okay. So when I'm saying he gave you the land, he may have actually given you the land? + +18 A. Sure. + +19 20 Q. Okay. And to the best of your knowledge, he's never given anyone else land out there? + +21 A. Not to my knowledge. + +22 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +23 BY MR. + +24 25 Q. All right. How big is this house that you built on the ranch? + +34 + +![](_page_35_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +2 Q. Were you ever at that house at the same time when he's at his house that's on that Zorro Ranch? + +10 11 Q. All right. We started back in 1991 with you making around \$55,000 ayear and that has progressed over time to a point where in 2007 you were making \$200,000 ayear. I don't want to go through every single year; that would take a really long time. But the progression, was that on ayearly basis normally or after two years or three years? + +12 A. Yearly basis. + +13 14 Q. Okay. And would that normally be in increments of? + +15 A. \$5,000. + +16 17 18 19 20 Q. Okay. You've talked about acouple other gifts that have been given to you from Jeffrey Epstein over the years; one is apool heater in 1995 and now some 40 acres of land on his New Mexico ranch. Any other gifts you can think about? + +21 A. No other gifts. + +22 23 24 25 Q. Okay. I don't want to split hairs with you. You obviously thought about that answer before giving it. What other items are you thinking about that he's given to you or cut you adiscount on or otherwise that + +![](_page_36_Picture_14.jpeg) + +A. 1800 square feet. + +A. Yes. + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 you feel was compensation for you working for him? + +2 A. I drive acompany car. I mean... + +3 Q. Okay. What kind of car? + +4 A. A Hummer. + +5 6 Q. You say "a company car." That's owned by NES, LLC? + +7 8 A. No, I think the registration has Zorro Development on it. + +9 Q. What is Zorro Development? + +10 11 A. I believe that's the ranch, or at least it has the name of the ranch. I don't know what the entity is. + +12 13 Q. And it's your understanding that that's a company vehicle? + +14 A. Yes. + +15 Q. And where is that vehicle primarily garaged? + +16 A. At my home. + +17 Q. In West Palm Beach or in the Zorro Ranch? + +18 A. No, here in West Palm Beach. + +19 20 Q. All right. And is there only one company vehicle that you're issued? + +21 A. Yes, sir. + +22 23 Q. And is that something that was that you did not have to pay for? + +24 25 A. No, it's just something I drive. I mean, it's not titled to me or anything like that. It's just acar + +![](_page_37_Picture_22.jpeg) + +36 + +ESQUIRE .M"Co n + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 661.394.2621 + +3 Q. All right. You've worked for him for 18 years. I don't even know how long the Hummer would last, but presumably, that's not the car you've had over the entire 18 years. Have you always had a company car? + +6 A. No, I haven't, no. + +9 10 Q. Do any other members of Mr. Epstein's piloting team have company cars? + +11 A. No. + +12 Q. Only you? + +13 A. Yes. + +14 15 Q. And do you know how that decision was made to get you a company vehicle? + +16 A. No. + +17 Q. What do you use that vehicle for? + +18 A. To and from the airport. + +19 20 also? Q. All right. Do you use it for personal reasons + +21 A. I guess, yes. + +22 Q. I mean, that's your primary vehicle? + +23 A. Yes, or I drive my wife's car. + +24 Q. Which is? + +25 A. Type of car? + +that I drive. + +Q. When did you get the Hummer? + +A. Probably three years ago. + +![](_page_38_Picture_23.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE to Almada Galls CompstT + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. Yes. + +2 A. A Mercedes. + +3 4 Q. And is that something that was also agift from Mr. Epstein? + +5 A. No, sir. + +6 Q. What type of Mercedes is that? + +7 A. A ML 430, ten years old. + +8 9 10 11 Q. All right. Are there any other items - company car, the land in New Mexico, the pool heater any other items that Mr. Epstein has given you over time as compensation or reward or anything else? + +12 A. No, sir. + +13 14 Q. And your only income is from Mr. Epstein or his companies? + +15 A. Correct. + +16 Q. Okay. And it's been that way since 1991? + +17 A. Yes. + +18 19 Q. How did you meet Mr. Epstein or become involved with him in 1991? + +20 21 22 23 A. We heard at the airport that Mr. Epstein was purchasing an airplane when Dave Rogers and myself were living in Columbus, and we had the opportunity to interview with him, and we did and got the job. + +24 Q. And this is before he owned the airplane? + +25 A. Yes. + +![](_page_39_Picture_20.jpeg) + +38 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +2 A. The Hawker. + +6 A. Five years, guesstimate; four or five years. + +8 A. Yes. + +9 10 11 Q. Did you keep any type of logs or documentation as to who would have been flying on that airplane if you transported any individuals? + +12 13 A. The same logs as you possess now are the flight logs. + +14 Q. Okay. + +15 A. That's the standard for the industry. + +16 17 Q. So that's something that you kept, or that Dave Rogers kept? + +18 A. Dave Rogers. + +19 20 21 22 23 Q. Okay. If there are any documents out there with names of passengers on any of the flights involving planes owned or controlled by Jeffrey Epstein and/or his companies, those would be documents in the possession of Dave Rogers and not yourself? + +24 A. the corporation actually, they belong to. + +25 Q. Okay. + +Q. And which airplane was that? + +Q. Does he still have the Hawker? + +A. No. + +Q. How long did he have that plane? + +Q. So sometime in the mid '905? + +![](_page_40_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQVIcalA3m , + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +BY MR. 40 + +MR. REINHART: That was acompound question. + +You might want to split it in half. + +MR. OEM Okay. + +Q. What documents do you believe exist that indicate names of individuals that have been passengers on Mr. Epstein's airplanes? + +MR. REINHART: Are we going back all the way from '91 to the present? + +MR. : Sure. + +THE WITNESS: You're talking about the Hawker? + +BY MR. + +Q. Any airplanes. What documents would there be? + +A. There would be the same: Flight logs and passenger manifests would exist. + +Q. And are either of those required? + +A. The flight log is required for the aircraft to track times and landings. + +Q. And in the flight log, is it required that you designate the names of the passengers? + +A. No. + +Q. That's just something that Dave Rogers did on his own? + +A. Everybody does that. It's more for Internal Revenue. + +![](_page_41_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE aaaaaa Calle Cenasy + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +3 A. Exactly, weight and balance. + +5 Q. Have you ever kept any flight logs that have names of people on the airplane? + +6 A. When you say "kept," I have filled out flight logs or the passenger manifest, yes. + +8 Q. By "kept" I meant maintained to where they're in your possession either on paper or computer? + +10 A. We keep -- + +11 12 13 MR. REINHART: Can you differentiate a flight log from the pilot's log that we showed you earlier? + +14 MR. : Okay. + +15 BY MR. + +16 17 Q. I'm talking about -- I don't know that it's called a flight log, a pilot's log or any kind of log. + +18 A. They are different, yes. + +19 20 21 22 Q. Yeah. I'm asking about, have you kept or do you have any documentation that would indicate the names of passengers that have flown on any of Jeffrey Epstein's planes? + +23 A. No. + +24 Q. Either in the form of paper or on a computer? + +25 A. No. + +Q. Okay. If something happens, they know who is on the plane? + +![](_page_42_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE ."m...." + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +1 Q. Makes that easy. + +2 A. Okay. + +3 Q. In 1991, were you the chief pilot? + +4 A. No. + +5 Q. Somebody else was the chief pilot? + +6 A. Yes. + +7 Q. Who's that? + +8 A. Dave Rogers. + +9 10 Q. All right. At what point in time did you become chief pilot and switched with Dave Rogers? + +11 A. Six years ago; five, six years ago. + +12 Q. Why? + +13 A. Professionalism, technique. + +14 Q. What do you mean by that? + +15 16 17 A. The way Dave would operate an aircraft, Jeffrey knew the difference when I was flying and when Dave was flying. + +18 Q. How do you know he knew the difference? + +19 A. Just -- + +20 Q. He told you? + +21 22 A. Yes. He knew the difference that if he never came up front, he knew who was flying, who landed. + +23 24 25 Q. And what was the conversation that he had with you that resulted in you becoming chief pilot, switching positions with Dave Rogers? + +![](_page_43_Picture_23.jpeg) + +42 + +ESQUIRE ati aleaavin Gallo Cc asp•ey + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +2 A. Jeffrey would always critique Dave's flying capabilities, and I tried to help Dave and explain to him what Jeffrey likes and doesn't like. And Jeffrey's also conveyed these likes and dislikes. And Dave maintained continuing with certain piloting techniques that were just not comfortable to passengers. And this went on through the years, and Jeffrey just got tired of it one day. + +10 Q. What specifically were Jeffrey Epstein's likes and dislikes with respect to the flight of the plane? + +11 12 13 MR. CRITTON: Let me put in aform here. But Idon't know what this has to do with anything in this case. + +14 MR. : I understand that, Bob. + +15 16 17 MR. CRITTON: I want to use this for some other depositions where we we've gone beyond the scope. + +18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE WITNESS: The case in point, the last straw was there was atechnique called quiet flying where you would retard the throttles well short of the runway and pretty much glide the airplane in. Well, if you don't do that correctly, you have to spool the engines up just prior to touching down that -- because you're losing air speed and it's an uncomfortable sound and feeling for the passengers + +![](_page_44_Picture_10.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE c.ib + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +BY MR. 44 + +thinking that you're not going to make the runway. + +And it was a continuous practice of Dave doing that to be neighbor friendly as opposed to being passenger-comfort friendly. + +Q. Okay. + +A. Hence, the transfer of power. + +Q. Has he ever discussed with you where he wants you to be, whether that is "stay in the cockpit when I have people on the airplane," or don't intermingle with the passengers or anything else? + +A. He's never stated that to us. + +MR. REINHART: Could you clarify which "he" you're talking about? + +MR. I'm talking about Jeffrey Epstein. + +MR. REINHART: Okay. + +BY MR. + +Q. You understood that? + +A. Yes. + +Q. It's my understanding that in the -- well, tell me other than the Hawker, what other airplanes have you flown for Jeffrey Epstein? + +A. A Gulfstream. + +Q. Does he still have that plane? + +![](_page_45_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +![](_page_46_Picture_22.jpeg) + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +46 + +hear you. + +THE WITNESS: Ili. + +MR. REINHART: And so Mr. Willits can hear you. + +BY MR. : + +Q. Other than the Gulfstream and the Boeing and the Hawker, what other airplanes has Jeffrey Epstein owned over the years? + +A. That is it. + +Q. And currently still owns or the companies associated with him own the Gulfstream and the Boeing? + +A. Yes. + +Q. And in the past two years, have you flown those two airplanes? + +A. Just for routine flights to keep them loose or, you know -- you know what I mean. + +Q. Have those two airplanes been flown by anyone else in the last two years? + +A. No. + +Q. Have those two airplanes been flown in the last two years for any reason other than routine maintenance-type flights? + +A. We've had one -- two flights I think in the past two years. + +Q. And what were the purposes of those flights + +![](_page_47_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE ....,.."" + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 and who was on the flights? + +2 3 A. One flight I believe we went to Sebring and another flight we went to Nassau, Bahamas. + +4 Q. And who did you go to Nassau, Bahamas with? + +5 6 7 8 A. I'd have to look at the flight log, but I think it was Sarah, Story and Nadia, I believe. I think that was the three passengers, to the best of my knowledge. + +9 10 11 Q. And it's my understanding that little St. James is an island that Jeffrey Epstein owns or controls? + +12 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +13 THE WITNESS: I don't know that he owns it. + +14 BY MR. + +15 16 Q. Has he ever been to an island called Little St. James? + +17 A. Yes. + +18 Q. And have you been there with Jeffrey Epstein? + +19 A. I've been there when he was there. + +20 21 Q. Have you flown on an airplane with him to that destination? + +22 A. No. + +23 24 Q. All right. When you say you've been there when he was there, how did that come about? + +25 A. We flew into St. and then we flew to + +![](_page_48_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE sz AlessaDtle OzIto Gans! + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +48 + +Little St. James in ahelicopter. + +Q. And do you fly the helicopter as well? + +A. Yes. + +Q. How many helicopters are owned or controlled by Jeffrey Epstein and/or corporations associated with him? + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: At this time, one. + +BY MR. + +Q. And has that helicopter been flown in the last two years? + +A. Just for routine maintenance. + +Q. And when you and -- let's say when and Story Cowells and Nadia flew to Nassau, do you know the purpose of that trip? + +A. No. + +Q. How long did you stay? + +A. Five hours. + +Q. Did you pick anybody up there? + +A. No. Meaning passengers? + +Q. Yes. + +A. No. + +Q. What happened? You landed the airplane and then what? + +A. The passengers left. Dave and I went and had + +![](_page_49_Picture_23.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 lunch. The passengers showed up and we came back. + +2 3 Q. Have you ever stayed at the home that is on Little St. James? + +4 A. No. + +5 6 Q. Have you known Jeffrey Epstein to stay at that home? + +7 A. I don't know that for a fact. + +8 9 10 Q • Okay. Do you believe that he is the owner or controller or has some interest in the home or the island of Little St. James? + +11 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +12 13 THE WITNESS: I have no knowledge of that being a fact. + +14 BY MR. + +15 Q. And you have no belief that that is afact? + +16 A. Exactly. + +17 18 Q. When you say you've been there when he was there, how many times has that occurred? + +19 A. Estimating, a hundred times. + +20 Q. Okay. + +21 A. Trying to give an honest answer. + +22 23 24 Q. Okay. And in the approximate -- I'm not going to hold you to ahundred times, but in the approximately hundred times -- + +25 A. Sure. + +![](_page_50_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. -- for what period of time are we talking about? + +3 A. During what period of time? + +4 Q. Right. + +5 6 7 A. Let's see, when did all this happen? What, 2007? So eight years prior to whenever he stopped flying. So... + +8 Q. '98/'99? + +9 A. Yeah, I guess, yes. + +10 Q. I mean, that sounds like aright + +11 12 A. Sounds about right, yeah. Don't hold me to it again. + +13 Q. All right. + +14 A. You're going back along way. + +15 16 17 Q. So from approximately the '98/'99 time frame when Jeffrey Epstein would fly to Little St. James, would you be the pilot? + +18 A. Yes. + +19 20 21 22 23 24 Q. Okay. And you say that you've been there -- I thought that you just told me that you've been there the same time he was there, but then I thought the subsequent question was well, were you on the flight with him, and I thought your answer was no. Maybe I misunderstood that. + +25 A. No, you said the question "Have you ever flown + +50 + +![](_page_51_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE am....m"n + +Toil Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 to his island?" We never landed on his island. We landed in + +3 Q. Got it. + +4 A. I was just trying to be exact. + +5 Q. Thank you. + +6 A. It's a small island. + +7 8 9 10 Q. Okay. So how is it that when Mr. Epstein wants to go to Little St. James, what is the path that you take to get actually to the island of Little St. James? + +11 A. I don't understand the question. + +12 13 Q. Well, you just told me you fly the airplane to St. + +14 A. Right. + +15 Q. And then what? + +16 17 18 19 20 A. Then sometimes I would go get the helicopter or he could also take aboat to the island. But normally the helicopter's located on St. I'd fire up the helicopter, come pick him up, drop him at the island and I come back to St. + +21 22 23 Q. And when he stays on St. James, you drop him off on St. James. I suppose you're going to tell me you don't know if he stays there or not? + +24 A. Exactly. + +25 Q. But do you stay -- + +51 + +![](_page_52_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQVLism + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. I don't. I mean -- + +2 3 Q. Well, he either stays there or someone else picks him up in a helicopter or he swims away? + +4 A. Correct. + +5 Q. Okay. You stay on St. + +6 A. Yes. + +7 8 Q. Okay. Is there a place that you've stayed on St. James, ever? + +9 A. No, I've never. + +10 11 12 13 14 Q. So in the hundred or more times that you've been to the island, is it my understanding that each of those times you've been there to drop off Jeffrey Epstein and/or any passengers and you've immediately left and gone to St. + +15 A. Yes, sir. + +16 17 Q. You never been inside that home that's located on St. James? + +18 A. Yes, I've been inside the home. + +19 Q. How many times have you been inside the home? + +20 A. I mean, ten, fifteen times. + +21 Q. And for what occasion? + +22 23 A. I've set up the theater system that's in the living room. + +24 Q. Okay. + +25 A. So it would be there to work to hook up a TV + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +52 + +![](_page_53_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE •a AlentarOalle Cespiay + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 or a stereo. + +2 Q. And do you know Les Wexler? + +3 A. No, I don't. + +4 Q. Have you ever met him before? + +5 A. I have met him. + +6 7 Q. Do you know of any relationship between Les Wexler and Jeffrey Epstein? + +8 9 A. I don't know what -- to what extent they have arelationship, no. + +10 Q. Do you know if they know one another? + +11 12 A. I don't know that for afact. They talk to one another, so I would assume. But I don't know to -- + +13 Q. How do you know they talk to one another? + +14 15 A. I've seen them speak to one another at the foot of the airplane. + +16 17 18 Q. All right. Have you ever flown the airplane -- any of the airplanes with Les Wexler as a passenger? + +19 A. No. + +20 21 Q. Have you ever flown the airplanes with III'. as a passenger? + +22 A. Yes. + +23 Q. And do you know + +24 A. Yes. + +25 Q. And for how long have you known + +53 + +![](_page_54_Picture_22.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 A. I'm guessing, six years. I mean, don't hold me to it. I'm not the greatest on length of times, but six, seven years, I think. + +4 Q. How did you meet her? + +5 6 A. I guess I was introduced. She was on aflight of ours. + +7 Q. You were introduced to her by whom? + +8 9 10 A. She may have introduced herself. I mean, you're going back aways. I don't know the official introduction, how it went. + +11 12 13 Q. And to your knowledge, what is her -- is she associated or affiliated in some way with Jeffrey Epstein? + +14 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +15 16 17 THE WITNESS: I would assume so. I don't know to what level or what actually her job description is. + +18 BY MR. : + +19 20 21 22 Q. All right. Well, how many flights have you flown where she and Jeffrey Epstein have been passengers together on one of the airplanes that we've been discussing? + +23 A. I'd only be guessing again. + +24 Q. We're talking hundreds of flights, though? + +25 A. Sure, sure, a lot of flights. + +![](_page_55_Picture_17.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +54 + +ESQUIRE ao AllitillOg GillOCOMMY + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 Q. It seems to be -- I mean, you seem like somebody who has common sense. It seems like somebody that knows Jeffrey Epstein? + +4 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +5 BY MR. a + +6 Q. Correct, + +7 A. Yes. + +8 9 10 Q. All right. And do you believe that there is a business relationship there or apersonal relationship there, from your observations? + +11 12 13 14 A. I'd only be speculating. When they get on the airplane, my focus is forward and flying safely. So I don't -- you know, I'd only be guessing at either one of those two. + +15 16 Q. Okay. Have you ever socialized with p + +17 A. No. + +18 19 Q. Other than speaking with her on the airplane, have you spoken with her elsewhere? + +20 21 A. Over the phone, in passing, Imean, walking down the street in New York. I mean, yes. + +22 23 Q. Why would you call or why would she call you? + +24 25 A. She would call me to schedule the aircraft for adeparture. + +![](_page_56_Picture_17.jpeg) + +55 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutIons.com + +1 Q. And have you ever called her? + +2 A. Yes. + +3 4 Q. When's the last time you talked to Ma Si? + +5 A. A week ago. + +6 Q. What was the occasion? + +7 8 A. We were discussing carpet for one of the aircraft. + +9 10 Q. And where was she when you were talking with her? + +11 A. I don't know. It was over the phone. + +12 Q. Did she call you or you call her? + +13 A. No, I called her on her cell. + +14 Q. Okay. And that's a New York number? + +15 A. I don't know. It's on speed dial. + +16 Q. Do you have your phone with you? + +17 A. Yes. + +18 Q. Could you tell me what that number is? + +19 A. Sure. + +20 Q. Thanks. + +21 A. Sure. (917)855-3363. + +22 23 Q. Which airplane were you discussing carpeting for? + +24 25 A. Was actually -- actually, it was for the helicopter. Now that I'm thinking about it, the + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +56 + +![](_page_57_Picture_24.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/EFTA02747718.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/EFTA02747718.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2c7d5cdaa5f3613dea368949ac9ed0c2c4fff2cd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/EFTA02747718.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,2442 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 58, + "chars": 56752, + "elapsed_seconds": 18.1, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_14.jpeg", + "_page_2_Picture_12.jpeg", + "_page_3_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_4_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_13.jpeg", + "_page_6_Picture_12.jpeg", + "_page_7_Picture_33.jpeg", + "_page_8_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_9_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_10_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_11_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_12_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_13_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_14_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_15_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_16_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_17_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_18_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_19_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_20_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_22_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_23_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_24_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_25_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_26_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_27_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_28_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_29_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_30_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_31_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_32_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_33_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_34_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_35_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_36_Picture_14.jpeg", + "_page_37_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_38_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_39_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_40_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_41_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_42_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_43_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_44_Picture_10.jpeg", + "_page_45_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_46_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_47_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_48_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_49_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_50_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_51_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_52_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_53_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_54_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_55_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_56_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_57_Picture_24.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A-1 \n(1 of 4)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 149.94, + 294.1893615722656 + ], + [ + 475.56890869140625, + 294.1893615722656 + ], + [ + 475.56890869140625, + 434.01409912109375 + ], + [ + 149.94, + 434.01409912109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certified Copy", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 442.8, + 50.799 + ], + [ + 540.5873413085938, + 50.799 + ], + [ + 540.5873413085938, + 69.904541015625 + ], + [ + 442.8, + 69.904541015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE k.11.1LENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT \nIN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 141.0, + 79.212 + ], + [ + 502.3321838378906, + 79.212 + ], + [ + 502.3321838378906, + 111.078857421875 + ], + [ + 141.0, + 111.078857421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEPOSITION OF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 268.2, + 302.211 + ], + [ + 369.84039306640625, + 302.211 + ], + [ + 369.84039306640625, + 316.20892333984375 + ], + [ + 268.2, + 316.20892333984375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEPOSITION OF LARRY VISOSKI", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 196.57799999999997, + 309.099 + ], + [ + 406.7092590332031, + 309.099 + ], + [ + 406.7092590332031, + 322.95416259765625 + ], + [ + 196.57799999999997, + 322.95416259765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROCEEDINGS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 231.552, + 102.459 + ], + [ + 392.553, + 102.459 + ], + [ + 392.553, + 116.13720703125 + ], + [ + 231.552, + 116.13720703125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 117 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 235 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 103 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 302 + ], + [ + "Line", + 59 + ], + [ + "Text", + 39 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 124 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 290 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 44 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 119 + ], + [ + "Line", + 60 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 272 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 126 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 295 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 126 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 317 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 128 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 286 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 279 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 284 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 272 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 297 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 127 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 284 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 269 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 277 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 111 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 293 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 291 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 244 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 50 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 119 + ], + [ + "Line", + 59 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 277 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 294 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 289 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 113 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 317 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 334 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 305 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 306 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 303 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 38, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 115 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 39, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 286 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 40, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 117 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 41, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 275 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 48 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 42, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 115 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 43, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 277 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 44, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 310 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 45, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 270 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 46 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 46, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 267 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 47, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 278 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 46 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 48, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 125 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 49, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 255 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 50 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 50, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 278 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 51, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 294 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 52, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 302 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 53, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 296 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 54, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 285 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 55, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 296 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 56, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 280 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 57, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 266 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747718" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a0161f5e31ea8156b168ce1d936f660ebbe7814f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:866194d63153ed8752cb02b22722cb35eccf82be699f35646b6d05bbdeb509f8 +size 1018 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_10_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_10_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e43c32c87b9c28db88ea5265f73753a15d510298 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_10_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:fc17269118ca0b239b2d36365403d13663c9e636391cdf5842472988c52eb5b5 +size 2436 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_11_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_11_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..708f2fa8708656c07415b4e79d4bee7ecd4cd31d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_11_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:289a0f32a1ce0ca2d4e848891362de468eb36f1cae19871d78a1a6f775f8e403 +size 2409 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_12_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_12_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..25d661d6e45117640fdf825c5ececb4bf84bb06d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_12_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:99b6505cbfd98613f3683cfd64319e402765aeafe3a9f3d2d60a3d32ea34b7cc +size 2509 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_13_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_13_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dbc88bff18b0594c8100e1f4fa8d6bc211e2ffaa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_13_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4ed8f2e506c9c62219f64bb7d3ddb591a3bbda49af3d551ae2849408f3fd559a +size 2442 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_14_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_14_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..054444de07ab8ebeac3cd4a444842006f6b27111 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_14_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:bf553286d01f0ade9f41e51c7d26bb6737fc2bcffbcc92c8e31715e649a6d72b +size 2424 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_15_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_15_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..759777f958a8caf1575d65e4b8391fcdd51a29d1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_15_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d0127710bf4d1cd38e8e1a22077a6d1663c2d6cd64d5ab2bea5bc1b79cb0a3d5 +size 2415 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_16_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_16_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7389397db2c1308db0b5a87fc6917143ad82c741 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_16_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8cfa309668dc52714e54b97cb770ba97d53fa06f61cb8c42a4659706d4fe767f +size 2408 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_17_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_17_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..feece6e81e40e75f991fe9cb728c00995d70b9ca --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_17_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2f23292b5105881cae2170d5efd5224633769aa04f78f8432345dbed217d4fc0 +size 2415 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_18_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_18_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c83d00425ac8991b4585e22c8be4d9dc72d08884 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_18_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7dd01374bd946999a376b530b1d7574c544f34a2a35b692d6e148d3bb7142acd +size 2487 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_19_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_19_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9fd7fb6e7d15f3a46763990bf0820924c57b92a6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_19_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:364376ba39396bb6306b2a9c8993c6fec58c153996977243c444843a91fcbe4f +size 2422 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_1_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_1_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..89e88a5fdda3f21d85050a5d62f05c98979af8da --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_1_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:57f5bf591b0742bfca861f559c2f3ffe9412e934bcf21436cd683b124888e86a +size 2570 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_20_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_20_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c684a67209d24777ddb2ce6e5e557e8b4d4a9d4f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_20_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:5225762de357b5ab1f3586c68499bd413bb147d69d65a49fcadf957891f9a493 +size 2420 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d5ad0cf0387694a7385dfe5ade01056781afa566 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:16a6a5bf1d96e59876bde4a80943b3d799c5c239903e8ccca6088b95ce35ba91 +size 2446 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_22_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_22_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3d59f581d7ee8a59f2ad676a1299e3dbb6fa3eea --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_22_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f9cd9c1d5c1cf2ff13769032de07a3109827c0f697accb915577da205f0fa29e +size 2411 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_23_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_23_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ffd6c15967f444f3ea3f56505e01c559275e330c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_23_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ea6988046111014db5b74817285240077ed8c236f34f470b43a579be887fdf28 +size 2462 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_24_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_24_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1d1945fe7f2a0908ddfb8c14ebe57b056f5cd28f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_24_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3a3b01a62a2061856b6ba6b2cf3fe770ad5a69a640d975d31e0426aaf388399a +size 2423 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_25_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_25_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..919f5524f2ff4ed6bb37084bfdc08c06677d0284 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_25_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2a36f506100fa7eaa08789c30abaa1e5c3239a6822966a13ea7a4268b3cb4dfb +size 2489 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_26_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_26_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c3cdffe5c78764789b190f1724e7523092d80708 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_26_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6ef48abe15fc7e42f3aa84559393d1c7012e252d867c5e6b458b30e60ffc107e +size 2446 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_27_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_27_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..66d0e200d33f7ec1880b2aceaa91bb6ec69fab49 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_27_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ef61e44f772e6e08b0b449124cf26530798c13ba1d799b480c201a59009b91a0 +size 2517 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_28_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_28_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d278a21bd88bc4991b4b6437544f86026dd425ea --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_28_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:44653c79742f73fab874898d5d3afd4760993ce5af2330fbe15e16736fae0067 +size 2364 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_29_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_29_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b46d50e7a27eadecf74c7fe596d579d5a7b8f009 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_29_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:508028e86e1f0c4d399eea5cdaabe0c9d52d06165bf0c7d3b3ca322c532900ff +size 2419 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_2_Picture_12.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_2_Picture_12.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c09f7603939fdd117237900d565c9da0b9f25b51 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_2_Picture_12.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:71d026607fdaa10ed8e830702cd7c831904f8c12ab27dd873daf0f866963b30c +size 2397 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_30_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_30_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c59bb109bef22b023c901194a7b907cb8e9332b2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_30_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:726cbec606ebeaa446edd6865e9d9406850308e3bce3728e3eaffefb57dc097a +size 2457 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_31_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_31_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e0c5087fa4ab4d86a4c2bd85b8b58c167c463304 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_31_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:9385119ec1935c26542964eed919404d7b852d5365a5fe544a58dcd341bdb2ed +size 2460 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_32_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_32_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4de8d79144f2e25d2a21a3bf6eb358de5f2d3702 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_32_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:efe6b45131eb4ad3425f06e73afef266e8689ec0de474c52075efecf88bd6ed7 +size 2455 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_33_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_33_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9cf93c71f8868d5cee343e6f0cf9c361360b5d5b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_33_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2ff5702b1feabf63d22ee60a4703802d569508f8a2c7fae183b36d31b3509bc1 +size 2484 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_34_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_34_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ed046c6c2276742492bc58de40cc75e35ef3b348 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_34_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ef7bb8c423a6def2f76605af882debcb9c39ecbcab8f323783c7957405a2a8f3 +size 2396 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_35_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_35_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d425fe7a9e6cfb2e93167053e77da0d4658023e4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_35_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0959126a3f0e8a3170f9b944f5208445e6b05f4f218b7e14d23b449daaf978aa +size 2444 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_36_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_36_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..02178791d698d2c511477c0a6e8c53958b832b0e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_36_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:409ebbec045b8212da84af5c0c20bdc0b2787317a8006b2b3fadf2608082da65 +size 2483 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_37_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_37_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0173626ba5bf3b9be5986e733aebfd40f776ac1f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_37_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:9c589f32924b4faee47081c3f719ee5acc7a0f5cfc5197bbb382aa579919ba6c +size 2421 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_38_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_38_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b66928b52283b3e9ccff185a15c87338d1ff4906 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_38_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0364546a3b055e28b0dd5e65b65dc986754401ade07e350e60615781a591793e +size 2457 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_39_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_39_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2b0638715ce74e1ae668720a38be715cd7a21889 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_39_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:df92e19c757669b7c8fcdce04ba8ca1939dc28004350952b17ddf4bb5e16f121 +size 2372 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_3_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_3_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d8ab54665b74f6c74321f5ddf5aef55456cd985b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_3_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f005701b8ee3a0364312dd0b15b9cff7adcf8f636b6d59830f1fe57b4b22ae75 +size 2515 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_40_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_40_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a952d92621e5c9e7fa0a95688b119f7a9f4fcb5f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_40_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b9d87b5cc0afb8bf7c025579502ec200c864bffc148e0ba6d584eccf892e3642 +size 2496 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_41_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_41_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..782fa5771ca27c5f344109f467b3f6e06d1423c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_41_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:173a0e54df9560573332ab450086b72fd56c970935d2f349165e6ecbd558b721 +size 2344 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_42_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_42_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fd0e7721e6ad0b1f03a7de15646587414662afdd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_42_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a1d0b55c1495126d1dbf45b9155ea9da451a6c133356ca1a2354686f304320e3 +size 3062 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_43_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_43_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f7b6e9c2c1968b75b7af914f928b29c22b87e1e5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_43_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a7ab44c91a754adef344509c4f5693f1e477674d9feb0f081668a4b9f4f06a42 +size 2518 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_44_Picture_10.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_44_Picture_10.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..112f9921891d84fb3a160907bed6ceca4b3cb723 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_44_Picture_10.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4596d8abdaff5a1c2720494dc40a74c1966a071dc22709aee4308a381d41c442 +size 2426 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_45_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_45_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b0ccfae657011ff6d27d1370b3e82d6e13db074f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_45_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4589f9506055af1f457957b6d6c7469334a5dc5b219ed96a4956d3c460543d37 +size 2380 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_46_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_46_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b1dc7cb4922a8115d8cee770545554ee8e127dd4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_46_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:54c8760e101a147c7272977796e88f2c793d3f797cc994e7bc09c71eb4acb592 +size 2339 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_47_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_47_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c2c7307e683932aa7f3e9d69b4fef9cc212535b0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_47_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:9982bdc671c3f165c00cb200e71e51515a9e2c6963a36d15368b74eb6fe7bf56 +size 2342 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_48_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_48_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8fc6ae9da4b84e8c78891c1ca49a00f817971768 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_48_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3fbcfcf7b670c80468187587801ed05a4fa6109cea6f9a40082874a632604cdb +size 2488 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_49_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_49_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..005fad66607599b293745355a73171bdff0f3f64 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_49_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:dd069985c0aaeea7fc5a1239f1807cdbf9066fe2f42e117f48d64f9780adbb26 +size 2359 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_4_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_4_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..856f85e6b2055395730e68f9c303eb825883d709 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_4_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:347630537b8a639a506938d241cb873684a6dbef79a732cc2ed6e9ab9b9fd1e4 +size 8262 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_50_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_50_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..851ee6b8bb0b5cc98016f05099a8e95832019425 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_50_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7ca248ae6a966177d281e786627e7cd540668cffa0536431e2a96631c08505df +size 2448 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_51_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_51_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5f5ffab7b72eef2f2ac052bd0dcce363ec3cbcf0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_51_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e3c45c56d6c3da585ca2ac97d768779c7e65eade869d63926ae4ff5922e40053 +size 2463 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_52_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_52_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b10b53df853102afbb6237e61f87033567a05eeb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_52_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c51fc774407895ab67c2429cac0fe0e6ab74c847461695ac0c73c092802f5d13 +size 2404 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_53_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_53_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..de7c58e0567bb7c6d0cf9e8ae8750cd5cdeec3d7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_53_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1106be63cb1f3bd2befbe79a8f2f857f0723b034e9f8701c0438ad68d551eb9e +size 2429 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_54_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_54_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..30068f14c15f419648507f8c7ff65d960656470c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_54_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:efd60e0eb9bb38766c04c58d792d4d6cfe8a0c71e5e381f37f6a9b97d112a6a3 +size 2444 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_55_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_55_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..37381c2b04823ebc0f17f5faa09e20f4e3c099f1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_55_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8bcf0e1ca471e22515ba34465a191c7aec72f6f8f827dac59c0a025f082b74d4 +size 2407 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_56_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_56_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d7fa7b7deace7bc4e73e80de5be996b6d5d2b689 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_56_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d2822d330d6e95d47ca48b0a44a95b165233bf0718644c1179dbe9e7b6ff559e +size 2479 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_57_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_57_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1432cfe5297593b67e01e0343d07acb5d5c8cee2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_57_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:38090586e70624572751cb413c3a141a7cfff0c1efaf996853db8521761fe29d +size 2527 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_5_Picture_13.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_5_Picture_13.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..997df4ed716e6616c6656115325cff425f2e96f9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_5_Picture_13.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b5ed99ba948f21e9535f8a81ea12ab3bf0a257c41d018bc6c693595f47c26cdb +size 2493 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_6_Picture_12.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_6_Picture_12.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e8dbbdfc5c8a3b7af75f24b399ba550b0ffc631f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_6_Picture_12.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:760e5cb8b3766632833cab8939a6324ddf54f996cb5efa0adbc04478c1070c53 +size 2432 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_7_Picture_33.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_7_Picture_33.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dff51753b22be77aad50f464b08b425f654934df --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_7_Picture_33.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c8ffdb87fd0873413a02168b1205f2794df158eb112ddafec3e98dd7c19a7e23 +size 2682 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_8_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_8_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3906a678c468615f3134cc6a27c26d9051d343af --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_8_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:bdafc1830303833f25024dc287a764f2d442d447e17640f7288bac51bfbc4576 +size 2417 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_9_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_9_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..beef39b5f8d9321deaec0c83d2dea82a0ea24b55 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747718/_page_9_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:fe1b8a4021f55c751f74571be4ee22a0afdcd9b75107580a9b2987590bee7dd1 +size 2446 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/EFTA02747776.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/EFTA02747776.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1de1e5cb0a385bc0cb68cbd337dd58486f5c795b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/EFTA02747776.md @@ -0,0 +1,3033 @@ +PLAINTIFF JANE DOES MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROVIDE RECENTLY-OBTAINED DEPOSITION TESTIMONY AND AFFIDAVIT DEMONSTRATING FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS BY EPSTEIN IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN AND INCORPORATED SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +![](_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg) + +## EXHIBIT A-2 + +(2 of 3) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +MR. Ma This is it? + +76 + +MR. CRITTON: Who took it from the deposition the other day? + +MR. IIIIIIII Ihave this one right now. + +MR. REINHART: That's the only copy? + +MR. =IS Okay. + +MR. CRITTON: So you took the original? + +MR. IMIIII Apparently. It has the original sticker. + +MR. CRITTON: When I say "the original," the original copy. Would you have someone recreate what you've got and send it to us so we have it? + +MR. : Sure. In fact, why don't I wait until I get the whole thing and I'll copy all the pages and send it to you instead of piecemeal. + +MR. HOROWITZ: You mean before the transcript comes? + +MR. : We can copy it. + +MR. CRITTON: If you give it to me, I'll copy it and send it back to you. + +MR. REINHART: I have acopy. It just doesn't have the exhibit sticker on. + +MR. : That's what was told to me the other day, that's why I took it. + +MR. CRITTON: I want something -- I just don't + +![](_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 want to -- if you give me a copy, I'll put a sticker on it. + +3 4 MR. REINHART: Or just copy the page that has the exhibit sticker on it. + +5 MR. CRITTON: Sorry. + +6 BY + +7 8 Q. Like on this flight, we have "JE." I'm assuming that's Jeffrey Epstein, correct? + +9 A. Yes, I'll assume. + +10 Q. "GM," Ghislaine Maxwell, right? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 Q. "SK," + +13 A. I would assume. + +14 15 Q. I mean -- okay. And then this name, do you recognize that person, Alexia? + +16 A. Never heard it. + +17 Q. And then + +18 A. Yes. + +19 Q. You've heard that name? + +20 A. I've heard the name. + +21 Q. Not sure who that is, though? + +22 A. No. + +23 24 Q. There's only one, two, three, four, five, six people on that flight? + +25 A. Uh-huh. + +![](_page_2_Picture_24.jpeg) + +77 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. That's pretty typical of the amount of passengers that you would have on aflight? + +3 A. It varied, sure. + +4 5 6 7 Q. Okay. But it varied between -- if we look a few lines down, Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were the only two passengers. Certainly there were flights like that as well, right? + +8 A. Mm-hmm. + +9 10 Q. And so it varied from having one or two people to six or seven people, right? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 13 Q. What's the most people that you remember traveling on any of Jeffrey Epstein's airplanes? + +14 A. Twenty-five. + +15 16 Q. Okay. That would be ararity, wouldn't you say? + +17 A. yeah. + +18 19 20 Q. Because I've looked through this log. I haven't seen any place where there were 25, but there are lines that have maybe eight or nine people listed. + +21 A. Right. + +22 23 24 25 Q. Let's see. There's aflight from January 15th -- sorry, January 17th, January 20th and January 22nd of 2002 that all had . That doesn't serve to refresh your recollection as to who + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +78 + +![](_page_3_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 that is, does it? + +2 A. No. + +3 4 5 Q. Okay. Do you know what the purpose of her being on the airplane flight along with Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and IIIIIIIIIIII would be? + +6 A. No. + +7 8 9 Q. Okay. Do you know how it comes about that gets on that flight? How does she even know there's a flight available? + +10 A. I don't know. + +11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Q. All right. Well, let's go down to somebody that we may all know alittle bit better. February 9th, 2002, there's a flight that has Bill Clinton, four Secret Service agents and then instead of listing names or initials or anything else, it's just listed as two males, one female, Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and I forget who Dave Rogers told me "AP" is. Do you remember who that is? + +19 A. No. + +20 21 Q. Okay. Either way, how is it that someone like Bill Clinton gets on aJeffrey Epstein flight? + +22 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +23 THE WITNESS: I don't know. + +24 BY MR. + +25 Q. Do you know before the flight takes off that + +![](_page_4_Picture_17.jpeg) + +79 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +1 Bill Clinton's going to be a passenger on the flight? + +2 A. Yes. + +3 4 Q. And how do you know? How do you get that information? + +5 6 7 8 9 10 A. The day before I'd get a phone call from, say, Sarah saying we're leaving tomorrow going to wherever, and sometimes she'll say who's going, sometimes she won't. On a case where President Clinton would be on board, we would put a little extra catering on board or do that little extra TLC to the aircraft. + +11 12 Q. If it's leaving -- this says it's leaving from MIA and where is it landing? + +13 A. HPN I believe is IIIII Plains. + +14 Q. Okay. Do you remember that flight? + +15 A. I remember being on it. + +16 17 18 Q. Well, I mean, if you look through here, obviously you had Bill Clinton on the airplane ten or twenty times, right? + +19 20 A. Yeah. He's my main focus. I remember him being on the aircraft, sure. + +21 22 Q. Do you remember him being on the airplane with younger girls? + +23 + +24 + +25 + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +80 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: No. + +![](_page_5_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIB,\_En, + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR. + +2 3 Q. Okay. Do you know what his relationship was with Jeffrey Epstein? + +4 A. No. + +5 Q. Do you know if they were friends? + +6 A. Assuming. + +7 8 Q. But you're assuming why? Just because he's on his plane? + +9 A. Yeah. + +10 11 12 Q. Okay. So you assume that the people that are listed on here are friends of Jeffrey Epstein's and that's why they are riding on his plane? + +13 A. I'm speculating. + +14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q. I'm just not familiar with the -- because I've never been on aprivate flight -- with the manner in which you go about getting on one of these flights. I mean, you have to, I guess, know that Jeffrey Epstein has a plane, that it's going from adestination that you are at and want to go to, and that it's available and those kind of things. Can you tell me, enlighten me -- + +21 22 23 24 25 A. Well, it's not publicly offered, no. It would be no different than you jumping in your car and knowing you're going to the mall. I mean, it's not public information, you know, where planes are coming to and from, and you don't put your name out there to get + +![](_page_6_Picture_15.jpeg) + +81 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 onboard a flight. + +2 3 Q. Does Jeffrey Epstein charge these people as passengers? + +4 A. I don't know. + +5 6 7 8 9 Q. Okay. Are these people such as Bill Clinton, does that mean that Bill Clinton called or somebody affiliated with Jeffrey Epstein to get on the plane or that Jeffrey Epstein called Bill Clinton and asked do you want a ride? + +10 MR. CRITTON: Form; predicate. + +11 THE WITNESS: I have no idea. + +12 BY MR. + +13 Q. No idea? + +14 A. No idea whatsoever. + +15 Q. Joe Pagano, do you know who that is? + +16 A. Yes. + +17 18 19 20 Q. What's his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, or what was it back in February -- sorry, March 17th of 2002, when he and and Jeffrey Epstein and Todd and one female were on this flight? + +21 22 23 A. I don't know to what extent or what his relationship is. He just was a passenger on the airplane. + +24 25 Q. Okay. And the next day -- sorry, two days later on the 19th of March, Bill Clinton flies again, + +![](_page_7_Picture_18.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +82 + +ESQUIRE • Aknaer 'Ws Camay + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 FatsImlle: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 this time with Doug Band, three Secret Service agents, Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and Do you remember that flight? + +4 A. Where did we go? + +5 Q. Starts in JFK. + +6 A. Right. + +7 Q. Where is that? + +8 MR. CRITTON: Do you have adate? + +9 MR. : March 19th, 2002. + +10 11 THE WITNESS: EGGW I believe is Luton, England. + +12 BY MR. + +13 Q. Okay. Do you remember flying to England? + +14 15 16 A. I do remember flying to England. I just don't remember that trip. What airplane were we in? We were in the Boeing. + +17 Q. Do you remember the purpose of the trip? + +18 A. No. + +19 Q. Do you know who Doug Band is? + +20 21 22 A. I heard he's Clinton's, how would you say, assistant. I mean, I've seen that in the newspaper, seen it on CNN. + +23 24 25 Q. Okay. Did you ever hear that Doug Band and Ghislaine Maxwell were together, even for aday or a night? + +83 + +![](_page_8_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE nAna ""W + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. No. + +2 3 4 Q. Did you ever hear that Doug Band and Ghislaine Maxwell were the people attributed to introducing Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein? + +5 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +6 THE WITNESS: I don't know. + +7 BY MR. + +8 9 10 Q. All right. There's another flight here on January -- I can't read this upside down. Maybe it says May -- + +11 A. Looks like. + +12 13 14 Q. -- 22nd, 2002. Again, with President Bill Clinton, Janice, Jessica. Can you tell me who Janice and Jessica are? + +15 A. I don't remember. + +16 Q. Would you know them if you saw them? + +17 18 A. Probably not because the names don't even ring a bell. + +19 20 21 22 23 Q. All right. And then there are plenty of flights, many of flights where Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and are the primary passengers, or at least are some of the passengers on the flights, correct? + +24 A. Mm-hmm, yes. + +25 Q. And still, as you sit here, you being the + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +84 + +![](_page_9_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 pilot of these flights, you're not sure what their relationship is or whether any of them were socially connected in any real way? + +4 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +5 6 7 THE WITNESS: No. When you're flying the airplane, there's a lot more going on than passengers' relations. + +8 MR. BY + +9 Q. All right. You remember this person, + +10 are you familiar with her at all? + +11 A. I remember the name, that's it. + +12 13 Q. What do you think her relationship is to Jeffrey Epstein? + +14 A. No idea. + +15 MR. CRITTON: What date are you on, Brad? + +16 MR. II, sorry. I am at June 21st, + +17 2002. + +18 BY MR. + +19 20 Q. That's not somebody that you specifically remember? + +21 A. Mm-mm, no. + +22 23 24 Q. No? Is that somebody that you think was a regular flyer for any period of time in Jeffrey Epstein's life? + +25 A. Not aregular. + +![](_page_10_Picture_21.jpeg) + +85 + +E S Qpj.a z ty + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +![](_page_11_Picture_22.jpeg) + +1 2 3 4 5 we're referring to the same flight on June 21st of 2002, that includes Jean Luc Brunel, Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, , those are the passengers of this flight, does that serve to jog your memory as to who is? + +6 7 8 9 A. No. I mean, you see how frequently we fly. I mean, it's -- the passengers in the back are so far removed from an operation of commanding an airplane like that, it's nothing that sticks in your head. + +10 11 12 Q. ' And you as the pilot, is there any way that you would know what's going on in the back of the airplane? + +13 A. No. My concerns are all on the cockpit. + +14 15 MR. CRITTON: Brad, the last one that you mentioned, was that the same date, June 21st, '02? + +16 MR. : Yes. + +17 BY MR. + +18 19 20 Q. ask you do you know. June 23rd, 2002, are you familiar with that name? There's another name here that I was going to + +21 A. No. + +22 23 Q. Also on the same flight with Jean Luc Brunel. That doesn't help to jog your memory either, right? + +24 A. No. + +25 Q. That's somebody that you remember as a + +![](_page_12_Picture_16.jpeg) + +87 + +ESQUIRE 1441 4444 + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquIresolutions.com + +1 frequent passenger? + +2 eferring to? + +3 Q. MS' + +4 A. No. + +6 Q. Dr. Jarecklaillinilielalltdy that you remember flying? + +7 8 A. I know the name. He may have been on the airplane once or twice. I'm guessing only. + +9 Q. Do you remember meeting him? + +10 A. Yes, I have met him. + +11 12 Q. Do you remember his purpose for being on the airplane? + +13 A. No, sir. + +14 15 Q. Amanda Venaro, do you remember her purpose for being on the airplane? + +16 A. No. + +17 MR. REINHART: Can we get a date? + +18 19 20 MR. I was asking him if he remembered Amanda Venaro. I wasn't referring to a specific flight. + +21 BY MR. + +22 Q. You don't remember her being on the flight? + +23 A. I don't remember the name. + +24 25 Q. Me showing you the flight isn't going to jog the memory? + +![](_page_13_Picture_22.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +88 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. No. The name that would launch it first -- + +2 3 4 MR. CRITTON: Could I ask you b quesbion? You have the original exhibit marked at the deposition. It looks like it's been highlighted. + +5 MR. EDNARDS: Phighlfhted it. + +6 7 8 9 MR. CRITTON: III, okay. So you've highlighted the original exhibit that's marked for the deposition? I just want the record to reflect that. + +10 Yeah. + +11 MR. CRITTON: Okay. Thank you. + +12 13 14 15 MR. At the time Ihighlighted it I didn't realize I was holding on to the original exhibit. I didn't realize that until you just pointed that out. + +16 MR. CRITTON: I've noticed that. + +17 18 19 MR. IIIIIII: So now when I give it to you, I'm giving you my work product as well. I don't see how this works against you, but anyway. + +20 BY MR. + +21 22 Q. MEW is that aname that you remember? + +23 Aprewmg%V. No. + +24 25 Q. Okay. And then Jean Luc Brunel is soltteboW4ro who I noticed flew relatively frequently, so is that why + +![](_page_14_Picture_17.jpeg) + +89 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquIresolutions.com + +1 2 you -- that name jogs your memory a little better than some of these other people? + +3 A. He dresses uniquely. + +4 Q. In what way? + +5 6 A. Just loud clothes, so something that you would remember, that's all. + +7 Q. Do you know his role in Jeffrey's life? + +8 A. No. + +9 10 11 Q. Ever heard that he is affiliated with Jeffrey Epstein because they both have asexual attraction to underage girls? + +12 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +13 14 THE WITNESS: You're making an assumption on that. + +15 BY MR. + +16 Q. Have you ever heard that? + +17 18 MR. REINHART: He's asked you if you ever heard that. + +19 BY MR. + +20 Q. If your answer is no, it's no. + +21 22 A. I'm sorry, I thought did. No, I have not. + +23 Q. Okay. I keep highlighting this name, + +24 25 just because it looks like somebody that's regularly flying on the airplane. But the more that you + +![](_page_15_Picture_21.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +90 + +ESQUIRE sa Al astA.rCtIleCOSOty + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 see her name, that doesn't change your opinion as to whether or not you remember her or what -- + +3 A. I remember the name, you know, that's all. + +4 5 Q. Do you remember about what age she was when she was flying on the airplane? + +6 A. No. + +7 8 Q. This could be somebody who is 50 years old or ten years old, for all you know? + +9 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +10 THE WITNESS: Yes. + +11 BY MR. + +12 Q. Okay. + +13 A. I mean, I would only be guessing at an age. + +14 15 Q. Yeah, but I mean, you don't remember her at all. So you don't -- + +16 A. I remember the name, exactly. + +17 Q. Other than the name? + +18 A. Right, yes, sir. + +19 20 Q. But you can't even come close to putting a face with that name? + +21 22 23 A. •I meank mo. !I mean, if you said draw her picture with -- I couldn't come close to even getting it. + +24 25 Q. Okay. You remember this flight where President Clinton, Kevin Spacey and Chris Tucker, + +![](_page_16_Picture_21.jpeg) + +91 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell? + +2 A. Yes. + +3 Q. From JFK to what is this, LPAZ? + +4 A. LPAZ, that is -- + +5 Q. South Africa or something? + +6 A. No, it's the Azores Islands, Santa Maria. + +7 Q. Do you know the purpose of that trip? + +8 A. That was a fuel stop. + +9 10 Q. Okay. And do you know why Chris Tucker and Kevin Spacey were on that airplane? + +11 A. No. + +12 Q. Did you talk to them? + +13 14 A. They came up in the cockpit and said hello. So they conversed, nothing more. + +15 16 17 18 Q. Another name that is on here a few times, I'm specifically referring right now to the dates of September 23rd and 24th of 2002, is Ron Burkle. Do you know who that is, Ron Burkle? + +19 20 A. I know what that is, yes. I didn't realize he was on our airplane. + +21 22 Q. Right now that is the first' time that you remember Ron Burkle being on your airplane? + +23 A. Yeah. + +24 25 Q. You don't know the purpose for him being on that airplane? + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +92 + +![](_page_17_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE AA Al flat/ Oaf. Colmar + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 A. No. Granted, I'm seeing this for the first time, so I'm trying to -- + +3 4 5 6 7 Q. Let me ask you that. Because this was given to me at a deposition of Dave Rogers, who I understand was the chief pilot for Mr. Epstein, and now you're the cheap pilot, but you always kind of worked in tandem, correct? + +8 A. Sure; we complemented each other. + +9 10 Q. And you both worked for the same company that flies Jeffrey Epstein's airplanes, right? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 13 14 15 16 Q. So I was of the presumption, which may have been -- I may have been misled here, or I may have, you know, misunderstood the purpose behind this book or how it was created. I thought that you had probably seen this before at some point in time? + +17 A. no. + +18 19 Q• book? Did you know that Dave Rogers was keeping this + +20 A. No. I know he keeps a pilot log book. + +21 22 Q. Okay. But you didn't know he was keeping the names of the people who were on the airplane? + +23 A. No. It's not required, so I mean, it's... + +24 25 Q. So today is the first time that you are learning that the names of the people that are on the + +93 + +![](_page_18_Picture_16.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 airplane was kept by Dave Rogers? + +2 A. Yes, in his log book. + +3 4 5 Q. Okay. And it's my understanding when you fly back into the country through Customs, you have to report the people that are on the airplane, right? + +6 A. Yes. + +7 8 Q. And who would create that document or call that information into Customs? + +9 A. Whoever the captain was for the day. + +10 Q. At times would that be you? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 13 14 Q. Okay. And at times when you would come into the country with passengers -- well, not at times. Didn't you also have to report their date of birth? + +15 A. Sure. + +16 17 18 Q. At times weren't there also people that you would bring in from other countries into the United States that were under the age of 18? + +19 A. Yes. + +20 21 22 Q. And at some times those were flights that included Jean Luc Brunel and girls that were under the age of 18, right? + +23 + +24 + +25 + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +94 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: I don't remember those flights. + +![](_page_19_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE aft Alexander Goat CO On) + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR.S + +2 3 4 Q. Okay. You don't remember which flights it would have been where there would have been girls under the age of 18? + +5 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +6 7 THE WITNESS: Well, I would have to look at the flight logs. + +8 BY MR. + +9 10 Q. It's not illegal to have somebody under the age of 18 on a flight anyway, right? + +11 A. No, not at all. + +12 13 14 Q. Were you ever aware that you, as pilot, were transporting girls under the age of 18 who were supposed to be models? + +15 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +16 THE WITNESS: I had no knowledge. + +17 BY MR. + +18 19 20 Q. Okay. You never knew who the people on the airplane were, what their purpose was, their role with Jeffrey Epstein or Jean Luc Brunel? + +21 A. No. + +22 Q. All right. Do you know + +23 A. No, I don't remember that name. + +24 Q. + +25 A. I remember the name. + +95 + +![](_page_20_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQVjBE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +1 2 Q. She flew frequently at least for aperiod of time. Do you remember that? + +3 A. Yes. + +4 5 6 Q. Is that somebody that you thought was familiar with the modeling industry or related to the modeling industry? + +7 A. No. + +8 9 Q. Okay. And these people, did Jeffrey Epstein ever tell you how he was associated with any of them? + +10 A. No. + +11 12 Q. Did you ever wonder how he was associated with any of them? + +13 A. No, never interested. + +14 15 16 17 18 Q. And on several of these -- on most of these, the names or initials of the people that are on the flight are listed. Do you know on the occasions where it lists generically two females or three females or six females, do you know why that was done? + +19 20 21 A. Just because we didn't know our the person's name. We tried to do the best we could to keep the records. + +22 23 Q. When you say "we tried to do the best that we could" -- + +24 A. Dave and I. + +25 Q. Okay. But the first time that you learned + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +96 + +![](_page_21_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE aAlex 'ado Gallo CemPaY + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 that he kept anybody's names was today, right? + +2 3 4 5 6 A. Well, I didn't know he kept them in his log book. We would fill out the passenger manifest as we're -- having passengers' names in your pilot log book, he's probably the only person in the world that does that. + +7 Q. Okay. + +8 9 10 A. So when you were mentioning putting the names down, when you said female or male, you know, I was referring to the passenger manifest. + +11 12 13 14 15 Q. For each of these same flights, then, that we're referring to out of this log book that was marked as Composite Exhibit 1 in Dave Rogers' deposition, am I understanding you correctly, then, there would also be a passenger manifest for each of these flights? + +16 A. Yes. + +17 18 Q. Now, where would I find the passenger manifest? Who keeps that documentation? + +19 A. Corporate -- our corporate office. + +20 Q. Which is whom? + +21 A. Up in New York, Darren Indyke. + +22 Q. At what corporation is that, though? + +23 A. NES, LLC, I guess. + +24 MR. REINHART: Do you know for sure? + +25 THE WITNESS: I don't know for sure. I mean, + +97 + +![](_page_22_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +1 2 when you say we would just send them up to New York. + +3 BY MR. + +4 Q. Did you ever keep acopy of them? + +5 A. No. + +6 Q. Why did you keep apassenger manifest? + +7 8 A. Just for tracking of -- to have the times on there for -- + +9 10 MR. REINHART: Can I confer with him on one thing before you ask aquestion? + +11 MR. : Yeah, yeah. + +12 (Off the record discussion.) + +13 14 15 MR. REINHART: Mr. , let him amend his prior answer. I think he misunderstood the question. + +16 17 MR. : I don't know what question we're amounting the answer to. + +18 19 20 21 22 23 24 MR. REINHART: Let me clarify this way: As the passenger manifests, they are corporate documents of either JEGE or Hyperion Air, whatever company owns the plane. Mr. Visoski has physical custody of them. He retains them but they're not his documents. They're the corporate documents. So they're not in New York. + +25 THE WITNESS: Those are the ones that I have + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +98 + +![](_page_23_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 at the airport office that I had turned into counsel that has the passenger names on them. + +3 BY MR. a + +4 Q. Okay. + +5 A. It's called apassenger manifest. + +6 Q. Okay. + +7 MR. REINHART: Right. + +8 BY MR.'S + +9 10 11 Q. The passenger manifest, just so I understand exactly what that is, tell me. Tell me in your own words. + +12 13 14 A. It's departure time, the city, the landing time exactly and the passengers that would have been on that flight. + +15 16 Q. And at times on that passenger manifest would you list also generically female or male? + +17 18 19 20 21 A. Yes. That was the document I was referring to stating that if we didn't know aperson, we did not go out of our way to find out a name. We just put in to account for how many people were on the aircraft at that time. + +22 23 24 25 Q. Who is currently in the custody or control sorry. Who currently maintains or has possession of the passenger manifest from 1998 through the present, through today for those airplanes that you flew related + +![](_page_24_Picture_16.jpeg) + +99 + +ESQUIRE so Al nadir Gallo caarai + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 to Jeffrey Epstein? + +2 3 4 5 6 7 A. I currently have, which counsel has now, 2005, Ibelieve, until the present time. And the records previous to that I believe were turned into counsel with the previous investigation with Jack Goldberger's office, I believe. I believe they maintain those records. + +8 9 Q. When you say "turned into counsel," there are alot of counsel involved here. + +10 A. Jack Goldberger's office, I believe. + +11 12 Q. When you say "the previous investigation," you're talking about the criminal investigation? + +13 A. Exactly, yes, sir. + +14 15 16 Q. And you're aware in that criminal investigation, obviously, that Jeffrey Epstein pled guilty to certain charges, correct? + +17 A. From what I read, yes. + +18 Q. Well, you did visit him in jail, right? + +19 A. Yes. We didn't talk about that. + +20 21 Q. Okay. You know in order to go to jail, though, you have to be convicted of some crime, right? + +22 + +23 + +24 BY MR. : + +25 Q. It wasn't like he was visiting the jail and + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +100 + +MR. CRITTON: Form; argumentative. + +THE WITNESS: Yes. + +![](_page_25_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE . .. + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +6 Q. Okay. So when we're talking about the criminal investigation, we're talking about the criminal investigation revolving around the allegations of Jeffrey Epstein engaging in sex acts with minors? + +9 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +10 BY MR. + +11 12 Q. talking That's the criminal investigation you're about, right? + +13 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +14 15 16 THE WITNESS: I don't know the full definition of really what happened there. I know that it was something to do with solicitation of prostitution. + +17 That's all I read. + +18 BY MR. + +19 20 21 Q. Okay. Were you aware that the allegations revolved around underage girls or girls under the age of 18? + +22 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +23 24 THE WITNESS: I was aware it revolved around it, yes. + +25 + +101 + +you were visiting and you happened to bump into each other. You actually went to see him while he was an inmate in jail? + +A. Right, yes. + +![](_page_26_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQT)IBE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquIresolutions.com + +1 BY MR. 1IIIII/ + +2 Q. Who first made you aware of that? + +3 A. The newspaper. + +4 Q. Were you ever questioned by the police? + +5 6 7 A. I don't know who questioned me, actually. I did have a questioning session, but I don't even remember who questioned me. + +8 Q. Where did that take place? + +9 A. I don't remember. + +10 Q. At your house? + +11 12 13 A. No. I'm thinking it was Jack Goldberger's office, or it may have been downtown at the Palm Beach County Courthouse or something in that area there. + +14 15 Q. Okay. So it either happened at an attorney's office that represented -- + +16 A. Exactly, yeah, I think so. + +17 Q. -- Jeffrey Epstein or the other side? + +18 A. Yeah. + +19 20 Q. And during that questioning, is that when you turned over the passenger manifest from prior to 2005? + +21 A. Yes. + +22 23 Q. And you turned those manifests directly over to Jack Goldberger? + +24 25 A. Yes. Actually, I believe Dave Rogers did that. I wasn't in possession of those records. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +102 + +![](_page_27_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. And for the passenger manifest prior to 2005, how far do those passenger manifests go back in time? + +3 4 A. They should go back, I guess, to 1991 or whenever we started existence. + +6 Q. And did you turn them over from 1991 all the way through to 2005? + +7 8 A. I don't know. I didn't turn them in. Dave Rogers did. + +9 10 Q. Are you in possession of a copy of any of those materials? + +11 A. No. + +12 13 14 Q. I thought that, you know, ten minutes ago when we were talking about this you said you had them back at an office or -- + +15 16 17 A. That was the office, the airplane office, which I've given to Bruce, which is the current log. He is in possession of them now. I had possession of them. + +18 19 20 Q. Okay. What he's in possession of -- just so I know what documents are where, he's in possession of the passenger manifests from 2005 through the present? + +21 A. Correct. + +22 23 24 Q. If I want to obtain the passenger manifests from 1998 through 2005, that's something that I would request from whom? + +25 THE WITNESS: Help me out. That's -- + +103 + +![](_page_28_Picture_16.jpeg) + +ESQUI.msC.2.BEasnu + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +BY MR. 104 + +MR. REINHART: If you know. + +THE WITNESS: I don't know who possesses them right now. They were turned into Jack Goldberger's office ayear and ahalf or two years ago. + +Q. You started out by indicating that you sent these passenger manifests, or a copy thereof, to Darren Indyke or someone at NES, LLC; is that correct? + +A. Correct. + +Q. If I requested them from NES, LLC, that's somebody at some point in time was in possession of all the passenger manifests? + +A. Sure. + +Q. And NES, LLC's address is the one you gave me at 301 East 66th Street? + +A. I believe so. I don't know what address they're using for that. I know that -- + +Q. But Darren Indyke's the attorney that I would call -- + +A. Yes, sir. + +Q. -- and he could probably steer me in the right direction? + +A. Yes. + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +![](_page_29_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR. + +2 Q. Do you know Amy Taylor? + +3 A. Yes. + +4 Q. How do you know her? + +5 A. She was on the airplane. + +6 Q. How old is she? + +7 A. I have no idea. + +8 Q. Age range? + +9 A. Twenty-eight. + +10 Q. Now? + +11 12 13 A. Yeah, 28, or maybe if not older now. She was probably 28 probably, I guess. She was somebody in her late 20s. + +14 15 Q. So we're talking about 2003? That's what I'm trying to understand. + +16 A. I'm guessing. + +17 18 Q. We're talking 2009 now. We're saying 28. By that do you mean in 2003 she was 23 or 24 years old? + +19 A. You're having me guess on her age. + +20 Q. Yeah. + +21 A. I mean, I can't be accurate. + +22 Q. Somebody between 18 and 25? + +23 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +24 BY MR. + +25 Q. At the time you were seeing her back in -- + +![](_page_30_Picture_25.jpeg) + +105 + +ESQUIRE K G + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Faislmlle: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. If you want me to guess -- + +2 Q. No, I don't want you to guess. + +3 A. I don't know then. + +4 Q. Well, if I say between ten and fifty? + +5 A. That's arange. + +6 7 Q. If I say between ten and fifty, you're not guessing there anymore. You know she's in there, right? + +8 A. She's in the middle there, yeah. + +9 10 Q. Okay. How can we narrow that down? We're talking about somebody in her 20s? + +11 A. In her 20s. + +12 Q. At least that's what you believed? + +13 A. Yes. + +14 15 Q. All right. Is that somebody that you know to be associated or friendly with Ghislaine Maxwell? + +16 A. I don't know. + +17 18 Q. Do you know what her relationship was to Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell? + +19 A. No. + +20 Q. Do you know where she is now? + +21 A. No idea. + +22 Q. When's the last time you talked to her? + +23 A. I don't know. What date do you have on there? + +24 Q. February 2003. + +25 A. So, probably that long ago. I may have said + +![](_page_31_Picture_25.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +106 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 hello. + +2 3 Q. That's somebody who was on the airplane multiple times? + +4 5 A. More than once. I mean, I have no account for how many times. + +6 7 8 Q. Well, I've asked you about abunch of names, most of which you don't really remember, but that's one name you do remember. + +9 A. Yeah, I remember the name, yeah. + +10 11 Q. Okay. And that's somebody who you actually - you would remember the face too? + +12 A. I might remember Amy's face. + +13 14 Q. All right. Do you remember why she would have ever been on your airplane? + +15 A. No idea. + +16 17 18 Q. President Andres Postrana, at the time I guess that was the president of Colombia back in February - sorry, March 20th of 2003. Do you know who that is? + +19 20 A. I don't remember him being on the airplane, but I know who that is. + +21 22 23 Q. Okay. He's on the airplane with Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and Jean Luc Brunel? + +24 A. Where did we go? + +25 Q. I'll let you look at it. I'm talking about + +107 + +![](_page_32_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQLTIBw 7g, + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 this line, PBI, left out of Palm Beach? + +2 3 A. Palm Beach to Nassau. I'm sorry, I don't remember that one. + +4 5 6 Q. When we're saying we're going down to Nassau, is that a place that you frequently went to with the airplane? + +7 A. No, not at all. + +8 9 Q. And is that aroute that you would take for the ultimate destination to be Little St. James? + +10 A. No. + +11 12 13 Q. If the ultimate destination was Little St. James -- show me aflight where the ultimate destination was Little St. James. + +14 A. Yeah, right here. TIST, that's St. + +15 16 17 18 Q. Okay. So on that flight that you just pointed to, March 27th, 2003, we have Jeffrey Epstein, again, Brent Tyndall -- do you know who Brent Tyndall is? + +19 A. Yes. + +20 Q. And who is that? + +21 A. I believe he was the chef. + +22 23 Q. And Magale Blanchen (phonetic), is that somebody you know to be a model these days? + +24 A. I have no idea. + +25 Q. Do you remember that flight? + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +108 + +![](_page_33_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. No. + +2 3 Q. Do you remember Naomi allia picking her up from St. OEMalong with Jean Luc Brunel? + +4 5 A. I remember her being on board. I don't remember the flight. + +6 Q. Do you know Joel Pashcow? + +7 A. Yes. + +8 Q. How do you know him? + +9 A. He was on the airplane. + +10 11 Q. And is that somebody you knew at one point in time to be a friend of Jeffrey Epstein's? + +12 13 A. He was on the airplane. I don't know what the relationship was. + +14 Q. Do you know what the relationship is today? + +15 A. No idea. + +16 17 Q. How about Todd Mister, do you know what that relationship is or was today? + +18 A. No. + +19 Q. Do you remember him? + +20 A. No. + +21 Q. Not at all? + +22 A. I mean, I know the name. I don't know. + +23 Q. Paula Epstein, do you know who that is? + +24 A. Yes. + +25 Q. Who is that? + +109 + +![](_page_34_Picture_24.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE "Almada Cane CoasPnI + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. That's Jeffrey's mom. + +2 Q. She's passed away? + +3 A. Yes. + +4 Q. At least that's your understanding, right? + +5 A. That's what I heard, yes. + +6 Q. Okay. Tila , do you know her? + +7 A. Tila n, I know the name. + +8 9 Q. Somebody who flew on the airplane with some regularity? + +10 A. Yes. + +11 12 Q. And do you know her to be friends of Ghislaine Maxwell or or Jeffrey Epstein? + +13 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +14 15 THE WITNESS: I have no idea who she was friends with. + +16 BY MR. : + +17 18 Q. All right. Do you know what role she ever played, if she played one, in Jeffrey Epstein's life? + +19 A. No. + +20 21 Q. All right. Glenn , are you familiar with him? + +22 A. Yes. + +23 Q. How do you know Glenn ? + +24 A. I met him on the airplane. + +25 Q. Outside of the airplane, have you ever seen + +![](_page_35_Picture_24.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +110 + +ESQUIRE is AI anict Gallo Cospan + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 him around Jeffrey Epstein? + +2 A. No. + +3 Q. All right. + +4 A. No. + +5 Q. do you know that name? + +6 A. No. + +7 8 Q. She was on several flights. You don't remember seeing her? + +9 A. No. + +10 11 Q. All right. And how about Alan Dershowitz, I'm sure you know who that is? + +12 A. Sure. He's famous. + +13 14 Q. What was your understanding of Alan Dershowitz's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein? + +15 A. Never talked about it. + +16 17 Q. Forrest Sawyer, do you know why he was on your airplane? + +18 A. Never heard the name, actually. + +19 Q. Really? + +20 A. No. + +21 Q. Larry Summers? + +22 A. I know the name. I don't remember flying him. + +23 Q. Have you ever talked to Joe Fontanela? + +24 A. Yes. + +25 Q. How do you know him? + +111 + +![](_page_36_Picture_25.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. He usually drops Jeffrey off at the airport. + +2 3 Q. In fact, you've called him directly before, right? + +4 A. Yes. + +5 Q. You still have his number? + +6 7 A. I haven't -- yes, I think I still got it in my memory. + +8 Q. Okay. What is it? + +9 10 A. It's been a few years. (917)945-7500. It's kind of an easy one. + +11 MR. CRITTON: 917 is the first + +12 THE WITNESS: Yes. + +13 MR. CRITTON: Who was this for? + +14 MR. REINHART: Joe, Joe Fontanela. + +15 MR. : Fontanela. + +16 BY MR. + +17 Q. Do you know his address, where he resides? + +18 A. No, I don't. + +19 20 Q. Do you know if he what his role is in Jeffrey Epstein's life? + +21 A. Not really. He just he drove the car. + +22 Q. He drove what car? + +23 A. The car up in New York. + +24 25 Q. Okay. Do you know if he's a housekeeper up at that house up in New York? + +![](_page_37_Picture_24.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +112 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +3. A. I don't know what his role is. + +2 3 Q. Have you ever worked for a company called Air Ghislaine? Do you know that company? + +4 A. Yes. + +5 Q. Do you know what that company does? + +6 A. No. + +7 8 Q. Have you ever been an employee of that company? + +9 A. No. + +10 Q. Do you know who runs that company? + +11 A. No. + +12 13 Q. Is Jeffrey Epstein associated with that company? + +14 A. I don't know. + +15 Q. How have you heard of that company? + +16 17 A. It's the company name that our registration for the helicopters is under, Air Ghislaine. + +18 19 Q. Is that somebody who's ever paid you, a company who's ever paid you? + +20 A. No. + +21 Q. Do you know Igor Zinoviev? + +22 A. Yes. + +23 Q. How do you know him? + +24 A. Met him on the airplane. + +25 Q. What is your understanding of his affiliation + +![](_page_38_Picture_24.jpeg) + +113 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 with Jeffrey Epstein? + +2 A. I don't know. He doesn't talk much. + +3 4 Q. is? Okay. And Sandy Berger, do you know who that + +5 A. I don't know. + +6 7 Q. Do you know any reason why you would have flown him on the airplane? + +8 A. I don't even know the name. + +9 Q. Adrianna Muchinska? + +10 A. I know the name Adrianna. + +11 12 Q. Somebody who flew on the plane pretty regularly? + +13 14 15 A. I would have to look at the logs. I think we've had that name on several -- it's acommon first name. I'm not familiar really on who that is. + +16 17 Q. What about Bella, do you know who Bella is? Is that aname you ever heard? + +18 A. Yes. + +19 Q. Works up in the New York office or something? + +20 A. Yes. + +21 Q. Have you ever spoken with Bella personally? + +22 A. Yes. + +23 24 Q. Do you know what she does for Jeffrey Epstein, if anything? + +25 A. I don't know exactly what her role is. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +114 + +![](_page_39_Picture_22.jpeg) + +ESQUJBE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. Do you know -- did you tell me, do you know what Leslie Gruff does for Jeffrey Epstein? + +3 A. I don't know her exact title. + +4 5 Q. You talked to all of these individuals at some point in time, either on the phone or in person, right? + +6 A. Yes. + +7 8 Q. And you don't know whether they play a role in Jeffrey Epstein's life, or if they do, what they do? + +9 A. Exactly. + +10 11 Q. And how do you decide who you're going to call for what reason? + +12 A. For example? Can you be more specific? + +13 14 15 Q. If you're going to make atelephone call and you're going to talk to let's say Leslie Gruff, why would you choose to call her? + +16 17 A. I don't know. You're having me make the phone call. I don't know why I would call her. + +18 Q. Have you ever called her? + +19 A. I think, yes, I've called her, sure. + +20 21 22 Q. Why? What would be the reason that you would call her? Somebody told you to call her? Here, call this number? + +23 24 25 A. I may have called her maybe to find out if we had a departure time for any specific trip. Imean, that would be... + +![](_page_40_Picture_18.jpeg) + +115 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. Okay. So you're calling her related to Jeffrey Epstein? + +3 A. Sure. + +4 5 Q. Okay. So you know that she plays some role in some aspect of Jeffrey Epstein's life, whatever that is? + +6 A. Right. + +7 8 9 10 11 Q. Okay. So when I'm asking these questions about these people, and I feel like I'm getting answers that I'm not really not sure that these people have any role in their life, that's not that's not completely accurate, right? + +12 MR. CRITTON: Form; argumentative. + +13 BY MR. + +14 15 16 17 18 Q. I mean, you do know that somehow involved with him, whether these people are socially or business-wise or otherwise, and during the course of your years, you've made telephone calls on his behalf or to coordinate things with them right? + +19 A. Right. + +20 21 MR. CRITTON: Object to the form. You said "these people." + +22 BY MR. + +23 24 Q. I'm talking about . That's somebody you called before, right? + +25 A. Sure. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +116 + +![](_page_41_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. What would be a reason you called + +2 + +3 4 5 6 MR. CRITTON: Object to form. Probably the same reasons he said two hours ago, for scheduling purposes. But you've covered that. Go ahead and answer it again. + +7 8 THE WITNESS: For scheduling purposes, would be my only reason to call her. + +9 BY MR. + +10 11 Q. That's funny that you used the exact same words that Mr. Critton wants you to use. + +12 MR. CRITTON: It's what he said two hours ago. + +13 BY MR. + +14 15 Q. What would be the reason why you would call Ms. Maxwell, Ghislaine Maxwell? + +16 A. Same reason. + +17 18 Q. That's not somebody you call these days, though, right? + +19 A. I haven't seen her in some time. + +20 21 22 Q. What made you stop calling Ghislaine Maxwell where you thought at one point in time you thought she was a person to call related to your job? + +23 A. Just was no reason to. + +24 25 Q. Is that somebody who you think is still affiliated or associated with Jeffrey Epstein or his -- + +117 + +![](_page_42_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +e:xn + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 whatever he does? + +2 A. I'd only can speculating. I don't know. + +3 Q• All right. Do you know the number + +4 (917)868-6145? + +5 MR. CRITTON: Could you say it slowly. 917? + +6 7 8 MR. MEM 868-6145. Thank you. And just in case you didn't get it, I'm going to mark these as an exhibit so that we can read them later. + +9 BY MR. + +10 Q. Do you know that number? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 Q. What is that number? + +13 A. That's my cell phone. + +14 Q. Okay. Is that still your cell phone? + +15 A. Yes, sir. + +16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. All right. I'm going to show you two documents here or pieces of paper. We'll mark them as Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 3. The first one is dated March 5th, 2005. Do you remember making this telephone call? And just for the record, this looks like a message that's being taken relative to aphone call that you made. + +23 24 MR. REINHART: So the question is does he remember making the phone call? + +25 + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +118 + +![](_page_43_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +119 + +3 Q. Do you remember making that phone call after reading the message? + +6 MR. REINHART: The question is, do you remember making the call? + +8 9 THE WITNESS: Okay, let me. "Person for the car will be here in 15 minutes to drop off foam and papers." I don't know. + +10 BY MR. + +11 Q. That doesn't mean anything to you? + +12 13 A. That doesn't -- I mean, you're talking four years ago. I can't answer that accurately. I mean... + +14 15 MR. REINHART: So the answer is you don't recall? + +16 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I don't recall. + +17 BY MR. + +18 Q. If you don't remember, that's fine. + +19 20 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Nos. 2 AND 3 were marked for identification.) + +21 BY MR. + +22 23 24 25 Q. So I'll show you Exhibit 3, the same type of document, and I can make the representation that this was message pads provided by the state attorney's office relative to the criminal investigation revolving around + +BY MR. a: + +A. Let me look at the date here. Okay. March. + +![](_page_44_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Jeffrey Epstein. So that's how I have these documents. I'm not trying to pull out old documents. + +3 MR. CRITTON: What's the date? + +4 MR. IIIIIIIII March 19th. + +5 6 MR. REINHART: The question is, do you remember the call? + +7 8 9 THE WITNESS: "Tom from Midnight Express is at" -- help me out -- "convention center with new boat. They are two points -- two parts of this." + +10 MR' BY + +11 Q. "Show"? + +12 A. "Show up the water" -- + +13 MR. REINHART: "On the water." + +14 15 THE WITNESS: "On the water and at the center." + +16 BY MR. + +17 Q. Do you remember making that call? + +18 19 20 A. No. I mean, "Tom from Midnight Express is at convention center with new boat. They are two parts of" -- I mean -- + +21 22 23 Q. But as Jeffrey Epstein's pilot, why would you be leaving such a message about Tom from Midnight Express relative to boats and aboat show? + +24 25 A. I help out with boat purchases or, you know, anything to do with, you know, that moves. So I mean, + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +120 + +![](_page_45_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE as Al xindez 0+110 Comma, + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 + +2 3 Q. Okay. When you say "you help out with boat purchases," what do you mean? + +4 5 6 A. Give my opinion, whether or not whether to buy acertain boat. It's just a hobby. I have knowledge on boats. Not only just airplanes but, you know. + +7 Q. You give your opinion to whom? + +8 A. To Jeffrey. + +9 10 Q. Okay. And Jeffrey Epstein obviously, at least in your mind, you believe he wants your opinion? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 13 Q. Okay. So boats is another thing that the two of you have discussed? + +14 A. Yes. + +15 16 17 18 Q. All right. And so this aconversation or at least some evidence that aconversation existed between yourself and Jeffrey Epstein relative to aboat or a boat show? + +19 A. Correct. + +20 Q. Do you remember having that conversation? + +21 22 23 A. We've had many conversations about boats and different boat shows. If you're referring to this one in '05, I don't recall this one. + +24 25 Q. Okay. So aside from being a pilot -- which throughout this entire deposition I believe your + +121 + +![](_page_46_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE it Aland.- 0•144 COMMOy + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +122 + +testimony has been, you know, you're just the pilot for him -- it looks like there's some other role that you're playing here in his life. I'm not suggesting that you are or you are not. I'm just saying from the appearance of this, it looks that way. Is there anything else that you want to tell me or that you want to clarify in terms of the role that you play in Jeffrey Epstein's life outside of being just his pilot? + +MR. REINHART: Let me object to form. He also told you he installs the audio and video equipment before. + +MR. Correct. + +THE WITNESS: I have an interest in boats. You know, with the island, I don't think I bought any boats, you know, for the company, but he appreciates my opinion on boat purchases. + +BY MR. + +Q. Okay. + +A. Having the knowledge of aviation and things that move quite fast. So I have consulted with him on boat items. + +Q. How many boat purchases are you aware of Jeffrey Epstein making in the time period that you've known him? + +A. Two or three. + +![](_page_47_Picture_13.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE nAl.nd./OWGmflfl + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. And has he consulted with you on each of those purchases? + +3 A. Not every one of them, no. + +4 5 Q. Does he own any boats now that you're aware of? + +6 A. I don't know if he owns them or not. + +7 8 Q• Okay. Do you know of any boats that he controls or maintains? + +9 A. Himself or? + +10 11 12 Q. How about this -- i'll ask you this way. 1 don't want to split hairs with you here: I know we've been talking about corporations and things like that. + +13 A. Yes he. + +14 15 Q. Do you know of any boats that he is the person with the most control over? + +16 A. Yes. + +17 18 Q. Okay. Where would those boats be located and what kind of boat are we talking about? + +19 20 A. St. is the location. It would be a 34-foot inflatable boat. I know that one specifically. + +21 Q. Okay. Do you know when he made that purchase? + +22 23 A. Eight years ago, seven years ago. It was a while ago. + +24 Q. Is that something you had had input in? + +25 A. Not on that one specifically, no. + +123 + +![](_page_48_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE "mm.G..wm + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 Q. Is there any other boat that you know of Jeffrey Epstein being the primary user of or the primary controller of? + +4 5 6 7 8 A. I mean, there's boats in St. IIMII. I mean, it's not part of my job, you know, what goes on with the boats or who controlled them. It's more of an opinion of what horsepower should be on the back of the boat, hull designs. It's out of my area. + +9 10 11 12 Q. But your sole responsibility or your sole obligation that you have ever had with Jeffrey Epstein relative to boats is just giving some opinions about the boat? + +13 A. Mm-hmm. + +14 Q. Is that yes? + +15 A. Yes, yes. + +16 17 Q. Okay. All right. Has he ever given you his opinions about boats? + +18 A. Sure. We've discussed it back and forth. + +19 20 Q. Other than boat conversations, have you ever talked other conversations, such as + +21 A. Cars. + +22 23 24 Q. Okay. How about such as -- have you ever known Jeffrey Epstein to have agirlfriend, somebody you consider a girlfriend? + +25 A. No. + +![](_page_49_Picture_16.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +124 + +ESQUIRE an AI aaaaa r Oa:to 0..1)W + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 Q. In the 18 years and all the travels you had with him, do you know anything about Jeffrey Epstein's sex life? + +4 A. No. + +5 Q. Do you know who he has sex with? + +6 A. No. + +7 Q. Do you know if he has sex with anybody? + +8 A. I don't know. + +9 10 Q. Do you know if he's ever had sex on the airplane while you've been piloting it? + +11 A. I have no idea. + +12 13 Q. That's something that you just wouldn't know because you're up in the cockpit? + +14 A. That is correct. + +15 16 THE WITNESS: Could I take a two-minute bathroom break just to lose my coffee? + +17 MR. S Sure. + +18 (A break was had at 12:35 p.m.) + +19 BY MR. + +20 21 22 23 24 Q. All right. We're back on the record. Over the years you've indicated that the -- any gifts or other items or things given to you by Jeffrey Epstein exclusively are the pool heater, the 40-acres of land and the -- + +25 A. Use of a company -- + +125 + +![](_page_50_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE as A:ent4tr Okl:s Cocayatf + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL. 33410 www.esquiresolutlons.eom + +1 Q. -- and the use of a company car? + +2 A. Yes. + +3 Q. That's it? + +4 A. (Nodding.) + +5 Q. Okay. + +6 A. Yes, I'm sorry, yes. + +7 8 9 Q. And the flight to Miami that was recently taken, other than Jeffrey Epstein and was there anybody else on that flight? + +10 A. No. + +11 12 Q. How long -- did you also fly them back from Miami to Palm Beach? + +13 A. No. He drove back. + +14 Q. When you say "he drove back," who drove back? + +15 16 A. Well, I assume he drove back. I did not fly him back. + +17 Q. When's the next time you saw him again? + +18 19 A. I would only be guessing. A week later, I mean. + +20 21 Q. Okay. And was that in Palm Beach County when you saw him the next time? + +22 A. Yes, sir. + +23 24 Q. Do you know of him leaving Palm Beach County in the last two years on any other occasion? + +25 A. No. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +126 + +![](_page_51_Picture_22.jpeg) + +ESQUI4"?.., + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. Did he ever fly anywhere else with you either by helicopter or airplane in the last two years? + +3 A. We flew one time to the Sikorsky plant. + +4 Q. What's the Sikorsky plant? + +5 6 A. That's where they build the Sikorsky helicopters. It's in Palm Beach County. + +7 Q. And when was that? + +8 A. Probably a month ago, I'm guessing. + +9 Q. For what purpose? + +10 A. They gave us a tour at a facility. + +11 Q. Who's they? + +12 A. Sikorsky. + +13 Q. And who requested the tour of the facility? + +14 A. They offered it to our flight department. + +15 Q. And who went? + +16 A. Jeffrey, myself, Nadia and Igor. + +17 18 19 Q. And if I wanted documentation of either of those trips, the trip to Miami or the trip to the Sikorsky plant, who would have that documentation? + +20 A. I would. + +21 22 Q. So I could request it from your attorney to get it from you? + +23 MR. REINHART: Let me just check. + +24 (Off the record discussion.) + +25 MR. REINHART: Okay. He has custody of it, + +127 + +![](_page_52_Picture_24.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE as Akarnda 0•11•Coapa" + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 but they're corporate documents. So you'd have to request it from Mr. Critton, who I understand represents all the corporations. + +4 THE WITNESS: Yes. + +5 BY MR. + +6 7 Q. What's the corporation that the document was prepared for? + +8 9 A. Meaning who -- what, like Air Ghislaine, the owner of the helicopter? Yes, Air Ghislaine. + +10 Q. Air Ghislaine? + +11 A. That's the helicopter. + +12 13 14 Q. And the name Ghislaine is obviously not that typical of a name. Is that reference or related to Ghislaine Maxwell? + +15 A. I would assume. I have no knowledge. + +16 Q. Nobody's ever told you that? + +17 A. Nobody's brought it up. + +18 19 Q. Okay. And how long were you at the Sikorsky facility? + +20 A. Three hours, four hours. + +21 Q. And what time of day was this? + +22 23 A. Nine in the morning. Nine, I think, and we returned at one, something like that. + +24 25 Q. And was the purpose to buy or purchase anything? + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +128 + +![](_page_53_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE "m"...,:..., + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 A. They have anew helicopter being developed there, so they're trying to look for investors in it. So they were just kind of pushing their product. + +4 5 Q. Do you know what Jeffrey Epstein does for a living for business today, these days? + +6 A. No. + +7 8 Q. Do you know or have you ever been to the Florida Science Foundation? + +9 A. Yes, sir. + +10 11 Q. And do you know what the Florida Science Foundation does? + +12 A. Not exactly. + +13 Q. Well, generally? + +14 A. No, I don't. I mean, really, I don't. + +15 16 17 Q. Okay. Is it your understanding that Jeffrey Epstein is somehow affiliated with the Florida Science Foundation? + +18 A. It's my understanding that, yes. + +19 20 21 Q. I mean, did you just by happenstance stumble into the Florida Science Foundation, or was it related to your relationship with Jeffrey Epstein? + +22 23 A. I've heard that's where his office was. I mean, I have no other -- + +24 Q. Why did you go there? + +25 A. Talk about airplanes. + +129 + +![](_page_54_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. Talk to who? + +2 A. Jeffrey. + +3 4 Q. Jeffrey just happened to be at the Florida Science Foundation? + +5 A. Yes. + +6 7 Q. How did you know that he was going to be at the Florida Science Foundation? + +8 A. He called me and told me. + +9 10 Q. And he said come to the Florida Science Foundation to talk to me about what? + +11 12 A. Maintenance on the airplanes, upcoming. It's an ongoing. + +13 Q. And did he have an office there? + +14 A. Yes. + +15 16 Q. So this is -- when you walked in, this is the place that's right next to Jack Goldberger's office? + +17 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +18 THE WITNESS: Yes. + +19 BY MR. + +20 21 Q. And you walk in and there's areception desk right there? + +22 A. Yes. + +23 24 Q. Is that where you talked or did you talk somewhere behind that reception desk? + +25 A. Behind the reception area. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +130 + +![](_page_55_Picture_22.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. Back in his office? + +2 A. Yes, sir. + +3 Q. What was that conversation? + +4 S A. Give me atime frame. I mean, I've been there several times. + +6 7 Q. Okay. How many times do you think you've been to the Florida Science Foundation? + +8 A. Twenty, thirty. Imean... + +9 10 Q. Well, the Florida Science Foundation's only been around since late 2007; is that right? + +11 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +12 BY MR. + +13 Q. Something around that? + +14 A. I don't know exactly. + +15 16 17 Q. All right. So in the last 20 years -- in the last couple of years you've been there 20 or 30 times, approximately? + +18 A. Yes, sir. + +19 20 21 22 Q. And during those times when you've been there, without having to go through each conversation, did you ever talk to him about the fact that he was on probation or that he was + +23 A. No. + +24 Q. -- any part of the criminal investigation? + +25 A. No, not at all. + +131 + +![](_page_56_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. What was the purpose of the conversation? + +2 3 4 5 6 A. We were sometimes talking about TVs, you know, the latest plasma that's out there, LCD, you know, setting up a stereo systems, you know, in the Palm Beach house. That's usually the main thrust of our conversations these days. + +7 8 9 Q. How would you know to go to the Florida Science Foundation on each of those occasions? Would he just call you? + +10 11 A. Yeah, he would call me and say come on by or I got a brochure on a new Samsung. + +12 13 Q. With each time you were at the Florida Science Foundation, how long would you stay typically? + +14 15 A. Ten, fifteen minutes. Not much more than that. + +16 17 Q. You would go there for ten or fifteen minutes, have a conversation about aTV and leave? + +18 A. Yes, sir. + +19 20 Q. Why couldn't you have that conversation over the phone? What was it about? + +21 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +22 23 24 25 THE WITNESS: If it was pertaining to a TV and I'd have a brochure, a picture of the TV -- one particular TV we looked at it was the size of a like five foot diagonal, so I had aphoto of myself + +![](_page_57_Picture_15.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +132 + +ESQUIRE aA:taasidtr OalLa Cann./ + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +133 + +standing next to it or the salesperson. So I mean, there's a reason to visually show him something reference to that. + +6 Q. Did you ever communicate with Jeffrey Epstein -- you can send him an e-mail, right? You could have done that? + +9 10 Q. To send him the picture or something like that, that was an option? + +11 A. Right. + +12 13 Q. And what's Jeffrey Epstein's e-mail address that you use? + +14 15 16 A. I have to do it on my computer, you know, with -- I have to type in the prompts for it because it's a long e-mail address. + +17 18 Q. Okay. How long have you e-mail corresponded with Jeffrey Epstein? + +19 20 21 A. Probably two years. A year to two years. I mean, it's fairly -- something we just started doing. I mean, we'd never done that in the past. + +22 23 Q. Well, in the past he was in jail or have some restrictions? + +24 A. The restrictions, yes. + +25 Q. So you you'd see him on the airplane + +BY MR. MM + +A. Yes. + +![](_page_58_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 frequently? + +2 A. Exactly. + +3 4 5 Q. So when you didn't see him on the airplane frequently, then some of your correspondence was by e-mail, other times by telephone? + +6 A. Mm-hmm. + +7 Q. And other times in person? + +8 A. Yes. + +9 10 11 Q. And what was your e-mail -- what was the substance of the e-mail correspondence that you would have with Jeffrey Epstein? + +12 13 A. It would have to be related. I mean, you have to give me a topic. I mean, whether it be a car -- + +14 Q. Never about the criminal investigation? + +15 A. III, no, no, never. + +16 17 Q. Do you know what his intention is or his plans are for when he is off probation? + +18 A. No idea. + +19 Q. Or off community control? + +20 A. I have no idea. + +21 22 23 Q. Has he ever indicated to you he wants you to fly him to some other location outside the United States to live permanently? + +24 A. II, no. + +25 Q. Have you ever flown to his place in Paris? + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +134 + +![](_page_59_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE an Alesadei 03:10 C•apnY + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. We've landed in Paris. + +2 3 Q. You're aware that he has some control over another piece of property over there? + +4 5 A. I know we've picked up luggage at aresidence. Idon't know to what extent his ownership is, if any. + +6 Q. All right. + +7 A. Right. + +8 9 Q. And are you aware that he has some employees that listen to what he says that work in that house? + +10 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +11 12 THE WITNESS: In Paris, yes, there is one person there. + +13 BY MR. + +14 Q. What's his name? + +15 16 A. Voltzan. Because I always thought there was nobody there. + +17 Q. Vultzan Cauldron (phonetic)? + +18 19 A. I don't know exactly. I would have to look it up. + +20 Q. Have you talked to him before? + +21 A. No. + +22 Q. When you've been in Paris -- + +23 A. You're not going to ask why? + +24 Q. Well, I'm assuming he doesn't speak English. + +25 A. There you go, okay. + +135 + +![](_page_60_Picture_23.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. So I thought there was no need for that? + +2 A. Okay. I just wanted to see. + +3 4 Q. Where do you stay when Jeffrey Epstein is in Paris? + +5 A. A hotel. + +6 7 Q. Okay. And in New Mexico, when you land there, you stay on the ranch somewhere, but at your place? + +8 A. I stay at my place. + +9 10 Q. And in New York, you have an apartment that he sets you up at, right, the 301? + +11 A. Yes, I have a place I could stay. + +12 Q. And in St. + +13 A. Hotel. + +14 Q. And in Paris you stay at a home? + +15 A. (Nodding.) + +16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. Are there any other properties such as what we were talking about today -- I'm not saying Jeffrey Epstein is the sole owner or direct owner, but any other properties that you're familiar with that Jeffrey Epstein is -- has direct access to and at least it gives the appearance to you that he is the owner or controller of that property? + +23 + +24 25 THE WITNESS: Name the list that you've stated. + +![](_page_61_Picture_19.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +136 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +ESQUIRE as A: xnate GolleGnapaay + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR• + +2 Q. The Manhattan house. + +3 A. Yes. + +4 5 6 Q. Mansion or whatever we want to call it, the Zorro Ranch, the island of St. James, the Palm Beach house. + +7 A. Mm-hmm. + +a Q. And the Paris place. + +9 A. That's all I'm aware of. + +10 11 12 Q. And have you ever at any of those five places hung around him and stayed around him for during the daytime for the course of an entire day? + +13 A. No. + +14 15 Q. All right. So do you know what he does during his days while he's there? + +16 A. No. + +17 18 Q. Are you aware of a list of underage girls that is kept to come over and service him each of those days? + +19 + +20 + +21 BY MR. + +22 23 Q. I'm the first person to ever even imply that to you, right? + +24 A. A list, yes, you are. + +25 Q. Okay. Have you ever been made aware that + +137 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: Absolutely not. + +![](_page_62_Picture_22.jpeg) + +ES QVIE ,Bcot. + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 keeps a list of underage girls to service Jeffrey Epstein for sexual purposes? + +3 A. I am not aware of them. + +4 MR. CRITTON: Form to the last question. + +5 BY MR. + +6 7 8 9 Q. Have you ever been made aware that Ghislaine Maxwell keeps a list of girls in the nearby areas of each of -- at Jeffrey Epstein's residences to service him sexually? + +10 A. No. + +11 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +12 BY MR. + +13 14 15 16 Q. Okay. Have you ever read some of the complaints that have been filed against him in the various courts, whether state court or federal court, against Jeffrey Epstein? + +17 A. No, I have not. + +18 19 20 Q. All right. So this Jane Doe 102 versus Jeffrey Epstein, you're not familiar with who that person is? + +21 A. No idea. + +22 23 Q. Okay. I'm going to mark Jane Doe, one of the 22, versus Epstein as Exhibit No. 4 to this deposition. + +24 25 (Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 4 was marked for identification.) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +138 + +![](_page_63_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR. IIIIIII + +2 3 4 5 Q. And ask you about some of the allegations in here and see if you know anything about them. It indicates he owns aflight of aircraft that includes a Gulfstream, a helicopter, and aBoeing 727. True? + +6 MR. CRITTON: What's the question? + +7 THE WITNESS: Please repeat. + +8 BY MR. MEN + +9 10 11 Q. Are you aware of him owning a Gulfstream IV aircraft, a helicopter and aBoeing 727? I think we talked about it, right? + +12 A. Right. + +13 14 Q. Okay. And it indicates afleet of motor vehicles? + +15 16 17 MR. CRITTON: Wait aminute. He said right, is that we talked about it, as distinct from him knowing one way or another. + +18 THE WITNESS: What's the question? + +19 BY MR. : + +20 Q. Do you know that he owns those things? + +21 A. I do not know that he owns them. + +22 Q. Do you believe that he owns those things? + +23 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +24 THE WITNESS: I would be guessing, so... + +25 + +139 + +![](_page_64_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE ouww, , n, + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR.IIIIIII: + +2 3 Q. What does the company NES, LLC, do to your knowledge? + +4 A. I have no idea. + +5 6 Q. How does that company generate profit, if you know? + +7 A. I have no idea. + +8 9 10 Q. but you have absolutely no clue what they do to generate money? That's the company that pays your paycheck, + +11 A. No, sir. + +12 Q. If anything? + +13 A. Correct. + +14 15 Q. Have you ever heard that that company generates money through sex trafficking of young girls? + +16 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +17 THE WITNESS: Absolutely not. + +18 BY MR. : + +19 20 21 22 Q. Never, okay. Have you ever heard that Jeffrey Epstein has a sexual preference for underage girls? Other than what you've read in the newspaper, have you heard that from any other individuals before? + +23 A. No. + +24 25 Q. Ever heard that he has had sex or sexual relationships with many minor girls, some as young as 12 + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +140 + +![](_page_65_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE . Al TiRdet ailloCmP... + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 years old? + +2 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +3 THE WITNESS: No. + +4 BY MR.S + +5 Q. Never? + +6 A. Never. + +7 8 9 Q. Have you ever seen any photographs in any of his homes depicting young-looking girls engaging in sex acts? + +10 A. No. + +11 12 Q. Or reading directly from the complaint, "engaged in lewd acts"? + +13 A. No, absolutely not. + +14 15 Q. Have you looked around the walls of his various homes when you're in there picking up luggage? + +16 17 18 A. I mean, not any more than I walked in here and not looking at the walls over there, I couldn't tell you what those are; so nothing specific. + +19 20 Q. Sometimes we're talking about a50,000 square foot house? + +21 A. Exactly. + +22 Q. In Manhattan? + +23 A. It's pretty big. + +24 25 Q. Okay. Have you ever looked at any of his computers for any reason? + +141 + +![](_page_66_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQVicl3E + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. No. + +2 Q. I know that you helped set up some of the + +3 A. Computers are not my expertise. + +4 5 6 Q. All right. Have you ever been told that Mr. Epstein committed sex acts against underage girls on aliteral daily basis, that's what he does? + +7 A. I've never been told that. + +B 9 Q. Have you ever read the complaints against him that indicate that's what he does on adaily basis? + +10 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +11 THE WITNESS: No. + +12 BY MR. + +13 14 15 Q. So in your mind, you never believed that you were transporting around somebody whose sole goal in life is to get -- have sex with little girls? + +16 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +17 THE WITNESS: i never believed that, no. + +18 BY MR. + +19 20 21 22 Q. Okay. Have you ever been told that he conspired with others, including assistants and/or his drivers and/or pilots and his friend Ghislaine Maxwell, to further these sex acts and to avoid police detection? + +23 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +24 BY MR. : + +25 Q. Have you ever -- anybody ever questioned you + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +142 + +![](_page_67_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +143 + +3 MR. REINHART: Hold on. The question is have you ever been told that fact that he just read to you? + +5 BY MR. + +6 Q. Right. + +8 9 10 Q. Has anybody ever questioned you about your possible involvement with helping to facilitate Mr. Epstein have sex with underage girls? + +11 A. No. + +12 13 14 Q. When you were questioned by either the police or the -- whoever the investigative resource that was being used at the time? + +15 A. Right. + +16 17 Q. Do you remember who that person was that was questioning you? + +18 A. No, I don't remember. + +19 20 Q. I know you don't know the location where it was, but do you remember who they were affiliated with? + +21 A. No. + +22 Q. Was it only one time? + +23 A. Yes. + +24 25 Q. Did you also have to testify before a grand jury proceeding? + +![](_page_68_Picture_20.jpeg) + +about that? + +A. I have never been told that fact. + +ESQUIRE nm" .. + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +1 A. No, I did not. + +2 3 Q. Have you ever known Mr. Epstein to get a massage while on an airplane? + +4 5 6 PHONE ATTORNEY: This is everybody in Boone, Charles and the witness is here and the court reporter and the videographer. + +7 8 MR. : Fantastic, but I think that you may have the wrong room. + +9 PHONE ATTORNEY: I was told to ask for 856. + +10 11 MR. : Let's go off the record. (Off the record discussion.) + +12 BY MR. • + +13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Q. All right. In the complaint, I'm going to tell you what it alleges and I'm going to ask if this helps to refresh your recollection about any of Jeffrey Epstein's activities. The defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, transported the plaintiff to another state in order to engage in sex acts with her. And this occurred when she was merely 15 years old. + +20 21 Do you remember transporting somebody that looked like they were 15 years old on your airplane? + +22 A. No, sir. + +23 24 25 Q. You never remember taking a 15-year-old, or somebody that looks around that approximate age, on your airplane? + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +144 + +![](_page_69_Picture_15.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +145 + +6 8 9 10 11 Q. Well, I know that you've indicated earlier in the deposition that you remember some girls under the age of 18 on the airplane. And so let me ask, before I get back into this, whether all those individuals you were talking about were accompanied by a parent or some of those people were on the airplane for some other purpose, modeling, or you don't know why they were there? I'm going to let you elaborate on who these people are that you believe may have been under the age of 18 and why you think they were on the airplane? + +12 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +13 14 15 16 17 18 19 THE WITNESS: We've had younger people on the airplane that have been, you know, with their family members, like you said. I don't remember transporting anybody that was of questionable age. I'm not -- I'd only be guessing at somebody's age if I didn't ID them at the foot of the airplane. So I can't guess to their age. + +20 BY MR. : + +21 22 23 24 Q. All right. "Mr. Epstein used his private jet to transport the minor plaintiff to Manhattan where he provided her spending money and accommodations with him at his mansion." + +25 Do you have any idea who that might be + +A. Can you be more specific? + +![](_page_70_Picture_11.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 referring to? + +2 + +3 + +4 BY MR. MM. + +5 6 7 Q. And you don't remember being a pilot of an airplane where he was transporting a 15-year-old to Manhattan from Miami or Palm Beach? + +8 9 A. No. I'd be guessing at somebody's age and I can't guess. + +10 11 12 13 Q. "Defendant transported plaintiff in his private jet to locations that included Palm Beach, New York City, Santa Fe, Los Angeles, San Francisco, St. Louis." + +14 15 Do you remember ever piloting his airplane to those destinations that I just mentioned? + +16 MR. REINHART: Can we break them down? + +17 Objection; compound. + +18 MR. : Okay. + +19 BY MR. + +20 21 Q. Beach? Have you ever flown his airplane to Palm + +22 A. Yes, sir. + +23 24 Q. Okay. Have you ever flown it to New York City? + +25 A. Yes. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +146 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: No, sir. + +![](_page_71_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE "..."..." + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. To Santa Fe? + +2 A. Yes. + +3 Q. To Los Angeles? + +4 A. Yes. + +5 Q. To San Francisco? + +6 A. Yes. + +7 Q. To St. Louis? + +8 A. Yes. + +9 10 11 Q. All right. Continuing to international destinations, including Europe, have you ever flown it to Europe? + +12 A. Yes. + +13 Q. The Caribbean? + +14 A. Yes. + +15 Q. And Africa? + +16 A. Yes. + +17 18 19 20 Q. On those flights to those various places, is it your -- to the best of your knowledge, you were unaware of Jeffrey Epstein engaging in sex with underage girls on his airplane? + +21 + +22 23 THE WITNESS: I have no knowledge of any of that. + +24 BY MR. + +25 Q. "He provided accommodations with him in order + +147 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +ESQUIRE + +![](_page_72_Picture_23.jpeg) + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquIresolutions.com + +1 2 3 to have her available to him at all times whenever he wanted, including while transporting the minor plaintiff on his private jet." + +4 That's something that you had no knowledge of? + +5 A. (Witness shakes head.) + +6 Q. You have to a yes or no. + +7 A. I'm sorry, no. + +8 9 10 11 12 Q. "Each time they would travel to one of these destinations, the same pattern of sexual abuse would occur, often with a vast array of aspiring models, actresses, celebrities, and/or other females, including minors from all over the world." + +13 14 Again, that's something you have no personal knowledge of? + +15 A. No. + +16 17 18 19 20 Q. Has anybody ever indicated that if you did have personal knowledge of some of these things, then you could also have been implicated in some form of a crime? Has any law enforcement or anybody ever indicated that to you? + +21 A. No. + +22 23 Q. Okay. Is that something you've ever worried about? + +24 A. No. + +25 Q. All right. "Upon information and belief, + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +148 + +![](_page_73_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE "mm""...... + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +10 11 A. I'd have to look at the flight logs, but I personally don't remember flying into Turkey. + +12 13 14 Q. And would the flight logs coming into the United States from Turkey indicate the names of the people on the plane? + +15 A. They might. + +16 17 Q. Okay. Where would I get those particular flight logs that would have that information? + +18 A. Depended upon what year you're talking. + +19 20 Q. We're talking in this particular complaint between 1998 and 2002. + +21 22 A. I'm not -- I don't possess those passenger manifests. + +23 Q. Do you know who would possess those? + +24 A. That would be I guess + +25 MR. REINHART: Do you know who has them today? + +149 + +defendant transported minor girls from Turkey." Did you ever leave in one of his airplanes out of Turkey? + +A. I'd have to look at the records. I don't recall Turkey. + +Q. Do you ever remember taking any minor girls out of Turkey? + +A. No, I don't remember. + +Q. What records would you have to look at to see if you took people out or left out of Turkey? + +ESQUIRE umeav + +![](_page_74_Picture_19.jpeg) + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresol utions. corn + +1 2 THE WITNESS: I do not know who has them today. + +3 BY MR. + +4 Q. Who did you give them to? + +5 6 7 A. Actually, I didn't give them to anybody. Dave Rogers was in possession of those logs. So I don't know where they are right now. + +8 9 10 11 12 Q. You're still thinking that the best evidence of that, any flight that may have left out of Turkey, would be in the flight logs that's marked as Composite Exhibit 1, or are we talking about the manifests that we've been referring to? + +13 14 A. I don't know how accurate that log book is or even how accurate the passenger manifest is. + +15 16 17 Q. Okay. So there may be no actual documentation indicating a flight leaving out of Turkey when, in fact, aflight may have left out of Turkey? + +18 A. Correct. + +19 20 21 Q. Okay. The Czech Republic is the next place listed. Is that aplace you've flown to or from in a Jeffrey Epstein airplane? + +22 A. More specific, could you name the city? + +23 24 25 Q. I can't name the city, at least the complaint doesn't name the city. But I've been to the Czech Republic before. Anywhere within that country, have you + +![](_page_75_Picture_15.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +150 + +ESQUIRE ".\_.th.Q"" + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/EFTA02747776.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/EFTA02747776.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..82ad3b2f9eced54906cc95950bcd8dec9eda142d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/EFTA02747776.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,3017 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 76, + "chars": 78606, + "elapsed_seconds": 28.42, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_2_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_3_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_4_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_6_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_7_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_8_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_9_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_10_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_11_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_12_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_13_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_14_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_15_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_16_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_17_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_18_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_19_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_20_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_21_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_22_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_23_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_24_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_25_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_26_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_27_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_28_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_29_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_30_Picture_25.jpeg", + "_page_31_Picture_25.jpeg", + "_page_32_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_33_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_34_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_35_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_36_Picture_25.jpeg", + "_page_37_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_38_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_39_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_40_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_41_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_42_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_43_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_44_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_45_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_46_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_47_Picture_13.jpeg", + "_page_48_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_49_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_50_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_51_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_52_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_53_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_54_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_55_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_56_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_57_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_58_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_59_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_60_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_61_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_62_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_63_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_64_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_65_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_66_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_67_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_68_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_69_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_70_Picture_11.jpeg", + "_page_71_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_72_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_73_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_74_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_75_Picture_15.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A-2", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 149.94, + 261.43792724609375 + ], + [ + 475.4967346191406, + 261.43792724609375 + ], + [ + 475.4967346191406, + 325.37054443359375 + ], + [ + 149.94, + 325.37054443359375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 301 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 243 + ], + [ + "Line", + 61 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 291 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 294 + ], + [ + "Line", + 61 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 295 + ], + [ + "Line", + 60 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 319 + ], + [ + "Line", + 61 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 125 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 277 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 125 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 270 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 124 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 129 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 230 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 283 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 267 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 287 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 127 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 331 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 294 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 268 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 307 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 309 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 284 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 304 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 296 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 113 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 286 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 311 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 280 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 266 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 293 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 300 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 292 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 276 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 268 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 243 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 123 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 38, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 123 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 39, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 286 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 40, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 327 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 41, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 277 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 42, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 294 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 43, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 284 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 44, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 279 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 45, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 299 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 46, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 298 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 47, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 313 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 41 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 48, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 308 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 49, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 299 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 50, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 296 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 51, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 276 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 52, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 127 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 53, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 275 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 54, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 284 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 55, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 263 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 56, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 281 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 57, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 325 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 58, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 112 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 59, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 127 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 60, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 275 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 61, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 125 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 62, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 280 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 63, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 282 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 64, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 289 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 65, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 275 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 66, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 258 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 67, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 292 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 68, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 118 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 69, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 301 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 70, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 325 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 71, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 256 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 72, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 125 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 73, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 284 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 74, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 110 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 75, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 320 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747776" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..be1ad80367e7968dbec9b947cf835714f7482306 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1e8e29d9b2df4e1964096b696335f33f433193f133bfc84e62319e6a380c0300 +size 1017 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_10_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_10_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..487e453d1a5c02666baf68f8f92c62b7d3438dc2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_10_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f4a84d2ad03a58273919832fe1de8e764e00d9d9b24f4bc290aa52c564a40b4b +size 2369 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_11_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_11_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b80c2800c5d050c7bbb0d29cef4eab242930867b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_11_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:04ff3de5d7b3161c8e413767a3209559df2dde766404618843fd07dcf1a936dc +size 5692 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_12_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_12_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..84e5ea339ab3fc7384827af8715303386a631027 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_12_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4c116a477f6041c25c575caf2e4277c960f7574cbafca89950b6fb7a1025590c +size 2447 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_13_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_13_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b5dae77f1bbdf43100054f8ce2a8bb16180f62f0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_13_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:75d3b2f43eb74ca41aed788fd22c75ef1ec1a8fa0cfa24f44efe6cd926621bbf +size 2360 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_14_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_14_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5e924169f40cd4786ec89c9a4bb130d0efbda860 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_14_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:5e03222e00cad47a96bee51733c8bfdca6d3285ade5966089e8e780b703ccaed +size 2409 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_15_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_15_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c1bbd7ad2f5250c42758fcfef7ea2e68a59f8aa8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_15_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e785b95703662d31ec3b2f219df16b43f9f06e823a977abcee050fbbb5c271ec +size 2360 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_16_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_16_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fd32afdcbe5b5e2a426bb6b037e09d1003a1578d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_16_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:969a2fc31c86c264527e0295ed545cca8d7e8a64ea03541f786f3cdd2398714a +size 2438 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_17_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_17_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3df4d715ecf78b230ce8922b05894d1374ae9078 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_17_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f2afc41d03393b359cfdce6a68ea0bf671d738129a2c134362b372bfc845a81a +size 2458 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_18_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_18_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9205eabfddb117e7ab94ca4dac94c0f2e12684b6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_18_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f059e8a8cd6996a330edf5eb0034a0635fbb6f5f52971c9b9d79770685ac13e2 +size 2508 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_19_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_19_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..12d27295d990e76f72165f29ade14f56a4150046 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_19_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7a5868313adfdf04da6da833e55624ca1dcfc94888d479c58531df6fbc3d43b6 +size 2450 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e1baed16b72467288b6f27d94120223f321c1fa3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:05d1e6f09c54a3dcbd6b95c83ea8f868cd0b296f635d6534621aabdb068141a0 +size 2511 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_20_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_20_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3cd4dbff9f149b478dd73cbd295df7cc29b34294 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_20_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f52f6afe5daf1672cea7b738855f241fa968b42599265086a8b021a4c764d0c9 +size 2420 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_21_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_21_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..da3ea429b38a10d337e0ca9b70f344a700e1fb6f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_21_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1edcafb5b7149f9ec7b31863e6428ca0aedf0346438a7c7f540ba690df59af20 +size 2397 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_22_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_22_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7e1b8c518a5029e0413b07c61607ede5ba57e6b7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_22_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:36c559307b28a4bbe2cfc414addda02ebfd71b28118130d657d0049d3ccfb21d +size 2434 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_23_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_23_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f6f04420953662883fb1ba49577e0d878825ea51 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_23_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1631dd1699a324c8d47d9fc73c0ae18eb687eaf26479491412bf6d55fa07a9c4 +size 2440 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_24_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_24_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ed34630306025551685cf6a7a7a66ca4fb0d110c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_24_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c34d6a3575e161dbe274a8a951e2a7d1e74401c7cefeb424c76ea2a59d9110fc +size 2436 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_25_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_25_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c1b66dc20bf7f36e7a246069b6bd2935b86b89aa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_25_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:fe6df3d51ad782dc028f6d6fffb8dfbf18875d90f36254257103dea32ed2543d +size 2622 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_26_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_26_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..32baa90500a61d7b76afc9f6431e422ad98054f5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_26_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:40e022e80cf98feefd4df2d48d4849f9952b6e7f791772caabd6d6a60c1f6920 +size 2462 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_27_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_27_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8425b0c91f34921e2801089606e1db0bc2bc31c9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_27_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:23548ef611d60b390df0a82ad6824db199c39056d9b9b09f164b0c2f01e10481 +size 2466 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_28_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_28_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a374062fa5eae43a3f93d9b784103af97f1d56e3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_28_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:679379258b854be943ce66f6886bdde0da124f667da0416373426e4ca6ca55e0 +size 2415 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_29_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_29_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..efec33002d3fd475eca1d9605317af1b279694df --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_29_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c39949a03739ee81fe40a187829294a7d3c0331fa5f5288eceb200af1ba03f73 +size 2438 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_2_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_2_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..deaee1f4f2b69581a2c9898e9c25ab290b7e6528 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_2_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f1f80b272f9ce25d3af0edb4a1bb6a04bbe0cbd58c0221802a26ce69a720be7a +size 2431 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_30_Picture_25.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_30_Picture_25.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..55142e8144756bc2341f22fc06f721c2866cf466 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_30_Picture_25.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2f069d3dc6495689b5e82e5d011ceb58d0784d4c4a446211b149a6b82a8a8299 +size 2408 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_31_Picture_25.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_31_Picture_25.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..19513edf27d9f5fa12f70baf6db7dbbcbb700fda --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_31_Picture_25.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6df2a19766e4450f5f0b397669ba3970b41c1c80566a6c8c8f3a52ecadcaeca2 +size 2441 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_32_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_32_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..78c1b3815be7a3fa896a9d46705889a509dbc91c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_32_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f9dad8a0add388fd92e9af2e6fb38b7f6af43418e4e20f61d0cdad7e0e08eae7 +size 2424 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_33_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_33_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..829c65dac2e5ad062729bab9dc42fe17ae963acd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_33_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f4c4f387b9126a5128ae75a54052e62809356116043e56f2293fe924524aab1b +size 2349 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_34_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_34_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e161f0094a6a99e639149f031e9301a288dce53b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_34_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f2d913d338488cb5dd11837de6700ba4e3ef4af1061d1767a522130825a4d141 +size 2416 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_35_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_35_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fdd516870457345ab99fb4bda93a1dd7477a2fb4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_35_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4a501ea360f930a6258b913773851c316c06ba5d4576189a3da649a7e156920c +size 2312 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_36_Picture_25.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_36_Picture_25.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2bc9c82fd5d10ec0a14098167fcb578437a6f1ec --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_36_Picture_25.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4e20b870611cbf176d19abe5c6a13f924fedcd510f25719001545096ccf8cd20 +size 2440 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_37_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_37_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..80a866e10c0fdea7d7e30a5f6d623b482d31efa2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_37_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:75dc2a70f401c4a0dfb53688d06465d77d526a10121b87681a3fb5e2b7363a5a +size 2333 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_38_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_38_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5c452cf7c67a0f9a256051d1ba32b50be2508406 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_38_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c6924bf12997fde2626745526e5dd55714b58cb996958581d8f6ab23c6624bc9 +size 2379 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_39_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_39_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d5a69b8ba8a5e1bf795f4e2668157d3ac7075c6a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_39_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8d3b31eecd6c460efbb9235b0f83932a9c21496a941346c6c5bc0210d1a850c4 +size 2401 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_3_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_3_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ad386c731bfc4bc0cf35d317cc298929f5c1389a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_3_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d86393483ef6250e6715ed36b9e902d7f60c8d651c4ddf498c9d2ae8cfca210d +size 2439 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_40_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_40_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..534bdd1a08b3539c0c8bd157fd9cf303a37501a1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_40_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e247d84e7f8ff1ad792b0221760f8bb03f26f4909e5cff2ca371408ab7479555 +size 2473 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_41_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_41_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..505c88df29f6357ef0fccbd21ec132ee9e50399e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_41_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a437255f6e2eeea59dca630acd246f5633dc780b82e748fd99dd22c3f51bd950 +size 2460 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_42_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_42_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..31f4e8ca776e9033b1faa7248705128dda248ad1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_42_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:929d4a49a6578796e002507d32968576b98954ece19f077330077a7d48dec03b +size 2502 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_43_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_43_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..27985c510f807b6341bf18418572f3c988890c19 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_43_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c95285cb57ca8c4693406c8ebb32fd3825d09107f0ff1891094d027ae023feef +size 2459 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_44_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_44_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..97001e2ac632ba8a0963f540b9d89592a6f827c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_44_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:bc2545dfc519dc27e34024535684bf3081cf182246a67241981c37231ea4834e +size 2373 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_45_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_45_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8b2dda9b118c4c31053a598d90d31680a2a8cc38 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_45_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ba3706d3f38b66727a7538960aeaf2a0c6b832759a19a495ac9406bc9a2625c4 +size 2390 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_46_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_46_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4b3defa1c85fe11e750b6f7bbdba58bace1a515d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_46_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b23b18f5ec7481870aa281a6095f0d3e19be0160eabe0f934d750bf8c3e910a2 +size 2424 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_47_Picture_13.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_47_Picture_13.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..05396a89f4672e9e2cdf5e67b3083dffc2ce0b04 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_47_Picture_13.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ef226cdba3b05e456f0055138317de7d8074437d76baabc23e3bacbd413d5831 +size 2424 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_48_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_48_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b1d32bca9f0156354bdfc89e321ffa45e7820919 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_48_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:27e6fc44371f9511cf44987b8592f43d2d8d372a0def7f55b23fd390334e126e +size 2446 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_49_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_49_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8dba98bf5c5bfad0174aabfc7c0f1977d96a8395 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_49_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:489aae7fadb9e2b11dfbf8efbfacf0197a97b5ab1980f17c91be9b472b7569cc +size 2392 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_4_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_4_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fcb0e0bea20625ede6d807a94e6dbbfe9510ce28 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_4_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:563f2fede7474b3e9068d0ffdebc7026ca9926fc827ad4ec977029c5e9357bab +size 2398 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_50_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_50_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d6c1decbae64f68cad900cef3a0671e8a7c53a08 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_50_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f4be32da87a4ad3b1b9e20b12169ac6ab8862827445f5d4d6db93f96f5d258cc +size 2386 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_51_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_51_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..97468f560fe417a5be1d2f50620a7e14c7b308c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_51_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:debbc30fb5e4fc748e98a27819ef12a931514e18e9626369c0f35588f027c472 +size 2465 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_52_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_52_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6bd7575914e49c74db7842e4ad6d9ca8b6a63797 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_52_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b15e85ba80896d5f96393186f993044a29ee4beda5fa370130d40c039b0d0a26 +size 2530 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_53_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_53_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..87b5c13db86675fc5f14ba1fe06d93bd0b7c913d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_53_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:5acaf5e0c2dafda7b8bf4c033641e3cc6bd449c50a2fc3d8473bdfb94b33e40f +size 2331 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_54_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_54_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..90a6929528345093883205f19424b0e01f713e02 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_54_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3b7fe8b7d5d876cff11b07e7ff6b367bc660c498708b08223f2cba24fa9abc08 +size 2466 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_55_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_55_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..586b7380e9606d9f0ad27b5f4190de6cc00ced66 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_55_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:46618493987e6b5b5bc7c57152ebbe62cca04654a8c1b0bb0b4b3957020c62b3 +size 2414 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_56_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_56_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b2425517165995dcc4c3a80f9585814b65918bd5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_56_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:72c6c14ed5d0e1146e4548fd1d8e6d5bf719e56426707971b7172fb9974442b0 +size 2438 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_57_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_57_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9e10f90a607e25b3da83f5135e4da93ce0281b74 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_57_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ce211f7e972c1968fd07afd9080d65ceb544151646b569406c72573757625812 +size 2345 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_58_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_58_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b8741aae120e767768a7a086b392439b499d830c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_58_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c67dae6c36b2378177f9087b557d67fba961f384615a74c266d7513be73902be +size 2465 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_59_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_59_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a288f0b50c17a75f1887e566f3ad9b400d25c1db --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_59_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ed5a89f415f79c1fdb3fb5b10bd29d9329fa6c846d5a55b136c2ca28a507e44c +size 2398 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_5_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_5_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c76e1347b26f5db6fc30e14b1bd36cc09b8827a6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_5_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c2950b0795cf190d81437c638a120ad31f7fdd5b81e44c90b2f6e14f70cf7b27 +size 2453 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_60_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_60_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..32d70ff65ee3ece18070ee9636da72e9eb149980 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_60_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1cda03b76aa3334fb3cc9153b4b150360e8dc1a917f4086e54fc4bcb5b51fb8d +size 2485 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_61_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_61_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..19a6bc61451fd9cccc58013465aa7aa9727b5d70 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_61_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2c3c5a19b3e24b1d790fe8849c1e2d67120160a4db6d5683dbbd1d83401d783a +size 2426 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_62_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_62_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..be1a8d519c40a14956d79522f74e3bbd3f25dd5a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_62_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ed4fab0a3dec349bdcfd44e58ec6de421ce4c422d9b5e9abbf83de3a73039588 +size 2362 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_63_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_63_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cea91ba335c4a983941a143c6836247f8988a001 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_63_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a4700e844c85a021c1762e2f8c7ee489a500f0fd528f1253330d4ab8f5d5f418 +size 2383 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_64_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_64_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c0491d2de5920fe92471447d8f4ff13075171fd9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_64_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0c9d3f9db4d2b73b73b4017f101db09725300f4af25777133edaad00cecd06d2 +size 2403 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_65_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_65_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..789508a5d36124b68d50042e5bcb477ed35815eb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_65_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:217cbf0f847a7a53ead96ce0399aad2787aa2bebee1385a6ad7d9366a7b6553c +size 2358 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_66_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_66_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fde2b12004aa5801fb4b277da441240c2f973b5f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_66_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3a92ee4a17798845a29803c26cd2728575eccf7f86e7e214df158055a25c016b +size 2446 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_67_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_67_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..769f8d719bf30a691d8dbc14e5fd82ba188385cf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_67_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:744b8955f652c2ece5040548b4b50c608426a3176e9f0956713040e9a3d3f452 +size 2479 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_68_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_68_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c0e11e8248c4630cdd637a47edb8acbc46a202d2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_68_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:97d369204a32317fb039948e36660e17763aab241fc00e89e55dc753f6b134ba +size 2359 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_69_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_69_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b05d7f66e6f09d78bfc19397a5585007b6f788eb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_69_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:9e2059e6d820cc78586ce3622b39e37dba2bcbad5f1b6a240795eb697fcf79aa +size 2374 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_6_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_6_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..507157d3611f3907ca2f932c37f7c7725e1c7881 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_6_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c027fb0186d651bb75cf6dfead9db9620cda7e5cd9743113b0a96bb4430e223f +size 2426 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_70_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_70_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dce800f98c66c463c5989f8836b2159000c94ea0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_70_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0fcefd6eeec3432e0745e62f648cdc016996f2cdd89fc9393ea1a69d94630f82 +size 2451 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_71_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_71_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..84b390c90ecd9b5c39183923c7727d84dc35df19 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_71_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2b2109f06805c3eab9f52a9035232f82fcb316922e62b92e241ec3a6cb54426c +size 2315 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_72_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_72_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8f255f46c8ace790a8d074a02c8388031e7e0eff --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_72_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:237f8e0231f26c24bf25100f4a9b91a78c5eb293104c00f854c6e23cd4b5d02f +size 2404 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_73_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_73_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9a0a23b4d0e5154245409e5c326a90e0cb81d86e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_73_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c57505ef9b67d75b928543b3fa23f3282de7af62df98720b9f682f957cf5f9dd +size 2394 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_74_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_74_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bbc969a0d0b85943704527048bd273f7bf2c824c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_74_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:77d4acb0e01d29fa8d5daf5f8116fe8192cec5e1359e3ef9f8fecef049dcfcd2 +size 2467 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_75_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_75_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d5dfb56bfa08b614ed5c1b29e3a445a19999be3f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_75_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:bdbc22d06dc219e4b0fe25152372bc65d5646459f891534b3956d20ae3f3ab98 +size 2430 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_7_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_7_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aa14b670e5941090aa6da61e151a7c93e76dddf4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_7_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d4ba3c7fc40684ae9edffb27fd4c17995a9a98c13bdce538c4f9c022b12eb78b +size 2399 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_8_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_8_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c5d4154085bf57239e33fd2a34fee2320d5cf93a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_8_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c26f360d2e3d2029f8528397c66a493220548bf22fdfa81878429c12e42b903f +size 2432 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_9_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_9_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5c7559186b30ac59b3f61ada8c7a95d163845f44 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747776/_page_9_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:42a1983d34e2a27013dd3f9cea054e11c4e29fe285e11dcc8555e55c1104eb35 +size 2450 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747852/EFTA02747852.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747852/EFTA02747852.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f87d2bf8dd56964c85e453c189cf3bd49df0a84a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747852/EFTA02747852.md @@ -0,0 +1,115 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROVIDE RECENTLY-OBTAINED DEPOSITION TESTIMONY AND AFFIDAVIT DEMONSTRATING FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS BY EPSTEIN IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN AND INCORPORATED SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe, hereby moves for leave to provide to the Court the recentlyobtained deposition testimony of Larry Visoski (Exhibit A) and related affidavit of forensic accountant Ronald E. Wise (Exhibit B) in support of her pending Motion for Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein [DE 165]. These materials demonstrate that Epstein is engaging in fraudulent transfers, by hiding assets in the name of Visoski (his personal pilot). Because these materials are highly relevant to Jane Doe's pending motion, the Court should grant Jane Doe leave to provide them to the Court and should consider them when ruling on Jane Doe's Motion. + +### FACTUAL BACKGROUND + +1. On June 19, 2009, Jane Doe filed a Motion for (among other things) Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of the Property of Epstein and to post a \$15 million bond to secure a potential judgment [DE 165 in case no. 9:08-CV-80119-KAM]. The motion argued that a receiver was appropriate in view of Jane Doe's evidence that Epstein was fraudulently transfers assets to defeat any judgment that she might obtain, including, in particular, Epstein's decision to invoke Fifth Amendment privilege rather than answer questions about fraudulent transfers. + +2. On July 13, 2009, Epstein filed his Response to the Motion [DE 198]. Epstein's main argument was that Jane Doe lacked sufficient proof of his fraudulent transfers and, without proof, could not rely on an adverse inference from his invocation. See [DE 198 at p. 10] ("As belabored throughout this memorandum, Jane Doe cites no independent evidence that Epstein is fraudulently transferring assets."). + +3. On July 20, 2009, Jane Doe filed a motion seeking leave to file supplemental information in support of her claims of Epstein's financial sophistication [DE 213]. (On August 5, 2009, Epstein objected to this supplemental information, primarily on grounds that the information was not newly-discovered [DE 244]). + +4. Meanwhile, on July 23, 2009, Jane Doe filed her reply to Epstein's response to her motion [DE 217]. Jane Doe explained that Epstein had failed to contest any of her allegations that he was fraudulently transferring assets and that, in any event, she had sufficient circumstantial evidence of Epstein's fraud to justify appointment of a receiver with control of Epstein's assets. + +5. On October 15, 2009, Jane Doe's counsel took the deposition of Larry Visoski, Epstein's personal pilot. See Ex. A to this Motion. In the deposition, Visoski admitted many facts relevant to the fraudulent transfer issue, including: + +- Visoski has been Jeffrey Epstein's personal pilot since 1991 and has flown Epstein's Boeing 727 and other aircraft around the world (Ex. A, Visoski Depo. at + - p. 20, 45); +- Visoski transported Epstein and girls under the age of 18 on the plane (id. at pp. 94-99); +- Visoski was unaware of the fact that a F-150 Truck, which he had purchased for Jeffrey Epstein, was titled in his name (Ex. A, Visoski Depo. at p. 202); +- Within the last year, Jeffrey Epstein purchased a \$68,000 Land Rover and registered it in Visoski's name (id. at 197, 207); +- Jeffrey Epstein also purchased a Mercedes-Benz 2005 by wiring funds to Visoski and then placing the car in Visoski's name (id. at 199); +- Jeffrey Epstein also bought a Jaguar X-Type 2005 so that he (Epstein) would have another car around Palm Beach available for his friends to use and then placed the car in Visoski's name (id. at 200); +- Visoski very recently placed an advertisement in his name to sell Jeffrey Epstein's Ferrari for \$159,000 (id. at 208); and +- Visoski's curiosity was "piqued" by all these registrations but he never asked Epstein any questions about them (id. at 201). + +6. Ronald Wise is an experienced forensic accountant recently retained by Jane Doe. He has recently reviewed public records related to the vehicle transfers discussed by Visoski. The cars in question are not titled in Epstein's name. Based on his training and experience and his review of the records, Mr. Wise has concluded that these asset transfers are fraudulent, in that they were made without receiving anything + +in return for value and that they appear to be done to conceal the identity of ownership. See Exhibit B to this Motion. + +#### LEGAL MEMORANDUM + +7. Jane Doe should be granted leave to file the Visoski deposition and Wise affidavit in support of her motion for appointment of a receiver. Both relate to very recently-discovered information and could not have been filed earlier. Both are also highly relevant to the pending motion, as they provide concrete evidence of a pattern of fraudulent asset transfers by Epstein designed to keep Jane Doe from satisfying any judgment that she might obtain against Epstein. + +8. Epstein will not be prejudiced by the Court reviewing this information. Jane Doe has no objection to Epstein filing any substantive response to the materials he might like to make as part of his response to this motion. (Jane Doe would then file a reply to any response) Epstein is also free to seek leave to supplement his previously-filed Memorandum of Law in Opposition to the Injunction Motion [DE 198]; Jane Doe has no objection to Epstein supplementing his response with additional legal arguments, provided that the response is filed within the Court's ordinary timelines and does not delay action on her motion for appointment of a receiver. + +9. In addition, Epstein will also not be prejudiced by the Court considering these materials as he has already been given the opportunity to explain whether he was making fraudulent asset transfers. Rather than discuss these transfers, however, Epstein asserted that he would incriminate himself if he answered such questions. For example, Epstein was asked the following requests for admissions: + +- Since being incarcerated you have, directly or indirectly (through the services or assistance of other persons), conveyed money or assets in an attempt to insulate or protect your money or assets from being captured in any civil lawsuits filed against you. Requests For Admissions #6. +- You are moving significant financial assets overseas, outside of the direct territorial reach of the U.S. and Florida Courts. RFA's #21. +- You are making asset transfers with the intent to defeat any judgment that might be entered against you in this or similar cases. RFA's #22. + +See [DE165 at 9]. Epstein refused to answer each of these requests on Fifth Amendment grounds. Having been given a full opportunity to provide any explanation he might like about his asset transfers — and having stonewalled Jane Doe through his Fifth Amendment invocations - Epstein can hardly complain now that Jane Doe has begun to uncover the specifics of his fraud and is submitting that evidence to this Court. + +## CERTIFICATE OF GOOD FAITH CONFERENCE + +Counsel for Epstein has been contacted and is unwilling to agree to this motion. + +### CONCLUSION + +For all these reasons, the Court should grant Jane Doe leave to supplement the support for the facts underlying her Motion for Appointment of a Receiver [DE 165] with the Visoski deposition and Wise affidavit, exhibits A and B to this motion. + +DATED October 30, 2009 + +Respectfully Submitted, + +/s/ J. J. + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 Facsimile (954) 527-8663 + +Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 30, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> /s/ J. + +# SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court - Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jeoldberner@aqwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrociarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsbero@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747852/EFTA02747852.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747852/EFTA02747852.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d269cece65e683ab7d8edf12c0d9f3da9c905589 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747852/EFTA02747852.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,487 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747852.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 9328, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.22, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROVIDE RECENTLY-\nOBTAINED DEPOSITION TESTIMONY AND AFFIDAVIT DEMONSTRATING \nFRAUDULENT TRANSFERS BY EPSTEIN IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR \nAPPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN \nAND INCORPORATED SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 73.44, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 539.172, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 539.172, + 471.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 73.44, + 471.91998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "FACTUAL BACKGROUND", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 229.5, + 105.30000000000001 + ], + [ + 383.64556884765625, + 105.30000000000001 + ], + [ + 383.64556884765625, + 120.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 120.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "LEGAL MEMORANDUM", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 236.232, + 161.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 377.0978088378906, + 161.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 377.0978088378906, + 175.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 236.232, + 175.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF GOOD FAITH CONFERENCE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 170.74800000000002, + 396.90000000000003 + ], + [ + 442.1212463378906, + 396.90000000000003 + ], + [ + 442.1212463378906, + 412.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 170.74800000000002, + 412.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 452.79 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 452.79 + ], + [ + 349.7690734863281, + 467.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 467.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 298.08 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 313.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 313.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 118.25999999999999 + ], + [ + 350.14093017578125, + 118.25999999999999 + ], + [ + 350.14093017578125, + 134.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 134.30352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747852" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/EFTA02747859.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/EFTA02747859.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ac2275f0b780a748f932112ab370196169e7509b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/EFTA02747859.md @@ -0,0 +1,2273 @@ +PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROVIDE RECENTLY-OBTAINED DEPOSITION TESTIMONY AND AFFIDAVIT DEMONSTRATING FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS BY EPSTEIN IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN AND INCORPORATED SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-hfARRA + +![](_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg) + +## EXHIBIT A-2 + +(2 of 4) + +1 helicopter. + +2 3 Q. In the last two years, did you tell me the helicopter has flown? + +4 A. Yes. + +5 Q. And where to? + +6 7 8 9 10 A. I have flown the helicopter to Fort Lauderdale on several occasions for maintenance. I've flown it to Miami. And I try to fly the helicopter at least every two weeks just either by myself to run it up to its it's important that it keeps moving. + +11 12 Q. Other than maintenance-type flights, have you flown the helicopter in the last couple of years? + +13 A. Yes. + +14 Q. And who was on the helicopter? + +15 A. I flew to Miami with Mr. Epstein. + +16 Q. When was that? + +17 18 A. It was acouple weeks ago or a month ago, I think. + +19 Q. For what? + +20 A. Sorry? + +21 Q. For what occasion? + +22 23 A. I think he had ameeting with his attorneys in Miami. + +24 25 Q. Today is October the 15th. Is this during the month of October that you had this flight in the + +![](_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg) + +57 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 helicopter with Mr. Epstein? + +2 3 A. I'd have to look at the book to be exact for you. + +4 5 Q. Okay. But it's either the end of September or the beginning of October? + +6 A. Yeah. + +7 8 Q. How do you know that he was meeting with his attorneys? + +9 10 A. I believe that he had mentioned that he was meeting his attorneys. + +11 Q. Did he tell you why? + +12 A. No. + +13 14 Q. Why did he tell you he was meeting with his attorneys? Did you ask him? + +15 A. No. + +16 17 Q. Okay. That's just something that he said to you in conversation? + +18 A. Yes, sir. + +19 20 Q. Was there anyone else on the airplane besides you and Mr. Epstein? + +21 A. Yes. + +22 Q. Who was that? + +23 A. Nadia. + +24 Q. Nadia who? + +25 A. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +58 + +![](_page_2_Picture_22.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE seAtmade/0O.O~..7 + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +59 + +Q. How long have you known + +A. I don't know, five years. A guess again, four, five years. + +Q. Do you know what her relationship is, if any, with Jeffrey Epstein? + +A. I do not know. + +Q. Do you know if she knows Jeffrey Epstein? + +A. I would assume so. They talk. I would imagine she knows him. + +Q. And how many times has she been on the airplane or the helicopter on flights at the same time as a passenger with Jeffrey Epstein? + +A. Many. I'd have to look at the logs. + +Q. Hundreds of times? + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: Sure. + +BY MR. + +Q. If you were going to, as somebody who has been Jeffrey Epstein's pilot for 18 years, tell me today who the five closest people are to Jeffrey Epstein, would Nadia be one of them? + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: I'd only be guessing and speculating. I have no idea. + +![](_page_3_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +1 BY MR. + +2 3 4 5 Q. Okay. Well, as his pilot and the person who travels with Jeffrey Epstein on the majority of his flights, who are the people who travel most frequently with Jeffrey Epstein? + +6 A. I'd have to look at the logs. + +7 MR. REINHART: Can we get a time period? + +8 BY MR. + +9 10 Q. In the last ten years, which people travel most frequently with him? + +11 12 A. I'd have to look at the flight logs to give you an accurate answer. + +13 14 Q. You can't give me one single name of somebody who you would say is a frequent flyer? + +15 A. + +16 + +17 A. Yes. + +18 Q. Anybody else? + +19 A. + +20 + +21 A. Yeah. + +22 Q. Okay. Anybody else? + +23 A. Just mainly those two. + +24 Q. How about Ghislaine Maxwell? + +25 A. Not for some time. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +60 + +![](_page_4_Picture_23.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE a AIMS. • 011l• COO pan + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. What's your understanding between the relationship of Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein? + +3 A. I don't really know. + +4 5 6 7 8 Q. All right. So when you say you're guessing that and know or are associated with Jeffrey Epstein, that guess is being made on the -- with the observation that they have been frequent flyers with Jeffrey Epstein on more than hundreds of flights on his private plane? + +10 A. Yes, that's what I'm basing it on. + +11 12 Q. And do you know where is staying these days? + +13 A. No. + +14 Q. Do you know what car she's driving these days? + +15 No, I don't. A. + +16 17 Okay. Do you know if she's living with Epstein these days? Q. Jeffrey + +18 I don't know that. A. + +19 20 Q. Do you know how Epstein? met Jeffrey + +21 A. I don't. + +22 23 24 Q. her into time? Were you on an international flight bringing the country from some other country at any + +25 A. I don't know. 61 + +![](_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toil Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 MR. REINHART: Can we clarify? You mean with + +2 Mr. Epstein or -- + +3 MR- No. + +4 BY MR. MM + +5 6 Q. Did you ever bring from some foreign country into the United States? + +7 A. I'd have to look at the log books, honestly. + +8 Q. That's not something you remember? + +9 10 11 A. No. I mean, she -- i think she's been on Europe trips with us, and I think she's returned from Europe with us, but I could not say that honestly. + +12 13 14 Q. On this recent helicopter flight with and Jeffrey Epstein, did you talk with them during that flight? + +15 A. No. + +16 17 Q. Where did the flight go from? And obviously, it landed in Miami, but where did you leave from? + +18 A. West Palm Beach. + +19 20 Q. And did Nadia and Jeffrey Epstein arrive together? + +21 22 23 24 A. You know, I don't remember. I was out at the helicopter and I think they both started walking up. So I don't know if they came separately or not. I was already at the helicopter. + +25 Q. How long is that flight from Palm Beach to + +![](_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +62 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Miami? + +2 A. Twenty-five minutes. + +3 4 Q. And did they talk to one another during that flight? + +5 A. No. + +6 7 Q. They were both completely silent during that flight? + +8 A. Yes. + +9 10 11 12 Q. Okay. Is that typical when they are on flights together, especially with the helicopter, where you're in pretty close quarters, that they would abstain from speaking to one another? + +13 MR. CRITTON: Form.. + +14 15 16 THE WITNESS: Yeah, it would be typical. It's very noisy and communicating in ahelicopter is, you know, not that comfortable. + +17 BY MR. + +18 19 20 21 Q. Over the last five or six years that you have known or been familiar with have you heard her and Jeffrey Epstein conversing with one another? + +22 23 24 25 A. I've heard them conversing, but if you ask me what they had said, I could say it -- I wouldn't even know what they had said to each other. I've seen them talking to each other. + +63 + +![](_page_7_Picture_16.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. But you don't remember a single specific conversation between Jeffrey Epstein and + +3 + +4 A. An honest answer, no. + +5 6 7 Q. Okay. And the same for ; have you seen or -- have you seen Jeffrey Epstein speak with + +8 A. I've seen him speak with her, yes. + +9 10 11 Q. Can you tell me a single specific conversation that you have overheard between Jeffrey Epstein and + +12 13 14 A. One thing that comes to mind would be make sure we have Oreo cookies on the airplane. It would be something completely nonchalant. + +15 16 17 Q. Okay. And do you know or have reason to know of any employment relationship between and Jeffrey Epstein? + +18 A. I have no knowledge of any of that. + +19 20 Q. Do you know if works for Jeffrey Epstein? + +21 A. I do not know. + +22 23 Q. Do you know if schedules massages for Jeffrey Epstein? + +24 A. I have no idea. + +25 Q. Has Jeffrey Epstein ever indicated to you that + +![](_page_8_Picture_18.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +64 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facslmlle: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 he is fascinated or infatuated or appreciates or loves or likes massages? + +3 A. I have no knowledge of that. + +4 5 6 Q. All right. How about Ghislaine Maxwell, has she ever talked to you about massage therapy or have you ever overheard her talking about that? + +7 A. No. + +8 9 Q. You certainly read the papers over the last couple of years, correct? + +10 11 12 A. Not on my top ten list. I mean, I've read a couple articles, but I'm not one to focus on that so much as some people would. + +13 14 15 Q. Okay. When the investigation about Jeffrey Epstein came about, the criminal investigation -- you're aware that's what I'm talking about, right? + +16 A. That was last year? + +17 Q. Well, it was a couple years ago. + +18 A. Right, okay. + +19 20 Q. Did you speak with Jeffrey Epstein about that investigation? + +21 A. No. + +22 23 Q. Were you told not to speak with him about that investigation? + +24 25 A. I think we knew ourselves that we weren't - it wouldn't be proper to even bring it up. + +![](_page_9_Picture_18.jpeg) + +65 + +ESQUIRE a: AlazaLtar Gabo Coasp•ty + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 861.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +1 2 3 4 Q. All right. When you read in the newspapers the allegations that Mr. Epstein was involved with numerous underage girls for sexual reasons, were you surprised? + +5 A. I didn't believe it. + +6 Q. Do you believe it today? + +7 A. I don't believe it. + +8 9 Q. You don't believe that Jeffrey Epstein was involved with underage girls in asexual way? + +10 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +11 12 13 THE WITNESS: You're asking for my opinion, and I don't think my opinion is relevant in that matter. + +14 BY MR. S + +15 16 17 Q. I think it's relevant. Can you just tell me whether today you believe that Jeffrey Epstein has engaged in sex with underage girls? + +18 19 MR. CRITTON: Form; speculation, irrelevant, always. + +20 THE WITNESS: It's irrelevant. + +21 BY MR. : + +22 Q. I need an answer. + +23 24 A. I don't believe he had sex with underage women. + +25 Q. Or engaged in any sexual acts with underage + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +66 + +![](_page_10_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE an Aland., Canoteepny + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +67 + +women? + +2 + +3 + +5 + +6 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: No. + +BY MR. la + +Q. You think that this is just a story that a bunch of underage women have made up? + +A. Speculation. + +MR. CRITTON: Objection. Now it's + +argumentative. Who gives a darn what he thinks one way or another? If he has personal knowledge -- + +MR. You're objecting to the form? + +MR. CRITTON: It's argumentative. + +MR. : You're objecting to the form? + +MR. CRITTON: Yes. + +MR. : Okay. + +BY MR. + +Q. Is that something that you believe that a bunch of women -- some of which know each other, some don't, some of which have been on the airplane and some which haven't -- made this up, that Jeffrey Epstein engaged in some sexual conduct with them? + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: What I believe doesn't matter in this case, does it? + +![](_page_11_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR. D: + +2 3 Q. I need an answer. Do you believe it? Do you believe these girls made this up? + +4 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +5 6 MR. REINHART: I'm going to instruct him not to answer. Move on. + +7 8 Is there a privilege that we're asserting? + +9 10 11 MR. REINHART: No, it's irrelevant. It's harassment and not likely to lead to discoverable evidence. + +12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. : I'm going to put on the record right now that it is -- we are allowed discovery into a RICO count. We are also allowed discovery into the intent of Mr. Epstein in developing a criminal enterprise designed to sexually exploit and sexually abuse underage girls. We believe that in doing so, he associated intentionally with people of similar beliefs that sex with underage girls is okay, and that there have been many discussions with this witness, as well as many other witnesses with -- to insure his protection from law enforcement that they not answer these specific questions. And thus, the opinions and beliefs of all of these witnesses that we are + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +68 + +![](_page_12_Picture_11.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE aa Almadas Gallo CeaPISI + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +69 + +alleging associated with this criminal enterprise are certainly reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. And if you're still instructing the witness, based on that proffer, not to answer any of these questions, I'm going to continue to ask the questions and you can instruct him not to answer and we can go to the Court. + +MR. REINHART: My response is to his opinion whether people making allegations in this case are colluding or making up a story is irrelevant to what you just said. So I am going to instruct him not to answer any question that goes to his opinion of someone else's motivation or the truth of facts to which he has no knowledge. + +So yes, I'm instructing him not to answer. + +MR. CRITTON: Let me add in my part, is that I think -- you're certainly not only capable to ask questions with regard to what his personal knowledge is, and if he knows something or he has reasonable basis for it; certainly you are entitled to that information. I think you've asked those questions and he's given you straightforward answers as to what he knew or what he didn't know under those circumstances. And as to what his + +![](_page_13_Picture_9.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +70 + +thoughts are on something which he has no factual basis or even an assumption to know one way or another is irrelevant. That's ultimately for a fact-finder in this case. + +While it's interesting, it's argumentative and Idon't think he's -- I mean, do it on a question-by-question basis. If he has knowledge, that's great, but to argue your case with this witness or any other witness doesn't serve a purpose and I think is, you know -- i think it's not a good use of our time, I'll put it that way. But you know, you can go ahead and ask. + +MR. : I can ask the question and if the witness is being instructed not to answer, we'll let ajudge decide whether he needs to answer the question and whether it's discoverable or not. + +MR. REINHART: Absolutely. Make your record. + +BY MR. + +Q. Do you have any reason to believe that Jeffrey Epstein engaged in sexual activity with underage women? + +A. I have no reason to believe. + +Q. Okay. So as you sit here today, based on your 18years of knowledge, experience and observation of Jeffrey Epstein, is it your belief that he has not had sex or engaged in sexual activity with underage women? + +![](_page_14_Picture_13.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE as Almetv Gall•Cotmay + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +71 + +A. It's an opinion, and I believe that he has not. + +Q. Okay. Isn't it true that at some point in time you learned that Jeffrey Epstein has -- strike that. + +6 MR. CRITTON: When you ultimately get to a good place to break, will you let us know? + +8 MR. Let's break now. + +9 (A break was had at 11:28 a.m.) + +10 BY MR. + +11 12 13 14 15 Q. All right. Eighteen years of being a pilot for Jeffrey Epstein and in terms of being able to name somebody that you would say you've observed with Jeffrey Epstein and would classify that person as Jeffrey Epstein's friend, can you name anybody? + +16 17 A. Nadia, Sarah; just people that we see routinely on the airplane. + +18 19 Q. That's people you see routinely in the last five to ten years, right? + +20 A. Yes. + +21 22 23 Q. Prior to that time, anybody that you've noticed as Jeffrey Epstein's friend may be Ghislaine Maxwell? + +24 A. What time frame? + +25 Q. Is that aperson that at some point in time + +![](_page_15_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIREcme",, + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 you would classify as Jeffrey Epstein's friend? + +2 3 A. I would classify it. I don't know if it's true. + +4 5 Q. But that's only because they were on the airplane together? + +6 A. Yes. + +7 8 9 Q. Do you know what Jeffrey Epstein does for a living in your 18 years of observing and talking with Jeffrey Epstein? + +10 A. No. + +11 Q. No idea? + +12 A. No. + +13 Q. Ever asked him? + +14 A. No, actually. + +15 Q. Ever been curious? + +16 A. Sure. + +17 Q. Ever done anything to satisfy that curiosity? + +18 19 A. If you mean Google it, not really, actually. Imean, I really have not. + +20 21 22 23 24 Q. Okay. So in 18 years of traveling and being the pilot and driving -- and taking this person, Jeffrey Epstein, from one property in New York to New Mexico and Florida and around the world, you have no idea what he does in terms of how he makes money? + +25 A. No, sir. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +72 + +![](_page_16_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 Q. I was produced this flight log -- tell me if I'm using the wrong term. What is this called, this book that I've been provided by Dave Rogers? + +4 A. I've never seen that book. + +5 6 7 Q. I'll let you see it. I don't know that it was always in a book, so maybe that's why you haven't seen it. Tell me what we're looking at. + +8 9 A. Well, judging with the name at the bottom, I believe this is Dave's flight log, log book. + +10 Q. I didn't know if it was called aflight log. + +11 12 A. Pilot log book, how's that? That's the appropriate name. + +13 14 15 Q. It was marked as Composite Exhibit 1 in Roger's deposition, as indicated by the exhibit sticker. We'll mark it the same in your deposition as well. + +16 17 MR. CRITTON: Why don't you refer to it as his? + +18 MR. : Fine. + +19 BY MR. + +20 Q. It's the pilot log book of Dave Rogers? + +21 A. Yes. + +22 23 24 25 Q. And the years provided in this book are 2002 through 2005; I can represent that to you. I'm going to ask you about certain people that David Rogers wrote down as being on the airplane and I want to ask you if + +![](_page_17_Picture_17.jpeg) + +73 + +ESQUIRE nAlisidor OatleCca)..7 + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquIresolutions.com + +1 you know who they are. This person right here is I= + +2 3 It seems like she flew on numerous flights. Do you know who that is? + +4 5 A. No. I heard the name, but I don't know who that is. + +6 7 Q. All right. Is that somebody that you remember seeing on any of the flights that you were on? + +8 9 A. What year are we talking about here? I don't remember. + +10 11 12 Q. Well, this is January 2002. You'd probably know how to read this book alittle bit better than me, so I don't know. + +13 14 15 A. He keeps his alot more current, so I know the name. If she walked in here right now, I would probably look right through her, to be honest. + +16 17 Q. Do you know what affiliation or relationship she had with Jeffrey Epstein? + +18 A. No. + +19 20 21 22 23 24 Q. Okay. There are various -- each row I'm told by David Rogers is adifferent flight and it indicates where it takes off from and where it lands, et cetera. There's a lot of other information, especially over on this side of the page that I'm not familiar with, nor do I need to be. + +25 A. Right. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +74 + +![](_page_18_Picture_15.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE "Ak.."0..".\_" + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 4 Q. But it's evident that the plane is being used, at least for this time period, January of 2002 through 2005, on a fairly regular basis. I mean, we're looking at January 6th, 11th, 13th, 13th, 14th, right? + +5 A. Uh-huh. + +6 7 8 Q. I mean, is that something that you would say accurately reflects the amount of use of Jeffrey Epstein's planes? + +9 A. Yes. + +10 Q. So he travels quite frequently? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 13 Q. And he travels with many different people, right? + +14 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +15 THE WITNESS: Yes. + +16 17 18 19 MR. CRITTON: Can I ask one question? I was wondering what happened, who has possession of now what's the original Exhibit No. 1 of Mr. Rogers' deposition? Did you retain it? + +20 MR. REINHART: The actual book itself? + +21 22 MR. : The court reporter took it, right? + +23 24 MR. CRITTON: The one marked as an exhibit, did you keep that? + +25 MR. REINHART: This is it. + +![](_page_19_Picture_18.jpeg) + +75 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +MR. Ma This is it? + +76 + +MR. CRITTON: Who took it from the deposition the other day? + +MR. IIIIIIII Ihave this one right now. + +MR. REINHART: That's the only copy? + +MR. Me Okay. + +MR. CRITTON: So you took the original? + +MR. IMIIII Apparently. It has the original sticker. + +MR. CRITTON: When I say "the original," the original copy. Would you have someone recreate what you've got and send it to us so we have it? + +MR. : Sure. In fact, why don't I wait until I get the whole thing and I'll copy all the pages and send it to you instead of piecemeal. + +MR. HOROWITZ: You mean before the transcript comes? + +MR. : We can copy it. + +MR. CRITTON: If you give it to me, I'll copy it and send it back to you. + +MR. REINHART: I have acopy. It just doesn't have the exhibit sticker on. + +MR. : That's what was told to me the other day, that's why I took it. + +MR. CRITTON: I want something -- I just don't + +![](_page_20_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 want to -- if you give me a copy, I'll put a sticker on it. + +3 4 MR. REINHART: Or just copy the page that has the exhibit sticker on it. + +5 MR. CRITTON: Sorry. + +6 BY + +7 8 Q. Like on this flight, we have "JE." I'm assuming that's Jeffrey Epstein, correct? + +9 A. Yes, I'll assume. + +10 Q. "GM," Ghislaine Maxwell, right? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 Q. "SK," + +13 A. I would assume. + +14 15 Q. I mean -- okay. And then this name, do you recognize that person, Alexia? + +16 A. Never heard it. + +17 Q. And then + +18 A. Yes. + +19 Q. You've heard that name? + +20 A. I've heard the name. + +21 Q. Not sure who that is, though? + +22 A. No. + +23 24 Q. There's only one, two, three, four, five, six people on that flight? + +25 A. Uh-huh. + +![](_page_21_Picture_24.jpeg) + +77 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. That's pretty typical of the amount of passengers that you would have on aflight? + +3 A. It varied, sure. + +4 5 6 7 Q. Okay. But it varied between -- if we look a few lines down, Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were the only two passengers. Certainly there were flights like that as well, right? + +8 A. Mm-hmm. + +9 10 Q. And so it varied from having one or two people to six or seven people, right? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 13 Q. What's the most people that you remember traveling on any of Jeffrey Epstein's airplanes? + +14 A. Twenty-five. + +15 16 Q. Okay. That would be ararity, wouldn't you say? + +17 A. yeah. + +18 19 20 Q. Because I've looked through this log. I haven't seen any place where there were 25, but there are lines that have maybe eight or nine people listed. + +21 A. Right. + +22 23 24 25 Q. Let's see. There's aflight from January 15th -- sorry, January 17th, January 20th and January 22nd of 2002 that all had . That doesn't serve to refresh your recollection as to who + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +78 + +![](_page_22_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 that is, does it? + +2 A. No. + +3 4 5 Q. Okay. Do you know what the purpose of her being on the airplane flight along with Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and IIIIIIIIIIII would be? + +6 A. No. + +7 8 9 Q. Okay. Do you know how it comes about that gets on that flight? How does she even know there's a flight available? + +10 A. I don't know. + +11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Q. All right. Well, let's go down to somebody that we may all know alittle bit better. February 9th, 2002, there's a flight that has Bill Clinton, four Secret Service agents and then instead of listing names or initials or anything else, it's just listed as two males, one female, Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and I forget who Dave Rogers told me "AP" is. Do you remember who that is? + +19 A. No. + +20 21 Q. Okay. Either way, how is it that someone like Bill Clinton gets on aJeffrey Epstein flight? + +22 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +23 THE WITNESS: I don't know. + +24 BY MR. + +25 Q. Do you know before the flight takes off that + +![](_page_23_Picture_17.jpeg) + +79 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Bill Clinton's going to be a passenger on the flight? + +2 A. Yes. + +3 4 Q. And how do you know? How do you get that information? + +5 6 7 8 9 10 A. The day before I'd get a phone call from, say, Sarah saying we're leaving tomorrow going to wherever, and sometimes she'll say who's going, sometimes she won't. On a case where President Clinton would be on board, we would put a little extra catering on board or do that little extra TLC to the aircraft. + +11 12 Q. If it's leaving -- this says it's leaving from MIA and where is it landing? + +13 A. HPN I believe is IIIII Plains. + +14 Q. Okay. Do you remember that flight? + +15 A. I remember being on it. + +16 17 18 Q. Well, I mean, if you look through here, obviously you had Bill Clinton on the airplane ten or twenty times, right? + +19 20 A. Yeah. He's my main focus. I remember him being on the aircraft, sure. + +21 22 Q. Do you remember him being on the airplane with younger girls? + +23 + +24 + +25 + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +80 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: No. + +![](_page_24_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR. + +2 3 Q. Okay. Do you know what his relationship was with Jeffrey Epstein? + +4 A. No. + +5 Q. Do you know if they were friends? + +6 A. Assuming. + +7 8 Q. But you're assuming why? Just because he's on his plane? + +9 A. Yeah. + +10 11 12 Q. Okay. So you assume that the people that are listed on here are friends of Jeffrey Epstein's and that's why they are riding on his plane? + +13 A. I'm speculating. + +14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q. I'm just not familiar with the -- because I've never been on aprivate flight -- with the manner in which you go about getting on one of these flights. I mean, you have to, I guess, know that Jeffrey Epstein has a plane, that it's going from adestination that you are at and want to go to, and that it's available and those kind of things. Can you tell me, enlighten me -- + +21 22 23 24 25 A. Well, it's not publicly offered, no. It would be no different than you jumping in your car and knowing you're going to the mall. I mean, it's not public information, you know, where planes are coming to and from, and you don't put your name out there to get + +![](_page_25_Picture_15.jpeg) + +81 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 onboard a flight. + +2 3 Q. Does Jeffrey Epstein charge these people as passengers? + +4 A. I don't know. + +5 6 7 8 9 Q. Okay. Are these people such as Bill Clinton, does that mean that Bill Clinton called or somebody affiliated with Jeffrey Epstein to get on the plane or that Jeffrey Epstein called Bill Clinton and asked do you want a ride? + +10 MR. CRITTON: Form; predicate. + +11 THE WITNESS: I have no idea. + +12 BY MR. + +13 Q. No idea? + +14 A. No idea whatsoever. + +15 Q. Joe Pagano, do you know who that is? + +16 A. Yes. + +17 18 19 20 Q. What's his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, or what was it back in February -- sorry, March 17th of 2002, when he and and Jeffrey Epstein and Todd and one female were on this flight? + +21 22 23 A. I don't know to what extent or what his relationship is. He just was a passenger on the airplane. + +24 25 Q. Okay. And the next day -- sorry, two days later on the 19th of March, Bill Clinton flies again, + +![](_page_26_Picture_18.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +82 + +ESQUIRE • Alenaer 'Ws Gamey + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Faalmlle: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 this time with Doug Band, three Secret Service agents Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and E M: Do you remember that flight? + +4 A. Where did we go? + +5 Q. Starts in JFK. + +6 A. Right. + +7 Q. Where is that? + +8 MR. CRITTON: Do you have adate? + +9 MR. : March 19th, 2002. + +10 11 THE WITNESS: EGGW I believe is Luton, England. + +12 BY MR. + +13 Q. Okay. Do you remember flying to England? + +14 15 16 A. I do remember flying to England. I just don't remember that trip. What airplane were we in? We were in the Boeing. + +17 Q. Do you remember the purpose of the trip? + +18 A. No. + +19 Q. Do you know who Doug Band is? + +20 21 22 A. I heard he's Clinton's, how would you say, assistant. I mean, I've seen that in the newspaper, seen it on CNN. + +23 24 25 Q. Okay. Did you ever hear that Doug Band and Ghislaine Maxwell were together, even for aday or a night? + +83 + +![](_page_27_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE "A..0,"."n + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. No. + +2 3 4 Q. Did you ever hear that Doug Band and Ghislaine Maxwell were the people attributed to introducing Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein? + +5 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +6 THE WITNESS: I don't know. + +7 BY MR. : + +8 9 10 Q. All right. There's another flight here on January -- I can't read this upside down. Maybe it says May -- + +11 A. Looks like. + +12 13 14 Q. -- 22nd, 2002. Again, with President Bill Clinton, Janice, Jessica. Can you tell me who Janice and Jessica are? + +15 A. I don't remember. + +16 Q. Would you know them if you saw them? + +17 18 A. Probably not because the names don't even ring a bell. + +19 20 21 22 23 Q. All right. And then there are plenty of flights, many of flights where Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and are the primary passengers, or at least are some of the passengers on the flights, correct? + +24 A. Mm-hmm, yes. + +25 Q. And still, as you sit here, you being the + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +84 + +![](_page_28_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIB.,...., E + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 pilot of these flights, you're not sure what their relationship is or whether any of them were socially connected in any real way? + +4 MR. CRITTON: Form + +5 6 7 THE WITNESS: No. When you're flying the airplane, there's a lot more going on than passengers' relations. + +8 BY MR. + +9 Q. All right. You remember this person, + +10 are you familiar with her at all? + +11 A. I remember the name, that's it. + +12 13 Q. What do you think her relationship is to Jeffrey Epstein? + +14 A. No idea. + +15 MR. CRITTON: What date are you on, Brad? + +16 17 MR. II, sorry. I am at June 21st, 2002. + +18 BY MR. + +19 20 Q. That's not somebody that you specifically remember? + +21 A. Mm-mm, no. + +22 23 24 Q. No? Is that somebody that you think was a regular flyer for any period of time in Jeffrey Epstein's life? + +25 A. Not aregular. + +![](_page_29_Picture_20.jpeg) + +85 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. Okay. Jean Luc Brunel, is that a name that you know? + +3 A. Yes. + +4 Q. How do you know that name? + +5 6 7 A. Only because it's a unique name and his attire is very unique. So you remember certain things. So I know he who that is. + +8 Q. Do you know what he does? + +9 4§Ni4,ask. No. + +10 11 Q. Do you know his association with Jegitillgretril Epstein, if any? + +12 A. No, I don't know what the relationship is. + +13 14 Q. Have you ever heard of him owning or running or managing a modeling company? + +15 16 A. I have seen that in the paper a few years back. + +17 18 19 Q. Okay. Other than seeing it in the paper, have you ever talked to Jean Luc Brunel or Jeffrey Epstein about owning or running or managing a modeling company? + +20 A. No. + +21 22 23 Q. Do you know if Jeffrey Epstein's affiliated with the modeling company that's owned, run or managed by Jean Luc Brunel? + +24 A. No, I have no idea. + +25 Q. And seeing that this is a flight now, that + +86 + +![](_page_30_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQVAMan4 IR\_En, + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 4 5 we're referring to the same flight on June 21st of 2002, that includes Jean Luc Brunel, Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, , those are the passengers of this flight, does that serve to jog your memory as to who is? + +6 7 8 9 A. No. I mean, you see how frequently we fly. I mean, it's -- the passengers in the back are so far removed from an operation of commanding an airplane like that, it's nothing that sticks in your head. + +10 11 12 Q. ' And you as the pilot, is there any way that you would know what's going on in the back of the airplane? + +13 A. No. My concerns are all on the cockpit. + +14 15 MR. CRITTON: Brad, the last one that you mentioned, was that the same date, June 21st, '02? + +16 MR. : Yes. + +17 BY MR. + +18 19 20 Q. There's another name here that I was going to ask you do you know. June 23rd, 2002, are you familiar with that name? + +21 A. No. + +22 23 Q. Also on the same flight with Jean Luc Brunel. That doesn't help to jog your memory either, right? + +24 A. No. + +25 Q. That's somebody that you remember as a + +![](_page_31_Picture_16.jpeg) + +87 + +ESQUIRE 1441 4444 + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquIresolutions.com + +1 frequent passenger? + +2 eferring to? + +3 Q. MS' + +4 A. No. + +6 Q. Dr. Jarecklaillinilielalltdy that you remember flying? + +7 8 A. I know the name. He may have been on the airplane once or twice. I'm guessing only. + +9 Q. Do you remember meeting him? + +10 A. Yes, I have met him. + +11 12 Q. Do you remember his purpose for being on the airplane? + +13 A. No, sir. + +14 15 Q. Amanda Venaro, do you remember her purpose for being on the airplane? + +16 A. No. + +17 MR. REINHART: Can we get a date? + +18 19 20 MR. I was asking him if he remembered Amanda Venaro. I wasn't referring to a specific flight. + +21 BY MR. + +22 Q. You don't remember her being on the flight? + +23 A. I don't remember the name. + +24 25 Q. Me showing you the flight isn't going to jog the memory? + +![](_page_32_Picture_22.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +88 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. No. The name that would launch it first -- + +2 3 4 MR. CRITTON: Could I ask you g quesbion? You have the original exhibit marked at the deposition. It looks like it's been highlighted. + +5 MR. EDNARDS: rhighlfhted it. + +6 7 8 9 MR. CRITTON: III, okay. So you've highlighted the original exhibit that's marked for the deposition? I just want the record to reflect that. + +10 Yeah. + +11 MR. CRITTON: Okay. Thank you. + +12 13 14 15 MR. At the time Ihighlighted it I didn't realize I was holding on to the original exhibit. I didn't realize that until you just pointed that out. + +16 MR. CRITTON: I've noticed that. + +17 18 19 MR. IIIIIII: So now when I give it to you, I'm giving you my work product as well. I don't see how this works against you, but anyway. + +20 BY MR. + +21 22 Q. Mile, is that aname that you remember? + +23 Ammewmca No. + +24 25 Q. Okay. And then Jean Luc Brunel is soltteibiart who I noticed flew relatively frequently, so is that why + +![](_page_33_Picture_17.jpeg) + +89 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquIresolutions.com + +1 2 you -- that name jogs your memory a little better than some of these other people? + +3 A. He dresses uniquely. + +4 Q. In what way? + +5 6 A. Just loud clothes, so something that you would remember, that's all. + +7 Q. Do you know his role in Jeffrey's life? + +8 A. No. + +9 10 11 Q. Ever heard that he is affiliated with Jeffrey Epstein because they both have asexual attraction to underage girls? + +12 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +13 14 THE WITNESS: You're making an assumption on that. + +15 BY MR. + +16 Q. Have you ever heard that? + +17 18 MR. REINHART: He's asked you if you ever heard that. + +19 BY MR. + +20 Q. If your answer is no, it's no. + +21 22 A. I'm sorry, Ithought did. No, I have not. + +23 Q. Okay. I keep highlighting this name, + +24 25 just because it looks like somebody that's regularly flying on the airplane. But the more that you + +![](_page_34_Picture_21.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +90 + +ESQUIRE as Al ni4r Othe Conley + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 see her name, that doesn't change your opinion as to whether or not you remember her or what -- + +3 A. I remember the name, you know, that's all. + +4 5 Q. Do you remember about what age she was when she was flying on the airplane? + +6 A. No. + +7 8 Q. This could be somebody who is 50 years old or ten years old, for all you know? + +9 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +10 THE WITNESS: Yes. + +11 BY MR. + +12 Q. Okay. + +13 A. I mean, I would only be guessing at an age. + +14 15 Q. Yeah, but I mean, you don't remember her at all. So you don't -- + +16 A. I remember the name, exactly. + +17 Q. Other than the name? + +18 A. Right, yes, sir. + +19 20 Q. But you can't even come close to putting a face with that name? + +21 22 23 A. •I mean): mo. !I mean, if you said draw her picture with -- I couldn't come close to even getting it. + +24 25 Q. Okay. You remember this flight where President Clinton, Kevin Spacey and Chris Tucker, + +![](_page_35_Picture_21.jpeg) + +91 + +ESQUIRE . ., , + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell? + +2 A. Yes. + +3 Q. From JFK to what is this, LPAZ? + +4 A. LPAZ, that is -- + +5 Q. South Africa or something? + +6 A. No, it's the Azores Islands, Santa Maria. + +7 Q. Do you know the purpose of that trip? + +8 A. That was a fuel stop. + +9 10 Q. Okay. And do you know why Chris Tucker and Kevin Spacey were on that airplane? + +11 A. No. + +12 Q. Did you talk to them? + +13 14 A. They came up in the cockpit and said hello. So they conversed, nothing more. + +15 16 17 18 Q. Another name that is on here a few times, I'm specifically referring right now to the dates of September 23rd and 24th of 2002, is Ron Burkle. Do you know who that is, Ron Burkle? + +19 20 A. I know what that is, yes. I didn't realize he was on our airplane. + +21 22 Q. Right now that is the first: time that you remember Ron Burkle being on your airplane? + +23 A. Yeah. + +24 25 Q. You don't know the purpose for him being on that airplane? + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +92 + +![](_page_36_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE .m"\_..m" + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 A. No. Granted, I'm seeing this for the first time, so I'm trying to -- + +3 4 5 6 7 Q. Let me ask you that. Because this was given to me at a deposition of Dave Rogers, who I understand was the chief pilot for Mr. Epstein, and now you're the cheap pilot, but you always kind of worked in tandem, correct? + +8 A. Sure; we complemented each other. + +9 10 Q. And you both worked for the same company that flies Jeffrey Epstein's airplanes, right? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 13 14 15 16 Q. So I was of the presumption, which may have been -- I may have been misled here, or I may have, you know, misunderstood the purpose behind this book or how it was created. I thought that you had probably seen this before at some point in time? + +17 A. no. + +18 19 Q book? Did you know that Dave Rogers was keeping this + +20 A. No. I know he keeps a pilot log book. + +21 22 Q. Okay. But you didn't know he was keeping the names of the people who were on the airplane? + +23 A. No. It's not required, so I mean, it's... + +24 25 Q. So today is the first time that you are learning that the names of the people that are on the + +93 + +![](_page_37_Picture_16.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 airplane was kept by Dave Rogers? + +2 A. Yes, in his log book. + +3 4 5 Q. Okay. And it's my understanding when you fly back into the country through Customs, you have to report the people that are on the airplane, right? + +6 A. Yes. + +7 8 Q. And who would create that document or call that information into Customs? + +9 A. Whoever the captain was for the day. + +10 Q. At times would that be you? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 13 14 Q. Okay. And at times when you would come into the country with passengers -- well, not at times. Didn't you also have to report their date of birth? + +15 A. Sure. + +16 17 18 Q. At times weren't there also people that you would bring in from other countries into the United States that were under the age of 18? + +19 A. Yes. + +20 21 22 Q. And at some times those were flights that included Jean Luc Brunel and girls that were under the age of 18, right? + +23 + +24 + +25 + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +94 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: I don't remember those flights. + +![](_page_38_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE a• Almada Gallo CO Say + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR.S + +2 3 4 Q. Okay. You don't remember which flights it would have been where there would have been girls under the age of 18? + +5 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +6 7 THE WITNESS: Well, I would have to look at the flight logs. + +8 BY MR. + +9 10 Q. It's not illegal to have somebody under the age of 18 on a flight anyway, right? + +11 A. No, not at all. + +12 13 14 Q. Were you ever aware that you, as pilot, were transporting girls under the age of 18 who were supposed to be models? + +15 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +16 THE WITNESS: I had no knowledge. + +17 BY MR. + +18 19 20 Q. Okay. You never knew who the people on the airplane were, what their purpose was, their role with Jeffrey Epstein or Jean Luc Brunel? + +21 A. No. + +22 Q. All right. Do you know + +23 A. No, I don't remember that name. + +24 Q. + +25 A. I remember the name. + +95 + +![](_page_39_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQVmaiBE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +1 2 Q. She flew frequently at least for aperiod of time. Do you remember that? + +3 A. Yes. + +4 5 6 Q. Is that somebody that you thought was familiar with the modeling industry or related to the modeling industry? + +7 A. No. + +8 9 Q. Okay. And these people, did Jeffrey Epstein ever tell you how he was associated with any of them? + +10 A. No. + +11 12 Q. Did you ever wonder how he was associated with any of them? + +13 A. No, never interested. + +14 15 16 17 18 Q. And on several of these -- on most of these, the names or initials of the people that are on the flight are listed. Do you know on the occasions where it lists generically two females or three females or six females, do you know why that was done? + +19 20 21 A. Just because we didn't know our the person's name. We tried to do the best we could to keep the records. + +22 23 Q. When you say "we tried to do the best that we could" -- + +24 A. Dave and I. + +25 Q. Okay. But the first time that you learned + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +96 + +![](_page_40_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE aAlex 'ado Gallo CemPaY + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 that he kept anybody's names was today, right? + +2 3 4 5 6 A. Well, I didn't know he kept them in his log book. We would fill out the passenger manifest as we're -- having passengers' names in your pilot log book, he's probably the only person in the world that does that. + +7 Q. Okay. + +8 9 10 A. So when you were mentioning putting the names down, when you said female or male, you know, I was referring to the passenger manifest. + +11 12 13 14 15 Q. For each of these same flights, then, that we're referring to out of this log book that was marked as Composite Exhibit 1 in Dave Rogers' deposition, am I understanding you correctly, then, there would also be a passenger manifest for each of these flights? + +16 A. Yes. + +17 18 Q. Now, where would I find the passenger manifest? Who keeps that documentation? + +19 A. Corporate -- our corporate office. + +20 Q. Which is whom? + +21 A. Up in New York, Darren Indyke. + +22 Q. At what corporation is that, though? + +23 A. NES, LLC, I guess. + +24 MR. REINHART: Do you know for sure? + +25 THE WITNESS: I don't know for sure. I mean, + +97 + +![](_page_41_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +1 2 when you say we would just send them up to New York. + +3 SY MR. + +4 Q. Did you ever keep acopy of them? + +5 A. No. + +6 Q. Why did you keep apassenger manifest? + +7 8 A. Just for tracking of -- to have the times on there for -- + +9 10 MR. REINHART: Can I confer with him on one thing before you ask aquestion? + +11 MR. : Yeah, yeah. + +12 (Off the record discussion.) + +13 14 15 MR. REINHART: Mr. , let him amend his prior answer. I think he misunderstood the question. + +16 17 MR. : I don't know what question we're amounting the answer to. + +18 19 20 21 22 23 24 MR. REINHART: Let me clarify this way: As the passenger manifests, they are corporate documents of either JEGE or Hyperion Air, whatever company owns the plane. Mr. Visoski has physical custody of them. He retains them but they're not his documents. They're the corporate documents. So they're not in New York. + +25 THE WITNESS: Those are the ones that I have + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +98 + +![](_page_42_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 at the airport office that I had turned into counsel that has the passenger names on them. + +3 BY MR. a + +4 Q. Okay. + +5 A. It's called apassenger manifest. + +6 Q. Okay. + +7 MR. REINHART: Right. + +8 BY MR.'S + +9 10 11 Q. The passenger manifest, just so I understand exactly what that is, tell me. Tell me in your own words. + +12 13 14 A. It's departure time, the city, the landing time exactly and the passengers that would have been on that flight. + +15 16 Q. And at times on that passenger manifest would you list also generically female or male? + +17 18 19 20 21 A. Yes. That was the document I was referring to stating that if we didn't know aperson, we did not go out of our way to find out a name. We just put in to account for how many people were on the aircraft at that time. + +22 23 24 25 Q. Who is currently in the custody or control sorry. Who currently maintains or has possession of the passenger manifest from 1998 through the present, through today for those airplanes that you flew related + +![](_page_43_Picture_16.jpeg) + +99 + +ESQUIRE so Al nadir Gallo caarai + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 to Jeffrey Epstein? + +2 3 4 5 6 7 A. I currently have, which counsel has now, 2005, Ibelieve, until the present time. And the records previous to that I believe were turned into counsel with the previous investigation with Jack Goldberger's office, I believe. I believe they maintain those records. + +8 9 Q. When you say "turned into counsel," there are alot of counsel involved here. + +10 A. Jack Goldberger's office, i believe. + +11 12 Q. When you say "the previous investigation," you're talking about the criminal investigation? + +13 A. Exactly, yes, sir. + +14 15 16 Q. And you're aware in that criminal investigation, obviously, that Jeffrey Epstein pled guilty to certain charges, correct? + +17 A. From what I read, yes. + +18 Q. Well, you did visit him in jail, right? + +19 A. Yes. We didn't talk about that. + +20 21 Q. Okay. You know in order to go to jail, though, you have to be convicted of some crime, right? + +22 + +23 + +24 BY MR. : + +25 Q• It wasn't like he was visiting the jail and + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +100 + +MR. CRITTON: Form; argumentative. + +THE WITNESS: Yes. + +![](_page_44_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE .....Gam.,, , + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +6 Q. Okay. So when we're talking about the criminal investigation, we're talking about the criminal investigation revolving around the allegations of Jeffrey Epstein engaging in sex acts with minors? + +9 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +10 BY MR. + +11 12 Q. That's the criminal investigation you're talking about, right? + +13 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +14 15 16 THE WITNESS: I don't know the full definition of really what happened there. I know that it was something to do with solicitation of prostitution. + +17 That's all I read. + +18 BY MR. + +19 20 21 Q. Okay. Were you aware that the allegations revolved around underage girls or girls under the age of 18? + +22 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +23 24 THE WITNESS: I was aware it revolved around it, yes. + +25 + +101 + +you were visiting and you happened to bump into each other. You actually went to see him while he was an inmate in jail? + +A. Right, yes. + +![](_page_45_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquIresolutions.com + +1 BY MR. 1IIIII/ + +2 Q. Who first made you aware of that? + +3 A. The newspaper. + +4 Q. Were you ever questioned by the police? + +5 6 7 A. I don't know who questioned me, actually. I did have a questioning session, but I don't even remember who questioned me. + +8 Q. Where did that take place? + +9 A. I don't remember. + +10 Q. At your house? + +11 12 13 A. No. I'm thinking it was Jack Goldberger's office, or it may have been downtown at the Palm Beach County Courthouse or something in that area there. + +14 15 Q. Okay. So it either happened at an attorney's office that represented -- + +16 A. Exactly, yeah, I think so. + +17 Q. -- Jeffrey Epstein or the other side? + +18 A. Yeah. + +19 20 Q. And during that questioning, is that when you turned over the passenger manifest from prior to 2005? + +21 A. Yes. + +22 23 Q. And you turned those manifests directly over to Jack Goldberger? + +24 25 A. Yes. Actually, I believe Dave Rogers did that. I wasn't in possession of those records. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +102 + +![](_page_46_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. And for the passenger manifest prior to 2005, how far do those passenger manifests go back in time? + +3 4 A. They should go back, I guess, to 1991 or whenever we started existence. + +6 Q. And did you turn them over from 1991 all the way through to 2005? + +7 8 A. I don't know. I didn't turn them in. Dave Rogers did. + +9 10 Q. Are you in possession of a copy of any of those materials? + +11 A. No. + +12 13 14 Q. I thought that, you know, ten minutes ago when we were talking about this you said you had them back at an office or -- + +15 16 17 A. That was the office, the airplane office, which I've given to Bruce, which is the current log. He is in possession of them now. I had possession of them. + +18 19 20 Q. Okay. What he's in possession of -- just so I know what documents are where, he's in possession of the passenger manifests from 2005 through the present? + +21 A. Correct. + +22 23 24 Q. If I want to obtain the passenger manifests from 1998 through 2005, that's something that I would request from whom? + +25 THE WITNESS: Help me out. That's -- + +103 + +![](_page_47_Picture_16.jpeg) + +ESQUItt.e.?." + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +BY MR. 104 + +MR. REINHART: If you know. + +THE WITNESS: I don't know who possesses them right now. They were turned into Jack Goldberger's office ayear and ahalf or two years ago. + +Q. You started out by indicating that you sent these passenger manifests, or a copy thereof, to Darren Indyke or someone at NES, LLC; is that correct? + +A. Correct. + +Q. If I requested them from NES, LLC, that's somebody at some point in time was in possession of all the passenger manifests? + +A. Sure. + +Q. And NES, LLC's address is the one you gave me at 301 East 66th Street? + +A. I believe so. I don't know what address they're using for that. I know that -- + +Q. But Darren Indyke's the attorney that I would call -- + +A. Yes, sir. + +Q. -- and he could probably steer me in the right direction? + +A. Yes. + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +![](_page_48_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR. MM: + +2 Q. Do you know Amy Taylor? + +3 A. Yes. + +4 Q. How do you know her? + +5 A. She was on the airplane. + +6 Q. How old is she? + +7 A. I have no idea. + +8 Q. Age range? + +9 A. Twenty-eight. + +10 Q. Now? + +11 12 13 A. Yeah, 28, or maybe if not older now. She was probably 28 probably, I guess. She was somebody in her late 20s. + +14 15 Q. So we're talking about 2003? That's what I'm trying to understand. + +16 A. I'm guessing. + +17 18 Q. We're talking 2009 now. We're saying 28. By that do you mean in 2003 she was 23 or 24 years old? + +19 A. You're having me guess on her age. + +20 Q. Yeah. + +21 A. I mean, I can't be accurate. + +22 Q. Somebody between 18 and 25? + +23 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +24 BY MR. + +25 Q. At the time you were seeing her back in -- + +105 + +![](_page_49_Picture_25.jpeg) + +ESQv•iujj3E "., + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Faislmlle: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.com + +1 A. If you want me to guess -- + +2 Q. No, I don't want you to guess. + +3 A. I don't know then. + +4 Q. Well, if I say between ten and fifty? + +5 A. That's arange. + +6 7 Q. If I say between ten and fifty, you're not guessing there anymore. You know she's in there, right? + +8 A. She's in the middle there, yeah. + +9 10 Q. Okay. How can we narrow that down? We're talking about somebody in her 20s? + +11 A. In her 20s. + +12 Q. At least that's what you believed? + +13 A. Yes. + +14 15 Q. All right. Is that somebody that you know to be associated or friendly with Ghislaine Maxwell? + +16 A. I don't know. + +17 18 Q. Do you know what her relationship was to Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell? + +19 A. No. + +20 Q. Do you know where she is now? + +23. A. No idea. + +22 Q. When's the last time you talked to her? + +23 A. I don't know. What date do you have on there? + +24 Q. February 2003. + +25 A. So, probably that long ago. I may have said + +![](_page_50_Picture_25.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +106 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 hello. + +2 3 Q. That's somebody who was on the airplane multiple times? + +4 5 A. More than once. I mean, I have no account for how many times. + +7 8 Q. Well, I've asked you about abunch of names, most of which you don't really remember, but that's one name you do remember. + +9 A. Yeah, I remember the name, yeah. + +10 11 Q. Okay. And that's somebody who you actually - you would remember the face too? + +12 A. I might remember Amy's face. + +13 14 Q. All right. Do you remember why she would have ever been on your airplane? + +15 A. No idea. + +16 17 18 Q. President Andres Postrana, at the time I guess that was the president of Colombia back in February - sorry, March 20th of 2003. Do you know who that is? + +19 20 A. I don't remember him being on the airplane, but I know who that is. + +21 22 23 Q. Okay. He's on the airplane with Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and Jean Luc Brunel? + +24 A. Where did we go? + +25 Q. I'll let you look at it. I'm talking about + +107 + +![](_page_51_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 this line, PBI, left out of Palm Beach? + +2 3 A. Palm Beach to Nassau. I'm sorry, I don't remember that one. + +4 5 6 Q. When we're saying we're going down to Nassau, is that a place that you frequently went to with the airplane? + +7 A. No, not at all. + +8 9 Q. And is that aroute that you would take for the ultimate destination to be Little St. James? + +10 A. No. + +11 12 13 Q. If the ultimate destination was Little St. James -- show me aflight where the ultimate destination was Little St. James. + +14 A. Yeah, right here. TIST, that's St. + +15 16 17 18 Q. Okay. So on that flight that you just pointed to, March 27th, 2003, we have Jeffrey Epstein, again, Brent Tyndall -- do you know who Brent Tyndall is? + +19 A. Yes. + +20 Q. And who is that? + +21 A. I believe he was the chef. + +22 23 Q. And Magale Blanchen (phonetic), is that somebody you know to be a model these days? + +24 A. I have no idea. + +25 Q. Do you remember that flight? + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +108 + +![](_page_52_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. No. + +2 3 Q. Do you remember Naomi Milla picking her up from St. 'EMI' along with Jean Luc Brunel? + +4 5 A. I remember her being on board. I don't remember the flight. + +6 Q. Do you know Joel Pashcow? + +7 A. Yes. + +8 Q. How do you know him? + +9 A. He was on the airplane. + +10 11 Q. And is that somebody you knew at one point in time to be a friend of Jeffrey Epstein's? + +12 13 A. He was on the airplane. I don't know what the relationship was. + +14 Q. Do you know what the relationship is today? + +15 A. No idea. + +16 17 Q. How about Todd Mister, do you know what that relationship is or was today? + +18 A. No. + +19 Q. Do you remember him? + +20 A. No. + +21 Q. Not at all? + +22 A. I mean, I know the name. I don't know. + +23 Q. Paula Epstein, do you know who that is? + +24 A. Yes. + +25 Q. Who is that? + +109 + +![](_page_53_Picture_24.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE as Almada Calle 2009 + +110 + +ESQUIRE t• AI natct Gallo Cospay + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 him around Jeffrey Epstein? + +2 A. No. + +3 Q. All right. + +4 A. No. + +5 Q. do you know that name? + +6 A. No. + +7 8 Q. She was on several flights. You don't remember seeing her? + +9 A. No. + +10 11 Q. All right. And how about Alan Dershowitz, I'm sure you know who that is? + +12 A. Sure. He's famous. + +13 14 Q. What was your understanding of Alan Dershowitz's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein? + +15 A. Never talked about it. + +16 17 Q. Forrest Sawyer, do you know why he was on your airplane? + +18 A. Never heard the name, actually. + +19 Q. Really? + +20 A. No. + +21 Q. Larry Summers? + +22 A. I know the name. I don't remember flying him. + +23 Q. Have you ever talked to Joe Fontanela? + +24 A. Yes. + +25 Q. How do you know him? + +111 + +![](_page_55_Picture_25.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquIresolutions.com + +1 A. He usually drops Jeffrey off at the airport. + +2 3 Q. In fact, you've called him directly before, right? + +4 A. Yes. + +5 Q. You still have his number? + +6 7 A. I haven't -- yes, I think I still got it in my memory. + +8 Q. Okay. What is it? + +9 10 A. It's been a few years. (917)945-7500. It's kind of an easy one. + +11 MR. CRITTON: 917 is the first + +12 THE WITNESS: Yes. + +13 MR. CRITTON: Who was this for? + +14 MR. REINHART: Joe, Joe Fontanela. + +15 MR. : Fontanela. + +16 BY MR. : + +17 Q. Do you know his address, where he resides? + +18 A. No, I don't. + +19 20 Q. Do you know if he what his role is in Jeffrey Epstein's life? + +21 A. Not really. He just he drove the car. + +22 Q. He drove what car? + +23 A. The car up in New York. + +24 25 Q. Okay. Do you know if he's a housekeeper up at that house up in New York? + +![](_page_56_Picture_24.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +112 + +ESQUIRE ••, nettGall.CaPtaf + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. I don't know what his role is. + +2 3 Q. Have you ever worked for a company called Air Ghislaine? Do you know that company? + +4 A. Yes. + +5 Q. Do you know what that company does? + +6 A. No. + +7 8 Q. Have you ever been an employee of that company? + +9 A. No. + +10 Q. Do you know who runs that company? + +11 A. No. + +12 13 Q. Is Jeffrey Epstein associated with that company? + +14 A. I don't know. + +15 Q. How have you heard of that company? + +16 17 A. It's the company name that our registration for the helicopters is under, Air Ghislaine. + +18 19 Q. Is that somebody who's ever paid you, a company who's ever paid you? + +20 A. No. + +21 Q. Do you know Igor Zinoviev? + +22 A. Yes. + +23 Q. How do you know him? + +24 A. Met him on the airplane. + +25 Q. What is your understanding of his affiliation + +![](_page_57_Picture_24.jpeg) + +113 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/EFTA02747859.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/EFTA02747859.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7c696e40b459da1e38c8c391d81efbb6f1f125f5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/EFTA02747859.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,2315 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 58, + "chars": 60647, + "elapsed_seconds": 16.85, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_2_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_3_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_4_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_7_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_8_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_9_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_10_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_11_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_12_Picture_11.jpeg", + "_page_13_Picture_9.jpeg", + "_page_14_Picture_13.jpeg", + "_page_15_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_16_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_17_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_18_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_19_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_20_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_21_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_22_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_23_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_24_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_25_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_26_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_27_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_28_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_29_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_30_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_31_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_32_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_33_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_34_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_35_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_36_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_37_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_38_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_39_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_40_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_41_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_42_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_43_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_44_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_45_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_46_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_47_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_48_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_49_Picture_25.jpeg", + "_page_50_Picture_25.jpeg", + "_page_51_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_52_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_53_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_54_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_55_Picture_25.jpeg", + "_page_56_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_57_Picture_24.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A-2", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 149.94, + 261.43792724609375 + ], + [ + 475.4967346191406, + 261.43792724609375 + ], + [ + 475.4967346191406, + 325.37054443359375 + ], + [ + 149.94, + 325.37054443359375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 282 + ], + [ + "Line", + 61 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 249 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 276 + ], + [ + "Line", + 60 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 123 + ], + [ + "Line", + 61 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 282 + ], + [ + "Line", + 68 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 123 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 272 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 115 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 125 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 273 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 258 + ], + [ + "Line", + 59 + ], + [ + "Text", + 45 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 304 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 332 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 341 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 278 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 274 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 326 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 321 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 273 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 302 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 244 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 292 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 296 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 296 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 320 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 127 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 281 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 125 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 261 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 128 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 125 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 229 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 284 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 269 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 293 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 127 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 333 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 38, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 293 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 39, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 270 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 40, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 307 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 41, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 309 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 42, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 284 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 43, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 304 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 44, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 297 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 45, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 109 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 46, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 286 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 47, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 315 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 48, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 281 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 49, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 128 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 50, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 293 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 51, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 292 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 52, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 292 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 53, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 279 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 54, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 268 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 55, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 243 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 56, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 124 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 57, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 123 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747859" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c9d4e22e6f9155158bc0e66d0ded6a227b5f6a3b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7ea7c7199a28b7dc76eda84f69c0abb62277d3a547d2b4ccdb67e7b5bcadaff8 +size 1016 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_10_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_10_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4f0ca45df2df4d3423fd710fbe77de8c16e67c03 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_10_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:791a811d194c67c248a3aca35a0e1839a3805aaa36f5ee82eb53f523270d9420 +size 2419 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_11_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_11_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e9a7a14bd4fdd6d292c9c4f3a6cab69a9ecad68d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_11_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:60070ea220c525be14a27d3ceaecc3818acbc23c64548597706de0c2ff016218 +size 2433 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_12_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_12_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..942c9a1de412eb0a829f40e5889d693c55f7e72d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_12_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0bb44bf0f0a02cdfc6a149558ab17ae88b189b9fe146ae9b7c59f997091399c3 +size 2399 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_13_Picture_9.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_13_Picture_9.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d498230a5c9f932132d92df830ab57651f909217 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_13_Picture_9.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:793696fee45209af398dd44abdd3b8412e1f390be52ac980101ad70eb629aba2 +size 2413 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_14_Picture_13.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_14_Picture_13.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2c8db16a6b57dcc474ae7c7c66981fc71d19abd3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_14_Picture_13.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4de48330a8b4cf8abf114758244a22a1a3e616cb207df468ffc8fdc0705aeeba +size 2410 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_15_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_15_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5618fad0e17989182e1201a094d79b0589b326fd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_15_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:5f5412fc0a0410317d3271ac4407c6ae4ccb834f52e029e2868ac0b905d5ce38 +size 2458 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_16_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_16_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1e62544f01226eaa0fb020a430b310487cfd2c28 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_16_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:97d9bf62760d74c1f11e95aad62461cd3fdbc125acecd4c07df8e115e17d1cdb +size 2416 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_17_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_17_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..50c1fc9ebbf7fb637ee3735612a096c38741b132 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_17_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0dc8587161fe084b207972ba89a53212c5617324876585d81c8b3e3f3458aafe +size 2450 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_18_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_18_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9e0223a768cebd0a393ed07e35a5fd8c3a71fbff --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_18_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ee58b35ea339e0c4e63be6d966c8af7a6598c33bd0b561773c409172679d91ef +size 2450 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_19_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_19_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5ac0195e449c1073579c82abfc7bc6879e2bed2d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_19_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:75cf05e374d92da3b177d1842e75cfacd5a27fa6998936e42ee17583757234d3 +size 2428 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c0d1fe81c7b70417c6c42fb9aaa52bcd08d96fb2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_1_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:98180c7937ac4172c59a99bd13bf9a2115926efdcf30c5bf1df41dd5f20eb425 +size 2390 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_20_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_20_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cae1d556ecc97734ff8ab7fcf340d8e6d6d42a35 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_20_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8981bdc2cf55548e233e29748069ce7512d692a4f43d5b1a87e706d754e0be19 +size 2511 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_21_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_21_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ae091f7f15f35f43d3cc617966f501e06199ab6b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_21_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:440e3db31186dd17fa680b6be3b04f2a2639f52c85c690e45273f36ab383d3c2 +size 2409 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_22_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_22_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..55b17d7b5b53730ea301a40f7d0cedd424484d74 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_22_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e43f4d381a9ad08069af7a7b32fef14b8c301dda08a9896d65168f4e25c6609e +size 2387 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_23_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_23_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5d06290ae3856bef789ba3f59b9c25d2beb749cf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_23_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:95f6e3c64aaeb040fb46d75bc9556e5d0e58c5f54e0a75eabb7d0f36e2b89530 +size 2459 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_24_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_24_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..00b280ad560bc0dfd40c1b1a1e05ffb2430d3c00 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_24_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ea932222069b642b3ab0dc607b8974addabf238b747f1e6b6dbe26b9ded0a2b1 +size 2454 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_25_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_25_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2e56dd51279db37c783be5d295e0d86a59a8c947 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_25_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:37dc30191d2f3876c4a2880d7b1d1c8033935dddf015a6349cf522a9c7ac20b2 +size 2424 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_26_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_26_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ffa9c5139a74fde1ef1725c3027a4ed463e3f669 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_26_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c3f971784148292605bcee6f5b7ae9e44e8bd0ab7a03a3216fddf36ee0236060 +size 2404 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_27_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_27_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cfa719246a55c43aefa50a9a4b6d32adb6add6d5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_27_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:fe02d2c14022a13f636b953b7e0adb52b35c112cf457deac4fbc4a6e25528320 +size 2427 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_28_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_28_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3bf57dbb3b0ce9b11b1a502b029b65a8eb0a7dbc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_28_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ebb734d61b3313202195f8b1774f07ca3e1a552b9232412d7c2f6053d0aad697 +size 3220 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_29_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_29_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a2313836eb577c0a5aeddf604f034821d576ed7d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_29_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:447b37ffd3675b2a85b7dc873f30083c665902c8b89ce1b2c0f5756318977f8e +size 2375 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_2_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_2_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..31a5934fc309882bc5b5c81931d23d0bb3df9b56 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_2_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ff6eadee852a00ba98e8373f59a29cd07471dbc9d26ab0138f8609854bb5981d +size 2481 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_30_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_30_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0269bea5b88f7411b8764895fb217cdfcacb8886 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_30_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d1f5051cd95a7712eaa0cbdf392ed27733a8323dc6a55f90c750b64a779572d8 +size 2455 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_31_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_31_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ab0e51588a8e04f582089f3b39765ff70c34b6d0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_31_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8003358da959affbb8b8ac1e3d771ff3d7450533995707802d63823bb93ad0bc +size 2442 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_32_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_32_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6a36b70758f13227a3529ef1c6933f2c95091796 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_32_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:bf517962fb6da5bf5a5cd546d0b4f4aefd527dad0c51f50efa0a4306d59ef18b +size 2352 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_33_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_33_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9d1151eb9a3a6162149ba030201b0929c044c3e3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_33_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:43c9bf896718b462fb9d3c209925d5268bbbbc0652fbe314c7cf7e37b70218d9 +size 2408 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_34_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_34_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..168f2250c07d279709466a95530e035d3fb66a0d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_34_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4c88012180fd6289706a8d9630ae3c461a82000881dd38e7d1cdcb196dccbeeb +size 2366 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_35_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_35_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..72b3e4aca7c5eb95932900f389441284a9a07716 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_35_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:98fa0ffee43feb3664c9cf56196edd1d61b0f822367403f92c75b64e691667fc +size 2439 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_36_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_36_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..18c0eac5c0e4704148204056e04d95215f7af4da --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_36_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7d1ef29f36e8b47b32b113c2cd2ad80d32684b8856ca5a833eb7a7a73d218c43 +size 2454 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_37_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_37_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..75667cbf4e9c1e438054e54268f57becf6b5f9ce --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_37_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f5147a3ee1f363030beafb711b98443ba2872f225e8b224ca1b2d664c8aaa25d +size 2426 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_38_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_38_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..566cc414d36d87d73d1efbb0639f6c04d9ecf15e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_38_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:15e9492013fc719bb42148755236aee5de22b86b9cc9794e8bab6afd10b0fe3f +size 2348 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_39_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_39_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..067d3059395c5f4e4786e0dde27517a248c3f122 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_39_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:70acca07ea70d3ce9cfe46b9760ef202d72b7d23508d92e9d4877e6314e99b50 +size 2414 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_3_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_3_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2786eadcacda0ac9b0730ee87e45f399cc4da09c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_3_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:84643f15577b8eed96095bfaa696e31e3e629954e0df2c0e33d74a182c361d3c +size 2461 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_40_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_40_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..01be2dfc1eac48f42edfcd613bfaed530b94767f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_40_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:45a6868ea4f76d7392eb13b2a1d0e5e4f1a1e558638125f6ef35c758f6684af7 +size 2398 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_41_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_41_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..40b8d9f4d725748db4a9e3eea38157693a565cff --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_41_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:73fb0752b77640ab692cd6ca3a688f963a0a087d7db64affd7c15e0f27ffd75a +size 2433 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_42_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_42_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..63f5b8a266c8e3eae7ddc2968849a36c65ff7dd1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_42_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ed9d48d6cc2fbc9ab401982c38ec30cd8d8b5e3823477b8648e1f701c6db159d +size 2436 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_43_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_43_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7fbd78bc13757a665b4a95b527c565adadfca292 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_43_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7be5be74f145ed075e34ddae3933350bf283c9c67ad5b17f347e584c74c3677d +size 2356 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_44_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_44_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cd87c9e5999bf624691db60928f0123dffa98adc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_44_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:8de1d612823e76ef29c05dc18e009d038a9d749d5c000ca2cc03e2366f534a50 +size 2384 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_45_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_45_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..324ad417bd547aff25a49497a976c07c0e8a29ac --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_45_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d2048eee2d1618dac4316e269c9fe33aa9d72f79426c2706257395f6c7957b21 +size 2458 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_46_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_46_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a2e0e26bc971f87059411b1593106b2222f07621 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_46_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6f342700d4dfec671b24b063deaa5440382a16255461feb8985be818f45c4935 +size 2467 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_47_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_47_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1a95b52594e752af293168afe37b11d80f5088ad --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_47_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c6641808cb316de9f5a4cd598b8f1eadcf3ad4290cb1aa539efe9d21d777c729 +size 2419 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_48_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_48_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7ba6144c9f18d7dfb5a69911b2aa879174c59ac3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_48_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a0a4085d6e544f7f0afce3bcaf3ae6bd0682c235e48592838013c9c1ed8b3e0b +size 2410 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_49_Picture_25.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_49_Picture_25.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..12a8a412b4feadf6f4998886defea4e42ecd3e22 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_49_Picture_25.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1f886d0fd1a2fe91a3cf352ebe0ab18b4c6a1f7ab8ed8aa7f01467c2755646c2 +size 2407 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_4_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_4_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..896886cfe21c70bc8e9232e37fd341957220b155 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_4_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d6abcf986b746c8b43723b85af667adbe2558df87e116e43d8d3cb2c4c02e3ff +size 2403 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_50_Picture_25.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_50_Picture_25.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2e9532f899ca6c48f09675d5139ca4db28d8cc16 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_50_Picture_25.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:60c60e4803f224b0e2cab89920f3d21b1460a92769db03587a7529ad4409275b +size 2452 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_51_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_51_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1b2026b12138f29d9ba39773e93a9bc0dee31c95 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_51_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:532bdcd3a9e79f037bdd38a1f2bcaad9dce8b75d30a42b8f83ce87166bf3b7b4 +size 2422 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_52_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_52_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..31d9df0dddd20703ad8e725b446d8aef203c7574 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_52_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ec8806634fbae206c92f58fe34ebb2949e1b36cb686950adbcdb303dc12b112a +size 2355 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_53_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_53_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cdf644c1564ac351cac9c99325b3328fec46c6a0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_53_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d3a9b8fef102a72847640551ed9b7eed6dbcfdeab4a78451dbffce31f6957834 +size 2422 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_54_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_54_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..10f29bd2d73dd0e09debbf6b62ba070475db4f81 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_54_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:31ec80f4718e68743153ca3cf83798643e26d389a592594a8a60065cc0e38f5a +size 2308 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_55_Picture_25.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_55_Picture_25.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..09c52dfe9b7237ec7a53c2a4860c73c7407e0a00 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_55_Picture_25.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a25889de15929ad1bc6a273f5346d54fb84e9fa0af9ae5cbecb06b6f6edefd8a +size 2443 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_56_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_56_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..67c01244d26f7dc0d6fb9901a1c1fd1eeb851d85 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_56_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:dd87eb108afbf551520b0b1a59e81b6759b56fa30a86bcb576859b241fe941b7 +size 2334 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_57_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_57_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4d65ed9525b738e11a9b99d850deeb4d3409474c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_57_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:bc3cf64a1f6e8f356f6495e8b9240ad01a5c951d6428f2e9b835d78f998c9b10 +size 2376 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7b455186f6d4cf0635a1e28fb0feaa1732dd3219 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_5_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ca11552addb889e66a20c0fd25efc3187830353e5cd2ba83d031b0f4ed4f1494 +size 2419 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1e9d934fb28fc4690fe7c31cf25708661b47227b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e9200f7cce6d3db2b7f9d72d051c892929c8a8f9570c1a1d874310e08d7de07a +size 2430 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_7_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_7_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..259b2e192d296e17cd1f1b83ce7068457275e3b7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_7_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0a07cee8ed1edc5e848d62e032cc44c45aaeda0c2998230b87789dec6e6f76eb +size 2433 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_8_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_8_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..76c42826fa2c81c949f66eb8a2dd3397a82cb1bd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_8_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:eef2de3dd4d4d17fd89294ebfe5e0221b5a5152da8a64bab1b089a281f1db495 +size 2440 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_9_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_9_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..37e21d6083e49ac97b9bd2ed4c301e7db76ff227 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747859/_page_9_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b9ab4d9e9aa1db7306efe6fd47028d1ff36e74e7e387800ff0e933d17158acfd +size 2468 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747917/EFTA02747917.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747917/EFTA02747917.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0a21f7a4dbc0730baffecc77c807cf6643867d66 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747917/EFTA02747917.md @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S NOTICE OF FILING EXHIBIT A-2 OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE EDE 3861 + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe, hereby files this Notice of Filing Exhibit A-2 of Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Provide Recently Obtained Deposition Testimony and Affidavit Demonstrating Fraudulent Transfers by Epstein in Support of her Motion for Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein and Incorporated Memorandum of Law [DE 386] filed October 30, 2009. Due to the file size uploading limitations of CM/ECF, Exhibits A-2, A-3, A-4 and B could not be filed the Motion. + +Respectfully Submitted, + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 30, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> /s/ J. J. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +## SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court - Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jeoldberner@aowpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidroqarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsbero@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattornev.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747917/EFTA02747917.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747917/EFTA02747917.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..025d1a775389a886d406113d256a5787e2a3c495 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747917/EFTA02747917.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,231 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747917.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2472, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.95, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S NOTICE OF FILING EXHIBIT A-2 OF \nPLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE EDE 3861", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 132.192, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 480.49554443359375, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 480.49554443359375, + 431.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 132.192, + 431.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 312.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 312.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 327.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 327.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 118.25999999999999 + ], + [ + 350.56756591796875, + 118.25999999999999 + ], + [ + 350.56756591796875, + 134.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 134.30352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747917" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/EFTA02747920.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/EFTA02747920.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6080de199f6167664e62e354e13b3e6b607b0f7a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/EFTA02747920.md @@ -0,0 +1,2375 @@ +PLAINTIFF JANE DOES MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROVIDE RECENTLY-OBTAINED DEPOSITION TESTIMONY AND AFFIDAVIT DEMONSTRATING FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS BY EPSTEIN IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER TO TAKE CHARGE OF PROPERTY OF EPSTEIN AND INCORPORATED SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +![](_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg) + +## EXHIBIT A-3 (3 of 4) + +1 with Jeffrey Epstein? + +2 A. I don't know. He doesn't talk much. + +3 4 Q. Okay. And Sandy Berger, do you know who that is? + +5 A. I don't know. + +6 7 Q. Do you know any reason why you would have flown him on the airplane? + +8 A. I don't even know the name. + +9 Q. Adrianna Muchinska? + +10 A. I know the name Adrianna. + +11 12 Q. Somebody who flew on the plane pretty regularly? + +13 14 15 A. I would have to look at the logs. I think we've had that name on several it's acommon first name. I'm not familiar really on who that is. + +16 17 Q. What about Bella, do you know who Bella is? Is that aname you ever heard? + +18 A. Yes. + +19 Q. Works up in the New York office or something? + +20 A. Yes. + +21 Q. Have you ever spoken with Bella personally? + +22 A. Yes. + +23 24 Q. Do you know what she does for Jeffrey Epstein, if anything? + +25 A. I don't know exactly what her role is. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +114 + +![](_page_1_Picture_22.jpeg) + +ESQUJ.137E + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. Do you know -- did you tell me, do you know what Leslie Gruff does for Jeffrey Epstein? + +3 A. I don't know her exact title. + +4 5 Q. You talked to all of these individuals at some point in time, either on the phone or in person, right? + +6 A. Yes. + +7 8 Q. And you don't know whether they play a role in Jeffrey Epstein's life, or if they do, what they do? + +9 A. Exactly. + +10 11 Q. And how do you decide who you're going to call for what reason? + +12 A. For example? Can you be more specific? + +13 14 15 Q. If you're going to make atelephone call and you're going to talk to let's say Leslie Gruff, why would you choose to call her? + +16 17 A. I don't know. You're having me make the phone call. I don't know why I would call her. + +18 Q. Have you ever called her? + +19 A. I think, yes, I've called her, sure. + +20 21 22 Q. Why? What would be the reason that you would call her? Somebody told you to call her? Here, call this number? + +23 24 25 A. I may have called her maybe to find out if we had a departure time for any specific trip. Imean, that would be... + +![](_page_2_Picture_18.jpeg) + +115 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. Okay. So you're calling her related to Jeffrey Epstein? + +3 A. Sure. + +4 5 Q. Okay. So you know that she plays some role in some aspect of Jeffrey Epstein's life, whatever that is? + +6 A. Right. + +7 8 9 10 11 Q. Okay. So when I'm asking these questions about these people, and I feel like I'm getting answers that I'm not really not sure that these people have any role in their life, that's not that's not completely accurate, right? + +12 MR. CRITTON: Form; argumentative. + +13 BY MR. + +14 15 16 17 18 Q. I mean, you do know that somehow involved with him, whether these people are socially or business-wise or otherwise, and during the course of your years, you've made telephone calls on his behalf or to coordinate things with them right? + +19 A. Right. + +20 21 MR. CRITTON: Object to the form. You said "these people." + +22 BY MR. + +23 24 Q. I'm talking about . That's somebody you called before, right? + +25 A. Sure. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +116 + +![](_page_3_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQVIllon" + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +BY MR. 117 + +What would be a reason you called =II + +MR. CRITTON: Object to form. Probably the same reasons he said two hours ago, for scheduling purposes. But you've covered that. Go ahead and answer it again. + +THE WITNESS: For scheduling purposes, would be my only reason to call her. + +Q. That's funny that you used the exact same words that Mr. Critton wants you to use. + +MR. CRITTON: It's what he said two hours ago. + +BY MR. + +Q. What would be the reason why you would call Ms. Maxwell, Ghislaine Maxwell? + +A. Same reason. + +Q. That's not somebody you call these days, though, right? + +A. I haven't seen her in some time. + +Q. What made you stop calling Ghislaine Maxwell where you thought at one point in time you thought she was a person to call related to your job? + +A. Just was no reason to. + +Q. Is that somebody who you think is still affiliated or associated with Jeffrey Epstein or his -- + +![](_page_4_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.00m + +1 whatever he does? + +2 A. I'd only can speculating. I don't know. + +3 Q• All right. Do you know the number + +4 (917)868-6145? + +5 MR. CRITTON: Could you say it slowly. 917? + +6 7 8 MR. MEM 868-6145. Thank you. And just in case you didn't get it, I'm going to mark these as an exhibit so that we can read them later. + +9 BY MR. + +10 Q. Do you know that number? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 Q. What is that number? + +13 A. That's my cell phone. + +14 Q. Okay. Is that still your cell phone? + +15 A. Yes, sir. + +16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. All right. I'm going to show you two documents here or pieces of paper. We'll mark them as Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 3. The first one is dated March 5th, 2005. Do you remember making this telephone call? And just for the record, this looks like a message that's being taken relative to aphone call that you made. + +23 24 MR. REINHART: So the question is does he remember making the phone call? + +25 + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +118 + +![](_page_5_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +119 + +3 Q. Do you remember making that phone call after reading the message? + +6 MR. REINHART: The question is, do you remember making the call? + +8 9 THE WITNESS: Okay, let me. "Person for the car will be here in 15 minutes to drop off foam and papers." I don't know. + +10 BY MR. + +11 0. That doesn't mean anything to you? + +12 13 A. That doesn't -- I mean, you're talking four years ago. I can't answer that accurately. I mean... + +14 15 MR. REINHART: So the answer is you don't recall? + +16 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I don't recall. + +17 BY MR. + +18 Q. If you don't remember, that's fine. + +19 20 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Nos. 2 AND 3 were marked for identification.) + +21 BY MR. + +22 23 24 25 Q. So I'll show you Exhibit 3, the same type of document, and I can make the representation that this was message pads provided by the state attorney's office relative to the criminal investigation revolving around + +BY MR. a: + +A. Let me look at the date here. Okay. March. + +![](_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Jeffrey Epstein. So that's how I have these documents. I'm not trying to pull out old documents. + +3 MR. CRITTON: What's the date? + +4 MR. IIIIIIIII March 19th. + +5 6 MR. REINHART: The question is, do you remember the call? + +7 8 9 THE WITNESS: "Tom from Midnight Express is at" -- help me out -- "convention center with new boat. They are two points -- two parts of this." + +10 MR' BY + +11 Q. "Show"? + +12 A. "Show up the water" -- + +13 MR. REINHART: "On the water." + +14 15 THE WITNESS: "On the water and at the center." + +16 BY MR. + +17 Q. Do you remember making that call? + +18 19 20 A. No. I mean, "Tom from Midnight Express is at convention center with new boat. They are two parts of" -- I mean -- + +21 22 23 Q. But as Jeffrey Epstein's pilot, why would you be leaving such a message about Tom from Midnight Express relative to boats and aboat show? + +24 25 A. I help out with boat purchases or, you know, anything to do with, you know, that moves. So I mean, + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +120 + +![](_page_7_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE \_m\_..."." + +Toil Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 + +2 3 Q. Okay. When you say "you help out with boat purchases," what do you mean? + +4 5 6 A. Give my opinion, whether or not whether to buy acertain boat. It's just a hobby. I have knowledge on boats. Not only just airplanes but, you know. + +7 Q. You give your opinion to whom? + +8 A. To Jeffrey. + +9 10 Q. Okay. And Jeffrey Epstein obviously, at least in your mind, you believe he wants your opinion? + +11 A. Yes. + +12 13 Q. Okay. So boats is another thing that the two of you have discussed? + +14 A. Yes. + +15 16 17 18 Q. All right. And so this aconversation or at least some evidence that aconversation existed between yourself and Jeffrey Epstein relative to aboat or a boat show? + +19 A. Correct. + +20 Q. Do you remember having that conversation? + +21 22 23 A. We've had many conversations about boats and different boat shows. If you're referring to this one in '05, I don't recall this one. + +24 25 Q. Okay. So aside from being a pilot -- which throughout this entire deposition I believe your + +121 + +![](_page_8_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE it Aland.: GAIL, CO112607 + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +122 + +testimony has been, you know, you're just the pilot for him -- it looks like there's some other role that you're playing here in his life. I'm not suggesting that you are or you are not. I'm just saying from the appearance of this, it looks that way. Is there anything else that you want to tell me or that you want to clarify in terms of the role that you play in Jeffrey Epstein's life outside of being just his pilot? + +MR. REINHART: Let me object to form. He also told you he installs the audio and video equipment before. + +MR. : Correct. + +THE WITNESS: I have an interest in boats. + +You know, with the island, I don't think I bought any boats, you know, for the company, but he appreciates my opinion on boat purchases. + +BY MR. + +Q. Okay. + +A. Having the knowledge of aviation and things that move quite fast. So I have consulted with him on boat items. + +Q. How many boat purchases are you aware of Jeffrey Epstein making in the time period that you've known him? + +A. Two or three. + +![](_page_9_Picture_14.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE an Almsda01:10C•SPn7 + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. And has he consulted with you on each of those purchases? + +3 A. Not every one of them, no. + +4 5 Q. Does he own any boats now that you're aware of? + +6 A. I don't know if he owns them or not. + +7 8 Q. Okay. Do you know of any boats that he controls or maintains? + +9 A. Himself or? + +10 11 12 Q. How about this -- i'll ask you this way. 1 don't want to split hairs with you here: I know we've been talking about corporations and things like that. + +13 A. Yes he. + +14 15 Q. Do you know of any boats that he is the person with the most control over? + +16 A. Yes. + +17 18 Q. Okay. Where would those boats be located and what kind of boat are we talking about? + +19 20 A. St. is the location. It would be a 34-foot inflatable boat. I know that one specifically. + +21 Q. Okay. Do you know when he made that purchase? + +22 23 A. Eight years ago, seven years ago. It was a while ago. + +24 Q. Is that something you had had input in? + +25 A. Not on that one specifically, no. + +123 + +![](_page_10_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE an AlmaOr GLLIOG•apaty + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 Q. Is there any other boat that you know of Jeffrey Epstein being the primary user of or the primary controller of? + +4 5 6 7 8 A. I mean, there's boats in St. IIMII. I mean, it's not part of my job, you know, what goes on with the boats or who controlled them. It's more of an opinion of what horsepower should be on the back of the boat, hull designs. It's out of my area. + +9 10 11 12 Q. But your sole responsibility or your sole obligation that you have ever had with Jeffrey Epstein relative to boats is just giving some opinions about the boat? + +13 A. Mm-hmm. + +14 Q. Is that yes? + +15 A. Yes, yes. + +16 17 Q. Okay. All right. Has he ever given you his opinions about boats? + +18 A. Sure. We've discussed it back and forth. + +19 20 Q. Other than boat conversations, have you ever talked other conversations, such as + +21 A. Cars. + +22 23 24 Q. Okay. How about such as -- have you ever known Jeffrey Epstein to have agirlfriend, somebody you consider a girlfriend? + +25 A. No. + +![](_page_11_Picture_16.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +124 + +ESQUIRE an AI aaaaa r Oa:to C•sp•VY + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 Q. In the 18 years and all the travels you had with him, do you know anything about Jeffrey Epstein's sex life? + +4 A. No. + +5 Q. Do you know who he has sex with? + +6 A. No. + +7 Q. Do you know if he has sex with anybody? + +8 A. I don't know. + +9 10 Q. Do you know if he's ever had sex on the airplane while you've been piloting it? + +11 A. I have no idea. + +12 13 Q. That's something that you just wouldn't know because you're up in the cockpit? + +14 A. That is correct. + +15 16 THE WITNESS: Could I take a two-minute bathroom break just to lose my coffee? + +17 MR. S Sure. + +18 (A break was had at 12:35 p.m.) + +19 BY MR. + +20 21 22 23 24 Q. All right. We're back on the record. Over the years you've indicated that the -- any gifts or other items or things given to you by Jeffrey Epstein exclusively are the pool heater, the 40-acres of land and the -- + +25 A. Use of a company -- + +125 + +![](_page_12_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQVIBX + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL. 33410 www.esquiresolutlons.00m + +1 Q. -- and the use of a company car? + +2 A. Yes. + +3 Q. That's it? + +4 A. (Nodding.) + +5 Q. Okay. + +6 A. Yes, I'm sorry, yes. + +7 8 9 Q. And the flight to Miami that was recently taken, other than Jeffrey Epstein and was there anybody else on that flight? + +10 A. No. + +11 12 Q. How long -- did you also fly them back from Miami to Palm Beach? + +13 A. No. He drove back. + +14 Q. When you say "he drove back," who drove back? + +15 16 A. Well, I assume he drove back. I did not fly him back. + +17 Q. When's the next time you saw him again? + +18 19 A. I would only be guessing. A week later, I mean. + +20 21 Q. Okay. And was that in Palm Beach County when you saw him the next time? + +22 A. Yes, sir. + +23 24 Q. Do you know of him leaving Palm Beach County in the last two years on any other occasion? + +25 A. No. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +126 + +![](_page_13_Picture_22.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 Q. Did he ever fly anywhere else with you either by helicopter or airplane in the last two years? + +3 A. We flew one time to the Sikorsky plant. + +4 Q. What's the Sikorsky plant? + +5 6 A. That's where they build the Sikorsky helicopters. It's in Palm Beach County. + +7 Q. And when was that? + +8 A. Probably a month ago, I'm guessing. + +9 Q. For what purpose? + +10 A. They gave us a tour at a facility. + +11 Q. Who's they? + +12 A. Sikorsky. + +13 Q. And who requested the tour of the facility? + +14 A. They offered it to our flight department. + +15 Q. And who went? + +16 A. Jeffrey, myself, Nadia and Igor. + +17 18 19 Q. And if I wanted documentation of either of those trips, the trip to Miami or the trip to the Sikorsky plant, who would have that documentation? + +20 A. I would. + +21 22 Q. So I could request it from your attorney to get it from you? + +23 MR. REINHART: Let me just check. + +24 (Off the record discussion.) + +25 MR. REINHART: Okay. He has custody of it, + +127 + +![](_page_14_Picture_24.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE ...."...m."." + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 but they're corporate documents. So you'd have to request it from Mr. Critton, who I understand represents all the corporations. + +4 THE WITNESS: Yes. + +5 BY MR. + +6 7 Q. What's the corporation that the document was prepared for? + +8 9 A. Meaning who -- what, like Air Ghislaine, the owner of the helicopter? Yes, Air Ghislaine. + +10 Q. Air Ghislaine? + +11 A. That's the helicopter. + +12 13 14 Q. And the name Ghislaine is obviously not that typical of a name. Is that reference or related to Ghislaine Maxwell? + +15 A. I would assume. I have no knowledge. + +16 Q. Nobody's ever told you that? + +17 A. Nobody's brought it up. + +18 19 Q. Okay. And how long were you at the Sikorsky facility? + +20 A. Three hours, four hours. + +21 Q. And what time of day was this? + +22 23 A. Nine in the morning. Nine, I think, and we returned at one, something like that. + +24 25 Q. And was the purpose to buy or purchase anything? + +![](_page_15_Picture_20.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +128 + +ESQUIRE "......w., + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 A. They have anew helicopter being developed there, so they're trying to look for investors in it. So they were just kind of pushing their product. + +4 5 Q. Do you know what Jeffrey Epstein does for a living for business today, these days? + +6 A. No. + +7 8 Q. Do you know or have you ever been to the Florida Science Foundation? + +9 A. Yes, sir. + +10 11 Q. And do you know what the Florida Science Foundation does? + +12 A. Not exactly. + +13 Q. Well, generally? + +14 A. No, I don't. I mean, really, I don't. + +15 16 17 Q. Okay. Is it your understanding that Jeffrey Epstein is somehow affiliated with the Florida Science Foundation? + +18 A. It's my understanding that, yes. + +19 20 21 Q. I mean, did you just by happenstance stumble into the Florida Science Foundation, or was it related to your relationship with Jeffrey Epstein? + +22 23 A. I've heard that's where his office was. I mean, I have no other -- + +24 Q. Why did you go there? + +25 A. Talk about airplanes. + +129 + +ESQUIRE ,..., + +![](_page_16_Picture_19.jpeg) + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. Talk to who? + +2 A. Jeffrey. + +3 4 Q. Jeffrey just happened to be at the Florida Science Foundation? + +5 A. Yes. + +6 7 Q. How did you know that he was going to be at the Florida Science Foundation? + +8 A. He called me and told me. + +9 10 Q. And he said come to the Florida Science Foundation to talk to me about what? + +11 12 A. Maintenance on the airplanes, upcoming. It's an ongoing. + +13 Q. And did he have an office there? + +14 A. Yes. + +15 16 Q. So this is -- when you walked in, this is the place that's right next to Jack Goldberger's office? + +17 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +18 THE WITNESS: Yes. + +19 BY MR. + +20 21 Q. And you walk in and there's areception desk right there? + +22 A. Yes. + +23 24 Q. Is that where you talked or did you talk somewhere behind that reception desk? + +25 A. Behind the reception area. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +130 + +![](_page_17_Picture_22.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE "Aka... , Gall, Co pant + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. Back in his office? + +2 A. Yes, sir. + +3 Q. What was that conversation? + +4 5 A. Give me a time frame. I mean, I've been there several times. + +6 7 Q. Okay. How many times do you think you've been to the Florida Science Foundation? + +8 A. Twenty, thirty. Imean... + +9 10 Q. Well, the Florida Science Foundation's only been around since late 2007; is that right? + +11 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +12 BY MR. + +13 Q. Something around that? + +14 A. I don't know exactly. + +15 16 17 Q. All right. So in the last 20 years -- in the last couple of years you've been there 20 or 30 times, approximately? + +18 A. Yes, sir. + +19 20 21 22 Q. And during those times when you've been there, without having to go through each conversation, did you ever talk to him about the fact that he was on probation or that he was + +23 A. No. + +24 Q. -- any part of the criminal investigation? + +25 A. No, not at all. + +131 + +![](_page_18_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutIons.com + +1 Q. What was the purpose of the conversation? + +2 3 4 5 6 A. We were sometimes talking about TVs, you know, the latest plasma that's out there, LCD, you know, setting up a stereo systems, you know, in the Palm Beach house. That's usually the main thrust of our conversations these days. + +7 8 9 Q. How would you know to go to the Florida Science Foundation on each of those occasions? Would he just call you? + +10 11 A. Yeah, he would call me and say come on by or I got a brochure on a new Samsung. + +12 13 Q. With each time you were at the Florida Science Foundation, how long would you stay typically? + +14 15 A. Ten, fifteen minutes. Not much more than that. + +16 17 Q. You would go there for ten or fifteen minutes, have a conversation about aTV and leave? + +18 A. Yes, sir. + +19 20 Q. Why couldn't you have that conversation over the phone? What was it about? + +21 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +22 23 24 25 THE WITNESS: If it was pertaining to a TV and I'd have a brochure, a picture of the TV -- one particular TV we looked at it was the size of a like five foot diagonal, so I had aphoto of myself + +![](_page_19_Picture_15.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +132 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +133 + +standing next to it or the salesperson. So I mean, there's a reason to visually show him something reference to that. + +6 Q. Did you ever communicate with Jeffrey Epstein -- you can send him an e-mail, right? You could have done that? + +9 10 Q. To send him the picture or something like that, that was an option? + +11 A. Right. + +12 13 Q. And what's Jeffrey Epstein's e-mail address that you use? + +14 15 16 A. I have to do it on my computer, you know, with -- I have to type in the prompts for it because it's a long e-mail address. + +17 18 Q. Okay. How long have you e-mail corresponded with Jeffrey Epstein? + +19 20 21 A. Probably two years. A year to two years. I mean, it's fairly -- something we just started doing. I mean, we'd never done that in the past. + +22 23 Q. Well, in the past he was in jail or have some restrictions? + +24 A. The restrictions, yes. + +25 Q. So you you'd see him on the airplane + +BY MR. MM + +A. Yes. + +![](_page_20_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 frequently? + +2 A. Exactly. + +3 4 5 Q. So when you didn't see him on the airplane frequently, then some of your correspondence was by e-mail, other times by telephone? + +6 A. Mm-hmm. + +7 Q. And other times in person? + +8 A. Yes. + +9 10 11 Q. And what was your e-mail -- what was the substance of the e-mail correspondence that you would have with Jeffrey Epstein? + +12 13 A. It would have to be related. I mean, you have to give me a topic. I mean, whether it be a car -- + +14 Q. Never about the criminal investigation? + +15 A. IS no, no, never. + +16 17 Q. Do you know what his intention is or his plans are for when he is off probation? + +18 A. No idea. + +19 Q. Or off community control? + +20 A. I have no idea. + +21 22 23 Q. Has he ever indicated to you he wants you to fly him to some other location outside the United States to live permanently? + +24 A. •, no. + +25 Q. Have you ever flown to his place in Paris? + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +134 + +![](_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE an Alesadei 03:10 Gan.) + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. We've landed in Paris. + +2 3 Q. You're aware that he has some control over another piece of property over there? + +4 5 A. I know we've picked up luggage at aresidence. Idon't know to what extent his ownership is, if any. + +6 Q. All right. + +7 A. Right. + +8 9 Q. And are you aware that he has some employees that listen to what he says that work in that house? + +10 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +11 12 THE WITNESS: In Paris, yes, there is one person there. + +13 BY MR. + +14 Q. What's his name? + +15 16 A. Voltzan. Because I always thought there was nobody there. + +17 Q. Vultzan Cauldron (phonetic)? + +18 19 A. I don't know exactly. I would have to look it up. + +20 Q. Have you talked to him before? + +21 A. No. + +22 Q. When you've been in Paris -- + +23 A. You're not going to ask why? + +24 Q. Well, I'm assuming he doesn't speak English. + +25 A. There you go, okay. + +135 + +![](_page_22_Picture_23.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. So I thought there was no need for that? + +2 A. Okay. I just wanted to see. + +3 4 Q. Where do you stay when Jeffrey Epstein is in Paris? + +5 A. A hotel. + +6 7 Q. Okay. And in New Mexico, when you land there, you stay on the ranch somewhere, but at your place? + +8 A. I stay at my place. + +9 10 Q. And in New York, you have an apartment that he sets you up at, right, the 301? + +11 A. Yes, I have aplace I could stay. + +12 Q. And in St. + +13 A. Hotel. + +14 Q. And in Paris you stay at ahome? + +15 A. (Nodding.) + +16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. Are there any other properties such as what we were talking about today -- I'm not saying Jeffrey Epstein is the sole owner or direct owner, but any other properties that you're familiar with that Jeffrey Epstein is -- has direct access to and at least it gives the appearance to you that he is the owner or controller of that property? + +23 + +24 25 THE WITNESS: Name the list that you've stated. + +![](_page_23_Picture_19.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +136 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +ESQUIRE az Mande:Gill\*Conran + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR.~: + +2 Q. The Manhattan house. + +3 A. Yes. + +4 5 6 Q. Mansion or whatever we want to call it, the Zorro Ranch, the island of St. James, the Palm Beach house. + +7 A. Mm-hmm. + +8 Q. And the Paris place. + +9 A. That's all I'm aware of. + +10 11 12 Q. And have you ever at any of those five places hung around him and stayed around him for during the daytime for the course of an entire day? + +13 A. No. + +14 15 Q. All right. So do you know what he does during his days while he's there? + +16 A. No. + +17 18 Q. Are you aware of a list of underage girls that is kept to come over and service him each of those days? + +19 + +20 + +21 BY MR. + +22 23 Q. I'm the first person to ever even imply that to you, right? + +24 A. A list, yes, you are. + +25 Q. Okay. Have you ever been made aware that + +137 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: Absolutely not. + +![](_page_24_Picture_22.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 keeps a list of underage girls to service Jeffrey Epstein for sexual purposes? + +3 A. I am not aware of them. + +4 MR. CRITTON: Form to the last question. + +5 BY MR. + +6 7 8 9 Q. Have you ever been made aware that Ghislaine Maxwell keeps a list of girls in the nearby areas of each of -- at Jeffrey Epstein's residences to service him sexually? + +10 A. No. + +11 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +12 BY MR. + +13 14 15 16 Q. Okay. Have you ever read some of the complaints that have been filed against him in the various courts, whether state court or federal court, against Jeffrey Epstein? + +17 A. No, I have not. + +18 19 20 Q. All right. So this Jane Doe 102 versus Jeffrey Epstein, you're not familiar with who that person is? + +21 A. No idea. + +22 23 Q. Okay. I'm going to mark Jane Doe, one of the 22, versus Epstein as Exhibit No. 4 to this deposition. + +24 25 (Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 4 was marked for identification.) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +138 + +![](_page_25_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE at Ahaabitc 04110 COSN.7 + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR. IIIIIII + +2 3 4 5 Q. And ask you about some of the allegations in here and see if you know anything about them. It indicates he owns aflight of aircraft that includes a Gulfstream, a helicopter, and aBoeing 727. True? + +6 MR. CRITTON: What's the question? + +7 THE WITNESS: Please repeat. + +8 BY MR. MEN + +9 10 11 Q. Are you aware of him owning a Gulfstream IV aircraft, a helicopter and aBoeing 727? I think we talked about it, right? + +12 A. Right. + +13 14 Q. Okay. And it indicates afleet of motor vehicles? + +15 16 17 MR. CRITTON: Wait aminute. He said right, is that we talked about it, as distinct from him knowing one way or another. + +18 THE WITNESS: What's the question? + +19 BY MR. + +20 Q. Do you know that he owns those things? + +21 A. I do not know that he owns them. + +22 Q. Do you believe that he owns those things? + +23 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +24 THE WITNESS: I would be guessing, so... + +25 + +139 + +![](_page_26_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR.IIIIIII: + +2 3 Q. What does the company NES, LLC, do to your knowledge? + +4 A. I have no idea. + +5 6 Q. How does that company generate profit, if you know? + +7 A. I have no idea. + +8 9 10 Q. That's the company that pays your paycheck, but you have absolutely no clue what they do to generate money? + +11 A. No, sir. + +12 Q. If anything? + +13 A. Correct. + +14 15 Q. Have you ever heard that that company generates money through sex trafficking of young girls? + +16 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +17 THE WITNESS: Absolutely not. + +18 BY MR. : + +19 20 21 22 Q. Never, okay. Have you ever heard that Jeffrey Epstein has a sexual preference for underage girls? Other than what you've read in the newspaper, have you heard that from any other individuals before? + +23 A. No. + +24 25 Q. Ever heard that he has had sex or sexual relationships with many minor girls, some as young as 12 + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +140 + +![](_page_27_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE . Al TiRdet ailloCa.P.... + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 years old? + +2 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +3 THE WITNESS: No. + +4 BY MR.S + +5 Q. Never? + +6 A. Never. + +7 8 9 Q. Have you ever seen any photographs in any of his homes depicting young-looking girls engaging in sex acts? + +10 A. No. + +11 12 Q. Or reading directly from the complaint, "engaged in lewd acts"? + +13 A. No, absolutely not. + +14 15 Q. Have you looked around the walls of his various homes when you're in there picking up luggage? + +16 17 18 A. I mean, not any more than I walked in here and not looking at the walls over there, I couldn't tell you what those are; so nothing specific. + +19 20 Q. Sometimes we're talking about a50,000 square foot house? + +21 A. Exactly. + +22 Q. In Manhattan? + +23 A. It's pretty big. + +24 25 Q. Okay. Have you ever looked at any of his computers for any reason? + +141 + +![](_page_28_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. No. + +2 Q. I know that you helped set up some of the + +3 A. Computers are not my expertise. + +4 5 6 Q. All right. Have you ever been told that Mr. Epstein committed sex acts against underage girls on aliteral daily basis, that's what he does? + +7 A. I've never been told that. + +B 9 Q. Have you ever read the complaints against him that indicate that's what he does on adaily basis? + +10 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +11 THE WITNESS: No. + +12 BY MR. + +13 14 15 Q. So in your mind, you never believed that you were transporting around somebody whose sole goal in life is to get -- have sex with little girls? + +16 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +17 THE WITNESS: i never believed that, no. + +18 BY MR. + +19 20 21 22 Q. Okay. Have you ever been told that he conspired with others, including assistants and/or his drivers and/or pilots and his friend Ghislaine Maxwell, to further these sex acts and to avoid police detection? + +23 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +24 BY MR. : + +25 Q. Have you ever -- anybody ever questioned you + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +142 + +![](_page_29_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toil Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +143 + +3 MR. REINHART: Hold on. The question is have you ever been told that fact that he just read to you? + +5 BY MR. + +6 Q. Right. + +8 9 10 Q. Has anybody ever questioned you about your possible involvement with helping to facilitate Mr. Epstein have sex with underage girls? + +11 A. No. + +12 13 14 Q. When you were questioned by either the police or the -- whoever the investigative resource that was being used at the time? + +15 A. Right. + +16 17 Q. Do you remember who that person was that was questioning you? + +18 A. No, I don't remember. + +19 20 Q. I know you don't know the location where it was, but do you remember who they were affiliated with? + +21 A. No. + +22 Q. Was it only one time? + +23 A. Yes. + +24 25 Q. Did you also have to testify before a grand jury proceeding? + +![](_page_30_Picture_20.jpeg) + +about that? + +A. I have never been told that fact. + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. No, I did not. + +2 3 Q. Have you ever known Mr. Epstein to get a massage while on an airplane? + +4 5 6 PHONE ATTORNEY: This is everybody in Boone, Charles and the witness is here and the court reporter and the videographer. + +7 8 MR. : Fantastic, but I think that you may have the wrong room. + +9 PHONE ATTORNEY: I was told to ask for 856. + +10 11 MR. Let's go off the record. (Off the record discussion.) + +12 BY MR. • + +13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Q. All right. In the complaint, I'm going to tell you what it alleges and I'm going to ask if this helps to refresh your recollection about any of Jeffrey Epstein's activities. The defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, transported the plaintiff to another state in order to engage in sex acts with her. And this occurred when she was merely 15 years old. + +20 21 Do you remember transporting somebody that looked like they were 15 years old on your airplane? + +22 A. No, sir. + +23 24 25 Q. You never remember taking a 15-year-old, or somebody that looks around that approximate age, on your airplane? + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +144 + +![](_page_31_Picture_15.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +145 + +6 9 10 11 Q. Well, I know that you've indicated earlier in the deposition that you remember some girls under the age of 18 on the airplane. And so let me ask, before I get back into this, whether all those individuals you were talking about were accompanied by a parent or some of those people were on the airplane for some other purpose, modeling, or you don't know why they were there? I'm going to let you elaborate on who these people are that you believe may have been under the age of 18 and why you think they were on the airplane? + +12 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +13 14 15 16 17 18 19 THE WITNESS: We've had younger people on the airplane that have been, you know, with their family members, like you said. I don't remember transporting anybody that was of questionable age. I'm not -- I'd only be guessing at somebody's age if I didn't ID them at the foot of the airplane. So I can't guess to their age. + +20 BY MR. : + +21 22 23 24 Q. All right. "Mr. Epstein used his private jet to transport the minor plaintiff to Manhattan where he provided her spending money and accommodations with him at his mansion." + +25 Do you have any idea who that might be + +A. Can you be more specific? + +![](_page_32_Picture_11.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 referring to? + +2 + +3 + +4 BY MR. IIIIIMI + +5 6 7 Q. And you don't remember being a pilot of an airplane where he was transporting a 15-year-old to Manhattan from Miami or Palm Beach? + +8 9 A. No. I'd be guessing at somebody's age and I can't guess. + +10 11 12 13 Q. "Defendant transported plaintiff in his private jet to locations that included Palm Beach, New York City, Santa Fe, Los Angeles, San Francisco, St. Louis." + +14 15 Do you remember ever piloting his airplane to those destinations that I just mentioned? + +16 MR. REINHART: Can we break them down? + +17 Objection; compound. + +18 MR. : Okay. + +19 BY MR. : + +20 21 Q. Have you ever flown his airplane to Palm Beach? + +22 A. Yes, sir. + +23 24 Q. Okay. Have you ever flown it to New York City? + +25 A. Yes. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +146 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: No, sir. + +![](_page_33_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE "......., + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. To Santa Fe? + +2 A. Yes. + +3 Q. To Los Angeles? + +4 A. Yes. + +S Q. To San Francisco? + +6 A. Yes. + +7 Q. To St. Louis? + +8 A. Yes. + +9 10 11 Q. All right. Continuing to international destinations, including Europe, have you ever flown it to Europe? + +12 A. Yes. + +13 Q. The Caribbean? + +14 A. Yes. + +15 Q. And Africa? + +16 A. Yes. + +17 18 19 20 Q. On those flights to those various places, is it your -- to the best of your knowledge, you were unaware of Jeffrey Epstein engaging in sex with underage girls on his airplane? + +21 + +22 23 THE WITNESS: I have no knowledge of any of that. + +24 BY MR. + +25 Q. "He provided accommodations with him in order + +147 + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +ESQUIRE ....... + +![](_page_34_Picture_23.jpeg) + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquIresolutions.com + +1 2 3 to have her available to him at all times whenever he wanted, including while transporting the minor plaintiff on his private jet." + +4 That's something that you had no knowledge of? + +5 A. (Witness shakes head.) + +6 Q. You have to a yes or no. + +7 A. I'm sorry, no. + +8 9 10 11 12 Q. "Each time they would travel to one of these destinations, the same pattern of sexual abuse would occur, often with a vast array of aspiring models, actresses, celebrities, and/or other females, including minors from all over the world." + +13 14 Again, that's something you have no personal knowledge of? + +15 A. No. + +16 17 18 19 20 Q. Has anybody ever indicated that if you did have personal knowledge of some of these things, then you could also have been implicated in some form of a crime? Has any law enforcement or anybody ever indicated that to you? + +21 A. No. + +22 23 Q. Okay. Is that something you've ever worried about? + +24 A. No. + +25 Q. All right. "Upon information and belief, + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +148 + +![](_page_35_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE "..."... " ... + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +10 11 A. I'd have to look at the flight logs, but I personally don't remember flying into Turkey. + +12 13 14 Q. And would the flight logs coming into the United States from Turkey indicate the names of the people on the plane? + +15 A. They might. + +16 17 Q. Okay. Where would I get those particular flight logs that would have that information? + +18 A. Depended upon what year you're talking. + +19 20 Q. We're talking in this particular complaint between 1998 and 2002. + +21 22 A. I'm not -- I don't possess those passenger manifests. + +23 Q. Do you know who would possess those? + +24 A. That would be I guess -- + +25 MR. REINHART: Do you know who has them today? + +149 + +defendant transported minor girls from Turkey." Did you ever leave in one of his airplanes out of Turkey? + +A. I'd have to look at the records. I don't recall Turkey. + +Q. Do you ever remember taking any minor girls out of Turkey? + +A. No, I don't remember. + +Q. What records would you have to look at to see if you took people out or left out of Turkey? + +![](_page_36_Picture_19.jpeg) + +ESQUIBE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 THE WITNESS: I do not know who has them today. + +3 BY MR. + +4 Q. Who did you give them to? + +5 6 7 A. Actually, I didn't give them to anybody. Dave Rogers was in possession of those logs. So I don't know where they are right now. + +8 9 10 11 12 Q. You're still thinking that the best evidence of that, any flight that may have left out of Turkey, would be in the flight logs that's marked as Composite Exhibit 1, or are we talking about the manifests that we've been referring to? + +13 14 A. I don't know how accurate that log book is or even how accurate the passenger manifest is. + +15 16 17 Q. Okay. So there may be no actual documentation indicating a flight leaving out of Turkey when, in fact, aflight may have left out of Turkey? + +18 A. Correct. + +19 20 21 Q. Okay. The Czech Republic is the next place listed. Is that aplace you've flown to or from in a Jeffrey Epstein airplane? + +22 A. More specific, could you name the city? + +23 24 25 Q. I can't name the city, at least the complaint doesn't name the city. But I've been to the Czech Republic before. Anywhere within that country, have you + +![](_page_37_Picture_15.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +150 + +ESQUIRE ".\_.th.Q"" + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +9 10 A. Exactly. Best of my knowledge, I don't remember. + +11 12 Q. Do you remember the reason for going to Turkey or to Prague? + +13 A. No. + +14 15 Q. This also says Asia. Have you ever flown to or from Asia with Jeffrey Epstein? + +16 A. Yes. + +17 Q. Or on a Jeffrey Epstein airplane? + +18 A. Yes. + +19 20 Q. Do you know the purpose of those flights to and from Asia? + +21 A. No. + +22 23 24 Q. Did it ever occur to you that maybe it was to pick up minor girls for him to have sex with on the back of the airplane? + +25 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +151 + +ever flown to or from in a Jeffrey Epstein airplane? + +A. We have flown to Prague. + +Q. Okay. Have you picked people up in Prague and flown out of Prague? + +A. I don't remember. + +Q. I'm not saying no, you didn't, but -- + +A. Best of my knowledge. + +Q. -- you don't remember? + +![](_page_38_Picture_22.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +B + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +152 + +THE WITNESS: Never occurred to me. + +BY MR. IIIIIII + +Q. Did you ever hear that he maintained some of these underage girls as sex slaves -- + +A. Never heard of such athing. + +Q. -- from the age of 12 through the age of 16? + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: No knowledge of that. + +BY MR. + +Q. Ever picked up girls that looked young, many of whom who spoke no English? Do you ever remember that? + +A. Zero, do not. + +Q. All right. The complaint goes on to say, "Plaintiff was required to be sexually exploited by defendant's adult male peers, including royalty." So I'm going to talk, do you have any familiarity with Prince Andrew? + +A. I know who he is. + +Q. Was he ever on the airplane? + +A. He may have been on the airplane. + +Q. Do you remember him on the airplane with young girls? + +A. No, I do not. + +Q. Do you remember Jeffrey Epstein flying in to + +![](_page_39_Picture_38.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 meet with Prince Andrew? + +2 3 A. I don't remember. I know that happened, but I couldn't be accurate. + +4 5 6 Q. Has Prince Andrew ever been on the airplane at the same time as a young girl, to the best of your memory and knowledge? + +7 A. To the best of my knowledge, no. + +8 9 10 Q. This also says politicians, talking about local or U.S. politicians. Do you remember certain politicians being on the airplane? + +11 A. No -- I mean yes, I do. + +12 Q. What politicians would that be? + +13 A. President Clinton. + +14 Q. Okay. Who else? + +15 16 A. Former president of Israel -- help me out with the name, Barak? + +17 Q. Ehud Barak? + +18 A. Yes, those are the two that I remember. + +19 20 Q. How many times was Ehud Barak on the airplane that you piloted for Mr. Epstein? + +21 A. Maybe once. + +22 23 Q. And where did that flight pick up and where did it go to, to the best of your memory? + +24 25 A. Best of my memory, it was Palm Beach to Teterboro. + +153 + +![](_page_40_Picture_20.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE en At me Ate Gilt. Ceaas 37 + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. Where is Teterboro? + +2 A. In New Jersey. + +3 4 Q. And what was the purpose of that flight, do you know? + +5 A. I don't know. + +6 Q. Was Jeffrey Epstein on the flight? + +7 8 A. I'd have to look at the flight logs to guarantee. + +9 10 Q. Anything about that flight stick out in your mind? + +11 A. None. + +12 13 Q. Such as a fine needing to be paid because it left after 10:00 p.m.? + +14 A. For that was the flight, yes. + +15 Q. You remember that? + +16 A. It's coming back to me. + +17 18 Q. And do you remember young girls being on that flight? + +19 A. No. + +20 Q. All right. + +21 A. I remember the fine. + +22 Q. Do you remember who paid the fine? + +23 24 25 MR. CRITTON: Hold on. Let me object to form of the question. "Do you remember" it suggests that there were. So form, predicate. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +154 + +![](_page_41_Picture_22.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 BY MR. =M.: + +2 3 Q. Okay. Do you remember who else was on that flight that left after 10 p.m.? + +4 A. No, I do not. + +5 Q. Do you remember why it left after 10 p.m.? + +6 A. No, I do not. + +7 8 Q. Do you remember Jeffrey Epstein instructing you to wait until after 10 p.m. to leave? + +9 A. No. + +10 11 Q. Would you have listened to him if he had told you -- if he had instructed you to do that? + +12 A. I don't understand the question. + +13 14 15 16 Q. Well, if he told you wait until after 10 p.m., I realize there's going to be a fine, but wait until after 10 p.m. to leave, intentionally leaving after 10 p.m., do you remember that instruction ever + +17 A. No, I don't remember that instruction. + +18 Q. Okay. + +19 20 21 A. I mean, it just happened to be departing after 10 and there is a penalty for leaving after 10 for noise. So there was no intention to... + +22 23 24 25 Q. All right. This also talks about this particular person 15 years old being sexually exploited by businessmen and/or other professional or personal acquaintances. Are you aware of other personal or + +![](_page_42_Picture_18.jpeg) + +155 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 professional acquaintances of Jeffrey Epstein also sexually abusing or exploiting little kids or underage girls on your airplane? + +4 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +5 THE WITNESS: No. + +6 BY MR. + +7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Q. If you had been aware that Mr. Epstein was - and by this -- this is more in the form of a hypothetical, and that I'm not going to suggest to you it's a fact that he was. But if you had been aware that every single day Jeffrey Epstein's goal was to locate underage girls for the purposes of sex, and either have sex with them on the airplane or at some other designation that you were destination that you were traveling him to, would you have continued to pilot those planes? + +17 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +18 THE WITNESS: You said it was hypothetical? + +19 BY MR. + +20 Q. Right, it is a hypothetical. + +21 22 23 A. Why would I want to answer that? Because you're being hypothetical. I mean, it would obviously be wrong. + +24 25 Q. Sure. Well, a hypothetical question is a legal question that I'm allowed to ask. + +![](_page_43_Picture_15.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +156 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +3. A. Okay. + +2 3 4 5 6 Q. And I'm just asking you if you did have knowledge that Jeffrey Epstein was having sex with little girls either on the plane or at aplace that you were taking him to or from on adaily basis, that's what he did, would you have continued to be his pilot? + +7 8 9 10 11 MR. CRITTON: Let me object. Object to the form. It's argumentative. It has no more value than assuming he was chopping up bodies or anybody was chopping up bodies in the plane you're flying. What difference does it make? Form. + +12 13 14 15 MR. What difference does it make in acase about him having sex with little girls? I'm not going to argue with you about it. You've stated your objection. + +16 17 MR. CRITTON: Exactly. It's an argumentative question. + +18 19 MR. : I'm not going to argue with you about it. + +20 21 MR. CRITTON: You're arguing with him about now. + +22 23 MR. No, I'm asking him the hypothetical. + +24 BY MR. + +25 Q. Can you answer that? Would you have continued + +157 + +![](_page_44_Picture_14.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE Almadet GilJeCeepiar + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.corn + +1 2 3 to be a pilot for somebody who's traveling to and from destinations with the goal of having sex with underage girls? + +4 M\$,•. CRITTON: Form. + +5 6 7 BY THE WITNESS: It could be any person. It doesn't have to be Jeffrey Epstein, then, right? MR. + +8 Q. True. + +9 10 A. No, I wouldn't pilot an airplane if there was wrongdoing going on. + +11 Q. That you knew about? + +12 A. That i knew you about, sure. + +13 14 Q. Me reading this complaint to you, is this the first time you've heard these allegations -- + +15 A. Yes. + +16 Q. -- against Mr. Epstein? + +17 A. Yes. + +18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. It goes on to say, "On one of Epstein's birthdays, a friend of Epstein sent him three 12-year-old girls from France who spoke no English for the purpose of -- for defendant to sexually exploit and abuse. After doing so, they were sent back to France the next day." + +24 Are you familiar with that occasion? + +25 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +158 + +![](_page_45_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 + +2 + +3 + +4 + +5 + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 + +22 + +23 + +24 + +25 + +BY MR. + +159 + +THE WITNESS: Never he atnaliailla + +you know of any friends that he has in France that would send him birthday present? + +A. No. + +Q. Do you know of him receiving any birthday gifts or birthday people from anyone? + +A. Never. + +Q. This particular person that filed this complaint, Jane Doe 102, indicates "Defendant and Ghislaine Maxwell acknowledged and celebrated plaintiff's 16th birthday." + +Do you remember them celebrating somebody who you flew on the airplane's 16th birthday? + +A. I don't recall. + +Q. Any of this jog your memory as to who is? + +A. No. + +Q. "From the age of 15, plaintiff" -- this Jane Doe 102 -- "was sexually exploited and abused by defendant on a daily basis and often multiple times each day." + +So going back, was there ever aday where you were with Jeffrey Epstein where you could observe him + +![](_page_46_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE n\*know Gain nonn + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 and during an entire day? + +2 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +3 4 THE WITNESS: I don't remember so I couldn't answer the question. + +5 BY MR. + +6 7 8 9 Q. "In September 2002, Defendant Epstein purchased a commercial round-trip airline ticket and provided a passport, U.S. currency and accommodations for plaintiff to fly to Thailand." + +10 11 Do you remember him doing that for anybody around that time period? + +12 A. No, sir. + +13 MR. CRITTON: What was the date? + +14 MR. September 2002. + +15 MR. CRITTON: Okay, thanks. + +16 MR. : I have here -- and this is + +17 18 19 20 21 11101::Mlactually my only copy, so I don't mind marking it as a composite exhibit, but we'll either copy this while thing or we'll have an agreement of counsel. It's the visitor inmate log from when Mr. Epstein was in jail in Palm Beach. + +22 23 MR. CRITTON: Well, before we get started, it is now 1:15. We started at 10:00. + +24 MR. : We didn't really start at 10:00. + +25 MR. CRITTON: Shortly thereafter. I was here + +![](_page_47_Picture_19.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +160 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 pretty much after 10. But we've been here since 10:00. I want to take alunch break. + +3 MR. : Let's do it. + +4 MR. CRITTON: For an hour? + +5 MR. : Sure. + +6 (A break was had at 1:15 p.m.) + +7 BY MR. + +8 9 10 11 Q. All right. I looked through the inmate log of the visitors who visited Jeffrey Epstein and your name appears one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight times. + +12 A. Okay. + +13 14 Q. Seem to be accurate in terms of how many times you went to visit him? + +15 A. I thought six, but yes, that's... + +16 17 18 Q. I'll let you review the records and tell me if you dispute any of that record. And I'll go ahead and mark that as Composite Exhibit 5. + +19 20 (Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 5 was marked for identification.) + +21 MR. REINHART: It's two pages. + +22 MR. : Two pages. + +23 MR. REINHART: Okay. + +24 BY MR. + +25 Q. Seem accurate? + +![](_page_48_Picture_21.jpeg) + +161 + +ESQUIRE ""\_."...rn + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 A. Yes. + +2 3 4 5 6 Q. Okay. Jeffrey Epstein's plea, I believe, was June 30th, 2008. I think that's when he was taken in custody from there. Your first visit is July 3rd, 2008. And the other name on that visit is Igor Zinoviev. Did you go with Igor to visit Jeffrey Epstein? + +7 A. Yes. + +8 Q. Why did you go with Igor? + +9 10 A. It just happened he wanted to see us both at the same time. There was no apparent reason. + +11 12 Q. you? How did you know that Jeffrey wanted to see + +13 14 15 16 17 A. I don't recall who called and told me that he wanted to see me. I couldn't give you an accurate name, whether it was, you know, his attorney, Darren. And actually, I would put a lot weight to I think it was Darren, his attorney. + +18 19 Q. That would have made a phone call to you that said -- + +20 A. Yeah, to go. + +21 22 23 Q. And what did you talk about with Jeffrey Epstein four days after he pled guilty to offenses that landed him in jail? + +24 25 A. I think the first visit was how disappointed or how scared he was, you know, being inside there. We + +![](_page_49_Picture_15.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +162 + +ESQUIRE .A....."" + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 just talked about general happenings that go on in there. + +3 Q. What did he say? + +4 5 6 7 8 9 10 A. It's terrible; it's cold; he can't sleep. They wake him up every two hours. You know, just items like that, uncomfortable things. We talked about the airplanes a great deal. You know, we got major maintenance on the big airplane, so we discussed that a little bit. And then it was really just how uncomfortable he was there. + +11 12 Q. How long did you visit with him on that first visit, July 3rd? + +13 A. I think we stayed the full hour. + +14 15 Q. All right. Is that what the time allotment was? + +16 17 18 19 20 21 A. I believe it is, yeah. I don't think you could leave early, or I'm not aware that you could leave early, until later on we found out you could stay for five minutes or longer. But I don't think any of us knew that was -- once you got in there, you stayed there for the hour. + +22 23 24 Q. Okay. So you talked to him for an hour and for the most part it was just about the conditions and his disappointment with the conditions? + +25 A. Sure, yeah, absolutely. + +163 + +![](_page_50_Picture_13.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +T0il Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 Q. And did Igor talk to him as well? + +2 3 4 5 6 A. Briefly. Imean, not that much. You're going back a little ways again to remember exactly what was discussed. You know, he asked how his family was doing. Iguess Igor's got ason, I think he asked how his son was doing. You know, just general questions like that. + +7 Q. Did you ride to the jail that day with Igor? + +8 9 10 11 A. I believe we did. I believe I met Igor probably at Jeffrey's house and picked him up, or if not, we may have met at the airport and drove together. But we did drive together on that occasion. + +12 Q. In what vehicle did you drive? + +13 A. The Hummer. + +14 15 Q. That's the vehicle you described earlier as the company vehicle? + +16 A. Yes, sir. + +17 Q. Is that a vehicle paid for by Jeffrey Epstein? + +18 A. Meaning? + +19 Q. Well, is that a vehicle paid for by you? + +20 A. What do you mean "paid for"? + +21 Q. Did you purchase the vehicle with your money? + +22 A. I didn't purchase that one, no. + +23 24 Q. Do you know if it was purchased by Jeffrey Epstein or acorporation of Jeffrey Epstein's? + +25 A. Probably a corporation. + +![](_page_51_Picture_20.jpeg) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +164 + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 MR. CRITTON: Form; move to strike. Sounds like aguess. + +3 BY MR. : + +4 5 6 7 Q. To the best of your knowledge, that's how most of the items that you've discussed -- that being the Boeing and the Gulfstream -- they were usually held in corporate names, to your knowledge? + +8 A. To my knowledge, exactly, yes. + +9 10 11 12 Q. And so when you're saying the -- when you're talking about the Hummer vehicle and you're stating that it's likely a corporate entity, is that just something that you're guessing about, or do you have knowledge? + +13 A. No, I'm just guessing. + +14 Q. Okay. + +15 A. I have no proof + +16 17 Q. -- of ownership of who it's registered to or anything like that? + +18 A. Exactly. + +19 Q. Is it registered to you? + +20 A. No, no. + +21 Q. So it's registered to somebody other than you? + +22 A. Exactly. + +23 Q. Okay. + +24 A. I just drive it, I guess. + +25 Q. Okay. So on July 5th, 2008, you go back to + +165 + +![](_page_52_Picture_21.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 see him in jail again, and again, Igor Zinoviev is listed as a visitor. Did you go with him together on that occasion? + +4 5 A. I didn't even realize it was two days after the first visit. + +6 Q. Well, I mean, you see where this is going? + +7 A. Yeah, I do. It gets further apart, yeah. + +8 9 Q. Do you remember what the discussion was on 7/5/08? + +10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 A. No, because it's probably similar to the first one. I mean, we talked -- actually, one of the visits we talked about fishing and just trying to -- you know, we were talking about things that would just occupy his mind with intelligent conversation that he probably wasn't getting there. So for that hour of the day, I tried to give my best of intelligent conversation to him. + +18 19 Q. Okay. On his visitor log you were the first one to go visit him. Did you know that? + +20 A. I did not know that. I wasn't aware of that. + +21 22 MR. CRITTON: Let me just object to form to the last question. + +23 BY MR. + +24 25 Q. Well, at least if these records are accurate, which are the records that were provided to us by the + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +166 + +![](_page_53_Picture_15.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE an Aleindu Gall, COZIP.S7 + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 facility that was holding Jeffrey Epstein, they're accurate, your name is the first one listed on the top of the sheet? + +4 5 A. Right. There may have been earlier dates. I have no idea. + +6 7 8 9 10 Q. well, you know, the first date that he could have been in there it looks like was 7/1/08 and then, you know, so I guess somebody could have seen him 7/1 or 7/2, but those records were never provided to us. You see we were provided a whole big stack. + +11 A. I understand. + +12 13 Q. The next date I'm going to talk to you about is 7/12/08. + +14 A. Uh-huh. + +15 16 Q. It looks, again, like it's yourself and Igor Zinoviev? + +17 A. Mm-hmm. + +18 19 20 21 22 Q. And that's something we talked about in this deposition. I'm going to ask you again, I don't know that you elaborated last time, what is your understanding of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein? Is that a friend of his? + +23 24 25 A. I don't know his job description. I mean, he's somebody that's around a lot, but I don't know his exact job description. His English is, to say, not + +167 + +![](_page_54_Picture_14.jpeg) + +ESQVii.B. + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutIons.com + +1 2 3 100percent, so conversation with somebody that doesn't fully understand you, you know, you get lost in translation alittle bit. So I don't -- + +4 5 6 7 Q. So on these three visits to the jail, the first three that we're talking about that we've talked about so far, each of those times you traveled to and from the jail with Igor? + +8 A. Mm-hmm. + +9 Q. Yes? + +10 A. Yes, yes. + +11 12 13 Q. And each of those time, is it fair to say you had some form of communication either on the way to the jail or + +14 A. Sure. + +15 Q. -- to the jail? + +16 A. Yeah. + +17 18 19 20 Q. Since you're going to see an inmate in the jail, is it a safe assumption a portion of that conversation was about the person that you're going to see and possibly the crime that was committed? + +21 A. Yes, that would be agood assumption. + +22 23 24 25 Q. Okay. And what was the form -- what was the substance of that conversation that you can remember related to Jeffrey Epstein and the location you were going to visit him? + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +168 + +![](_page_55_Picture_16.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE ie stad. Calle Coopny + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 4 A. I think Igor and I discussed on trying to be upbeat and not look at the position that he's in sitting across the table from us, to be upbeat and uplift his spirits. + +5 6 7 Q. Did you and Igor discuss whether or not you were going to talk to him about his plea of guilty or the fact that he's not registered as a sex offender? + +8 A. No. + +9 10 Q. Or whether you were going to stay away from those topics? + +11 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +12 13 14 THE WITNESS: We never -- we don't discuss that amongst ourselves and/or with Jeffrey in any way, form. + +15 BY MR. + +16 17 Q. Okay. But that's not -- I realize you didn't discuss that. You've told me that. + +18 19 A. Right, but we didn't discuss that even prior to going in, as you asked. + +20 21 Q. Okay. So your discussion was mainly hey, let's be upbeat? + +22 A. Yes. + +23 24 Q. And that was to, in essence, maintain his spirits or raise his spirits? + +25 A. Exactly. 169 + +![](_page_56_Picture_17.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutions.corn + +1 2 Q. Okay. And you were doing that as afriend of his, not just his pilot, right? + +3 4 5 6 7 8 A. I felt honored that he asked me to come and give support like that, because prior to him going away, it was known to us that there was going to be no visitors, because I had offered to him that I would be happy to come and visit him if he deemed it necessary, and he says no, I'm not going to have anybody. + +9 Q. So -- + +10 11 A. I guess it was so bad there, that he may have changed his mind and wanted to have some visitors. + +12 13 14 Q. When did you have this conversation with him where he indicated he was not going to have visitors while he was in jail? + +15 16 A. I don't exactly remember. It may have been on the trip heading to Palm Beach, the last flight. + +17 18 Q. From his island, from St. I guess it would be from? + +19 20 21 A. I forgot where it started from. It might have been New York or the island, one of the two. I don't remember the last flight. + +22 23 24 Q. And I mean, did at least the fact come up that hey, this aperson who you're is going to be in jail for some time? + +25 A. Mm-hmm, yes. + +Larry visoski October 15, 2009 + +170 + +![](_page_57_Picture_14.jpeg) + +ESQUIB,. ., + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Facsimile: 561.394.2621 + +1 2 3 4 Q. And in the course of that conversation, again, the allegations and the unusual I'll call it case against him, that didn't come up between you and Mr. Epstein? + +5 A. I never talked about it with him. + +6 7 8 9 Q. And at that point in time, what were you aware of in terms of the number of girls that he was alleged to have had sexual -- some sort of sexual relationship with him at his Palm Beach house? + +10 A. What was the question? How many girls? + +11 Q. Yeah, how many girls were you -- + +12 A. Aware of? + +13 Q. -- aware of? + +14 A. None. I wasn't aware of any, to be honest. + +15 16 17 Q. The next visit is on 7/17/08 and it's Igor Zinoviev and somebody named Jean Rene and then yourself. Do you know who Jean Rene is? + +18 A. No. + +19 20 Q. Do you think that that visit, that you visited him at the same time that Jean Rene visited? + +21 MR. CRITTON: What's the date? + +22 MR. : It's 7/17/08. + +23 24 25 THE WITNESS: No, I don't know aJean Rene, unless somebody came after. I mean, I don't -- I don't know a Jean Rene. + +171 + +![](_page_58_Picture_18.jpeg) + +ESQUIRE se Al na4 •7 + +Toll Free: 866.709.8777 Faalmlle: 561.394.2621 Suite 600 4440 PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 www.esquiresolutiOnS.COm \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/EFTA02747920.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/EFTA02747920.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6925923154c90f52eac86004e0f00a8c6667c7a5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/EFTA02747920.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,2354 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 59, + "chars": 63331, + "elapsed_seconds": 12.3, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_2_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_3_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_4_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_5_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_7_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_8_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_9_Picture_14.jpeg", + "_page_10_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_11_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_12_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_13_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_14_Picture_24.jpeg", + "_page_15_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_16_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_17_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_18_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_19_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_20_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_22_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_23_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_24_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_25_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_26_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_27_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_28_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_29_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_30_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_31_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_32_Picture_11.jpeg", + "_page_33_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_34_Picture_23.jpeg", + "_page_35_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_36_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_37_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_38_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_39_Picture_38.jpeg", + "_page_40_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_41_Picture_22.jpeg", + "_page_42_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_43_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_44_Picture_14.jpeg", + "_page_45_Picture_18.jpeg", + "_page_46_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_47_Picture_19.jpeg", + "_page_48_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_49_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_50_Picture_13.jpeg", + "_page_51_Picture_20.jpeg", + "_page_52_Picture_21.jpeg", + "_page_53_Picture_15.jpeg", + "_page_54_Picture_14.jpeg", + "_page_55_Picture_16.jpeg", + "_page_56_Picture_17.jpeg", + "_page_57_Picture_14.jpeg", + "_page_58_Picture_18.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A-3 \n(3 of 4)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 149.94, + 290.20654296875 + ], + [ + 475.9205627441406, + 290.20654296875 + ], + [ + 475.9205627441406, + 432.3670349121094 + ], + [ + 149.94, + 432.3670349121094 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 286 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 326 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 278 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 290 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 283 + ], + [ + "Line", + 61 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 278 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 295 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 297 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 315 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 42 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 311 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 298 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 291 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 274 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 125 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 273 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 287 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 269 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 281 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 320 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 112 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 127 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 275 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 303 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 276 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 283 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 282 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 273 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 258 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 292 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 118 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 300 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 323 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 256 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 127 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 287 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 108 + ], + [ + "Line", + 54 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 321 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 38, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 109 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 39, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 287 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 48 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 40, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 299 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 41, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 263 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 42, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 125 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 43, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 296 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 44, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 295 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 45, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 283 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 46, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 273 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 44 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 47, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 123 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 48, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 274 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 49, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 125 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 50, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 321 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 51, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 323 + ], + [ + "Line", + 62 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 52, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 290 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 53, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 329 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 54, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 125 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 55, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 310 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 56, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 288 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 57, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 345 + ], + [ + "Line", + 63 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 58, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 329 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747920" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..be1ad80367e7968dbec9b947cf835714f7482306 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1e8e29d9b2df4e1964096b696335f33f433193f133bfc84e62319e6a380c0300 +size 1017 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_10_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_10_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7c8673b3911b90818490d0a8355b6663a60da7c5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_10_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:9cbf088c6c9473de0c046231f768f9a66fe6efad2ec2692f91837f680e6cb0bd +size 2438 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_11_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_11_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..45279856df94c4e48a0fe6b2385aba8464008636 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_11_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c57e35414723049149d81a705a479ca66458ab16ea4db6731f143638365d5cc2 +size 2357 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_12_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_12_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2e4fe909fff6816f5c44b86f389adc361c6127be --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_12_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7dabe8a6ac61b1e83509fa83355d3238a784372210a5bff6f6e55a86903ecfc4 +size 2393 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_13_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_13_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e387b4d022ef072c5417f3c4dca6ce3780e95e30 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_13_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:934618835186214ae5c4537123fe316f45ecb0385c4a3d77c8ba82e2d0aa0a0e +size 2390 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_14_Picture_24.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_14_Picture_24.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..961cfd81050bd5cf6eaa76e32bc6c7cbf0b9ddf2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_14_Picture_24.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:03ddad83783c9fd3bf2807f687a2e124616a6b913d8ce80e1d71fa3be77d45cd +size 2528 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_15_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_15_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ac774f85c7e1015349af39ce38a6e2b745aa88aa --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_15_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:bc9f8f1bc0a84fd1189f8cc6daf88926b9eecea5b029e26fe45ae99dbe4104a1 +size 2297 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_16_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_16_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..30e043101e858a0487e60bf3ad30a2653d303c09 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_16_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ec60507b5bbfc216b24cd82664d56880541a421ea57cd0a70b263604f1ffebe9 +size 2430 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_17_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_17_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..549c0ecd9df8b461b35546d75b30df0e17196f04 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_17_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:39d9429e12136d031816a5ab0560b2b7e9b1af9dacfe18947f68313a4942cb7c +size 2411 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_18_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_18_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9a713c12502aee5f4d6cde10158d97dfd1f7e4c1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_18_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1c06a4bf6bb29579d794a68f2c06928ff3713f2e0b9893f0095a6e8692143ae8 +size 2438 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_19_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_19_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6a194d265926ecc6ea90866e679e95f21f1b5258 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_19_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4c6b344217710640017525269d0a44ec4aade8fe1a8ba8540f9f035bf6c127e4 +size 2344 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_1_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_1_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..867a1ff85de133cbc270a1f8a6aeccd18ab89df1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_1_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:41cec67aa56b5b0a95a849b414759607e23dc7ee74af54ceaac8f59b3b4ada9c +size 2393 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_20_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_20_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..01a3e781ef0fc7f17234dcef16ab465db099fd39 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_20_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:12b258e1c6ae734cda2044653e8539463f0ad68f57d8e0d88b8f1f6e1b9483cf +size 2402 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b93c09946412c19f73f26958d5f8df0645c3da8d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_21_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:294967314c576729d5f9e33042a1489771201ed8797367f00210d5656709dfbb +size 2404 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_22_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_22_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0e230014700188765f99c69d947c6e8a3364ebb3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_22_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d0e8d91283ac7a75c9f1d8258548485d693dfbdc581bb4b8d7404911dccf6d6f +size 2368 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_23_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_23_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1f5e6da43436f5043444cebc7f38eea21100a051 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_23_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4b0399aede9f313d6c91c77c17b44eba7fc8bcb3aa9e4b86b104c48e755a25de +size 2428 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_24_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_24_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bf56e90712c1243b27ba29572013270aab6d5802 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_24_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0c7d7bb7aa58d61e06e8e17385353bb41c8f03e053fa9daa1fedee099f062bc7 +size 2365 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_25_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_25_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f0075bc0a2bea8ff76e8bcb41011a927fa86a792 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_25_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:cb646b5eaea0fe51facad4def87e133bfce274abf28e19209ec1194c606b342b +size 2371 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_26_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_26_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b47d8186a4de161542205305952a401741dec0f4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_26_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3bb8dcced167e51824079763148b8439c8101b70798fb86dbae9ab6de5e3a72a +size 2421 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_27_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_27_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7bd783c97a5116e3efe20a7f27e84878898e8d44 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_27_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:cb3a3d217129416fa1b8d5cc6b939c268c8c35895b11886415a261505328534c +size 2358 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_28_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_28_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..83cb1a9a5182b59c9f565eb9988f522d69de7ff9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_28_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3c06a8c21b5ffb20f351e3d0f2de7ead53c3be2ef831580fe72cd2c5c3a56932 +size 2445 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_29_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_29_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..037c7fa7a4514207abaf015f5e212ab719ea6eb8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_29_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:84c16c2cb0e6ebb52b3e686ec83b79b267668fb180a749e91eac2ab965cdb4c4 +size 2483 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_2_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_2_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..efee3c37d59960b58e3e0e21a276df25c2dc2bee --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_2_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ac373d4a324f6300c51a473ad417474038b40542153d13ac1bcb3b4d1b69dc00 +size 2475 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_30_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_30_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..acdd4862d61ad8514593d58df7d5e948308fa7e6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_30_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a9a87f78a1a17dc2e280b575a83b0265983d9f936c424e4bd33667722ff6fffb +size 2363 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_31_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_31_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5399b5578585212b888217b297c10902fcfc6dce --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_31_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e4a5d712777e8fe8dfbe44f3f64af2a7952a9fa0b75752b221d21835e0bb8570 +size 2371 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_32_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_32_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ead48377da8fae6d0781c80162f2cdab5c75a5f9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_32_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:ba5c5ec33e816164fc7786f8412ba0e2782085c42afc02d5924423da922c341d +size 2536 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_33_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_33_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ccb5edaf008f050a7d3d42f418f367435b40b80e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_33_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7a81a07c2971cba5d4c87306ae4624d920c1a20c38a244ad21de5e6eb2bdfa88 +size 2365 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_34_Picture_23.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_34_Picture_23.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2d8673e3e4b437f4c08eba2acb0c4a734d80bb8a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_34_Picture_23.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0c7457be8fd3b8c329fea7c42f619719816dedfbd7af24bd4099e33cd57b06d1 +size 2424 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_35_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_35_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a65871b154c5a69fefcd46079e14ea15c4a9e980 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_35_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e5fc27ca322672ff2fc7486c0b3d97722a6967764d4ac72b30c9ba43ac6f28d2 +size 2397 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_36_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_36_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3f63ac8a5770fcb0b2f8a09a8692151aa9b901b5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_36_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:bdebff6ec915b1cded8b639edb653c8449a86dae312d7a833dfabcb21775bd21 +size 2463 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_37_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_37_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..078e6f859b86bda4d6ccf29769e341ffb1cb6419 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_37_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b034b4f2fd8f4cbac650b34f8ab6da21621a119f3a0c096398120c023ddb7d34 +size 2431 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_38_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_38_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..748c4d79151a207e161e228ff7935efaa0514b69 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_38_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c687307c6fffafabe72589a30043f5ee9703ccf267c33a61067946509f886361 +size 2489 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_39_Picture_38.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_39_Picture_38.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b8fe51cc29f7018825d888799f8e3f5e25b9ae06 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_39_Picture_38.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f1266ac8d29ce08667878b9a4ae51f65bd9c2fc2835212cc73f7a8c49bcb8cc4 +size 2523 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_3_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_3_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..db4e5b72c54005c6e8286dceadde207e9c5cd05e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_3_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d773bed8f777995d7158a35d00f7c243f6780ca76d9c18779dcef84427bac4a6 +size 2455 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_40_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_40_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e0cd52df227d56b3a5f450a94f4d7da01efcd8fe --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_40_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:6a9b4aff9b10cd3325e475693382f0ad94787064fa2de0591999202fe3a1f1fd +size 2430 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_41_Picture_22.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_41_Picture_22.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..43e802e3117125e02911fa5c589a55b143a97910 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_41_Picture_22.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:a1deefa7474660bdd3fd72bcd7f30ad2e1d1a545588d00ac258290a9509de1cb +size 2469 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_42_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_42_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..059542c54fe2d99c2866ccd642e42802c1207aa5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_42_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3aee45b0d3652a08dda447fd1f9e132820c7ab2fc89c5077c1136957294be641 +size 2439 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_43_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_43_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ceb221c8d9b75447c6359fd229e0a00dfac2fbc1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_43_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b09df4cda98d1b24c94be5f6e82651dd410cd20ffde13c9118cf7b547c41dd7b +size 2404 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_44_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_44_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..219868403bae111b97ac927b2b2858625a0ee132 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_44_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2f197f56658a64d40c4e09e14a3e1da4062827b8f0734aa8df99400e313f3b17 +size 2428 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_45_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_45_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0b75b0046f139e94459353660139a3a96a1a07cf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_45_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b766de640fb7ffc32fb6c7c4b503d818e2569b8ae26e8c6cb4af4712f80146dd +size 2468 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_46_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_46_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3c980db047233fdf0b92c7a702d656d93baecfa2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_46_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:81f68752b12d800b0dabf57aa79c766fe1e421ad80630530aa5e310f394b706e +size 2520 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_47_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_47_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9a293db821f4f45c6dfbaf4589d2ffcf01e370a8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_47_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c97616f4c02381518ab593258eac8d68706476ecd0a967b562daed03c45ce135 +size 2453 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_48_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_48_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0daa5091c13af7c63aadebd8005de2925e30dc3d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_48_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:21f93a04c624fe2811524ff420a09f0c87ccc0aebf216882d60bd4d85a8421cf +size 2450 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_49_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_49_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6ca11cc89eac2531d78c64fa4cf09dbdc0bed2c2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_49_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2ababfc59f704aa2cbe6a7dea311903996f0edc7c9646137bf99107ba82221dd +size 2490 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_4_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_4_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a34c200e80d6c561378f0b6ecb241eb38924e60e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_4_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:50d14d965bd59d8ba5a9f0261b1912bae20711e7af6469e710001e06fdfc5f35 +size 2440 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_50_Picture_13.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_50_Picture_13.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e53812105c9d316e007a9b133455da8033f69f14 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_50_Picture_13.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c276b63be8601cd0f83dc2eb26fbb0158a791e16f954efb233886b9a14d979ed +size 2469 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_51_Picture_20.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_51_Picture_20.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3134d2bfa22a146e12657bd13b77426d23f3796d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_51_Picture_20.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c6dd566ca2e981261ad764bd6603a2f907e86221ce9cf8ce3ec20d801c3be2ff +size 2452 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_52_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_52_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9c73d73a8295eb5d0b0978a850f57161240b856f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_52_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:eee31733b503cd16e53b926bf3b43122db73ec01051f5ae608825048c540a3be +size 2395 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_53_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_53_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..772399c96238764e179a38b32a60cd7524b1cf53 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_53_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3e34950ab9bab75874afad9ddf69365875f499435e3d53ed5df6d5955245997f +size 2412 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_54_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_54_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d10c2f4f28b2916972e970d6115c31b7f5fb70da --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_54_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f4c6a6b8fecd01ea902a6e9e44155ad61b4c9509a84adda9f74a322f16a1691d +size 2452 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_55_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_55_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0da092356e5d353c3aecd8330e12bb04d795a51a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_55_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:9e79963201a130ac5a3e9f2d2ed0eea507df3e6ae513f91dd18d12da420234e0 +size 2441 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_56_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_56_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fbe1370442d215ccc5b3c9e263371b5eeb0cc282 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_56_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3c632af1d964ddf50e7b083a1c755ccbcd4bf2603ab2c3e893933ab6e5dff22b +size 2429 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_57_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_57_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8fa4d9f1a318ec79415e675523c19cea8019651a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_57_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:cb0bc79303ba29163b43e1a8f6870c96318a9ae2e46cd33fabbbca65a1a50623 +size 2533 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_58_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_58_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8d5a4aebfe065475c4c80b641703aaf392bb349e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_58_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3102a3740e71c0214c80414629ad4c593fac3f1f324a2f4e21888b7508c0462a +size 2405 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_5_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_5_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a217fa4cbc13bceceb644cbb9d1953f933a63df8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_5_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:25b8b359d0a80adc53bb0c6fd20b0a230f770969b5bc7e7ebb402675f3c3cad9 +size 2459 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d6d96e53c756310332e0f4f307697d2c5b147545 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_6_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:4f20cbedde75d63298a029c028f993b8dad05e639c842061ab99c2c988a72868 +size 2373 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_7_Picture_19.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_7_Picture_19.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fc69064d8e9268d9859f0a87b69e5dbd794e5788 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_7_Picture_19.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d3f098bf81d0e5b46ce840d0bdd695097758452e41b36b83934b17a70b60d5d0 +size 2393 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_8_Picture_18.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_8_Picture_18.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3ec06167177ace6ddd435d316eefc4ed9c2630c2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_8_Picture_18.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7f9a2f1eb8b07a0a707159e2df3064fae617a9be9f9c76329576c77c24a0f14c +size 2436 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_9_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_9_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..013d1e4f1b39d872b8fe0ac77c4555fb900ebeec --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747920/_page_9_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b3f45a6f4605c83e25308cc016e961a0641d26724311ecd2bb29edb0ccdda0a2 +size 2431 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747979/EFTA02747979.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747979/EFTA02747979.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2b6c155c4b26fef3950d603a95c75357c4aaf836 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747979/EFTA02747979.md @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/M. + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S NOTICE OF FILING EXHIBIT A-3 OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE EDE 3861 + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe, hereby files this Notice of Filing Exhibit A-3 of Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Provide Recently Obtained Deposition Testimony and Affidavit Demonstrating Fraudulent Transfers by Epstein in Support of her Motion for Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein and Incorporated Memorandum of Law [DE 386] filed October 30, 2009. Due to the file size uploading limitations of CM/ECF, Exhibits A-2, A-3, A-4 and B could not be filed with the Motion. + +Respectfully Submitted, + +ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 522-3456 + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Facsimile (954) 527-8663 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: bedwards@rra-law.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 30, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> /s/ J. J. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +## SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court - Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jeoldberner@aqwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrociarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsbero@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747979/EFTA02747979.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747979/EFTA02747979.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fc3232401fccdf41c0da5002648c75e603e67b1d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747979/EFTA02747979.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,231 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747979.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2480, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.91, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S NOTICE OF FILING EXHIBIT A-3 OF \nPLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE EDE 3861", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 132.192, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 480.49554443359375, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 480.49554443359375, + 431.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 132.192, + 431.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 312.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 312.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 327.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 327.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 118.25999999999999 + ], + [ + 350.56756591796875, + 118.25999999999999 + ], + [ + 350.56756591796875, + 134.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 134.30352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747979" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747982/EFTA02747982.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747982/EFTA02747982.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..eac0b6ddbe6c08050d8e31be4d98f42ddb40e669 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747982/EFTA02747982.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOES 2-8' MOTION TO COMPEL NET WORTH DISCOVERY, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion to Exceed Page Limitation in Response to Plaintiffs' Jane Does 2-8s Motion to Compel Net Worth Discovery, with Incorporated Memorandum of Law. Having considered Defendant's Motion to exceed page limitation, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant's Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Jane Does 2-8s Motion to Compel Net Worth Discovery, with Incorporated Memorandum of Law may exceed 20 pages. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747982/EFTA02747982.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747982/EFTA02747982.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2c5f029d92cd3ecdf2cd7646fc00ff35de0a506a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747982/EFTA02747982.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747982.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1110, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.74, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 415.48565673828125, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 415.48565673828125, + 102.7230224609375 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 102.7230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE \nLIMITATION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOES 2-8' MOTION \nTO COMPEL NET WORTH DISCOVERY, WITH INCORPORATED \nMEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 95.47200000000001, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 523.26, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 523.26, + 419.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 95.47200000000001, + 419.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 9 + ], + [ + "Line", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747982" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747984/EFTA02747984.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747984/EFTA02747984.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..705adcdbc1f002f3298db75726f2607bafc6fdcc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747984/EFTA02747984.md @@ -0,0 +1,73 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +# DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOES 2-8' MOTION TO COMPEL NET WORTH DISCOVERY, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves to exceed the page limitation of 20 pages imposed by Loc. Gen. Rule 7.1. C. 2. (S.D. Fla.), in his Response in Opposition to Jane Does 2-8s Motion to Compel Net Worth Discovery, with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 333 and 333-1). In support of his motion, Defendant states: + +- 1. This motion is being filed in an abundance of caution. +- 2. Local Gen. Rule 7.1 C. 2. provides in part that "absent prior permission of the court, no party shall file any legal memorandum exceeding twenty pages in length." +- 3. A length exceeding 20 pages is required so that Defendant may fully address the issues raised in Plaintiff's Motion to Compel which are directed to Defendant's Answers to Interrogatories and Defendant's Response to Plaintiffs Production Request. In order + +to present Defendant's response in an organized and understandable manner, the 20 page limitation is required to be exceeded. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court grant Defendant's motion, and enter an order allowing a response, including memorandum of law, which is in excess of 20 pages by two (2) additional pages. + +#### Rule 7.1 Certification + +Pursuant to communication by telephone, Plaintiff's counsel has no objection to the request to exceed 20 pages herein. + +> By: MICHA PI , ESQ. Florida ar NO. 7296 ROBERT D. CRM'ON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com + +### Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that atrue copy of the foregoing wa with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that t being served this day on all counsel of record identified on th the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 2 day of el ctronically filed going document is wing Service List in 2009 + +Respectfully ted, + +By: ROBER CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bc1claw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN 303Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/253-0164 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattorney.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +Brad..., Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards@rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cascell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassello@Jaw.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 isxasearcylaw.com jph@searcylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecaabrucereinhartlaw + +Counsel for Defendant + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsberg@podhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 laaesq@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747984/EFTA02747984.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747984/EFTA02747984.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3c81a462897a2430c06d9533a60836edfeb83ceb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747984/EFTA02747984.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,296 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747984.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4726, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.92, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 410.65200000000004, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 410.65200000000004, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN \nRESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOES 2-8' MOTION TO COMPEL NET \nWORTH DISCOVERY, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 90.576, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 526.3199999999999, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 526.3199999999999, + 405.81000000000006 + ], + [ + 90.576, + 405.81000000000006 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 212.22000000000003 + ], + [ + 359.856, + 212.22000000000003 + ], + [ + 359.856, + 224.37 + ], + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 224.37 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 458.46 + ], + [ + 366.2454833984375, + 458.46 + ], + [ + 366.2454833984375, + 471.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 471.41999999999996 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.168, + 199.26 + ], + [ + 422.9892578125, + 199.26 + ], + [ + 422.9892578125, + 239.76 + ], + [ + 192.168, + 239.76 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 245 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 228 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 306 + ], + [ + "Line", + 71 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747984" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747988/EFTA02747988.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747988/EFTA02747988.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..454bf074529b69ca5005be7ff082a7d35c83b7a4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747988/EFTA02747988.md @@ -0,0 +1,140 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAIIIIMI + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF NET WORTH DOCUMENTS DATED JUNE 29, 2009 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his Responses and Objections to the Request for Production of Net Worth Documents and states: + +Request No. 1: All Federal and State income tax returns, including all W-2 forms, 1099 forms and schedules, for tax years 2003-2008. + +Response and Objections to Request Number 1: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for + +all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense, however responding to this and other relating inquiries have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information that would be protected. More specifically, the act of producing the above information may implicitly communicate statements of fact in that they would implicitly authenticate the requested information, require Epstein to admit that the requested information exists and admit that same were in his possession, custody and control. The very act of production itself may therefore provide alink in the chain of evidence adverse to Epstein, see generally United States vHubbell 520 US 27, 36 (2000) + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the request for production as unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The specific information requested as to tax returns also seeks information that is confidential and protected by federal law, 26 USC 6103. Further, Plaintiffs Complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's request seeks information for atime period from 2003-2008. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be produced, it should not be produced without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be produced at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +Request No. 2: All documents relating to the assets, liabilities, income, expenses and net worth of Defendant, including without limitation, the following for each of the past five (5) years. + +- a. annual financial reports; +- b. balance sheets; +- c. income statements; +- d. cash flow statements; +- e. quarterly financial reports; +- f. budget reports; and +- g. financial analysis + +Response and Objections to Request Number 2: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments + +as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in asupplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense, however responding to this and other relating inquiries have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information that would be protected. More specifically, the act of producing the above information may implicitly communicate statements of fact in that they would implicitly authenticate the requested information, require Epstein to admit that the requested information exists and admit that same were in his possession, custody and control. The very act of production itself may therefore provide alink in the chain of evidence adverse to Epstein, see generally United States vHubbell 520 US 27, 36 (2000) + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the request for production as unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, Plaintiffs Complaint alleges atime period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiffs request seeks information for a time period of the past five (5) years. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be produced, it should not be produced without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be produced at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +Request No. 3: All documentation which refer or relate to financing or loans requested or applied for by the Defendant, including loan applications, appraisals, financial spreadsheets, etc. + +Response and Objections to Request Number 3: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments + +as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense, however responding to this and other relating inquiries have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information that would be protected. More specifically, the act of producing the above information may implicitly communicate statements of fact in that they would implicitly authenticate the requested information, require Epstein to admit that the requested information exists and admit that same were in his possession, custody and control. The very act of production itself may therefore provide a link in the chain of evidence adverse to Epstein, see generally United States v Hubbell 520 US 27, 36 (2000) + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the request for production as unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2002 to present. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be produced, it should not be produced without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be produced at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Request No. 4:** Any and all appraisals indicating fair market value of real estate or other property of Defendant. + +**Response and Objections to Request Number 4:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference + +under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense, however responding to this and other relating inquiries have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information that would be protected. More specifically, the act of producing the above information may implicitly communicate statements of fact in that they would implicitly authenticate the requested information, require Epstein to admit that the requested information exists and admit that same were in his possession, custody and control. The very act of production itself may therefore provide a link in the chain of evidence adverse to Epstein, see generally United States v Hubbell 520 US 27, 36 (2000) + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the request for production as unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2002 to present. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be produced, it should not be produced without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be produced at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Request No. 5:** Any and all documents referring or relating to investment or savings accounts, including without limitation, account statements and summaries. + +**Response and Objections to Request Number 5:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference + +under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in asupplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense, however responding to this and other relating inquiries have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information that would be protected. More specifically, the act of producing the above information may implicitly communicate statements of fact in that they would implicitly authenticate the requested information, require Epstein to admit that the requested information exists and admit that same were in his possession, custody and control. The very act of production itself may therefore provide alink in the chain of evidence adverse to Epstein, see generally United States vHubbell 520 US 27, 36 (2000) + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the request for production as unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Further, Plaintiffs Complaint alleges atime period of in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiffs request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2002 to present. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be produced, it should not be produced without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be produced at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +## Certificate of Service + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing ha .S. M and facsimile to the following addressees this 2009. een sent day of + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +[ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com](mailto:ahorowitz@hermanlaw.com) + +[iherman@hermanlaw.com](mailto:iherman@hermanlaw.com) + +[lrivera@hermanlaw.com](mailto:lrivera@hermanlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2* + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey* + +*Epstein* + +![]()By: + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-842-2820 + +Fax: 561-515-3148 + +*(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747988/EFTA02747988.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747988/EFTA02747988.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..52ad146b84c4e8c0e45d8729cba01ce0dea2d695 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747988/EFTA02747988.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,324 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747988.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 16929, + "elapsed_seconds": 12.5, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 89.91 + ], + [ + 414.1298522949219, + 89.91 + ], + [ + 414.1298522949219, + 119.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 119.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO \nPLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF NET WORTH \nDOCUMENTS DATED JUNE 29, 2009", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 124.23600000000002, + 286.74 + ], + [ + 501.76434326171875, + 286.74 + ], + [ + 501.76434326171875, + 331.55352783203125 + ], + [ + 124.23600000000002, + 331.55352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 523.26 + ], + [ + 376.4535827636719, + 523.26 + ], + [ + 376.4535827636719, + 537.2374267578125 + ], + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 537.2374267578125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 492 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 547 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 490 + ], + [ + "Line", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 50 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747988" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747995/EFTA02747995.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747995/EFTA02747995.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4c367c82151669ea200be44092d1473ae58ecd5c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747995/EFTA02747995.md @@ -0,0 +1,205 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAMal + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S NET WORTH INTERROGATORIES DATED JUNE 29. 2009 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his answers and objections to Plaintiff's Net Worth Interrogatories, dated June 29, 2009 and states: + +Interrogatory No. 1: State the fair market value of all assets in which Defendant has an ownership interest. + +Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 1: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time + +period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiffs interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2002 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in asupplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive \_his right to decline to respond. to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide alink in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +Interrogatory No. 2: Identify all financial statements or other documents from which net worth Interrogatory No. 1 was calculated. + +Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 2: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to + +lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2002 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 3:** State gross liabilities, expenses, and other offsets to net worth, and identify all documents from which such items were calculated or determined. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 3:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, + +proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2002 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 4:** List all real property, by legal description and/or street address, in which Defendant holds an ownership interest, and state for each the title holder of the property shown in the public records, and identify the nature and extent of Defendant's ownership. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 4:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2002 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 5:** List all corporations, partnerships and other business entities in which Defendant has an ownership interest or had no ownership in the past five (5) years. As to each entity, list the address and nature of the business, and the Defendant's ownership interest. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 5:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference + +under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for the past five (5) years. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 6:** Identify all firms or companies which have performed property appraisals of Defendant's assets in the past five (5) years. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 6:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments + +as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for the past five (5) years. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 7:** List all cars, boats, airplanes and other modes of transportation in which Defendant has an ownership interest. As to each, list the year, make and model, the appraised value, and the percent of Defendant's ownership interest. + +--- + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 7:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition + +without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2002 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 8:** Identify all persons, firms and companies which have performed tax or accounting related functions for Defendant in the past ten (10) years. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 8:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for + +production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for the past ten (10) years. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 9:** Identify all employees of Defendant whose duties or functions include accounting, bookkeeping or financial planning. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 9:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain + +U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2002 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +--- + +**Interrogatory No. 10:** Identify any and all transfers of assets or property made by you or for which you signed any document or otherwise authorized, from January 1, 2006 to present. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 10:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2006 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 11:** Identify all foreign firms, companies and trusts in which you have an ownership interest. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 11:** : Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for a time period from January 1, 2002 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +--- + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 12:** Identify all firms or institutions in which Defendant has maintained an investment, brokerage, savings and/or trust account in the past five (5) years. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 12:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information for the past five (5) years. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +--- + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but + +before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +**Interrogatory No. 13:** Identify all current employment and other sources of income from 2008 to present. + +**Response and Objections to Interrogatory Number 13:** Defendant is asserting specific legal objections including but not limited to relying on certain U.S. constitutional privileges in declining at present to respond to this request for production based on advice from my counsel that I cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial history and condition without waiving my Fifth Amendment and I must accept this advice or risk losing my Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my constitutional rights, would be unreasonable and would therefore violate the Constitution. + +In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, Defendant also objects as the interrogatory is unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature and seeks information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor does it appear to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Plaintiff's interrogatory seeks information from 2008 to present. The information sought is also privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +Responding to the above financial request would require Epstein to identify information regarding the offenses that were the prior subject of a federal investigation as set forth in more detail in a supplementary response available to be provided to the court in camera and ex parte to the extent the good faith assertion of the privilege is in question. The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. This interrogatory, if answered, would require testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter. Responding to this and other relating inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and therefore are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. + +To the extent this court rules that some or all of the requested information be provided, it should not be provided without limitations (including + +confidentiality), and should only be provided at the very end of litigation but before trial in order for Plaintiff to establish her burden making it apparent that punitive damages can be awarded. + +![]()STATE OF FLORIDA ) +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +I hereby certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared JEFFRY E. EPSTEIN, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Interrogatories who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above-named person: personally known/identification, and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this 31 day of August, 2009. + +![]()PRINT JESSICA CADWELL +Notary Public/State of Florida +Commission #: DD853529 +My Commission + +Expires: 04/19/2013 + +![](_page_14_Picture_267.jpeg) + +## Certificate of Service + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the fo via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 2009. ing has een sent day of + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ahorowitzahermanlaw.com jhermanChermanlaw.com IriveraQhermanlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 + +Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jaqesaebellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Respectfully sub + +By: ROBERT D RITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar o. 224162 rcritCbciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 moikeabcIclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-842-2820 Fax: 561-515-3148 + +(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747995/EFTA02747995.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747995/EFTA02747995.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fc89ad2493ef41646174c34a6ff2ed396861a280 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747995/EFTA02747995.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,560 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747995.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 16, + "chars": 42782, + "elapsed_seconds": 17.42, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_14_Picture_267.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 216.036, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 422.4530944824219, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 422.4530944824219, + 115.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 216.036, + 115.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS \nTO PLAINTIFF'S NET WORTH INTERROGATORIES \nDATED JUNE 29. 2009", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.29599999999999, + 285.12 + ], + [ + 511.2586975097656, + 285.12 + ], + [ + 511.2586975097656, + 328.55352783203125 + ], + [ + 127.29599999999999, + 328.55352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 257.03999999999996, + 110.97 + ], + [ + 379.71710205078125, + 110.97 + ], + [ + 379.71710205078125, + 124.74 + ], + [ + 257.03999999999996, + 124.74 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 541 + ], + [ + "Line", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 221 + ], + [ + "Text", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 224 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02747995" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747995/_page_14_Picture_267.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747995/_page_14_Picture_267.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d35b165e00709f8d299954a4763ce393cc2ef71d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02747995/_page_14_Picture_267.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:2fa8516d57b488aa0557bd2689a1aa6050fc26ef8d2e0e1c3a66485685360103 +size 12322 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748011/EFTA02748011.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748011/EFTA02748011.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7a2df4e4a30609552deaf7cc0de8d40d57933dd7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748011/EFTA02748011.md @@ -0,0 +1,304 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRal + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## Defendant's Response In Opposition to Jane Doc 2-8s Motion to Compel Net Worth Discovery, With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Response In Opposition to Jane Doe 2-8s Motion to Compel Net Worth Discovery (DE 333 and 333-1), With Memorandum Of Law. In support, Epstein states: + +#### I. Procedural Background + +Plaintiffs served their First Request for Production of Net Worth documents and Interrogatories, and Epstein served his responses and objections thereto. See Composite Exhibit "A" and "B", respectively the Interrogatory Responses/Objections and the Responses/Objections to the Requests for Production, all of which are incorporated herein by reference. Plaintiff filed her Motion to Compel (DE 333). + +Previously, this Court entered orders (DE 242 and 293) sustaining several of Epstein's objections under the Fifth Amendment. Many of the instant requests are covered by the Court's orders DE 242 and 293. These cases have been consolidated for discovery. Therefore, pursuant to this Court's previous orders regarding discovery and issues concerning the 5th Amendment (DE 242), Epstein is providing certain information in camera because same relates to the 5th Amendment issues previously challenged by Plaintiffs. + +#### II. Epstein's Objections Should Be Sustained Under The 5th Amendment Because The Discovery Requests Seek Testimonial And Incriminating Information + +#### a. Introduction and Discovery Requests + +The Magistrate Judge found that several of the requests were ". . . testimonial in nature, in that by production, Epstein would be implicitly communicating `statements of fact' to which the Fifth Amendment privilege may be validly asserted." (DE 242, p. 10). On that basis, and as alimited example, this Court denied Plaintiffs motion relative to requests seeking telephone records of calls made by Epstein to his employees. Likewise, this Court denied Plaintiffs motion relative to interrogatories seeking the names of Epstein's employees or their telephone numbers finding that same "would furnish alink in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute Epstein of acrime." (DE 242, p.8-9). Additionally, this Court denied Plaintiff's motion relative to interrogatories that required Epstein to identify persons or witnesses that have knowledge of the events in question. Id. at p. 8. In ruling, the court recognized that ". . . the facts alleged in the Amended Complaints, the elements needed to convict Epstein of a crime, and . . . the Court's knowledge concerning the cases at issue" provide abasis for Epstein to raise the privilege based upon "genuinely threatening questions" which could furnish alink in the chain of evidence needed to convict Epstein of acrime. (DE 242, p.18) United States v. Goodwin, 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir. 1980). + +[Redacted text block consisting of multiple horizontal lines of blacked-out content.] + +**The Interrogatories** + +**Interrogatory No. 1:** State the fair market value of all assets in which Defendant has an ownership interest. + +**Interrogatory No. 2:** Identify all financial statements or other documents from which net worth Interrogatory No. 1 was calculated. + +**Interrogatory No. 3:** State gross liabilities, expenses, and other offsets to net worth, and identify all documents from which such items were calculated or determined. + +[Redacted text block consisting of a short line of blacked-out content.] + +Interrogatory No. 4: List all real property, by legal description and/or street address, in which Defendant holds an ownership interest, and state for each the title holder of the property shown in the public records, and identify the nature and extent of Defendant's ownership. + +Interrogatory No. 5. List all corporations, partnerships and other business entities in which Defendant has an ownership interest or had no ownership in the past five (5) years. As to each entity, list the address and nature of the business, and the Defendant's ownership interest. + +Interrogatory No. 6: Identify all firms or companies which have performed property appraisals of Defendant's assets in the past five (5) years. + +Interrogatory No. 7: List all cars, boats, airplanes and other modes of transportation in which Defendant has an ownership interest. As to each, list the year, make and model, the appraised value, and the percent of Defendant's ownership interest. + +Interrogatory No. 8: Identify all persons, firms and companies which have performed tax or accounting related functions for Defendant in the past ten (10) years. + +Interrogatory No. 9: Identify all employees of Defendant whose duties or functions include accounting, bookkeeping or financial planning. + +Interrogatory No. 10: Identify any and all transfers of assets or property made by you or for which you signed any document or otherwise authorized, from January 1, 2006 to present. + +Interrogatory No. 11: Identify all foreign firms, companies and trusts in which you have an ownership interest. + +Interrogatory No. 12: Identify all firms or institutions in which Defendant has maintained an investment, brokerage, savings and/or trust account in the past five (5) years. + +Interrogatory No. 13: Identify all current employment and other sources of income from 2008 to present. + +# The Requests For Production + +Request No. 1: All Federal and State income tax returns, including all W-2 forms, 1099 forms and schedules, for tax years 2003-2008. + +Request No. 2: All documents relating to the assets, liabilities, income, expenses and net worth of Defendant, including without limitation, the following for each of the past five (5) years. + +Request No. 3: All documentation which refer or relate to financing or loans requested or applied for by the Defendant, including loan applications, appraisals, financial spreadsheets, etc. + +Request No. 4: Any and all appraisals indicating fair market value of real estate or other property of Defendant. + +Request No. 5: Any and all documents referring or relating to investment or savings accounts, including without limitation, account statements and summaries. + +In Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein, Case No. 80119, the Magistrate Judge found, "[i]n 2008, Epstein entered into aNon-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") with the United States Attorney General's Office for the Federal Southern District of Florida and the State Attorney's Office for Palm Beach County. Under the terms of the NPA, any criminal prosecution against Epstein is deferred as long as he abides by the certain terms and conditions contained therein. If at any time the USAO's Office has reason to believe Epstein is in breach of the Agreement, it need only provide Epstein's counsel with notice of the breach and then move forward with Epstein's prosecution. Accordingly, the undersigned would agree with Epstein ... that the fact there exists aNPA does not mean that Epstein is free from future criminal prosecution, and that in fact, `the threat of prosecution is real, substantial and present.'" See August 4, 2009 Order (DE 242) and September 9, 2009 Omnibus Order (DE 293); and Manson v. United States, 244U.S. 362, 365 (1917). Moreover, as this court knows, the NPA only defers prosecution in the Southern District of Florida, not other districts. Therefore, Epstein is "confronted by a substantial and `real,' and not merely trifling or imaginary, hazard[] of incrimination" when it comes to Plaintiff's discovery requests. United States v. Apfelbaum, 445U.S. 115, 128 (1980). + +The Fifth Amendment serves as aguarantee against testimonial compulsion and provides, in relevant part, that "[n]o person...shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be awitness against himself." (DE 242, p.5); see also Edwin v. Price, 778F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985) (citing Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414U.S. 70, 77 (1973)). The privilege is accorded liberal construction in favor of the right and extends not only to answers that would support acriminal conviction, but extends also to those answers which would furnish alink in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for acrime. See Hoffman v. United States, 341U.S. 479, 486 (1951). Information is protected by the privilege not only if it would support acriminal conviction, but also in those instances where "the responses would merely `provide alead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate." See United States v. Neff, 315F.2d 1235, 1239 (9th Cir.), cert denied, 447U.S. 925 (1980); Blau v. United States, 340U.S. 159 (1950); SEC v Leach, 156F.Supp.2d 491, 494 (E.D. PA. 2001). + +The Court has already ruled on questions similar to the ones posed by Plaintiffs and which seek similar identifying (or production of) information that could be used to incriminate Epstein, would furnish alink in the chain of evidence used to prosecute him and would require Epstein to be awitness against himself. + +## b. Epstein's Filth Amendment Privilege Should Be Sustained As To Interrogatory No.s 5, 6, 8. 9, 11, 12 And 13 Because Each Seek To Have Epstein Identify Witnesses That Could Testify Against Hun + +The court sustained Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege as it related to interrogatories that would require Epstein to identify employees and/or witnesses that could testify against Epstein. (DE 242, p.7-11 & DE 293). Here, Plaintiff's Interrogatory No.s 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13 ask Epstein to, among other things, list corporations, partnerships and other entitled that Epstein has/had an ownership interest, identify all firms employed by Epstein that have performed services for Epstein, identify all persons, firms and companies employed by Epstein that have \_performed tax or accounting work for Epstein, identify all employees of fEpstein]whose duties or functions include accounting, bookkeeping or financial planning, identify all foreign firms, companies and trust in which [Epstein has1 an ownership interest, identify all institutions in which Epstein has maintained accounts with and identify all current employment and other sources of income for Epstein? + +These interrogatories seek compelled statements that could reasonably "furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute Epstein in future criminal proceedings or even support acriminal conviction." See infra regarding In sum, the above interrogatories ask Epstein to identify corporations, firms, institutions and trusts he has/had an interest in, employees, accountants, tax advisors, bookkeepers and Epstein's + +If Epstein cannot be forced to identify witnesses against him 242 and 293, then it goes without saying that he cannot be forced to identify persons, employees, accountants, tax advisors, bookkeepers, witnesses, entities/institutions, corporations and/or trusts that could result in Epstein providing alink to witnesses that could testify against him. In particular, identifying all corporations, partnerships, and other business entities in which he had/has an interest (Interrogatory No. 5), all firms or companies employed by Epstein to conduct appraisals (Interrogatory No. 6), all firms or companies employed by Epstein to perform tax or accounting functions(Interrogatory No. 8), all of Epstein's employees that performed accounting, bookkeeping or financial planning (Interrogatory No. 9), all foreign firms, companies or trusts in which he has an ownership interest (Interrogatory No. 11), all firms or institutions in which he had an investment, brokerage, savings or trust account (Interrogatory No. 12) and his current employment (Interrogatory No. IS), would violate his Fifth Amendment rights and should also be sustained because requiring him to respond could "... reveal the availability to him and/or use by him of "interstate facilities" and thus would constitute a link in the chain of evidence that could potentially expose him to the dangers of selfincrimination." See DE 282 and 293. This same argument applies to Interrogatory Numbers 4 and 7 which request that Epstein identify all real property in his name and his cars, boats and airplanes, all of which could reveal the availability to him and/or use of interstate facilities. DE 293. ate infra with regard to argument as to how the requested information could also lead to Epstein's whereabouts — a fact this court ruled as being crucial to this case and the other related cases. (DE 293, p.5). + +current employment, all of which could result in Epstein providing information that could implicate him and could result in Epstein providing ahint or aclue as to who may have knowledge of the events in question. (DE 242 & 293) Asking Epstein to identify such information will implicate the Fifth Amendment, force him to incriminate himself in the commission of crimes and force Epstein to provide compelled information. See g., DE 242. This is the same thing as asking Epstein to identify and provide alist of his employees, which the court has already ruled would be tantamount to asking Epstein to ". . .identify potential witnesses against him. .." (DE 242, p. 9-11) See also, infra. + +Requiring Epstein to list and delineate the requested information constitutes compelled testimonial admissions that could potentially provide a`lead or clue' or alink in the chain of evidence having a tendency to incriminate Epstein and would threaten to invade his privilege against being required to produce and/or testify. Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232F.3d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir. 2000)(the "privilege" against self-incrimination does not depend upon the likelihood, but upon the possibility of prosecution and also covers those circumstances where the disclosures would not be directly incriminating, but could provide an indirect link to incriminating evidence). + +As this court recognized, Epstein can properly invoke his Fifth Amendment right to not identify any person who may have information pertaining to the alleged events. For these reasons, Epstein's justified concern with regard to answering the above interrogatories and the resulting waiver of his Fifth Amendment Privilege in this regard is substantial, real and not merely imaginative. Accordingly, Defendant's assertion of the protections afforded under the 5th, 6th, and le Amendments of the United States Constitution are required to be upheld. + +In addition, Interrogatory No.s 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13 and the information sought relate to potential federal claims of violations. See infra for more detailed and incorporated argument and DE 282 and 283, in camera. + +**c. *Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege And Other Objections Should Further Be Sustained As To Interrogatory Numbers 1-13 and Request to Produce Numbers 1-5*** + +Interrogatory Numbers 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 will be addressed in this section; however, the same argument applies to Interrogatory Numbers 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13 (addressed above on different grounds) and Request for Production Numbers 1-5. + +Epstein cannot provide answers/responses to questions relating to his financial history and condition without waiving his Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. The requests are unreasonable, overbroad, confidential, proprietary in nature, the subject of potential federal claims violations and thus seek information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action. The information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to the terms of the NPA and Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 408, and Fla. Stat. 90.410. + +(i) [REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] + +--- + +4 The United States Supreme Court has expressly encompassed the innocent citizen as well as the guilty within the ambit of Fifth Amendment protections (i.e., that Epstein may deny any allegation that he violated the above-described federal statutes is not in conflict with his constitutional right not to be compelled by requests to make disclosures that would further any investigation against him or incriminate him.) The Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination is accorded "liberal construction," Hoffman, 341 U.S. at 486, and extends not only to answers that would in themselves support a criminal conviction, but extends also to those answers (or responses as in the instant matter) that would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a crime. Id. In practice, the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination "permits a person not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings." Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985), citing Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973)). Thus, information is protected by the privilege not only if it would support a criminal conviction, but also in those instances where "the responses would merely provide a 'lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate." United States v. Neff, 615 F.2d 1235, 1239 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 825 (1980). + +[REDACTED] +[REDACTED] +[REDACTED] +[REDACTED] +[REDACTED] +[REDACTED] +[REDACTED] +[REDACTED] + +Answers to the specified Interrogatories and Requests for Production could therefore provide self-incriminating information and the possibility of future criminal prosecution for an alleged violation of the above target offenses. Production would constitute a testimonial admission of the genuineness, the existence, and Epstein’s control of such records, and thus presents a real and substantial danger of self-incrimination in this case, in other related cases and as well in areas that could result in criminal prosecution. Hubbell, 530 U.S. at 35-36. Accordingly, any compelled testimony that provides a “lead or clue to a source of evidence of such [a] crime” is protected by Fifth Amendment. SEC v Leach, 156 F.Supp.2d 491, 494 (E.D. PA. 2001). See supra. Questions seeking “testimony” regarding names of witnesses, leads to phone or travel records, or financial records that would provide leads to tax or money laundering or unlicensed money transmittal investigations are protected. See also Hoffman v United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951)(“the right against self-incrimination may be invoked if the answer would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute for a crime”) and United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000). See + +infra for detailed argument applying the Fifth Amendment to the target offenses. Here, the information sought is financial in nature and, therefore, directly relates to Epstein's business activities and thus Answers to the specified discovery requests could provide alink in the chain of evidence used to prosecute Epstein for those crimes. Sheldon v. Sheldon, 193B.R. 152, 162 (S.D.N.Y 1996). + +To the extent the discovery requests seek financial information exchanged between Epstein and the federal authorities, this court already ruled on similar requests in 80119whereby the Plaintiffs, Jane Doe 2-7, asked the following: + +Request No. 2. All documents referring or relating to the United States' agreement with Defendant to defer federal prosecution subject to certain conditions, including without limitation, the operative agreement between Defendant and the United States and all amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +Request No. 3. All documents referring or relating to Defendant's agreement with the State of Florida on his plea of guilty to violations of Florida Criminal Statutes, including without limitation, the operative plea agreement and any amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. + +Request No.4.All documents obtained in discovery or investigation relating to either the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal Case, including without limitation, documents obtained from any federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, the State Attorney's office and the United States Attorney's office. + +The court specifically held at p.17 of its Order at DE 242 that "[defendant's Motion as it relates to Production requestnumber(s) 2, 3, 4... . is (granted]. The very act of producing documents in response to these requests is testimonial in nature, in that by production, Epstein would be implicitly communicating `statements of fact,' to which the Fifth Amendment privilege may be validly asserted . Hubbell, 530U.S. at 35-36. Here, not only do the subject requests involve `statements of fact,' but the financial information sought, including tax returns, + +[REDACTED] +[REDACTED] +[REDACTED] + +As such, Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege assertion as it relates to these requests should be sustained. See infra. + +In addition to the above argument, the specific information requested in request number 1 as to personal tax returns also seeks information that is confidential and protected by federal law, 26 U.S.C. §6103. + +**(ii) *The Fifth Amendment*** + +The Fifth Amendment is a safe harbor for all citizens, including those who are innocent of any underlying offense. The specified Interrogatories and Requests, if answered, may result in compelled testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter in this case [REDACTED] + +[REDACTED] Responding to this and other related inquiries would have the potential to provide a link in a chain of information and/or leads to other evidence or witnesses that would have the specific risk of furthering an investigation against him and, therefore, are protected from compulsion by Epstein's constitutional privilege. If required to respond to the requests for Production, Epstein will be implicitly communicating statements of fact, authenticating documents and testifying to their location and existence. DE 242 and 293. + +Under Hubbell, the Fifth Amendment encompasses compelled statements that lead to the discovery of incriminating evidence even though the statements themselves are not incriminating, and it further protects the target of a grand jury investigation from + +being compelled to answer questions designed to elicit information about the existence of potentially incriminating evidence including, but not limited to, financial information. (emphasis added) Hubbell, 530U.S. at 37-38 and 43-44. Hubbell applies broadly to the specified discovery requests in the instant matter. + +The court will note that, as worded, the interrogatories and the requests seek information regarding Epstein's assets, ownership of assets and transfer of assets, and the requests broadly seek information relating to assets, ownership of assets, corporations and trusts and transfer of assets in locations inside and outside the United States. Defendant has already provided this court with sufficient argument at DE 282 and DE 283detailing why the production or identification of information showing or providing a clue as to Epstein's whereabouts could provide alink in the chain of evidence regarding: (a) Epstein's air travel within the United States and Foreign Territories; (b) Epstein's communications with others relating to or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries; and (c) Epstein's personal calendars and schedules. Given that the essential proof of an allegation of 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) would include travel records, schedules regarding trips and locations, flight records, calendars, and transportation arrangements, the court found that Epstein had made amore particularized showing because producing such information "could reveal the availability to him and/or use by him of interstate facilities and thus would constitute alink in the chain of evidence that could potentially expose [Epstein] to the dangers of self incrimination." (DE 293, p.6) + +Here, Plaintiffs request that Epstein identify his financial information, ownership of assets and transfers of assets inside and outside the United States, which "could reveal + +the availability to him and/or use by him of interstate facilities and thus would constitute alink in the chain of evidence that could potentially expose [Epstein] to the dangers of self incrimination." (DE 293, p.6). Plaintiffs wish to obtain this information to corroborate their position that Epstein has traveled, had the means to travel, and had business or residences inside and outside of the United States to allegedly transport females for purposes of sex, which is no different from the requests this Court has already ruled upon and sustained Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege in response thereto. (DE 242& 293). In analyzing Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege, this court cannot dismiss the allegations made by other Jane Doe's in the related cases. In summary, this court reasoned that: + +"[i]n this and the other civil actions, Plaintiffs allege that Epstein violated certain federal and state criminal statutes in an attempt to make claims against Epstein ranging from sexual battery to intentional infliction of emotional distress. The lynchpin for the exercise of federal criminal jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. §2422(b), which figures in some of the complaints filed, is `the use of any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce' and the analogous essential element of 18 U.S.C. §2423(b), which also figures in some of the Complaints, is `travel[s) in interstate commerce or travels into the United States or . . . travels in foreign commerce.' Accordingly, requiring Epstein to provide responses. . .would in essence be compelling him to provide assertions of fact + +While these Interrogatories and Requests appear to be general-identification type information, which on their face may not appear to infringe upon Epstein's rights under the 511 Amendment, responding to same would furnish Plaintiff with the ability to serve subpoenas on certain institutions, entities, employees, accountants, tax advisors, housekeepers and others in charge of the homes Epstein owns and others that are affiliated with the corporations, partnerships and other business entities Epstein has an interest in including, but not limited to, the request that Epstein list all foreign firms, companies and trusts in which Epstein has an ownership interest, which may furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to convict Epstein of acrime. See (DE 282 and 293, in camera). Epstein cannot be required to waive his privileges under the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and provide compelled testimony and information that may, directly or indirectly, furnish Plaintiff aclue or link in the chain of evidence used to prosecute him. Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232F.3d at 1263(the "privilege" against self-incrimination does not depend upon the likelihood, but upon the possibility of prosecution and also covers those circumstances where the disclosures would not be directly incriminating, but could provide an indirect link to incriminating evidence). Essentially, Plaintiff's Interrogatories and Requests seek to have Epstein be awitness against himself, assist with Plaintiffs' investigation and identify areas that could result in future prosecution of Epstein, including the + +Next, ". . Epstein's whereabouts. . .[is] crucial [to the] issues in this case and other related cases and . . . if he is forced to reveal [certain] information, these testimonial disclosures could subsequently be used to incriminate him and/or prosecute him for a criminal offense." (DE 293, p.4-5) The court correctly recognized that "the lynchpin for the exercise of federal criminal jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. §2422(b), which figures in some of the complaints filed, is `the use of any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce' and the analogous essential element of 18 U.S.C. §2423(b), which also figures in some of the Complaints, is `travel[s] in interstate commerce or travels into the United States or . . . travels in foreign commerce." Accordingly, if Epstein's telephone records are protected from disclosure under the Fifth Amendment it goes without saying that his financial information is also protected from disclosure as revealing same could result in subsequent subpoenas for information that may identify his whereabouts on a particular day and time and may also lead to the identity of witnesses that may have knowledge of the alleged events. In particular, Interrogatory Numbers 1-13 and Request Numbers 1-2, 4 and 5 all seek information that could provide a link in the chain as to Epstein's whereabouts, which could result in self-incrimination and future criminal prosecution. + +Even so, Epstein cannot be compelled to provide information that would lead to the identity of witnesses that may have knowledge of the alleged events. In sum, Epstein cannot be required to be a witness against himself or provide information that may incriminate him and lead to future prosecution. Each of the Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaints includes allegations that Epstein is of "tremendous wealth, power and influence." Ses g., DE 62,18. Each Plaintiff seeks in excess of 50 million dollars. The Second Amended Complaint states that ' , Epstein's assistant" was a part of "Epstein's plan and scheme (which) reflected a particular pattern and method" in the alleged recruiting of girl's to come to Epstein's Palm Beach mansion and give him "massages" in exchange for money. See 2nd Am. Complaint, ¶11-13 (emphasis added) Plaintiff also alleges that Epstein "maintains his principal home in New York and also owns residences in New Mexico, St. and Palm Beach. FL." Id. ¶8. "Upon information and belief, Jeffrey Epstein carried out his scheme and assaulted girls in Florida, New York and on his private island, known as Little St. James, in St. )1 Id. ¶10. The nature of the allegations are serious, and state clearly that the alleged assaults occurred in Florida, New York and in AM'. + +The foregoing allegations demonstrate clearly how information concerning Epstein's whereabouts and his financial condition are sustainable under the Fifth Amendment. Given the importance of interstate and foreign travel, Epstein's whereabouts, the assets or businesses he owns and any other identifying financial information relating to his whereabouts is protected under the Fifth Amendment because being compelled to provide same could potentially identify witnesses to testify against Epstein, thereby resulting in testimonial authentication, location, possession and the existence of certain information and self-incrimination. Here, there is too close a nexus between the information sought and the pivotal jurisdictional requisites of 18 U.S.C. 2422(b)(the use of "interstate facilities" and 18 U.S.C. 2423(b)(the requirement of interstate travel i.e., Epstein's places of employment, locations of homes and businesses in and out of the United States and his assets). As such, answers to the specified discovery requests will obviously reveal Epstein's whereabouts (or possible whereabouts), which could provide leads to other evidence that could inculpate Epstein. If Epstein is compelled to provide any information relative to the Specified Requests that information could subsequently be used to incriminate him and it might be used to establish the elements of the target offenses identified above. + +Moreover, the allegations clearly provide that Epstein is rich and spent substantial sums on the matters that are the subject of the civil complaints. Therefore, in connection with the target offenses setout above and the NPA, Epstein has a Fifth Amendment privilege not to admit he has any money, wealth, interests in any businesses, partnerships and/or corporations since doing so would constitute links in the chain of evidence that would pose a specific hazard of self-incrimination and prosecution. + +Next, requiring Epstein to provide responses to the contested production requests would in essence constitute atestimonial admission of the genuineness, the existence, and Epstein's control of such records, and thus presents areal and substantial danger of selfincrimination in this case, in other related cases and as well in areas that could result in criminal prosecution. See generally Hoffman, 341U.S. at 486 and Hubbell, 530U.S. at 36; In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 1F.3d 87, 93 (2d Cir. 1993)(noting that in those instances where the existence and/or location of the requested documents are unknown, or where production implicitly authenticates the requested documents, the act of producing responsive documents is considered testimonial and is protected by the Fifth Amendment). It is evident from the requests themselves, the allegations in the various Complaints, and the facts and circumstances surrounding these cases, that to demand from Epstein amore particularized showing, requires Epstein to walk athin line with regard to "surrender[ing] the very protection which the privilege is designed to guarantee." Hoffman, 341U.S. at 479. The United States Supreme Court has made clear that the scope of the Fifth Amendment Privilege also encompasses the circumstance where "the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena (or production request) has a compelled testimonial aspect.i4 Hubbell, 530U.S. at 36; see also Fisher v. United States 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §138 (6th Ed.). The "implicit authentication" rationale appears to be the prevailing justification for the Fifth Amendment's application to documentary subpoenas, which is no different from producing documents responsive to a request for production. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36 (2000); Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S., 757, 763-764, (1966) ("the privilege reaches . . . the compulsion of responses which are also communications, for example, compliance with a subpoena to produce one's papers); v. United States, 409 U.S. 322, 344-46 (1973) (the person complying with the subpoena "implicitly testifies that the evidence he brings forth is in fact the evidence demanded"); People v. Defore, 242 N.Y. 13, 27 (1926) ("A defendant is 'protected from producing his documents in response to a Subpoena duces tecum, for his production of them in court would be his voucher of their genuineness.' There would then be `testimonial compulsion' "). + +For these reasons, Epstein's justified concern with regard to answering the above Interrogatories and Requests for Production, and the resulting waiver of his Fifth Amendment Privilege in this regard and/or providing self-incriminating information is substantial, real and not merely imaginative. Accordingly, based on the facts and circumstances of this case, and under applicable law, Defendant's assertion of the protections afforded under the 5h, e h, and 14th Amendments of the United States Constitution are required to be upheld. + +# (iii) Third Party Privacy Rights + +Here, Interrogatory Numbers 5, 6, 8, 9 and 11-13 also seek information that may violate others' third-party privacy rights. As noted by the United States Supreme Court in Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438, 454, 92 S.Ct. 1029, 1038, at fn. 10 (1972): + +In Stanley, 394 U.S., at 564, 89 S.Ct., at 1247, the Court stated:'(A)Iso fundamental is the right to be free, except in very limited circumstances, from unwanted governmental intrusions into one's privacy." The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man's spiritual nature, of his feelings and of his intellect. They knew that only a part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions, and their sensations. They conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone-the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized man.' [Citations omitted]. + +The fundamental right of privacy is not only guaranteed under by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, but also under the Constitution of the State of Florida, Art. I, Sect. 23. As summarized by the Florida Supreme Court in Shaktman v. State, 553 So.2d 148, 150-51 (Fla. 1989): + +The right of privacy, assured to Florida's citizens, demands that individuals be free from uninvited observation of or interference in those aspects of their lives which fall within the ambit of this zone of privacy unless the intrusion is warranted by the necessity of a compelling state interest. In an opinion which predated the adoption of section 23, the First District aptly characterized the nature of this right. + +A fundamental aspect of personhood's integrity is the power to control what we shall reveal about our intimate selves, to whom, and for what purpose. + +Bryon, Harless, Schaffer, Reid & Assocs., Inc. v. State ex rel, Schellenberg, 360 So.2d 83, 92 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), quashed and remanded on other grounds, 379 So.2d 633 (Fla.1980). Because this power is exercised in varying degrees by differing individuals, the parameters of an individual's privacy can be dictated only by that individual. The central concern is the inviolability of one's own thought, person, and personal action. The inviolability of that right assures its preeminence over "majoritarian sentiment" and thus cannot be universally defined by consensus. + +(Emphasis added). + +Clearly, the nature of the questions identified would require Epstein to list information that may identify third parties (that could also testify against him) and necessarily thwart such individuals' rights to assert their constitutional right of privacy as guaranteed under the United States and Florida Constitutions as well as their rights under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. + +Accordingly, Defendant's assertion of the protections afforded under the 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments of the United States Constitution are required to be upheld. + +Wherefore, Epstein respectfully requests that this Court issue and order: + +- a. finding that the danger Epstein faces by being forced to testify in this case relative to the above interrogatories and produce or identify the specified documents is substantial and real, and not merely trifling or imaginary; +- b. sustaining Epstein's Fifih Amendment Privilege and other delineated constitutional privileges as it relates to the above interrogatories and requests and denying Plaintiff's Motion in that regard; and +- c. for such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +Respectfully + +By: MICHAEL , ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this etday of November 2009 + +Respectfu ly\$r.mitted, + +T D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/515-3148 Fax +(*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein*) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80469* + +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 isx®searcylaw.com iph@searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf ahbrucereinhar law.com rimm Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 + +rjosefsberg@nodhurst.com kezell©podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-8059/ and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesq@bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748011/EFTA02748011.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748011/EFTA02748011.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..194b513fff03d1fff0ee21ab83c9e65999a853ce --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748011/EFTA02748011.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1203 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748011.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 24, + "chars": 42907, + "elapsed_seconds": 14.24, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.1331787109375, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 411.876, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 411.876, + 99.70697021484375 + ], + [ + 201.1331787109375, + 99.70697021484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant's Response In Opposition to Jane Doc 2-8s Motion to Compel Net Worth \nDiscovery, With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 526.3199999999999, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 526.3199999999999, + 350.27685546875 + ], + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 350.27685546875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Procedural Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 473.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 392.16387939453125, + 473.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 392.16387939453125, + 486.55377197265625 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 486.55377197265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Epstein's Objections Should Be Sustained Under The 5th Amendment \nBecause The Discovery Requests Seek Testimonial And Incriminating \nInformation", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 90.576, + 181.44 + ], + [ + 490.212, + 181.44 + ], + [ + 490.212, + 224.37 + ], + [ + 90.576, + 224.37 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "a. Introduction and Discovery Requests", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 196.452, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 238.95 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 252.4212646484375 + ], + [ + 196.452, + 252.4212646484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Interrogatories", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 260.1, + 433.35 + ], + [ + 359.856, + 433.35 + ], + [ + 359.856, + 447.93 + ], + [ + 260.1, + 447.93 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "The Requests For Production", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 236.232, + 639.9000000000001 + ], + [ + 388.1395263671875, + 639.9000000000001 + ], + [ + 388.1395263671875, + 655.3192291259766 + ], + [ + 236.232, + 655.3192291259766 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "b. Epstein's Filth Amendment Privilege Should Be Sustained As To Interrogatory \nNo.s 5, 6, 8. 9, 11, 12 And 13 Because Each Seek To Have Epstein Identify Witnesses \nThat Could Testify Against Hun", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 528.9508666992188, + 597.78 + ], + [ + 528.9508666992188, + 641.7837219238281 + ], + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 641.7837219238281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "c. Epstein's Fifth Amendment Privilege And Other Objections Should Further Be Sustained As To Interrogatory Numbers 1-13 and Request to Produce Numbers 1-5", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 139.536, + 159.57000000000002 + ], + [ + 477.36, + 159.57000000000002 + ], + [ + 477.36, + 203.31 + ], + [ + 139.536, + 203.31 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(ii) The Fifth Amendment", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 270.54 + ], + [ + 401.47200000000004, + 270.54 + ], + [ + 401.47200000000004, + 285.12 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 285.12 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.46800000000002, + 460.0799999999999 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 460.0799999999999 + ], + [ + 229.5, + 473.84999999999997 + ], + [ + 207.46800000000002, + 473.84999999999997 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(iii) Third Party Privacy Rights", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 210.88999938964844, + 459.2699999999999 + ], + [ + 434.9296875, + 459.2699999999999 + ], + [ + 434.9296875, + 476.60302734375 + ], + [ + 210.88999938964844, + 476.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 485.18999999999994 + ], + [ + 366.0479431152344, + 485.18999999999994 + ], + [ + 366.0479431152344, + 499.863037109375 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 499.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 22, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 223.56000000000003 + ], + [ + 422.28, + 223.56000000000003 + ], + [ + 422.28, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 190.94400000000002, + 264.06000000000006 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 236 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 348 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 383 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 371 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 379 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 544 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 376 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 240 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 251 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 391 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 298 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 349 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 404 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 360 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 72 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 390 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 73 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 99 + ], + [ + "Line", + 49 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748011" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748035/EFTA02748035.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748035/EFTA02748035.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0430865905b502e801d0d0ef81f83431669828e9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748035/EFTA02748035.md @@ -0,0 +1,325 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +### Defendant's Response In Opposition To Plaintiffs' Appeal And Objections To Magistrate Judge's Order Entered September 10, 2009 (DE 293), With Memorandum Of Law + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Appeal and Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Order Entered September 10, 2009 (DE 293), with Incorporated Memorandum of Law. In support, Epstein states: + +## I. Procedural Background + +- 1. The Magistrate Judge entered an order (DE 242) sustaining several of Epstein's Fifth Amendment objections and stating, among other things, that Epstein must supplement his Response Memorandum to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel. (DE 242) +- 2. On August 31, 2009, Epstein filed his Supplementary Brief providing a more particularized showing as to why his objections under the Fifth Amendment should be sustained. (DE 282)(the "Supplementary Brief'). Of even date, Epstein filed his Motion for Reconsideration and Request for Rule 4 Appeal of Portions of the + +Magistrate's Order et al. (DE 282X"Epstein's Rule 4 Appeal") As discussed in more detail below, the Magistrate Judge was provided with unredacted versions of the Supplementary Brief and Epstein's Rule 4 Appeal, in camera.1 + +3. After Epstein provided a more particularized showing in the Supplementary Brief and his Rule 4 Appeal as to why Epstein's objections should be sustained or reconsidered under the Fifth Amendment, the Magistrate Judge entered the Omnibus Order at DE 293 sustaining Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege. + +4. As set forth in DE 293 and the case law cited therein, the Magistrate Judge followed the appropriate procedures and law in entering DE 293 and therefore same should be sustained and left undisturbed. + +### II. The Magistrate Judge Followed The Appropriate Procedures Under the Fifth Amendment In Entering DE 293 + +5. As Plaintiffs concede in their Rule 4 Appeal (p.2)(DE 327), the Magistrate Judge's initial order at DE 242 directed Epstein to make "a particularized showing, by in camera submission or otherwise, demonstrating how the Fifth Amendment may validly be asserted in response to these requests." DE 242. + +6. Inconsistent with the law (discussed infra) and the Magistrate's Order, Plaintiffs claim that "[t]he Magistrate [made her ruling] apparently in reliance upon the substantially redacted Supplementary Brief filed by Defendant" and that Defendant was required to produce documents in making his more particularized showing. Plaintiffs' Rule 4 Appeal at p.3. + +7. From the outset, Defendant provided the Magistrate Judge with unredacted copies of the Supplementary Brief (DE 282) and the Rule 4 Appeal (DE 282), in camera. + +if Epstein had not provided the information in camera but instead provided same to opposing counsel, Epstein would have waived his Fifth Amendment privilege. + +Epstein electronically filed those same briefs in redacted form in order to preserve his rights under the Fifth Amendment. Therefore, the Magistrate Judge, despite Plaintiffs' specious contentions, did not make her rulings based upon substantially redacted briefs. + +8. Blacks law Dictionary (8th Edition 2004), defines an in camera inspection as "[aj trial judge's private consideration of the evidence." Obviously, if an in camera inspection is the trial judge's private consideration of the facts, Plaintiff cannot argue that they are entitled to receive unredacted versions of the briefs, which contain evidence that would inevitably be used to incriminate Epstein and result in Epstein's waiver of his Fifth Amendment privilege. + +9. In Hoffman v. U.S., 341 U.S. 479, 71 S.Ct. 814, 95 Ltd. 118 (1951), the Supreme Court enunciated the standard for measuring when a witness may properly claim his right against self-incrimination, and thus refuse to respond to questions: + +To sustain the privilege, it need only be evident from the implications of the question, in the setting in which it is asked, that a responsive answer to the question or an explanation of why it cannot be answered might be dangerous because injurious disclosure could result. The trial judge in appraising the claim "must be governed as much by his personal perception of the peculiarities of the case as by the facts actually in evidence.s2 + +Id. at 486-87, 71 S.Ct. at 918; see also (DE 242, p.6) + +A proper application of this standard requires that the Fifth Amendment claim be raised in response to specific questions. This permits the reviewing Court to determine whether a responsive answer might lead to injurious disclosures. United States v. + +2 Once a particularized showing has been made, "[ilt is for the Court to decide whether a witness' silence is justified and to require him to answer if it clearly appears to the Court that the witness asserting the privilege is mistaken as to its validity." In re Moroarath, 718 F.2d 161, 166-67 (6d' Cir. 1983). Here, the Court has spoken, and has considered the nature of the allegations made against Epstein along with the in camera submissions. + +Malnik 489 F.2d 682, 685 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 826, 95 S.Ct. 44, 42 L.Ed.2d 50 (1974). + +10. It is clear that Epstein followed not only the Court's order (DE 242) but also the well-settled law with regard to making a more particularized showing that there is reasonable cause for Epstein to believe that a direct answer or response to the requests would support a conviction or provide a link in the chain of evidence to support a conviction against Epstein. See e'g., Sheldon v. Sheldon, 193 B.R. 152, 162 (S.D. N.Y. 1996Xthe Court, in camera, determined that answers to certain deposition questions would support a conviction or provide a link in the chain of evidence to support a conviction) As this Court recognized, Epstein's refusal to respond or produce information to each request is, as required, based on a specific apprehension of a compelled production and disclosure providing a link in the chain of evidence adverse to him. Blau v. United States, 340 U.S. 159 (1950). Production would therefore constitute a testimonial admission of the genuineness, the existence, and Epstein's control of such records, and thus presents a real and substantial danger of self-incrimination in this case, in other related cases and as well in areas that could result in criminal prosecution. See generally Hoffman v United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951) and United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000). + +11. Therefore, Epstein is not required to produce any documents or responses to interrogatories. Instead, an evaluation can and was made by this Court of Epstein's unredacted in camera submissions, and it was clearly evident from the implications of the interrogatories and the requests that a responsive answer to the interrogatories and the requests for production could result in injurious disclosures and compelled testimony, + +which would, among other things, require Epstein to be a witness against himself. Under the law espoused in Hoffman an explanation of why answers to the subject interrogatories and the requests for production would violate Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege is sufficient. In entering DE 292, the Magistrate Judge considered all the facts necessary including, but not limited to, and the setting in which the interrogatories and the request for production were made and thus correctly entered DE 293. + +12. As this Court ruled in DE 242, ". . . it is evident from the requests themselves, the allegations in the various complaints, and the facts and circumstances surrounding these cases, that to demand a more particularized showing of danger, would require Epstein to 'surrender the very protection which the privilege is designed to guarantee.'" "As such, no more particularized showing than that offered by Epstein in his Response Brief is necessary." (DE 242, p.18); citing Hoffman, 341 U.S. at 479. Here, the Magistrate Judge correctly followed Hoffman. That same reasoning should apply here. + +13. Significantly, Plaintiffs have not challenged several of the interrogatories and the requests for production in which Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege was sustained in DE 242 (above) based upon their misguided theory that an "explanation" is not sufficient in detailing why Epstein's privilege should be sustained and that answers to interrogatories and responsive documents must be produced in order to make a more particularized showing to sustain the privilege. If this Court accepts Plaintiffs' slanted argument, then a severe conflict would exist between what is required to sustain the protections of the Fifth Amendment as to interrogatories and requests for production. That is, if Plaintiff's theory is accepted, then this Court must make a ruling that is in + +direct conflict with Hoffman and require Epstein to respond to interrogatories and produce documents to make a more particularized showing rather than provide the appropriate explanation as to how answers or responses would be injurious under Hoffman. Plaintiffs would, albeit incorrectly, have this Court believe that it was not permitted to make a determination of Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege from the requests themselves, the allegations in the various complaints, and the facts and circumstances surrounding these cases as provided under Hoffman. Plaintiffs' argument simply does not make sense and is unsupported by the law. + +14. Epstein, in his Response in Opposition which led to the entering of DE 242, and in his Rule 4 Appeal and his Supplementary Brief, has demonstrated and provided fact specific explanations as why answers to the subject interrogatories and the request for production would violate Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege. As Hoffman observed: The claim of privilege must be sustained unless it is "'perfectly clear, from a careful consideration of all the circumstances in the case, . . . that the answer(s) cannot possibly have such tendency' to incriminate." Id. at 488. (quoting Temple v. Commonwealth, 75 Va. 892, 898 (1881)(emphasis in original).)) Here, the Court cannot conclude that answers and responses cannot possibly have a tendency to incriminate Epstein. + +# III. The Underlying Federal Statutes And the Specified Discovery Requests + +15. As to Interrogatory Numbers 7 and 11, Epstein made a sufficient showing as to why answers relate to potential federal claims violations as well as the statutes pled by Plaintiffs in an effort to recover millions from Epstein. For example, the underlying criminal offense, as it relates to Interrogatory Number 7, is ". . . knowingly persuading, + +inducing, enticing or coercing any individual to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, to engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so . . ." Id. Interrogatory Number 7 asks for time periods Epstein was present in Florida and the dates he arrived and departed (i.e., traveled into and out of Florida). Plaintiffs allege that Epstein engaged a "scheme and plan" against minor girls at his places of residence (i.e., Florida, New York and St. a If Plaintiffs allegations are accepted as true, forcing Epstein himself to provide this information may provide a clue or a link in the chain of evidence allowing Plaintiff or others to satisfy one or more of the elements of 18 U.S.C. 2422(a) resulting in self-incrimination, and may subject Epstein to future criminal prosecution under the NPA or in another district for an alleged violation of a criminal offense Likewise, other Jane Does such as Jane Doe 102 have contended that they are entitled to 18 U.S.C. 2255 damages based on Epstein's violation of 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) a separate federal criminal statute that prohibits "a person who travels in interstate commerce or travels into the United States...for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual activity". By seeking testimonial disclosures regarding dates Epstein traveled to and from the State of Florida, a response to contested interrogatory 7 may furnish a link in the chain of evidence that could potentially expose Epstein to the hazards of self-incrimination as to 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) violations. As such, the court made the correct ruling and no further particularized showing is required as that would cause Epstein to surrender his Fifth Amendment rights. + +16. Next, the underlying criminal offense, as it relates to Interrogatory Number 11, is ". . . using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign + +commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so. . . ." Id. Interrogatory Number 11 asks for Epstein to identify all telephone numbers used by Epstein, including cellular phones and landlines in any of his residences, by stating the complete telephone number and the name of the service provider. Plaintiff alleges that Epstein engaged a "scheme and plan" against minor girls at his places of residence, (i.e., Florida, New York and St. M . Assuming Plaintiff's allegations are true, forcing Epstein himself to provide this information may provide a clue or a link in the chain of evidence allowing Plaintiff or others to satisfy one or more of the elements of 18 U.S.C. 2422(b) (e.g., telephones the use of any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce) resulting in selfincrimination, and may subject Epstein to future criminal prosecution under the NPA or in another district for an alleged violation of a criminal offense. Significantly, this Court sustained Epstein's objections to Interrogatory Number 12, which requested information similar to Interrogatory Number 11. As such, the court made the correct ruling and no further particularized showing is required as that would cause Epstein to surrender his Fifth Amendment rights. + +17. Likewise, Request for Production numbers 10, 11, 19 and 21 all relate to potential federal claims violations as well as the statutes pled by Plaintiffs in an effort to recover millions from Epstein. For instance, Plaintiffs alleges violations of 18 U.S.C. 2422, entitled "Coercion and enticement", contained in Chapter 117 of Title 18 — "Transportation for Illegal Sexual Activity and Related Crimes," and as to other Jane Does, violations of 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) which criminalizes interstate or foreign travel for the purpose of having illicit sexual activity. Both 18 U.S.C. 2422(b) and 2423(b) are alleged by Jane Doe 2 and other Jane Does as predicate criminal offenses for federal damages lawsuits pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 which creates a civil remedy for personal injuries when a plaintiff can first show a violation of specified federal statutory criminal statues. Most importantly for purposes of the Court's making a determination regarding whether Epstein had shown a specific risk of self-incrimination, or that production of a document would constitute a link in the chain of evidence, (see DE242, at pgs 8-9, 18), the lynchpin for the exercise of federal criminal jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. 2422(b) is "the use of "any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce" and the analogous essential element of 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) is "travel {s} in interstate commerce or travels into the United States or {as} to a United States citizen...travels in foreign commerce". Thus, facially, an essential proof of any allegation of 18 U.S.C. 2422(b) — the statutory precondition alleged by Jane Doe 2 for a 2255 civil damage recovery - includes telephone, cellular phone, e-mail records or other "communications" as a facility of interstate commerce during which use there was persuasion, inducement, enticing, or coercing of an underage person to engage in prostitution or sexual activity. Contested requests for production numbers 10, 11, 19 and 21 ask that Epstein produce information (e.g.. documents reflecting Epstein's air travel, aircraft used and flight manifests, all communications with female models, MC2 models or Jean Luc Brunel relating to or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries and his personal calendars and schedules) that could reveal the availability to him or use of such interstate facilities and thus would constitute a link in the chain of evidence that could potentially + +expose him to the hazards of self-incrimination as to 18 U.S.C. 2422(b) federal criminal violations. Again, other Jane Does such as Jane Doe 102 have contended that they are entitled to 18 U.S.C. 2255 damages based on Epstein's violation of 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) a separate federal criminal statute that prohibits "a person who travels in interstate commerce or travels into the United States...for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual activity". By seeking testimonial disclosures regarding Epstein's Epstein's air travel, aircraft used and flight manifests, all communications with female models, MC2 models or Jean Luc Brunel relating to or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries and his personal calendars and schedule, assuming Plaintiffs' allegations to be true, responses to contested requests 10, 11, 19 and 21 may furnish a link in the chain of evidence that could potentially expose Epstein to the hazards of selfincrimination as to 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) violations. As such, the court made the correct ruling and no further particularized showing is required as that would cause Epstein to surrender his Fifth Amendment rights. + +18. As such, the court made the correct ruling and no further particularized showing is required as that would cause Epstein to surrender his Fifth Amendment rights. + +# (i) Application Of The es Amendment + +19. In the instant case, it is evident from the requests themselves, the allegations in the various Complaints, and the facts and circumstances surrounding these cases, that to demand from Epstein a more particularized showing, requires Epstein to walk a thin line with regard to "surrender[ing] the very protection which the privilege is designed to guarantee." Hoffman, 341 U.S. at 479. The United States Supreme Court has made clear that the scope of the Fifth Amendment Privilege also encompasses the circumstance where "the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena (or production request) has a compelled testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. at 36; see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence, Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §138 (61h Ed.). The "implicit authentication" rationale appears to be the prevailing justification for the Fifth Amendment's application to documentary subpoenas, which is no different from producing documents responsive to a request for production. See U.S. v Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36 (2000); Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S., 757, 763-764, (1966) ("the privilege reaches . . . the compulsion of responses which are also communications, for example, compliance with a subpoena to produce one's papers); v. United States. 409 U.S. 322, 344-46 (1973) (the person complying with the subpoena "implicitly testifies that the evidence he brings forth is in fact the evidence demanded"); People v. Defore. 242 N.Y. 13. 27 (1926) ("A defendant is 'protected from producing his documents in response to a Subpoena duces tecum, for his production of them in Court would be his voucher of their genuineness.' There would then be 'testimonial compulsion' "). + +20. Again, if plaintiffs theory is accepted, Epstein would be compelled to produce documents and therefore provide assertions of fact, thereby admitting that such documents existed and further admitting that the documents were in his possession or control, and were authentic. In other words, the very act of production of the category of documents requested would implicitly communicate "statements of fact." Hubbell, supra; Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 71 S.Ct. 814 (1951). As such, the act of production might not only provide evidence to support a conviction, but also a link in the + +chain of evidence for prosecution. Importantly, such compulsion to produce is the same as being compelled to testify. Thus, in those instances where the existence and/or location of the requested documents are unknown, or where the production would "implicitly authenticate" the requested documents, the act of producing responsive documents is considered "testimonial" and is protected by the Fifth Amendment. In re Grand Jury Subpoena 1 F.3d 87, 93 (2nd Cir. 1993); see also Fisher v. U.S., 425 U.S. 391, 410 (1976)(issue expressed as whether compliance with a document request or subpoena "tactically conceded" the items authenticity, existence or possession by defendant). Even more egregious is that fact that producing or responding to the Specified Requests could result in self-incrimination and potential prosecution and waiver of the 5111 Amendment. "The claimant must [also) be `confronted by substantial and `real,' and not merely trifling or imaginary, hazards of incrimination." United States v. Anfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 128 (1980). Accordingly, responses to the requests propounded upon Epstein would provide information which is protected by the privilege i.e., "the responses [c]ould merely provide a `lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate [Epstein]" United States v., Neff, 615 F.2d 1235, 1239 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 825 (1980). + +### IV. This Is Not An Instance Where Sealing Occurred Or Should Have Occurred — This is a Private In Camera Viewing By Definition + +21. As to Plaintiffs' argument that Defendant did not follow the local rules with regard to sealing Epstein's Rule 4 Appeal and the Supplementary Brief, Defendant's response is simple — this is not an instance where documents were submitted under seal but rather for private in camera review, which is within the Court's discretion. Interestingly, several documents have been filed by Defendant in this federal Court + +redacting the faces of each of the Plaintiffs and/or their identifying information without moving to seal same. Do the plaintiffs now concede that since the local rules were not followed in that "redacting" instance that all of their Plaintiffs faces and names can be made public — Epstein thinks not. Plaintiffs forget that "[t]he immediate and potential evils of compulsory self-disclosure transcend any difficulties that the exercise of the privilege may impose on society in the detection and prosecution of crime." United States v. M, 1944, 322 U.S. 694, 698, 64 S.Ct. 1248, 1251, 88 L.Ed. 1542. + +Wherefore, Epstein respectfully requests that this Court issue and order: + +- a. denying Plaintiffs' Rule 4 Appeal and Sustaining DE 293; and +- b. for such other and further relief is Court deems just and proper. + +HAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also ce ify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of identifi d on t following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on t 2009. + +By: ROBERTD. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bc1claw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +### Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomev.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +lack P.•, Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Bamhart & Shipley, + +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcylaw.com + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. =, Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +jph@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf(@,brucereinhartlaw + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsbergQpodhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesoakellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748035/EFTA02748035.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748035/EFTA02748035.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9bcb74ccf607a4711ed0fd52bfee8d424159102f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748035/EFTA02748035.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,794 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748035.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 15, + "chars": 26485, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.52, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 413.636474609375, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 413.636474609375, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Defendant's Response In Opposition To Plaintiffs' Appeal And Objections To \nMagistrate Judge's Order Entered September 10, 2009 (DE 293), With \nMemorandum Of Law", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 510.65570068359375, + 320.76 + ], + [ + 510.65570068359375, + 362.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 362.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Procedural Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 486.0 + ], + [ + 390.715087890625, + 486.0 + ], + [ + 390.715087890625, + 501.363037109375 + ], + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 501.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. The Magistrate Judge Followed The Appropriate Procedures Under the Fifth \nAmendment In Entering DE 293", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.024, + 351.53999999999996 + ], + [ + 521.2225341796875, + 351.53999999999996 + ], + [ + 521.2225341796875, + 380.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 93.024, + 380.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "III. The Underlying Federal Statutes And the Specified Discovery Requests", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 573.48 + ], + [ + 513.3382568359375, + 573.48 + ], + [ + 513.3382568359375, + 589.8530120849609 + ], + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 589.8530120849609 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(i) Application Of The es Amendment", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 515.97 + ], + [ + 417.4839782714844, + 515.97 + ], + [ + 417.4839782714844, + 534.35302734375 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 534.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IV. This Is Not An Instance Where Sealing Occurred Or Should Have Occurred \n\u2014 This is a Private In Camera Viewing By Definition", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 91.8, + 545.13 + ], + [ + 525.0368041992188, + 545.13 + ], + [ + 525.0368041992188, + 575.2230072021484 + ], + [ + 91.8, + 575.2230072021484 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 431.73 + ], + [ + 364.58050537109375, + 431.73 + ], + [ + 364.58050537109375, + 446.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 446.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 142.56 + ], + [ + 364.20050048828125, + 142.56 + ], + [ + 364.20050048828125, + 157.10302734375 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 157.10302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 72 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 149 + ], + [ + "Line", + 74 + ], + [ + "Text", + 72 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 35 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748035" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748050/EFTA02748050.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748050/EFTA02748050.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..29560640ecc0733846d2196c8b1add147f896a0d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748050/EFTA02748050.md @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +#### PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AGAINST SECOND DAY OF DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF EXTENDING PAST SEVEN HOURS IN THE AGGREGATE, AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files this Motion for Protective Order Against Second Day of Deposition of Plaintiff Extending Past Seven Hours in the Aggregate, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, as follows: + +# Introduction + +1. Plaintiff Jane Doe filed a similar Motion for Protective Order on October 29, 2009 seeking relief from Defendant taking her deposition for a second day. (DE 378). Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 seeks essentially the same relief limiting her deposition to seven hours, and, accordingly, Jane Doe No. 4 joins in Jane Doe's Motion for Protective Order. As discussed below, a deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 longer than seven hours in the aggregate would be contrary to Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(d)(1), S.D.Fla.L.R. 26.1(K), and this Court's Consolidation Order. (DE 98). + +### Background + +2. Pursuant to Court Order, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's deposition was taken on October 27, 2009. The deposition lasted from approximately 11:00 a.m. until 6:04 p.m. Defendant's counsel stopped his questioning at that time, stating that he had another appointment. + +3. Defendant has subsequently demanded that Jane Doe No. 4 appear for a second day of deposition. The parties have tentatively agreed that this second day of deposition will take place on November 17, 2009. + +4. Plaintiffs' counsel has calculated the aggregate time Jane Doe No. 4 has spent in deposition thus far, deducting time spent in breaks, and has determined that Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 has spent five hours and thirty five minutes in deposition. This calculation has been provided to Defendant's counsel, and has not been disputed. + +5. For the reasons set forth below, Jane Doe No. 4 should not be required to complete her deposition for a period longer than one hour and twenty five minutes. This will provide Defendant with an aggregate total of seven hours deposition time of Jane Doe No. 4. + +### Discussion + +6. Rule 30(d)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P., provides a limit on the time that may be taken for a deposition: + +> Unless otherwise stipulated or ordered by the court, a deposition is limited to one day of seven hours. The Court must allow additional time consistent with Rule 26(d)(2) if needed to fairly examine the deponent ... + +Consistent with Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(d)(1), S.D.Ra.L.R. 26.1(K) provides that "[u]nless otherwise authorized by the Court or stipulated by the parties, a deposition is limited, under Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(d) to one day of seven hours." + +7. This one day, seven hour limit was waived under the Court's Consolidation Order for circumstances that are not present in the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4. Specifically, the Court's Order consolidating cases dated May 14, 2009 (DE 98) waives the seven hour limit so that the multiple Plaintiffs' attorneys in these cases may have an adequate opportunity to question witnesses with regard to each particular Plaintiff: + +> For depositions, Local Rule 26.IK (limiting deposition time to one day of seven hours) is waived so as to allow each party an adequate opportunity to develop fully the record as it may relate to that party. However, this waiver shall not be construed as authority for any party to take unnecessarily long depositions, or abuse the process. Any abuses of this waiver shall result in the imposition of appropriate sanctions against the offending party. + +(Order, p. 41 8) (emphasis supplied). + +8. This waiver does not apply to the deposition of a Plaintiff taken by the Defendant. Defendant's counsel is the only attorney asking questions at this deposition. There are two other Plaintiffs' attorneys attending the deposition, one of which has appeared by telephone. It is unlikely that either of these Plaintiffs' attorneys will ask questions of Jane Doe No. 4 because nothing in the testimony indicates that their clients had any contact with Jane Doe No. 4. Plaintiffs' counsel may have some questions of Jane Doe No. 4 in the nature of clarification of testimony, but Jane Doe No. 4's counsel does not seek to use any part of Defendant's seven hour aggregate for purposes of those questions, which will be brief and be made at the end of the deposition. + +9. Separate and apart from the time limit for depositions under the federal and local rules, the questioning of Jane Doe No. 4 thus far has been argumentative, hostile, badgering and abusive. Substantial portions of the questioning have not related to any legitimate discovery purpose. For example, the first exhibit marked by Defendant's attorney at the deposition was the Proposal for Settlement that Defendant's counsel served earlier in the case. Defendant's attorney badgered Jane Doe No. 4 regarding this Proposal for Settlement, questioning whether she received and understood Defendant's settlement proposal. Such a line of questioning is highly improper and plainly not designed to lead to admissible testimony or the discovery of admissible evidence. As another example, Jane Doe No. 4 testified early in her deposition that the first three massages approximately she gave to Jeffrey Epstein were not sexual and she did not remove any clothes. Beginning with approximately the fourth massage, during her junior year of high school when she was 16 years old, she was asked progressively to remove more clothes and engage in more activities of a sexual nature. Over approximately a two-year period, she would engage in massages in which she was naked and sexual activity occurred approximately twice a week during periods in which Epstein was in Palm Beach. She made it clear early in her testimony that she did not recall the exact dates in which these massages occurred. Despite this, Defendant's counsel engaged in flurries of identical questions demanding exact dates, berating and badgering the witness, on repeated occasions throughout the course of the deposition. As demonstrated by these examples, a substantial portion of the deposition thus far has consisted of abusive questioning and not legitimate discovery. + +Questioning that unfairly embarrasses, humiliates, intimidates, or harasses the deponent, or invades his or her privacy absent a clear statement on the record explaining how the answers to such questions will constitute, or lead to, competent evidence admissible at trial. + +At the present time, Plaintiff's attorneys have not yet received the copy of the transcript of Jane Doe No. 4's deposition taken on October 27, 2009. Upon receipt, Plaintiff's attorney will file the transcript to demonstrate the abusive practices engaged in by Defendant's attorney. + +There are other instances of abuse by Defendant's counsel at Jane Doe No. 4's deposition. S.D.Fla.L.R. 30.1(A)(5) defines abusive deposition conduct to include the following: + +10. This is not a commercial case, in which the questioning must necessarily be focused on numerous complex commercial documents. In Dunkin Donuts, Inc. v. Mary's Donuts. Inc. 206 F.R.D. 518 (S.D.Fla. 2002), the Court allowed the Plaintiff to depose the Defendant's accountant and corporate representative for an additional seven hours because it was a complex commercial case involving seven years of commercial activity and 10,000 pages of documents. Id. at 522. See also Pace v. City of Palmetto, 2007 WL 470477 (S.D.Fla. 2007) (granting a party one hour additional deposition time because the deponent had not read documents in advance, and was taking an inordinate amount of time during the deposition to read documents). The nature of this case, for damages arising from sexual misconduct, does not warrant a deposition in excess of seven hours. + +IL Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(d)(1), S.D.Fla.L.R. 26.1(K) and the Court's Consolidation Order (DE 98), it is the Defendant's burden to demonstrate why more than seven hours of deposition time is necessary for a particular Plaintiff. Not only can Defendants not make such a demonstration, the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 emphatically demonstrates that more than seven hours of deposition time would only provide Defendant with a license for abuse, which is plainly part and parcel of Defendant's strategy to intimidate and harass the Plaintiffs in these cases. + +12. Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 is willing to sit for a second day of deposition for a period of no longer than one hour and twenty five minutes, giving Epstein an aggregate of seven hours of deposition time. Under the circumstances, any more deposition questioning will clearly be abusive. This additional one hour twenty five minutes of deposition time is more than enough time for Defendant to complete any remaining legitimate questions of Jane Doe No. 4. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests a protective order consistent with Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(d)(1) and S.D.Fla.L.R. 26.1(K), as well as this Court's Consolidation Order, providing Defendant with no more than an additional one hour and twenty five minutes of deposition time of Jane Doe No. 4, and for such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A3 + +Undersigned counsel has conferred with Defendant's counsel in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this motion, and has been unable to do so, as Defendant's counsel has advised that Defendant opposes this motion. + +Dated: November 3, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) + +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +# CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on November 3, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service list in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +### SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. ieoldbergereagwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@vodhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748050/EFTA02748050.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748050/EFTA02748050.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..82c296655519391b2963aa46512c786739a091fb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748050/EFTA02748050.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,467 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748050.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 11118, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.42, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 99.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 99.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE \nORDER AGAINST SECOND DAY OF DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF \nEXTENDING PAST SEVEN HOURS IN THE AGGREGATE, \nAND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 119.34, + 347.49 + ], + [ + 493.51983642578125, + 347.49 + ], + [ + 493.51983642578125, + 403.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 119.34, + 403.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Introduction", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 270.504, + 498.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 341.27581787109375, + 498.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 341.27581787109375, + 513.363037109375 + ], + [ + 270.504, + 513.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 271.728, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 340.87298583984375, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 340.87298583984375, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 271.728, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Discussion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 276.624, + 485.18999999999994 + ], + [ + 336.7409362792969, + 485.18999999999994 + ], + [ + 336.7409362792969, + 499.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 276.624, + 499.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.744, + 153.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 483.5617980957031, + 153.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 483.5617980957031, + 169.10302734375 + ], + [ + 129.744, + 169.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 495.72 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 495.72 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 511.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 225.82799999999997, + 511.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748050" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748057/EFTA02748057.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748057/EFTA02748057.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aa1df95bb291ee7c0292041b1b29aa48faa1cb05 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748057/EFTA02748057.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## ORDER + +Upon Plaintiffs' Jane Doe Nos. 2-7' Unopposed Motion for Enlargement of Time to Ox 640-S31) Respond to Defendant's Motions to Compel Independent Medical Examination and good cause being shown, it is hereby + +ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs shall have an enlargement of time until October 13, 2009, to respond to the Defendant's Motions to Compel Independent Medical Examinations of Jane Does 2-7. + +DONE AND ORDERED in in Ft. Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this sg a day of 1Q 194e.h'tyO2-;i009. + +Cfrerhin DISTRICT C 11JUDGE MOll s rca \e' A SO-IL D \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748057/EFTA02748057.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748057/EFTA02748057.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..577b764c1fc48c9b2658ade980e8fd7388480495 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748057/EFTA02748057.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748057.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 879, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.98, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 212.489990234375, + 112.9102783203125 + ], + [ + 400.365, + 112.9102783203125 + ], + [ + 400.365, + 140.13 + ], + [ + 212.489990234375, + 140.13 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.28499999999997, + 375.0302734375 + ], + [ + 327.18, + 375.0302734375 + ], + [ + 327.18, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 282.28499999999997, + 388.79999999999995 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748057" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748058/EFTA02748058.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748058/EFTA02748058.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..42860af2983abd2afaa9480b738ba74a858a7635 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748058/EFTA02748058.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion to Exceed Page Limitation in Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel ACo. 38) Responses to Request for Production with Incorporated Memorandum of Law. "Having considered Defendant's motion to exceed page limitation by one (1) page, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Response to Request for Production with Incorporated Memorandum of Law may exceed 20 pages by one (1) additional page. + +DONE and ORDERED this .54 -day of 40 'te\_m.kert.....), 2009. + +![]()Kenneth A. Marra +United States District Judge +Maystake + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748058/EFTA02748058.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748058/EFTA02748058.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..380f20b5c7878ceb9c34b50569f860a68cdac230 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748058/EFTA02748058.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,135 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748058.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1246, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.85, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 210.32999999999998, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 411.2239074707031, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 411.2239074707031, + 116.103515625 + ], + [ + 210.32999999999998, + 116.103515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE \nLIMITATION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO \nCOMPEL RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION \nWITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 106.39499999999998, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 515.4481201171875, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 515.4481201171875, + 417.6035461425781 + ], + [ + 106.39499999999998, + 417.6035461425781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748058" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748060/EFTA02748060.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748060/EFTA02748060.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..743cfc613189d0031001bcbf5112407d2eb2d2a7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748060/EFTA02748060.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S Unopposed Motion For Extension of Time in Which to File a Response to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-8' Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery and 0.6 0 3615 Incorporated Memorandum of Law, having considered Defendant's Unopposed Motion and Plaintiffs counsel being in agreement with the requested extension, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall file a Response to Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-8' Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery and Incorporated Memorandum of Law on or before November 2, 2009. + +DONE and ORDERED this 544N day of 2009 + +Courtesy Copies all counsel + +0 Ann 3n -- + +L-t n.Nea Z:okn 5 fs14/ + +United States Dietriet Judge + +Miss L sbrax\_. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748060/EFTA02748060.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748060/EFTA02748060.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..01007a9f8fe3e6afda53455c22a42571f4ae8801 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748060/EFTA02748060.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748060.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 1126, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.88, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.715, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 412.7339172363281, + 90.72 + ], + [ + 412.7339172363281, + 119.4735107421875 + ], + [ + 209.715, + 119.4735107421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 288.435, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 335.828369140625, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 335.828369140625, + 381.6035461425781 + ], + [ + 288.435, + 381.6035461425781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748060" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748061/EFTA02748061.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748061/EFTA02748061.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..66a81c15694fb0cf56b0f116156ea08e8088e5f8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748061/EFTA02748061.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRAi + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +FILED by D.C. NOV - 5 2009 STEVEN M. LARIMORE CLERK U.S. DIST. CT S.D. OF FLA. - WPS + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court sua sponte. + +The following motions, all related to the attendance of Defendant Epstein at Plaintiffs' depositions (D.E. #s 292, 296, 297, and 298), are hereby rendered moot as a result of this Court's Order of October 23, 2009 (D.E. #369). Accordingly, the Clerk's Office is hereby ordered to strike these motions from the ICMS system as pending. The Clerk's Office is also hereby ordered to strike as moot from the ICMS system as a pending motion, D.E. #350. + +DONE AND ORDERED this Novemberg2009, in , at West Palm Beach, Florida. + +0 + +LINNEA R. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748061/EFTA02748061.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748061/EFTA02748061.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..39a927b9add0f3b1f65e10ae4ff4a52484408305 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748061/EFTA02748061.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748061.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1053, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.81, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.875, + 74.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 408.2714538574219, + 74.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 408.2714538574219, + 102.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 199.875, + 102.91998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.67, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 331.3642272949219, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 331.3642272949219, + 404.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 281.67, + 404.41998291015625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748061" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748063/EFTA02748063.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748063/EFTA02748063.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..592caf053c346e432e6c21761f0e9835b5154c4d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748063/EFTA02748063.md @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOES 2-8' MOTION TO COMPEL NET WORTH DISCOVERY, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion to Exceed Page Limitation in Response to Plaintiffs' Jane Does 2-8s Motion to Compel .Catirse) Net Worth Discovery, with Incorporated Memorandum of Law. Having considered Defendant's Motion to exceed page limitation, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Defendant's Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Jane Does 2-8s Motion to Compel Net Worth Discovery, with Incorporated Memorandum of Law may exceed 20 pages. + +DONE and ORDERED this ,511- day of ij O Qel4PCP---, 2009. + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record + +• + +K • Lt Asi".3 + +United States lla.p:st L'i Judge + +KagalSk-vs-IC \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748063/EFTA02748063.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748063/EFTA02748063.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f30e0658306e8a149e1cc0bfe66ce89b17767494 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748063/EFTA02748063.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748063.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1163, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.81, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 210.32999999999998, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 409.7239074707031, + 88.28999999999999 + ], + [ + 409.7239074707031, + 117.2335205078125 + ], + [ + 210.32999999999998, + 117.2335205078125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE \nLIMITATION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOES 2-8' MOTION \nTO COMPEL NET WORTH DISCOVERY, WITH INCORPORATED \nMEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 108.24, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 511.2862243652344, + 363.69 + ], + [ + 511.2862243652344, + 418.3535461425781 + ], + [ + 108.24, + 418.3535461425781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 16 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748063" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748065/EFTA02748065.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748065/EFTA02748065.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dc623e72a047cc3421eb4ea9ef8c68a8fa427787 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748065/EFTA02748065.md @@ -0,0 +1,238 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRS + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #5 (80381) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independentlpsychological medical examination and states: + +I. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Ryan M.D. of C.W. M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on November 20, 2009 at Prose Court Reporting, 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite #1500, West Palm Beach, FL 33401. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring a sweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. See infra and Motion attached at DE (328) for scope and time of IME. See Exhibits attached as well. + +2. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as a witness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +3. Plaintiff and Defendant have agreed to the date, time and location of the above-scheduled examination. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (328). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (328). + +See Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documents have been provided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient notice L. been made. + +> By: MICHAE KE, ESQ. Florida B. #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 5th day of November, 2009 + +Respectfully sub "tted, + +By: ROBERT D. RITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar o. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike®bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) + +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* + +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* + +*08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80811* + +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. ████, Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +Brad ██████████, Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +*Pro Hac Vice* + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. ██████████, Esq. + +██████████ Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) + +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) + +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* + +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748065/EFTA02748065.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748065/EFTA02748065.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7b1a91c00d612d171a25acf3061f435018a69d7b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748065/EFTA02748065.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,249 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748065.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5308, + "elapsed_seconds": 10.09, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 416.6464538574219, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 416.6464538574219, + 105.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 105.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT \nMEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #5 (80381)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 104.652, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 516.364990234375, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 516.364990234375, + 395.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 104.652, + 395.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 366.45050048828125, + 434.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 366.45050048828125, + 449.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 449.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 157.14000000000001 + ], + [ + 422.28, + 157.14000000000001 + ], + [ + 422.28, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 197.64 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 77 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 56 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748065" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748069/EFTA02748069.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748069/EFTA02748069.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..77155c65c0359589e3b9ed4e4634c240c0d3fdcf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748069/EFTA02748069.md @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +This cause is before the Court upon Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets, Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein, and to Post a \$15 Million Bond to Secure Potential Judgment (DE 165). Defendant Jeffrey Epstein filed a response in opposition to the motion (DE 198), and Plaintiff filed a reply (DE 217). The motion is now fully briefed and ripe for review. + +Plaintiff's motion argues that Defendant is fraudulently transferring his assets with the specific intent to defeat any judgment that might be entered against him in this and other similar cases. Plaintiff therefore seeks an order enjoining Defendant from fraudulent transfers of his assets, appointing a receiver to take charge of Defendant's property, and requiring Defendant to post a \$15 million dollar bond against any potential judgment in this case. + +The relief sought by Plaintiff is injunctive and, essentially, amounts to a prejudgment writ of attachment. v. Cascade Intern., Inc., 21 F.3d 1520, 1530 (11th Cir. 1994) (vacating district court's preliminary injunction freezing defendant's assets). "No relief of this character has been thought justified in the long history of equity jurisprudence." De Beers Consol. Mines, Ltd. v. United States, 325 U.S. 212, 222-23 (1945). + +"Preliminary injunctive relief freezing a defendant's assets in order to establish a fund with which to satisfy a potential judgment for money damages is simply not an appropriate exercise of a federal district court's authority." =, 21 F.3d at 1530. Indeed, "[i)t is entirely settled by a long and unbroken line of Florida cases that in an action at law for money damages, there is simply no judicial authority for an order requiring the deposit of the amount in controversy into the registry of the court ... or indeed for any restraint upon the use of a defendant's unrestricted assets prior to the entry of judgment." Id. at 1531, gatgn Konover Realty Assoc., Ltd. v. Mladen, 511 So.2d 705, 706 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). + +In Florida, an injunction cannot be entered to prevent a party from using or disposing of his assets prior to the conclusion of a legal action. Briceno v. Bryden Investments, Ltd., 973 So.2d 614, 616 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). See also SME Racks, Inc. v. Sistemas Mecanicos Para, Electronics, S.A. 243 Fed.Appx. 502 (11'h Cir. 2007) (affirming district's court's denial of preliminary injunction to freeze defendant's assets); Proctor v. Eason 651 So.2d 1301, 1301-02 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (Defendant not required to deposit funds in court registry prior to final judgment where Plaintiff failed to show unavailability of an adequate remedy at law and the likelihood of irreparable harm, two elements essential to entry of an injunction); Lawhon v. Mason, 611 So.2d 1367 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) (quashing trial court order requiring defendant to + +give plaintiffs ten days notice prior to the transfer of any assets in excess of \$500). + +Additionally, as the Eleventh Circuit explained in + +In actions at law, plaintiffs in Florida possess an adequate, exclusive prejudgment remedy for the sequestration of assets under the attachment statute, Fla.Stat.Ann. § 76.04-.05 (West 1987), provided that they can satisfy the enumerated statutory grounds for relief. Accordingly, the use of injunctive relief as a substitute for the remedy of prejudgment attachment, with its attendant safeguards, is improper. + +21 F.3d at 1531 (emphasis added). Here, Plaintiff did not move to amend her complaint to allege a claim under the Florida Uniform Fraudulent Transfers Act ("FUFTA"), Fla. Stat. § 726.101, et ms ,' Rather, she filed the present motion for injunctive relief. Even if she had moved to amend her complaint, it is certainly not clear that she could meet the required statutory elements. Plaintiff's motion is premised on the contention that Defendant is fraudulently transferring his assets. However, Plaintiff's motion is entirely devoid of evidence of Defendant's alleged fraudulent transfers. The Court declines to conclude that Defendant is fraudulently transferring assets based upon the adverse inferences relied upon by Plaintiff. Plaintiff's supplemental filing regarding the titles of approximately five of Defendant's vehicles is clearly de minimis particularly in light of Plaintiff's repeated characterization of Defendant as a "billionaire." + +Based upon the foregoing, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that + +&#x27;Fraudulent transfer claims under Florida law arise under the Florida Uniform Fraudulent Transfers Act ("FUFTA"), Fla. Stat. § 726.101, et seq.. FUFTA, as set forth in Florida Statute § 726.105, provides the substantive requirements that must be pled to state a valid fraudulent transfer claim. Nationsbank, N.A. v. Coastal Utilities, Inc., 814 So.2d 1227, 1229 (Fla. Dist Ct. App. 2002). The plaintiff must show that "(I) there was a creditor to be defrauded; (2) a debtor intending fraud; and (3) a conveyance of property which could have been applicable to the payment of the debt due." W. + +(1) PlaintiffJane Doe's Motion for leave to Provide Recently-obtained Deposition + +Testimony and Affidavit (DE 386 in 08-80119) is GRANTED. + +(2) PlaintiffJane Doe's Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets, + +Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein, and to Post a \$15 Million + +Bond to Secure Potential Judgment (DE 165 in 08-80119) is DENIED. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, + +Florida, this 5ih day of November, 2009. + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies to: all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748069/EFTA02748069.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748069/EFTA02748069.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e802ebf938324e98e42f991ddc57fc0dcf00c450 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748069/EFTA02748069.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,219 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748069.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5928, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.88, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 330.7633361816406, + 383.93999999999994 + ], + [ + 330.7633361816406, + 398.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 398.2330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748069" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748073/EFTA02748073.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748073/EFTA02748073.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..48c16eb38fbe03e2f9bce4b723eaf400b88abb3b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748073/EFTA02748073.md @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPS'IlIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## JOINT AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS FOR IMEs, PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS AND DEFENDANT'S REPLY + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant, Epstein, and Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8' Joint Agreed Order on Defendant's Motion for IME, Plaintiffs' Response, and Defendant's Reply, and the Court having considered Motions, Response and Reply, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: + +1. Pursuant to Federal Rule 35, Defendant filed various Motions for IMEs'of 301 Plaintiffs at DEs A303-304, 308-309, 310-311, 317-318, 319-320 and 328-329, with 0,0 1 m o4-ten's, 0 E. s 3 'Ho attached Affidavits from Dr. Ryon M. Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Response is docketed at DE 345. Defendant's Reply is docketed at DE 362. Based upon the agreement set forth herein, the above Motions, Response, and Reply are moot. + +2. On October 28, 2009, the Court entered an Omnibus Order (DE 377), relative to Plaintiffs' sexual history. Questions that involve Plaintiffs' sexual histories at + +the IMEs will be permitted and governed by the Omnibus Order at DE 377. Information provided by the Plaintiffs shall remain confidential and used for litigation purposes only. + +3. The parties further agree that the Defendant may conduct an independent IME pursuant to rule 35 of Jane Doe Nos. 2-8. The IME may be videotaped. A live video-feed of the IME shall be available to counsel in an adjacent room. All videotaping expensing shall be shared equally by the Plaintiff and Defendant. + +4. Absent further court order, each IME shall last no longer than eight (8) hours, including all testing and interviewing. + +5. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein will not attend the IMEs or make himself seen by Plaintiffs on the date of their IMEs. + +6. The [ME shall not take place at Epstein's counsel's office but will take place at a mutually agreeable location in Palm Beach County, Florida. The fees for an additional room for the video feed will be split equally among Plaintiffs and Defendant. + +DONE and ORDERED this #day of \ 0 eAtAccep-' , 2009. + +•\*-414C-. Linnea R. Jo Magistrate Judge on + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748073/EFTA02748073.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748073/EFTA02748073.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d1697bd6759c021857cbd7e01485a012b434534c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748073/EFTA02748073.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748073.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2423, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.88, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 210.32999999999998, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 410.0939025878906, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 410.0939025878906, + 116.4735107421875 + ], + [ + 210.32999999999998, + 116.4735107421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JOINT AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS FOR IMEs, \nPLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS AND DEFENDANT'S \nREPLY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.78, + 350.73 + ], + [ + 516.4164428710938, + 350.73 + ], + [ + 516.4164428710938, + 390.9735412597656 + ], + [ + 105.78, + 390.9735412597656 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 231 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748073" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/EFTA02748075.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/EFTA02748075.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ea3d31a18a2b5c4672414f3ff25c5f634f1d245f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/EFTA02748075.md @@ -0,0 +1,641 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAJ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### THIRD PARTY WITNESS, IGOR ZINOVIEW'S, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Third Party Witness, Igor Zinoview's, ("Mr. Zinoview") by and through his undersigned attorney, moves this Court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) for a protective order regarding his deposition and as grounds therefore would state: + +1. As reflected on the affidavit of Igor Zinoview, attached as Exhibit A, he works for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Mr. Epstein') as a driver and bodyguard. He did not know Mr. Epstein before November of 2005. He first became employed by Mr. Epstein in November of 2005. + +2. Additionally, Mr. Zinoview would testify as set forth on his affidavit, that at no time has he discussed with Mr. Epstein any issues involving Mr. Epstein's criminal case nor any of the cases or issues involved with civil plaintiffs. + +3. In many of the depositions, counsel for L.M. and E.W., has asked them as witnesses to assume certain facts about which they have no knowledge, and he then asks their opinions about certain facts. See Exhibit B -Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions. + +4. There is no information which Mr. Zinoview has relating to the facts and circumstances surrounding any of the pending civil cases, in that none of their allegations directed to Mr. Epstein extend beyond September of 2005. Therefore whatever information Mr. Zinoview may have, postdates that time. + +5. Regarding the scope of discovery, Judge Linnea noted in her October 28, 2009 Omnibus Order (DE #377), "[w]hile the scope of discovery is broad, it is not without limits. Washington v. & Williamson Tobacco 959 F.2d 1566, 1570 (11th Cir. 1992). ... Courts have long held that `[w]hile the standard of relevancy [in discovery] is a liberal one, it is not so liberal as to allow a party to roam in the shadow zones of relevancy and to explore matter (sic) which does not presently appear germane on the theory that it might conceivably become so.' Food Lion Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Intern. Union, 103 F.3d 1007, 1012-13 (CA. D.C. 1997) (string cite omitted)." + +6. Rule 26(c), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, provides that, "[a] party or any person from whomn discovery is sought may move for a protective order in the court where the action is pending.... The court may, for good cause, issue an order to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense, including one or more of the following: (A) forbidding the disclosure or discovery;" + +7. As set forth in his affidavit, Mr. Zinoview cannot possibly have any knowledge or information that is presently germane to this action. Accordingly, the Court should enter a protective order prohibiting his deposition. + +WHEREFORE, third-party witness moves this court for a protective order pursuant to Rule 26(c), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that his deposition not take place or the questioning be limited. + +> By: JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER ESQ. Florida Bar No. 262013 jageso@bellsouth.net + +## Rule 7.1 Certification + +I hereby certify that counsel for the movant has conferred or attempted to confer with opposing counsel in a good faith effort to resolve the discovery issues prior to the filing of this motion for protective order but has been unable to do so. + +### Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of November, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER ESQ. Florida Bar No. 262013 iagesa@bellsouth.net Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +#### Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Brad Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattornev.com ahorowiteexabuseattorney,com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561.582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. M, Esq. Seamy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsx@searcvlaw.corn iph@searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards©rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp@law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaint WJane Doe + +Isidro M. =, Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datum Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia©bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 thoftut@podhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brucereinh rtl w.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq, + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +skuvin@leorioldkuvin.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jauesqlabellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA- + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. + +# AFFIDAVIT OF IGOR ZINOVIEV + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Igor Zinoviev having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +- 1. My name is Igor Zinoview. +- 2. I began working for Mr. Epstein in November of 2005. +- 3. I did not know him until I began working for him. +- 4. I have never discussed nor has he ever attempted to discuss with me any facts or information relating to any legal matters in which he is involved. + - 5. I work for Mr. Epstein as his driver, bodyguard and trainer. + +EXHIBIT A + +Page 2 + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +![]()STATE OF FLORIDA +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +I hereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Igor Zinoviev known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above named person: Igor Zinoviev, and that an oath was/was not taken. + +WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this day of Nov. 9, 2009. + +![](_page_6_Picture_85.jpeg) + +![]()IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 502008CA028051XXXXMB AB + +L.M., + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER TO PROHIBIT INAPPROPRIATE DEPOSITION QUESTIONS + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein"), pursuant to Rule 1.280(c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, moves for a protective order to prohibit argumentative, harassing and inappropriate questions in depositions, and states: + +1. At numerous depositions, Plaintiffs counsel has repeatedly asked argumentative and harassing questions that are irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +2. In particular, Plaintiffs counsel has asked questions that improperly sought to illicit lay opinions from fact witnesses, asked questions regarding witnesses' feelings towards Mr. Epstein and their beliefs regarding media reports of this case, asked whether they would leave their children with Mr. Epstein and asked whether they would go back to work for Mr. Epstein assuming the media reports were accurate, among other things. These questions and the responses thereto will never be admissible. They are argumentative, irrelevant and seek speculative answers and inadmissible lay opinions. + +EXHIBIT + +Lio v, Epstein + +Case No. 502008CA028051XXXXMBAB + +Epsteln's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions + +Page 2 of 9 + +3. For example, in the deposition of Larry Visoski, one of Mr. Epstein's pilots, Plaintiffs counsel asked the following questions seeking to obtain Mr. Visoski's beliefs and opinions on Plaintiffs allegations: + +> Q. All right. When you read in the newspapers the allegations that Mr. Epstein was involved with numerous underage girls for sexual reasons, were you surprised? + +A. I didn't believe it. + +Q. Do you believe it today? + +A. I don't believe it. + +Q. You don't believe that Jeffrey Epstein was involved with underage girls in a sexual way? + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: You're asking for my opinion, and I don't think my opinion is relevant in that matter. + +BY MR. + +Q. I think it's relevant. Can you just tell me whether today you believe that Jeffrey Epstein has engaged in sex with underage girls? + +MR. CRITTON: Form; speculation, irrelevant, always. + +THE WITNESS: It's irrelevant. + +BY MR. + +Q. I need an answer. + +A. I don't believe he had sex with underage women. + +Q. Or engaged in any sexual acts with underage women? + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +1,,M v. Epstein Case No. 502008CA028051XXXXMBAB Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions Page 3 of 9 + +THE WITNESS: No. + +BY MR. + +Q. You think that this is just a story that a bunch of underage women have made up? + +A. Speculation. + +• \* \* \* + +Q. Then we'll handle the question this way: If you were to believe based on information and evidence that Mr. Epstein engaged in sex or some form of sex acts with people of the age range of 12, 13, 14, 15 years old, would you continue your employment with Mr. Epstein? + +MR. CRITTON: Form; speculation. + +THE WITNESS: I would certainly be speculating and I have to discuss it with my wife long and hard. I don't think I could give you a correct and honest answer at this time. + +See Excerpts of Deposition of Larry Visokski at 66-67; 181-82 (attached as composite Exhibit A). Other examples of similar improper questions are included in Exhibit A. + +4. Not only do these questions seek improper lay opinions, Plaintiffs counsel asked Mr. Visoski his belief as to the truth of hearsay newspaper articles. The foregoing questions are obviously Irrelevant, argumentative and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +5. Moreover, whether Mr. Visoski would continue working for Mr. Epstein if Plaintiff's allegations are true has absolutely no relevance to any claim or defense in this case. The questions are simply improper and meant to harass and embarrass the ism v. Epstein Case No. 50200BCA028051XXXXMBAB Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions Page 4 of 9 + +witness. + +6. Mr. Visoski was questioned for over four hours and much of the time was wasted on irrelevant and harassing questions. + +7. Plaintiffs counsel asked similar questions at the deposition of Larry Eugene ME, another one of Mr. Epstein's pilots: + +> Q. Certainly you've read certain newspaper articles about the allegations, police reports, otherwise, the allegations that occurred or have been alleged to have occurred at his Palm Beach mansion, correct? + +A. Uh-huh. + +Q. Correct? + +A. Correct. + +Q. Given the nature of those allegations, would you leave your daughter of 17, 16, 15 years old with Mr. Epstein alone? + +MR. PIKE: Form. Move to strike. + +A. Yes. + +\* \* . + +Q. And despite pleading guilty to procuring underage girls for the purposes of sex, you still feel comfortable leaving a 13, 14, 15-year-old girl around him? + +MR. PIKE: Form. Move to strike. + +A. Yes. I mean, with my daughter, yes. I don't know how he behaves around anybody else. I just know that the respect that he showed me, I feel safe with my daughter. + +Q. And have you read in detail the reports as to what happened at his house with the girls? + +LM v. Epstein + +Case No. 502008CA028051XXXXMBAB + +Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions + +Page 5 of 9 + +A. Only — + +MR. PIKE: Form. + +A. — what's been in the newspapers and published. + +Q. If you read and hear testimony given - well, I can tell you now - testimony has been given in this case that what happens is: A 13 or 14 year old is led upstairs by herself, told to get naked, he lays down on his back, there is a brief massage before he turns over, exposes himself erect, masturbates while he tells this 13 or 14 year old to pinch his nipples as hard as she can while he inserts his fingers into their vagina and ejaculates all over them before saying, "Take your money and leave." + +MR. PIKE: Form. Move to strike. + +BY MR. + +Q. Okay? Then, "You can continue to come back for \$200 every time or every girl you bring me within your age group and I get to do this again, I pay you \$200 per person." If that is the testimony -- + +MR. PIKE: Form. + +Q. — that what happens behind closed doors with him, do you still feel comfortable leaving a13 or 14 year old in a room with Jeffrey Epstein? + +MR. PIKE: Form. + +A. If that, in fact, is what actually happened, no. + +Q. [Would you] go back - considering what you've read and what you may or may not believe - would you go back to working for Jeffrey Epstein? + +MR. PIKE: Form. + +A. I can't say. I still work for him on a maintenance - to + +LM v. Epstein + +Case No. 502008CA028051XXXXMBAB + +Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions + +Page 6 of 9 + +maintain the airplanes and stuff like that, so. + +See Excerpts of Deposition of Larry Eugene at 135-36; 175-76; 184 (attached as composite Exhibit B). + +8. Again, whether Mr. would work for Mr. Epstein "considering what [he has] read and what [he] may or may not believe" (i.e. considering hearsay media accounts and inadmissible lay opinion) has no bearing on the instant case. + +9. In addition, questions regarding whether Mr. would leave his children alone with Mr. Epstein could have only been meant to harass and embarrass Mr. Ma Nevertheless, Mr. testified that he would leave his children with Mr. Epstein. As Plaintiffs counsel was obviously not happy with the answer to this question, he proceeded to press Mr. with inflammatory statements until he got the answer he wanted. + +10. Plaintiff's counsel has also asked the same improper line of questions in other witnesses' depositions. + +11. The above-cited questions exceed the bounds of permissible discovery; they have absolutely no relevance to this case. Accordingly, the Court should enter a protective order prohibiting such questions and should sanction Plaintiffs counsel if such inappropriate questions are asked at future depositions. + +12. Regarding the scope of discovery, Judge Linnea noted in her October 28, 2009 Omnibus Order,' "[w]hile the scope of discovery is broad, it is not + +1 The Omnibus Order (DE #377) was entered in the federal companion case Jane Doe No. 2 v, Epstein Case No. 08-CIV-80119 MARRia in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida. + +LM v. Epstein Case No. 502008CA028051X=MBAB Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions Page 7 of 9 + +without limits. Washington v. OM& Williamson Tobacco, 959F.2d 1566, 1570 (11th Cir. 1992). ... Courts have long held that '[w]hile the standard of relevancy [in discovery] is a liberal one, it is not so liberal as to allow a party to roam in the shadow zones of relevancy and to explore matter (sic) which does not presently appear germane on the theory that it might conceivably become so.' Food Lion. Inc. V. United Food & Commercial Workers Intern. Union, 103F.3d 1007, 1012-13 (C.A. D.C. 1997) (string cite omitted)." See also Capco Properties, LLC v. Monterry Gardens of Pinecrest Condo. 982So. 2d 1211, (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (holding that discovery in civil cases must be relevant to the subject matter of the case and must be admissible or reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence) Morton Plant Hospital Ass'n, Inc. v. Shahbas, 960So. 2d 820, 824 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (holding that "discovery should be denied when it has been established that the information requested is neither relevant to any pending claim or defense nor will it lead to the discovery of admissible evidence," citing Tanchel v. Shoemaker, 928So. 2d 440, 442 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)). + +13. As illustrated above, the questions are simply not germane to any pending claim or defense nor will they lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Whether Mr. Visoski believes or disbelieves the media accounts of this case, or whether Mr. would leave his children with Mr. Epstein is not relevant and cannot conceivably lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +14. The Court should curtail these inappropriate lines of questions and enter a protective order prohibiting them. + +15. Rule 1.280(c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, provides the Court with + +LM v. Epstein + +Case No. 5020D8CA028051XX)0MBAB + +Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions + +Page 8 of 9 + +the power to "make any order to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression or undue burden or expense that justice requires including ... (4) that certain matter not be inquired into, or that the scope of the discovery be limited to certain matters." + +16. Accordingly, Epstein requests the Court enter a protective order prohibiting Plaintiffs counsel from asking witnesses' questions regarding opinions and beliefs regarding media articles and the allegations in this case and whether they would leave their children with Epstein or questions of a similar nature, and limiting the scope to the witnesses personal knowledge regarding matters relevant to the claims and defenses in this case. See Shahbas, 960 So. 2d at 824. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, respectfully requests the Court enter a protective order prohibiting Plaintiffs counsel from asking witnesses' questions regarding opinions and beliefs regarding media articles and the allegations in this case and whether they would leave their children with Epstein or questions of a similar nature, and limiting the scope to the witnesses personal knowledge regarding matters relevant to the claims and defenses in this case and grant any additional relief the Court deems just and proper. + +#### Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was sent by fax and U.S. Mail to the following addressees on this 3rd day of November, 2009: + +Brad Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 + +jjA v. Epstein + +Case No. 5O200SCA02805DOOO(MBAB + +Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions + +Page 9 of 9 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +954-522-3456 Phone + +954-527-8663 Fax + +Counsel for Plaintiff + +Jay Howell, Esq. + +Jay Howell & Associates, P.A. + +644 Cesery Boulevard + +Suite 250 + +Jacksonville, FL 32211 + +904-680-1234 Phone + +904-680-1238 Fax + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP + +303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 + +West Palm Be , FL 33401 + +(561) 842 + +(561)84 + +By: (1.1-19)— Critton, Jr. + +F orida Bar #224162 + +Michael J. Pike + +Florida Bar #617296 + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 + +|

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
CASE NO. 50200BCA028051XXXXMB AD

L.M.,

-vs-

JEFFREY EPSTEIN,

Defendant.


DEPOSITION OF LARRY VISOSKI

Thursday, October 15, 2009
10:18 - 3:37 p.m.

515 W. Flaglet Drive
Suite P200
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

Reported By:
Wendy Beath, [REDACTED], RPR, CRR, FPR
Notary Public, State of Florida
Esquire Deposition Services
West Palm Beach Office Job #127542

|

1 ---

2 INDEX

3 ---

4

5 WITNESS: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS

6 LARRY VISOSKI

7

8 BY MR. [REDACTED] 6

9 BY MR. CRITTON: 214

10 BY MR. [REDACTED] 220

11 BY MR. CRITTON: 221

12 ---

13 EXHIBITS

14 ---

15

16 NUMBER DESCRIPTION PAGE

17 PLAINTIFF'S EX. 1 FLIGHT LOG BOOK
(MARKED IN PREVIOUS DEPO)

18

19 PLAINTIFF'S EX. 2 MESSAGE PAD 119

20 PLAINTIFF'S EX. 3 MESSAGE PAD 119

21 PLAINTIFF'S EX. 4 COMPLAINT 139

22 PLAINTIFF'S EX. 5 INMATE VISITOR LOG 151

23

24

25

| +|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|

2

1 APPEARANCES:

2 On behalf of the Plaintiff:

3 [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] ESQUIRE

4 ROTHSTEIN, ROSENFELDT, ADLER

5 401 East Las Olas Boulevard

6 Suite 1650

7 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33394

8 On behalf of the Defendant:

9 ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE

10 BURMAN, CRITTON & LUTTIER

11 303 Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400

12 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

13 On behalf of the Witness:

14 BRUCE REINHART, ESQUIRE

15 250 South Australian Avenue

16 Suite 1400

17 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

18 ALSO PRESENT:

19 CARA L. [REDACTED] ESQUIRE

20 1220 N.W. 157th Avenue

21 Pembroke Pines, Florida 33028

22 ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQUIRE

23 MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A.

24 18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218

25 Miami, Florida 33160

26 RICHARD H. WILLITS, ESQUIRE (VIA TELEPHONE)

27 RICHARD H. WILLITS, P.A.

28 2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404

29 Lake Worth, Florida 33461

|

4

1 PROCEEDINGS

2 ---

3 Deposition taken before Wendy Beath [REDACTED]

4 Certified Realtime Reporter and Notary Public in and for

5 the State of Florida at Large, in the above cause.

6 ---

7 MR. [REDACTED]: We're going to put something on

8 the record about -- well, we'll do it this way --

9 MR. REINHART: Do it at the end, after we get

10 him -- whatever you want. It's your show.

11 MR. [REDACTED]: Okay. There were -- I don't

12 even think Mr. Willis is aware of this. There was

13 a subpoena duces tecum for this witness, as well as

14 the previous witness, which was another pilot, Dave

15 Rogers, and that duces tecum was to bring the

16 flight logs related from 1998 through 2005. What

17 was produced at the previous deposition were flight

18 logs from 2002 through 2005, and now Mr. Reinhart

19 has agreed to produce the remainder of the flight

20 logs requested, those going from 1998 through 2002.

21 MR. REINHART: Correct. They're pilot logs,

22 not flight logs. There are other records we

23 indicated are corporate records, and with those you

24 have to deal with Mr. Critton.

25 MR. CRITTON: However, with the proviso, too,

| + +![](_page_16_Picture_4.jpeg) + +67 + +women? + +MR. CRITTON: Form. + +THE WITNESS: No. + +BY MRIMMI: + +Q. You think that this Is Just a story that a 6 bunch of underage women have made up? + +A. Speculation. • + +8 MA. CRITTON: Objection. Now Its + +9 argumentative. Who gives a dam what he thinks one :0 way or anot r? f he has personal knowledge — + +I1 MR : You're objecting to the form? + +;2 MR. CRITTON: Its argumentative + +13 MRIIM1: You're objecting to the form? + +lla MR. CRITTON: Yes. + +15 Milli: Okay. + +.16 BY MR + +17 0, Is that something that you believe that a + +18 bunch of women — some of which know each other, some + +19'. don't, some of which have been on the airplane and some 20 which haven't — made this up, that Jeffrey Epstein + +21 engaged in some sexual conduct with them? + +22 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +23 THE WITNESS: What I believe doesalt matter In + +24 this case, does it? + +25 + +66 + +1 Q. All right. When you read in the newspapers 2 the allegations that Mr. Epstein was involved with 3 numerous underage girls for sexual reasons, were you 4 surprised? + +5 A. I didn't believe it. + +6 Q. Do you believe it today? + +7 A. I don't believe it. + +8 Q. You don't believe that Jeffrey Epstein was 9 involved with underage girls in a sexual way? + +10 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +11 THE WITNESS: You're asking for my opinion, 12 and I don't thlric my opinion is relevant In that 13 matter. + +14 BY MR. + +15 Q. I think It's relevant Can you just tell me + +16 whether today you believe that Jeffrey Epstein has 17 engaged in sex with underage girls? + +18 MR. CRITTON: Form; speculation, Irrelevant, 19 always. + +20 THE WITNESS: It's Irrelevant. + +21 BY MR. + +22 Q. I need an answer. + +23 A. I don" believe he had sex with underage + +24 women. + +25 0. Or engaged in any sexual acts with underage + +68 + +1 BY MR.MB: + +2 Q. I need an answer. Do you believe It? Do you 3 believe these girls made this up? + +4 MR. CRITTON: Form. + +S MR. REINHART: I'm going to tnstrud him not 6 to answer. Move on. + +7 MR.—: Is there a privilege that we're 8 assesting? + +9 MR. REINHART: No, It's irrelevant. It's 10 harassment and not likely to lead to discoverable 11 evidence. + +12 I'm going to-put on the record + +13 right now that it is — we we allowed discovery 14 into a RICO count. We are also allowed discovery + +15 Into the intent of Mr. Epstein In developing a 16 criminal enterprise designed to sexually exploit + +17 and sexually abuse underage girls. We believe that 18 in doing so, he associated intentionally with + +19 people of similar beliefs that sex with underage 20 gkb is okay, and that there have been many + +21 discussions with this witness, as well as many + +22 other witnesses with -- to Insure his protection 23 from law enforcement that they not answer these + +24 specific questions. And thus, the opinions and 25 beliefs of all of these witnesses that we are + +alleging associated with this criminal enterprise are certainly reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. And If you're still instructing the witness, based on that proffer, not to answer any of these questions, I'm going to continue to ask the questions and you can instruct him not to answer and we can go to the B Court. MR. REINHART: My response is to his opinion whether people making allegations in this case are colluding or making up astory is irrelevant to what you lust said. So I am going to instruct him not to answer any question that goes to his opinion of someone else's motivation or the truth of facts to which he has no knowledge. So yes, I'm instructing him not to answer. MR. CRInON: Let me add in my part, is that I think — you're certainly not only capable to ask questions with regard to what his personal knowledge is, and if he knows something or he has reasonable basis for it; certainly you are entitled to that information. I think yotNe asked those questions and he's given you straightforward answers as to what he knew or what he didn't know under those circumstances. And as to what his + + I a A. Its an ophlon. and I believe that he has not. O. Okay. Isn't It true that at some point In time you teamed that Jeffrey Epstein has — strike that. MR. CRITTON: When you &Rime\* get to a good place to break, will you let us knoW? MR.-: Lets break ncw. (A break was had at 11:28 a.m.) BY MR. =M. C. AN right. Subteen years of being a pilot for Jeffrey Epstein and In terms of being able to name somebody that you would say you've observed w1h Jeffrey Epstein and wotid classify that person as Jeffrey Epstein's friend, can you name anybody? A Nadia. Sarah: Just people that we see routinely on the airplane. Q. That's people you see routinely In the last five to ten years, right? A Yes. Q. Prior to that time, anybody that youVe noticed as Jeffrey Epstein's friend may be Ghislaino Maxwell? A. What time frame? Q. Is that a person that at some point In time + +thoughts are on something which he has no factual basis or even an assumption to know one way or another is Irrelevant. That's ultimately for a fact-finder In this case SWhile it's interesting, it's argumentative and I don't think he's — I mean, do it on a question-by-question basis. If he has knowledge, that's great, but to argue your case with this witness or any other witness doesn't serve a purpose and I think is, you know — I think its not a good use of our time, I'll put it that way. But you Imow, you can go ahead and ask. MR. EMI Ican ask the question and if ihe witness is being instructed not to answer, we'll let a Judge decide whether he needs to answer the question and whether its discoverable or not. MR. REINHART: Absolutely. Make your record. Is BY MR. a O. Do you have any reason to believe that Jeffrey Epstein engaged in sexual activity with underage women? A. I have no meson to believe. z2 O. Okay. So as you sit here today, based on your 18 years of knowledge, experience and observation of Jeffrey Epstein, is il your belief that he has not had sex or engaged in sexual activity with underage women? + +you wotld classify as Jeffrey Epstein's friend? A. I would classify il. I donl know if its true. O. But hats only because they were on the airplane together? A. Yes. O. Do you know what Jeffrey Epstein does for a Piing In your 16 years of observing and talking with Jeffrey Epstein? A. No. O. No Idea? A. No. O. Ever asked Nm? A. No, actually-Q. Ever been curious? A, Sure. O. Everxione anything to satisfy that curiosity? le A. If you mean Google It, not really, actually. I mean. I really have not. Q. Okay. So In 18 years of [revising and being the plot and driving — and taking this person. Jeffrey Epstein, from one property In New York to New/Ate:co and Florida and around the world, you have no idea Mat he does in terms of how he makes money? A. No, sir. + +mr••••••••••••r•• lealWilt••• We. • + + .3 f. MR. CRITrON: Form. THE WITNESS: No. + +BY MR. + +Q. If you had been aware that Mt. Epstein was and by this — this Is more in the form of a hypothetical, end that I'm not going.to suggest to you res a fact that he was. But If you had been aware that every single day Jeffrey Epstein's goal was to locate underage girls (or the purposes of sex, and either have sex with them on the airplane or at some other designation that you were destination that you were traveling him to, would you have continued to pilot those planes? + +AT MR. CRITTON: Form. THE WITNESS: You said It was hypothetical? + +BY MR. + +Q. Rilit,SpOthatical. A. Why would I want to answer that? Because you're being hypothetical. Imoan, It would obviously ;3 be wrong. + +:4 Q. Sure. Well, a hypothetical question Is a IS legal question that I'm allowed to ask. + +A. Okay. Q. And I'm just asking you if you did have knovAedge that Jeffrey Epstein was having sex with little girls either on the plane or al a place that you were taking him to or from on adaily basis, that's what he did, would you have continued to be his \*17 MR. CRITTON: Lel me object. Object lo the oform. it's argumentative. II has no more value than assuming he was chopping up bodies or anybody was dapping up bodies in the plane you're ftykig. What &Heron°, does h make? Form. MR. Whet difference does II make in a case about hkil having sex with little girls? not going to argue with you about it. You've staled your objection. MR. CRITTON: Exactly. It's an argumentative question. MR. not going to argue with you about 11. MR. CRITTON: You're arguing with him about MR. Me No, I'm asking him the hypothetical. By MR...11 0. Can you answer that? Would you have continuer + +to be a pilot for somebody who's traveling to and from destinations with the goal of having sex with underage girls? MR. CRITTON: Form. THE WITNESS: It could be any person. It doesn't have to be Jeffrey Epstein, then, right? BY MR-: O. True. A. No, I wouldn't pilot an airplane if there was wrongdoing going on. Q. That you knew about? A. That I knew you about, sure. Q. Me reading this complaint to you, Is Ws the first time you've heard these allegations — A. Yes. Q. — against Mr. Epstein? A. Yes. + +, + +which he pied guilty to — MR. CRITTON: Form. MR. REINHART: Can we — for purposes of your hypothetical, Mat facts do you want him to assume are true? You said the facts to which he pled guilty, but the witness already said he doesn't know what he pled guilty to. He knows the charge he doesn't know the facts. BY MR. Q. Sarchallon of prostitution of a minor, somebody under the age of 18. MR. That's the charge, right. sNIcItallon of prostitution of a minor? MR. CRITTON: No. I think you've got it wrong. Ill object to the form. MR. Okay. BY MR. Q. Then well handle the question this way. If you were to believe based on information and evidence that Mr. Epstein engaged in sex or some form of sex act with people of the age range of 12, 13, 14,15 years oid, wouid yOu continue your employment with W. Epstein? MR. CRITTON: Form; speculation. THE WITNESS: I would certainly be speculating + +182' + +and I have lo discuss it with my wife long and • hard. I don't think I could give you a correct and honest answer at this time. BY MR. O. Ogles the akegations that have been made in this case. Is this something that you have discussed with anyone other than your attorney? A. No, not really. Only from the fact that theyre allegations and there's stE a lot more work, I'm sure, to be discovered. MR. CRITTON: Let me put on there, for the -- If this deposition li not typed — and We request It — I'd like at least this portion Where Mr. last question back about five pages worth. so Just if you could mark it from this page back about five pages. II nobody requests the deposition, rd just like those fare pages. MR. I'm going to request the deposition, so... MR. CRITTON: Okay. We'll mark this then, so you midi tell me where It Is, approximately. BY MR. O. Is I ere a son why you have not discussed with Jeffrey Epstein the allegations that have been mi + +Larry Eugene [REDACTED] - Volume I + +October 6, 2009 + +|

1

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN
AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA

VOLUME I Pages 1 to 200

L.M.,

Plaintiff,

vn.

JEFFREY EPSTEIN,

Defendant.

X

DEPOSITION OF
LARRY EUGENE [REDACTED]
TAKEN ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF
October 6, 2009
10:55 a.m. - 2:20 p.m.
515 N. Flagler Drive
West Palm Beach, FL 33401-4321

Jennifer Dilerenzo, court reporter

|

3

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL
On behalf of the Defendant:
ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS
BY: JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER, ESQ.,
250 Australian Avenue
Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
561-659-8300
jgoldberger@agwpa.com

On behalf of the Defendant by telephone:

BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN
BY: MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ.,
515 N. Flagler Drive
Suite 400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
561-842-2820
mpike@bclclaw.com

On behalf of the witness:

LAW OFFICE OF BRUCE E. REINHART
BY: BRUCE E. REINHART, ESQ.,
One Clearlake Center
250 S. Australian Avenue
Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
561-202-6360
BReinhart@BruceREinhartLaw.com

| +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|

2

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
On behalf of the Plaintiff L.M.:
ROTHSTEIN, ROSENEEL DT & ADLER
BY: [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED], ESQ.
and MICHAEL WHEELER, ESQ.,
401 East Las Olas Boulevard
Suite 1850
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33394
954-522-3458
bedwards@rra-law.com
mmhester@rra-law.com

On behalf of Plaintiffs Jane Doe 2 through 8:

MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A.
BY: JESSICA D. ARBOUR, ATTORNEY-AT-LAW,
18205 Biscayne Boulevard
Suite 2218
Miami, FL 33100
305-931-2200
jarbour@sexabusealtorney.com

On behalf of Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and 102 by
telephone:

PODHURST ORSECK, P.A.
BY: KATHERINE W. EZELL, ATTORNEY-AT-LAW,
25 W. Flagler Street
Miami, FL 33130
305-355-2800
kezell@podhurst.com

On behalf of the Plaintiff C.M.A. by telephone:

LAW OFFICE OF RICHARD WILLITS, P.A.
BY: RICHARD WILLITS, ESQ.,
2280 10th Avenue N.
Suite 404
Lake Worth, FL 33401
661-582-7600
linyurwillis@aol.com

|

4

INDEX OF EXAMINATION

WITNESS:
LARRY EUGENE [REDACTED] Page

DIRECT EXAMINATION
By Mr. [REDACTED] #5

CROSS-EXAMINATION
By Ms. Ezell #190

CROSS-EXAMINATION
By Mr. Willits #195

CROSS-EXAMINATION
By Mr. Pike #196

FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION
By Mr. [REDACTED] #199

---

INDEX TO EXHIBITS

Plaintiff's
Exhibit Description Page
1 Twenty-four pages of "JEGE, Inc.,
Passenger Manifest." #138

(Plaintiff's Composite 1 was attached to the
original transcript and copies of the transcript.)

| + +![](_page_22_Picture_36.jpeg) + +135 + +1 A I have no Idea. I don't know. 2 O. When you say 07al was MI 3 condo in the icture what's your understanding as to Is relative to Mr. Epstein? 5 A I don't know. I don't understand. I 6 don't know. I didn't know If maybe she was like an 7 exchange — Jeffrey always appeared to be very 8 Involved in education and philanthropy. I extra 9 know If she was an exchange-type student or something 10 or vhat. I didn't know. 11 O. When you say he appeared to be Involved In," 12 what do you mean? 13 A Educational things, foundations, science 14 foundations, and things. 15 O. Speaking of - the Florida Science FoundaUon 16 Is a piece Mere, when he wee on work release, he spent a 17 lot of lime there, you're aware of that? 18 A. That's what I've heard, yeah. 19\ O. What does that place do? 20 A 1 have no idea. 21 O. Does it do anything? 22 A I don't know. I don't know anything abod 23 IL 24 O. Certainly you've read certain newspaper 25 articles about the allegations, mice reports, + +136 + +- 1 otherwise, the allegations that occurred or haw been 2 alleged to have occurred at his Palm Beach mansion, 3 correct? 4 A. Uh-huh. S Q. Corned? 6 A. Correct. 7 0. Given the nature of those allegations, would B you leave your daughter of 17, 10, 15 years old with Mr. 9 Epstein alone? .10 MR. PIKE: Form. Move to strike. 11 A Yes, 12 Q. You would? 13 A. (Witness nods head.) 14 0. And why? 15 A. Because I don't fear that he would try 16 anything with my daughter. He showed — When I 17 worked for him he showed me respect He never — I +- 18 never He never showed me disrespect. He would ask 19 how the family is. I mean, not on a personal level, 20 but an employer/employee. 21 0. Right. Okay. 22 A. He never showed me any reason not to trust 23 him. 24 0. But you're not a 13-year old girl, so. 25 A No, but, like I say, he never showed me + +Q. And despite pleading guilty to procuring underage girls for the purposes of sex, you still feel comfortable leaving a 13, 14,15-year-old girl around I him? + +MR. PIKE: Form. Move to elate. + +A. Yes. I mean, with my daughter, yes. don't know how he behaves around anybody else. I just know that the respect that he showed ma, I feel safe with my daughter. + +0. And have you read In detail the reports as to what happened at his house with the girls? + +A. Only - + +MR. PIKE: Form. + +A. — what's been in the newspapers and published. + +Q. If you read and hear testimony given - well, I can tell you now -testimony has been given In this case 1k that what happens Is: A 13 or 14 year old Is led + +upstairs by herself, told to get naked, he lays down on his back, there Is a brief massage before he turns over, exposes himself erect, masturbates while he tens this 13 or 14 year oW to pinch his nipples as hard as she can while he Inserts his fingers into their vagina and ejaculates all over them before saying, "Take your money and leave." + +MR. PIKE: Form. Move to strike. + +BY Q. Okay? Then, "You can continue to coma back (or \$200 every Lime or every girt you bring me within your age group and I gel to do this again, I pay you \$200 per person.' If that is the testimony — + +MR. PIKE: Form. + +Q. — that what happens behind closed doors yrith him, do you still feel comfortable leaving a13 or 14 year old In a room with Jeffrey Epstein? + +• MR. PIKE: Form. + +A. if that, In fact, is what actually happened, no. + +184 + +1 you witnessed Jeffrey Epstein committing? 2 A No. 3 Q. Would you a A. No. 5 0. — go back - considering what you've read and 6 what you may or may not believe- would you go back to 7 working for Jeffrey Epstein? a MR. PIKE: Form. 9 A. I cant say. I still work for him on a 10 maintenance -to maintain the airplanes and sluff 11 like (hal. so. 12 Q. You're on his payroll? 13 A. Salaried, yes. 0. Do you know who else Is on his payroll? 15 A. Well, Dave and Larry. 16 Q. Certainty. K i want to know more about his 17 private life - do you know who's at his house? 18 A. No. 19 0. Do you know who his housekeeper Is? 20 A. No. 21 Q. Do you know who his architect is? 22 A. No, no. 23 0. Does Larry visit him at his house? 24 A. I would assume so. 25 Q. Why do you say you would assume so? 'That \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/EFTA02748075.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/EFTA02748075.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..03d1635cf2735e829d9ee7cbae6d20e4345878e2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/EFTA02748075.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1176 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 26, + "chars": 48943, + "elapsed_seconds": 38.58, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_6_Picture_85.jpeg", + "_page_16_Picture_4.jpeg", + "_page_22_Picture_36.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 196.95000000000002, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 396.1564025878906, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 396.1564025878906, + 120.228515625 + ], + [ + 196.95000000000002, + 120.228515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "THIRD PARTY WITNESS, IGOR ZINOVIEW'S, \nMOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND \nINCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 172.70999999999998, + 352.35 + ], + [ + 422.93267822265625, + 352.35 + ], + [ + 422.93267822265625, + 392.8485412597656 + ], + [ + 172.70999999999998, + 392.8485412597656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 240.597, + 323.19 + ], + [ + 349.61285400390625, + 323.19 + ], + [ + 349.61285400390625, + 338.4785461425781 + ], + [ + 240.597, + 338.4785461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.80300000000003, + 441.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 348.9690856933594, + 441.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 348.9690856933594, + 455.4785461425781 + ], + [ + 241.80300000000003, + 455.4785461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 185.724, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 378.081, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 378.081, + 133.728515625 + ], + [ + 185.724, + 133.728515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.59300000000002, + 92.34 + ], + [ + 400.326416015625, + 92.34 + ], + [ + 400.326416015625, + 120.6820068359375 + ], + [ + 199.59300000000002, + 120.6820068359375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF IGOR ZINOVIEV", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.84399999999997, + 366.12 + ], + [ + 389.1354064941406, + 366.12 + ], + [ + 389.1354064941406, + 381.5985412597656 + ], + [ + 209.84399999999997, + 381.5985412597656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER TO \nPROHIBIT INAPPROPRIATE DEPOSITION QUESTIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 150.7335662841797, + 288.35999999999996 + ], + [ + 448.3589782714844, + 288.35999999999996 + ], + [ + 448.3589782714844, + 315.9 + ], + [ + 150.7335662841797, + 315.9 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.21500000000003, + 585.6299999999999 + ], + [ + 363.1531677246094, + 585.6299999999999 + ], + [ + 363.1531677246094, + 598.59 + ], + [ + 244.21500000000003, + 598.59 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 172 + ], + [ + "Line", + 85 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 228 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 241 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 294 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 267 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 325 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 306 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 357 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 325 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 154 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 663 + ], + [ + "Line", + 148 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Form", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 166 + ], + [ + "Line", + 81 + ], + [ + "Text", + 57 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 992 + ], + [ + "Line", + 131 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 233 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 373 + ], + [ + "Line", + 47 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 478 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 113 + ], + [ + "Line", + 55 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 395 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748075" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/_page_16_Picture_4.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/_page_16_Picture_4.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f9f704180b56a027a6e02ec26e26d3cda16f69ec --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/_page_16_Picture_4.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:949584447137f3f2bf3b9ad96c41ab218e4930c4c13ea0636f1d12d5ea5e3f3e +size 12213 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/_page_22_Picture_36.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/_page_22_Picture_36.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..625241b89ef855b7f3456f50c5046761efa220e3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/_page_22_Picture_36.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:fadd46556037b9661ee74a428f29cb5fe34dcec1acbd20a036e35ebb2eb86917 +size 11218 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/_page_6_Picture_85.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/_page_6_Picture_85.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9b690676240259ef6b3678629bede17231f570de --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748075/_page_6_Picture_85.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f93ccbc845c709b4bd7a49816835fb5f31f49fbbc099a0926d9d3bffe4ae49ba +size 18739 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748101/EFTA02748101.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748101/EFTA02748101.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1863c75fafc56a9b5a10200e1ab4e4188acb1d4e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748101/EFTA02748101.md @@ -0,0 +1,246 @@ +0260 + +1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +2 CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +3 JANE DOE NO. 2, + +4 Plaintiff, 5 -vs-VOLUME III + +6 JEFFREY EPSTEIN, 7 Defendant. + +8 Related cases: 08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 9 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-801092 + +I0 II 12 13 VIDEO-CONFERENCED AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE + +14 15 Wednesday, September 30, 2009 9:37 a.m. - 6:10 p.m. + +16 One Clearlake Centre 17 250 South Australian Avenue, 1st Floor West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +18 19 20 Reported SE , Pamela J. RPR, FPR, CLR 21 Prose Reporting Agency, Inc. + +22 23 24 25 0261 + +I APPEARANCES: 2 On behalf of the Plaintiff Jane Doe: 3 BRAD J. ESQUIRE ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER 4 Las Olas City Centre, Suite 1650 401 East Las Olas Boulevard 5 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 954.315.7273 6 bedwards@rra-law.com 7 On behalf of the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein: 8 ROBERT D. CR1TTON, JR., ESQUIRE BURMAN, CR1TTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN, LLP 9 303 Banyan Boulevard Suite 400 + +"01-MK A" + +18 Q. Okay. Turn -- flip the page. There was a +19 document -- the letter is -- and just so the record is +20 clear -- I'm enclosing a proposal for settlement in +21 order to resolve the action which has been filed by your +22 client. And then attached -- and that's paraphrasing -- +23 attached to the letter is a proposal of settlement, sent +24 by Mr. Epstein to you, in the amount of \$45,000, plus +25 \$5,000 for attorney's fees. + +0425 + +1 Were you aware sometime in March of '09 that +2 you were offered \$45,000 to resolve the case? + +3 A. Yes. + +4 Q. Okay. And did you understand that -- that +5 if, in fact, Mr. Epstein comes back and gets an award of +6 a sum something less than \$45,000, say \$30,000, or +7 you're not successful in getting a judgment in excess of +8 35 -- 30,000, \$32,000, that you'll be responsible -- or +9 you may be responsible for all of Mr. Epstein's +10 attorney's fees and costs that were incurred after the +11 proposal for settlement? + +12 MR. [REDACTED]: Form. + +13 BY MR. CRITTON: + +14 Q. That is that Mr. Epstein can get a judgment +15 against you, maybe hundreds of thousands of dollars, are +16 you aware of that fact? + +17 A. No. + +18 Q. Okay. And do you know that that will be +19 against you for your entire life until you pay that off? + +20 MR. [REDACTED]: Form. + +21 THE WITNESS: No. + +22 MR. [REDACTED]: How is that reasonably calculated +23 to lead to admissible evidence? + +24 BY MR. CRITTON: + +25 Q. Ms. Jane Doe, we've talked about the first + +0426 + +1 time you went to Mr. Epstein's house and, I believe, the +2 second time you went to Mr. Epstein's house; correct? + +3 MR. [REDACTED]: Form. + +4 THE WITNESS: Yes. + +5 BY MR. CRITTON: + +6 Q. Okay. And you've testified that you went to +7 Mr. Epstein's house another approximately 18 times; is +8 that correct? + +9 A. Yes. + +10 Q. All right. And we have not discussed any of +11 those events, at least as of this point today; have we? + +12 MR. [REDACTED]: Form. + +13 THE WITNESS: I know that I have told you +14 that every time I ever went to his house, he +15 touched me, and I gave him a massage. + +16 BY MR. CRITTON: + +19 occurred or what occurred at each of those massages; +20 have we -- other than what you generally have told me; +21 correct? + +22 MR. [REDACTED]: Form. + +23 THE WITNESS: Correct. + +24 MR. CRITTON: I'm going to adjourn the +25 deposition now. It is about five after 6:00, and +0427 + +1 the Court's order said that we could, if +2 appropriate, go longer than seven hours. There are +3 a number of additional areas that I want to cover +4 with your client, including some background +5 information that was not disclosed in her answers +6 to interrogatories that I've not yet gotten to. + +7 I'd like to go into the other visits that she +8 had with Mr. Epstein, that is who she saw, what +9 occurred, both by her and with Mr. Epstein, and +10 anyone else who may have been present at the time. + +11 I want to review the various counts of the +12 complaint with her, separate and apart from the +13 allegations of the various visits. + +14 There's some other background -- family +15 background information I want to cover with her, +16 and I want to cover with her any other areas of +17 which she may have knowledge regarding witnesses, +18 including with regard to either L.M. issues, E.W. +19 issue, or potentially other individuals who are +20 Plaintiffs in this case. + +21 There are some other additional, as I said, +22 family background that I wish to explore, as well +23 as the medical records, which I have not yet had an +24 opportunity to discuss with her, which we obtained, +25 and her school records. + +0428 + +1 My best estimate for the time for completing +2 her deposition is approximately two and half to +3 three hours. If I can do it in a more reasonable +4 or a quicker fashion, I will certainly do that. + +5 And as I advised you, Brad, I am going out of +6 town on Friday. I'm in the process of moving my +7 house. It's supposed to occur on Monday or Tuesday +8 of next week. We -- it is now, as I said, +9 6 o'clock. We started about a little before +10 10 o'clock today. I think that the request is not +11 unreasonable, and I will also have opportunity to +12 have reviewed the transcript, so that I'm not -- +13 that I don't ask duplicative questions or retread +14 some area that we've already covered that I think +15 has been properly covered. + +16 As I indicated earlier is we spent almost +17 eight hours with a person named Rodriguez, who was +18 a house manager for Mr. Epstein for approximately +19 six months, who was, I'd say, a small-time player. + +20 And this is a young lady who is seeking + +21 extensive damages, whose -- damages in excess of +22 \$50 million for both compensatory and punitive +23 damages. And I think we have a right to fully +24 explore. It's certainly not the intent to harass, +25 intimidate or to cause her any undue stress. I'll + +0429 + +1 be glad to work out a time that works for both you +2 and Ms. Jane Doe. + +3 MR. [REDACTED]: Just so that it is clear, we -- +4 we will not be in agreement to your proposal. I +5 wrote down the various areas you intend to go into. +6 Every single one of them was covered. I will be +7 able to point to those areas in the transcript when +8 we have a hearing on this matter. + +9 As you pointed out earlier, Mr. Critton, the +10 seven-hour time limit was relieved by way of the +11 consolidation order, and it was done in the context +12 of depositions that are going to require multiple +13 attorneys -- because there are so many attorneys +14 involved in this ultimate litigation -- multiple +15 attorneys to ask questions of a particular witness +16 whose deposition is going to exceed seven hours, +17 such as Mr. Rodriguez, who was asked questions by +18 all seven or eight attorneys. This witness is +19 being asked questions by one attorney. That was +20 not the intent of the Court's order, and I think +21 that Judge Marra is going to have to rule on that +22 issue again. Every single one of the issues that +23 you intend to go into was covered. + +24 And I'd like to also put on the record that +25 in your last 15 minutes you proceeded to go into + +0430 + +1 proposals for settlement, which you know are not +2 admissible, nor reasonably calculated to lead to +3 admissible evidence, and you did that at your own +4 peril. And so, if we are going to resume any +5 deposition of Jane Doe, then it will be by way of +6 court order. + +7 MR. CRITTON: We're done. end 6:09 p.m. +8 (Whereupon, the Deposition was suspended at +9 6:09 p.m.) + +10 - - - + +11 + +12 + +13 + +14 + +15 + +16 + +17 + +18 + +19 + +20 + +21 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748101/EFTA02748101.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748101/EFTA02748101.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3e26ff1443dea77cc83a00b02c3b3e9a7bc680b5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748101/EFTA02748101.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,136 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748101.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 7718, + "elapsed_seconds": 10.72, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 116 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 32 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 30 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748101" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748105/EFTA02748105.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748105/EFTA02748105.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6e5c7ce7c7a3f77501ce232b2a7c671dacb838f4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748105/EFTA02748105.md @@ -0,0 +1,382 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRal + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +### EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOE'S MOTIONS FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER BARRING SECOND DEPOSITION AND INCORPORATED MOTION TO STRIKE + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein"), submits this Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs, Jane Doe, Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Day of Deposition ("Motion") (DE # 378) and incorporated Motion to Strike Jane Doe's Motion, and states: + +## Response in Opposition to Jane Doe's Motion + +- 1. Jane Doe's Motion (DE #378) seeks a protective order barring the completion of her deposition, which is set for November 13, 2009.1 +- 2. On September 20, 2009, Epstein began Jane Doe's deposition. While Jane Doe states her deposition lasted approximately eight hours (from 9:37 a.m. to 6:10 p.m.), she fails to + +While Jane Doe's deposition is set for this Friday, November 13, 2009, it will likely be re-set to the week of November 16, 2009 as her compulsory medical exam was rescheduled to November 13, 2009. Jane Doe is represented by the law firm Rothstein, Rosenfeldt & Adler ("RRA"), which as belle news regarding alleged illegal and unethical conduct regarding investments in settlements/cases. Brad Esq. of RRA asked to reschedule the pending compulsory medical exams of his three clients, Jane Doe and two state court Plaintiffs, LM and EW, which were originally set for November 9, 10 and 11, respectively. Epstein's counsel agreed to reset the exams. Jane Doe's compulsory medical exam is now scheduled for November 13, 2009. Nevertheless, as Jane Doe's deposition will most likely occur during the week of November 16, 2009, Epstein submits this Motion to avoid further delay and since the parties are under specific discovery deadlines and the Court previously denied Epstein's Motion for Continuance (DE #187). + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARRAIRM + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to ane oe s Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Day of Deposition and Incorporated Motion to Strike + +Page 2 of 9 + +take into account lunch and other breaks. When taking into account the various breaks, Jane Doe was actually deposed for 6 hours and 52 minutes.2 + +3. Per the Court's May 14, 2009 Order Consolidating Cases for Purposes of Discovery (DE # 98), "Local Rule 26.1 K (limiting deposition time to one day of seven hours) is waived so as to allow each party an adequate opportunity to develop fully the record as it may relate to that party." + +4. Jane Doe is seeking in excess of \$50,000,000 in damages in this case, primarily to "hurt Jeffrey Epstein." See 9/20/09 Deposition Transcript of Jane Doe ("JD Depo") at 421. Yet Jane Doe admitted that Epstein never threatened her, never used physical force, never restrained her and never provided her with drugs or alcohol. See JD Depo at 322. Moreover, Jane Doe did not give or receive oral sex from Mr. Epstein, did not engage in anal or vaginal sex with Mr. Epstein. See JD Depo at 312-13. + +5. When counsel for Epstein adjourned Jane Doe's deposition, he attempted to coordinate the completion of her deposition, which he estimated would take approximately three hours. But Jane Doe's counsel opposed additional time and took the position that the Court's Order (DE #98) only waived the seven-hour time limit in instances where multiple Plaintiffs' attorneys are questioning the witness. See Excerpts of JD Depo at 426-429, attached as Exhibit A. + +6. In adjourning Jane Doe's deposition, counsel for Epstein noted that he intended to cover the following topics in the completion of Jane Doe's deposition, which he estimated would take approximately two and a half to three hours: + +> a. Background information not disclosed in answers to interrogatories and family background information. See Exhibit A at 427; + +2 Counsel for Epstein confirmed the actual time with the court reporter. + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +Epstein's Response in Opposition toIMPes Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Day of Deposition and + +Incorporated Motion to Strike + +Page 3 of 9 + +- b. The details of each time Jane Doe went to Mr. Epstein's house, which was not addressed at her September 20, 2009 deposition. Counsel for Mr. Epstein only had time to question Jane Doe generally about her visits to Mr. Epstein's house. kt, at 426-27, +- c. The various counts of the complaint, separate and apart from the allegations of the various visits. j +- d. Jane Doe's knowledge of other witnesses/Plaintiffs, including LM and EW, also clients of Brad a Esq. Id. at 427; and +- e. School records and medical records, including Milton School, Planned Parenthood, St. Mary's Medical Center, Wellington Regional Hospital, and Pace Center for Girls. Id. + +7. Epstein is also entitled to depose Jane Doe regarding her past sexual history, an opportunity he did not have when he began her deposition since the Court had not ruled on Epstein's Motion to Compel (DE #s 67 & 68), which sought information related to Plaintiffs' past sexual history. Jane Doe's counsel instructed her not to answer any questions "relate[ed] to sexual partners' names or sexual positions". See Exhibit A at 162 — 170. + +8. However, on October 29, 2009, the Court granted Epstein's Motions to Compel (DE #s 67 & 68) related to Plaintiffs' past sexual history. In its Order (DE #377), the Court poignantly acknowledged, "[u]nder the circumstances of this case, where Plaintiff has alleged that Epstein ... `sexually assault her' ... Plaintiff has put the nature of her claimed injuries and source and extent of her damages at issue, such that Epstein is entitled to discover evidence which would show the nature of Plaintiff's relationship with males, whether she has suffered other acts of sexual misconduct as alleged in her Complaint, and whether she suffered injury + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARRN + +Epstein's Response in Opposition toltiles Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Day of Deposition and + +Incorporated Motion to Strike + +Page 4 of 9 + +and/or damages as a result of the other claimed sexual misconduct with males." See DE #377 at 9. + +9. The Court went on, "the requests at issue go to the very heart of Plaintiff's damage claims, requesting not only general information relating to Plaintiff's sexual history, but inquiring as to specific instances wherein Plaintiff received compensation or consideration for sex acts, claim other males sexually assaulted ... her, and/or claim other males committed lewd or lascivious acts on her. As a global matter, Plaintiffs clearly and unequivocally place their sexual history at issue by their allegations.... To deny Epstein this discovery. would be tantamount to barring him from mounting a defense." See DE #377 at 10 (emphasis added). + +10. Moreover, there are a myriad of relevant issues that cannot not be adequately covered in seven hours, such as Jane Doe's drug use s(s c JD Depo at 83-85), her employment at strip clubs (id. at 272; 304), numerous incidents of violence and drug use in her home (a. at 191- 94; 232; 361-63), running away from home (a. at 188-90; 232, the murder of Joey Tones by her father, her witnessing her father physically abuse Joey prior to his death and the psychological effect it had on Jane Doe, including post-traumatic stress disorder, which she is also claiming in this case (id. at 150; 193-94; 232; 361-63). + +11. Jane Doe is also a witness to other related cases and testified she was friends with LM and EW, Plaintiffs in companion state court cases. See JD Depo at 26. + +12. Next, Jane Doe improperly refused to answer questions regarding her address, other persons living with her and the identity of her landlord. See JD Depo at 77-79; 265-66; 302. Her attorney plainly said "[g]o to the Court to get [the] information." Id. at 79. She also admitted to lying under oath in a deposition as well as a court proceeding (id. at 182-83) and testified that the father of her child was a cocaine dealer (id. at 299). Based on Jane Doe's + +Case No. 08-C1V-80119-MARRA/ + +Epstein's Response in Opposition loarTrie s Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Day of Deposition and + +Incorporated Motion to Strike + +Page 5 of 9 + +eventful past history and the multitude of relevant issues, deposing her for an additional three hours is clearly warranted under the circumstances. + +13. Indeed, in its Order denying Plaintiff's, C.M.A., Motion for Protective Order (DE #289) requesting the Court limit her independent psychological/psychiatric medical examination to six hours and to prohibit repeated questions regarding Plaintiffs medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history and substance abuse history, the Court noted that Plaintiff is seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages and that "full knowledge of Plaintiffs past and present medical, psychological, familial and social histories is essential." See DE # 289 at 4. The Court therefore allowed eight hours, the full amount of time requested by Epstein's expert, to conduct the examination. Moreover, with respect to Plaintiff's motion to limited repeated questions, "the Court agree[d] with Defendant that to restrict the number of times defense counsel may ask Plaintiff personal and sensitive questions concerning some of the pivotal issues in this case would work an injustice by preventing Defendant from being able to defend himself." See DE # 289 at 5. + +14. Epstein simply requests an additional three hours to complete Jane Doe's deposition. Given that Jane Doe's counsel instructed her not to answer crucial questions related to her past sexual history, and considering the Court recently ruled this information is not only discoverable, but goes to the heart of Plaintiff's damages, Epstein should be permitted three hours to finish Jane Doe's deposition. + +15. Although the Court waived the seven hour time limit in S.D. Fla. L.R. 26.1 K (also found in Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(d)), Osborne v. Columbia Helicopters, Inc., 2009 WL 2215076 (S.D.W.Va. 2009) is illustrative and supports Epstein's request for additional time to depose Plaintiffs. In Osborne a personal injury case, the defendant requested additional time to depose + +Case No. 08-CIV-130119-MARIS + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe's Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Day of Deposition and + +Incorporated Motion to Strike + +Page 6 of 9 + +the plaintiff because the plaintiff testified to prior injuries, employers, medical providers and witnesses which were not included in his written discovery responses. Id. \*2. In granting the defendant an additional 1 day of 7 hours to depose the plaintiff, the court reasoned that because the plaintiff provided incomplete written discovery responses, the defendant "did not have a full opportunity to examine Mr. Osborne respecting all of the information which might properly be considered in his discovery deposition." a \*5 (emphasis added). + +16. Just like the defendant in Osborne, Epstein has not had a full opportunity to examine Jane Doe as to all information which might properly be considered in her deposition such as information not disclosed in her interrogatories and since she refused to answers questions, both in her deposition and in response to written discovery, regarding her past sexual history. + +17. Per the Court's Order (DE #377), Epstein is entitled to discover information regarding Jane Doe's past sexual history. If the Court were to grant Jane Doe's Motion, it would essentially be punishing Epstein for timely proceeding with discovery while his Motions to Compel (DE #s 67 & 68) related to past sexual history were still pending, which Epstein was required to do because the Court denied an earlier motion for continuance (DE # 187) and said in essence, do your discovery. Granting Jane Doe's Motion would also allow her to circumvent the Court's Order (DE #377) by denying Epstein the opportunity to obtain discovery that is central to the defense of this and other cases. + +18. Accordingly, the Court should deny Jane Doe's Motion (DE #378) and permit Epstein an additional three hours to complete Jane Doe's deposition. + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARRN + +Epstein's Response in Opposition lollies Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Day of Deposition and + +Incorporated Motion to Strike + +Page 7 of 9 + +# Motion to Strike Jane Doe's Motion + +19. As a threshold matter, the Court should strike Jane Doe's Motion for failure to comply with the Court's August 11, 2009 Order (DE # 263). Specifically, the Order provides, "[h]ereinafter, all motions and other court filings that relate to discovery ... shall be styled consistent with the styling of this Order.... Any motions styled incorrectly or filed in multiple cases will be stricken from the docket for failure to follow the Court's Order." See DE # 263. + +20. Jane Doe's Motion (DE # 378), which is a motion for protective order and therefore "relate[d] to discovery," is clearly styled incorrectly and is not consistent with the styling of the Court's August 11, 2009 Order (DE #263). Accordingly, the Court should strike Jane Doe's Motion. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, respectfully requests the Court strike Jane Doe's Motion (DE #378) for failure to comply with the Court's August 11, 2009 Order (DE #263) or, alternatively, deny Jane Doe's Motion (DE #378) and permit an additional three hours for the completion of Jane Doe's deposition and grant any additional relief the Court deems just and proper. + +By: + +ROBERT I3. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida B6 No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED] + +*Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe's Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Day of Deposition and Incorporated Motion to Strike* + +Page 8 of 9 + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 12th day of November, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: + +![]()Florida Bar No. 224162 + +[rcrit@bclclaw.com](mailto:rcrit@bclclaw.com) + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +[mpike@bclclaw.com](mailto:mpike@bclclaw.com) + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +303 Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/253-0164 Fax + +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** + +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** + +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) + +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-* + +*80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-* + +*80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-* +*80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +*Pro Hac Vice* + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe's Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Day of Deposition and + +Incorporated Motion to Strike + +Page 9 of 9 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. M, Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcylaw.com + +iroh searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Hagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsbere@modhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. + +09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iagesq@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748105/EFTA02748105.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748105/EFTA02748105.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..41f08aaca8fb5589c516aafacba0689e744d0a3f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748105/EFTA02748105.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,497 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748105.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 9, + "chars": 17473, + "elapsed_seconds": 13.1, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 195.80844116210938, + 65.61 + ], + [ + 405.75600000000003, + 65.61 + ], + [ + 405.75600000000003, + 91.87945556640625 + ], + [ + 195.80844116210938, + 91.87945556640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO \nJANE DOE'S MOTIONS FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER BARRING \nSECOND DEPOSITION AND INCORPORATED MOTION TO STRIKE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 353.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 497.4871826171875, + 353.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 497.4871826171875, + 395.7494201660156 + ], + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 395.7494201660156 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Response in Opposition to Jane Doe's Motion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.66, + 490.86 + ], + [ + 423.5039999999999, + 490.86 + ], + [ + 423.5039999999999, + 507.1219482421875 + ], + [ + 186.66, + 507.1219482421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Motion to Strike Jane Doe's Motion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 208.07999999999998, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 398.5069274902344, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 398.5069274902344, + 118.10302734375 + ], + [ + 208.07999999999998, + 118.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 244.8, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 356.79599999999994, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 356.79599999999994, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 244.8, + 114.20999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 416.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 359.24399999999997, + 416.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 359.24399999999997, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 429.29999999999995 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 363 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 60 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 121 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 138 + ], + [ + "Line", + 68 + ], + [ + "Text", + 63 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748105" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748114/EFTA02748114.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748114/EFTA02748114.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a20841d4e48a560c7387f03dcd93261759cb8dac --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748114/EFTA02748114.md @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ +From: Stuart Mermelstein [mailto:smermeisteln@sexabuseattomey.com] + +Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 3:12 PM + +To: Jessica Cadwell + +Cc: Adam Horowitz; Lisa l= + +Subject: RE: Jane Doe #4 + +Jessica: First, November 6 does not work. Both Adam and I have irreconcilable conflicts that date. Our legal assistant, Lisa, will email you with our available dates. + +As to the length of the remaining deposition, you apparently misunderstood our position. I spoke with Adam, and he did not propose that you be given 2 hours of deposition time in addition to the remaining time you would be entitled to under the 7 hour rule. + +After speaking with Adam, we have determined that there was 5 hours and 35 hours of elapsed deposition time on October 27, after deducting breaks taken during the course of the day. That leaves 1 hour 25 mins of remaining deposition time. In the interests of compromise and cooperative discovery, we are willing to produce Jane Doe No. 4 for her continued deposition for 2 hours 25 mins of deposition time, giving Defendant 8 hours total deposition time of Jane Doe 4. That is as far as we are willing to go, and would be subject to Bob's agreement not to use this compromise against us with respect to Jane Doe's pending motion for protective order on the 7 hour issue, which we intend to join. + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Blvd. + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +phone: (305) 931-2200 + +fax: (305) 931-0877 + +From: Jessica Cadwell [mallto:JCadwell@bdclaw.com] + +Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 1:56 PM + +To: Adam Horowitz; Stuart Mermelstein + +Cc: Robert D. Critton Jr. + +Subject: Jane Doe #4 + +Adam and/or Stuart — + +While Bob does not agree that the depositions are limited to 7 hours, he believes that with all the breaks and lunch Tuesday, we still have about 1.5-2 hours left for Doe #4. With your proposed two additional hours, that totals 4. Bob would like to agree to 4 additional hours (2 that are leftover and your proposed 2 additional) on Doe #4. We would like to do this on Friday, November 6, 2009. Please let me know if this will work. + +Jessica — + +feemica &dva#, es, nit + +Certified Paralegal + +Florida Registered Paralegal + +BURMAN CRITTON LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP + +303 Banyan Boulevard + +Suite #400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Tel: (561) 842-2820 / Fax: (561) 844-6929 + +11/12/2009 + +"too 1( 4 '' + +EFTA02748114 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748114/EFTA02748114.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748114/EFTA02748114.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dbba09e848f300c8ce3ae9c41f9a9cc2cf5d0dc0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748114/EFTA02748114.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,54 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748114.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 2368, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.6, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 98 + ], + [ + "Line", + 48 + ], + [ + "Text", + 34 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748114" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748115/EFTA02748115.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748115/EFTA02748115.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3903c34a78d39029293d75b6404b85cf3e63eeca --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748115/EFTA02748115.md @@ -0,0 +1,203 @@ +0001 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +2 3 CASE NO.: 08-CV -80119-MARRA/ 4 + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +5 Plaintiff, + +6 -vs- VOLUME I OF III + +7 JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +8 Defendant. + +9 Related cases: 10 08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 11 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +12 VIDEO-CONFERENCED AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF 13 JANE DOE NO. 4 + +14 Tuesday, October 27, 2009 15 11:11 - 6:05 p.m. + +16 17 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 115 18 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +19 + +20 21 Reportecaim Cynthia RPR, FPR 22 Notary Public, tate of Florida Prose Court Reporting + +I APPEARANCES: 2 On behalf of the Plaintiff, L.M. and E.W.: 3 MICHAEL J. WHEELER, ESQUIRE ROTHSTEIN, ROSENFELDT, ADLER 4 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 5 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Phone: 954.522.3456 + +6 7 On behalf of Jane Does 1 through 8: 8 ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQUIRE STUART S. MERMELSTEIN, ESQUIRE 811 + +9 MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +10 Suite 2218 +Miami, Florida 33160 +11 Phone: 305.931.2200 +E-mail: Ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +12 +13 On behalf of C.M.A.: +14 RICHARD HORACE WILLITS, ESQUIRE +RICHARD H. WILLITS, P.A. +15 2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +16 Lake Worth, Florida 33461 +Phone: 561.582.7600 +17 (Via Telephone) + +18 On behalf of the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein: +19 ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE +MARK T. LUTTIER, ESQUIRE +20 BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP +303 Banyan Boulevard +21 Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 +22 Phone: 561.842.2820 +23 + +24 ALSO PRESENT: Jeffrey Epstein, via video conference +Jeff [REDACTED] Videographer +25 Visual Evidence, Incorporated + +0003 + +1 +2 INDEX +3 +4 WITNESS: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS +5 JANE DOE NO. 4 +6 +7 +8 +9 BY MR. LUTTIER 4 + +10 EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE +11 - - - +12 +13 DEFENDANT'S EX. 1 Proposal for Settlement 72 +14 DEFENDANT'S EX. 2 Answers to Interrogatories 232 +15 DEFENDANT'S EX. 3 Petition for Injunction 348 +16 DEFENDANT'S EX. 4 Handwritten Note 384 +17 DEFENDANT'S EX. 5 Psychological/Social History 394 +18 +19 +20 +21 +22 +23 +24 +25 + +| | EXHIBIT | DESCRIPTION | PAGE | +|----|-------------------|------------------------------|------| +| 14 | DEFENDANT'S EX. 1 | Proposal for Settlement | 72 | +| 15 | DEFENDANT'S EX. 2 | Answers to Interrogatories | 232 | +| 16 | DEFENDANT'S EX. 3 | Petition for Injunction | 348 | +| 17 | DEFENDANT'S EX. 4 | Handwritten Note | 384 | +| 18 | DEFENDANT'S EX. 5 | Psychological/Social History | 394 | + +PROCEEDINGS + +--- + +Deposition taken before Cynthia [REDACTED] + +Registered Professional Reporter and Florida Professional Reporter, and Notary Public in and for the State of Florida at Large, in the above cause. + +- - - + +THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the 27th day of October, 2009. The time is 11:11 a.m. This is the videotape deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 in the matter of Jane Doe No. 4 versus Epstein. + +This deposition is being held at 250 South Australian Avenue, West Palm Beach, Florida. + +My name is Jeff [REDACTED] I am the videographer representing Visual Evidence, Incorporated. + +Will the attorneys please announce their appearances for the record. + +MR. HOROWITZ: Sure. Adam Horowitz, counsel for Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4. + +MR. LUTTIER: Mark Luttier, counsel for Jeff Epstein. + +MR. CRITTON: Robert Critton on behalf of Mr. Epstein. + +MR. HOROWITZ: Let me just do a -- + +0005 + +MR. WILLITS: Rick Willits on behalf of [REDACTED] + +MR. HOROWITZ: Let me just note a brief objection. Per the letter that we have written to you, we intend to object and instruct our client not to answer to the extent there are questions whose answers will implicate Rule 412. The issue of Rule 412 is, is before the court in a pending motion, and before the depo was set, we fully briefed the issue before the court and have noted our intent to object to questions which implicate that question -- that rule. + +MR. CRITTON: 412 deals with the -- + +MR. HOROWITZ: Sexual, sexual history. + +MR. CRITTON: -- sexual history, and our, we briefed it -- + +MR. HOROWITZ: We briefed it. + +MR. CRITTON: -- on both sides, and our position is, is Judge [REDACTED] was pretty clear in her order with regard to CME and with regard to this medical exam that was done by Dr. [REDACTED] in the [REDACTED] case as to why it's relevant, and why it's material and why it's important. We understand your position, don't + +2 MR. LUTTIER: Ready? +3 THE COURT REPORTER: Yes. +4 MR. LUTTIER: Please state your name. [REDACTED] +5 you have to swear her in. + +6 Thereupon, +7 (JANE DOE NO. 4) +8 Having been first duly sworn or affirmed, was +9 examined and testified as follows: + +10 THE WITNESS: Yes. +11 DIRECT EXAMINATION + +12 BY MR. LUTTIER: + +13 Q. What is your name, [REDACTED]? +14 A. Jane Doe No. 4. +15 Q. And how do you spell your middle name? +16 A. (Witness spells middle name.) +17 Q. And your last name is -- (Mr. Luttier +18 spelled the witness's last name.) +19 A. Yes. +20 Q. Okay. Jane Doe No. 4, when were you born? +21 A. June 6, 1987. +22 MR. WILLITS: I can barely hear the +23 witness. Can we get it a little closer to her? +24 MR. HOROWITZ: Yes. +25 + +0007 + +1 BY MR. LUTTIER: + +2 Q. Have you ever been known by any other +3 name? +4 A. No. +5 Q. Have you ever been deposed before? +6 A. Deposed? +7 Q. That is have your deposition taken as +8 we're doing today. +9 A. No. +10 Q. Have you ever given anybody any kind of +11 statement under oath before? +12 A. The police reports, you mean? +13 Q. Could be, yeah. +14 A. Yeah. +15 Q. All right. Do you know what the +16 significance of an oath is? +17 A. Yeah, where you tell the truth. +18 Q. Okay. You understand you are under oath +19 today? +20 A. Yes. +21 Q. Do you know what the significance of +22 violating an oath is? +23 A. (Witness shakes head.) +24 Q. Like, if you don't tell the truth when +25 you're under oath, do you know -- + +0008 + +1 A. Yeah, you're in trouble. +2 Q. Okay. You know that's against the law to +3 do that? \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748115/EFTA02748115.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748115/EFTA02748115.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7e9f2cc40786c129635fa0d965d9f8e8d90030f2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748115/EFTA02748115.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,168 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748115.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 6103, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.52, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "PROCEEDINGS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.024, + 63.17999999999999 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 63.17999999999999 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 93.024, + 75.33 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 113 + ], + [ + "Line", + 56 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 45 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748115" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748119/EFTA02748119.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748119/EFTA02748119.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0008a5cc2dcf05341dff96d6e1a21638c7e70e10 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748119/EFTA02748119.md @@ -0,0 +1,363 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/MM + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOE NO. 4'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AGAINST SECOND DAY OF DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF EXTENDING PAST SEVEN HOURS IN THE AGGREGATE + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein"), submits this Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's, Jane Doe No. 4, Motion for Protective Order Against Second Day of Deposition of Plaintiff Extending Past Seven Hours in the Aggregate ("Motion"), and states: + +- 1. Jane Doe No. 4 filed her Motion (DE #392) on November 3, 2009 seeking to limit her deposition to a total of seven hours. The completion of Jane Doe No. 4's deposition is currently set for November 17, 2009. Thus, this response is being filed to avoid further delay in discovery. +- 2. On October 27, 2009, Jane Doe No. 4 was deposed for approximately five hours and thirty five minutes. +- 3. In her Motion, Jane Doe No. 4 joins in Jane Doe's Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Day of Deposition (DE #378), but asserts that she is "willing to sit for a second + +Case No. 08-CI V-801 I 9-MARRA/ Epstein's Response in Opposition totilleNo. 4's Motion for Protective Order Against Second Day of Deposition of Plaintiff Extending Past Seven Hours in the Aggregate + +Page 2 of 8 + +day of deposition for a period of no longer than one hour and twenty five minutes." ee DE #392 ¶12. + +4. Under Local Rule 26.1 K and Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(d), Epstein would be entitled to an additional one hour and twenty-five minutes as a matter of right. So despite her attempt to appear reasonable and accommodating, Jane Doe No. 4 is not doing anyone any favors by agreeing to sit for another hour and twenty-five minutes. + +5. Per the Court's May 14, 2009 Order Consolidating Cases for Purposes of Discovery (DE # 98), "Local Rule 26.1 K (limiting deposition time to one day of seven hours) is waived so as to allow each party an adequate opportunity to develop fully the record as it may relate to that party." + +6. For the reasons set forth herein, Epstein requests an additional four hours to complete Jane Doe No. 4's deposition, which is patently fair and reasonable. Counsel for Epstein relayed this request to Jane Doe No. 4's counsel, but he was unwilling to agree to the additional four hours. See 10/29/09 E-mail attached as Exhibit A. + +7. Jane Doe No. 4 is seeking in excess of a million dollars in damages for purported emotional and psychological injuries sustained as a result of her encounters with Mr. Epstein. + +8. There are a myriad of issues to cover with Jane Doe No. 4 relevant to Epstein's defense of this case. As with many of the Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No. 4 has had a complicated and eventful past history including, but not limited to: (1) drug use which includes cocaine, marijuana, ecstasy and xanax see 10/27/09 Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 at 215-17); (2) repeated instances of domestic violence and physical and verbal abuse by her former boyfriend, Preston Vinyard, in which he bit her finger, spit on her, poured beer on her and called her + +Case No. 08-C1V-801)9-MARRA/ + +Epstein's Response in Opposition toliMNo. 4's Motion for Protective Order Against Second Day of + +Deposition of Plaintiff Extending Post Seven Hours in the Aggregate + +Page 3 of 8 + +degrading names such as "whore," "slut," and "cunt" (id. at 29-30; 296-298); (3) three pregnancies with Vinyard that ended in three abortions, which she failed to disclose to various physicians, including her own psychiatric expert, Dr. Kliman, and which she admitted caused her more emotional trauma than her encounters with Mr. Epstein (id. at 299-306); and (4) arrests, including a recent arrest in Jupiter, Florida in October 2009 for domestic violence where she attacked, hit and bit her current boyfriend and about which she asserted the Fifth Amendment and refused to answer questions (Li at 25-26; 339; 346-48). Despite such emotional trauma, Jane Doe No. 4 never sought treatment from a mental health professional until she was sent to Dr. Kliman by her attorneys after this suit was filed (a. at 242). + +9. Moreover, while Jane Doe No. 4 was seeing Mr. Epstein (both before and after she turned 18), which she testified was between 30 and 50 times (id. at 77-78), including her freshman year of college at University (id.. at 74), she made a sex tape depicting vagina and oral sex with her boyfriend which she voluntarily showed to Mr. Epstein GI at 226-230). She also admitted to lying to the police (id. at 12-13) and lying to physicians, including her own expert, Dr. Kliman (hi at 306). + +10. Epstein is also entitled to depose Jane Doe No. 4 regarding her past sexual history, an opportunity he did not have when he began her deposition since the Court had not ruled on Epstein's Motion to Compel (DE #s 67 & 68), which sought information related to Plaintiffs' past sexual history. Jane Doe No. 4's counsel instructed her not to answer any questions "relate[ed] to sexual partners' names or sexual positions". See Excerpt of 10/27/2009 Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 at 5 attached as Exhibit B. + +Jane Dot No. 2 v. Eosteig + +Case No. 08-OV-801I9-MARRM + +Epstein's Response in Opposition toculTeNo. 4's Motion for Protective Order Against Second Day of + +Deposition of Plaintiff Extending Past Seven Hours in the Aggregate + +Page 4 of 8 + +11. However, on October 29, 2009, the Court granted Epstein's Motions to Compel (DE #s 67 & 68) related to Plaintiffs' past sexual history. In its Order (DE #377), the Court poignantly acknowledged, "[u]nder the circumstances of this case, where Plaintiff has alleged that Epstein ... `sexually assault her' ... Plaintiff has put the nature of her claimed injuries and source and extent of her damages at issue, such that Epstein is entitled to discover evidence which would show the nature of Plaintiff's relationship with males, whether she has suffered other acts of sexual misconduct as alleged in her Complaint, and whether she suffered injury and/or damages as a result of the other claimed sexual misconduct with males." See DE #377 at 9. + +12. The Court went on, "the requests at issue go to the very heart of Plaintiff's damage claims, requesting not only general information relating to Plaintiff's sexual history, but inquiring as to specific instances wherein Plaintiff received compensation or consideration for sex acts, claim other males sexually assaulted ... her, and/or claim other males committed lewd or lascivious acts on her. As a global matter, Plaintiffs clearly and unequivocally place their sexual history at issue by their allegations.... To deny Epstein this discovery, would be tantamount to barring him from mounting a defense." See DE #377 at 10 (emphasis added). + +13. All of the foregoing issues are directly relevant to Jane Doe No. 4's damage claims and credibility in this case and Epstein is entitled to fully discover all such issues. + +14. Epstein simply requests an additional four hours to complete Jane Doe No. 4's deposition. Given that her counsel instructed her not to answer crucial questions related to her past sexual history, and considering the Court recently ruled this information is not only + +Case No. 08-CIV-80I19-MARIIA + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Protective Order Against Second Day of + +Deposition of Plaintiff Extending Past Seven Hours In the Aggregate + +Page 5 of 8 + +discoverable, but goes to the heart of Plaintiff's damages, Epstein should be permitted four hours to finish Jane Doe No. 4's deposition. + +15. Although the Court waived the seven hour time limit in S.D. Fla. L.R. 26.1 K (also found in Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(d)), Osborne v. Columbia Helicopters, Inc., 2009 WL 2215076 (S.D.W.Va. 2009) is illustrative and supports Epstein's request for additional time to depose Plaintiffs. In Osborne, a personal injury case,' the defendant requested additional time to depose the plaintiff because the plaintiff testified to prior injuries, employers, medical providers and witnesses which were not included in his written discovery responses. Id. \*2. In granting the defendant an additional 1 day of 7 hours to depose the plaintiff, the court reasoned that because the plaintiff provided incomplete written discovery responses, the defendant "did not have a full opportunity to examine Mr. Osborne respecting all of the information which might properly be considered in his discovery deposition." Id. \*5 (emphasis added). + +16. Just like the defendant in Osborne, Epstein has not had a full opportunity to examine Jane Doe No. 4 as to all information which might properly be considered in her deposition such as information regarding her past sexual history. + +17. Per the Court's Order (DE #377), Epstein is entitled to discover information regarding Jane Doe No. 4's past sexual history. If the Court were to grant Jane Doe No. 4's Motion, it would essentially be punishing Epstein for timely proceeding with discovery while his Motions to Compel (DE #s 67 & 68) related to past sexual history were still pending, which + +Despite Jane Doe No. 4's assertion that "(title nature of this case, for damages arising from sexual misconduct, does not warrant a deposition in excess of seven hours" and her suggestion that only complex commercial cases involving voluminous documents justifies exceeding the seven hour limit, Osborne plainly demonstrates that even a run-of-the-mill personal injury action involving neck and back injuries sustained by an employee of a timber cutting company can merit a deposition in excess of seven hours. + +Case No. 08-C1V-80 I 19-MARRA/ + +Epsteln's Response in Opposition toaniale No. 4's Motion for Protective Order Against Second Day of + +Deposition of Plaintiff Extending Past Seven Hours in the Aggregate + +Page 6 of 8 + +Epstein was required to do because the Court denied an earlier motion for continuance (DE # 187) and said in essence, do your discovery. Granting Jane Doe No. 4's Motion would also allow her to circumvent the Court's Order (DE #377) by denying Epstein the opportunity to obtain discovery that is central to the defense of this and other cases. + +18. Accordingly, the Court should deny Jane Doe No. 4's Motion (DE #378) and permit Epstein an additional four hours to complete Jane Doe No. 4's deposition. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, respectfully requests the Court deny Jane Doe No. 4's Motion (DE #392) and permit an additional four hours for the completion of Jane Doe No. 4's deposition and grant any additional relief the deems just and proper. + +By: + +ROBERT D. RITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar o. 224162 + +rcrit@belcl W.COM + +Case No. I9-MARRAI + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Protective Order Against Second Day of + +Deposition of Plaintiff Extending Past Seven Hours in the Aggregate + +Page 7 of 8 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 12th day of November 2009 + +Respectfully submi + +By: + +ROBERT CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida No. 224162 + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bcIclaw.com + +BURMAN, CR1TTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +303 Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/253-0164 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARFIAa + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitz(asexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08- + +80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08- + +80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwardsQrra-law.corn + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hat Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +Case No. 08-CIV-8011119-MARRa + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Protective Order Against Second Day of + +Deposition of Plaintiff Extending Past Seven Hours in the Aggregate + +Page 8 of 8 + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. ■, **Esq.** + +**Searcy Denney Scarola Bamhart & Shipley, P.A.** + +**2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard** + +**West Palm Beach, FL 33409** + +**561-686-6300** + +**Fax: 561-383-9424** + +**isxAsearcylaw.com** + +**iPh®searcvlaw.com** + +**Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.** + +**Bruce Reinhart, Esq.** + +**Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A.** + +**250 S. Australian Avenue** + +**Suite 1400** + +**West Palm Beach, FL 33401** + +**561-202-6360** + +**Fax: 561-828-0983** + +**ecf brucereinhar n** + +**Counsel for Defendant** + +**Theodore J. Leopold, Esq.** + +**Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq.** + +**Leopold, Kuvin, P.A.** + +**2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200** + +**Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410** + +**561-684-6500** + +**Fax: 561-515-2610** + +**skuvin®leopoldkuvin.com** + +**Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804** + +**801-585-6833 Fax** + +**cassellp®law.utah.edu** + +**Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe** + +**Isidro M. = Esq.** + +**Law Firm, P.A.** + +**224 Datura Street, Suite 900** + +**West Palm Beach, FL 33401** + +**561-832-7732** + +**561-832-7137 F** + +**isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net** + +**Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-** + +**80469** + +**Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq.** + +**Katherine W. Ezell, Esq.** + +**Podhurst Orseck, P.A.** + +**25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800** + +**Miami, FL 33130** + +**305 358-2800** + +**Fax: 305 358-2382** + +**riosefsberg@podhurst.com** + +**kezell@podhurst.com** + +**Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos.** + +**09-80591 and 09-80656** + +**Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq.** + +**Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.** + +**250 Australian Avenue South** + +**Suite 1400** + +**West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012** + +**561-659-8300** + +**Fax: 561-835-8691** + +**iagesa@bellsouth.net** + +**Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein** \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748119/EFTA02748119.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748119/EFTA02748119.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a26e5416e08d2e8756ec103a3059a71c75fa95dc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748119/EFTA02748119.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,409 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748119.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 14648, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.9, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 410.24566650390625, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 410.24566650390625, + 103.10302734375 + ], + [ + 197.06400000000002, + 103.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOE NO. 4'S MOTION FOR \nPROTECTIVE ORDER AGAINST SECOND DAY OF DEPOSITION \nOF PLAINTIFF EXTENDING PAST SEVEN HOURS IN THE AGGREGATE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 85.06800000000001, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 525.4046630859375, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 525.4046630859375, + 406.10302734375 + ], + [ + 85.06800000000001, + 406.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 136.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 360.79791259765625, + 136.07999999999998 + ], + [ + 360.79791259765625, + 150.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 150.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 451.9800000000001 + ], + [ + 361.95050048828125, + 451.9800000000001 + ], + [ + 361.95050048828125, + 466.863037109375 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 466.863037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 117 + ], + [ + "Line", + 59 + ], + [ + "Text", + 51 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 161 + ], + [ + "Line", + 78 + ], + [ + "Text", + 74 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748119" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748127/EFTA02748127.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748127/EFTA02748127.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8b3d8105abb9b423259db36c2960956475bd64e4 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748127/EFTA02748127.md @@ -0,0 +1,825 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +![Filed by [Signature] D.C. NOV 12 2009 STEVEN M. LARIMORE CLERK U.S. DIST. CT. S.D. OF FLA. - W.P.B.]() + +### DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE, & INCORPORATED MEMORAN W (AS TO JANE DOE v. EPSTEIN, Case No. 08-CIV-80893 Marra/ + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, pursuant to Rules 26, 34, and 37, Fed.R.Civ.P. (2009), moves for entry of an order for the preservation of evidence directed to J. , a "partner" in Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, P.A. ("RRA"); Stuart Rosenfeldt as partner/shareholder and receiver of RRA; and Herbert Stettin, as Court Appointed Receiver for RRA. In support, Epstein states: + +1. This motion is being filed as an emergency motion due to the fact that RRA law firm's implosion has been developing over the last six-seven days associated with serious ethical and criminal implications. Various documents and information (written and electronic) could intentionally or inadvertently be destroyed by those who seek to + +Case No. 08-CIV-801189 + +Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence /I Incorporated Memorandum of Law + +Page 2 of 9 + +protect themselves from potential criminal or bar related violations. Epstein seeks only to preserve the status quo as to the relief sought. + +2. Relevant to this motion, Epstein is currently the named Defendant in three civil actions — one of which is filed in federal court (Jane Doe v. Epstein, Case No. 08-CIV-80893, U.S.D.C. S.D. Fla.), and two of which have been filed in state court in the 15th Judicial Circuit Court, Palm Beach County, State of Florida, (L.M. v. Esptein, Case No. 502008CA028051XXXXMB AB; E.W. v. Epstein, Case No. 502008CA028058XXXXMB AB), (hereinafter "civil actions"). + +3. In each of these civil actions, each of the Plaintiffs is represented by J. , William Berger and the RRA law firm, 1109 NE 2d Street, Hallendale Beach, Florida 33009-8515. Attorneys Alder and Peter Feaman have also appeared for the Plaintiffs. + +4. Based upon recent and ongoing media reports, statements of law enforcement personnel (FBI and others), and statements of attorneys for investors (as more fully detailed below herein), RRA and Scott Rothstein and possibly other attorneys and/or members, illegally and unethically solicited investors to invest monies in and/or to buy a financial interest in the potential outcome or settlement of pending or prospective lawsuits, or settled lawsuits and operated a Ponzi scheme. Based upon media reports and statements by persons with knowledge of this investment scam, RRA, by and through its attorneys and members, would seek monies from investors in exchange for a promise of a financial interest in a structured settlement or outcome of potential or pending legal actions, or to purchase an interest therein. + +Case No. 08-CIV-801189 + +Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence & Incorporated Memorandum of Law + +Page 3 of 9 + +5. As part of this scheme, RRA, by and through its attorneys and members, may have unethically and illegally: + +- A. Sold an interest in non-settled personal injury lawsuits (which are nonassignable and non-transferable) or sold a non-existent structured settlements (including those cases involving Epstein); +- B. Reached agreements to share attorneys fees with non-lawyers; +- C. Used investor money to pay plaintiffs "up front" money such that plaintiffs would refuse to settle; +- D. Conducted searches, wiretaps or other activities in violation of state or federal laws and Bar rules. + +6. Any such actions by RRA, through its attorneys and members, would be a violation of various Florida Bar Rules prohibiting the improper sharing of fees or costs, and various conflict of issues rules to name a few. This of course raises many questions, such as: how can any RRA attorney in these civil actions represent its client's interests and give unbiased legal counsel when an outside investor has been promised a financial interest in the outcome of the action?; if a plaintiff is receiving payments from investment monies while her action is ongoing, this clearly would impact the plaintiff's decision of whether or not to settle the current litigation; are the Plaintiffs motivated to, in essence, commit perjury or shade their testimony to gain the greatest return on the investment? In essence, if RRA was counseling its Plaintiffs to either knowingly or unknowingly participate in an improper and unethical investment scheme and the client was a participant, her case may be subject to dismissal. + +Case No. 08-CIV-801189 + +Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence & Incorporated Memorandum of Law + +Page 4 of 9 + +7. Miami attorney and developer, Alan Sakowitz, was quoted in a recent article as saying that he had met with Rothstein as a potential investor in August of 2009, but became suspicious. He stated "I was convinced it was all a Ponzi scheme and I notified the FBI in detail how Scotty was hiding behind a legitimate law firm to peddle fake investments." Attorney Sakowitz was also quoted as saying Rothstein had sophisticated eavesdropping equipment and former law enforcement officers who would sift through a potential defendants' garbage. + +8. Respected Ft. Lauderdale attorney William Scherer represents multiple Rothstein related investors. He indicated in an article that RRA/Rothstein had used the "Epstein Ploy ... as a showpiece as bait. That's the way he raised all the money. He would used legitimate cases as bait for luring investors into fictional cases. All the cases he allegedly structured were fictional. I don't believe there was a real one in there." + +9. Relevant to Epstein and these three civil actions, the evidence as detailed below herein is required to be preserved to ensure that any and all evidence of (a) improper or illegal payments to the three Plaintiffs, (b) the specific details of the investment scheme (who, what, when, how much), (c) all written agreements between investors, Rothstein, RRA and any Plaintiff, (d) investigator billings and services, and any other evidence relevant to the investment scheme which has been estimated to be in the range of \$500 million, according to media reports, is not destroyed by RRA and Stuart Rosenfeldt; Herbert Stettin, as Court Appointed Receiver, in each of their capacities as Records Custodian, employees, agents, associates, partners or other representative for RRA. + +Case No. 08-CIV-801189 + +Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence & Incorporated Memorandum of Law Page 5 of 9 + +10. Defendant has previously served Subpoenas Duces Tecum for Deposition, dated November 5, 2009, upon J. =. Esq.; Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, PA; Stuart Rosenfeldt, Esq., as Records Custodian For RRA; and Herbert Stettin, as the Court Appointed Receiver for RRA. The Subpoenas, which were filed in the state court action of L.M. v. Epstein, referenced above, are attached as Composite Exhibit A. Epstein believes RRA and the persons identified herein exercise sole custody and control over all the items identified in the subpoenas. The items identified are directly relevant to the impact of the described investment scheme on the civil actions in which Esptein is named as a Defendant. + +11. Defendant seeks an Order preserving the items specifically identified in the attached Subpoenas, Composite Exhibit A, and as well any investigators (firm employed or third party) billings and services documents and directing J. S Esq.; Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, PA; Stuart Rosenfeldt, Esq., as Records Custodian For RRA; and Herbert Stettin as Court Appointed Receiver as receiver for RRA to neither destroy, tamper with, or alter any evidence relevant to the investment scheme described above herein. A proposed order is attached as Exhibit B. + +12. When there is a good faith belief that evidence may be lost or destroyed, the Court has the authority to enter an order preserving such evidence. See AT&T Mobility LLC v. Dynamic Cellular Corp. 2008 WL 2139518 (S.D. Fla. May 7, 2008). Tracfone Wireless, Inc. v. Trading, Inc., 2008 WL 918243, at \*1 (N.D. Tex. Mar. 13, 2008) (finding "a legitimate concern for the continuing existence and maintenance of the integrity of the evidence in question absent an order preserving the evidence."). This + +Case No. 08-CIV-801189 + +Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence & Incorporated Memorandum of Law + +Page 6 of 9 + +evidence, most of which is in the sole custody, dominion and control of the persons and entity identified herein is critical and indispensable to Epstein's ability to fully defend the actions brought against him and to evaluate and analyze whether the Plaintiffs and their attorney have been acting in good faith and in truthful manner when it comes to discovery and attempts to resolve the actions; and also whether unethical, illegal, or fraudulent conduct has occurred which would preclude Plaintiffs from pursuing their claims, or whether Plaintiffs and their attorneys irresolvable conflicts. Epstein's concerns outweigh any potential harm to the Plaintiffs from the entry of an order preserving the evidence. There is no burden to the Plaintiffs as it the lawyers, law firm and receiver, identified herein that possess and control the items identified in the subpoenas. + +WHEREFORE, Epstein respectfully requests this Court enter an Order to preserve all evidence relevant to the investment scheme as described herein and to further prohibit the persons and RRA from tampering, destroying or altering any such evidence and to grant any additional relief the Court deems just and proper. + +# Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant in good faith conferred with Plaintiffs counsel, by telephone and Mr. does not oppose the entry of an order. + +Counsel for Defendant wrote and enclosed copies of this motion and proposed agreed orders to Kendall Coffey, Esq., counsel for Stuart A. Rosenfeldt, individually, and Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, P.A., Coffey Burlington 2699 South Bayshore Drive, Penthouse, Miami, Florida 33133, and Paul Singerman, Esq., counsel for Herbert + +Case No. 08-CIV-801189 + +Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence & Incorporated Memorandum of Law Page 7 of 9 + +Stettin, Esq. as Court Appointed Receiver, Berger Singerman, 2000 South Biscayne Blvd., Suite 1000, Miami, FL 33131. At the time this motion is being filed, the undersigned has not received a response from Mr. Coffey or Mr. Singerm + +> By: s/Robert D. Critton ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., :SQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com + +#### Certificate of Service + +IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 12th day of November 2009. + +Atrue copy was served by fax and U.S. Mail to Kendall Coffey, Esq., counsel for Stuart A. Rosenfeldt, individually, and Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, P.A., Coffey Burlington, 2699 South Bayshore Drive, Penthouse, Miami, Florida 33133, and Paul Singerman, Esq., counsel for Herbert Stettin, Esq. as Court Appointed Receiver, Berger Singerman, 2000 South Biscayne Blvd., Suite 1000, Miami, FL 33131. + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/Robert D. Critton ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit bciclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +moikee.bcIclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 303 Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/253-0164 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +Case No. 08-CIV-801189 + +Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence 8 Incorporated Memorandum of Law Page 8 of 9 + +#### Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAMOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm(asexabuseattornev.com + +ahorowitzAsexabuseattornev.corn + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08- + +80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, + +08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhwaihotmail.com + +Jack Sc rola, Esq. + +Jack P. M, Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx searcvlaw.com + +jphAsearcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassello law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidr , Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarciaabellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Pod hurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flag ler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberca,podhurst.com + +Case No. 08-CIV-801189 + +Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence & Incorporated Memorandum of Law + +Page 9 of 9 + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecfatorucereinhartlaw. com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +skuvinaleopoldkuvin.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +kezell(ftodhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jaqesqabellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +L.M. + +CASE NO. 502008CA028051XXXXMB AD + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM FOR DEPOSITION + +THE STATE OF FLORIDA + +TO: Stuart Rosenfeldt, Esq., as Records Custodian For Rothstein Rosenfeldt & Adler, P.A. 401 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite #1650 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear at Prose Court Reporting, 101 NE 3rd Avenue, Suite #1500, Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301, on November 19, 2009, 1:00 p.m., bring with you the following: + +See attached Exhibit A + +If you fail to appear, you may be in contempt of court. + +You are subpoenaed by the attorney whose name appears on this subpoena and unless excused from this subpoena by the attorney or the Court, you shall respond to this subpoena as directed. + +DATED this 5th day of November. 2009. + +ROBERT D. QRITTON, JR. (Attorneys f Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) Burman, Cri ton, Luttier & Coleman 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-842-2820 + +BY: + +ROBERT D CRITTON, JR., ESQ. For the Co rt + +> Nett pie EXHIBIT A + +# EXHIBIT A - RECORDS CUSTODIAN + +## DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS + +A. "Document" means any written or graphic matter or other means of preserving thought or expression, and all tangible things from which information can be processed or transcribed, including the originals and all non-identical copies, whether different from the original by reason of any notation made on such copy or otherwise, including, but not limited to, correspondence, memoranda, notes, messages, letters, purchase orders, telegrams, teletype, telefax bulletins, e-mails, electronic data, meetings, reports, or other communications, interoffice and intro-office telephone calls, diaries, chronological data, minutes, books, reports, charts, ledgers, invoices, worksheets, receipts, returns, trade information regarding fabric, carpets, samples etc..., computer printouts, prospectuses, financial statements, schedules, affidavits, contracts, cancelled checks, transcripts, statistics, surveys, magazine or newspaper articles, releases (and any and all drafts, alterations and modifications, changes and amendments of any of the foregoing), graphs or aural records or representations of any kind, including, without limitation, photographs, charts, graphs, microfiche, microfilm, video tape, recordings, motion pictures and electronic, mechanical or electric recordings or representations of any kind (including, without limitation, tapes, cassettes, discs and recordings), and including the file and file cover. + +The term "Document" also means any and all computer records, data, files, directories, electronic mail, and information of whatever kind whether printed out or stored on or retrievable from floppy diskette, compact diskette, magnetic tape, optical or magnetic-optical disk, computer memory, hard drive, zip drive, jaz drive, orb drive, microdisk, external memory stick, software, or any other fixed or removable storage media, including without limitation, all back-up copies, dormant or remnant files, and any and all miscellaneous files and/or file fragments, regardless of the media on which they reside and regardless of whether the data consists in an active file, deleted file, or file fragment. + +B. "Communications" means any oral or written statement, dialogue, colloquialism, discussion, conversation or agreement. + +C. "Plaintiff" means L.M. (LM. v. Jeffrey Epstein, Palm Beach County Case i4S02008CA0280SDOOCXMB), E.W. (E.W. v. Jeffrey Epstein, Palm Beach County Case ti502008CA0280582COO6118), Jane Doe/S.R. (Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, United States District Court Case #08-civ-80893-Marrae), and any other person who is or was represented by Rothstein Rosenfeldt & Adler that has not yet filed an action against Jeffrey Epstein, and any employee, agent or attorney for any plaintiff and/or any other person acting for or on behalf of any plaintiff, or under her authority and control. + +D. "RRA" means Rothstein Rosenfeldt & Adler, P.A. + +E. "Money" means any tangible thing of value. + +## REQUESTED ITEMS + +1. For the time period from January 1, 2008, to present, any and all documents reflecting communication between, or on behalf of RRA, its employees or agents or clients, and any third party regarding a purported settlement of any litigation between Jeffrey Epstein and RRA and/or its clients, or the financing of any litigation between Jeffrey Epstein and RRA and/or its clients, including but not limited to: + +- a. Representations that litigation with Jeffrey Epstein has been settled; +- b. Soliciting or receiving money in return for settlement funds alleged paid or to be paid on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein; +- c. Soliciting money to help finance ongoing litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; +- d. Soliciting money to be given to, or used on behalf of, the plaintiffs in litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; + +- e. Communication between third party investors or potential investors and the plaintiffs or their attorneys involved in litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; +- f. Payments made by RRA to or on behalf of any plaintiff + +2. Any and all fee agreements that exist or have existed between the following: + +- a. Any Plaintiff and J. associated +- b. Any Plaintiff and the law firm RRA or any entity with which he was + +3. All documents reflecting the sale, purchase or investment by any person or entity (company, corporation, LLC, etc...) in the prospective settlement or resolution of any plaintiffs case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +4. All emails data, correspondence, memos, or similar documents exchanged between J. and Scott W. Rothstein, and/or any attorney or representative of RRA and any investor or third party (person or entity) in any plaintiff's case where the investor provided financing to include, money and/or any other consideration to J. a, any plaintiff, or RRA with regard to the settlement or potential settlement of any plaintiffs case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +5. All agreements or documents of any nature which were entered into by an investor relating to any plaintiff's case with Jeffrey Epstein and any of the following: + +- a. Scott W. Rothstein +- b. J. +- c. RRA +- e. any entity formed by RRA or J. or Scott W. Rothstein to create investment opportunities for third party investors to invest in any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein + +6. All fee sharing agreements between J. RRA, or Scott W. Rothstein and/or any other attorney or investor relating to any aspect of any plaintiff's case. + +7. All investment packages, or information, settlement agreements, and any other documents made available to any investor by J. , RRA, Scott W. Rothstein or any of Scott W. Rothstein's entity to solicit "investors" for or in any plaintiffs case. + +8. The names and addresses of all individuals or entities who invested in any aspect of any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +9. All assignments or agreements between any investor (person or entity) and any plaintiff and/or her attorneys regarding any plaintiff's case (cause of action) against Jeffrey Epstein. + +10. All documents evidencing payment of any bill or costs in each plaintiffs case against Jeffrey Epstein, and the source(s) for said payments of any costs. + +S I.Siress releases, tapes of interviews, transcripts of interviews generated by J. or any existing or former RRA attorney, regarding any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +L.M. + +CASE NO. 502008CA028051XXXXMB AD + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM FOR DEPOSITION + +### THE STATE OF FLORIDA + +TO: Herbert Stettin, as receiver for Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, PA 6401 Hammock Drive Coral Gables, FL 33156-2105 + +YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear at Prose Court Reporting, 101 NE 3rd Avenue, Suite #1500, Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301, on November 19, 2009, 4:00 p.m., bring with you the following: + +See attached Exhibit A + +If you fail to appear, you may be in contempt of court. + +You are subpoenaed by the attorney whose name appears on this subpoena and unless excused from this subpoena by the attorney or the Court, you shall respond to this subpoena as directed. + +DATED this 5th day of November, 2009. + +BY: ROBERT . CRITTON, JR., ESQ. For the C urt + +ROBERT D. C ITTON, JR. (Attorneys for efendant Jeffrey Epstein) Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-842-2820 + +# EXHIBIT A - RECORDS CUSTODIAN + +### DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS + +A. "Document" means any written or graphic matter or other means of preserving thought or expression, and all tangible things from which information can be processed or transcribed, including the originals and all non-identical copies, whether different from the original by reason of any notation made on such copy or otherwise, including, but not limited to, correspondence, memoranda, notes, messages, letters, purchase orders, telegrams, teletype, telefax bulletins, e-mails, electronic data, meetings, reports, or other communications, interoffice and intra-office telephone calls, diaries, chronological data, minutes, books, reports, charts, ledgers, invoices, worksheets, receipts, returns, trade information regarding fabric, carpets, samples etc..., computer printouts, prospectuses, financial statements, schedules, affidavits, contracts, cancelled checks, transcripts, statistics, surveys, magazine or newspaper articles, releases (and any and all drafts, alterations and modifications, changes and amendments of any of the foregoing), graphs or aural records or representations of any kind, including, without limitation, photographs, charts, graphs, microfiche, microfilm, video tape, recordings, motion pictures and electronic, mechanical or electric recordings or representations of any kind (including, without limitation, tapes, cassettes, discs and recordings), and including the file and file cover. + +The term "Document" also means any and all computer records, data, files, directories, electronic mail, and information of whatever kind whether printed out or stored on or retrievable from floppy diskette, compact diskette, magnetic tape, optical or magnetic-optical disk, computer memory, hard drive, zip drive, jaz drive, orb drive, microdisk, external memory stick, software, or any other fixed or removable storage media, including without limitation, all back-up copies, dormant or remnant files, and any and all miscellaneous files and/or file fragments, regardless of the media on which they reside and regardless of whether the data consists in an active file, deleted file, or file fragment. + +B. "Communications" means any oral or written statement, dialogue, colloquialism, discussion, conversation or agreement. + +C. "Plaintiff' means L.M. (L.M. v. Jeffrey Epstein, Palm Beach County Case 14.502008CA028050000CMB), E.W. (E.W. v. Jeffrey Epstein, Palm Beach County Case #502008CA0280.58,000CMB), Jane Doe/S.R. (Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, United States District Court Case #08-civ-80893-Marraa), and any other person who is or was represented by Rothstein Rosenfeldt & Adler that has not yet filed an action against Jeffrey Epstein, and any employee, agent or attorney for any plaintiff and/or any other person acting for or on behalf of any plaintiff, or under her authority and control. + +D. "RRA" means Rothstein Rosenfeldt & Adler, P.A. + +E. "Money" means any tangible thing of value. + +# REQUESTED ITEMS + +1. For the time period from January 1, 2008, to present, any and all documents reflecting communication between, or on behalf of RRA, its employees or agents or clients, and any third party regarding a purported settlement of any litigation between Jeffrey Epstein and RRA and/or its clients, or the financing of any litigation between Jeffrey Epstein and RRA and/or its clients, including but not limited to: + +- a. Representations that litigation with Jeffrey Epstein has been settled; +- b. Soliciting or receiving money in return for settlement funds alleged paid or to be paid on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein; +- c. Soliciting money to help finance ongoing litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; +- d. Soliciting money to be given to, or used on behalf of, the plaintiffs in litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; + +- e. Communication between third party investors or potential investors and the plaintiffs or their attorneys involved in litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; +- f. Payments made by RRA to or on behalf of any plaintiff +- 2. Any and all fee agreements that exist or have existed between the following: + - a. Any Plaintiff and J.M or any entity with which he was associated + - b. Any Plaintiff and the law firm RRA + +3. All documents reflecting the sale, purchase or investment by any person or entity (company, corporation, LLC, etc...) in the prospective settlement or resolution of any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +4mill Mr, correspondence, memos, or similar documents exchanged between J. and Scott W. Rothstein, and/or any attorney or representative of RRA and any investor or third party (person or entity) in any plaintifts ie • or provided financing to include, money and/or any other consideration to J. , any plaintiff, or RRA with regard to the settlement or potential settlement of any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +5. All agreements or documents of any nature which were entered into by an investor relating to any plaintiff's case with Jeffrey Epstein and any of the following: + +- a. colt W. +- b. 31.1 +- c. RRA +- e. any entity formed by RRA oral J.M1 or Scott W. Rothstein to create investment opportunities for third party investors to invest in any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein + +6. All fee sharing agreements between= RRA, or Scott W. Rothstein and/or any other attorney or investor relating to any aspect of any plaintiff's case. + +7. All investment packages, or agreements, and any other documents made available to any investor by J. , RRA, Scott W. Rothstein or any of Scott W. Rothstein's entity to solicit "investors" for or in any plaintiff's case. + +8. The names and addresses of all individuals or entities who invested in any aspect of any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +9. All assignments or agreements between any investor (person or entity) and any plaintiff and/or her attorneys regarding any plaintiff's case (cause of action) against Jeffrey Epstein. + +10. All documents evidencing payment of any bill or costs in each plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein, and the source(s) for said payments of any costs. + +11. All releases, tapes of interviews, transcripts of interviews generated by ar any existing or former RRA attorney, regarding any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +L.M. + +CASE NO. 502008CA028051XXXXMB AD + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM FOR DEPOSITION + +# THE STATE OF FLORIDA + +TO: J. Esq. NI 2" tree Hallendale Beach, FL 33009-8515 -or-Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, PA 1109 NE 2nd Street Hallendate Beach, FL 33009-8515 + +YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear at Prose Court Reporting, 101 NE 3r° Avenue, Suite #1600, Ft Lauderdale, FL 33301, on November 19, 2009, 9:00 a.m., bring with you the following. + +See attached Exhibit A + +If you fail to appear, you may be in contempt of court. + +You are subpoenaed by the attorney whose name appears on this subpoena and unless excused from this subpoena by the attorney or the Court, you shall respond to this subpoena as directed. + +DATED this 5th day of November. 2009. + +BY: + +ROBERT D. QRITTON, JR. (Attorneys f Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-842-2820 + +ROBERT /D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. For the ourt + +#### EXHIBIT A + +## DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS + +A. "Document" means any written or graphic matter or other means of preserving thought or expression, and all tangible things from which information can be processed or transcribed, including the originals and all non-identical copies, whether different from the original by reason of any notation made on such copy or otherwise, including, but not limited to, correspondence, memoranda, notes, messages, letters, purchase orders, telegrams, teletype, telefax bulletins, e-mails, electronic data, meetings, reports, or other communications, interoffice and intra-office telephone calls, diaries, chronological data, minutes, books, reports, charts, ledgers, invoices, worksheets, receipts, returns, trade information regarding fabric, carpets, samples etc..., computer printouts, prospectuses, financial statements, schedules, affidavits, contracts, cancelled checks, transcripts, statistics, surveys, magazine or newspaper articles, releases (and any and all drafts, alterations and modifications, changes and amendments of any of the foregoing), graphs or aural records or representations of any kind, including, without limitation, photographs, charts, graphs, microfiche, microfilm, video tape, recordings, motion pictures and electronic, mechanical or electric recordings or representations of any kind (including, without limitation, tapes, cassettes, discs and recordings), and including the file and file cover. + +The term "Document" also means any and all computer records, data, files, directories, electronic mail, and information of whatever kind whether printed out or stored on or retrievable from floppy diskette, compact diskette, magnetic tape, optical or magnetic-optical disk, computer memory, hard drive, zip drive, jaz drive, orb drive, microdisk, external memory stick, software, or any other fixed or removable storage media, including without limitation, all back-up copies, dormant or remnant files, and any and all miscellaneous files and/or file fragments, regardless of the media on which they reside and regardless of whether the data consists in an active file, deleted file, or file fragment. + +B. "Communications" means any oral or written statement, dialogue, colloquialism, discussion, conversation or agreement. + +C. "Plaintiff' means L.M. (L.M. v. Jeffrey Epstein, Palm Beach County Case #502008CA028051.XYXXMB), E.W. (E.W. v. Jeffrey Epstein, Palm Beach County Case #502008CA028058)OOOCMB), Jane Doe/S.R. (Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, United States District Court Case 1108-civ-80893-Marra/..a, and any other person who is or was represented by Rothstein Rosenfeldt & Adler that has not yet filed an action against Jeffrey Epstein, and any employee, agent or attorney for any plaintiff and/or any other person acting for or on behalf of any plaintiff, or under her authority and control. + +D. "RRA" means Rothstein Rosenfeldt & Adler, P.A. + +E. "Money" means any tangible thing of value. + +# REOUESTED ITEMS + +1. For the time period from January I, 2008, to present, any and all documents reflecting communication between, or on behalf of RRA, its employees or agents or clients, and any third party regarding a purported settlement of any litigation between Jeffrey Epstein and RRA and/or its clients, or the financing of any litigation between Jeffrey Epstein and RRA and/or its clients, including but not limited to: + +- a. Representations that litigation with Jeffrey Epstein has been settled; +- b. Soliciting or receiving money in return for settlement funds alleged paid or to be paid on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein; +- c. Soliciting money to help finance ongoing litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; +- d. Soliciting money to be given to, or used on behalf of, the plaintiffs in litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; + +- e. Communication between third party investors or potential investors and the plaintiffs or their attorneys involved in litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; +- f. Payments made by RRA to or on behalf of any plaintiff + +2. Any and all fee agreements that exist or have existed between the following: + +- a. Any Plaintiff and J. or any entity with which he was associated +- b. Any Plaintiff and the law firm RRA + +3. All documents reflecting the sale, purchase or investment by any person or entity (company, corporation, LLC, etc...) in the prospective settlement or resolution of any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +4. All emails data, correspondence, memos, or similar documents exchanged between J. MI and Scott W. Rothstein, and/or any attorney or representative of RRA and any investor or third party (person or entity) in any plaintiffs ca t where the investor provided financing to include, money and/or any other consideration to J. M , any plaintiff, or RRA with regard to the settlement or potential settlement of any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +5. All agreements or documents of any nature which were entered into by an investor relating to any plaintiff's case with Jeffrey Epstein and any of the following: + +- a. Scott W. R thstein +- b. J. +- c. RRA +- e. any entity formed by RRA or J. or Scott W. Rothstein to create investment opportunities for third party investors to invest in any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein + +6. All fee sharing agreements between J. RRA, or Scott W. Rothstein and/or any other attorney or investor relating to any aspect of any plaintiff's case. + +7. All investment packages, inforiasetliagreements, and any other documents made available to any investor by J. , RRA, Scott W. Rothstein or any of Scott W. Rothstein's entity to solicit "investors" for or in any plaintiff's case. + +8. The names and addresses of all individuals or entities who invested in any aspect of any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +9. All assignments or agreements between any investor (person or entity) and any plaintiff and/or her attorneys regarding any plaintiff's case (cause of action) against Jeffrey Epstein. + +10. All documents evidencing payment of any bill or costs in each plaintiffs case against Jeffrey Epstein, and the source(s) for said payments of any costs. + +11. All releases, tapes of interviews, transcripts of interviews generated by J. or any existing or former RRA attorney, regarding any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA + +L.M. + +CASE NO. 502008CA028051)00C(MB AD + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM FOR DEPOSITION + +THE STATE OF FLORIDA + +TO: 1 11. 12" R. tree Esq. Hallandale Beach, FL 33009-8515 -or-Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, PA 1109 NE 2nd Street Hallandale Beach, FL 33009-8515 + +YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear at Prose Court Reporting, 101 NE 3r' Avenue, Suite #1500, Ft Lauderdale, FL 33301, on November 19, 2009, 9:00 a.m., bring with you the following: + +See attached Exhibit A + +If you fail to appear, you may be in contempt of court. + +You are subpoenaed by the attorney whose name appears on this subpoena and unless excused from this subpoena by the attorney or the Court, you shall respond to this subpoena as directed. + +DATED this 5th day of November. 2009. + +BY: + +ROBERT D. TTON, JR. (Attomeys f Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-842-2820 + +ROBERT/D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. For the ourt + +#### EXHIBIT A + +#### DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS + +A. "Document" means any written or graphic matter or other means of preserving thought or expression, and all tangible things from which information can be processed or transcribed, including the originals and all non-identical copies, whether different from the original by reason of any notation made on such copy or otherwise, including, but not limited to, correspondence, memoranda, notes, messages, letters, purchase orders, telegrams, teletype, telefax bulletins, e-mails, electronic data, meetings, reports, or other communications, interoffice and intra-office telephone calls, diaries, chronological data, minutes, books, reports, charts, ledgers, invoices, worksheets, receipts, returns, trade information regarding fabric, carpets, samples etc..., computer printouts, prospectuses, financial statements, schedules, affidavits, contracts, cancelled checks, transcripts, statistics, surveys, magazine or newspaper articles, releases (and any and all drafts, alterations and modifications, changes and amendments of any of the foregoing), graphs or aural records or representations of any kind, including, without limitation, photographs, charts, graphs, microfiche, microfilm, video tape, recordings, motion pictures and electronic, mechanical or electric recordings or representations of any kind (including, without limitation, tapes, cassettes, discs and recordings), and including the file and file cover. + +The term "Document" also means any and all computer records, data, files, directories, electronic mail, and information of whatever kind whether printed out or stored on or retrievable from floppy diskette, compact diskette, magnetic tape, optical or magnetic-optical disk, computer memory, hard drive, zip drive, jaz drive, orb drive, microdisk, external memory stick, software, or any other fixed or removable storage media, including without limitation, all back-up copies, dormant or remnant files, and any and all miscellaneous files and/or file fragments, regardless of the media on which they reside and regardless of whether the data consists in an active file, deleted file, or file fragment. + +B. "Communications" means any oral or written statement, dialogue, colloquialism, discussion, conversation or agreement. + +C. "Plaintiff" means L.M. (L.M. v. Jeffrey Epstein, Palm Beach County Case #502008CA028051XX)O(MB), E.W. (E.W. v. Jeffrey Epstein, Palm Beach County Case 11502008CA0280582OOOa1B), Jane Doe/S.R. (Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, United States District Court Case #08-civ-80893-Marra\_), and any other person who is or was represented by Rothstein Rosenfeldt & Adler that has not yet filed an action against Jeffrey Epstein, and any employee, agent or attorney for any plaintiff and/or any other person acting for or on behalf of any plaintiff, or under her authority and control. + +D. "RRA" means Rothstein Rosenfeldt & Adler, P.A. + +E. "Money" means any tangible thing of value. + +#### REOUESTED ITEMS + +1. For the time period from January 1, 2008, to present, any and all documents reflecting communication between, or on behalf of RRA, its employees or agents or clients, and any third party regarding a purported settlement of any litigation between Jeffrey Epstein and RRA and/or its clients, or the financing of any litigation between Jeffrey Epstein and RRA and/or its clients, including but not limited to: + +- a. Representations that litigation with Jeffrey Epstein has been settled; +- b. Soliciting or receiving money in return for settlement funds alleged paid or to be paid on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein; +- c. Soliciting money to help finance ongoing litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; +- d. Soliciting money to be given to, or used on behalf of, the plaintiffs in litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; + +- e. Communication between third party investors or potential investors and the plaintiffs or their attorneys involved in litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; +- 1. Payments made by RRA to or on behalf of any plaintiff + +2. Any and all fee agreements that exist or have existed between the following: + +- a. Any Plaintiff and J. associated +- b. Any Plaintiff and the law firm RRA or any entity with which he was + +3. All documents reflecting the sale, purchase or investment by any person or entity (company, corporation, LLC, etc...) in the prospective settlement or resolution of any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +4. All emails data, correspondence, memos, or similar documents exchanged between J. and Scott W. Rothstein, and/or any attorney or representative of RRA and any investor or third party (person or entity) in any plaintiff's case where the investor provided financing to include, money and/or any other consideration to J. any plaintiff, or RRA with regard to the settlement or potential settlement o any plaints s case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +5. All agreements or documents of any nature which were entered into by an investor relating to any plaintiff's case with Jeffrey Epstein and any of the following: + +- a. Scott W. Rothstein +- b. J. +- c. RRA +- e. any entity formed by RRA or J. or Scott W. Rothstein to create investment opportunities or t ird party investors to invest in any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein + +6. All fee sharing agreements between J. RRA, or Scott W. Rothstein and/or any other attorney or investor relating to any aspect of any plaintiff's case. + +7. All investment packages, information, settlement agreements, and any other documents made available to any investor by J. RRA, Scott W. Rothstein or any of Scott W. Rothstein's entity to solicit "investors" for or in any plaintiff's case. + +8. The names and addresses of all individuals or entities who invested in any aspect of any plaintiffs case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +9. All assignments or agreements between any investor (person or entity) and any plaintiff and/or her attorneys regarding any plaintiffs case (cause of action) against Jeffrey Epstein. + +10. All documents evidencing payment of any bill or costs in each plaintiffs case against Jeffrey Epstein, and the source(s) for said payments of any costs. + +1..ress releases, tapes of interviews, transcripts of interviews generated by J. or any existing or former RRA attorney, regarding any plaintiff's case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +### ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN's Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence, & Incorporated Memorandum of Law, dated November 12, 2009. It is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant's motion is GRANTED. + +Accordingly, J. , Stuart Rosenfeldt, as a partner/shareholder in RRA and Receiver of RRA and Herbert Stettin, as Court Appointed Receiver for RRA, are HEREBY ordered and directed to immediately preserve, and neither tamper with or alter the items of evidence identified in the Subpoenas Duces Tecum For Deposition directed to them and attached as Composite Exhibit A to Defendant's motion and also identified below herein absent further order of this Court: + +EXHIBITS + +Case No. 08-CIV-801189 + +Order on Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence + +Page 2 of 4 + +1. For the time period from January 1, 2008, to present, any and all documents reflecting communication between, or on behalf of RRA, its employees or agents or clients, and any third party regarding a purported settlement of any litigation between Jeffrey Epstein and RRA and/or its clients, or the financing of any litigation between Jeffrey Epstein and RRA and/or its clients, including but not limited to: + +- a. Representations that litigation with Jeffrey Epstein has been settled; +- b. Soliciting or receiving money in return for settlement funds alleged paid or to be paid on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein; +- c. Soliciting money to help finance ongoing litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; +- d. Soliciting money to be given to, or used on behalf of, the plaintiffs in litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; +- e. Communication between third party investors or potential investors and the plaintiffs or their attorneys involved in litigation against Jeffrey Epstein; +- f. Payments made by RRA to or on behalf of any plaintiff + +2. Any and all fee agreements that exist or have existed between the following: + +- a. Any Plaintiff and ME J. S or any entity with which he was associated +- b. Any Plaintiff and the law firm RRA + +3. All documents reflecting the sale, purchase or investment by any person or entity (company, corporation, LLC, etc...) in the prospective settlement or resolution of any plaintiffs case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +4. All ema c ence, memos, or similar documents exchanged between J. and Scott W. Rothstein, and/or any attorney or representative of RRA and any investor or third party (person or entity) in any plaintiffs case where the in rov ncing to include, money and/or any other consideration to J. , any plaintiff, or RRA with regard to the settlement or potential settlement of any plaintiffs case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +Case No. 08-CIV-801189 + +Order on Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence + +Page 3 of 4 + +5. All agreements or documents of any nature which were entered into by an investor relating to any plaintiffs case with Jeffrey Epstein and any of the following: + +- a. Scott W. Rothstein +- b. +- c. RA +- e. any entity formed by RRA or J. or Scott W. Rothstein to create investmell.portuni les or third party investors to invest in any plaintiffs case against Jeffrey Epstein + +6. All fee sharing agreements between J. MIMI RRA, or Scott W. Rothstein and/or any other attorney or investor re atinTEW aspect of any plaintiffs case. + +7. All investment packages, information, settlement areements, and any other documents made available to any investor by J. RRA, Scott W. Rothstein or any of Scott W. Rothstein's entity oso icit "investors" for or in any plaintiffs case. + +8. The names and addresses of all individuals or entities who invested in any aspect of any plaintiffs case against Jeffrey Epstein. + +9. All assignments or agreements between any investor (person or entity) and any plaintiff and/or her attorneys regarding any plaintiff's case (cause of action) against Jeffrey Epstein. + +10. All documents evidencing payment of any bill or costs in each plaintiffs case against Jeffrey Epstein, and the source(s) for said payments of any costs. + +11. All ress releases, tapes of interviews, transcripts of interviews generated by J. or any existing or former RRA attorney, regarding any plaint' scase against Jeffrey Epstein, and; + +12. All investigator (RRA employed and third parties) billing and invoice records reflecting services rendered/performed relating to any case involving Jeffrey Epstein. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of November, 2009. + +Case No. 08-CIV-801189 + +Order on Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence + +Page 4 of 4 + +Linnea R. + +United States Magistrate Judge + +Courtesy copies: + +The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra + +Counsel of Record + +Kendall Coffey, Esq. + +Coffey Burlington + +Office in the Grove, Penthouse + +2699 South Bayshore Drive + +Miami, FL 33133 + +Paul Singerman, Esq. + +Berger Singerman, + +2000 South Biscayne Blvd. + +Suite 1000 + +Miami, FL 33131 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748127/EFTA02748127.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748127/EFTA02748127.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8b801924f79eb6cd7fcecaeb163832b74e3241af --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748127/EFTA02748127.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1882 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748127.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 33, + "chars": 49702, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.65, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 195.57, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 402.0281677246094, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 402.0281677246094, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 195.57, + 97.19999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR ORDER FOR THE \nPRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE, & INCORPORATED MEMORAN W\n(AS TO JANE DOE v. EPSTEIN, Case No. 08-CIV-80893 Marra/", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 98.39999999999999, + 370.98 + ], + [ + 507.375, + 370.98 + ], + [ + 507.375, + 413.39715576171875 + ], + [ + 98.39999999999999, + 413.39715576171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 158.055, + 537.0300000000001 + ], + [ + 456.40716552734375, + 537.0300000000001 + ], + [ + 456.40716552734375, + 554.6735229492188 + ], + [ + 158.055, + 554.6735229492188 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.07999999999998, + 318.33 + ], + [ + 366.31158447265625, + 318.33 + ], + [ + 366.31158447265625, + 331.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 241.07999999999998, + 331.28999999999996 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.385, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 358.0609130859375, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 358.0609130859375, + 139.32 + ], + [ + 245.385, + 139.32 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM FOR DEPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.64999999999998, + 255.05029296875 + ], + [ + 433.0091552734375, + 255.05029296875 + ], + [ + 433.0091552734375, + 269.18701171875 + ], + [ + 190.64999999999998, + 269.18701171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A - RECORDS CUSTODIAN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.25500000000002, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 416.41448974609375, + 87.48 + ], + [ + 416.41448974609375, + 102.35302734375 + ], + [ + 207.25500000000002, + 102.35302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 210.32999999999998, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 414.1219787597656, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 414.1219787597656, + 128.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 210.32999999999998, + 128.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REQUESTED ITEMS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.38, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 371.10089111328125, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 371.10089111328125, + 472.3535461425781 + ], + [ + 253.38, + 472.3535461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM FOR DEPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.64999999999998, + 250.55029296875 + ], + [ + 431.5091552734375, + 250.55029296875 + ], + [ + 431.5091552734375, + 264.68701171875 + ], + [ + 190.64999999999998, + 264.68701171875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "THE STATE OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.255, + 275.40000000000003 + ], + [ + 215.2220458984375, + 275.40000000000003 + ], + [ + 215.2220458984375, + 289.4470520019531 + ], + [ + 84.255, + 289.4470520019531 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A - RECORDS CUSTODIAN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.25500000000002, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 415.2471618652344, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 415.2471618652344, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 207.25500000000002, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 210.32999999999998, + 112.05889892578125 + ], + [ + 412.2584228515625, + 112.05889892578125 + ], + [ + 412.2584228515625, + 126.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 210.32999999999998, + 126.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REQUESTED ITEMS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.38, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 371.47088623046875, + 454.4100000000001 + ], + [ + 371.47088623046875, + 469.7335510253906 + ], + [ + 253.38, + 469.7335510253906 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM FOR DEPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.495, + 261.63 + ], + [ + 435.1249084472656, + 261.63 + ], + [ + 435.1249084472656, + 276.9405517578125 + ], + [ + 192.495, + 276.9405517578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "THE STATE OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 85.485, + 286.74 + ], + [ + 218.87625122070312, + 286.74 + ], + [ + 218.87625122070312, + 301.7005615234375 + ], + [ + 85.485, + 301.7005615234375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 279.21000000000004, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 347.3321533203125, + 89.1 + ], + [ + 347.3321533203125, + 102.87 + ], + [ + 279.21000000000004, + 102.87 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 20, + "polygon": [ + [ + 211.56, + 115.01999999999998 + ], + [ + 415.7655944824219, + 115.01999999999998 + ], + [ + 415.7655944824219, + 129.73419189453125 + ], + [ + 211.56, + 129.73419189453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REOUESTED ITEMS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 21, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.84, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 374.48089599609375, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 374.48089599609375, + 474.2235412597656 + ], + [ + 255.84, + 474.2235412597656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM FOR DEPOSITION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 24, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.495, + 260.82 + ], + [ + 436.515380859375, + 260.82 + ], + [ + 436.515380859375, + 276.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 192.495, + 276.21000000000004 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EXHIBIT A", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 25, + "polygon": [ + [ + 278.595, + 89.91 + ], + [ + 345.8826904296875, + 89.91 + ], + [ + 345.8826904296875, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 278.595, + 103.68 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 25, + "polygon": [ + [ + 210.94500000000005, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 414.2885437011719, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 414.2885437011719, + 129.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 210.94500000000005, + 129.60000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REOUESTED ITEMS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 26, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.22500000000002, + 456.8399999999999 + ], + [ + 371.59747314453125, + 456.8399999999999 + ], + [ + 371.59747314453125, + 470.6099999999999 + ], + [ + 255.22500000000002, + 470.6099999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 29, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.875, + 72.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 408.6453552246094, + 72.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 408.6453552246094, + 101.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 199.875, + 101.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION \nFOR ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 29, + "polygon": [ + [ + 145.755, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 463.8819885253906, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 463.8819885253906, + 389.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 145.755, + 389.79998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 237 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Form", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 298 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 357 + ], + [ + "Line", + 79 + ], + [ + "Text", + 74 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 176 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 35 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 73 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 81 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 16 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 80 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 328 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 16 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 235 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 326 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 350 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 75 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 14 + ], + [ + "Line", + 7 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 336 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748127" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748160/EFTA02748160.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748160/EFTA02748160.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..23885a54df0f809a7278772b8ac5de68bfaea3f6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748160/EFTA02748160.md @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MA.RRA/M. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. Related Cases: 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## JOINT AGREED PROTECTIVE ORDER + +Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-8, Jane Doe and (CMA) ("Plaintiffs") and their counsel and Defendant and his counsel, in the above-styled cases have agreed to the entry of this Protective Order pursuant to United States Magistrate Judge Linnea R. October 28th, 2009 Order. [DE 377]. + +1. As to the tax returns and supporting documentation to be produced by Plaintiffs, the parties have agreed that information contained in such documents may be disclosed, summarized, described or otherwise communicated or made available in whole or in part only to the following persons: (a) Defendant, attorneys for the Defendant, and regular employees of such attorneys assisting in the conduct of this action, and outside photocopying and document services companies, to use only for purposes of this litigation; (b) retained experts assisting counsel for Defendant in this action, and (c) used in discovery including depositions of witnesses + +tr + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein Page 2 + +and referenced in court filings to the extent it is relevant and necessary. To the extent the information has been obtained through other sources, this order shall not apply. + +2. As to any documents which were to be produced by a Plaintiff depicting Plaintiff in photos, movies, DVDs, videotapes or similar type of visual documents in which she performs or has performed sexual acts or simulated sex acts, the parties have agreed that the actual documents should not be produced and in place thereof, Plaintiff shall provide a written description, to include identifying the type of documents, the names and addresses of all individuals depicted, date(s) of documents, the acts depicted, location of depiction, and the person(s) who made the document. Because the actual documents are not to be produced, the parties have agreed that information contained in such disclosures may be disclosed, summarized, described or otherwise communicated or made available in whole or in part only to the following persons: (a) Defendant, attorneys for the Defendant, and regular employees of such attorneys assisting in the conduct of this action, and outside photocopying and document services companies, to use only for purposes of this litigation; (b) retained experts assisting counsel for Defendant in this action, and (c) used in discovery including depositions of witnesses and referenced in court filings to the extent it is relevant and necessary. To the extent the information has been obtained through other sources, this order shall not apply. + +3. As to any documents that are produced in response to Request for Production nos. 10, 11, 17 and 18 and any answers in response to Interrogatory nos. 18, 19, 20, and 21, the parties have agreed that information contained in such documents or answers may be disclosed, summarized, described or otherwise communicated or made available in whole or in part only to the following persons: (a) Defendant, attorneys for the Defendant, and regular employees of Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein Page 3 + +such attorneys assisting in the conduct of this action, and outside photocopying and document services companies, to use only for purposes of this litigation; (b) retained experts assisting counsel for Defendant in this action, and (c) used in discovery including depositions of witnesses and referenced in court filings to the extent it is relevant and necessary. To the extent the information has been obtained through other sources, this order shall not apply. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of November, 2009. + +Linnea R. + +United States Magistrate Judge + +Courtesy copies: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748160/EFTA02748160.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748160/EFTA02748160.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5654b9cedd05a6baa7c6cd3ae3d61f9d672b8a65 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748160/EFTA02748160.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,177 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748160.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3941, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.72, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.78400000000002, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 397.7526550292969, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 397.7526550292969, + 105.3480224609375 + ], + [ + 197.78400000000002, + 105.3480224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JOINT AGREED PROTECTIVE ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.93, + 353.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 412.5233459472656, + 353.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 412.5233459472656, + 369.72802734375 + ], + [ + 186.93, + 369.72802734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748160" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748163/EFTA02748163.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748163/EFTA02748163.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e8f01e96463245eeab09cb01682682ddef285256 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748163/EFTA02748163.md @@ -0,0 +1,195 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## NOTICE OF FILING JOINT AGREED PROTECTIVE ORDER + +Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-8, Jane Doe and (CMA) and their counsel and Defendant Jeffrey Epstein and his counsel, in the above-styled cases hereby give Notice of Filing their Joint Agreed Protective Order . In support thereof : + +- 1. Joint Agreed Protective Order in compliance with United States Magistrate Judge Linnea October 28t°, 2009 Order [DE 377] + +By: Robert D Critton, Jr. Florida = ar No. 224162 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 13th day of November , 2009 + +Respectfully sub + +By: ROBERT D. C i ON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar N 224162 rcrit@bc1claw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bc1claw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAJ. + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 + +Brad M, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm®sexabuseattomev.com + +ahorowitz®sexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isx®searcylaw.com + +inlasearcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff; CM.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brucereinhartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +bedwards®rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +casselln®law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. =, Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarciaalellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsbergapodhurst.com + +kezell®podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesnAbellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748163/EFTA02748163.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748163/EFTA02748163.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..110859aa34bf786c6d1f77f3fe6e99717384fe35 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748163/EFTA02748163.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,235 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748163.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3614, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.15, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.151, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 402.80804443359375, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 402.80804443359375, + 97.8580322265625 + ], + [ + 191.151, + 97.8580322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF FILING JOINT AGREED PROTECTIVE ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.23299999999999, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 468.0133361816406, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 468.0133361816406, + 376.1080322265625 + ], + [ + 127.23299999999999, + 376.1080322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.20000000000005, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 353.66790771484375, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 353.66790771484375, + 127.8580322265625 + ], + [ + 241.20000000000005, + 127.8580322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 241.80300000000003, + 543.51 + ], + [ + 353.261474609375, + 543.51 + ], + [ + 353.261474609375, + 558.7380218505859 + ], + [ + 241.80300000000003, + 558.7380218505859 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 79 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 159 + ], + [ + "Line", + 79 + ], + [ + "Text", + 76 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748163" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748166/EFTA02748166.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748166/EFTA02748166.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3f1d026da4bc73e55004ea5c122764a1e02e6094 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748166/EFTA02748166.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +/ + +## ORDER + +Upon Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery, and good cause being shown, it is hereby + +ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs shall have an enlargement of until November 23, 2009, to file their Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this day of , 2009. + +DISTRICT COURT JUDGE \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748166/EFTA02748166.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748166/EFTA02748166.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2297a8fda3558c38d944f3d6caf0172ef70f2fdc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748166/EFTA02748166.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748166.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 841, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.8, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 330.7633361816406, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 330.7633361816406, + 403.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 403.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748166" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748167/EFTA02748167.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748167/EFTA02748167.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..be0133809b6f91b62853a83abdc0f9e7e3331e93 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748167/EFTA02748167.md @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +/ + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REOUESTS FOR NET WORTH DISCOVERY + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does Nos. 2-8, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby file this Unopposed Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery, and state as follows: + +- 1. On November 2, 2009 Defendant Jeffrey Epstein filed a Response to Jane Does Nos. 2-8 Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery. +- 2. Plaintiffs seek an enlargement of time until November 23, 2009, to file a Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery. This enlargement of time is necessary due to demand on Plaintiffs' + +counsel in other cases and matters. Additionally, the additional time is requested will allow Plaintiffs to adequately address the issues raised in Defendants' Response. + +- 3. This Motion seeks a brief enlargement of lime and is not brought for purposes of undue delay. +- 4. Plaintiffs' counsel has conferred with Defendant's counsel regarding this request for enlargement of time, and he has no objection to this request. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, Jane Does Nos. 2-8, respectfully request an Order granting an enlargement of time until November 23, 2009, to file Plaintiffs' Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery. + +Dated: November 13, 2009. Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattomey.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plainttffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on November 13, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748167/EFTA02748167.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748167/EFTA02748167.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e377200096f7bfb2f807829b2a02faa63c8d3617 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748167/EFTA02748167.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,281 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748167.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3183, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.89, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.63200000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 205.63200000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NOS. 2-8' UNOPPOSED MOTION \nFOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE REPLY \nMEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL \nRESPONSES TO REOUESTS FOR NET WORTH DISCOVERY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 134.02800000000002, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 478.52203369140625, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 478.52203369140625, + 445.10302734375 + ], + [ + 134.02800000000002, + 445.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 85.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 156.67200000000003, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748167" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748171/EFTA02748171.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748171/EFTA02748171.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..acddf55087397c0e48da7ab92bce80523e21ae84 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748171/EFTA02748171.md @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order of the Preservation of Evidence (D.E. #405). + +The Court has reviewed the above-referenced Motion, which has been styled an "Emergency" by counsel for Epstein, and agrees that based upon the substance of the pleading and the nature of the relief sought, the Motion has been properly filed on an emergency basis. By the Motion, Epstein moves for an order requiring the preservation of all evidence relevant to the investment scheme referenced in the Motion and further prohibiting the individuals at the RRA Law Firm from tampering, destroying or altering any such evidence. Of the three attorneys contacted with respect to their position on the motion and as to whether they agree to the relief sought or intend to file a response in opposition, only one attorney, Mr. could definitively state that he had no + +Paul Mr. involved, attorneys two other The Motion. the in sought relief the to opposition in 2009, 16, November Monday, until requested have Coffee, Kendall Mr. and Singerman in response a file to or sought, relief the to -objection non their either state to which whatever to agree will he that stated has Coffee Kendall Mr. Motion. the to opposition issue. the on Singerman Mr. by taken ultimately position Court the as time such until quo status the maintain to effort an in and Accordingly, + +hereby, is it Motion, the on rules + +Evidence of Preservation the for Motion said that ADJUDGED AND ORDERED + +2009, 17, November Tuesday, until BASIS TEMPORARY A ON GRANTED is 405) # (D.E. Motion. the on order final a issue shall Court the point which at Palm West at in 2009, 13, November this ORDERED AND DONE + +Florida. Beach, + +Ason— i r + +ON JO R. LINNEA JUDGE MAGISTRATE S ST UNITED + +Marra A. Kenneth Honorable The CC: Record of Counsel All \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748171/EFTA02748171.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748171/EFTA02748171.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..02784f94f29aa31653775b3983ebf09d651424dd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748171/EFTA02748171.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,139 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748171.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2139, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.73, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 406.6453857421875, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 406.6453857421875, + 99.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 99.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 282.13200000000006, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 390.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 282.13200000000006, + 390.43353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748171" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748173/EFTA02748173.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748173/EFTA02748173.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2b42bf3c3cef4b4abff75886f61872350b7d8a67 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748173/EFTA02748173.md @@ -0,0 +1,118 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION www.flsd.uscourts.gov + +JANE DOE #2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRS + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFERY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER, P.A.'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE [D.E.405] + +The Honorable Herbert Stettin ("Stettin"), the State Court appointedl receiver ("Receiver") and Chief Restructuring Officer ("CRO") of Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, P.A.'s ("RRA"), hereby responds to the Defendant's Emergency Motion For Order For The Preservation of Evidence [D.E.405], and states: + +1. Certain lawyers previously employed by RRA represent the Plaintiff in this matter. As has been well documented in the media, towards the end of October of this year, RRA was rocked by allegations of financial scandal. As a result of these allegations, on November 2, 2009, Stuart A. Rosenfeldt ("Rosenfeldt"),on.behallot himselfand RRA,.filectalawsuit against his partner Scott W. Rothstein ("Rothstein"), alleging multiple wrongful acts on the part of Rothstein, RRA's former Chief Executive Officer (the "Receivership Action") in the Circuit Court of Broward County. + +On November 4, 2009, Judge Streitfeld appointed Stettin as the Receiver of RRA. Broward County Case No. 09- 059301. + +2. On November 4, 2009, The Honorable Jeffrey Streitfeld, presiding over the Receivership Action: (a) removed Rothstein as the Chief Executive Officer, and (b) appointed Stettin as the Receiver for RRA. Promptly thereafter, Stettin assumed stewardship of RRA and since then, has handled a very broad set of problems, virtually of which have been on an emergency basis, including this matter. + +3. On November 11, 2009, Rosenfeldt, as the sole officer and director of RRA, executed a resolution appointing Stettin as the CRO of RRA and delegated to Stettin all operational and managerial control over RRA. This effectively removed Rosenfeldt from all managerial roles at RRA and Stettin, as CRO, is now the only executive of RRA. + +4. As it pertains to this matter, since his appointment in accordance with his duties as Receiver and as CRO, Stettin has moved quickly and carefully to secure all assets and records of RRA. In the midst of doing so however, the Department of Justice executed search warrants on the offices of RRA, removing, among things, in excess of forty (40) boxes of documents. It is believed the Department of Justice also sequestered about thirteen (13) boxes of documents related to this case. This action occurred before Stettin could complete his inventory and accounting of the vastly disorganized office and record keeping systems of RRA. + +5. Stettin assures both the Defendant as well as this Court that he understands fully the gravity of document and evidence\_preservation. It is his charge.\_Stettin,has\_and\_intends\_to\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_. continue to fully comply with his fiduciary duties both as Receiver and now as CRO of an alleged bankruptcy debtor. In fact, security at the firm's computer system and its documents is one of his foremost present concerns and tasks. + +6. The Bankruptcy Code (11 U.S.C. §101 et seq.), requires that a debtor in possession behave and function with the same types of responsibilities as a trustee. 11 U.S.C. + +§1107. RRA is currently an alleged debtor in possession and Stettin is executing on the fiduciary duties that are imposed upon him as the executive of RRA. In light of the foregoing, Stettin has no objection to the entry of an order that is consistent with his fiduciary obligations. Notwithstanding, to the extent the Defendant wishes for Stettin to produce documents or sit for a deposition on November 19, 2009, Stettin respectfully requests that this Court extend that date for at least 45 days, so that he may attend to the continuing critical, pressing needs of stabilizing RRA and resolving the outstanding issues that occur when a law firm of 150 employees suddenly implodes overnight. + +WHEREFORE, Herbert Stettin respectfully requests that: (1) any order entered conform with his statutorily imposed duties; (2) any deposition of Stettin be postponed for at least 45 days; and (3) granting such other relief as the Court deems just and proper. + +Dated: November 16, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +BERGER SINGERMAN, P.A. Proposed Attorneys for Alleged Debtor 350 East Broward Boulevard, 10ih Floor Telephone: (954) 525-9900 Facsimile: (954) 523-2872 + +By: s/ Charles H. Lichtman + +Charles H. Lichtman + +clichtman@bcrgersingerman.com + +Direct Dial: (954) 712-5138 + +Florida Bar No. 501050 + +Isaac Marcushamer + +imarcushamer@bergersingerman.com + +Florida Bar No. 0060373 + +## Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 §smesexabuseattorney.com ahorowitzAsexabuseattornev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08- 80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhwahotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. Esq. Searcy enney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsxesearcvlaw.com jph@searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Brad , Esq. RothsMenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwardsarra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellpelaw.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. , Esq. ili Lail., P.A. atura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F + +isidrooarciaebellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsberoftoodhurst.com + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 +Fax: 561-515-2610 +[skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com](mailto:skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-08804* + +Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esq. +Michael J. Pike, Esq. +Burman Critton, Luttier & Coleman +303 BANYAN Boulevard, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 +Tel.: 561-842-2820 +Fax.: 561-253-0164 +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748173/EFTA02748173.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748173/EFTA02748173.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..02f322e86469aa5d012dae40c072a8b6c17746cb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748173/EFTA02748173.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,268 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748173.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 7460, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.28, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA \nWEST PALM BEACH DIVISION \nwww.flsd.uscourts.gov", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 202.95000000000002, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.0939025878906, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.0939025878906, + 139.728515625 + ], + [ + 202.95000000000002, + 139.728515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER, P.A.'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S \nEMERGENCY MOTION FOR ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE \n[D.E.405]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.87, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 523.7296752929688, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 523.7296752929688, + 336.9785461425781 + ], + [ + 84.87, + 336.9785461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 187.575, + 139.32 + ], + [ + 408.97499999999997, + 139.32 + ], + [ + 408.97499999999997, + 178.5714111328125 + ], + [ + 187.575, + 178.5714111328125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 318 + ], + [ + "Line", + 75 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748173" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748178/EFTA02748178.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748178/EFTA02748178.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e42b56990b094fd1ab9c499e793b2c8aeea4ad09 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748178/EFTA02748178.md @@ -0,0 +1,362 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOE NO. 4'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO THE SCOPE OF INQUIRY AT THE DEPOSITIONS OF JANE DOE NO. 4'S PARENTS AND INCORPORATED MOTION TO STRIKE + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein"), submits this Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's, Jane Doe No. 4, Motion for Protective Order As to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe No. 4's Parents (DE #148) ("Motion"), and incorporated Motion to Strike, and states: + +1. In her Motion (DE #148),l Jane Doe No. 4 asks the Court to enter a protective order prohibiting counsel for Epstein from asking her parents leading questions regarding Jane Doe No. 4's three abortions and limiting counsel "to asking only open-ended questions on the subject of abortion, such as whether they know if Jane Doe No. 4 has ever had an abortion." See + +Jane Doe No. 4's Motion was improperly filed as DE #148 in case no. 08-80380 in violation of the Court's August II, 2009 Order (DE #263), which provides, "[h]ereinafter, all motions and other court filings that relate to discovery ... shall be styled consistent with styling of this Order, and shall be FILED ONLY in Jane Do No. 2 v. Epstein, case no. 08-80119...." The instant Motion is clearly related to discovery and therefore should have been filed in case no. 08-80119. + +Jane Dot No. 4 v. Epstein + +Case No. 08CIV-80119-MARRADIRIN + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to ant oe o. 4's Motion Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions ofJane Doe + +No.4 s Parents + +Page 2 of 8 + +DE #148 Ad Damnum Clause. In essence, Jane Doe No. 4 wants this Court to tell Epstein's counsel "how" it must ask question to Jane Doe No. 4's parents who we can only speculate will be somewhat favorable to her. Does Jane Doe No. 4 want all questions to be scripted? + +2. First, Jane Doe No. 4's Motion is premature as Epstein has not yet set the depositions of Jane Doe No. 4's parents. + +3. Next, this is yet another attempt by Plaintiff to control discovery and insulate herself and her witnesses by asking the Court to disallow discovery of information directly relevant and material to her damage claims on the basis that it may be "embarrassing" or "upsetting" to her parents. See DE #148 ¶6. However, the Court has ruled on a number of these issues as follows: + +- a. Plaintiffs' attorneys sought to preclude the Epstein from serving third party subpoenas and allowing only Plaintiffs' counsel to obtain depositions and those materials and "filter them" to defense counsel. That motion was denied, and the court tailored a method such that the Epstein could obtain the records directly. See DE #253. +- b. Plaintiff's counsel sought to limit the s chological psychiatric examination in C.M.A. v. Jeffrey Epstein and (Case No. 08-CIV-80811), as to time, subject matter and scope. However, agistrate entered an order denying the requested restrictions. See DE # 289. +- c. Many Plaintiffs' objected to discovery regarding current and past employment (although they are seeking loss of income, both in past and future). The Court granted Epstein's Motions to Compel related to Plaintiffs' tax returns and documents related to Plaintiffs'eamings. See DE #377. +- d. All Plaintiffs objected to discovery of their prior sexual history, consensual and forced as being irrelevant. The Court granted Epstein's Motions to Compel information related to Plaintiffs' past sexual history. See DE # 377. + +4. Jane Doe No. 4 is seeking to recover millions of dollars in damages for "confusion, shame, humiliation and embarrassment," "severe psychological and emotional Jane Doe No, 4 v. Epstein + +Case No. 08-CIV-8011944ARRal + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion Order as to the Scope of inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe + +No.4 's Parents + +Page 3 of 8 + +injuries," "severe permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages" and "severe mental anguish and pain." See Second Amend. Compl. (DE #62)115, 22, 28. Yet she wants to impermissibly narrow the scope of permissible discovery to serve her own personal interests, namely, to continue to hide the fact she had three abortions from her parents. + +5. As with many of the Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No. 4 has had a complicated and eventful past history including, but not limited to: (1) drug use which includes cocaine, marijuana, ecstasy and xanax (see 10/27/09 Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 ["Jane Doe No. 4 Depo"] at 215-17); (2) repeated instances of domestic violence and physical and verbal abuse by her former boyfriend, Preston Vinyard, in which he bit her finger, spit on her, poured beer on her and called her degrading names such as "whore," "slut," and "cunt" L at 29-30; 296-298); (3) three pregnancies with Vinyard that ended in three abortions, which she failed to disclose to various physicians, including her own psychiatric expert, Dr. Kliman, and which she admitted caused her more emotional trauma than her encounters with Mr. Epstein GI at 299-306); and (4) arrests, including a recent arrest in Jupiter, Florida in October 2009 for domestic violence where she attacked, hit and bit her current boyfriend (a at 25-26; 339; 346-48). However, Jane Doe No. 4 never sought treatment from a mental health professional until she was sent to Dr. Kliman by her attorneys after this suit was filed OA at 242). + +6. Moreover, while Jane Doe No. 4 was seeing Mr. Epstein (both before and after she turned 18), which she testified was between 30 and 50 times (lit at 77-78), including her freshman year of college at University (id. at 74), she made a sex tape depicting vaginal and oral sex with her boyfriend which she voluntarily showed to Mr. Epstein (id• at 226-230). Jane Doe No. 4 v. EDS-teal + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to No. 4S Motion Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe + +No.4's Parents + +Page 4 of 8 + +She also admitted to lying to the police (id. at 12-13) and lying to physicians, including her own expert, Dr. Kliman (a at 306). + +7. On the other hand, Jane Doe No. 4 testified that all contact and conduct with Epstein was voluntary and consensual; she did not have intercourse, oral or anal sex with Epstein nor did she touch his genitalia; and at no time did Epstein ever restrain her or use physical force. See Jane Doe No. 4 Depo at 78-79; 168-70; 361. + +8. Jane Doe No. 4's parents are important witnesses in that they likely have information about her psychological and emotional condition pre-Epstein, during the time she was seeing Epstein, and post-Epstein. + +9. Jane Doe No. 4 argues "since [her parents] are unaware of the abortions, neither will be able to provide any information about when the procedures occurred, her mental state at the time of each procedure, whether any complications arose, or any other information that could reasonably be calculated to lead to admissible evidence.... [Epstein's] counsel intends to inquire into these matters solely for the purpose of harassing, embarrassing, and oppressing Jane Doe No. 4." See DE #148 + +10. However, questioning Jane Doe No. 4's parents about her abortions is, in fact, directly relevant to her claim of damage in this case. In her October 27, 2009 deposition, Jane Doe testified that having three abortions was more traumatic that her encounters with Mr. Epstein. See Jane Doe No. 4 Depo at 304-05. + +11. Jane Doe No. 4's parents are likely aware of the allegations in this case (or they will be when they are deposed). That Jane Doe No. 4 is comfortable with her parents knowing about allegations of sexual abuse, and physical and verbal abuse by Preston Vinyard, while she Jam Doe No. 4 v. Eastejg + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA. + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. ses Motion Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe + +No.4 's Parents + +Page 5 of 8 + +was a teenager but not comfortable with them knowing about three abortions is telling as to the psychological impact the abortions had on Jane Doe No. 4. + +12. It is axiomatic that the discovery rules were intended to promote the search for truth, which is the heart of our judicial system. It follows that full knowledge of relevant facts will aid in the search for truth. The converse is also true — withholding relevant facts will obstruct the search for truth. + +13. Permitting Jane Doe No. 4's parents to be deposed regarding her alleged emotional damages without them knowing the full extent of traumatic events that may have caused or contributed to her damages could certainly skew their testimony. For example, if Jane Doe No. 4's parents are oblivious to her having three abortions, they may incorrectly attribute her alleged emotional distress to Mr. Epstein when, in fact, it may very well have been caused by the multiple abortions. + +14. Indeed, the Court denied Plaintiff's, C.M.A., Motion for Protective Order (Order at DE #289) requesting the Court limit her independent psychological/psychiatric medical examination to six hours and to prohibit repeated questions regarding Plaintiffs medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history and substance abuse history. In its Order, the Court noted that Plaintiff is seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages and that no authority was uncovered to support the "novel positions that a Plaintiff who puts her mental, emotional and psychiatric state at issue can place a limitation on the number of times defense counsel ... can inquire into areas relevant to these issues where the subject matter involved is `highly personal,' embarrassing,"sensitive,' or otherwise `humiliating.'" See DE #289 at 3. + +Jane Doe No. 4 v. Eckstein + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/1 + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. Cs Motion Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions ofJane Doe + +No.4 's Parents + +Page 6 of 8 + +15. The same reasoning applies to the instant Motion. Jane Doe No. 4 cites no authority for the proposition that Epstein should be precluded from asking her parents leading questions regarding her three abortions, events that admittedly had a substantial and traumatic impact on her. + +16. To the contrary, it is clearly permissible for Epstein's counsel to ask leading questions of Jane Doe No. 4's parents. Rule 30(c)(1), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, provides that "[t]he examination and cross-examination of a deponent proceed as they would at trial under the Federal Rules of Evidence, except Rules 103 and 615." Rule 611(c), Federal Rules of Evidence, provides in pertinent part, "[w]hen a party calls ... a witness identified with an adverse party, interrogation may be by leading questions." + +17. Jane Doe No. 4's parents certainly constitute "witness[es) identified with an adverse party" and therefore Epstein may ask leading questions in their depositions. + +18. For all of the foregoing reasons, the Court should deny Jane Doe No. 4's Motion. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, respectfully requests the Court deny Jane Doe's Motion (DE #148) and grant any additional relief the Court deems just and proper. + +> By: /s./ Robert D. Critton, Jr. ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bc1claw.com + +Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein + +Case No. 08-CTV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED] + +*Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe No. 4's Parents* + +Page 7 of 8 + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 16th day of November, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: /s./ Robert D. Critton, Jr. + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rcrit@bclclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bclclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +303 Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/253-0164 Fax + +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** + +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** + +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/[REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +*Pro Hac Vice* + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/J [REDACTED] + +*Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe No. 4's Parents* + +Page 8 of 8 + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* + +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. [REDACTED] Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) + +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +[skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com](mailto:skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804* + +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED] Esq. + +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) + +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos.* + +*09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748178/EFTA02748178.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748178/EFTA02748178.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..897c644c278bb849557d86a31102dc31a745489b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748178/EFTA02748178.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,393 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748178.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 15560, + "elapsed_seconds": 13.41, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 411.9594421386719, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 411.9594421386719, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOE \nNO. 4'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO \nTHE SCOPE OF INQUIRY AT THE DEPOSITIONS OF JANE \nDOE NO. 4'S PARENTS AND INCORPORATED MOTION TO STRIKE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 116.28, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 504.4470520019531, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 504.4470520019531, + 419.6017761230469 + ], + [ + 116.28, + 419.6017761230469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 363.52799999999996, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 363.52799999999996, + 128.79 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 128.79 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 431.73 + ], + [ + 363.52799999999996, + 431.73 + ], + [ + 363.52799999999996, + 444.69000000000005 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 444.69000000000005 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 309 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 105 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 137 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748178" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748186/EFTA02748186.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748186/EFTA02748186.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9e266e20285d0bd6d7560f2028b04009714c1ff7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748186/EFTA02748186.md @@ -0,0 +1,253 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/MM + +JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## REPLY TO ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER'S P.A.'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE IDE 4051 SAS TO JANE DOE v. EPSTEIN CASE NO.: 08-CIV- 80893) + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Reply to Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler P.A.'s ("RRA") Response to Defendant's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence [DE 405], and states: + +1. It now appears that the Honorable Herbert Stettin ("Mr. Stettin") is the sole individual, as the Chief Restructuring Officer, in charge of RRA assets, including electronic and paper records. There also appears to be no objection to the entry of the preservation order consistent with his fiduciary/trustee duties for RRA, although certain documents may no longer exist within his possession. + +2. Par. 4 of the response reflects that some 40 plus boxes of documents were obtained by the Department of Justice from search warrants served on the offices of RRA; "it is believed that the Department of Justice also sequestered about (13) boxes of documents related to this [Epstein] case." In fact there are three Epstein cases which have been brought by the RRA firm, one being in federal court, two in state court. Mr. Stettin confirms Defendant's belief that there are serious ethical and potentially criminal issues that may impact Plaintiffs' ability to pursue their cases. + +3. Unfortunately, time is critical with regard to this case in that there are deadlines to Disclose Experts and Exchange Reports by October 29, 2009 (but Plaintiff has not seen her expert, has no report and only made herself available for the Defendant's exam on November 13, 2009), deposition discovery deadline is November 28, 2009 and a calendar call of February 19, 2010 for the February 22, 2010 trial docket. While the undersigned understands that Mr. Stettin may be working expeditiously to deal with critical and pressing needs of stabilizing the firm, a delay of 45 days for his deposition (which has been set in the state court case in the 15t11 Judicial Circuit Court, Palm Beach County, State of Florida, L.M. v. Epstein, Case No. 502008CA028051XXXXMB AB, not the case subludice) will place his deposition sometime during the first 15 days of January, after every pre-trial deadline has expired. + +4. If in fact there has been inappropriate and/or illegal conduct associated with the prosecution of this case by RRA or any of its attorneys or by the Plaintff herself, which might result in sanctions, dismissal or other remedy, Defendant Epstein will be severely prejudiced. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant Epstein request that the court's preservation order be made permanent, which does not seem inconsistent with Mr. Stettin's position as expressed by his lawyers but deny the relief sought for delaying the deposition unless the court is disposed to modify the current scheduling deadlines and trial date that exist in this case. + +By: Robert D. ritton, Jr. . Florida tar #224162 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of recordidentified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this /t1r day of November, 2009 + +Respectfully subni ed, + +By: ROBERT D RITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bc1claw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Brad , Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssmasexabuseattornev.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhwaotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. S Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcylaw.com + +icohfasearcylaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellpalaw.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plainti Vane Doe + +Isidro M. MN Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarciaQbellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsbern@oodhurst.com + +kezellapodhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +inesoabellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Charles H. Lichtman, Esq. + +Isaac Marcushamer, Esq. + +Berger Singerman, P.A. + +350 East Broward Boulevard, 10th Floor + +954-525-9900 + +954-523-2872 Fax + +clichtmanabergersingennan.com + +imarcushamerebergersinRerman.com + +Proposed Attorneys for Alleged Debtor \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748186/EFTA02748186.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748186/EFTA02748186.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4699a61f09af8b1a6a287c7ae0abcfca328793d3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748186/EFTA02748186.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,295 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748186.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 6663, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.61, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 413.99566650390625, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 413.99566650390625, + 104.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 104.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REPLY TO ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER'S P.A.'S \nRESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR ORDER \nFOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE IDE 4051 \nSAS TO JANE DOE v. EPSTEIN CASE NO.: 08-CIV- 80893)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 113.83200000000001, + 349.92 + ], + [ + 504.4033508300781, + 349.92 + ], + [ + 504.4033508300781, + 408.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 113.83200000000001, + 408.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 239.76 + ], + [ + 364.20050048828125, + 239.76 + ], + [ + 364.20050048828125, + 254.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 254.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 612.36 + ], + [ + 365.70050048828125, + 612.36 + ], + [ + 365.70050048828125, + 626.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 626.9830169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 171 + ], + [ + "Line", + 84 + ], + [ + "Text", + 81 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748186" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748191/EFTA02748191.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748191/EFTA02748191.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e409ca38c78624fd054b256374739ea6a6ab90a1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748191/EFTA02748191.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-801 I 9-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE REGARDING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO EXTEND PRETRIAL DEADLINES IN CASE 08-80893 + +T HIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion for an Extension of Time to Complete Trial Deadlines (DE 361), filed October 20, 2009. In his Motion, Defendant suggests that the panics are not able to comply with the deadlines in the Court's scheduling order for this case (Jane Doe 08-80893) and proposes new deadlines for experts, discovery, substantive pretrial motions, and mediation. The Court seeks PlaintiffJane Doe (08-80893)'s position regarding Defendant's Motion. Accordingly, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that PlaintiffJane Doe (08-80893) shall file a response to + +Defendant's Motion on or before Monday, November 23, 2009. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, + +Florida, this 16'" day of November, 2009. + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies to: all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748191/EFTA02748191.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748191/EFTA02748191.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..356869fca1ed682b6207542c92c3179fd5b74dca --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748191/EFTA02748191.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748191.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1247, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.72, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE REGARDING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO \nEXTEND PRETRIAL DEADLINES IN CASE 08-80893", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 90.576, + 383.13 + ], + [ + 521.5682983398438, + 383.13 + ], + [ + 521.5682983398438, + 412.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 90.576, + 412.18353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 19 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748191" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748193/EFTA02748193.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748193/EFTA02748193.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..18c8a7ce1ad3d09c211aa4d6268ac6e123980b04 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748193/EFTA02748193.md @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## OMNIBUS ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the following motions: (1) Plaintiff' Jane Doe's Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Deposition and for Sanctions (D.E. #378); and, (2) Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Protective Order Re Second Day of Deposition (D.E. #392). For the following reasons said Motions are denied. + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm beach, New York and St. with the promise of money in exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +The instant Motions are nearly identical and seek, as to each respective Plaintiff, Jane Doe in the case of D.E. #378 and Jane Doe in the case of D.E. #392, protection/limitation from having to appear at a second deposition. Jane Doe was deposed on September 20, 2009 for a total of anywhere between just under 7 hours to 8 hours.' Jane Doe 4 was deposed on October 27, 2009, and the parties are in agreement that taking into account breaks, the deposition lasted 5 hours and 35 minutes. Plaintiffs contend that under Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(d)(1), S.D. Fla. L.R. 26.1(K), and the Court's Consolidation Order (D.E. #98), all of which limit a deposition of an individual to a single day of seven hours unless leave of Court is granted, it is Defendant's burden to demonstrate why more than seven hours of deposition time + +&#x27; In her Motion, Jane Doe represents that she was deposed for 8 hours. For his part, Defendant Epstein contends in his Response in Opposition that taking into account lunch and other breaks, the actual figure is 6 hours and 50 minutes, which figure he contends was confirmed with the court reporter. The Court finds that whether Jane Doe was deposed for just under 7 hours as Epstein contends, or for 8 hours as Jane Doe alleges, is under the circumstances herein presented, of no consequence. + +is necessary for a particular Plaintiff. According to Plaintiff, Epstein has failed to sustain his burden in this regard and, as such, he should not be able to re-depose Jane Doe at all', and should only be able to re-depose Jane Doe 4 for an additional 1 hour and 25 minutes, providing Epstein with an aggregate of 7 hours deposition time of Jane Doe 4. + +Epstein contends the Court's May 14, 2009 Consolidation Order, which provides that "Local Rule 26.1K (limiting deposition time to one day of seven hours) is waived so as to allow each party an adequate opportunity to develop fully the record as it may relate to that party," effectively waives L.R. 26.1 K's limitation on the length of a deposition, thereby relieving Epstein from the seven hour deposition limit. The Court need not reach this issue, however, in that Epstein has provided sufficient and reasonable grounds in his Response Memorandum to sustain his burden, to the extent it is his burden, of showing additional time to depose Jane Doe and Jane Doe 4 is needed, to fully and fairly prepare his defense. + +Plaintiffs are seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, and invasion of privacy. Epstein's counsel represents he will need an additional 2'/: to 3 hours to depose Jane Doe, so that he can cover such topics as background information not disclosed in answers to interrogatories, family + +&#x27;This is based on Plaintiffs' representation that Jane Doe's deposition lasted 8 hours.

background information, details regarding Jane Doe's visits to Epstein's home, Jane Doe's knowledge of other witnesses, school records and medical records, and finally, details regarding her past sexual history, an opportunity he did not have when he began her deposition as the Court had not yet ruled on Epstein's Motion to Compel (D.E. #s 67 & 68), which sought information related to Plaintiff's past sexual history.

As for Jane Doe 4, Epstein's counsel represents he will need approximately an additional 4 hours to complete her deposition, owing to her "complicated and eventful past history" including alleged drug use, repeated instances of domestic violence, multiple aborted pregnancies and arrests. Def's Resp., p. 2. Also, as with Jane Doe, Epstein's counsel claims he needs additional time to depose Jane Doe 4 on details regarding her past sexual history, an opportunity he did not have when he began her deposition as the Court had not yet ruled on Epstein's Motion to Compel (D.E. #s 67 & 68), which sought information related to Plaintiff's past sexual history. At Jane Doe 4's initial deposition she was instructed by her counsel not to answer any questions "relat[ed] to sexual partners' names or sexual positions." Jane Doe 4 Deposition Excerpt, attached as Ex. "B" to Def's Resp., at 5. With these subjects fairly open to inquiry, it is only reasonable that Epstein's counsel will require additional time to depose Jane Doe and Jane Doe 4 on these areas.

The Court agrees with Epstein that all of the foregoing issues are directly relevant to Plaintiffs' damage claims and credibility, and to deny him additional time

in which to depose these Plaintiffs would be unreasonable under the circumstances and result in prejudice to Epstein by denying him the opportunity to obtain discovery that is central to his defense. See Osborne v. Columbia Helicopters, Inc., 2009 WL 2215076 (S.D. W.Va. 2009)(granting the defendant an additional one day of 7 hours to depose the plaintiff, reasoning that because the plaintiff provided incomplete written discovery responses, the defendant "did not have full opportunity to examine Mr. Osborne respecting all of the information which might properly be considered in his discovery deposition.") In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff' Jane Doe's Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Deposition and for Sanctions (D.E. #378); and Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Protective Order Re Second Day of Deposition (D.E. #392) are DENIED. Epstein's counsel is hereby given leave to re-depose Jane Doe for up to 3 additional hours and hereby given leave to re-depose Jane Doe 4 for up to 4 additional hours. Counsel for the parties are ordered to immediately confer and come to a mutual agreement upon a date and time in which these depositions can be continued sometime within two (2) weeks from the date hereof, unless otherwise agreed to by the parties. Plaintiffs' request for sanctions is denied.

Palm West at , in 2009, 17, November this ORDERED AND DONE

Florida. Beach,

r

ON JOH R. LINNEA JUDGE MAGISTRATE S STAN UNITED

Marra A. Kenneth Honorable The CC: Record of Counsel All

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748193/EFTA02748193.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748193/EFTA02748193.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6140c4fd96fa2035b0961e6e6c9468f2e85320d7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748193/EFTA02748193.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,287 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748193.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 8136, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.1, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.5008544921875, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.5008544921875, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OMNIBUS ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 360.8534240722656, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 360.8534240722656, + 440.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 440.30352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748193" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748199/EFTA02748199.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748199/EFTA02748199.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..427c680eecb47bfcaf884375dace59b1a9daae54 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748199/EFTA02748199.md @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order of the Preservation of Evidence (D.E. #405). + +By this Motion, Epstein moves for an order requiring Herbert Stettin, the State Court appointed receiver ("Receiver") and Chief Restructuring Officer ("CRO") of the Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Adler, P.A. ("RRA") law firm, to preserve all evidence relevant to the investment scheme referenced in the Motion and further prohibit the individuals at the RRA Law Firm from tampering, destroying or altering any such evidence.' In his response to the Motion, + +&#x27; The Motion also sought to have the order apply and be directed to J. , a 'partner' in [RRA and] Stuart Rosenfeldt as partner/shareholder and receiver of RRA" (Deis Emer. Mtn., p.1). However, on November 11, 2009, a resolution was entered appointing Stettin as the CRO of RRA and delegating to him all operational and managerial control over RRA. This Resolitactively removed Rosenfeldt from all managerial roles at RRA, and to the extent had any managerial roles, + +Stettin has represented that he intends to continue to fully comply with his fiduciary duties both as receiver and now as CRO of an alleged bankruptcy debtor, and to comply with 11 U.S.C. §101 et seq. ,which requires a debtor in possession to behave and function with the same types of responsibilities as a trustee. Stettin's Resp., pp. 2-3. Accordingly, Stettin contends he has no objection to the entry of an order consistent with his fiduciary obligations. Id. at 3. This language has been interpreted by counsel for Epstein and by this Court as Stettin having no objection to the entry of a preservation order consistent with his fiduciary/trustee duties for RRA. + +However, Stettin goes on to state that to the extent Defendant wishes for Stettin to produce documents or to sit for deposition on November 19, 2009, he requests a continuance of at least forty-five (45) days so that he can attend to the continuing critical and pressing needs occasioned by RRA's collapse. While the Court understands the difficult position Stettin has been placed in and believes that he has been working expeditiously to deal with the onerous job of stabilizing the law firm, unfortunately there are deadlines in place in this case with respect to the exchange of expert witness reports, deposition discovery deadline, and so forth, that will expire before the requested forty-five (45) day extension lapses. Consequently, were the Curt to agree to the extension requested, Epstein could be severely prejudiced. + +Accordingly, counsel for Epstein and Stettin are hereby ordered to immediately confer and reach agreement on mutually acceptable terms for inclusion in a proposed agreed upon preservation of evidence order, which proposed order shall be filed with the + +effectively removed him as well, resulting in Stettin, as CRO, being the only executive at RRA. + +Court and a copy delivered to the undersigned for her signature within five (5) days from the date hereof. In the meantime the temporary order requiring the preservation of evidence and the maintenance of the status quo (D.E. #408) is hereby renewed and shall continue in effect until such time as the proposed order referred to above has been issued by the Court. As for the deposition and document production noticed for November 19, 2009, same shall be continued, but in view of the fast approaching scheduling deadlines, only for ten (10) days instead of the forty-five (45) days requested. In accordance with the foregoing, counsel for the parties are ordered to immediately confer and reach agreement upon a mutually acceptable date and time for deposition and document production to take place no later then (10) days from the date hereof. The Court observes that the District Court has before it a motion to continue the scheduling deadlines in this case (D.E. #361), and that if such motion is granted, the forty-five (45) day extension requested by Stettin shall be automatically granted and counsel for the parties are instructed to once again confer and reach agreement upon a date and time for deposition and document production to take place within forty-five (45) days from the date hereof. + +DONE AND ORDERED this November 18, 2009, in at West Palm Beach, Florida. + +LINNEA R. J ON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748199/EFTA02748199.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748199/EFTA02748199.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cac4b8db026b079f312c4368fe468d30705821eb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748199/EFTA02748199.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,181 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748199.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 4697, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.93, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 71.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 406.6453857421875, + 71.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 406.6453857421875, + 99.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 99.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 390.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 390.43353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748199" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748202/EFTA02748202.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748202/EFTA02748202.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..10029244fe87fd2208c9b72a7a84598ca03bb4d0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748202/EFTA02748202.md @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOE NOS. 2-7 AND JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S JOINT MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLETE TRIAL DEADLINES + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2-7, and Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, by and through their undersigned attorneys, jointly move this Court for an extension of time to complete trial deadlines, and as good cause in support of granting the motion, state as follows: + +- 1. These cases are currently set on a two week trial docket commencing on June I. 2010. The discovery cutoff is presently December 11, 2009. +- 2. Despite the cooperative efforts of counsel, discovery has proceeded slowly in these cases for various reasons. The depositions of the Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 have been the subject of motion practice. Presently, one partial deposition of a Plaintiff has been taken, that of Jane Doe No. +- 4. The depositions of Jane Does Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 have not yet been scheduled. Plaintiffs and Defendant have stipulated to the Rule 35 examinations of the Plaintiffs, and thus far only two of the Plaintiffs' examinations have been completed. + +3. There are pending discovery disputes, including Plaintiffs' appeal of Magistrate + +Order dated September 9, 2009 on Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel, and Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Net Worth Discovery. The scheduling of nonparty depositions has been difficult because many of the depositions are out-of-state and these depositions need to be coordinated with all Plaintiffs' counsel in these cases, which are consolidated for purposes of discovery. Additionally, a substantial majority of the nonparties subpoenaed by Plaintiffs have retained separate counsel, requiring that their depositions be coordinated with the witness's attorney. As a result, a significant number of nonparty depositions remain to be taken. Additionally, witness's attorneys have raised various issues which have delayed these depositions. + +4. Based on the foregoing, the parties jointly move for an extension of the pretrial deadlines, which the parties believe is necessary despite their best efforts to complete discovery in a timely manner. The parties propose the following revised schedule: + +- A. Date to complete mediation April 7, 2010 +- B. Date to complete discovery April 12, 2010 +- C. Date to complete substantive pretrial motions May 7, 2010 +- D. Date to disclose experts and Exchange expert reports: July 1, 2010 +- E. Proposed Pre-trial conference August, 2010 +- F. Proposed Trial September, 2010 + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-7 and Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, jointly request that this Court enter an Order granting this Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Trial Deadlines, in accordance with the revised schedule set forth above. + +Dated: November 18, 2009. + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: /s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe 2-7 + +Stuart S. Mermelstein + +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +Adam D. Horowitz + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +By: /s/ Michael J. Pike + +BURMAN, CRITTION, LUTTIER et al. + +Attorneys for Defendant Epstein + +Robert D. Critton, Jr. + +rcrit@bciclaw.com + +Michael J. Pike + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +515 N. Flagler Drive + +Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748202/EFTA02748202.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748202/EFTA02748202.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cada0caac608710103b620492d56ba4c21682fe7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748202/EFTA02748202.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,193 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748202.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3544, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.21, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS' JANE DOE NOS. 2-7 AND JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S JOINT \nMOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLETE TRIAL DEADLINES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 86.29199999999999, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 526.729736328125, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 526.729736328125, + 398.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 86.29199999999999, + 398.2330322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748202" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748205/EFTA02748205.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748205/EFTA02748205.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fa64671e2a9f168bfdcb6fcda3a36cbfab148719 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748205/EFTA02748205.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +![](_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg) + +## ORDER + +Upon Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth pie \*gin) Discovery, and good cause being shown, it is hereby + +ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs shall have an enlargement of until November 23, 2009, to file their Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this day of telik Jog. , 2009. + +tskive4s.-t-LI away "ef.Asti \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748205/EFTA02748205.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748205/EFTA02748205.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..56615710fa28fc7da3d578c7e0b7de66d15fb729 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748205/EFTA02748205.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,115 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748205.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 894, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.86, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.10000000000002, + 115.66168212890625 + ], + [ + 398.19232177734375, + 115.66168212890625 + ], + [ + 398.19232177734375, + 141.75 + ], + [ + 209.10000000000002, + 141.75 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 279.21000000000004, + 391.23 + ], + [ + 326.566162109375, + 391.23 + ], + [ + 326.566162109375, + 405.0 + ], + [ + 279.21000000000004, + 405.0 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748205" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748205/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748205/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..14be85c4cc983525f444284ab934fa63953780c5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748205/_page_0_Picture_11.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3dea00737983ad02a8da7a87f66c3c205e96494c12285c68d4e27680f6702ec2 +size 11402 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748206/EFTA02748206.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748206/EFTA02748206.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c2a3e0663a3b43a0463fc0e3bf5741c1351d04e7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748206/EFTA02748206.md @@ -0,0 +1,59 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARFa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## OMNIBUS ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion for Sanctions and to Compel Deposition of Jane Doe 4 (D.E. #305); and Plaintiff, Jane Doe 4's Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order (D.E. #306). These motions have, in part, been rendered moot in that since the filing of the motions, the deposition of Jane Doe 4 has taken place. As for the sanctions portions of each of the parties' respective motions, the Court finds no sanctions warranted against any of the parties or attorneys involved in this matter. The Court has carefully reviewed and considered the allegations made in the pleadings and finds the entire incident to have been the result of an innocent misunderstanding and misinterpretation of circumstances, and that no individual's action in this regard to the level which would justify the imposition of sanctions. In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby + +(1) Defendant Epstein's Motion for Sanctions and to Compel Deposition of Jane + +Doe 4 (D.E. #305) is **DENIED**. That portion of the Motion seeking an order + +requiring Jane Doe 4 appear for deposition is denied as moot, in that since + +the fully of the motion, said deposition has taken place. The terms in place + +for Epstein to be granted leave to continue Jane Doe 4's deposition are the + +subject of a separate order. That portion of the Motion seeking an order + +imposing sanctions is denied: + +(2) Plaintiff, Jane Doe 4's Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order + +(D.E. #306) is **DENIED**. That portion of the Motion seeking an order relieving + +Jane Doe 4 from having to appear for deposition is denied as moot, in that + +since the fully of the motion, said deposition of Jane Doe 4 has taken place. + +The terms in place for Epstein to be granted leave to continue Jane Doe 4's + +deposition are the subject of a separate order. That portion of the Motion + +seeking an order imposing sanctions is denied. + +**DONE AND ORDERED** this November 19, 2009, in [REDACTED], at West Palm + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marta +All Counsel of Record + +LINNEA R. JOHNSON +UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +![]()Beach, Florida. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748206/EFTA02748206.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748206/EFTA02748206.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8dfad24dcba6da20dcb1b3acdfe404620046e40a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748206/EFTA02748206.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,174 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748206.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2442, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.67, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 53.46 + ], + [ + 406.6453857421875, + 53.46 + ], + [ + 406.6453857421875, + 81.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 81.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OMNIBUS ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 358.02 + ], + [ + 360.8534240722656, + 358.02 + ], + [ + 360.8534240722656, + 372.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 372.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 283.356, + 720.9000000000001 + ], + [ + 506.124, + 720.9000000000001 + ], + [ + 506.124, + 736.29 + ], + [ + 283.356, + 736.29 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Text", + 37 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748206" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748208/EFTA02748208.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748208/EFTA02748208.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5ce814ea13dd25ca2d7718f30b4f2bb0c58b5aad --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748208/EFTA02748208.md @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## OMNIBUS ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Jane Doe #4's Motion for Protective Order as to Scope of Depositions of Jane Doe 4's Parents (D.E. #148 in Case No. 08-80380); and the related motion filed by Epstein to Strike, incorporated in Epstein's Response in Opposition (D.E. #410). Having reviewed the pleadings filed incident to these matters and being otherwise duly advised in the premises it is hereby, + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: + +- (1) Jane Doe #4's Motion for Protective Order as to Scope of Depositions of Jane Doe 4's Parents (D.E. #148 in Case No. 08-80380) is STRICKEN for failure to comply with the District Court's August 11, 2009 Order requiring all motions relating to discovery be filed in Case No. 08-80119; and, + +Epstein's in incorporated Strike, to Epstein by filed Motion related The (2) + +Motion #4's Doe Jane GRANTED. is #410), (D.E. Opposition in Response + +Parents 4's Doe Jane of Depositions of Scope to as Order Protective for + +stricken. hereby is 08-80380) No. Case in #148 (D.E. + +Beach, Palm West at in 2009 19, November this ORDERED AND DONE + +Florida. + +iIPSon.\_.-- iptueC ON A JO R. LINNEA JUDGE MAGISTRATE S e STA UNITED + +Marra A. Kenneth Honorable The CC: Record of Counsel All \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748208/EFTA02748208.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748208/EFTA02748208.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fc8118221159cb57f25493d5e45d052eac678be1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748208/EFTA02748208.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,151 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748208.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1514, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.78, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 72.29888916015625 + ], + [ + 407.5008544921875, + 72.29888916015625 + ], + [ + 407.5008544921875, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OMNIBUS ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 396.90000000000003 + ], + [ + 360.8534240722656, + 396.90000000000003 + ], + [ + 360.8534240722656, + 411.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 411.80352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748208" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748210/EFTA02748210.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748210/EFTA02748210.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b2affc7c14b6c5c3ce5627942ee21a89f2f59337 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748210/EFTA02748210.md @@ -0,0 +1,321 @@ +0 + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +-vs- + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +VOLUME I OF III + +## Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## VIDEO-CONFERENCED AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO. 4 + +Tuesday, October 27, 2009 11:11 - 6:05 p.m. + +250 Australian Avenue South Suite 115 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Reported By: Cynthia , RPR, FPR Notary Public, State of Florida Prose Court Reporting + +![](_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg) + +Q. How about the question, have you ever been pregnant, do you remember being asked that question? + +A. No, I don't. + +Q. Well, if the transcript shows that you were asked that question, and if you were honest with Dr. Kliman like you told us you would, you would have told him that you had three pregnancies, wouldn't you? + +A. I would have stated that to like my lawyer though, because — + +Q. No, no, no. I want to know about + +Dr. Kliman. + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Don't talk about what you told your lawyer. + +BY MR. LUTHER: + +Q. Yeah, I don't want to ask you about your lawyer. I know you tell your lawyer all kinds of stuff. + +A. Uh-huh. + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. I want to know whether or not if + +Dr. Kliman asked you if you'd ever had any pregnancies — + +A. That is -- + +Q. -- you would have answered him truthfully, end you would have told him you had three pregnancies, wouldn't you? + +A. I don't -- It's something I don't want anybody to know, in fact, no. + +Q. Why not? Why don't you want people to know -- + +A. Why not? + +Q. -- you went and aborted three kids? Why wouldn't you want people to know that? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, argumentative. + +BY MR. LUTHER: + +Q. Tell me why you wouldn't want them to know . + +A. Because it's none of their business. + +Q. Does it cause you any upset to know that you aborted three kids in your life? + +A. Of course. + +Q. Why does it cause you upset? + +A. Because, somebody's life. + +Q. Were you told before each of these ons that you had what they call viable + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +1 THE WITNESS: What is viable? + +2 BY MR. LUTTIER: + +3 Q. That is there was a heartbeat in the 4 fetus. + +5 A. No. + +6 Q. Are you sure? + +7 A. I didn't want to know anything about it. + +8 Q. Are your sure you weren't told you had 9 viable fetus? + +10 A. It might have been in the papers that I 11 signed. I don't — I'm not sure that I -- + +12 Q. I want to be fair to you. I want to tell 13 you we've got your medical records, too, okay? + +14 A. Yeah. + +15 Q. So, the records from your gynecologist, we 16 have those too. + +17 A. Okay. + +18 Q. Now, were you told before you aborted 19 these three children - + +20 A. I don't know. + +21 Q. — that you had a viable fetus? + +22 A. I don't know. I don't remember. + +23 Q. Does it give you any, any emotional pain 24 that you aborted three fetuses? + +25 A. Yeah, I have had emotional pain about it. + +1 Q. It's contrary to everything you ever 2 learned as a child as a Roman Catholic, isn't it? + +3 A Yeah. + +4 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, 5 argumentative. + +6 BY MR. LITIMER: + +7 Q. Does your mom know you aborted three kids? + +8 A. No. + +9 Q Does your dad know you aborted three kids? + +10 A. No. + +11 Q. What do you think they'd think? + +12 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, 13 argumentative. + +14 THE WITNESS: I don't know. + +15 BY MR. LUTHER: + +16 Q. Do you think they're going to be happy 17 about that? + +18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, 19 argumentative. + +20 THE WITNESS: No. + +21 BY MR. LUTTEER: + +22 Q. Is it going to cause you a little 23 emotional upset? + +24 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +25 THE WITNESS: I mean, I have — I have to + +deal with it when I talk to, when I speak to them. + +BY MR. LUTHER: + +Q. My question is, is it going to cause you any emotional upset? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: I don't know because I haven't experienced it. I'm sure. + +BY MR LUTTTER: + +Q. Wouldn't you agree with me that aborting three fetuses -- + +A. Yeah. + +Q. — would be far more traumatic — + +A his. + +Q -- than giving aman amassage in the nude? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, argumentative. + +BY MR. LUTHER + +Q. Wouldn't you agree with me? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + +BY MR. LUTHER: + +Q I want you to tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury whether or not aborting three fetuses is more traumatic than giving aman a + +massage in the nude. + +MR MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +BY MR. LUTHER: + +Q. Just tell the ladies and gentlemen in the camera, yes or no. + +A. Yeah. + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +BY MR. LU'TTIER: + +Q. Did you go get any psychological help for the fact that you aborted three kids? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +THE WITNESS: No. + +BY MR. LUTHER: + +Q Are you telling Dr. Ruepto, Rubello (sic), whatever his name is, that you had three abortions? + +A. Have I told him? + +Q. Yeah. + +A. Yeah. + +Q. And did you tell him how you felt about that? + +MR MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + +THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +BY MR. LUTHER + +Q. And when did you tell him that? + +A. I don't remember. + +Q. Did you tell him -- + +A I don't -- + +Q -- the first visit? + +A. I don't remember what visit I told him, but I know I told him. + +Q. Okay. He is the first guy you ever told, right? + +A. First guy that I ever told? + +Q. The first doctor, medical health professional that you told you had, you aborted three fetuses, didn't you? + +A. Yeah. + +Q. You didn't tell Kliman, did you? + +A. No. + +Didn't want Kliman to know. + +Ididn't want anybody to know that, no. Q. A. + +Because it's embarrassing to you, isn't Q. + +it? + +A. Yeah. + +Q. It makes you feel bad, doesn't it? + +A. Yeah. + +Q. Tell me how it makes you feel. + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + +BY MR. LUTHER: + +Q. How do you feel that you aborted three + +babies? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, asked and answered. + +THE WITNESS: How do I feel? + +BY MR. LUMER: + +Q. Tell me how you feel. + +A. How would you feel? + +Q. Well, I know how I'd feel, but that's not + +the question. A. Yeah. + +Q !want to know how you feel. + +A. It was very upsetting and emotional. + +Q. How upsetting? + +MR MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, + +argumentative. MR. CRITLDN: Mark, you have no time. + +MR. LUTHER: Okay. + +THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're off the record at + +4:10. This is the end of Tape 2. + +(A brief recess was held.) + +w O + +> N D E + +D \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748210/EFTA02748210.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748210/EFTA02748210.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..eb80e48f4272e00dcd499729bc06d0e9c3e8a964 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748210/EFTA02748210.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,206 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748210.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 6371, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.3, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 436.4267272949219, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 436.4267272949219, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 102.06 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Related cases:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 107.71199999999999, + 300.51 + ], + [ + 227.51734924316406, + 300.51 + ], + [ + 227.51734924316406, + 315.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 107.71199999999999, + 315.09000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VIDEO-CONFERENCED AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF \nJANE DOE NO. 4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 121.78800000000001, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 494.75146484375, + 384.75 + ], + [ + 494.75146484375, + 413.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 121.78800000000001, + 413.90999999999997 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 134 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 217 + ], + [ + "Line", + 107 + ], + [ + "Text", + 96 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 759 + ], + [ + "Line", + 167 + ], + [ + "Text", + 85 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748210" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748210/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748210/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f684edbc4260347886ac2d03754493e1de04e41f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748210/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:614266a66bb94e90de12950f06b1e7b554e332b5de58fd6c8878be3e4d119e78 +size 7672 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748213/EFTA02748213.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748213/EFTA02748213.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f1b1efb10e6b6e91a085a3445dbafd646558ca13 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748213/EFTA02748213.md @@ -0,0 +1,112 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARla + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4's RENEWED MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO THE SCOPE OF INQUIRY AT THE DEPOSITIONS OF JANE DOE NO. 4's PARENTS. AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4 ("Plaintiff'), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's Renewed Motion for Protective Order, pursuant to S.D.Ra.L.R. 7.1, and states as follows: + +I. By Order dated November 19, 2009 (DE 418), in Case No. 08-80380, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Protective Order was stricken for failure to comply with this Court's August II, 2009 Notice to Counsel, and May 14, 2009, Order Consolidating Cases. Plaintiff's counsel inadvertently, in error, filed this Motion under Jane Doe No. 4's case number instead of under the consolidated case number, 08-80119. Accordingly, Plaintiff renews her Motion by filing under the correct case number. + +2. Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein have advised Plaintiffs' counsel that they intend to take the depositions of the mother and father of Jane Doe No. 4 within the next few weeks. Plaintiff does not oppose Defendant taking the depositions of her parents, but a protective order from this Court is necessary as to the scope of the inquiry into one particular discrete matter. + +3. At Jane Doe No. 4's deposition on October 27, 2009, she testified that she has had abortions. She further testified that neither of her parents is aware that she has had abortions. At no time has she ever had any intention of disclosing the information about her abortions to her parents. Jane Doe No. 4 is presently 22 years old. + +4. Counsel for Defendant Epstein asked Jane Doe No. 4 a number of questions at her deposition indicating clearly that Jane Doe No. 4's abortions would be a subject of inquiry in her parents' depositions. This included the following inappropriate questions: + +- a. "Does your mom know you aborted three kids?" +- b. "Does your dad know you aborted three kids?" +- c. "What do you think they'd think?" and +- d. "Do you think they're going to be happy about that?"' + +See Exhibit "A". + +5. It is obvious from the questioning at Jane Doe No. 4's deposition that Defendant's attorney intends to inform Jane Doe No. 4's parents about the abortions through leading questions at their depositions. + +6. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 (c)(1) allows the court to issue an order to protect a party from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense by several methods, including "(D) forbidding inquiry into certain matters, or limiting the scope of disclosure or discovery to certain matters" upon good cause shown by the moving party. "The good cause + +Furthermore, Jane Doe No. 4's sister, Y.B., was asked about her knowledge of Jane Doe No. 4's abortions at her deposition. Unlike Jane Doe No. 4's parents, Y.B. was already aware that her sister had abortions. + +standard for issuing a protective order requires the Court to balance the moving party's interest in preventing the discovery sought against the other person's interest in seeking the discovery." + +v. Burlage, 2009 WL 2230794 at 4 (S.D. Fla. 2009) (citing Chicago Tribune Co. v. Bridgestone/Firestone. Inc. 263 F.3d 1304 (11th Cir. 2001). + +7. Plaintiffs great concern is that through leading questions Defendant's counsel will Inform Jane Doe No. 4's parents about the abortions. Epstein has no conceivable interest in interrogating Jane Doe No. 4's parents about Jane Doe No. 4's abortions. Since they are unaware of the abortions, neither will be able to provide any information about when the procedures occurred, her mental state at the time of each procedure, whether any complications arose, or any other information that could reasonably be calculated to lead to admissible evidence. Epstein is not alleged to be the man responsible for impregnating Jane Doe No. 4 on any occasion. Counsel intends to inquire into these matters solely for the purpose of harassing, embarrassing, and oppressing Jane Doe No. 4. Plaintiff does not object to non-leading questions on this subject matter, such as "do you know whether Jane Doe No. 4 has ever had an abortion?" + +8. In addition, leading questions revealing Jane Doe No. 4's abortions would have the added effect of embarrassing, harassing, upsetting, and shaming Jane Doe No. 4's parents, who are non-parties to this lawsuit. The line of inquiry could lead to irreparable damage to Jane Doe No. 4's relationship with her Roman Catholic parents. Further, Jane Doe No. 4's parents are not expert witnesses and their opinion as to whether these abortions (which they do not even know about) affected Jane Doe No. 4 would not seem to have any relevance. + +9. Therefore, Jane Doe No. 4 has a great interest in preventing the discovery that outweighs any conceivable interest by Epstein in this discovery and a Rule 26(cX1)(D) protective order is appropriate. + +10. Furthermore, Jane Doe No. 4 has not authorized the release of her private medical information to third parties. She has not waived her privacy interests in the medical information such that disclosure to a nonparty would be authorized. Disclosure to her parents would constitute the public disclosure of private facts, a violation of Jane Doe No. 4's right of privacy, which she has not waived simply by virtue of being a plaintiff in a lawsuit for sexual abuse against a convicted sex offender. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe 4, respectfully requests that this Court issue a protective order prohibiting leading questions at the depositions of Jane Doe No. 4's parents on the subject of Jane Doe No. 4's abortions; limiting Defendant's attorney to asking only openended questions on the subject of abortion, such as whether they know if Jane Doe No. 4 has ever had an abortion; and all such other relief this Court deems just and appropriate. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A3 + +Undersigned counsel has conferred with Defendant's counsel in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this motion, and has been unable to do so, as Defendant's counsel has advised that Defendant opposes this motion. + +Dated: November 19, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) + +ssm@sexabuseattornev.com + +Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) + +ahorowitz @sexabuseattorney.com + +MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-8 + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on November 19, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@aewpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748213/EFTA02748213.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748213/EFTA02748213.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fe6ca2e2c517bb0cff92e7009771940dba31316f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748213/EFTA02748213.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,372 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748213.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 7813, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.23, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 67.23 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 67.23 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 95.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 95.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4's RENEWED MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE \nORDER AS TO THE SCOPE OF INQUIRY AT THE DEPOSITIONS OF \nJANE DOE NO. 4's PARENTS. AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 81.396, + 341.82 + ], + [ + 530.604, + 341.82 + ], + [ + 530.604, + 385.10302734375 + ], + [ + 81.396, + 385.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.744, + 369.36 + ], + [ + 483.43438720703125, + 369.36 + ], + [ + 483.43438720703125, + 384.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 129.744, + 384.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 67.05889892578125 + ], + [ + 386.0939636230469, + 67.05889892578125 + ], + [ + 386.0939636230469, + 81.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 81.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 66.42 + ], + [ + 454.7248229980469, + 66.42 + ], + [ + 454.7248229980469, + 109.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 109.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748213" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748219/EFTA02748219.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748219/EFTA02748219.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a0379b1ba37e1a6f4a2405bd273c1d5a584b85d3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748219/EFTA02748219.md @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-801 I9-MARRA1 ✓ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER RE-SETTING TRIAL DATE & PRETRIAL DEADLINES + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-7 and Defendant + +Jeffrey Epstein's Joint Motion for an Extension of Time to Complete Trial Deadlines (DE 415). + +The Court has reviewed the Joint Motion and is otherwise advised in the premises. It is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Joint Motion (DE 415) is GRANTED as follows: + +## Trial Date & Location + +I. This case is set for trial on the two-week calendar commencing Monday, September 27. 2010. Counsel for all parties shall appear at a calendar call commencing at 10:00 A.M. on Friday, September 24, 2010. Unless instructed otherwise by subsequent order, the trial and all other proceedings in this case shall be conducted at the U.S. Courthouse, 701 Clematis Street, West Palm Beach, Florida. + +## Pretrial Schedule + +2. Pretrial discovery will be conducted in accordance with Local Rules 16.1 and 26.1 and + +the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. No pretrial conference shall be held in this action, unless the Court determines, either sua sponie or upon motion and order, that a pretrial conference is necessary. In setting the following deadlines, the Court has considered the parties' suggested discovery schedule. Dates and other agreements between the parties not otherwise addressed herein shall be considered part of this Order. To the extent this Order conflicts with the Local Rules, this Order supersedes the Local Rules. + +Discovery Cutoff — April 12, 2010 + +Substantive Pretrial Motions — May 7, 2010 + +Disclose/Exchange Expert Reports — July I, 2010 + +Mediation Cutoff — 60 days before calendar call + +Mandatory Pretrial Stipulation — Fifteen days before calendar call + +Motions in Limine — Fifteen days before calendar call + +Responses to Motions in Limine — Ten days before calendar call + +Jury Instructions — Five days before calendar call + +Proposed Findings & Conclusions — Five days before calendar call + +Voir Dire Questions — Calendar call + +Exhibit List for Court — First day of Trial (impeachment excepted) + +Witness List for Court — First day of Trial (impeachment excepted) + +DONE AND ORDERED in at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, + +Florida, this 19th day of November, 2009. + +CZ + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies to: all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748219/EFTA02748219.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748219/EFTA02748219.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8b32e494d6b6dd439a21b1b04d3824895c3fc6e8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748219/EFTA02748219.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,193 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748219.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2598, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.68, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER RE-SETTING TRIAL DATE & PRETRIAL DEADLINES", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 132.192, + 369.36 + ], + [ + 480.12298583984375, + 369.36 + ], + [ + 480.12298583984375, + 383.60302734375 + ], + [ + 132.192, + 383.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Trial Date & Location", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.63600000000002, + 509.49 + ], + [ + 364.2954406738281, + 509.49 + ], + [ + 364.2954406738281, + 523.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 246.63600000000002, + 523.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Pretrial Schedule", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 675.54 + ], + [ + 354.7689208984375, + 675.54 + ], + [ + 354.7689208984375, + 689.7240600585938 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 689.7240600585938 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 76 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748219" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748221/EFTA02748221.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748221/EFTA02748221.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..39cf25da909e292ddc7aaef3171ff5968b7ac9df --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748221/EFTA02748221.md @@ -0,0 +1,340 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOE NO. 4'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO THE SCOPE OF INQUIRY AT THE DEPOSITIONS OF JANE DOE NO. 4'S PARENTS + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein"), submits this Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's, Jane Doe No. 4, Motion for Protective Order As to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe No. 4's Parents (DE #420) ("Motion"), and states: + +1. In her Motion (DE #420), Jane Doe No. 4 asks the Court to enter a protective order prohibiting counsel for Epstein from asking her parents leading questions regarding Jane Doe No. 4's three abortions and limiting counsel "to asking only open-ended questions on the subject of abortion, such as whether they know if Jane Doe No. 4 has ever had an abortion." See DE #420 Ad Damnum Clause. In essence, Jane Doe No. 4 wants this Court to tell Epstein's counsel "how" it must ask question to Jane Doe No. 4's parents who we can only speculate will be somewhat favorable to her. Does Jane Doe No. 4 want all questions to be scripted? + +,lane Dos No. 4 v. Epstein + +Case No. 08-C1V-80119-MARRA.= + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe + +No.4 's Parents + +Page 2 of 8 + +2. First, Jane Doe No. 4's Motion is premature as Epstein has not yet set the depositions of Jane Doe No. 4's parents. + +3. Next, this is yet another attempt by Plaintiff to control discovery and insulate herself and her witnesses by asking the Court to disallow discovery of information directly relevant and material to her damage claims on the basis that it may be "embarrassing" or "upsetting" to her parents. See DE #42018. However, the Court has ruled on a number of these issues as follows: + +- a. Plaintiffs' attorneys sought to preclude the Epstein from serving third party subpoenas and allowing only Plaintiffs' counsel to obtain depositions and those materials and "filter them" to defense counsel. That motion was denied, and the court tailored a method such that the Epstein could obtain the records directly. See DE #253. +- b. Plaintiff's counsel sought to limit the s chological psychiatric examination in C.M.A. v. Jeffrey Epstein and (Case No. 08-CIV-80811), as to time, subject matter and scope. However, Magistrate entered an order denying the requested restrictions. See DE # 289. +- c. Many Plaintiffs' objected to discovery regarding current and past employment (although they are seeking loss of income, both in past and future). The Court granted Epstein's Motions to Compel related to Plaintiffs' tax returns and documents related to Plaintiffs' earnings. See DE #377. +- d. All Plaintiffs objected to discovery of their prior sexual history, consensual and forced as being irrelevant. The Court granted Epstein's Motions to Compel information related to Plaintiffs' past sexual history. See DE # 377. + +4. Jane Doe No. 4 is seeking to recover millions of dollars in damages for "confusion, shame, humiliation and embarrassment," "severe psychological and emotional injuries," "severe permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages" and "severe mental anguish and pain." See Second Amend. Compl. (DE #62)1¶15, 22, 28. Yet she wants to impermissibly narrow the scope of permissible discovery to serve her Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein + +Case No. 08-C1V-80119-MA111a + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe + +No.4 's Parents + +Page 3 of 8 + +own personal interests, namely, to continue to hide the fact she had three abortions from her parents. + +5. As with many of the Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No. 4 has had a complicated and eventful past history including, but not limited to: (1) drug use which includes cocaine, marijuana, ecstasy and xanax (Les 10/27/09 Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 ["Jane Doe No. 4 Depo"] at 215-17); (2) repeated instances of domestic violence and physical and verbal abuse by her former boyfriend, Preston Vinyard, in which he bit her finger, spit on her, poured beer on her and called her degrading names such as "whore," "slut," and "cunt" (id. at 29-30; 296-298); (3) three pregnancies with Vinyard that ended in three abortions, which she failed to disclose to various physicians, including her own psychiatric expert, Dr. Kliman, and which she admitted caused her more emotional trauma than her encounters with Mr. Epstein (LL at 299-306); and (4) arrests, including a recent arrest in Jupiter, Florida in October 2009 for domestic violence where she attacked, hit and bit her current boyfriend (id. at 25-26; 339; 346-48). However, Jane Doe No. 4 never sought treatment from a mental health professional until she was sent to Dr. Kliman by her attorneys after this suit was filed (id. at 242). + +6. Moreover, while Jane Doe No. 4 was seeing Mr. Epstein (both before and after she turned 18), which she testified was between 30 and 50 times (id. at 77-78), including her freshman year of college at University (LL at 74), she made a sex tape depicting vaginal and oral sex with her boyfriend which she voluntarily showed to Mr. Epstein (id. at 226-230). She also admitted to lying to the police (id. at 12-13) and lying to physicians, including her own expert, Dr. Kliman (id. at 306). + +Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA. + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions ofJane Doe + +No.4 is Parents + +Page 4 of 8 + +7. On the other hand, Jane Doe No. 4 testified that all contact and conduct with Epstein was voluntary and consensual; she did not have intercourse, oral or anal sex with Epstein nor did she touch his genitalia; and at no time did Epstein ever restrain her or use physical force. See Jane Doe No. 4 Depo at 78-79; 168-70; 361. + +8. Jane Doe No. 4's parents are important witnesses in that they likely have information about her psychological and emotional condition pit-Epstein, during the time she was seeing Epstein, and post-Epstein. + +9. Jane Doe No. 4 argues "since [her parents] are unaware of the abortions, neither will be able to provide any information about when the procedures occurred, her mental state at the time of each procedure, whether any complications arose, or any other information that could reasonably be calculated to lead to admissible evidence.... [Epstein's] counsel intends to inquire into these matters solely for the purpose of harassing, embarrassing, and oppressing Jane Doe No. 4." See DE #420 17. + +10. However, questioning Jane Doe No. 4's parents about her abortions is, in fact, directly relevant to her claim of damage in this case. In her October 27, 2009 deposition, Jane Doe testified that having three abortions was more traumatic that her encounters with Mr. Epstein. See Jane Doe No. 4 Depo at 304-05. + +11. Jane Doe No. 4's parents are likely aware of the allegations in this case (or they will be when they are deposed). That Jane Doe No. 4 is comfortable with her parents knowing about allegations of sexual abuse and physical and verbal abuse by Preston Vinyard but not comfortable with them knowing about three abortions is telling as to the psychological impact the abortions had on Jane Doe No. 4. + +;ant Doe No. 4 v. Epstein + +Case No. 08-CIV-80I19-MARIta + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe + +No.Cs Parents + +Page 5 of 8 + +12. It is axiomatic that the discovery rules were intended to promote the search for truth, which is the heart of our judicial system. It follows that full knowledge of relevant facts will aid in the search for truth. The converse is also true — withholding relevant facts will obstruct the search for truth. + +13. Permitting Jane Doe No. 4's parents to be deposed regarding her alleged emotional damages without them knowing the full extent of traumatic events that may have caused or contributed to her damages could certainly skew their testimony. For example, if Jane Doe No. 4's parents are oblivious to her having three abortions, they may incorrectly attribute her alleged emotional distress to Mr. Epstein when, in fact, it may very well have been caused by the multiple abortions. + +14. Indeed, the Court denied Plaintiff's, C.M.A., Motion for Protective Order (Order at DE #289) requesting the Court limit her independent psychological/psychiatric medical examination to six hours and to prohibit repeated questions regarding Plaintiff's medical history, psychiatric history, sexual history, social history, sexual abuse history and substance abuse history. In its Order, the Court noted that Plaintiff is seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages and that no authority was uncovered to support the "novel positions that a Plaintiff who puts her mental, emotional and psychiatric state at issue can place a limitation on the number of times defense counsel ... can inquire into areas relevant to these issues where the subject matter involved is `highly personal,' embarrassing,"sensitive,' or otherwise `humiliating.'" See DE #289 at 3. + +15. The same reasoning applies to the instant Motion. Jane Doe No. 4 cites no authority for the proposition that Epstein should be precluded from asking her parents leading Jane Doe No. 4 v. Epstein + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe + +No.4 's Parents + +Page 6 of 8 + +questions regarding her three abortions, events that admittedly had a substantial and traumatic impact on her. + +16. To the contrary, it is clearly permissible for Epstein's counsel to ask leading questions of Jane Doe No. 4's parents. Rule 30(c)(1), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, provides that "[t]he examination and cross-examination of a deponent proceed as they would at trial under the Federal Rules of Evidence, except Rules 103 and 615." Rule 611(c), Federal Rules of Evidence, provides in pertinent part, "[w]hen a party calls ... a witness identified with an adverse party, interrogation may be by leading questions." + +17. Jane Doe No. 4's parents certainly constitute "witness[es] identified with an adverse party" and therefore Epstein may ask leading questions in their depositions. + +18. For all of the foregoing reasons, the Court should deny Jane Doe No. 4's Motion. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, respectfully requests the Court deny Jane Doe's Motion (DE #420) and grant any additional relief the Court deems just and proper. + +> By: /s./ Robert D. Critton, Jr. ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rerit(4bc1claw.com + +Jane Doc No. 4 v. Epstein + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARILza + +Epstein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe No.4 's Parents + +Page 7 of 8 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this Mtit day of November, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: /s./ Robert D. Critton, Jr. + +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224162 + +rerit@belclaw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bctelaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +303 Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/253-0164 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E ps + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Brad Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 1650 + +Suite 2218 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Miami, FL 33160 Phone: 954-522-3456 + +305-931-2200 Fax: 954-527-8663 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 bedwards@rra-law.com + +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com 80893 + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08- Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08- Pro Hac Vice + +80994 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. 801-585-5202 + +2290 10th Avenue North 801-585-6833 Fax + +Jane Doe No 4 v. EDSteir' + +Case No. 08-CIV-801I9-MARRA + +E,ostein's Response in Opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe + +No.4 's Parents + +Page 8 of 8 + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. ■, **Esq.** + +**Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A.** + +**2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard** + +**West Palm Beach, FL 33409** + +**561-686-6300** + +**Fax: 561-383-9424** + +**isx@searcvlaw.com** + +**jph@searcylaw.com** + +**Counsel for Plaint& C.M.A.** + +**Bruce Reinhart, Esq.** + +**Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A.** + +**250 S. Australian Avenue** + +**Suite 1400** + +**West Palm Beach, FL 33401** + +**561-202-6360** + +**Fax: 561-828-0983** + +**ecf brucereinhartlaw.com** + +**Counsel for Defendant** + +**Theodore J. Leopold, Esq.** + +**Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq.** + +**Leopold, Kuvin, P.A.** + +**2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200** + +**Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410** + +**561-684-6500** + +**Fax: 561-515-2610** + +**skuvin@leonoldkuvin.com** + +**Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-** + +**08804** + +**cassellpAlaw.utah.edu** + +**Co-counsel for Plaintiflane Doe** + +**Isidro M. =, Esq.** + +**Law Firm, P.A.** + +**224 Datura Street, Suite 900** + +**West Palm Beach, FL 33401** + +**561-832-7732** + +**561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia®bellsouth.net** + +**Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80469** + +**Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq.** + +**Katherine W. Ezell, Esq.** + +**Podhurst Orseck, P.A.** + +**25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800** + +**Miami, FL 33130** + +**305 358-2800** + +**Fax: 305 358-2382** + +**riosefsberiz@podhurst.com** + +**kezell@podhurst.com** + +**Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos.** + +**09-80591 and 09-80656** + +**Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq.** + +**Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.** + +**250 Australian Avenue South** + +**Suite 1400** + +**West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012** + +**561-659-8300** + +**Fax: 561-835-8691** + +**jagesq@bellsouth.net** + +**Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein** \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748221/EFTA02748221.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748221/EFTA02748221.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7cc9f533cdb0690975729d482614a368975f77bb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748221/EFTA02748221.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,405 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748221.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 14821, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.83, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 411.3864440917969, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 411.3864440917969, + 100.863037109375 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 100.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOE NO. 4'S \nMOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO THE SCOPE OF \nINQUIRY AT THE DEPOSITIONS OF JANE DOE NO. 4'S PARENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 116.28, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 496.38336181640625, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 496.38336181640625, + 403.863037109375 + ], + [ + 116.28, + 403.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 363.83050537109375, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 363.83050537109375, + 129.363037109375 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 129.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 430.9200000000001 + ], + [ + 363.79791259765625, + 430.9200000000001 + ], + [ + 363.79791259765625, + 445.863037109375 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 445.863037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 72 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 101 + ], + [ + "Text", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 153 + ], + [ + "Line", + 75 + ], + [ + "Text", + 70 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748221" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748229/EFTA02748229.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748229/EFTA02748229.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..11e4c386a06d84bf3bf61facfcb3df0921373407 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748229/EFTA02748229.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO ATTEND MEDIATION (AS TO CMA V. EPSTEIN AND , 08-CIV-80811) + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion to Attend Mediation and Plaintiffs counsel being in agreement with the entry of this order, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that + +The court's no contact order, [DE 238], shall not preclude Defendant Epstein from attending Plaintiff deposition, mediation, or the trial of this case. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009 + +Linnea R. United States Magistrate Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Judge Kenneth Marra Counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748229/EFTA02748229.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748229/EFTA02748229.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f01f1fb2ae0b53ec121c4b1c2fa67eed1f23f261 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748229/EFTA02748229.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748229.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 882, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.7, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 413.1453552246094, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 413.1453552246094, + 113.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 113.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO ATTEND MEDIATION \n(AS TO CMA V. EPSTEIN AND , 08-CIV-80811)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.5, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 541.7826538085938, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 541.7826538085938, + 389.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 76.5, + 389.79998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748229" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748230/EFTA02748230.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748230/EFTA02748230.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aea778523695f05544dac34386dd2828e3fd8d28 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748230/EFTA02748230.md @@ -0,0 +1,160 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO ATTEND MEDIATION AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT THEREOF (AS TO CMA v. EPSTEIN AND 08-CIV-80811] + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, moves this Court for an order allowing him to attend mediation in the above-styled matter and as grounds set forth would state: + +- 1. The Court entered a no contact order which may apply to MI [DE 238]. +- 2. Plaintiffs counsel and plaintiff, have no objection to Mr. Epstein attending deposition, mediation and obviously trial. +- 3. Therefore, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, in an abundance of caution, requests that the court enter the attached proposed Agreed Order which shall not + +C.M.A. v. Epstein, et al. Page 2 + +preclude him from attending Plaintiff trial of this case. deposition, mediation, or the + +# Rule 7.1 Certification + +Defense counsel has spoken with Plaintiffs counsel and he has no objection to the entry of the proposed agreed order. + +> Robert D. I ritton, Jr. Attorney fir Defendant Epstein + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of recor\_sattentified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on thig day of November 2009 + +Respectfully submitt + +By: ROBERT D. ITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar 224162 rcrit bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +C.M.A. v. Epstein, et al. +Page 3 + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Brad [REDACTED] Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +C.M.A. v. Epstein, et al. +Page 4 + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 +Fax: 561-515-2610 +[skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com](mailto:skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-08804* + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748230/EFTA02748230.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748230/EFTA02748230.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1eeb7e8bc3c4b5993f224410ff04a8ee66c4cce0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748230/EFTA02748230.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,280 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748230.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5099, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.95, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 72.1875 + ], + [ + 412.7753601074219, + 72.1875 + ], + [ + 412.7753601074219, + 101.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 101.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO ATTEND MEDIATION \nAND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT THEREOF \n(AS TO CMA v. EPSTEIN AND 08-CIV-80811]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 153.0, + 385.3074951171875 + ], + [ + 467.0721435546875, + 385.3074951171875 + ], + [ + 467.0721435546875, + 427.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 153.0, + 427.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 162.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 366.57135009765625, + 162.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 366.57135009765625, + 177.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 177.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.772, + 299.70000000000005 + ], + [ + 390.4054260253906, + 299.70000000000005 + ], + [ + 390.4054260253906, + 314.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 263.772, + 314.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.72, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 149.85000000000002 + ], + [ + 189.72, + 149.85000000000002 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748230" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748234/EFTA02748234.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748234/EFTA02748234.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..de3ccc779810b5a75f1a3aa050d9a630e83d003e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748234/EFTA02748234.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTERsSON TO ATTEND MEDIATION fAS TO CMA V. EPSTEIN AND 08-CIV-80811) + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion to Attend Mediation and Plaintiffs counsel being in agreement with the entry of this order, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: + +The court's no contact order, [DE 238], shall not preclude Defendant Epstein from attending Plaintiff case. deposition, mediation, or the trial of this + +DONE and ORDERED this day of , 2009 + +Courtesy Copies: Judge Kenneth Marra Counsel of record + +Linnea R. United States Magistrate Judge \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748234/EFTA02748234.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748234/EFTA02748234.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cf805232b7a12dc4ca825d26f48dd510269e884d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748234/EFTA02748234.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748234.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 875, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.7, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 413.5253601074219, + 85.05 + ], + [ + 413.5253601074219, + 114.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 114.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTERsSON TO ATTEND MEDIATION \nfAS TO CMA V. EPSTEIN AND 08-CIV-80811)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.5, + 362.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 542.5326538085938, + 362.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 542.5326538085938, + 390.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 76.5, + 390.91998291015625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748234" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748235/EFTA02748235.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748235/EFTA02748235.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..11ed200924a21219b9cf2abea97b99f181299661 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748235/EFTA02748235.md @@ -0,0 +1,164 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +### DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO ATTEND MEDIATION AND MEMORANDUM INS iTHEREOF (AS TO CMA v. EPSTEIN AND , 08-CIV-808111 + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, moves this Court for an order allowing him to attend mediation in the above-styled matter and as grounds set forth would state: + +- 1. The Court [DE 238]. +- 2. Plaintiffs counsel and plaintiff, Epstein attending deposition, mediation and obviously trial. +- 3. Therefore, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, in an abundance of caution, requests that the court enter the attached proposed Agreed Order which shall not entered a no contact order which may apply to have no objection to Mr. + +C.M.A. v. Epstein, et al. Page 2 + +preclude him from attending Plaintiff deposition, mediation, or the trial of this case. + +## Rule 7.1 Certification + +Defense counsel has spoken with Plaintiffs counsel and he has no objection to the entry of the proposed agreed order. + +Robert D. c ritton, Jr. Attorney f r Defendant Epstein + +# Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of recorgalentified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on thigday of November 2009 + +Respectfully submitt + +By: ROBERT D. ITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar . 224162 rcrit(a.bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bcfclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +C.M.A. v. Epstein, et al. +Page 3 + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler +401 East Las Olas Boulevard +Suite 1650 +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-522-3456 +Fax: 954-527-8663 +[bedwards@rra-law.com](mailto:bedwards@rra-law.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +C.M.A. v. Epstein, et al. +Page 4 + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 +561-684-6500 +Fax: 561-515-2610 +[skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com](mailto:skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-08804* + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748235/EFTA02748235.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748235/EFTA02748235.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f0228cdd84033e9f436dde6df877c0ef89254ab0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748235/EFTA02748235.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,280 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748235.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5095, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.82, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 413.120849609375, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 413.120849609375, + 99.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 99.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO ATTEND MEDIATION \nAND MEMORANDUM INS iTHEREOF \n(AS TO CMA v. EPSTEIN AND , 08-CIV-808111", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 153.0, + 384.67889404296875 + ], + [ + 468.25189208984375, + 384.67889404296875 + ], + [ + 468.25189208984375, + 425.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 153.0, + 425.68353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 158.4375 + ], + [ + 366.9440612792969, + 158.4375 + ], + [ + 366.9440612792969, + 173.4200439453125 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 173.4200439453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 264.384, + 294.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 390.4452819824219, + 294.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 390.4452819824219, + 310.3000183105469 + ], + [ + 264.384, + 310.3000183105469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 190.332, + 106.11000000000001 + ], + [ + 422.28, + 106.11000000000001 + ], + [ + 422.28, + 146.60999999999999 + ], + [ + 190.332, + 146.60999999999999 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748235" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748239/EFTA02748239.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748239/EFTA02748239.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..eea1ac5139c2fab9fe8398f14d5f23e8f6c924af --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748239/EFTA02748239.md @@ -0,0 +1,75 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES NOS. 2-8' REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR NET WORTH DISCOVERY AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiffs, Jane Does Nos. 2-8 ("Plaintiffs"), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby file this Reply Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Net Worth Discovery and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, and state as follows: + +# ARGUMENT + +# I. THE PLAINTIFFS ARE ENTITLED TO NET WORTH DISCOVERY BECAUSE EPSTEIN HAS NO VALID CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS OR PRIVILEGES THAT WOULD PREVENT SUCH DISCOVERY + +Epstein's Response contains not a single case authority in support of Epstein's dubious argument that the Fifth Amendment privilege applies to financial discovery, even where the criminal prosecution feared is not a financial crime. In an effort to confuse the issues, Epstein points this Court to the Magistrate's prior Order sustaining Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege as to the production of telephone records and the identification of witnesses with knowledge of the subject events. (D.E. 242). Those discovery requests are readily distinguishable in that they + +arguably implicate or provide evidence of Epstein's contacts with underage girls. Here, the Plaintiffs' requests for net worth discovery have nothing to do with Epstein's contacts with underage girls or his commission of a crime.' + +Epstein also argues that his net worth discovery responses could "reveal the availability to him and/or use by him of `interstate facilities' and thus would constitute a link in the chain of evidence that could potentially expose him to the dangers of self-incrimination." See Response, p. 7, n. 2. This argument is misguided. The fact that Plaintiff has access to "interstate facilities", such as an airplane, has nothing to do with his commission of a crime. In any case, Plaintiffs were not transported across the state line. All of the Plaintiffs resided in Florida at the time of the abuse and they were sexually assaulted in Epstein's Palm Beach home. The scope of the Plaintiffs' document requests at issue is limited to Defendant's net worth. The requests are unrelated to Defendant's inducement of minors to sexual activity. As a result, compelling Defendant to provide net worth discovery does not concern his Fifth Amendment rights. + +Epstein also argues that production of net worth discovery will provide a chain in the link of evidence regarding (a) "Epstein's air travel"; (b) "Epstein's communications with other relating to or referring to females coming into the United States", and (c) "Epstein's personal calendar and schedules. Yet, none of these issues are even remotely implicated by the actual discovery requests, which merely seek to identify Epstein's net worth and assets. There is no request in the net worth discovery for any documents or information pertaining to Epstein's air + +&#x27; Several pages of Epstein's Response Brief were redacted and unavailable to Plaintiffs. As a result, Plaintiffs cannot fully address all of Defendants' arguments. Clearly, Plaintiffs are prejudiced to the extent they do not have knowledge of all of Defendant's arguments. Epstein did not seek leave of court to file a redacted brief or even an in camera submission. Thus, a determination whether Epstein should be permitted to file a redacted brief and whether all the redactions are justified is necessary if the Court intends to sustain any of Epstein's objections based on Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege. + +travel, communications, or personal calendar. As an example, Plaintiff's discovery request does not seek Epstein's flight log, passenger manifests or anything about how he used his private aircraft, merely information on Epstein's assets. Nothing about disclosing the fact that Epstein has certain assets would reveal how he used those assets, or even where Epstein was located at a particular date and time. Contrary to Epstein's strenuous argument, the net worth discovery requests do not inquire as to how (or even whether) Epstein used his assets. Moreover, Epstein is incorrect and misguided that Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 will use this information to corroborate an allegation in the Complaint that Epstein transported them for purposes of sex. Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 do not even allege that Epstein transported females as part of interstate commerce for purposes of sex. In any case, the only basis for a Fifth Amendment objection is that it would aid in prosecution — not that it will facilitate civil claims. There is no Fifth Amendment privilege as to a party's production of documents merely because it will aid an opposing party in civil litigation. + +Epstein also refuses to disclose the identity of witnesses with knowledge of his net worth. Instead, Epstein argues that disclosure of the identity of such witnesses would also lead to the identity of witness with knowledge of the alleged events. There is no authority for such a broad interpretation of the Fifth Amendment. Indeed, if the Fifth Amendment were so broadly construed, a party could never get any discovery on any issue from someone charged with a crime. + +Epstein also asserts that his tax return is confidential under federal law. This argument has already been overruled as a basis for withholding tax returns in discovery when Plaintiffs were ordered by this Court to produce their tax returns. Finally, Epstein contends that third party privacy rights are implicated by plaintiffs' net worth discovery requests. This is absurd. In this litigation, plaintiffs have had to disclose the most intimate aspects of their lives, including their sexual history with non-parties. It would be grossly consistent if third party privilege rights were upheld in the context of Epstein's net worth discovery, yet denied in the areas of the most intimate aspects of Plaintiffs' lives. + +# CONCLUSION + +Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs respectfully request that Defendant's assertions of privilege and objections be denied and overruled, and that an Order be entered directing Defendant to produce documents responsive to the Plaintiffs' Requests for Production of Net Worth Documents and answer Plaintiffs' Net Worth Interrogatories. Plaintiffs further request such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +Dated: November 23, 2009 Respectfully Submitted, + +By: /s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattomey.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on November 23, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +# SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. iaoldberaer@aawna.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidroaarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack ith@searcvlaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawverwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg riosefsbera@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748239/EFTA02748239.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748239/EFTA02748239.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4137fe35f295733cf746f9ca6e4c9f6121906e20 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748239/EFTA02748239.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,410 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748239.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 7968, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.11, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFFS JANE DOES NOS. 2-8' REPLY MEMORANDUM \nIN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUESTS \nFOR NET WORTH DISCOVERY AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.05199999999999, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 538.0112915039062, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 538.0112915039062, + 376.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 74.05199999999999, + 376.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ARGUMENT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 284.58, + 473.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 362.61444091796875, + 473.03999999999996 + ], + [ + 362.61444091796875, + 487.863037109375 + ], + [ + 284.58, + 487.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. THE PLAINTIFFS ARE ENTITLED TO NET WORTH DISCOVERY BECAUSE \nEPSTEIN HAS NO VALID CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS OR \nPRIVILEGES THAT WOULD PREVENT SUCH DISCOVERY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 68.544, + 499.77 + ], + [ + 537.336, + 499.77 + ], + [ + 537.336, + 542.9830169677734 + ], + [ + 68.544, + 542.9830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONCLUSION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 262.548, + 153.09 + ], + [ + 349.8291320800781, + 153.09 + ], + [ + 349.8291320800781, + 169.10302734375 + ], + [ + 262.548, + 169.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.9223937988281, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.9223937988281, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 167.07600000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 445.149169921875, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 445.149169921875, + 113.60302734375 + ], + [ + 167.07600000000002, + 113.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748239" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748245/EFTA02748245.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748245/EFTA02748245.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..acbb98e4d0899785fa2758f18473510e9995075c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748245/EFTA02748245.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAMMI + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, VS. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +/ + +## AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEI ON TO ATTEND MEDIATION fAS TO CMA V. EPSTEIN AND , 08-CIV-80811] + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion to Attend Mediation and Plaintiffs counsel being in agreement with the entry of this order, it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that + +The court's no contact order, [DE 238], shall not preclude Defendant Epstein from attending Plaintiff deposition, mediation, or the trial of this case. + +DONE and ORDERED this as vttday of s.tvenutet 2009 + +LAPPRIES!"lehrteren aliment. A- 'mogul United States Magistrate Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Judge Kenneth Marra Counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748245/EFTA02748245.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748245/EFTA02748245.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5dd758aa31dbad3b7b08c8655aa9399dd8f3a946 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748245/EFTA02748245.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748245.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 925, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.75, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.565, + 99.29888916015625 + ], + [ + 403.6453857421875, + 99.29888916015625 + ], + [ + 403.6453857421875, + 126.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 203.565, + 126.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEI ON TO ATTEND MEDIATION \nfAS TO CMA V. EPSTEIN AND , 08-CIV-80811]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 79.95, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 527.74169921875, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 527.74169921875, + 394.55352783203125 + ], + [ + 79.95, + 394.55352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748245" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748246/EFTA02748246.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748246/EFTA02748246.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4dc32555d8d38b7a65f1e90c45e63ef4a79d50dd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748246/EFTA02748246.md @@ -0,0 +1,294 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2. + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +PLAINTIFF, RESPONSE TO THIRD PARTY WITNESS, IGOR ZINOVIEW'S, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, by and through her undersigned counsel, hereby files her Response Third Party Witness, Igor Zinoview's, Motion For Protective Order and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (D.E. 402), and in support thereof states as follows: + +- 1. Third party witness, Igor Zinoview, seeks to have this Court enter an order preventing his deposition from going forward at all, or, in the alternative, limiting the scope of permissible questioning during same. Mr. Zinoview's deposition is presently scheduled to be taken on December 18, 2009. +- 2. Mr. Zinoview has been employed by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, as his "driver, bodyguard, and trainer" since November of 2005. See Affidavit of Igor Zinoview + +(D.E. 402) dated November 9, 2009. Mr. Zinoview argues that his deposition should not go forward as scheduled because Defendant Epstein has never discussed nor attempted to discuss with him "any facts or information related to any legal matters in which he [Jeffrey Epstein] is involved." Id. From Mr. Zinoview's vague assertion springs the bold yet erroneous argument that "Mr. Zinoview cannot possibly have any knowledge or information that is presently germane to this action." + +3. It should initially be noted that a "complete prohibition of a deposition is an extraordinary measure which should be resorted to only in rare occasions." Jennings v. Family Management, 201 F.R.D. 272 (D.D.C. 2001); See also, Salter v. Upjohn Co., 593 F.2d 649, 651 (59) Circ. 1979)(It is very unusual for trial court to prohibit the taking of a deposition altogether, and absent extraordinary circumstances, such order would likely be in error.)• Inv. Properties Intern., Ltd. v. IOS, Ltd., 459 F.2d. 705, 708 (2d Circ. 1972)("an order to vacate a notice of taking deposition is generally regarded as both unusual and unfavorable . . . "). Neither Mr. Zinoview's conclusory affidavit nor his Motion provide anything even approaching the "extraordinary circumstances" necessary to justify the entry of order precluding his deposition from going forward at all. + +4. Additionally, Mr. Zinoview's vague assertion that he and Defendant Epstein have never discussed any facts or information related to any legal matters that Mr. Epstein is involved in does not give rise to requisite "extraordinary circumstances" either. Detweiler Bros, Inc. v John Graham and Company, 412 F.Supp. 416 (E.D. Wash, 1976)(Plaintiff could not properly seek to prohibit defendant from deposing plaintiff's employee via a protective order on grounds that employee had no knowledge of matters at issue.) See also 8 Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ. §2037, and "A witness ordinarily cannot escape examination by denying knowledge of any relevant facts, since the party seeking to take the deposition is entitled to test the witness's lack of knowledge.") + +5. The undersigned, as well as counsel for all of the other victims of Jeffrey Epstein, are entitled to question and challenge Mr. Zinoview on his purported lack of knowledge. Mr. Zinoview and plaintiffs' counsel very well might have a difference of opinion on what constitutes "facts and information related to any legal matters" in which Defendant Epstein is involved. The victims of Jeffrey Epstein ought not to be forced to accept Mr. Zinoview's opinion as to what constitutes "facts and information related to any legal matters" involving Jeffrey Epstein. Instead, plaintiffs should be able to explore these relevant matters directly with Mr. Zinoview, rather than being forced to rely on his twenty seven (27) word claim of lacking any knowledge. + +6. Additionally, Mr. Zinoview worked for Defendant Epstein during portions of the Palm Beach Police Department's months' long investigation which spanned from March 15, 2005 through February 2006 into the illegal sexual contact committed by Defendant Epstein against these minor plaintiffs. Accordingly, Mr. Zinoview certainly might have direct knowledge about what was going on in and around the Epstein residence during the time period in which he was employed by Defendant Epstein as his "driver, bodyguard, and trainer" while his employer was being investigated by law enforcement. Given the Defendant's voracious invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege, the plaintiffs have consistently been denied the opportunity to seek any relevant information directly from Defendant Epstein himself. Rather, plaintiffs have been forced to build their cases against Mr. Epstein by other discovery methods, including deposing his employees who may have relevant information. + +7. Third party witness Igor Zinoview has failed to meet his very high burden of establishing "extraordinary circumstances." Mr. Zinoview has failed to demonstrate the "good cause" required by Rule 26(c) to protect a person from "annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense" to overcome the liberal scope of permissible discovery. The above proposed lines of inquiry of Mr. Zinoview are certainly reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Accordingly, to the extent that it seeks to preclude his deposition from going forward at all, Mr. Zinoview's Motion should be denied + +8. Next, Mr. Zinoview also seeks to prevent questions being posed to him wherein he is first asked to "assume certain facts about which he has no knowledge," and then be asked about his "opinions about certain facts." First, it remains to be seen exactly what facts about which Mr. Zinoview has no knowledge. Second, Mr. Zinoview's opinions and beliefs about the factual matters surrounding plaintiffs' claims are relevant to exploring any potential bias and prejudice in favor of his employer and against Defendant Epstein's victims. For example, if Mr. Zinoview believes that these plaintiffs are simply inventing their claims against his employer that they were sexually victimized by Defendant Epstein while they were minor children, it very well might impact his impartiality as a witness. Third, the undersigned has no present intention of engaging in this line of questioning unless the proverbial "door" has been opened by Mr. Zinoview first. Lastly, counsel for Mr. Zinoview is certainly free to invoke the privileges afforded to him by the applicable procedural rules should he feel that his client is being asked inappropriate questions during the deposition. + +9. In conclusion and for the reasons cited above, Mr. Zinoview's Motion For Protective Order should be denied in its entirety. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, respectfully requests that this Court deny Third Party Igor Zinoview's Motion For Protective Order. + +Respectfully submitted, + +/s/Jack P ■ + +**JACK SCAROLA** + +**Florida Bar No. 169440** + +**JACK P.** + +**Florida Bar No.: 0547808** + +**Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A.** + +**2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard** + +**West Palm Beach, Florida 33409** + +**Phone: (561) 686-6300** + +**Fax: (561) 383-9456** + +**Attorneys for Plaintiff** + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on November 281h, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified below via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. + +/c/.lark P ■ + +**Jack Scarola** + +**Florida Eau No.: 169440** + +**Jack P.** + +**Florida Bar No.: 0547808** + +**Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A.** + +**2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard** + +**West Palm Beach, Florida 33409** + +**Phone: (561) 686-6300** + +**Fax: (561) 383-9424** + +**Attorneys for Plaintiff** + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119 -MARRA + +Stuart S. Mame!stein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm©sexabuseattomev,com + +ahorowitz®sexabuseattornev.corn + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhwahotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. M, Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +isx@searcvlaw.com + +ich@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +Brad , Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards©rra-lavv.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp(glaw.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datum Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia©bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsbera©podhurst.com kezell®podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecRilbrucereinhartlaw. om + +Counsel for Defendant + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq, + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +skuvi4ge000ldkitvin,cOurt + +Counsel for Plaint!, in Related Case No. + +08-08804 + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +inescebellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748246/EFTA02748246.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748246/EFTA02748246.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2cb2cb0dc2d5ec6fd6c83433c9ccfdd5c181772f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748246/EFTA02748246.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,386 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748246.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 10437, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.28, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 409.7621765136719, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 409.7621765136719, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 85.67999267578125 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 85.67999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate \nof Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 368.7734375, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 368.7734375, + 100.863037109375 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 100.863037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 40 + ], + [ + "Line", + 20 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 36 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 177 + ], + [ + "Line", + 87 + ], + [ + "Text", + 81 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748246" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748254/EFTA02748254.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748254/EFTA02748254.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dd5d823e020c3b6f0332a4c8631a5df0e9eeefb0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748254/EFTA02748254.md @@ -0,0 +1,70 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +/ + +## JANE DOE NO. 4'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF HER MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO THE SCOPE OF INQUIRY AT THE DEPOSITIONS OF JANE DOE NO. 4's PARENTS + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4 ("Plaintiff'), submits this Reply in Support of Her Motion for Protective Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe No. 4's Parents, and states as follows: + +- 1. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein attempts to distract this Court from the issue at hand by loading his Response with facts that have no bearing on the issue before the Court, such as Jane Doe No. 4's age at the time that she was sexually abused by Epstein and her history of drug experimentation. Plaintiff is merely requesting an order to prevent Epstein's attorneys from informing nonparties, her parents, of Plaintiff's sensitive, private medical information. +- 2. Granting a Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) protective order is appropriate when the interests of the party seeking relief outweighs that of the party seeking discovery, specifically when the purpose of the discovery is to annoy, embarrass, or oppress the party seeking relief. Nowhere in his Response does Epstein provide any information that suggests that informing Jane Doe No. + +4's parents through deposition questioning that Jane Doe No. 4 has had abortions is necessary or appropriate for fair depositions of the parents. Epstein has received extensive discovery on Jane Doe No. 4's abortions, including her medical records and her own testimony. Informing Jane Doe No. 4's parents about this sensitive matter through deposition questions is merely an attempt to intimidate, harass, annoy and embarrass Jane Doe No. 4, and serves no legitimate purpose in discovery. + +3. Jane Doe No. 4's parents are not expert witnesses. Their trial testimony is limited to their personal knowledge, and will not include opinion testimony. Fed.R.Evid. 602. While they will be allowed to testify at trial as to their personal observations of Jane Doe No. 4 during the relevant time period when she was being sexually abused by Epstein, their trial testimony cannot include speculation as to the causes of any mood changes, academic slumps, or emotional challenges that occurred during that time.' That would be the exclusive domain of expert testimony under the Rules of Evidence. Accordingly, informing the parents of Jane Doe No. 4's abortions is not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. + +4. Epstein also asserts that this Motion is premature as he has not scheduled the depositions of Jane Doe No. 4's parents. In fact, his attorneys have contacted Plaintiffs' counsel on multiple occasions since the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 to schedule the parents' depositions. Pursuant to Local Rule, Plaintiff's counsel conferred with Defendant's counsel prior to filing her Motion for Protective Order, who informed Plaintiff's counsel that Defendant opposed the relief requested. At no time did Defendant's counsel indicate that they may not take the parents' depositions. It is the leading deposition questions on the subject of Jane Doe No. 4's + +Likewise, Jane Doe No. 4's parents have no personal knowledge of her sexual abuse by Epstein and would not be allowed to opine as to the contribution the abuse made to the changes they observed. + +abortions that Plaintiff seeks to prevent. The depositions cannot proceed absent a court order on this issue. + +5. This Court has previously protected the anonymity and privacy of the Plaintiffs, in a manner that balanced their privacy rights with Defendant's right to investigate and conduct discovery. For example, this Court forbade Epstein from including the full caption on third-party subpoenas for the Plaintiffs' employment and medical records. + +6. Jane Doe No. 4 has demonstrated a compelling interest in preventing Epstein and his attorneys from victimizing her further by informing her parents that she has had abortions. He has not demonstrated that he has any interest in disclosing the information through leading deposition questions other than to annoy, embarrass, and harass Jane Doe No. 4. Put simply, questions that inform Jane Doe No. 4's parents - who have no knowledge of the abortions - about Jane Doe No. 4's private, medical history cannot lead to the discovery of competent, admissible evidence at trial. Accordingly, a protective order is necessary and appropriate to prevent such unnecessary, damaging questions. + +Dated: November 30, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on November 30, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. ieoldbereer@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bc1claw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidroearcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcvlaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawverwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsbere@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748254/EFTA02748254.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748254/EFTA02748254.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c4632c5b6e2afe24d8a28d697f886462d385b9e1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748254/EFTA02748254.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,311 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748254.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 6106, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.95, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JANE DOE NO. 4'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF HER MOTION \nFOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO THE SCOPE OF INQUIRY \nAT THE DEPOSITIONS OF JANE DOE NO. 4's PARENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 133.416, + 332.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 478.9031677246094, + 332.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 478.9031677246094, + 376.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 133.416, + 376.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 71.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 389.619384765625, + 71.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 389.619384765625, + 85.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 85.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 167.07600000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 445.149169921875, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 445.149169921875, + 113.60302734375 + ], + [ + 167.07600000000002, + 113.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748254" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748259/EFTA02748259.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748259/EFTA02748259.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e4649022603ee01793a37648d74584b9c12b448f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748259/EFTA02748259.md @@ -0,0 +1,1337 @@ +## 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +3 CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA1 + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +-vs- VOLUME I OF III + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +10 08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +11 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +/ + +VIDEO-CONFERENCED AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF 13 JANE DOE NO. 4 + +Tuesday, October 27, 2009 + +15 11:11 - 6:05 p.m. + +17 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 115 18 west Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +21 Reported By: + +Cynthia , RPR, FPR + +22 Notary Public, State of Florida + +Prose Court Reporting + +1 APPEARANCES: + 2 On behalf of the Plaintiff, L.M. and E.W.: + 3 MICHAEL J. WHEELER, ESQUIRE + 4 ROTHSTEIN, ROSENFELDT, ADLER + 501 East Las Olas Boulevard + Suite 1650 + 5 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 + Phone: 954.522.3456 + +6 + 7 On behalf of Jane Does 1 through 8: + 8 ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQUIRE + 9 STUART S. MERMELSTEIN, ESQUIRE + MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. + 18205 Biscayne Boulevard + 10 Suite 2218 + Miami, Florida 33160 + 11 Phone: 305.931.2200 + E-mail: Ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +12 + 13 On behalf of C.M.A.: + 14 RICHARD HORACE WILLITS, ESQUIRE + RICHARD H. WILLITS, P.A. + 2290 10th Avenue North + Suite 404 + 16 Lake Worth, Florida 33461 + Phone: 561.582.7600 + (Via Telephone) + +17 + 18 On behalf of the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein: + 19 ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE + MARK T. LUTTIER, ESQUIRE + BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP + 303 Banyan Boulevard + Suite 400 + West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + Phone: 561.842.2820 + +22 + 23 + 24 ALSO PRESENT: Jeffrey Epstein, via video conference + Jeff [REDACTED], Videographer + 25 Visual Evidence, Incorporated + +1 PROCEEDINGS + 2 --- + 3 Deposition taken before Cynthia [REDACTED], + 4 Registered Professional Reporter and Florida + 5 Professional Reporter, and Notary Public in and for + 6 the State of Florida at Large, in the above cause. + 7 - - - + 8 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the 27th day of + 9 October, 2009. The time is 11:11 a.m. This is + 10 the videotape deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 in + 11 the matter of Jane Doe No. 4 versus Epstein. + 12 This deposition is being held at 250 South + 13 Australian Avenue, West Palm Beach, Florida. + 14 My name is Jeff [REDACTED]. I am the + 15 videographer representing Visual Evidence, + 16 Incorporated. + 17 Will the attorneys please announce their + 18 appearances for the record. + 19 MR. HOROWITZ: Sure. Adam Horowitz, + 20 counsel for Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4. + 21 MR. LUTTIER: Mark Luttier, counsel for + 22 Jeff Epstein. + 23 MR. CRITTON: Robert Critton on behalf of + 24 Mr. Epstein. + 25 MR. HOROWITZ: Let me just do a -- + +1 INDEX + 2 + 3 + 4 WITNESS: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS + 5 JANE DOE NO. 4 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 EXHIBITS + 11 + 12 + 13 EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE + 14 DEFENDANT'S EX. 1 Proposal for Settlement 72 + 15 DEFENDANT'S EX. 2 Answers to Interrogatories 232 + 16 DEFENDANT'S EX. 3 Petition for Injunction 348 + 17 DEFENDANT'S EX. 4 Handwritten Note 384 + 18 DEFENDANT'S EX. 5 Psychological/Social History 394 + 19 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23 + 24 + 25 + +1 MR. WILLITS: Rick Willits on behalf of + 2 [REDACTED]. + 3 MR. HOROWITZ: Let me just note a brief + 4 objection. Per the letter that we have written + 5 to you, we intend to object and instruct our + 6 client not to answer to the extent there are + 7 questions whose answers will implicate Rule + 8 412. The issue of Rule 412 is, is before the + 9 court in a pending motion, and before the depo + 10 was set, we fully briefed the issue before the + 11 court and have noted our intent to object to + 12 questions which implicate that question -- that + 13 rule. + 14 MR. CRITTON: 412 deals with the -- + 15 MR. HOROWITZ: Sexual, sexual history. + 16 MR. CRITTON: -- sexual history, and our, + 17 we briefed it -- + 18 MR. HOROWITZ: We briefed it. + 19 MR. CRITTON: -- on both sides, and our + 20 position is, is Judge [REDACTED] was pretty clear + 21 in her order with regard to CME and with regard + 22 to this medical exam that was done by Dr. [REDACTED] + 23 in the [REDACTED] case as to why it's + 24 relevant, and why it's material and why it's + 25 important. We understand your position, don't + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 6 agree with it, and we'll proceed. MR. LUTHER: Ready? THE COURT REPORTER: Yes. MR. LUTTIER: Please state your name. you have to swear her in. Thereupon, (JANE DOE NO. 4) Having been first duly sworn or affirmed, was examined and testified as follows: THE WITNESS: Yes. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. What is your name, A. Jane Doe No. 4. Q. And how do you spell your middle name? A. (Witness spells middle name.) Q. And your last name is -- (Mr. Luther spelled the witness's last name.) A. Yes. Q. Okay. Jane Doe No. 4, when were you born? A. June 6, 1987. MR. WILLITS: I can barely hear the witness. Can we get it a little doser to her? MR. HOROWITZ: Yes. 7 a + +Page 8 1 A. Yeah, you're in trouble. 2 Q. Okay. You know that's against the law to 3 do that? 4 A. Yeah. 5 Q. All right. And you know there are 6 criminal sanctions associated with -- 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. -- lying under oath? And have you been, 9 have you been taught at any time in your lifetime 10 the importance of telling the truth? 11 A. Yeah. 12 Q. And when do you recall first being taught 13 the importance of telling the truth? 14 A. Ever since I was a little girl, my parents 15 taught me. 16 Q. Okay. And have -- to the best of your 17 knowledge have you always told the truth when you 18 are under oath? 19 A. Yeah. Well, when I was -- well, certain 20 times, yeah, when I was scared, I didn't know what 21 to do. I mean, yeah, I mean like under an 22 interview, like what are you trying to -- 23 Q. Have you always told the truth when you've 24 been under oath? That's my question to you. 25 A. Like as if today? + +Page 7 1 BY MR. LUTTIER: 2 Q. Have you ever been known by any other 3 name? 4 A. No. 5 Q. Have you ever been deposed before? 6 A. Deposed? 7 Q. That is have your deposition taken as 8 we're doing today. 9 A. No. 10 Q. Have you ever given anybody any kind of 11 statement under oath before? 12 A. The police reports, you mean? 13 Q. Could be, yeah. 14 A. Yeah. 15 Q. All right. Do you know what the 16 significance of an oath is? 17 A. Yeah, where you tell the truth. 18 Q. Okay. You understand you are under oath 19 today? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Do you know what the significance of 22 violating an oath is? 23 A. (Witness shakes head.) 24 Q. Like, if you don't tell the truth when 25 you're under oath, do you know -- + +Page 9 1 Q. As of from the day you were born until 2 today as you sit here now. 3 A. Yeah. 4 Q. What was your answer? 5 A. Yeah. 6 Q. All right. So at any point in time that 7 you ever told anybody -- 8 A. Under oath, is that like when police ask 9 you a question; is that being under oath? 10 Q. I mean when somebody -- 11 A. Because I don't think I've -- I don't 12 think I've ever been under oath like -- besides like 13 this moment. 14 Q. I think when somebody asks you and tells 15 you that you are giving a sworn statement. 16 A. I guess like if I were -- 17 MR. HOROWITZ: Are you testifying? Let me 18 object to the form. 19 MR. LUTTIER: My question stands. 20 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 21 THE WITNESS: Like, if you write a, like, 22 pre-statement or something like that? 23 BY MR. LUTTIER: 24 Q. No. If someone says to you, or asks you, 25 is everything that you say true and correct. + +Page 10 1 A. Yeah. 2 Q. And if you answer yes to that, you 3 understand you're telling them that what you have 4 told them is true and correct? 5 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 6 BY MR. LUTTIER: 7 Q. Is that right? 8 A. Yeah. 9 Q. Okay. So, at any point in time that you 10 have given a statement to anyone under oath, you've 11 always told the truth, correct? 12 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 13 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 14 BY MR. LUTTIER: 15 Q. Do you know of times that you've lied when 16 you are under oath? 17 A. Not under oath, but when I've been asked 18 questions by the police, I've been scared not 19 know -- not knowing what to do, that I didn't, like 20 speak the whole truth. 21 Q. Well, your parents, when you were taught 22 from a young age to tell the truth, did they, did 23 they tell you to tell the truth to police officers? 24 A. I've -- my parents never sat me down and 25 was like if you're going to be in front of the + +Page 12 1 Q. Okay. Have you always answered that 2 question when it's been asked of you truthfully? 3 A. Yes, most of the time. Yes. 4 Q. That wasn't my question. My question was 5 have you always answered that question truthfully? 6 MR. HOROWITZ: Form. 7 THE WITNESS: I feel like you're asking me 8 the same question and I've already answered. 9 BY MR. LUTTIER: 10 Q. You just answer my question, . Do 11 you need the court reporter to read it back to you? 12 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. Asked 13 and answered. 14 THE WITNESS: Ask me again. 15 BY MR. LUTTIER: 16 Q. Have you always answered the question, if 17 someone says to you, is everything you've told me 18 true and correct, have you always answered that 19 question truthfully? 20 A. In the past, no. 21 Q. So you've lied in the past; is that right? 22 MR. HOROWITZ: Form. 23 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 24 BY MR. LUTTIER: 25 Q. Okay. Who did you lie to, =? + +Page 11 1 police, tell the truth. They never thought in their 2 wildest dreams that I would be under, be in the 3 presence of police officers, so they're not -- they 4 don't sit me down if a police officer asks you, they 5 have only just told me, tell the truth. 6 Q. They have told you -- 7 A. They have never said, if a police 8 officer comes up to you and asks you to speak the 9 truth, tell them the truth. They have never, they 10 just told me like knowledge like the parents give to 11 kids, like teaching their kids to grow. 12 Q. So, they taught you to tell the truth 13 under all circumstances, whether you are under oath 14 or not under oath; is that right? 15 A. Yeah. 16 Q. And they told you to tell the truth to 17 everybody, whether they were a police officer or not 18 a police officer, correct? 19 A. Yeah. 20 Q. And you certainly know that if someone 21 says to you and asks you a question specifically, is 22 everything that you have said is true, you know that 23 they're asking you whether or not what you have just 24 told them is true, don't you? 25 A. Yeah. + +Page 13 1 A. The police officers that first invest -- 2 asked me questions whenever this whole thing went 3 down. 4 Q. You lied to police officers? 5 A. No, I didn't lie to them. I was scared 6 and I didn't tell them the whole truth. 7 Q. Did you tell them the truth or did you not 8 tell them the truth? 9 A. No, I did tell them the truth, but 10 didn't tell them everything. 11 Q. Did you answer their questions truthfully? 12 A. Yes. Most of the questions that they 13 asked me, I don't remember. 14 Q. Well, I don't mean most, I want to know if 15 you answered every question that -- 16 MR. HOROWITZ: That's her answer. Object 17 to the form. 18 BY MR. LUTTIER: 19 Q. -- they asked you truthfully. 20 A. I don't -- I don't recall the questions 21 they were asking me. 22 Q. Well, have you seen a transcript of the 23 interrogation and the questioning that they had with 24 you? 25 A. Probably three years ago. + +1 Q. Okay. Well, when you read the + 2 transcript -- + 3 A. I don't remember. I don't recall. + 4 MR. HOROWITZ: Just wait -- + 5 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 6 Q. You need to let me finish my question. + 7 MR. HOROWITZ: Let him finish his + 8 question. + 9 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 10 Q. When you read the transcript, were your + 11 answers all truthful? + 12 A. I don't remember the questions that they + 13 asked. I don't remember the questions. I don't + 14 know what exact questions. + 15 Q. I don't want to play semantics with you, + 16 [REDACTED]. My question is, when you read the transcript + 17 were all of your answers truthful? + 18 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form, asked + 19 and answered. + 20 THE WITNESS: I don't -- + 21 MR. HOROWITZ: You already answered. + 22 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 23 Q. Go ahead and answer my question. + 24 A. I don't, I don't -- yeah, I already + 25 answered your question. I don't know what you want + +1 Q. And that was what school? + 2 A. [REDACTED] University. + 3 Q. And it was two officers from what agency? + 4 A. I don't even know how many officers there + 5 was. I don't remember. + 6 Q. You just -- it's just a blank in your + 7 mind? + 8 A. I know that there were officers there. + 9 Q. Is it a blank in your mind how many + 10 officers were there? + 11 A. Yes. I don't recall. + 12 Q. Do you have any problem with your memory? + 13 A. No. + 14 Q. Okay. Do you know why you can't recall + 15 how many officers were there? + 16 MR. HOROWITZ: Form. + 17 THE WITNESS: Because it was a while ago. + 18 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 19 Q. Was it more -- well, okay. + 20 A. It was a scary situation. + 21 Q. So you're saying that as time passes, your + 22 recollection begins to fade; is that right? + 23 A. No. + 24 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. + 25 + +1 me to say. + 2 Q. It's not what I want you to say, [REDACTED], I + 3 want you to answer my question. And my question was + 4 when you read the transcript were all, and I + 5 emphasize the word all, of your answers as reflected + 6 in that transcript truthful? + 7 A. No. + 8 Q. So, and this was about three years ago you + 9 claim you saw a transcript of some interview between + 10 you and some police officers? + 11 A. The police officer with -- regarding + 12 Jeffrey Epstein. The question -- the first + 13 interview -- the first interview I had with the + 14 police officers. + 15 Q. And you say this happened three years ago? + 16 A. No. Last time I looked over it. First + 17 time I got interviewed, I don't remember what date + 18 it was. It was probably like four years ago, and + 19 this happened 2005 when I first got interviewed by + 20 those cops. + 21 Q. You're talking about the police officers? + 22 A. That they came and asked me questions. + 23 Q. And where did they come to ask you + 24 questions? + 25 A. At my school. + +1 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 2 Q. Your recollection doesn't fade with the + 3 passage of time; is that right? + 4 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. + 5 THE WITNESS: No. I remember certain -- I + 6 remember certain things, but small details like + 7 that -- + 8 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 9 Q. Okay. Small detail, what you've + 10 described -- + 11 A. The cops, like, they're might have been + 12 two. There might have been three. I don't -- I + 13 wasn't paying attention. Like, how many cops there + 14 was, I don't know. + 15 Q. Are you describing, when you say small + 16 detail, are you describing -- + 17 A. No, not small detail. I didn't mean it + 18 like, say it like that. I don't know how many cops + 19 there were. I don't -- + 20 Q. Are you describing the event where, where + 21 police officers interview you as being a small + 22 detail? + 23 MR. HOROWITZ: Form. + 24 THE WITNESS: No. It's not a small + 25 detail. + +Page 18 + +1 BY MR. LUTTIER: + +2 Q. Was it a significant event in your life? + +3 A. Yes, it was. + +4 Q. Had police officers often interviewed you + +5 before that? + +6 A. No. I have had before, but no, this was + +7 just -- + +8 Q. You'd had interaction with police agencies + +9 before this interview revolving, involving + +10 Mr. Epstein, hadn't you? + +11 A. Yeah, but that's -- + +12 MR. HOROWITZ: Just answer his question -- + +13 THE WITNESS: Right. + +14 MR. HOROWITZ: -- yes or no. + +15 THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +16 BY MR. LUTTIER: + +17 Q. What police agencies had you had + +18 interaction with before you had this interview with + +19 regard to Mr. Epstein? + +20 A. [REDACTED] Palm Beach cops. + +21 Q. And did you tell them the truth or did you + +22 lie to them? + +23 A. Yes, I told them the truth. + +24 Q. So, on that occasion -- + +25 A. Yes. + +Page 20 + +1 A. Yeah. + +2 Q. Now, did anything happen between the date + +3 that you were interviewed by the [REDACTED] Palm Beach + +4 Police officers, and you knew to tell the truth, and + +5 the date that you interviewed -- were interviewed by + +6 the police officers with Jeffrey Epstein, that + +7 caused you to forget that you should tell the truth + +8 when you're being interviewed by police officers? + +9 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. + +10 THE WITNESS: I was sexually abused, and I + +11 was scared. + +12 BY MR. LUTTIER: + +13 Q. And as a result of that, you forgot that + +14 you were supposed to tell the truth? + +15 A. I didn't forget. I was scared. + +16 Q. So, you intentionally didn't tell the + +17 truth to the police officers; is that correct? + +18 A. No, I didn't know what to -- I didn't know + +19 if I was going to get in trouble. I was -- I didn't + +20 know. I thought -- I didn't know what to do. + +21 Q. Did -- + +22 A. I was scared. + +23 Q. Did someone tell you that if you were + +24 going to get in trouble that was an excuse not to + +25 tell the truth? + +Page 19 + +1 Q. -- you knew that what you should do is + +2 tell the truth? + +3 A. Uh-huh. + +4 Q. All right. And how did you know that what + +5 you ought to do is tell the [REDACTED] Palm Beach Police + +6 the truth? + +7 A. Because -- do you mean, like, how do I + +8 know it was the right thing to do? Because it was + +9 the truth. + +10 Q. How did you know it was the right thing to + +11 do? + +12 A. Because it was the truth and my parents, + +13 like, taught me to tell the truth. + +14 Q. And how long was it before this interview + +15 in the Epstein matter that you -- you had + +16 interaction with the [REDACTED] Palm Beach Police? + +17 (Mr. Wheeler entered the room.) + +18 MR. WHEELER: Good morning. + +19 THE WITNESS: A year maybe. + +20 BY MR. LUTTIER: + +21 Q. Okay. So one year prior to your interview + +22 with police officers with respect to the Jeffrey + +23 Epstein matter, you had been interviewed by the + +24 [REDACTED] Palm Beach Police and you knew to tell them + +25 the truth, correct? + +Page 21 + +1 MR. HOROWITZ: Object, form. + +2 THE WITNESS: No. + +3 BY MR. LUTTIER: + +4 Q. You knew that it was an important matter + +5 that the police officers were coming to talk to you + +6 about, didn't you? + +7 A. Yeah. + +8 Q. It was a very significant matter in your + +9 life, wasn't it? + +10 A. Of course. + +11 Q. And you knew what you had to do was tell + +12 these officers the truth, didn't you? + +13 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. + +14 BY MR. LUTTIER: + +15 Q. Correct? + +16 A. For the most -- yes. + +17 Q. Well, you knew that that's what you were + +18 supposed to do, right? + +19 A. Yeah. + +20 Q. That was the right thing to do and that's + +21 what you'd always been taught to do; isn't that + +22 right? + +23 A. Yeah. + +24 Q. Okay. Now, from, from this point in time + +25 that you say the police officers came to interview + +Page 22 1 you atM University, do you recall what year that 2 was? 3 A. 2005. 4 Q. And do you remember what month it was? 5 A. No. Probably -- no. Middle of my 6 freshman year. 7 Q. Does October refresh your recollection? 8 A. October, November. 9 Q. So October or November of '05, you. 10 interviewed by one or more police officers at 11 University; is that correct? 12 A. Yeah. 13 Q. But you don't know how many officers? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Do you know what agency they were from? 16 A. Palm Beach, Florida. 17 Q. And how do you recall that the police were 18 from Palm Beach -- the, the individuals interviewing 19 you were from the Palm Beach police? 20 A. Because that's where everything happened 21 was in Palm Beach. 22 Q. Well, you have been interviewed by other 23 police agencies besides the Palm Beach police, 24 haven't you? 25 MR. HOROWITZ: Form. + +Page 24 1 Beach police, the Jupiter police and the FBI. 2 You've been interviewed by all those police agencies 3 in the past? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. And each time one of those police agencies 6 interviewed you, you knew you were to tell the 7 truth, correct? 8 A. Yeah. 9 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 10 BY MR. LUTTIER: 11 S. Did you -- when you were interviewed by 12 Palm Police agency, what was it with respect 13 to? 14 A. It was about -- what do you mean, what was 15 it with respect to? 16 Q. What were they interviewing you about? 17 A. My ex-boyfriend. 18 Q. Who is that? 19 A. Preston. 20 Q. Preston who? 21 A. Vinyard. 22 Q. S;lat the only time you were interviewed 23 by the= Palm Beach Police? 24 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 25 THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +Page 23 1 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 2 BY MR. LUTTIER: 3 Q. Who else has interviewed you? 4 MR. HOROWITZ: Form. 5 BY MR. LUTTIER: 6 Q. What other police agencies have 7 interviewed ou? 8 A Palm, Palm Beach, and Jupiter. 9 Q. Any other police agency? And by police 10 agency I mean any kind of police agency -- 11 A. FBI. 12 Q. -- federal agency, state agency, local 13 agency, any type of police agency. 14 A. FBI. 15 Q. So you're adding FBI now to your list? 16 A. Well, is that -- is that part, is that 17 part of this? 18 Q. Yeah, the FBI is a police agency. 19 A. FBI, somebody from -- I don't remember 20 what, it was like somebody, I am guessing the State, 21 somebody that was, wanted to see me, like help me 22 like psychologic, like, help me like through this. 23 I don't remember, I'm guess -- yeah, that's all, I'm 24 sure. 25 Q. So you have Palm police, the Palm + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 25 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Have you ever been arrested by the.. Palm Beach Police Department? A. Yeah. And when was that? A. When I was -- when was that? Q. Uh-huh. A. When I was 17. Q. Okay. And when was that? What's the date? A. The exact date, I don't -- Q. Roughly. A. -- remember. I don't remember. Q. Do you know -- well, when's your birthday? It's in June, right? A. June 6. Q. Okay. And it was -- it was when you were 17, between the ages of 17 and 18? A. Uh-huh. Q. And what were you -- what were you arrested for? A. It was the middle -- it was during the school year when I was 17, and I don't remember date or month. Q. And what were you arrested for? Q. + +| | Page 26 | | Page 28 | +|----|------------------------------------------------------|----|-----------------------------------------------------| +| 1 | A. DUI. | | | +| 2 | Q. Okay. And did, did you have a discussion | | | +| 3 | or an interview with the police agency when they | | | +| 4 | arrested you for DUI? | | | +| S | A. No. | | | +| 6 | Q. Did you have any discussion with a police | | | +| 7 | officer at that time when you were arrested? | | | +| 8 | A. They, they -- no, it was for DUI, like | | | +| 9 | they don't sit and interview you or write a | | | +| 10 | statement. | | | +| 11 | Q. Did they ask you any questions? | | | +| 12 | A. Yeah, have you been drinking. | | | +| 13 | Q. Did you answer any questions that the | | | +| 14 | police asked you on that occasion? | | | +| 15 | A. Yes. | | | +| 16 | Q. Did you answer truthfully? | | | +| 17 | A. Yes. | | | +| 18 | Q. Did you know that that's what you were | | | +| 19 | supposed to do? | | | +| 20 | A. Yes. | | | +| 21 | MR. HOROWITZ: Form. | | | +| 22 | BY MR. LOTTER: | | | +| 23 | Q. Okay. Have you -- have you had any other | | | +| 24 | interaction with the =Palm Beach Police | | | +| 25 | Department other than when you were arrested for DUI | | | +| | | 1 | Preston Vinyard, what did they ask you about? | +| | | 2 | A. I don't remember. I don't know what the | +| | | 3 | first time. There was several. I mean, I don't | +| | | 4 | remember. | +| | | 5 | Q. There were several times that the police | +| | | 6 | interviewed you with respect to something. | +| | | 7 | A. Two or three times. I told you that. | +| | | 8 | Q. And generally what were those interviews | +| | | 9 | about? | +| | | 10 | A. Our relationship. | +| | | 11 | Q. And what caused the police to be | +| | | 12 | interviewing you on two or three occasions about | +| | | 13 | your ex-boyfriend, Preston Vinyard? | +| | | 14 | MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. | +| | | 15 | THE WITNESS: His drink -- our | +| | | 16 | relationship. | +| | | 17 | BY MR. LUTHER: | +| | | 18 | Q. What do you mean your relationship? | +| | | 19 | Explain what you mean by that. | +| | | 20 | A. His drinking. | +| | | 21 | Q. Why would the police be interviewing you | +| | | 22 | about your boyfriend's drinking? | +| | | 23 | MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. | +| | | 24 | THE WITNESS: Because there was an abusive | +| | Page 27 | 25 | situation at one time. Page 29 | +| 1 | and an interview about your ex-boyfriend Preston | | | +| 2 | Vinyard? | | | +| 3 | A. No. | | | +| 4 | . How many times were you interviewed by the | | | +| 5 | Palm Beach Police Department with respect to | | | +| 6 | Preston Vinyard? | | | +| 7 | A. Maybe twice or three times. | | | +| 8 | Q. And do you recall when that was? | | | +| 9 | A. No, I don't. | | | +| 10 | Q. And was that a significant event to you, | | | +| 11 | that is, you being interviewed by the Palm | | | +| 12 | Beach Police Department with respect to your | | | +| 13 | ex-boyfriend Preston Vinyard? | | | +| 14 | A. Was it significant? | | | +| 15 | Q. Yeah, an important event in your life? | | | +| 16 | A. Yeah, any -- from the police, yeah. It | | | +| 17 | was the police interviewing me about my | | | +| 18 | relationship, yeah. | | | +| 19 | Q. So, so you considered that to be an | | | +| 20 | important event in your life? | | | +| 21 | A. It wasn't -- not now, no. | | | +| 22 | Q. At the time was it an important event? | | | +| 23 | A. Yeah. | | | +| 24 | Q. And on the first time that they | | | +| 25 | interviewed you about your ex-boyfriend, | | | +| | | 1 | BY MR. LUTTIER: | +| | | 2 | Q. What do you mean by abusive? | +| | | 3 | A. Where he, he -- it was -- I don't even | +| | | 4 | remember. It was, it was a while. It was just one | +| | | 5 | time. I mean, we got in like an argument and I | +| | | 6 | think the cops were called, and that was what | +| | | 7 | happened. | +| | | 8 | Q. Well, you said it had to do with a, if I | +| | | 9 | remember your testimony, an abusive situation. And | +| | | 10 | I've asked you to clarify what you mean by abusive | +| | | 11 | situation. And you say there was an argument and | +| | | 12 | the cops were called. Can you give me more -- | +| | | 13 | A No, there was -- | +| | | 14 | Q -- specifics about what this abusive | +| | | 15 | situation was? | +| | | 16 | A. There was a time where he, he would drink | +| | | 17 | a lot. He was an alcoholic, and he would get out of | +| | | 18 | control when he drank. And he would raise his | +| | | 19 | voice, get loud. And there was one time where he | +| | | 20 | got violent with me. | +| | | 21 | Q. What do you mean by, he got violent with | +| | | 22 | you? | +| | | 23 | A. He was in my face and bit my finger. | +| | | 24 | Q. What do you mean when you say he was in | +| | | 25 | your face? | + +Page 30 A. It means he was in my face. We were arguing, argument. Q. You mean he was dose -- A. Yes. Q. -- his face was close in proximity to yours? A. Yeah. Q. And he bit your finger? A. Uh-huh. Q. Was that -- MR. HOROWITZ: Instead of uh-huh just say yes. THE WITNESS: Yes. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. I assume that while that event was transpiring it was asignificant event to you. A. Yeah, when it happened. Q. Did it scare you? A. Uh-huh. Q. Did it -- did it cause -- A. Yes. MR. HOROWITZ: Thank you. THE WITNESS: Sorry. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did it cause you to have fear? + +Page 32 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. THE WITNESS: What is a more traumatic time? BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Yeah. What was more traumatic than that that had happened to you in your life as of that point in time? A. Meeting Jeffrey Epstein. Q. Meeting Mr. Epstein. Do you mean physically being introduced to the man? A. No, being sexually abused by Mr. Epstein. Q. Okay. And what do you mean by sexually abused? MR. HOROWITZ: Take your time. THE WITNESS: Being fingered by him, having him use a vibrator on me, grabbing my nipples, smelling my butt, jerking off in front of me, licking my clit, several times. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. What several times, licking your clit several times? A. Fingering me several times. Q. So, licking your clit was not several times? MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. + +Page 31 A. Yeah. Q. Fear of him, I would assume. A. Yeah. Q. Has -- up to that point in time, how did it compare to any other event that had happened in your life in terms of the shock to you and the trauma it caused you? A. It was shocking, but it made me strong, and I've moved on from that. Q. At the point in time that this interaction happened that you've described between you and Mr. Vinyard where he bit your finger and he was in your face -- A. Uh-huh. Q. -- was that the most traumatic thing that had ever happened to you in your life as of that point in time? A. No. Q. Had you had other boyfriends do the same thing to you? A. No. Q. What was a more traumatic event that had happened to you at that point in time than the event where your ex-boyfriend was in your face and bit your finger? + +Page 33 THE WITNESS: No. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Now, when did this -- anything else? A. (Witness shakes head.) Q. Is the answer, no? A. Yes, it's no. MR. HOROWITZ: don't think she even question was. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q I said anything else. A. No. Q. Now, when was the date that this event occurred where the police were summoned with Mr. Vinyard? A. With Mr.-- when what? Q. With Preston Vinyard, when you say he was in your face and he bit your finger. A. Yeah. Q. When did that happen? A. I don't remember. Q. What year? A. Maybe '06, or no, I -- sorry. I graduated '05 -- '03 maybe, '04. Q. Had you met Mr. Epstein at the time that Object to the form. I understands what the last + +Page 34 1 this event that you've described with Mr. Vinyard 2 occurred where he was in your face and bit your 3 finger? 4 A. I don't remember. Yeah, because I met 5 Mr. Epstein before or around the same time that I 6 met Preston. 7 Q. Well -- 8 A. I met him before I hung -- started, before 9 I was serious with Preston, so yeah. 10 Q. Well, do you know when you first met 11 Mr. Epstein? 12 A. Yeah, when I was 15 years old. 13 Q. And how do you know that's when you first 14 met him? 15 A. Because it was the middle of my sophomore 16 year. I was 15 years old my sophomore year. 17 Q. And how do you know it was the middle of 18 your sophomore year? 19 A. Because that's when I was in class with 20 and that's how I knew her and that's 21 who brought me there. 22 Q. Do you have any record of when you first 23 met Mr. Epstein; that is any written record 24 anywhere? 25 A. Any written record? + +Page 36 1 I met him when I did. 2 Q. Well, we're going to come back to why you 3 would tell people something that is not true, but 4 I'll get to that later. 5 MR. HOROWITZ: Move to strike, 6 argumentative. 7 BY MR. LUTT1ER: 8 Q. Now, you say you first met Mr. Epstein 9 when you were 15 in the mid homore 10 year, and you said somebody , you 11 mentioned -- 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. -- she introduced you to him? 14 A. Uh-huh. 15 Q. What do you mean she introduced you to 16 him? 17 A. She brought me to his house. 18 Q. What do you mean she brought you to his 19 house? 20 A. She drove me to her -- his house. 21 ou had some sort of discussion with 22 about going to Mr. Epstein's before she 23 drove you to his house for the first occasion? 24 A. Yeah. 25 Q. Had you had more than one discussion with + +Page 35 1 Q. Yep. 2 A. On paper? 3 Q. Whether it's -- examples, but I don't mean 4 to limit my question, examples could be you made a S note somewhere, you noted it on a calendar, you 6 wrote it down someplace. 7 A. No. 8 Q. Is there any record to the best of your 9 knowledge anywhere in the world that establishes the 10 first date upon which you met Mr. Epstein? 11 A. No. 12 Q. So, the sole basis for you to have -- for 13 you claiming that you met Mr. Epstein in the middle 14 of your sophomore year -- 15 A. I did. 16 Q. -- is your recollection; is that right? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Have you ever told anyone in the world 19 that you met Mr. Epstein for the first time at some 20 other time? 21 A. No. 22 Q. Are you sure? 23 A. From what I can recall, yeah. I don't -- 24 I mean, I don't recall, but I don't see why I 25 wouldn't tell the truth, like tell them that's when + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 25 Page 37 about going to Mr. Epstein's house before she drove you there for the first time? A. More than one conversation about going there? Q. Yep. A. Yeah. any conversations did you have with about going to Mr. Epstein's house before you went there for the first time? A. Probably two, once on the phone and once on the way there. Q. And how, how long was it or approximately how long was It before e that you had your conversations with about going to Mr. Epstein's house before you went there for the first time? A. Ask that one more time, please. Q. Do you know what the word prior means? It means before -- A. Before it happened. Q. Okay. Prior to you going to Mr. Epstein's house for the first time, how long was it iligt you had this conversation with ? Was it like a month beforehand, two months beforehand, six months beforehand? + +Page 38 1 A. I don't remember. 2 Q. Do you, do you have any idea at all? 3 A. No. 4 Q. Do you have any approximation? 5 A. No. 6 Q. Do you have any record of your 7 conversations with her? 8 A. No. 9 Q. Whether it's writing or recorded or -- 10 A. No. 11 Q. -- or any other manner? Have you ever had 12 discussions with about Mr. Epstein 13 since you went there for the first time? 14 A. Yeah. 15 Q. Have you had discussions with 16 about Mr. Epstein since you were interviewed at 17 University by the police department? 18 A. About Jeffrey Epstein? 19 Q. About anything. 20 A. Yeah. 21. 6Okay. Have you had discussions with= 22 since you were interviewed at.. University 23 by the police department about Jeffrey Epstein? 24 A. Yeah. 25 Q. And when did you last have a conversation + +Page 40 1 Q. So, sometime between December of '08 and 2 J nu ' you, to use your words, ran into 3 at Dr. Feelgood's -- 4 A. Uh-huh. 5 Q. -- in downtown West Palm Beach? 6 A. Yeah. 7 Q. Was it an accidental meeting -- 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. -- or was it a planned meeting? 10 MR. HOROWITZ: This will help you out. 11 Just kind of wait until he's -- 12 THE WITNESS: Done talking. 13 MR. HOROWITZ: -- he's done talking, yeah, 14 because, you know, it's for both of your 15 benefits. 16 THE WITNESS: Sorry. What? 17 BY MR. LUTTIER: 18 Q. Was it a coincidental meeting, or had you 19 planned to meet her there? 20 A. Coincidental. 21 Q. And why were you going to Dr. Feelgood's 22 on this occasion when you ran into her? 23 A. To hang out with friends. 24 Q. Were you going alone or were you alone? 25 A. No, I wasn't. + +Page 39 1 with about Jeffrey Epstein? 2 A. When we were out. 3 Q. Out? What do you mean by -- 4 A. I ran into her in a club. 5 Q. What dub? 6 A. Dr. Feelgood's. 7 Q. And where is Dr. Feelgood's located? 8 A. Downtown Clematis. 9 Q. And when did you run into her at 10 Dr. Feelgood's? 11 A. Probably January, maybe. 12 Q. January of what year? 13 A. '09 or '08 or it was, maybe 2008, 2009, 14 somewhere between. 15 Q. Which is it, 2008 or 2009? 16 A. It was like January, like right before, in 17 like January. 18 Q You mean -- 19 A '08, like -- 20 Q. The end of '08 -- 21 A. -- like December. 22 Q. Okay. 23 A. Yeah, the end of '08, beginning of '09. I 24 don't remember exactly what month, but I know it was 25 in that time frame, approximately. + +Page 41 1 Q. Who were you with? 2 A. Lauren. 3 Q. lib who? 4 A. 5 Q. And who is 6 A. Used to be one of my friends. 7 Q. I assume -- 8 A. Friend, a friend of mine. 9 Q. Okay. 10 A. Not used to be a friend of mine. 11 Q. Okay. Was anybody -- ' o to 12 Dr. Feelgood's with this friend ? 13 A. Yes. 14 . ere anybody else with you and 15 when you went to Dr. Feelgood's? 16 A. No. 17 Q. So, the two of you had hooked up, as they 18 say, and were heading to Dr. Feelgood's? 19 A. We went out together. 20 Q. Okay. And had you gone with 21 to some other place before you went to 22 Dr. Feelgood's? 23 A. No, we got ready at her -- her place, and 24 then went together. 25 Q. Her place meaning what? + +Page 42 1 A. Her house where she's staying. 2 Q. Does she live here locally, or did she at 3 that time? 4 A. Yeah. 5 Q. And where did she live? 6 A. Briar Bay. 7 Q. Briar, B-r-i-a-r? 8 A. Uh-huh. 9 Q. Did she have a house or an apartment or 10 something there? 11 A. She was staying with her boyfriend. 12 Q. And who was that? 13 A. Brian. 14 Q. Brian who? 15 A. I don't, I don't know his last name. 16 Q. Had you met him before? 17 A. Uh-huh. 18 MR. HOROWITZ: Yes? 19 THE WITNESS: Yes. Sorry. 20 BY MR. LUTTIER: 21 Q. And who drove on this occasion that you 22 went to Dr. Feelgood's? 23 A. I don't remember. 24 Q. Did you have a car then? 25 A. Yes. + +Page 44 1 too? 2 A. I think she took the semester off because 3 she had something happen with her family. I 4 remember -- 5 Q But she -- 6 A I don't know if she was still in school or 7 if she was already off. I don't remember. 8 Q. But this is atlEi University? 9 A. Lauren? 10 Q. Yeah. 11 A. No. 12 Q. And you said shLtiaRk the semester off. 13 A. She didn't go tone 14 Q. 5, she went to a different -- do you know 15 where she went? 16 A. FAU. 17 Q. MU. What campus? 18 A. Boca, I'm pretty sure. 19 Q. All right. So, all ri ad 20 it been since you had seen before you 21 got together to go to Dr. Feelgood's? 22 A. She's a good friend of mine. I see her, I 23 mean, saw her often. 24 Q. And you two were at different colleges, 25 correct? + +Page 43 1 Q. What car did you have then? 2 A. A Saturn. 3 Q. Did have a car then? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. What did she have? 6 A. An Ultima. 7 Q. Is there any record anywhere that you 8 could consult to refresh your memory about who drove 9 on this occasion -- 10 A No. 11 Q -- when you went to Dr. Feelgood's? 12 A. Huh-uh. 13 Q. What kind of car did you say she had? 14 A. An Ultima. 15 Q. Do you remember the color? 16 A. Silver. 17 Q. And why were you and getting 18 together to go to Dr. Feelgood's on this occasion in 19 December of '08 or January of '09? 20 A. To hang out. 21 Q. And now by December of '08, were you 22 already a student at univers? 23 A. I was still a student at= University, 24 yes. 25 Q. And was a student there, + +Page 45 1 A. Uh-huh. 2 Q. Would you see her often while you were 3 each enrolled in your different colleges? 4 A. Yes. 5 . Wi what degree of frequency did you see 6 7 A. Well, we were friends. We saw each other 8 often. Sometimes we -- maybe a week. Sometimes I'd 9 see her every day. 10 Q. Even while you were at college? 11 A. I have been friends with her for years. 12 Yes. 13 Q. Well, let's talk about in the year 2008. 14 A. Uh-huh. 15 In the year 2008, you were a student at 16 University for that entire year, correct? 17 A. In the beginning of the year, I probably 18 saw her about maybe once a week, not even, maybe 19 two -- maybe twice every two weeks. I mean, I 20 don't, I don't remember. 21 Q. Let's break this down. In Walendar I. 22 year 2008, you were a student at University for 23 the entire year, correct? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. In the calendar year 2008, was + +' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 46 a student at FAU for the entire year? A. Yes. I don't know if she was there for the entire year. Q. All right. For some period, at least, she was a student? A. Yeah. Q. You lived -- did you live on the campus at . 1? A. I lived on cam us. Q. Where did live? A. With her boyfriend. Q. On the FAU campus? A. No, in Briar Bay. Q. And Briar Bay is in what city? A. Palm Beach. Q. So, sa was commuting from -- A. Yes. Q. Boca? A. Yes. When, when I asked you if you were living at University on campus, I, I meant that to mean full time. Did you understand that? A. Yeah, freshman through senior year. Q. Did you have an apartment or something Palm Beach to the FAU campus in + +Page 48 1 Q. Earlier you mentioned that in the 2 beginning of the year you thought you might have 3 seen her every day. 4 A. On weekends, like when I -- when I had -- 5 I played soccer. I don't know exactly my -- when I 6 was in my soccer schedule, when I was traveling a 7 lot for soccer, I had soccer games. So whenever I 8 wasn't playing soccer, I hung out with Lauren. 9 Q. All right. Then give me your -- if you 10 can't give me more specifics, give me your best 11 approximation of what degree of frequency. 12 A. Once a week maybe. 13 Q. Okay. And that would be -- 14 A. Or maybe I would -- maybe I would see her 15 maybe twice that month. 16 Q. Did there come a time in the calendar year 17 2008 that you saw her with greater frequency? 18 A. When my season, soccer season ended. 19 Q. And when is that? 20 A. It ended in October. 21 Q. So, ober of '08, did you 22 begin to see more frequently? " 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Now, how long had 25 friend of yours? been a + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 there? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. during the entire period of time in 2008? A. From junior to senior year. Q. And your junior year was what year, calendar year? A. '08 to '09. Q. Okay. All right. Now, during that you were living in that dorm and was commuting back and forth to FAU from Palm Beach, in the calendar year 2008 with what degree of frequency did you personally see A. Of '08? Q. Of '08. A. I don't know. She was my friend. I saw her once a week maybe. Page 47 No. Did you have a house there? No. Did you have a dorm there? Dorm. Okay. What dorm did you live in? Newland. N-e-w-1-a-n-d? Uh-huh. And you were -- were you in the same dorm + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 a 21 22 24 25 Page 49 A. Maybe five, six years. Wait, sophomore, junior, senior, freshman. Yeah, like five years. Q. And when did you first meet her, when you were in high school? A. Uh-huh. Yes. Q. Was she in the same class as you were? A. Q. A. Q. A. No. Was she ahead of you in high school? Yes. How many years? One year. t. On this occasion when you and went to Dr. Feelgood's and ran into , di -- indicated • that you had a conversation with about Jeff Epstein. Do you recall that testimony? A. Yes. Q. And was it just the three of you for ' n, that is you, A. No, it was just me and Haley. milJust you and Haley. And where wasat the time of this conversation? A. Dancing and hanging out with a guy. She wasn't sober. + +• 1 Page SO Q. Was there ever -- she what? A. She wasn't sober. Q. Were you sober? A. Yes. Q. And did this interaction occur when you first got there or after you had been there for some period of time? A. We had been there probably 30 minutes. Q. Was sober when she got there? MR. CR1TTON: Are you saying Lauren or Haley? I'm sorry. MR. LUTHER: No, Lauren. BY MR. LUTHER: Q Yeah, was there? MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. THE WITNESS: No, we both went there together. BY MR. LUTHER: QWas sober when you got there. MR. HOROWITZ: Form. THE WITNESS: No. Well, yeah. When we left Dr. Feelgood's, no. We went to sober when you got + +Page 52 A. More of an acquaintance than a friend. Me and her were never -- never really hung out. Like moderations, like, hung out maybe for a month and then we wouldn't talk for four months. Q. Okay. But in any event, you were dishonest with her when she asked you if you were suing Jeff Epstein? A. Uh-huh, because I didn't want to speak about it to her. Q. Well, what else did you and she discuss about Jeff Epstein on that occasion? A. Nothing. I told her I wasn't seeing him, and I didn't want to talk about it. Q. Well, there wouldn't have been anything to talk about if you weren't seeing him, right? A. Yeah. MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. So, what did you mean when you said you didn't want to talk about it? A. Nothing, I just -- I didn't tell her I didn't want to talk about it. I just said no, and then I just -- we talked about what, where she's been for the last, like, while. Q. Now, I just want to darify: You + +Page 51 first. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. When did you, how long had you been at A. Maybe like two hours. Q. Was there any time on this occasion when you went to Dr. Feelgood's that you and and were together talking? A. Lauren didn't really talk to Haley much that night. She, she was, she said hi to her, but she was like, more like, she wasn't like there. She was like dancing, having a good time, so we just left. Q. And what was the conversation that transpired between you and regarding Jeff Epstein? A. She asked me if I was suing Mr. Epstein. Q. And what did you say? A. I told her no, because I didn't want to -- I didn't want to talk to her about the situation. I was out. Q. And so you lied to your friend A. She's not my -- she's not a friend. Q. Was she ever a friend of yours? ME? + +Page 53 understand that today you are under oath, right? A. Yes. Q. And you understand that means that you have sworn that you are going to tell the truth? A. Yes. MR. HOROWITZ: Let me just -- you have instructed her, and she -- she said she understood the oath, so I'm not sure where you are going. I object to the form and move to strike. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Did you say anything else to on this occasion at Dr. Feelgood's about Epstein? MR. HOROWITZ: Form. THE WITNESS: No. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Are you sure? A. Yes. Q. Did you say anything to on this occasion at Dr. Feelgood's -- A No. Q -- about Jeff Epstein? A. No, I told her that I -- she saw Lauren there. Me and her both seen Haley for the first + +Page 59 time in years, and we saw her. We were just like in shock and that was it. That's all we talked about, like, God, I can't see -- I can't believe we're seeing Haley here since the whole Jeffrey Epstein. That's the only conversation that me and Lauren had. Q. So, how long did the conversation between you and Haley take? A. About, about Mr. Epstein? Q. Yeah. A. Like five seconds. Q. And that was the only thing that was said was what you just told me? A. About Mr. Epstein, yes. . Now, ou kind of indicated that you said was an acquaintance of yours? A. Uh-huh. . But did you tell me earlier that was the person that drove you over to Mr. Epstein's the first time? A. Yeah. Q. So, at that time, that is the time she drove you over to Mr. Epstein's, was she more than an acquaintance of yours? A. We were friends on and off. I never trust, I could never trust her. + + Page 56 Q. What did you -- A. In high school you're, you're friends with somebody one day and you're not the next. Q. So when did you first learn that you felt A. Whenever I intro.., to some of my that you couldn't trust friends and I later found out that she was talking about me behind my back. Q. What did you learn she was saying about you behind your back? A. I don't remember exactly what it was. I just remember that she was saying stuff behind my back, and that was the reason why we didn't get along. We fought because of that occasion. We got into a fistfight. Q. When did you get into afistfight with MOM A. Probably like, I don't know. I don't even remember. Sometime in high school, sophomore, junior year -- or sophomore to junior, junior year, sometime around then. I don't remember. Q. Which was it? You said you met her -- A. I met her in --Q. -- in your sophomore year. A. Yeah, sophomore year. + +Page 55 Q. Why couldn't you trust her? A. Because she wasn't, like, truthful. She was, she -- there was -- she was shady about situations. She'd be your friend one minute and then behind your back the next. Q. And how long did you know MIMI A. How long have I known her or how long did I know her? Q. No, at that time how long had you known her? A. I met her my sophomore year, I don't think -- I don't know. Q. So, from the beginning, the first day you met her, you -- A. No, I met her in class. It was -- I know it was my Spanish class. I don't know if it was fall or spring. I just know I met her in my Spanish class. Q. In your junior year -- A No. Q -- or sophomore year? A. My sophomore year. Q. So, from the first time you met her, did you know that she was somebody you couldn't trust? A. No. + +Page 57 Q. So -- MR. CRITTON: You guys are talking over one another. MR. LUTTIER: Thank you. MR. CRITTON: We're going to have a miserable record. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. So, was it the year that you met her that you got into afistfight with her or the next year? A. I don't remember. Q. So anything, any record from which you could consult to refresh your memory? A. No. Q. And where did this fistfight occur? A. I don't remember. Q. Was it asignificant event in your life that you're having afistfight with another girl in your sophomore year of high school or junior year of high school? A. I mean, at that time I'm sure, but not -- Q. Was that something that often happened in your life that way -- A. No. Q. -- you'd have afistfight with another girl? + +Page 58 A. No, never. Q. And you have no -- A. She, like, came at me. MR. HOROWITZ: Just answer what he asks. THE WITNESS: Sorry. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. What do you mean, she came at you? A. Fighting me with her hands. Q. But you can't recall where that happened? A. At a party in high school. Q. So, now you do recall where it happened? A. I don't know where it was. We were out one night. Q. And what was the cause of the fight? A. Her talking behind my back and me asking her about it and -- Q. Well, what did she say behind your back? A. I don't remember. Q. This event that was -- you've described as being significant, you don't recall what the specific cause of it was? MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. THE WITNESS: No. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. And how long did this fistfight go on at + +Page 60 Q. And you said one of those was on the phone and one was in the car on the way to Mr. Epstein's. Have I got that right? A. Not on the phone. In a car, she drove me there in the car talking about it. Q. So there was two conversations. The first conversation was between you and her on the phone. A. Yeah. Q. The second conversation was when you were in the car driving to Mr. Epstein's? A. Yes. Q. All right. Now, how is it that you are able to recall that there were only two conversations between the two of you about -- A. I said -- MR. HOROWITZ: Wait for him to finish the question. THE WITNESS: Sorry. I said it was possibly two conversations. I didn't say that there was. But from what I remember I said there was possibly two conversations. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Could there have been more? A. Yeah. Maybe. I don't remember. Q. Okay. And do you recall when the first + +Page 59 this party? A. It wasn't -- she just came at me. We didn't, like, touch each other, like people pulled us back, but it was about to like, like become a fight. She was like coming at me and somebody pulled her, like, off me. Q. And when did this occur in relationship to when she took you to Mr. Epstein's for the first time? A. I don't remember. Q. Before or after she took you to Mr. Epstein's for the first time? A. S this was after. Q. So there was some period of time between when you first met her in your sophomore year and this fight that you were friendly with her? A. When I first met her, yes. I didn't know. MR. HOROWITZ: Just answer what he asks. THE WITNESS: Sorry. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Now, you said that ou had two conversations with before you went -- she took you to Mr. Epstein's for the first time, correct? A. Uh-huh. + +Page 61 phone conversation with was in relationship to the point in time that you were actually taken to Mr. Epstein's? A. Do I remember -- sorry, ask the question again. Q. Was it amonth, two months beforehand? A. No, I don't remember. Q. What was the substance of your first conversation with about Jeffrey Epstein, the one that you described as having taken place on the phone? A. What did the conversation consist of? Q. Yes. A. She said that there's this guy in Palm Beach that she knows, that you get \$200 if you give him a massage, and that you don't have to -- she said that like, if he asks about your age, don't say anything, like, not to tell him, and I mean that was pretty much it. Q. Did she tell you anything else? A. No. MR. LUTTIER: Would you go back and read her answer for me? (The requested portion of the record was read by the reporter.) + +Page 62 ' 1 BY MR. LUTTIER: 2 Q. What did you mean when you started to say 3 you don't have to? What were you talking about, 4 don't have to? What was she referring to? 5 A. What do you mean, don't -- nothing, I 6 was -- 7 Q. Well, you said that she told you, you 8 don't have to, and then you went off on something 9 else. 10 A. Nothing. I know there was nothing that 11 she said I don't have to. I misphrased my words. 12 Q. So she didn't say to you anything that you 13 don't have to? 14 A. No. What do you mean don't -- like, I 15 don't have to tell him how old you are, like your 16 age. I rephrased. 17 Q. So, what she said to you, your best 18 recollection is -- 19 A. Yeah, she said, like, don't tell him -- 20 Q. -- you don't have to tell him your age or 21 don't tell him your age? 22 A. Don't tell him your age. 23 Q. Okay. And did she say anything else to 24 you? 25 A. Not that -- I mean, no. + +I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 64 Q. So the only thing you knew was you were going to somebody's house in Palm Beach and you were going to give him a massage, but you weren't to tell him your age. Is that what you're telling me? MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. THE WITNESS: (Witness nods head.) BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. You need to -- audibly. A. Yeah. Q. And are you sure about that? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. Have you ever told anybody in the world any different story about what you were told by MIR MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. THE WITNESS: I mean, not that I remember. I don't, I never really talked to anybody about this situation. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Well, that's not true. We talked to -- MR. HOROWITZ: Excuse me. Move to strike. You can't testify. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Well, didn't you tell me earlier that you talked to the Palm Beach Police, you talked to the + +Page 63 1 Q. Did she tell you anything else about what 2 to expect or what would be expected of you? 3 A. No, she said that, like, he -- well, she 4 said, I don't -- no, I mean, no. She said, like, 5 she made it seem like it wasn't like a big deal, 6 like, all you're going to go there, you're going to 7 give him a massage, you're going to get \$200 for it, 8 and then you're going to leave. 9 Q. That wasn't my question. My question was, 10 did she tell you anything else -- 11 A. No. 12 Q. -- about what to expect? Not a single 13 word from her mouth about what to expect? 14 A. No. You mean to give him a massage? 15 Q. Okay. I got that. You said she said you 16 have to give him a massage and don't tell him how 17 old you are. Those are the only two things she told 18 you before you went to Jeffrey Epstein's? 19 A. About Mr. Epstein? Yes. 20 Q. Well, about anything else before you went 21 to Mr. Epstein's? 22 A. Conversations? 23 Q. Yeah. Anything else she said to you 24 before you went to Mr. Epstein's? 25 A. No. + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 65 FBI, you thought you talked to somebody from the State about this situation? A. Yeah, other than people that come -- like ask me about it, not like friends or like -- what are you -- like, never mind, I won't even -- Q. My question was have you ever told anybody in the world anything different about what A. Not that I remember, no. Q. -- told you? A. No, not that I remember. Q. You wouldn't have just made stuff up -- A. No. Q. -- and told somebody some fabricated story, would you? A. No. Q. So, if you told somebody something else -- A. No, but no, I -- Q. -- it would have been the truth; is that right? A. (No verbal response.) Q. If you told somebody anything else about what'll= told you about what to expect, it woul aye been the truth even though you don't recall it now; is that correct? + +Page 66 1 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 2 THE WITNESS: No. Uke -- 3 BY MR. LUTTIER: 4 Q. No? 5 A. Sorry. Say that one more time. I'm so 6 confused. Say that one more time. 7 Q. You wouldn't have made something up and 8 told somebody something that wasn't true about what 9 =MI told you to expect? 10 A. No, I would not make something up. 11 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 12 BY MR. LLRTIER: 13 Q. So, if there is testimony about you 14 telling others wha told you to expect, 15 it would have been truthful -- 16 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to form. 17 BY MR. LUTTIER: 18 Q. -- what you told them, correct? 19 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 20 THE WITNESS: If that's what I said? 21 BY MR. LUTTIER: 22 Q. Yeah. 23 A. If it was written down, yeah. 24 Q. For example, let's just assume, for 25 purposes of this question, you told the police + +Page 68 1 THE WITNESS: I don't remember, no. 2 BY MR. LUTTIER: 3 Q. -- to expect at Jeffrey Epstein's; is that 4 correct? 5 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to form. 6 BY MR. LUTTIER: 7 Q. Do you want her to read it back to you? 8 A. Yeah. 9 Q. She'll read it back to you. 10 (The requested portion of the record was 11 read by the reporter.) 12 THE WITNESS: No, she could have. I don't 13 remember. 14 BY MR. LU 15 Q. So, could have told you a lot 16 of other things about what to expect at 17 Mr. Epstein's, but you just don't recall what she 18 said as you sit here now; is that right? 19 A. Yeah. 20 . . Like, as you think about it now, 21 actually told you what to expect in 22 terms of what you should wear or not wear, didn't 23 she? 24 A. No. 25 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. + +Page 67 1 officers that told you more than what 2 you just told me. 3 A. Well, then I forgot what I said to the 4 police officers. 5 Q. Wait, wait a minute. 6 A. I am just remembering the specific details 7 that I remembered that I will never forget. 8 Q. That's not my point. Well, you've -- 9 apparently, you are not sure if you forgot other 10 things, right? 11 A. No. If there's other -- there was like -- 12 IN, never mind. 13 Q M, no we're going to -- 14 A I don't understand what you're trying to 15 ask. 16 Q. -- get. I want to go through this. I 17 want to make sure that we're very dear about what 18 your recollection is. 19 A. I am sorry, I don't remember. 20 Q. Let me put it to you straight. 21 A. I am telling you what I remember. 22 Q. Okay. So you're not denying that you told 23 police officers that told you more than 24 what you just told me she told you to expect -- 25 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to form. + +1 2 3 I 6 7 B 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 69 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. You're sure of that? A. Yeah. Did you ever tell anybody that told you what to expect in terms of what you should wear or not wear -- MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. -- when you went to Mr. Epstein's? A. What I should wear? Q. Wear or not wear. What was to be expected of you; i.e., would you be clothed, would you not be clothed, that kind of stuff. A. Yeah, to wear dothes. Q. So that's all you recall as -- well, strike that. What did Haley tell you about what to wear or not wear? A. I don't remember. Q. You are not denying that she said something to you; you just don't recall? A. I don't see why she would tell me to wear something. Q. That's not my question. You're not denying that she told you something about what to + + Page 70 wear or not wear? A. I don't remember. How about were there any statements I= ade to you of whether it would be expected that you would have your clothes on or you would remove any portion of your clothes during the massage? MR. HOROWITZ: We're going an hour, so -- 8A. No, that I'd keep my clothes on. 8 MR. LUTTIER: Just mark that as Exhibit 1. 9 Q. Did that -- did you have that conversation 9 (Defendant's Exhibit No. 1 was marked for with 1=i...before you went to Jeffrey 10 identification.) 11Epstein's the first time? 11 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record at A. I don't remember. 12 12:07. 13Q. So, you don't know? You're not telling us 13 (A brief recess was held.) 14 under oath today that told you that you 14 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: It is now 12:15. were going to go to Jeffrey Epstein's house, give 15 BY MR. LUTTIER: him a massage, you were going to leave all your 16 Q. IR I have now handed you what's been 17clothes on, and you were going to get paid \$200? 17 marked as x ibit No. 1. Can you -- have you ever MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 18 seen that document before? THE WITNESS: Yeah, why would I take my -- 19A Yeah, with my lawyer. BY MR. LUTHER: 20 Q. Have you ever seen that document? 21Q. I am not asking you why, a The "why" 21 MR. HOROWITZ: She said yes with her is no matter. I want to know whether you're 22 lawyer. denying -- 23MR. LUTTIER:' did she? Okay. A. No, I don't remember. 24 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. -- that, that she told you anything about 25 Q. So, you have had an opportunity to review + + Page 72 THE WITNESS: What am I reading? MR. HOROWITZ: Nothing. Just look it over. Can we take a break? MR. LUTHER: Yeah, I was going to ask you just to let her look at that while we take a break. + +Page 71 Page 73 what would be expected in terms of whether you were 1 this before today? THE WITNESS: No, I don't remember. 4 MR. HOROWITZ: Let me just object to the, + +going to have your clothes on. 2 A. Uh-huh. MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 3 Q. And you're aware of its contents? BY MR. LUTTIER: 5 to the exhibit as being used for any purpose Q. Good, but you're not denying that -- 6in, in this litigation. And by that definition MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 7 it can't be. It's astatutory proposal for BY MR. LUTTIER: 8 settlement. Q. -- she said something about it? 9 BY MR. LUTTIER: MR. HOROWITZ: mars the fifth time 10 Q. All right. And, and do you recall you've asked that question. 11 approximately how long ago you first saw this BY MR. LUTHER: 12 document? Q. Correct? Is it yes or no? 13 A. A while ago. MR. HOROWITZ: Well, it's not a yes or no. 14 Q. What's your best approximation? Object to the form. 15 A. I don't --MR. LUTTIER: I get to ask the questions. 16 MR. HOROWITZ: Don't wait for me. We're MR. HOROWITZ: Yeah, and she said -- she 17 on record. gets to answer them. She said I don't know. 18 THE WITNESS: I don't know. BY MR. LUTTIER: 19 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Is it a yes or a no? 20 Q. Okay. Was it six months, a year? Just a A. I don't -- 21 rough approximation. MR. HOROWITZ: I don't know is her answer. 22 A. Yeah. Move on. 23 Q. Do you understand what it is? MR. LUTHER: Let me show you something, 24 A. Uh-huh. Let's mark this as Exhibit No. 1. 25 Q. Okay. That's ayes? + +• 1 Page 74 A. Yeah. Q. All right. Now, you say you -- your, your recollection is that you first saw Mr. Epstein in the middle of your sophomore year. When was the last time that you were, that you went to Mr. Epstein's or saw him? By "saw him"I mean performed amassage on him or went to his house. A. It was like my freshman year in college. Q. That's -University? A. Uh-huh. Q. And that would be the year 2005? A. 2005, 2006. Q. Okay. Well, you graduated from high school in --A. '05. Q. -- June of '05. That would have been when you turned 18, right? A. Uh-huh. Q. Okay. Then you started at University in about August of '05 -- A. Fall. Q. -- Is that correct? A. Uh-huh, correct, in the fall. So, and then it was after you had started ME University you, you were still going to + +Page 76 they came to see you? A. Probably, yeah. I was there. Q. And with what degree of frequency did you go to Mr. Epstein's between June of '05 and October of '05? That covers the summer of '05 and the fall of '05. A. Maybe twice a week. Every single time. MR. HOROWITZ: He's saying summer and fall of '05. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Right, do you know specifically -- A. Maybe like whenever -- every time he was in town, maybe like two to three times a week. Q. So, for the month of June '05, July '05, August '05, September '05, and October '05, that's five months, your recollection is that you were going to Mr. Epstein's twice a week during that period? A. Two or three times. MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Two or three times per week? A. Uh-huh. Every single time -- or every time he was in the States or in Palm Beach. Q. Well, was he in Palm Beach for the entire + +Page 75 Mr. Epstein's, correct? A. Uh-huh. Q. And do you recall when the last time you went to Mr. Epstein's in relationship to when you were interviewed by the Palm Beach Police Department? A. Do I -- sorry, ask the question again. Q. Yeah. When was the last time you went to Mr. Epstein's in relationship to when you were interviewed by the police at I. University? A. Sometime in '05, like right before I went --Q. Literally it was days before you were interviewed by the police that you had been to Mr. Epstein's, wasn't it? A. I don't know. Probably. Q. It was like October of '05 that the police came to see you at. University? A. Maybe. I don't know. I know -- I don't remember. I know it was like sometime in '05. I don't remember. It was between like the middle of my freshman year. Q. Did you, do you recall that when the police were there seeing you that, that you had been to Mr. Epstein's within less than ten days before + +Page 77 period from June 1st of '05 to October of '05? MR. HOROWITZ: Form. THE WITNESS: No, not that I can remember. He was always traveling. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Do you know for what period of time he was in Palm Beach between June and October of '05? A. No. Like, whenever he would come down, he would stay for, I don't even know, I mean -- Q. So it would be a fair statement to say you don't know how often you went to Mr. Epstein's? A. Yeah, I do. I went there every two or three times. But I just don't -- every time he came he would come for the week and he'd leave or maybe he'd come for two days and then leave. Maybe he'd be down here for a month and then leave. Q. Can you tell me how many times you went to Mr. Epstein's between June 1st of 2005 and October 31st of 2005? MR. HOROWITZ: Form. THE WITNESS: How many times I went? BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Uh-huh. A. Well, approximately, approximately like 30 or, I don't know, but approximately like 30 to 50 + +Page 78 ' 1 times. Q. Okay. In that time period? A. Like, or yeah. Q. Okay. Now, during that entire time S period, actually from the 6th of June until October 31st of '05, you were 18 years of age, correct? A. How old? From June -- yeah. Q. From June 6th, 2005, until October 31st, 2005, you were 18 years of age -- A. Uh-huh. Q. -- correct? On each occasion that you went to Mr. Epstein's during the period from June 1st of 2005 through October 31st of 2005, you went voluntarily, correct? A. Yeah, I went there. Q. As a matter of fact, every time that you went to Mr. Epstein's, you went voluntarily? MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Isn't that correct? MR. HOROWITZ: Objection. THE WITNESS: Yeah, I went there. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Okay. You went voluntarily. Nobody + +Page 80 next to like a massage booth, and he was on the phone like, like the whole time that I was in there giving him a massage. I think he said hi to me. I think I talked to him a whole matter of maybe five minutes. And then he left the money on the bathroom and I left. Q. And were you fully clothed during -- A. Yes. Q. -- that entire time? A. Yes. Q. And did you get paid money? A. Yeah. Q. What did you get paid? A. \$200. Q. And did get paid money? A. Yes. For my -- Q. What did she get paid? A. \$200. Q. And were you aware of that at the time? A. Yeah. Q. And did she tell you that? A. Uh-huh. Q. And when did she tell you that, before you went or after you went? A. I don't remember. + +Page 79 forced you to go to Mr. Epstein's, correct? MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form, compound. THE WITNESS: Yeah. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. All right. And that would be true from the time took you on the first time until you last went sometime in October of '05? MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Correct? A. Uh-huh. Q. And on the very first visit that you went to Mr. Epstein's when took you there, what occurred? A. From the first occasion? Q. Yes. A. Nothing. I went there. I went, went there, met with Sarah. She brought me upstairs. Table was set up. He was in the office or upstairs in the bathroom. And showed me where the lotion was, gave me lotion and told me that he was going to be in, be coming in through the bathroom. And then whenever he got in there, the first time I went, he was on -- he has aphone right + +Page 81 Q. Was there asignificant gap in time before you went back to Mr. Epstein? A. Yeah. Q. Approximately how long, a year? A. No, less than a year. Probably about like five to six months. Q. Have you ever told anyone that it was close to a year before you went back to Mr. Epstein? A. Maybe. I don't, I don't know. Q. Was it -- when you went back to Mr. Epstein's for the second time, how did you get there? A. I think Jane Doe No. 3 took -- this girl Jane Doe No. 3 took me. Q. What is Jane Doe No. 3's name? A. Jane Doe No. 3. What do you mean, what's her name? Q. What's her name? What's her last name? A. Jane Doe No. 3. S wait, yeah. Q. And was she a friend of yours? A. Yeah. Q. And why was she taking you to Mr. Epstein's? MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. THE WITNESS: Because I didn't have a + +Page 82 vehicle to travel. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Well, did Jane Doe No. 3 contact you about going to Mr. Epstein's, or did you contact Jane Doe No. 3 about going to Mr. Epstein's? A. No, I think Haley, Haley was bringing me back there for a second time, and Jane Doe No. 3 drove me there. Q. What do you mean, Haley was bringing you back? A. She made the appointment for me to go, and I didn't -- she didn't bring me there. Jane Doe No. 3 drove me there. Q. Had Jane Doe No. 3 ever been there? A. I don't know. Q. Did you have a discussion with Jane Doe No. 3 on the way there? A. About what? Q. About anything, about what you were going to do or why you were going there. A. I'm sure, but I don't remember the conversation. Q. Well, what was the substance of the conversation? A. I don't, I mean, if she's bringing me + +Page 84 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. THE WITNESS: Because I had been there. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did you give her -- S A I don't --Q -- directions on how to get there? A. I don't remember if I gave her directions. I don't remember -- Q. You don't remember anything about it, but you remember Jane Doe No. 3 got \$200? A. I don't know if she'd been there. I don't know at that time If she'd been there. I don't remember if I gave her directions. I don't know if I drove her there. I don't remember. Q. Are you telling us that you don't recall anything about your conversation with her on the way there? MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Is that your testimony under oath? A. Yeah, I don't, don't know what we talked about on the way there. Q. Did you discuss the fact that -- A. I don't know. Q. -- you were going there to give amassage + +Page 83 there, I'm sure there is conversation. I don't know what we talked about. Q. Well, did you tell her why you were going? A. I am sure she already knew. Q. How would she know? A. Because she's the one that gave Haley the money, \$200. Q. What do you mean, she gave Haley the money? A. I'm guess -- I mean, I don't know. I am guessing. Q. Well, are you guessing about all of this, or do you have aspecific recollection? A. No, I'm not guessing about all this. I just don't know. Q. Well, what is the difference between saying you don't know and saying you're guessing? MR. HOROWITZ: Objection, argumentative. BY MR. RITTER: Q. Is there a difference between those two? A. Yeah, there is. I don't know. Q. Well, had Jane Doe No. 3 been there before? A. I don't know. Q. How did she know how to get there? + +Page 85 and get \$200? A. No. I don't know. I am sure she knew. Q. How would she know? MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. THE WITNESS: I'm sure -- I don't think --I don't know. Maybe we talked about it, but I don't know if we talked about it on the way there. I don't know -- I'm sure she -- she was my, one of my friends. I am sure, she -- we talked about it, but I don't know if it was on the way there. I don't remember the conversation we had on the way there. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Is she still your friend? A. Yes. Q. Is still your friend? A. No. SIs hat was the other girl's name, is she still your friend? A. We're civil, but we don't hang out. Q. Did something happen in your relationship or --A. I mean, we just don't hang out anymore. Q. Why don't you hang out anymore? A. I got a boyfriend. + +1 Q. Who is that? + 2 A. Ricky. + 3 Q. Ricky who? + 4 A. Bullard. + 5 Q. B-u-l-l-a-r-d? + 6 A. Uh-huh. I don't go out at much as I used + 7 to. + 8 Q. And how long has Ricky Bullard been your + 9 boyfriend? + 10 A. A year and like two months. + 11 Q. So that's what, from sometime in the + 12 beginning of 2008? + 13 A. Uh-huh. + 14 Q. Is that a yes? + 15 A. Yes. Sorry, sorry. + 16 Q. Did you ever do any drugs with + 17 Mr. Bullard? + 18 A. Drinking. Is that considered a drug? + 19 Q. Did you ever do any drugs with + 20 Mr. Bullard? I don't consider alcohol to be a drug. + 21 A. No. Trying to think. Cigarettes. + 22 Q. No, I am talking about drugs? + 23 A. No. + 24 Q. You know. + 25 A. No. + +1 Q. Okay. Did you ever see him deal drugs? + 2 A. No. + 3 Q. Did you ever tell any of your friends that + 4 Mr. Bullard dealt drugs? + 5 A. No. + 6 Q. Are you sure about that? + 7 A. Yes. + 8 Q. Okay. Now, who was your boyfriend before + 9 Mr. Bullard? + 10 A. Alan. + 11 Q. Alan who? + 12 A. Hatfield. + 13 Q. And how long was he your boyfriend? + 14 A. Like two years, maybe a little -- two. + 15 Q. And who was your boyfriend before that? + 16 A. Preston. + 17 Q. Preston Vinyard? + 18 A. Uh-huh. + 19 Q. Okay. Now, back at Mr. Epstein's, the + 20 second time you went, what occurred? + 21 A. █████ when was the second time? + 22 Q. What occurred the second time you went to + 23 Mr. Epstein's? + 24 A. Same thing. + 25 Q. Same thing as the first time? + +1 Q. You know what I am talking about by drugs, + 2 don't you? + 3 A. Yes, drugs, yeah. + 4 Q. You have never done any with Mr. Bullard? + 5 A. No. + 6 Q. Did you ever get any from Mr. Bullard? + 7 A. No. + 8 Q. Did you ever see Mr. Bullard do any drugs? + 9 A. No. + 10 Q. Are you sure? + 11 A. Uh-huh. + 12 Q. Do you know whether or not Mr. Bullard has + 13 ever done any drugs? + 14 A. I'm sure. + 15 Q. Okay. Why are you sure? + 16 A. Who hasn't? + 17 Q. So, you said you're sure, why are you + 18 sure? + 19 A. I am, I don't -- in high school, I mean, I + 20 don't know. I don't know. + 21 Q. I didn't ask when. + 22 A. I'm sure. I don't know. + 23 Q. So it's you don't know if he did drugs, + 24 not that you know he did do drugs? + 25 A. No, I don't know then. + +1 A. Yeah. + 2 Q. You remained fully clothed? + 3 A. Uh-huh. Yes. Sorry, sorry. + 4 Q. Got paid \$200? + 5 A. Uh-huh. Yes. + 6 Q. Did this Jane Doe No. 3 wait for you to do + 7 whatever you were doing to give him the massage? + 8 A. Yeah. + 9 Q. She got paid \$200 for bringing you? + 10 A. Yeah. + 11 Q. And you knew she was getting paid to bring + 12 you? + 13 A. Yeah. + 14 Q. Did you ever wonder why people were + 15 getting paid money just for driving you over there? + 16 A. A lot of girls in high school were going + 17 there. Haley was bringing a bunch of people there. + 18 Q. Did you ever wonder why they were getting + 19 paid money to bring you there? + 20 A. To give, give him a massage. + 21 Q. Yeah, but why would Jane Doe No. 3 be + 22 being paid money just to bring you there? + 23 A. She wasn't. She took me there. + 24 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. + 25 + +Page 90 ' 1 BY MR. LUTTIER: 2 Q. That's what I'm saying. Why was she 3 getting paid money just to take you there? 4 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 5 BY MR. LUTTIER: 6 Q. Did you ever wonder about that? 7 A. No. 8 Q. Did you ever ask them? 9 A. (Witness shakes head.) 10 Q. Did you ever ask Haley, why are you 11 getting paid \$200 for just driving me over here? 12 A. I mean, because she referred girls? She 13 brought several girls there, so I guess it was 14 because she brought somebody over there. I don't 15 know. 16 Q. Just a referral fee? 17 A. Yeah. 18 Q. But you knew people were getting paid 19 money to bring you to Mr. Epstein's, correct? 20 A. Haley, yeah. 21 Q. Okay. Well, and then did anybody else get 22 paid money for bringing you there? 23 A. No. 24 Q. Between the first time you went, and then 25 the five- or six-month gap until the second time, + +Page 92 1 A. Yeah. 2 Q. So, Haley called you up then and said go 3 to Jeffrey Epstein's on some date? 4 A. No. Yeah. 5 Q. That's how that happened? 6 A. Yeah. 7 Q. And you said okay? 8 A. Yeah, because I had gone there once and it 9 wasn't -- it was awkward, but it wasn't, I didn't 10 take any clothes off. It wasn't -- I gave him a 11 massage, \$200, 20 minutes, and then I was out of 12 there. 13 Q. What was awkward about it the first time? 14 A. Being upstairs in the bathroom, not 15 knowing who the person is. 16 Q. Well, when you say upstairs, this wasn't a 17 bathroom? 18 A. Yeah, it was. It was like there was a 19 shower in it. There was a room that went into a 20 toilet. 21 Q. How big was the room? 22 A. It was big. It was like, probably like 23 the size of this room. 24 Q. Any other -- you said there was a phone in 25 there? + +Page 91 I did you contact Mr. Epstein or did someone from 2 Mr. Epstein's contact you to come the second time? 3 A. It was an appointment. I didn't contact 4 him. I was brought there again. 5 Q. What do you mean -- 6 MR. HOROWITZ: Mr. Luther, you can't 7 interrupt her. 8 BY MR. LUTTIER: 9 Q. ■ **I thought you were done. Go ahead, 10 finish. 11 A. No. I was brought there again. I had, 12 because Haley gets -- for every girl that she 13 brought a different person, she would get \$200. And 14 she wouldn't get another \$200 for the same girl that 15 she brought there. She would only get \$200 for 16 every different girl. 17 The first time I went, it had been a while 18 since I went the second time, so she got another 19 \$200 on top of me because they didn't even recognize 20 me for the second time that I went there. 21 Q So -- 22 A So, they didn't contact me. 23 Q. How did you know -- 24 A. She made the appointment. 25 Q. Who, who is she, Haley?** + +**1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Yeah. Was there a desk in there? No. Any other kind of seating facilities? Like a A Uh-So this bathroom had a n it? Like a -- yeah. Page 93 Q. Okay. All right. So on the second occasion that you went there, you went there voluntarily, correct? A. Yeah. Q. All right. And did anybody, did Haley tell you anything about what to expect when you went the second time? A. No. Q. When was the third time you went? A. I don't remember. Probably shortly right after. Q. You say probably. How long was it? A. Probably -- Q. You say it was five to six months between the first and second visit. A. No.** + +Page 94 1 Q. And now we're talking about -- 2 A. No, not five or six months. It was -- I 3 don't remember exactly, but after the second time I 4 went, the third and after, after the second time S went, it would be like twice a month I would, once a 6 month, twice a month. And then it progressively got 7 worse -- I mean, not worse, but progressively I went 8 there more often. 9 Q. Well, you say it was once or twice a month 10 after the third time? 11 A. After the second time I went. 12 Q. Yeah. Do, do you have any records from 13 which you can determine? You say once a month, then 14 you say twice a month, then you say -- 15 A. No, I said, I went -- the first time I 16 went, then I didn't go for like five or six months. 17 And after the second time I went, I was going there 18 like twice a month, and then it was like every 19 single time he was in -- every single time he was in 20 town I would go. 21 Q. How do you know you went every time he was 22 in town? 23 A. Because I -- well, I'm sure it was every 24 single time I (sic) was in town. 25 Q. My question is how do you know you went + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 96 A. No. I -- Q. When you say the end, are you talking about -- A. No, my junior -- no, my junior year. Sorry. MR. HOROWITZ: Both of you are talking over each other. MR. LUTTIER: But she is now. MR. HOROWITZ: No. Fine. Jane Doe No. 4 -- THE WITNESS: Sorry. MR. HOROWITZ: -- wait until he's done asking his question. And if he interrupts you, I'm going to say the same thing to him. Okay? THE WITNESS: Okay. Sorry. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Are you talking about the period now between June and October of '05 that he made this statement to you that you were his favorite? A. From '04 to '05? Q. No, from June of '05 to October of '05. A. Is that whenever he said that? MR. HOROWITZ: Is that a question? THE WITNESS: Is that -- + +Page 95 1 every time he was in town? Flow do you know when he 2 was this town? 3 A. Because there were other girls that were 4 going there too. 5 Q. How do you know if he was there? Do you 6 know what his schedule was? 7 A. No. 8 Q. So you don't know if he was in town or 9 not, right? 10 A. Well, towards the end, whenever I was 11 going there all the time, he said that I was his 12 favorite girl and like he would want -- like he 13 always -- every time when he came in town, like, 14 that's what I am guessing like, you know. I know 15 that I was there like every single time that he was 16 in town. 17 Q. Now, you mentioned toward the end that he 18 made that statement to you. Are you talking about 19 now October of -- 20 A. And he would -- 21 Q. Wait a minute. You're talking about now 22 the period between June and October of '05? 23 A. Wait. What? Say that one more time. 24 Q. You said at the end he told you you were 25 his favorite girl. + +Page 97 1 BY MR. LUTTIER: 2 Q. You said in the end he told you that you 3 were his favorite. And my question is -- 4 A. No. 5 Q. -- when you say the end, are you talking 6 about the period from June of '05 to October of '05? 7 A. No. 8 Q. What period are you talking about? 9 A. From '04 -- well, let me think. From '04 10 so on. 11 Q. What do you mean, so on? 12 A. The last time I went. 13 Q. Okay. The fact of the matter is you have 14 no record from which you can tell us with any kind 15 of accuracy how many times you went to 16 Mr. Epstein's; is that correct? 17 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 18 THE WITNESS: How many times I went? 19 BY MR. LUTHER: 20 Q. Right. 21 A. Approximately I can, like, approximately 22 tell you how many times I went. 23 Q. You don't have any record that you can 24 look at and say I can tell you I went -- 25 A. No, I don't have a written record, no. + +Page 98 Page 100 1 Q. -- this number of times. All you're doing 1 Q. Was he there in August of 2004? 2 is you're guessing now about how often you think you 2 A. I don't know. 3 went -- 3 Q. Was he there in September of 2004? 4 MR. HOROWITZ: Object -- 4 A. I don't know. 5 BY MR. LUTTIER: 5 Q. Was he there in October of 2004? 6 Q. -- isn't that right? 6 A. I don't know. 7 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 7 Q. Was he there in November of 2004? 8 BY MR. LUTHER: 8 A. I don't know. 9 Q Correct? 9 Q. Was he there in December of 2004? 10 A. No, I am not guessing. 10 A. I don't know. 11 Q. well, you don't even know when Mr. Epstein 11 Q. Was he there in January of 2005? 12 was in town, do you? 12 A. I don't know. 13 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 13 Q. Was he there in February of 2005? 14 THE WITNESS: When he was in town he would 14 A. I don't know. call me. 15 Q. Was he there in March of 2005? 16 BY MR. LUTTIER: 16 A. I don't know. 21A. 1 am sure. 21 Q. The fact of the matter is you don't know 22 Q. How do you know that? 22 when Mr. Epstein was in town, do you? 23 A. Because I went there. I'm sure. I 23 MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. 24 don't -- 24 THE WITNESS: I don't have exact dates, Q. You don't know if you went there in 25 no. + +17Q. Tell me in the year 2004 when he was in 17 Q. Was he there in April of 2005? 18 town. 18 A. I don't know. 19 A. Tell -- how, like, what do you mean? 19 Q. Was he there in May of 2005? Q. Was he there in January of 2004? 20 A. I don't know. + +Page 99 Page 101 A. I know I went -- 4 A. I know I think I have his personal number. MR. HOROWITZ: Hold on. Now you're 7 MR. HOROWITZ: You keep doing it. You Q. Was he there in April of 2004? 18 A. Probably like, probably sometime, June or A. I don't know. 19 August -- September, October. + +January of '04, do you? 1 BY MR. LUTTIER: A. (No verbal response.) 2 Q. Did you ever personally call Mr. Epstein Q. You don't know, do you? 3 on the phone? Q. You don't know if you went there -- 5 I had Sarah's personal number I think. A. -- approximate dates, no, I don't know. 6 Q. Wasn't my question. interrupting her. 8 keep interrupting. BY MR. HOROWITZ: 9 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Okay. You don't know if you went to see 10 Q. Did you ever personally call Mr. Epstein him -- 11 on the phone? When I say call, talk to him A I don't know approximate dates, I'm sorry. 12 personally on the phone. Q. Was he there in Jan -- in February of 13 A. Talk to him on the phone? Yes. 2004? 14 Q. When? A. I don't know. 15 A. When I found out that the cops were Q. Was he there in March of 2004? 16 investigating girls. A. No, I don't know. 17 Q. And when was that? Q. Was he there in May of 2004? 20 Q. Of '05? A. I don't know. 21 A. Yeah. No. Yeah. Wait -- Q. Was he there in June of 2004? 22 Q. And how did you find out -- A. I don't know. 23 A. -- it's '05, '06, I think. Wait, yeah. Q. Was he there in July of 2004? 24 Q. And how did you find out the cops were A. I don't know. 25 investigating? + +A. Because word got -- there was a lot of girls that went there, and word got around that one of the girls that had gone there was maybe 13 years old. + +Q. Well, how did you find out about it? + +A. How did I find out about it? + +Q. Somebody call you? + +A. Probably found out from one of the girls that were going there in high school. + +Q. Who called you? + +A. Nobody. I mean, there was a lot of young girls that were going there. + +Q. Who called you and told you? + +A. One of the girls that was hanging out that went there. I don't know. + +Q. Which girl? + +A. Jane Doe No. 7, Jane Doe No. 7. + +Q. Jane Doe No. 7 who? + +A. Jane Doe No. 3. It was -- Haley brought some girl from high school that was 13 years old. + +Q. How do you know that? + +A. Because it was her cousin's girlfriend. + +Q. Who told you that Haley brought somebody that was 13 years old? + +A It was in high school. Palm Beach + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. This group of friends that you had, all you know is what they told you, right? + +A. Yeah. + +Q. All right. And Jane Doe No. 7, what's Jane Doe No. 7's last name? + +A. Doe. + +Q. Doe. She was aregular there, right? + +A. (Witness nods head.) + +Q. Right? + +A. She went there, yeah. + +And a matter of fact, your friend was somebody that went, wasn't she? + +A. (Witness nods head.) + +Q. Wasn't she? + +A. Yes. + +Q. And you were the one that took her there, weren't you? + +A. Yeah. + +Q. And on the third time that you went, what occurred? + +A. When I went there, same thing, like, we would go there and Sarah would walk you up to the room. There would be a massage table. Sometimes there wouldn't be a massage table, and you would + + is a small high school. + + Q. My question is who told you that Jane Doe No. 7 brought somebody -- I mean that Haley brought somebody that was 13 years old? + + A. Jane Doe No. 7 or lane Doe No. 3 or one of the girls that were going there at the time that knew the girl, that knew that girl. + + Q. So you don't know of your own personal knowledge whether someone who was 13 years old went there or not, do you? + + A. I, I heard about her. I know how she is, like, how she looks like. + + Q. You don't know of your own personal knowledge. You weren't there. You didn't see this person? + + A. No, I wasn't there. + + Q. All you know is what somebody told you among your little friends, your group of friends? + + MR. HOROWITZ: Excuse me, Counsel. Take it easy. + + MR. LUTTIER: Okay. + + MR. HOROWITZ: There is no, reason, no, no reason to point at the witness. + + MR. LUTTIER: Okay. + +have to, you would help her set it up or you would set it up yourself. Just kind of like from the third time on it just kind of like, something like, like, like -- + +MR. HOROWITZ: Take your time. Take your time. + +THE WITNESS: Like -- the third time I went there, it was like I was giving him a massage. He was on the phone. On the third time, like more conversation. From the third time on, it got worse, I would go in and -- + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Well, first, I'm asking you about the third time. What occurred on the third time? + +A. Same thing, you give him a massage. He was more friendly, more talkative. I kept m clothes on, but this time he was more like, M, this is what I do. It was more conversation, like. + +First time I went like he was on the phone. The second time on the phone doing business calls, but then talking at the same time. The third time like just talking to me, like it was like a friend. + +Q. Isn't it afact, I'M, that -- or did anything else happen on the third occasion? + +A. (Witness shakes head.) + + A. Q. time? A. It was -- Q. This is --A. The second time I went it was probably like a week later, maybe a month later, like a month later that I went. Q. Well, let's go through this. You said the first time it was in the middle of your sophomore year. It was five or six months later before you went a second time. So by now are you into your senior year? A. No. Q. When is the second time, then? MR. HOROWITZ: You skipped ayear of high school. MR. LUTTIER: I did. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Are you into your junior year by then? Q. So you gave him a massage -- A. No. Q. -- fully clothed, right? A. Yeah. Q. And you got paid \$200 and you left? Uh-huh. And by now, we're up to what point in + +Page 106 + +Page 108 was a nice guy, that you didn't have to do anything you didn't want to do, that he might ask you to take your top off or take part of your clothes off, but if you didn't want to, you didn't have to do anything; isn't that what you were told? MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. THE WITNESS: I don't remember. I don't remember what Haley -- the conversation between me and her. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Okay. But you knew that when you went that you, you may be asked to take your top off, but you didn't have to if you didn't want to, right? MR. HOROWITZ: Form. THE WITNESS: No, but -- BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Correct, you knew that, right? MR. HOROWITZ: Form. THE WITNESS: No. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. You didn't know that? A. No, why would I take my top off? Q. Did you tell the police when they interviewed you from the Palm Beach Police Department when you were a freshman in college that + + Page 107 A. Second time I went, I was like middle of my sophomore year. Second time -- first time I went it was the middle of my sophomore year. Q. Okay. You say the first time you went was in the middle of your sophomore year? A. Like the middle of my sophomore year. Q. Okay. All right. A. And then the second time I went was like in the summer of my sophomore year when I would go -- Q. A. Q. A. Q. All right. So the third time is when, sometime during your junior year? A. Yeah, beginning of my, like, the end of summer, end of summer, like beginning of my junior year. Q. Now, okay, isn't it true -- A. Like the end of the summer, yeah. Q. Isn't it true, S that told you before she took you there the first time that you were going to go give amassage to a guy in Palm Beach, you were going to get paid \$200, that he Was it after your birthday in the summer? Yeah, like, right around that area. So, you're 16 at that point, right? Uh-huh, yeah. + +Page 109 you knew before you went there exactly what was going to be expected? Did you tell that to the police? A. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know what I had -- I don't remember. I don't know what I wrote. I don't know what I said to them. Q. Well, if you, if the transcript of that interview shows that that's what you said to them, you didn't just make it up, did you? A. No. MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Okay. Now, when was the last -- you say three years ago you saw this transcript, right? That's the transcript of your interview with the police department. A. Probably about three -- when was it, four years ago, my freshman year. Q. And what did you do with it? What did you do with the transcript? A. Of a copy of it? Q. Yeah. A. My statement? Q. Your interview with the police department, you said you saw atranscript. It means it's in + + Page 110 writing. A. I don't know what I did with it. Q. But you were given acopy, right? A. I don't even know if I was given acopy. Idon't remember if I was given acopy. Q. You just got done testifying earlier in this deposition that about three years ago you read atranscript of It. A. Yeah, it was probably about three years ago. Q. Well, where did you read this transcript if it wasn't given to you? A. Whenever I got -- hired my lawyer, or not -- when I talked to my lawyers. Whenever everything came out, like looking over it. Q. So, you, that was the first time you saw it? A. Yeah. Q. All right. Was it given to you? A. Yeah, I think so. Q. Have you got it in your papers someplace at home or something? A. I don't know where it's at. Q. Okay. But when you read it, did you call the Palm Beach Police Department up and tell them + +Page 112 I didn't answer their questions, which made me even more scared, so I didn't -- so I answered their questions. Q. Well, it was the FBI, right? A. Yeah. Q. They identified themselves as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, right? A. (Witness nods head.) Q. Correct? A. Yeah. Q. You know to say -- A Yeah. Q You know who the FBI is, don't you? A. Yeah. Q. So they came and identified themselves and said they wanted to ask you questions? A. Uh-huh. Yes. Q. All right. And you sat down and did you answer their questions? A. Yeah. Q. And did you tell them the truth? A. Yeah. Q. Do you have atranscript of that interview? A. No. + +Page 111 there were any, any inaccuracies in it? A. No, I didn't call. Q. You didn't call and tell them? A. Unh-unh. Q. Okay. Now, when you were interviewed by the FBI, you said you were interviewed by them, too, right? Do you know when that happened? A. I don't remember when that happened. It was sometime afterward. Q. After what, after the Palm Beach Police? A. Maybe my sophomore year in college. I don't -- possibly, I don't remember. Q. Where did that interview happen? A. When they came? Let me think, when they came to my school they, they asked me questions and I didn't want to -- I don't know. They, they came to my school and then they -- once, yeah, at my school. Q. Okay. So this is like the Palm Beach Police, they came to University and interviewed you, right? A. They asked me, they wanted to ask me questions, and I said I wasn't going to answer any questions because I was scared. And they said they were going to have to give me asubpoena to court if + +Page 113 Q. Did you tell them something different than what you told the Palm Beach Police Department? A. Yeah, yeah. Q. Why did you -- and what you're telling us is you didn't tell the truth to the Palm Beach Police Department, but you did to the FBI; is that right? A. Yeah. Q. How many people interviewed you from the FBI on that occasion? A. I don't remember. There were two people that came and asked me questions. Q. And did you -- and was the statement recorded? A. I don't remember. Q. Do you remember having somebody with a tape recorder going? A. I don't remember. I think it was off record, but I can't remember. Q. How long did it take? A. I know they asked me questions there several times. Like afterwards where I would call them up and tell them more. Q. You called them or they called you? A. I called them, like, after interviewing. + +Q. And why did you call them? A. Because she said if there is anything else that you want to get off your chest, let me know. Q. All right. So now we know there was a "she" involved? A. (Witness nods head.) Q. Who was the she? A. I don't remember her name. Q. Was that somebody from the U.S. Attorney's office? A. No, FBI. Q. FBI. So we had one female FBI agent, and --A. A male FBI agent. Q. -- one male. And you don't remember either of their names? A. I don't remember the male. I remember the female. Q. What was her name? A. Nestek. Q. Nestek, N-e-s-t-e-k? A. I don't know how to spell that name, and I'm pronouncing it to my best ability. Q. And to your recollection that would have been your second year at -University? + + Page 116 it was one of those rooms in there. Q. In the courthouse? A. Yeah. Q. Are you talking about the Federal courthouse? A. Yeah, I think it was the Federal courthouse or it might -- somewhere downtown. Q. And who did you meet with? A. Detective Nestek. Q. Anybody else? Another lady. Who was the other lady? I don't remember her name. What was, what was her role? They were to help me through my situation. Did she say who she was or who she was A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. with? A. I don't know. I don't remember. I forgot. She was some, somebody there just to talk about, like, what was going on because I had more to say about what had gone on, but I had more to say about what had happened. Q. Was it somebody from the United States Attorney's office? A. I don't know. I don't who the lady -- I + +A. Yes. Q. Were you interviewed by the FBI on any occasion other than when they came to IN University in your sophomore year? MR. HOROWITZ: Form. THE WITNESS: At III no. I mean, like what do you mean? Sorry. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did any FBI come to see you any other time? A. On -- I'm trying to think. I met with the FBI afterwards. I don't think she came to see me. Q. What, what do you mean, you met with the FBI afterwards? A. I came here to court. Q. What court? A. A court in downtown West Palm. Q. With ajudge in a court proceeding? A. No. Q. Okay. Well, what do you mean by you came to court? A. Just with her, to meet with her, and -- Q. You mean you came to a courthouse? A. Not acourthouse, like it's the courthouse. I don't know what room. Somewhere -- + +Page 117 don't know what this lady's role played. I don't know. Q. How about Maria Villafana; does that name ring a bell? A. I had -- she gave me, I don't remember her name. She gave me acard, business card along time ago. I don't have it. I don't know. Q. Was anybody else present for this interview or this meeting that occurred? A. I think it might have -- no, it was just us two. I think there might have been another lady, three ladies in the room. Q. Three total or four total, three other women and you? A. No, three. Q. All right, three. A. I think there was two, but I think that one came out of the room and then she left, and another lady came in. So there was like two, there was like three, two to three. Q. Did you have a lawyer there? A. No. Q. Had you retained alawyer by then? A. No. Q. All right. So that's your second meeting + +Page 122 talked to the cops, I talked to him. So it was fresh in my memory, so I told him everything that I had told the cops. Q. As a matter of fact, at the time that the -- well, strike that. Was Mr. Epstein good to you? MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Was Mr. Epstein good to you? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. I mean, didn't he -- did he give you some gifts? A. Yeah. Q. What kind of gifts did he give you? A. Well, he rented me a car. Q. Okay. A. Rented me a car and bought me lingerie from Victoria Secret, bought me a vibrator. What else? Like, gave me like a brush. It was a vibrating brush. I mean, it was pretty much it. Offered me to go like out of the, offered me to travel. Q. Did you ever travel with Mr. Epstein? A. I was not old enough to travel. Q. Did you ever see Mr. Epstein -- when I say + +Page 124 A. Am I good with computers? Q. Yeah. Do you use the computer? A. Yeah, I use the computer. Q. Do you have any social web site that you have for yourself? A. Yeah, Facebook. Q. Okay. Do you have anything besides Facebook? A. My e-mail account, Yahoo. Q. And what's your Facebook address? A. Jane Doe No. Q. And on your Facebook, is it still up today? A. Uh-huh. Q. Have you deleted anything from your Facebook about discussions concerning Mr. Epstein? A. I don't even know if I ever -- I don't think I've ever put any discussions up that's regarding Mr. Epstein. Q. Have you ever communicated with Mr. Epstein via the computer? A. No. Q. That would be e-mail, or -- A. Yeah, no. Q. -- however else they do it these days. + +Page 123 "see" I mean have one of these massages that you gave Mr. Epstein -- any place other than his house in Palm Beach? A. No. Q. All right. Other than the phone conversation you had with Mr. Epstein after -- or when the police were about to interview you, and a conversation you may have had about renting acar, have you ever had any other direct phone conversation with Mr. Epstein? A. Can you ask that question one more time? Q. Other than the phone conversation you had with Mr. Epstein wherein you told him that the police were asking questions, and the possibility that you may have spoken with either him or Sarah about renting acar, have you had any other phone conversation with Mr. Epstein directly? A. No, no. Q. Have you -- and you say you've never performed amassage on Mr. Epstein or any other act physically with him other than at his house in Palm Beach? A. Yeah, just at the house in Palm Beach. Q. Okay. And by the way, are you a person that's, are you proficient with computers? + +Page 125 Texting, do you ever text Mr. Epstein? A. (Witness shakes head.) MR. HOROWITZ: You have to answer -- THE WITNESS: No. MR. HOROWITZ: -- instead of shaking your head, no. THE WITNESS: I said, no. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Have you in the last, since 2004, have you gone to the City of Chicago, Illinois? A. Yeah. Q. When did you go to Chicago? A. My junior, junior year. Q. Junior year of what? A. My summer, junior going into my senior year, that summer. Q. Of what, of University? A. Yeah. Q. So junior -- A. Of '0 -- what is it, '0 -- sorry, I can't give you an accurate date. Summer, '06, '08, '09, so, yeah, '08. Q. If '05 was your freshman year. A. Yeah, so it was my junior year. Q. And '06 would have been your sophomore + +Page 126 ' 1 year. A '7/8. Q "07 would have been your junior year, and '08 would be your senior year. A. •, then '07, but January, after January of that summer -- Q. No, I am not -- A -- is '08. Q I don't want to put the date in your mind. I just went through -- A. No. Q. -- that chronology. A. Of '08, that summer. Q. Summer of '08? A. Yeah. Q. When you say Summer of '08, what month are you talking about? A. Probably the end of June. End of June, end, middle -- Q. So this is approximately three years after the last time you saw Mr. Epstein? A. Uh-huh. Q. Okay. Tell us -- and is that the only time you've been to Chicago, Illinois? A. Uh-huh. + +Page 128 at that time? A. Yeah. I withdrew from that class. Q. What class were you going to there? A. Biology. Q. And where were you going to school? A. The community college. Q. What school? A. What is it called? I am drawing a blank of what the university was called. It won't come to me right now. I can't recall it. 9. This is while you were still enrolled at University? A. No. d the summer off. Yeah, I was enrolled at University, but I had the summer off. Q. And who were you living with when you were in Orlando? A. I had two roommates. Q. And who were they? A. I forgot. I didn't socialize with them. It's a, it's like a, like a -- Jefferson Lofts is like a living -- you don't know who your roommates are. I was supposed to -- I was supposed to take over -- MR. HOROWITZ: Just answer his question. + + Page 127 Q. Okay. THE COURT REPORTER: Yes? THE WITNESS: Yes. Sorry, sorry. I keep forgetting. BY MR. LUTTIER: QTell us who you went to Chicago with. A. Jane Doe No. 7, Sylvia, Chelsea, Vanessa, another girl named Vanessa. Q. And what are -- what's Sylvia, Chelsea and Vanessa's last names. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. I am not sure what their last names are. Did you know them? Yeah. How did you know them? From living in Orlando. Well, you were living in Orlando? Yeah. Q. Okay. And you lived there during what period of time? A. The summer of '08. Q. And where did you live in Orlando? A. Jefferson Lofts. Q. And why were you living there? A. To work and go to school. Q. Well, were you going to school in Orlando + +Page 129 THE WITNESS: I don't know. I don't know. Sorry. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. All right. So who were you living with was the question. MR. HOROWITZ: Unless you want to hear the whole story. THE WITNESS: Two girls, two other girls and I don't remember, I think one girl's name was Kate, and I don't remember the other roommate. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. When you originally went there you were going to live with who? A. Jane Doe No. 7. Q. And Jane Doe No. 7's roommate was who -- A. I don't know. Q. -- at the time? A. I don't know. Q. And you were going to take Jane Doe No. 7's roommate's place? A. Yeah. Q. All right. Now, did you know Sylvia, Chelsea, and Vanessa before you went to Orlando? A. No. I just met them through Jane Doe No. + +Page 130 7. Q. And who is it that paid for this trip to Chicago? A. Jane Doe No. 7's friend Mario. Q. And who is Mario? A. Some friend's Jane Doe No. 7, friends' -- Jane Doe No. 7's friend. Q. How old was this person? A. I'm not sure. I don't know how old he was. Q. Roughly. A. Probably like 305, 40s maybe. Q. And anybody else go on this trip? A. Yeah. Q. Who else? A. Jane Doe No. 7, Sylvia, Chelsea and Vanessa. Q. I mean other than those people. And did Mario go on this trip, too? A. He's, he is the one lives, he lives in Chicago. Q. Okay. And did you stay at Mario's when you went to Chicago? A. We stayed -- yeah, not his place. Well, John -- one of his places, I guess. + +Page 132 talked to him for five minutes that night, maybe. Q. Did you tell any of your friends that -- A. So there is no reason for me to want to talk about him if I wasn't at -- if I only had like a five, ten minute conversation with him. Q. Did you tell any of your friends or anyone whether you consider them a friend or not, that you had met someone that was like Mr. Epstein named Charley and that he had taken you to Chicago? A. No, no. Q. No one in the world? A. Charley didn't take me to Chicago. Q. Okay. So that never happened? That conversation -- A. No. Q. -- never took place? All right. And how is it that you got invited to go on this trip? A. Jane Doe No. 7 invited me. Q. And Jane Doe No. 7 was another person that would go to Mr. Epstein's, right? A. Yes. Q. Did you take Jane Doe No. 7 to Epstein's? A. No, I don't think so. Q. Did you get paid \$200 from Mr. Epstein for taking there? + +Page 131 Q. Where did you stay in Chicago? A. John Hancock building. Q. And in a, in a room there? A. Yeah. Q. Anybody named Charley along? A. I think that was one of his friends that went out with us one night, one of his older friends. Q. And how old is Charley? A. He is older. He is -- I'm not sure how old he is, but maybe 50s. Q. And did you have any interaction with Charley? A. No. Q. Did you get any gifts from Charley? A. No. Q. Did you discuss this trip with anybody else? A. Yeah. Q. Who? A. I don't know. I put -- people that asked, I guess, by my pictures. Q. Did you ever describe this person Charley as another Jeff Epstein to any of your friends? A. No, I didn't even talk to Charley. I only + +Page 133 A. Yeah. Q. And what did you tell -- what, if anything, did you tell Lauren -- well, strike that. Was Lauren's first visit to Mr. Epstein the one that you took her to? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. What did you tell Lauren about -- A. I don't remember. Q. Wait aminute, let me finish my question. What did you tell Lauren about what to expect from the first visit to Mr. Epstein? A. I don't remember. Q. And when did you take Lauren to Mr. Epstein? A. I don't remember. Q. Do you remember ayear? A. Maybe my senior year. I don't remember. Q. So how many times had you been to Mr. Epstein's at the point in time that you took Lauren there? A. It might have been my junior year or my senior year that I took her. I don't remember when I took her. Q. Well, at the time that you took her, whenever it was, how many times had you been to + +Page 134 Mr. Epstein's? A. Probably a few times. Q. How many? A. Before I took -- I don't remember when I took Lauren, so I can't tell you how many times I had been there before I took her. Q. What's your best estimate? A. I don't know when I took her, so I don't know how to answer that question. Q. Well, do you know if it was more than three times? A. I am sure. Q. Was -- how old was Lauren when you took her there? A. I don't know how old Lauren was when I took her there. I think she was 18. Q. So, Lauren was out of high school by then? A. She might have been a senior in high school or she could have been out of high school. Q. And she was one year ahead of you? A. Yeah. Q. So, that would have meant that you were taking her -- A. She could have been her senior year in high school, or she, I could have been a senior year + +Page 136 A. I don't remember when I saw her there, so I don't know, like, if they were the same. Q. Okay. Well -- A. What are you, like, I -- Q. Did there come apoint in time after the third massage that the way you performed massages on Mr. Epstein changed? A. It progressively got worse, yes, but I don't recall. Q. When you say worse, what do you mean by worse? A. lie would get more, like, aggressive, like, he would be more friendly. Like after, like, goin there acouple of times, then he would ask me, will you take your top off, and then the next time when I would get up and go to leave, he goes, take your bra off or, you know, next time you go can you take your pants off, or it progressively got worse, and then next time it was like, he like used a vibrator on me, and then the next time he used a vibrator and fingering me, and then the next time he would do that and then licking my dit, and then before that, grabbing my nipples and at last, I mean it progressively got worse. Q. When you say the next time, you mean there + +Page 135 in high school. Q. So, it could have been in your junior or senior year of high school? A. Yeah. Q. And you said you first went in the middle of your sophomore year, right? A. Uh-huh. Q. So, under your recollection of events would it be a fair characterization that at the point in time that you took Lauren to Mr. Epstein's, you had been to Mr. Epstein's on several occasions? A. Yeah. Q. At the point -- as of the point in time that you took Lauren there, had you -- had all the massages that you performed for Mr. Epstein been conducted in the same manner as what you have described in the first three visits? MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. THE WITNESS: I don't know when I brought her there, so I don't know -- you're asking me the same question. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. At the point in time that you brought her, had all the massages that you had performed for Mr. Epstein been like the first three? + +Page 137 was one visit, and then literally the next visit he said, take your top off, and it was literally the next visit that he said something else, and literally the next visit he said something else -- A Yeah. Q -- or were there more than one visit -- A. It progressively got worse. Q. Was there more than one time you performed massages between these events? MR. HOROWITZ: Object to the form. THE WITNESS: Ask that again. What do you -- you talk like... BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Let's take the fourth visit, what happened on the fourth visit? A. Got a massage, takes my shirt off, take my underwear, like I just said. Q. Well, I'm asking you about the fourth visit now. First of all, can you tell me when the fourth visit happened? A. It happened after the third visit. Q. Okay. Probably happened before the fifth visit, too, right? A Yeah. MR. HOROWITZ: Argumentative. Can we take + +Page 138 + +a break? MR. LUTTIER: Yeah. MR. HOROWITZ: I need to catch aflight. My partner is going to take over. MR. CFUTTON: We need to change the tape. THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record at 1:10. End of Tape 1. (A Luncheon recess was held from 1:10 p.m. until 1:59 p.m. and Mr. Merrnelstein entered the deposition room and Mr. Horowitz was absent.) \* \* \* \* \* + +| A | B | C | | | +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|

[REDACTED] 2:24 4:14
ability 114:23
able 60:13
absent 138:10
abused 20:10 32:11,13
abusive 28:24 29:2,9
29:10,14
accidental 40:7
account 124:9
accuracy 97:15
accurate 125:21
acquaintance 52:1
54:15,23
act 123:20
Adam 2:8 4:19
adding 23:15
address 124:10
ADLER 2:3
affirmed 6:8
afterward 111:9
age 10:22 61:17 62:16
62:20,21,22 64:4
78:6,10
agencies 18:8,17 22:23
23:6 24:2,5 118:25
agency 16:3 22:15 23:9
23:10,10,12,12,13,13
23:18 24:12 26:3
118:16,19
agent 114:12,14
ages 25:18
aggressive 136:12
ago 13:25 15:8,15,18
16:17 73:11,13
109:14,18 110:7,10
117:7
agree 6:1
ahead 14:23 49:8 91:9
134:20
Ahorowitz@sexabus...
2:11
Alan 88:10,11
alcohol 86:20
alcoholic 29:17
5:2,23
announce 4:17
answer 5:6 9:4 10:2
12:10 13:11,16 14:23
15:3 18:12 26:13,16
33:5 58:4 59:18
61:23 71:18,22
111:23 112:1,19
125:3 128:25 134:9
answered 12:1,5,8,13
12:16,18 13:15 14:19
14:21,25 112:2
answers 3:15 5:7 14:11
14:17 15:5 121:19,21

|

anybody 7:10 9:7
41:11,14 64:12,17
65:6 69:4 90:21
93:14 116:10 117:8
118:4,13 119:1
130:13 131:5,17
anymore 85:23,24
apartment 42:9 46:25
apparently 67:9
appearances 2:1 4:18
appointment 82:11
91:3,24
approximate 99:6,12
approximately 37:12
39:25 73:11 77:24,24
77:25 81:4 97:21,21
126:20
approximation 38:4
48:11 73:14,21
April 99:18 100:17
area 107:12
arguing 30:2
argument 29:5,11 30:2
argumentative 36:6
83:18 137:25
arrested 25:2,21,25
26:4,7,25
asked 10:17 12:2,12
13:2,13,19 14:13,18
15:22 26:14 29:10
46:21 51:17 52:6
71:11 108:12 111:15
111:22 113:12,21
121:8,16,18,19
131:21
asking 11:23 12:7
13:21 58:15 70:21
96:13 105:13 119:11
120:25 121:21,22
123:14 135:20
137:18
asks 9:14,24 11:4,8,21
58:4 59:18 61:17
associated 8:6
assume 30:15 31:2 41:7
66:24
attention 17:13
attorneys 4:17
Attorney's 114:9
116:24 118:5,8,13
audibly 64:8
August 74:20 76:15
100:1 101:19
Australian 1:17 4:13
Avenue 1:17 2:15 4:13
aware 73:3 80:19
119:18
awkward 92:9,13
a.m 4:9

|

B

B 3:10
back 12:11 36:2 47:19
55:5 56:8,10,13
58:15,17 59:4 61:22
68:7,9 81:2,8,10 82:7
82:10 88:19
Banyan 2:20
barely 6:22
basis 35:12
bathroom 79:21,23
80:5 92:14,17 93:8
Bay 42:6 46:13,14
Beach 1:18 2:21 4:13
18:20 19:5,16,24
20:3 22:16,18,19,21
22:23 23:8 24:1,23
25:3 26:24 27:5,12
40:5 46:15,18 47:20
61:15 64:2,25 75:5
76:24,25 77:7 102:25
107:25 108:24
110:25 111:10,19
113:2,5 119:12,13,24
123:3,22,23
beginning 39:23 45:17
48:2 55:13 86:12
107:17,18
begins 16:22
behalf 2:2,7,13,18 4:23
5:1
believe 54:3 118:17
bell 117:4
benefits 40:15
best 8:16 35:8 48:10
62:17 73:14 114:23
134:7
big 63:5 92:21,22
Biology 128:4
birthday 25:14 107:11
Biscayne 2:9
bit 29:23 30:8 31:12,24
33:18 34:2
blank 16:6,9 128:8
Boca 44:18 46:19
booth 80:1
born 6:20 9:1
bought 122:17,18
Boulevard 2:4,9,20
boyfriend 42:11 46:11
85:25 86:9 88:8,13
88:15
boyfriends 31:19
boyfriend's 28:22
bra 136:17
50:25 51:4
break 45:21 72:3,6
138:1
Brian 42:13,14

|

C

C 4:1
calendar 35:5 45:21,25
47:15,20 48:16
call 98:15 101:2,10,11
102:7 110:24 111:2,3
113:22 114:1 119:11
called 29:6,12 92:2
102:10,13 113:24,24
113:25 118:20 119:8
128:8,9
calls 105:20
campus 44:17 46:7,9
46:12,18,22
car 42:24 43:1,3,13
60:2,4,5,10 122:15
122:17 123:8,16
card 117:6,6
Carolyn 5:2,23
case 1:3 5:23
cases 1:9
catch 138:3
cause 4:6 30:20,25
58:14,21
caused 20:7 28:11 31:7
certain 8:19 17:5,6
certainly 11:20
change 138:5
changed 136:7
characterization 135:9
Charley 131:5,9,13,15
131:23,25 132:9,12
Chelsea 127:7,9 129:24
130:16

|

chest 114:3
Chicago 125:10,12
126:24 127:6 130:3
130:21,23 131:1
132:9,12
chronology 126:12
Cigarettes 86:21
circumstances 11:13
city 46:14 125:10
civil 85:20
claim 15:9
claiming 35:13
clarify 29:10 52:25
class 34:19 49:6 55:15
55:16,18 128:2,3
clear 5:20 67:17
Clematis 39:8
client 5:6
clit 32:18,20,23 136:22
close 30:3,5 81:8
closer 6:23
clothed 69:12,13 80:7
89:2 106:3
clothes 69:14 70:5,6,8
70:17 71:2 92:10
105:17 108:3
club 39:4,5
CME 5:21
coincidental 40:18,20
COLEMAN 2:20
college 45:10 74:8
108:25 111:11 128:6
colleges 44:24 45:3
color 43:15
come 15:23 36:2 48:16
65:3 77:8,14,15 91:2
115:9 128:9 136:5
comes 11:8
coming 21:5 59:5 79:23
communicated 124:20
community 128:6
commuting 46:16
47:19
compare 31:5
compound 79:3
computer 124:2,3,21
computers 123:25
124:1
concerning 124:16
conducted 135:16
conference 2:24
confused 66:6 118:21
consider 86:20 132:7
considered 27:19 86:18
consist 61:12
consult 43:8 57:12
contact 82:3,4 91:1,2,3
91:22
contents 73:3

| + +| control 29:18 | 55:13 56:3 121:25 | 82:4,7,12,14,16 | 53:14,23 54:4,8,13 | ex-boyfriend 24:17 | +|-------------------------|------------------------|------------------------|-------------------------|-------------------------| +| conversation 37:3,23 | days 75:13,25 77:15 | 83:22 84:10 89:6,21 | 61:10 63:19 74:3 | 27:1,13,25 28:13 | +| 38:25 49:15,19,23 | 121:25 124:25 | 96:9 102:17,17,18,19 | 81:2,8 91:1 98:11 | 31:24 | +| 51:14 54:5,6 60:7,9 | deal 63:5 88:1 | 103:2,5,5 104:5,6,7,8 | 100:22 101:2,10 | e-mail 2:11 124:9,23 | +| 61:1,9,12 70:9 82:22 | deals 5:14 | 124:11 127:7 129:15 | 119:8 120:9,10,18,20 | E.W 2:2 | +| 82:24 83:1 84:16 | dealt 88:4 | 129:16,20,25 130:4,6 | 120:24 122:6,9,23,25 | | +| 85:12 105:10,18 | December 39:21 40:1 | 130:7,16 132:18,19 | 123:2,6,10,13,17,20 | | +| 108:8 119:19,23 | 43:19,21 100:9 | 132:22 | 124:16,19,21 125:1 | | +| 120:8,10,18,23 123:6 | Defendant 1:8 2:18 | doing 7:8 89:7 98:1 | 126:21 131:24 132:8 | | +| 123:8,10,12,17 132:5 | Defendant's 3:14,15,16 | 101:7 105:20 | 132:24 133:4,11,14 | | +| 132:14 | 3:17,18 72:9 | dorm 47:5,6,7,11,18 | 135:15,25 136:7 | | +| conversations 37:7,14 | definition 73:6 | downtown 39:8 40:5 | Epstein's 36:22 37:1,8 | | +| 38:7 59:22 60:6,14 | degree 45:5 47:20 | 115:17 116:7 | 37:15,21 54:19,22 | | +| 60:19,21 63:22 | 48:11 76:3 | Dr 5:22 39:6,7,10 40:3 | 59:8,12,23 60:2,10 | | +| 120:15 | deleted 124:15 | 40:21 41:12,15,18,22 | 61:3 63:18,21,24 | | +| cops 15:20 17:11,13,18 | denying 67:22 69:20,25 | 42:22 43:11,18 44:21 | 68:3,17 69:9 70:11 | | +| 18:20 29:6,12 101:15 | 70:23 71:6 | 49:13 50:25 51:7 | 70:15 74:6 75:1,4,9 | | +| 101:24 119:21 120:5 | 27:5,12 38:17,23 | 53:13,21 | 75:15,25 76:4,17 | | +| 101:24 119:21 120:5 | 75:6 108:25 109:16 | drank 29:18 | 77:11,18 78:13,18 | | +| 121:6,8,17,18,19,20 | 109:24 110:25 113:2 | drawing 128:8 | 79:1,14 81:11,23 | | +| 121:22 122:1,3 | 113:6 | dreams 11:2 | 82:4,5 88:19,23 | | +| copy 109:21 110:3,4,5 | depo 5:9 | drink 28:15 29:16 | 90:19 91:2 92:3 | | +| correct 9:25 10:4,11 | deposed 7:5,6 | drinking 26:12 28:20 | 97:16 132:20,22 | | +| 11:18 12:18 19:25 | deposition 1:12 4:3,10 | 28:22 86:18 | 133:19 134:1 135:10 | | +| 20:17 21:15 22:11 | 4:12 7:7 110:7 | driving 60:10 89:15 | 135:11 | ESQUIRE 2:3,8,8,14 | +| 24:7 44:25 45:16,23 | 138:10 | drove 36:20,23 37:2 | 2:19,19 | FBI 23:11,14,15,18,19 | +| 59:24 65:25 66:18 | 135:17 | 42:21 43:8 54:18,22 | establishes 35:9 | 24:1 65:1 111:6 | +| 68:4 71:13 74:22,23 | 34:1 58:19 61:10 | 60:4 82:8,13 84:14 | estimate 134:7 | 112:4,13 113:6,10 | +| 75:1 78:7,12,15,21 | | drug 86:18,20 | event 17:20 18:2 27:10 | 114:11,12,12,14 | +| 79:1,11 90:19 93:12 | describing 17:15,16,20 | drugs 86:16,19,22 87:1 | 27:15,20,22 30:15,16 | 115:2,9,12,14 118:1 | +| 97:16 98:9 108:17 | DESCRIPTION 3:13 | 87:3,8,13,23,24 88:1 | 31:5,22,23 33:13 | 118:2,11,12 119:1 | +| 112:9 | | 88:4 | 34:1 52:5 57:16 | fear 30:25 31:2 | +| 93:5,6,8 | | DUI 26:1,4,8,25 | 58:19 | February 99:13 100:13 | +| counsel 4:20,21 103:19 | | duly 6:8 | events 135:8 137:9 | federal 23:12 112:6 | +| couple 136:14 | | | everybody 11:17 | 116:4,6 | +| course 21:10 | | | Evidence 2:25 4:15 | fee 90:16 | +| court 1:1,22 5:9,11 6:3 | | | Ex 3:14,15,16,17,18 | feel 12:7 | +| 12:11 111:25 115:15 | | | EX 3:14,15,16,17,18 | Feelgood's 39:6,7,10 | +| 115:16,17,18,21 | | | exact 14:14 25:11 | 40:3,21 41:12,15,18 | +| 127:2 | | | 100:24 119:19 | 41:22 42:22 43:11,18 | +| courthouse 115:23,24 | | | exactly 39:24 48:5 | 44:21 49:12 50:25 | +| 115:25 116:2,5,7 | | | 56:11 94:3 109:1 | 51:7 53:13,21 | +| cousin's 102:22 | | | exam 5:22 | felt 56:4 | +| covers 76:5 | | | EXAMINATION 6:11 | female 114:12,18 | +| criminal 8:6 | | | examined 6:9 | fifth 71:10 137:22 | +| Critton 2:19,20 4:23,23 | | | example 66:24 | fight 58:14 59:5,16 | +| 5:14,16,19 50:11 | | | examples 35:3,4 | Fighting 58:8 | +| 57:2,5 138:5 | | | excuse 20:24 64:21 | find 101:22,24 102:5,6 | +| CROSS 3:4 | | | 103:19 | Fine 96:9 | +| Cynthia 1:21 4:3 | | | exhibit 3:13 71:25 72:8 | finger 29:23 30:8 31:12 | +| C.M.A 2:13 | | | 72:9,17 73:5 | 31:25 33:18 34:3 | +| D | | | expect 63:2,12,13 | fingered 32:15 | +| D 2:8,19 3:2 4:1 | | | 65:23 66:9,14 67:24 | fingering 32:22 136:21 | +| dancing 49:24 51:12 | | | 68:3,16,21 69:5 | finish 14:6,7 60:16 | +| date 15:17 20:2,5 25:10 | | | 93:15 133:10 | 91:10 133:9 | +| 25:11,23 33:13 35:10 | | | expected 63:2 69:11 | first 6:8 8:12 13:1 | +| 92:3 125:21 126:9 | | | 70:4 71:1 109:2 | 15:12,13,16,19 27:24 | +| dates 99:6,12 100:24 | | | explain 28:19 119:1 | 28:3 34:10,13,22 | +| day 4:8 9:1 45:9 48:3 | | | extent 5:6 | 35:10,19 36:8,23 | + +|

37:2,9,16,22 38:13
49:3 50:6 51:1 53:25
54:19 55:13,23 56:4
59:8,12,15,17,23
60:6,25 61:8 70:11
73:11 74:3 79:7,13
79:16,25 88:25 90:24
91:17 92:13 93:24
94:15 105:13,19
106:15 107:2,4,23
110:16 133:4,11
135:5,17,25 137:19
fistfight 56:15,16 57:9
57:14,17,24 58:25
five 49:1,2 54:10 76:16
80:4 81:6 90:25
93:23 94:2,16 106:16
132:1,5
flight 138:3
Florida 1:1,18,22 2:5
2:10,16,21 4:4,6,13
22:16
follows 6:9
forced 79:1
forget 20:7,15 67:7
forgetting 127:4
forgot 20:13 67:3,9
116:19 128:20
form 9:18,20 10:5,12
12:6,12,22 13:17
14:18 16:16,24 17:4
17:23 20:9 21:1,13
22:25 23:4 24:9,24
26:21 28:14,23 32:1
32:25 33:7 50:17,23
52:17 53:9,15 58:22
64:5,15 66:1,11,16
66:19 67:25 68:5,25
69:7 70:18 71:3,7,15
76:20 77:2,20 78:19
79:2,9 81:24 84:1,18
85:4 89:24 90:4
97:17 98:7,13 100:23
108:6,14,18 109:11
115:5 118:6 122:7
135:18 137:10
Fort 2:5
forth 47:19
fought 56:14
found 56:7 101:15
102:8
four 15:18 52:4 109:17
117:13
fourth 137:14,15,18,20
FPR 1:21
frame 39:25
frequency 45:5 47:21
48:11,17 76:3
frequently 48:22

|

fresh 122:2
freshman 22:6 46:24
49:2 74:8 75:22
108:25 109:18
120:24 125:23
friend 41:8,8,10,12
44:22 47:24 48:25
51:22,24,25 52:1
55:4 81:20 85:14,16
85:19 104:12 105:22
130:4,7 132:7
friendly 59:16 105:16
136:13
friends 40:23 41:6 45:7
45:11 54:24 56:2,7
65:4 85:9 88:3
103:18,18 104:2
130:6 131:6,8,24
132:2,6
friend's 130:6
front 10:25 32:17
full 46:23
fully 5:10 80:7 89:2
106:3


G

G 4:1
games 48:7
gap 81:1 90:25
generally 28:8
getting 43:17 89:11,15
89:18 90:3,11,18
gifts 122:12,14 131:15
girl 8:14 57:17,25
81:13 91:12,14,16
95:12,25 102:16,20
103:7,7 127:8
girlfriend 102:22
girls 89:16 90:12,13
95:3 101:16 102:2,3
102:8,12,14 103:6
119:16,17,21 120:6
129:8,8
girl's 85:18 129:9
give 11:10 29:12 48:9
48:10,10 61:15 63:7
63:14,16 64:3 70:15
84:4,25 89:7,20,20
105:15 107:24
111:25 122:11,14
125:21
given 7:10 10:10 110:3
110:4,5,12,19
giving 9:15 80:3 105:8
go 14:23 41:11 43:18
44:13,21 58:25 61:22
63:6 67:16 70:15
76:4 79:1 82:11 86:6
91:9 92:2 94:16,20

|

104:23 105:11
106:14 107:10,24
121:7 122:21 125:12
127:24 130:13,19
132:17,20 136:16,17
God 54:3
goes 136:16
going 10:25 20:19,24
36:2,22 37:1,3,8,14
37:21 40:21,24 53:4
53:9 57:5 63:6,6,7,8
64:2,3 67:13 70:15
70:16,17 71:2 72:4,7
74:25 76:17 79:22
82:4,5,19,20 83:3
84:25 89:16 94:17
95:4,11 96:14 102:9
102:12 103:6 107:24
107:25 109:2 111:23
111:25 113:17
116:20 118:22 119:2
119:5,17,17,19,22
120:6,7,14 125:15
127:25 128:3,5
129:14,20 136:13
138:4
good 19:18 44:22 51:12
71:6 122:6,9 124:1
government 118:10,14
118:15
grabbing 32:16 136:23
graduated 33:23 74:13
greater 48:17
group 103:18 104:2
grow 11:1
guess 9:16 23:23 83:10
90:13 130:25 131:22
guessing 23:20 83:11
83:12,14,17 95:14
98:2,10
guy 49:24 61:14 107:24
108:1 121:13
guys 57:2


H

H 2:14 3:10
Haley 34:20 36:10,22
37:1,8,14,23 38:12
38:15,21 39:1 40:3
49:14,15,20,21,22
50:12 51:7,9,15,22
53:12,25 54:4,7,15
54:17 55:6 56:5,17
59:22 61:1,9 64:14
65:7,23 66:9,14 67:1
67:23 68:15,21 69:4
69:17 70:3,10,14
79:7,14 80:15 82:6,6
82:9 83:6,8 85:16

|

89:17 90:10,20 91:12
91:25 92:2 93:14
102:19,23 103:3
107:22 108:8
H 5:22
Hancock 131:2
handed 72:16
hands 58:8
Handwritten 3:17
hang 40:23 43:20 85:20
85:23,24
hanging 49:24 102:14
happen 20:2 33:20
44:3 85:21 105:24
111:13
happened 15:15,19
22:20 29:7 30:17
31:5,11,16,23 32:6
37:20 57:21 58:9,11
92:5 111:7,8 116:22
119:7 132:13 137:14
137:20,21,22
happens 119:23
Hatfield 88:12
head 7:23 33:4 64:6
90:9 104:9,14 105:25
112:8 114:6 125:2,6
heading 41:18 118:17
hear 6:22 129:6
heard 103:11 120:5
held 4:12 72:13 138:8
help 23:21,22 40:10
105:1 116:15
hi 51:10 80:3
high 49:4,8 56:2,19
57:18,19 58:10 74:13
87:19 89:16 102:9,20
102:25 103:1 106:21
134:17,18,19,25
135:1,3
him''I 74:6
hired 110:13
history 3:18 5:15,16
Hold 99:7
home 110:22
hooked 41:17
HORACE 2:14
Horowitz 2:8,9 4:19,19
4:25 5:3,15,18 6:24
9:17,20 10:5,12 12:6
12:12,22 13:16 14:4
14:7,18,21 16:16,24
17:4,23 18:12,14
20:9 21:1,13 22:25
23:4 24:9,24 26:21
28:14,23 30:11,22
32:1,14,25 33:7 36:5
40:10,13 42:18 50:17

|

50:23 52:17 53:6,15
58:4,22 59:18 60:16
64:5,15,21 66:1,11
66:16,19 67:25 68:5
68:25 69:7 70:18
71:3,7,10,14,17,22
72:2,7,21 73:4,16
76:8,20 77:2,20
78:19,22 79:2,9
81:24 83:18 84:1,18
85:4 89:24 90:4 91:6
96:6,9,12,23 97:17
98:4,7,13 99:7,9
100:23 101:7 103:19
103:22 105:5 106:21
108:6,14,18 109:11
115:5 118:6 122:7
125:3,5 128:25 129:6
135:18 137:10,25
138:3,10
hour 72:7
hours 51:5
house 36:17,19,20,23
37:1,8,15,22 42:1,9
47:3 64:2 70:15 74:7
119:18,22 123:2,21
123:23
Huh-uh 43:12
hung 34:8 48:8 52:2,3


I

idea 38:2 119:4
identification 72:10
identified 112:6,15
III 1:6
Illinois 125:10 126:24
implicate 5:7,12
importance 8:10,13
important 5:25 21:4
27:15,20,22
inaccuracies 111:1
Incorporated 2:25 4:16
indicated 49:14 54:14
individuals 22:18
Injunction 3:16
instruct 5:5
instructed 53:7
intend 5:5
intent 5:11
intentionally 20:16
interaction 18:8,18
19:16 26:24 31:10
50:5 131:12
interrogation 13:23
Interrogatories 3:15
interrupt 91:7
interrupting 99:8
101:8
interrupts 96:13

| +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +| interview 8:22 15:9,13 | John 130:25 131:2 | 99:17,19,21,23,25 | licking 32:18,20,23 | 64:23 66:3,12,17,21 | +|-------------------------|------------------------|----------------------|--------------------------|------------------------| +| 15:13 17:21 18:9,18 | JR 2:19 | 100:2,4,6,8,10,12,14 | 136:22 | 68:2,6,14 69:1,8 | +| 19:14,21 21:25 26:3 | judge 5:20 115:18 | 100:16,18,20,21 | lie 12:25 13:5 18:22 | 70:20 71:5,8,12,16 | +| 26:9 27:1 109:8,15 | July 76:14 99:24 | 101:4 102:15,21 | lied 10:15 12:21 13:4 | 71:19,24 72:4,8,15 | +| 109:24 111:13 | June 6:21 25:15,16 | 103:8,11,13,17 104:3 | 51:22 | 72:23,24 73:9,19 | +| 112:24 117:9 123:7 | 74:16 76:4,14 77:1,7 | 108:21 109:4,4,4,5,6 | life 18:2 21:9 27:15,20 | 76:10,21 77:5,22 | +| interviewed 15:17,19 | 77:18 78:5,8,9,14 | 110:2,4,23 111:7,16 | 31:6,16 32:6 57:16 | 78:20,24 79:5,10 | +| 18:4 19:23 20:3,5,5,8 | 95:22 96:18,21 97:6 | 112:11,13 113:21 | 57:22 | 82:2 83:19 84:3,19 | +| 22:10,22 23:3,7 24:2 | 99:22 101:18 126:18 | 114:3,4,22 115:25 | lifetime 8:9 | 85:13 90:1,5 91:6,8 | +| 24:6,11,22 27:4,11 | 126:18 | 116:18,25 117:1,2,7 | limit 35:4 | 96:8,16 97:1,19 98:5 | +| 27:25 28:6 38:16,22 | junior 47:13,14 49:2 | 118:22,23,24 119:9 | lingerie 122:17 | 98:8,16 101:1,9 | +| 111:5,6,20 113:9 | 55:19 56:20,20,20 | 119:20,20 120:5,7 | list 23:15 | 103:21,24 104:1 | +| 115:2 121:3,6 | 57:18 96:4,4 106:25 | 121:9,20 124:17 | literally 75:13 137:1,2 | 105:12 106:23,24 | +| interviewing 22:18 | 107:16,18 125:13,13 | 127:12,14 128:22 | 137:4 | 108:10,16,20 109:12 | +| 24:16 27:17 28:12,21 | 125:14,15,19,24 | 129:1,1,17,19,23 | litigation 73:6 | 115:8 118:9 122:8 | +| 113:25 119:21 | 126:3 133:21 135:2 | 130:9 131:21 134:8,9 | little 6:23 8:14 88:14 | 125:8 127:5 129:3,12 | +| interviews 28:8 | Jupiter 23:8 24:1 | 134:10,15 135:19,20 | 103:18 | 135:22 137:13 138:2 | +| introduced 32:10 36:13 | K | knowing 10:19 92:15 | live 42:2,5 46:7,10 47:7 | lying 8:8 | +| 36:15 56:6 | Kate 129:10 | knowledge 8:17 11:10 | 127:21 129:14 | 16:2 22:1,10 | +| invest 13:1 | keep 70:8 101:7,8 | 35:9 103:9,14 | lived 46:7,9 127:18 | 38:16,22 43:22,23 | +| investigating 101:16,25 | keep 107:3 | known 7:2 55:7,9 | lives 130:20,20 | 44:8,13 45:16,22 | +| Investigation 112:7 | kept 105:16 | knows 61:15 | living 46:21 47:18 | 46:8,22 74:9,19,25 | +| invited 132:17,18 | kids 11:11,11 | | 127:15,16,23 128:16 | 75:10,18 111:20 | +| involved 114:5 | kind 7:10 23:10 40:11 | | 128:22 129:4 | 114:25 115:3,6 120:3 | +| involving 18:9 | 43:13 54:14 69:13 | | LLP 2:20 | 120:4,25 125:17 | +| issue 5:8,10 | 93:4 97:14 105:2,3 | | local 23:12 | 128:12,14 | +| i.e 69:12 | 122:14 | | locally 42:2 | L.M 2:2 | +| J | knew 19:1,24 20:4 21:4 | | located 39:7 | | +| J 2:3 | 21:11,17 24:6 34:20 | | Lofts 127:22 128:21 | | +| Jan 99:13 | 64:1 83:4 85:2 89:11 | | long 19:14 37:12,13,22 | male 114:14,15,17 | +| Jane 1:4,13 2:7 3:5 | 90:18 103:7,7 108:11 | | 44:19 48:24 51:3 | man 32:10 | +| 4:10,11,20 6:7,14,20 | 108:17 109:1 | | 54:6 55:6,7,7,9 58:25 | manner 38:11 135:16 | +| 81:13,14,15,16,19 | know 7:15,21,25 8:2,5 | | 73:11 81:4 86:8 | March 99:16 100:15 | +| 82:3,4,7,12,14,16 | 8:20 10:15,19 11:20 | | 88:13 93:21 113:20 | Maria 117:3 118:16 | +| 83:22 84:10 89:6,21 | 11:22 13:14 14:14,25 | | 117:6 | Mario 130:4,5,19 | +| 96:9 102:17,17,18,19 | 16:4,8,14 17:14,18 | | look 72:2,5 97:24 | Mario's 130:22 | +| 103:2,5,5 104:5,6 | 19:4,8,10 20:18,18 | | looked 15:16 | mark 2:19 4:21 71:25 | +| 124:11 127:7 129:15 | 20:20,20 22:13,15 | | looking 110:15 | marked 72:9,17 | +| 129:16,20,25 130:4,6 | 25:14 26:18 28:2 | | looks 103:12 | massage 61:16 63:7,14 | +| 130:7,16 132:18,19 | 34:10,13,17 37:18 | | lot 29:17 48:7 68:15 | 63:16 64:3 70:7,16 | +| 132:22 | 39:24 40:14 42:15 | | lot 69:12,22 | 74:7 80:1,3 84:25 | +| January 39:11,12,16 | 44:6,14 46:2 47:24 | | loud 29:19 | 89:7,20 92:11 104:24 | +| 39:17 40:2 43:19 | 48:5 55:6,8,12,15,16 | | Luncheon 138:8 | 104:25 105:9,15 | +| 98:20 99:1 100:11 | 55:17,24 56:18 58:12 | | Luttier 2:19,20 3:6 | 106:1 107:24 123:20 | +| 126:5,5 | 59:17 62:10 70:13,22 | | 4:21,21 6:2,4,12,17 | 136:6 137:16 | +| Jeff 2:24 4:14,22 49:15 | 71:18,22 73:18 75:16 | | 7:1 9:19,23 10:6,14 | massages 123:1 135:15 | +| 51:16 52:7,11 53:23 | 75:19,19,20 76:11 | | 12:9,15,24 13:18 | 135:24 136:6 137:9 | +| 119:8 131:24 | 77:6,9,11,25 81:9 | | 14:5,9,22 16:18 17:1 | material 5:24 | +| Jefferson 127:22 | 82:15 83:1,5,10,15 | | 17:8 18:1,16 19:20 | matter 4:11 19:15,23 | +| 128:21 | 83:17,21,24,25 84:11 | | 20:12 21:3,14 23:2,5 | 21:4,8 70:22 78:17 | +| Jeffrey 1:7 2:18,24 | 84:12,13,21,24 85:2 | | 24:10 25:1 26:22 | 80:4 97:13 100:21 | +| 15:12 19:22 20:6 | 85:3,6,7,8,10 86:24 | | 28:17 29:1 30:14,24 | 104:12 122:4 | +| 32:8 38:18,23 39:1 | 87:1,12,20,20,22,23 | | 32:4,19 33:2,10 36:7 | 6:13 12:10,25 | +| 53:13 54:4 61:9 | 87:24,25 90:15 91:23 | | 40:17 42:20 50:13,14 | 14:16 15:2 70:21 | +| 63:18 68:3 70:10,15 | 94:21,25 95:1,5,6,8 | | 50:20 51:2 52:18 | 71:25 72:16 105:23 | +| 92:3 | 95:14,14 98:11,22,25 | | 53:11,17 57:4,7 58:6 | 107:22 | +| jerking 32:17 | 99:3,4,5,6,10,12,15 | | 58:24 59:20 60:22 | mean 7:12 8:21,21 9:10 | +| | | 71:25 106:14 137:14 | 61:22 62:1 64:7,19 | 13:14 17:17 19:7 | + +|

23:10 24:14 28:3,18
28:19 29:2,5,10,21
29:24 30:3 32:9,12
35:3,24 36:15,18
39:3,18 44:23 45:19
46:23 52:19 57:20
58:7 61:18 62:2,5,14
62:25 63:4,14 64:16
74:6 77:9 81:16 82:9
82:25 83:8,10 85:23
87:19 90:12 91:5
94:7 97:11 98:19
102:11 103:3 115:6,7
115:13,20,23 118:7
122:11,20 123:1
130:18 136:10,23,25

meaning 41:25

means 30:1 37:18,19
53:3 109:25

meant 46:22 134:22

medical 5:22

meet 40:19 49:3 115:22
116:8 119:24 121:7

meeting 32:8,9 40:7,9
40:18 117:9,25 118:1

memory 16:12 43:8
57:12 122:2

mentioned 36:11 48:1
95:17

Mermelstein 2:8,9
138:9

met 33:25 34:4,6,8,10
34:14,23 35:10,13,19
36:1,8 42:16 55:11
55:14,15,17,23 56:22
56:23 57:8 59:15,17
79:19 115:11,13
121:10 129:25 132:8

Miami 2:10

MICHAEL 2:3

middle 6:15,16 22:5
25:22 34:15,17 35:13
36:9 74:4 75:21
106:15 107:1,3,5,6
126:19 135:5

mind 16:7,9 65:5 67:12
126:9

mine 41:8,10 44:22

minute 55:4 67:5 95:21
132:5 133:9

minutes 50:8 80:5
92:11 132:1

miserable 57:6

misphrased 62:11

moderations 52:3

moment 9:13

money 80:5,11,15 83:7
83:9 89:15,19,22
90:3,19,22

|

month 22:4 25:24
37:24 39:24 48:15
52:3 61:6 76:14
77:16 94:5,6,6,9,13
94:14,18 106:12,12
126:16

months 37:24,25 52:4
61:6 73:20 76:16
81:6 86:10 93:23
94:2,16 106:16

morning 19:18

motion 5:9

mouth 63:13

move 36:5 53:9 64:21
71:23

moved 31:9

moved 41:4,5,12,15
41:20 43:3,17,25
44:20 45:6,25 46:10
46:16 47:18,21 48:22
48:24 49:13,20,23
50:9,15,21 51:8
53:20 85:19 104:13
132:25

N

N 3:2 4:1

name 4:14 6:4,13,15,16
6:17,18 7:3 42:15
81:15,17,18,18 85:18
104:6 114:8,19,22
116:13 117:3,6
118:24 129:9

named 127:8 131:5
132:8

names 114:16 127:10
127:11

need 12:11 14:6 64:8
138:3,5

Nestek 114:20,21 116:9

never 10:24 11:1,7,9
52:2,2 54:24,25 58:1
64:17 65:5 67:7,12
87:4 123:19 132:13
132:16

Newland 47:8
nice 108:1

night 51:10 58:13
131:7 132:1

nipples 32:17 136:23

nods 64:6 104:9,14
112:8 114:6

North 2:15

Notary 1:22 4:5

note 3:17 5:3 35:5

noted 5:11 35:5

November 22:8,9 100:7

number 98:1 101:4,5
N-e-s-t-e-k 114:21

|

N-e-w-l-a-n-d 47:9

O

O 4:1

oath 7:11,16,18,22,25
8:8,18,24 9:8,9,12
10:10,16,17 11:13,14
53:1,8 70:14 84:20

object 5:5,11 9:18,20
10:5,12 12:12 13:16
14:18 16:24 17:4
20:9 21:1,13 24:9,24
28:14,23 32:1,25
33:7 50:17 52:17
53:9 58:22 64:5,15
66:1,11,16,19 67:25
68:5,25 69:7 70:18
71:3,7,15 73:4 76:20
78:19 79:2,9 81:24
84:1,18 85:4 89:24
90:4 97:17 98:4,7,13
100:23 108:6 109:11
122:7 135:18 137:10

objection 5:4 78:22
83:18

occasion 18:24 26:14
36:23 40:22 42:21
43:9,18 49:12 51:6
52:11 53:13,21 56:14
78:12 79:16 93:11
105:24 113:10 115:3

occasions 28:12 135:11

occur 50:5 57:14 59:7

occurred 33:14 34:2
79:15 88:20,22
104:21 105:14 117:9

October 1:14 4:9 22:7
22:8,9 48:20,21
75:17 76:4,15 77:1,7
77:19 78:6,9,14 79:8
95:19,22 96:18,21
97:6 100:5 101:19

offered 122:21,21

office 79:20 114:10
116:24 118:5,14,14

officer 11:4,8,17,18
15:11 26:7

officers 10:23 11:3
13:1,4 15:10,14,21
16:3,4,8,10,15 17:21
18:4 19:22 20:4,6,8
20:17 21:5,12,25
22:10,13 67:1,4,23

okay 6:24 11:7 44:14 59:13
67:12,13 72:23 81:19
88:21 91:9 105:17
121:5 126:5 136:14

okay 6:20 7:18 8:2,16
10:9 12:1,25 14:1

|

16:14,19 17:9 19:21
21:24 25:9,17 26:2
26:23 32:12 37:21
38:21 39:22 41:9,11
41:20 47:7,17 48:13
52:5 60:25 62:23
63:15 64:12 67:22
68:20 72:23 73:20,25
74:13,19 78:2,4,25
87:15 88:1,8,19
90:21 92:7 93:10
96:14,15 97:13 99:10
103:21,24 107:4,7,20
108:11 109:13
110:24 111:5,19
115:20 121:4,9,23
122:11,16 123:24
124:7 126:23 127:1
127:18 130:22
132:13 133:7 136:3
137:22

Olas 2:4

old 34:12,16 62:15
63:17 78:8 102:4,20
102:24 103:4,9
122:24 130:8,9 131:9
131:11 134:13,15

older 121:13 131:7,10
once 37:10,10 45:18
47:25 48:12 92:8
94:5,9,13 111:17

opportunity 72:25

order 5:21

originally 129:13

Orlando 127:15,16,21
127:25 128:17
129:24

ought 19:5

P

P 4:1

PAGE 3:13

paid 70:17 80:11,13,15
80:17 89:4,9,11,15
89:19,22 90:3,11,18
90:22 106:5 107:25
130:2 132:24

Palm 1:18 2:21 4:13
18:20 19:5,16,24
20:3 22:16,18,19,21
22:23 23:8,8,25,25
24:12,23 25:3 26:24
27:5,11 40:5 46:15
46:18 47:19 61:14
64:2,25 75:5 76:24
76:25 77:7 102:25
107:25 108:24
110:25 111:10,19
113:2,5 115:17

|

119:12,13,24 123:3
123:21,23

pants 136:18

paper 35:2

papers 110:21

parents 8:14 10:21,24
11:10 19:12

part 23:16,17 108:3

partner 138:4

party 58:10 59:1

passage 17:3

passes 16:21

paying 17:13

pending 5:9

people 36:3 59:3 65:3
89:14,17 90:18 113:9
113:11 130:18
131:21

performed 74:7 123:20
135:15,24 136:6
137:8

period 46:4 47:12 50:7
59:14 76:18 77:1,6
78:2,5,13 95:22
96:17 97:6,8 127:19

person 54:18 91:13
92:15 103:15 118:17
121:15 123:24 130:8
131:23 132:19

personal 101:4,5 103:8
103:13

personally 47:21 101:2
101:10,12

Petition 3:16

phone 2:5,11,16,22
37:10 60:1,4,7 61:1
61:11 79:25 80:2
92:24 101:3,11,12,13
105:9,19,20 120:9,14
123:5,9,12,16

physically 32:10
123:21

picture 121:14

pictures 131:22

place 41:21,23,25
61:11 123:2 129:21
130:24 132:16

places 130:25

Plaintiff 1:5 2:2 4:20

planned 40:9,19

play 14:15

played 48:5 117:1

playing 48:8

please 4:17 6:4 37:17

point 9:6 10:9 21:24
31:4,10,17,23 32:7
61:2 67:8 103:23
106:7 107:13 121:14
133:19 135:10,13,13

| +|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +| 135:23 136:5 | psychologic 23:22 | 83:13 114:24 135:8 | Reported 1:21 | 138:10 | +|-------------------------|------------------------|-------------------------|-------------------------|------------------------| +| police 7:12 9:8 10:18 | Psychological/Social | record 4:18 34:22,23 | reporter 4:4,5 6:3 | roommate 129:11,16 | +| 10:23 11:1,3,4,7,17 | 3:18 | 34:25 35:8 38:6 43:7 | 12:11 61:25 68:11 | roommates 128:18,22 | +| 11:18 13:1,4 15:10 | Public 1:22 4:5 | 57:6,11 61:24 68:10 | 127:2 | roommate's 129:21 | +| 15:11,14,21 17:21 | pulled 59:3,6 | 72:11 73:17 97:14,23 | Reporting 1:22 | rooms 116:1 | +| 18:4,8,17 19:5,16,22 | purpose 73:5 | 97:25 113:19 138:6 | reports 7:12 | ROSENFELDT 2:3 | +| 19:24 20:4,6,8,17 | purposes 66:25 | recorded 38:9 113:14 | represent 118:15,15 | ROTHSTEIN 2:3 | +| 21:5,25 22:10,17,19 | put 67:20 124:18 126:9 | recorder 113:17 | representing 4:15 | rough 73:21 | +| 22:23,23 23:6,9,9,10 | 131:21 | records 94:12 | 118:10 | Roughly 25:12 130:11 | +| 23:13,18,25 24:1,1,2 | P.A 2:9,14 | RECROSS 3:4 | requested 61:24 68:10 | ██████████ | +| 24:5,12,23 25:3 26:3 | p.m 1:15 138:8,9 | REDIRECT 3:4 | respect 19:22 24:12,15 | 20:3 23:8,25 24:12 | +| 26:6,14,24 27:5,12 | | referral 90:16 | 27:5,12 28:6 | 24:23 25:2 26:24 | +| 27:16,17 28:5,11,21 | | referred 90:12 | response 65:21 99:2 | 27:5,11 46:15,18 | +| 33:14 38:17,23 64:25 | | referring 62:4 | result 20:13 | 47:19 102:25 | +| 66:25 67:4,23 75:5 | | reflected 15:5 | retained 117:23 | RPR 1:21 | +| 75:10,14,17,24 | | refresh 22:7 43:8 57:12 | review 72:25 | rule 5:7,8,13 | +| 108:23,24 109:3,16 | | regard 5:21,21 18:19 | revolving 18:9 | run 39:9 | +| 109:24 110:25 | | regarding 15:11 51:15 | RICHARD 2:14,14 | | +| 111:10,20 113:2,6 | | 124:19 | Rick 5:1 | S | +| 119:12,13,17,24 | | Registered 4:4 | Ricky 86:2,3,8 | S 2:8 3:10 4:1 | +| 120:25 123:7,14 | | regular 104:8 | right 7:15 8:5 9:6 10:7 | sanctions 8:6 | +| portion 61:24 68:10 | | Related 1:9 | 11:14 12:21 16:22 | Sarah 79:19 104:23 | +| 70:6 | | relationship 27:18 | 17:3 18:13 19:4,8,10 | 120:20 123:15 | +| position 5:20,25 | | 28:10,16,18 59:7 | 21:18,20,22 25:15 | Sarah's 101:5 | +| possibility 121:4 | | 61:2 75:4,9 85:21 | 35:16 39:16 44:19,19 | sat 10:24 112:18 | +| 123:14 | | relevant 5:24 | 46:4 47:17 48:9 | Saturn 43:2 | +| possibly 60:19,21 | | remained 89:2 | 49:12 52:15 53:1 | saw 15:9 44:23 45:7,18 | +| 111:12 | | remember 13:13 14:3 | 60:3,12 65:20 67:10 | 47:24 48:17 53:24 | +| presence 11:3 | | 14:12,13 15:17 16:5 | 68:18 73:10 74:2,17 | 54:1 73:11 74:3,6,6 | +| present 2:24 49:19 | | 17:5,6 22:4 23:19,23 | 75:11 76:11 79:6,25 | 109:14,25 110:16 | +| 117:8 | | 25:13,13,23 28:2,4 | 93:10,14,19 95:9 | 126:21 136:1 | +| Preston 24:19,20 27:1 | | 29:4,9 33:21 34:4 | 97:20 98:6 104:3,5,8 | saying 16:21 50:11 | +| 27:6,13 28:1,13 | | 38:1 39:24 42:23 | 104:10 106:3 107:7 | 56:9,12 76:8 83:17 | +| 33:17 34:6,9 88:16 | | 43:15 44:4,7 45:20 | 107:12,13,15 108:13 | 83:17 90:2 | +| 88:17 | | 56:11,12,19,21 57:10 | 108:17 109:14 110:3 | says 9:24 11:21 12:17 | +| pretty 5:20 44:18 61:19 | | 57:15 58:18 59:10 | 110:19 111:7,21 | scare 30:18 | +| 122:20 | | 60:20,24 61:4,7 | 112:4,7,18 113:7 | scared 8:20 10:18 13:5 | +| pre-statement 9:22 | | 64:16 65:9,11 67:19 | 114:4 117:16,25 | 20:11,15,22 111:24 | +| prior 19:21 37:18,21 | | 67:21 68:1,13 69:19 | 120:1,12 121:12 | 112:2 | +| probably 13:25 15:18 | | 70:2,12,24 71:4 | 123:5 128:10 129:4 | scary 16:20 | +| 22:5 37:10 39:11 | | 75:20,21 77:3 80:25 | 129:23 132:16,20 | schedule 48:6 95:6 | +| 45:17 50:8 56:18 | | 82:21 84:7,8,9,10,13 | 135:6 137:23 | school 15:25 16:1 | +| 75:16 76:2 81:5 | | 84:14 85:11 93:19 | ring 117:4 | 25:23 44:6 49:4,8 | +| 92:22 93:19,21,22 | | 94:3 108:7,8 109:5 | Robert 2:19 4:23 | 56:2,19 57:18,19 | +| 101:18,18 102:8 | | 110:5 111:8,12 | ██████████ | 58:10 74:14 87:19 | +| 106:11 109:17 110:9 | | 113:11,15,16,18,19 | 37:1,8,14,24 38:12 | 89:16 102:9,20,25 | +| 126:18 130:12 134:2 | | 114:8,15,17,17 | 38:15,22 39:1 40:3 | 103:1 106:22 111:15 | +| 137:22 | | 116:13,18 117:5 | 49:14,15,20 51:7,15 | 111:17,18 120:6 | +| problem 16:12 | | 118:3 119:19,20 | 51:23 53:12 54:15,18 | 127:24,25 128:5,7 | +| proceed 6:1 | | 129:9,10 133:8,12,15 | 55:6 56:5,17 59:22 | 134:17,19,19,25 | +| proceeding 115:18 | | 133:16,17,22 134:4 | 61:1,9 64:14 65:8,23 | 135:1,3 | +| Professional 4:4,5 | | 136:1 | 66:9,14 67:1,23 | season 48:18,18 | +| proficient 123:25 | | remembered 67:7 | 68:15,21 69:5 70:4 | seating 93:4 | +| progressively 94:6,7 | | remembering 67:6 | 70:10,14 79:7,14 | second 60:9 81:11 82:7 | +| 136:8,18,24 137:7 | | remove 70:6 | 80:15 85:16 107:22 | 88:20,21,22 90:25 | +| pronouncing 114:23 | | rented 120:13,17 | 112:4,7,18,12 | 91:2,18,20 93:10,16 | +| proposal 3:14 73:7 | | 122:15,17 | role 116:14 117:1 | 93:24 94:3,4,11,17 | +| Prose 1:22 | | renting 123:8,16 | room 19:17 92:19,21 | 105:20 106:11,17,20 | +| proximity 30:5 | | rephrased 62:16 | 92:23 104:24 115:25 | 107:1,2,8 114:25 | + +| 117:25 | | | | | | | | | | | | +|--------------------------|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--| +| seconds 54:10 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| Secret 122:18 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| see 23:21 35:24 44:22 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 45:2,5,9 47:21 48:14 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 48:22 54:3 69:22 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 75:18 76:1 87:8 88:1 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 99:10 103:14 115:9 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 115:12 122:25 123:1 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| seeing 52:12,15 54:4 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 75:24 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| seen 13:22 44:20 48:3 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 53:25 72:18,20 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| semantics 14:15 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| semester 44:2,12 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| senior 46:24 47:13 49:2 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 106:18 125:15 126:4 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 133:17,22 134:18,24 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 134:25 135:3 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| September 76:15 100:3 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 101:19 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| serious 34:9 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| set 5:10 79:20 105:1,2 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| settlement 3:14 73:8 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| sexual 5:15,15,16 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| sexually 20:10 32:11 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 32:12 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| shady 55:3 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| shakes 7:23 33:4 90:9 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 105:25 125:2 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| shaking 125:5 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| she'd 55:4 84:11,12 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| She'll 68:9 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| shirt 137:16 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| shock 31:6 54:2 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| shocking 31:8 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| shortly 93:19 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| show 71:24 121:13,14 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| showed 79:21 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| shower 92:19 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| shows 109:8 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| sic 94:24 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| sides 5:19 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| significance 7:16,21 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| significant 18:2 21:8 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 27:10,14 30:16 57:16 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 58:20 81:1 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| Silver 43:16 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| single 63:12 76:7,23 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 94:19,19,24 95:15 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| sit 9:2 11:4 26:9 68:18 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| site 124:4 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| situation 16:20 28:25 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 29:9,11,15 51:20 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 64:18 65:2 116:15 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| situations 55:4 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| six 37:25 49:1 73:20 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 81:6 93:23 94:2,16 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 106:16 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| six-month 90:25 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| size 92:23 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| skipped 106:21 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| small 17:6,9,15,17,21 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 17:24 103:1 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| smelling 32:17 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| sober 49:25 50:2,3,9,15 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 50:21 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| soccer 48:5,6,7,7,8,18 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| social 124:4 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| socialize 128:20 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| sole 35:12 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| somebody 9:10,14 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 23:19,20,21 36:10 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 55:24 56:3 59:5 65:1 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 65:14,17,22 66:8 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 90:14 102:7,23 103:3 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 103:4,17 104:13 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 113:16 114:9 116:19 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 116:23 118:18,20 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 119:9 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| somebody's 64:2 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| someplace 35:6 110:21 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| sophomore 34:15,16,18 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 35:14 36:9 49:1 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 55:11,21,22 56:19,20 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 56:24,25 57:18 59:15 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 74:4 106:15 107:2,3 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 107:5,6,9 111:11 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 115:4 125:25 135:6 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| sorry 30:23 33:23 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 40:16 42:19 50:12 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 58:5 59:19 60:18 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 61:4 66:5 67:19 75:7 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 86:15,15 89:3,3 96:5 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 96:11,15 99:12 115:7 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 125:20 127:3,3 129:2 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| sort 36:21 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| South 1:17 4:12 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| SOUTHERN 1:1 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| Spanish 55:16,17 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| speak 10:20 11:8 52:8 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| specific 58:21 67:6 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 83:13 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| specifically 11:21 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 76:11 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| specifics 29:14 48:10 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| spell 6:15 114:22 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| spelled 6:18 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| spells 6:16 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| spoken 123:15 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| spring 55:17 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| stands 9:19 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| started 34:8 62:2 74:19 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 74:24 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| starting 48:21 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| state 1:22 4:6 6:4 23:12 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| 23:20 65:2 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| statement 7:11 9:15 | | | | | | | | | | | | +| | | | | | | | | | | | | + +|

104:20 105:3,5,6,7
105:10,11,14,14,17
105:19,20,21,21
106:8,11,15,17,20
107:1,2,2,4,8,15,23
110:16 115:10 117:6
120:12 122:4 123:11
126:21,24 127:19
128:1 129:18 133:19
133:24 135:10,13,23
136:5,15,17,19,20,21
136:25 137:8
times 8:20 10:15 27:4,7
28:5,7 32:18,20,21
32:22,24 76:13,19,22
77:13,17,21 78:1
97:15,18,22 98:1
113:22 133:18,25
134:2,5,11 136:14
today 7:8,19 8:25 9:2
53:1 70:14 73:1
120:12 124:13
toilet 92:20
told 8:17,23 9:7 10:4
10:11 11:5,6,10,16
11:24 12:17 18:23
28:7 35:18 51:19
52:12 53:24 54:12
62:7 63:17 64:12,13
65:6,10,14,17,22,23
66:8,9,14,18,25 67:1
67:2,22,23,24,24
68:15,21 69:5,25
70:14,25 79:22 81:7
95:24 97:2 102:13,23
103:2,17 104:3
107:23 108:5 113:2
119:16 121:16,24
122:2,3 123:13
top 91:19 108:3,12,22
136:15 137:2
total 117:13,13
touch 59:3
town 76:13 94:20,22,24
95:1,2,8,13,16 98:12
98:14,18 100:22
transcript 13:22 14:2
14:10,16 15:4,6,9
109:7,14,15,20,25
110:8,11 112:23
transpired 51:15
transpiring 30:16
trauma 31:7
traumatic 31:15,22
32:2,5
travel 82:1 122:22,23
122:24
traveling 48:6 77:4
trip 130:2,13,19 131:17

|

132:17
trouble 8:1 20:19,24
true 9:25 10:4 11:22,24
12:18 36:3 64:20
66:8 79:6 107:20,22
trust 54:25,25 55:1,24
56:5
truth 7:17,24 8:10,13
8:17,23 10:11,20,22
10:23 11:1,5,9,9,12
11:16 13:6,7,8,9
18:21,23 19:2,6,9,12
19:13,25 20:4,7,14
20:17,25 21:12 24:7
35:25 53:4 65:19,24
112:21 113:5 121:15
121:23
truthful 14:11,17 15:6
55:2 66:15
truthfully 12:2,5,19
13:11,19 26:16
trying 8:22 67:14 86:21
115:11
Tuesday 1:14
turned 74:17
twice 27:7 45:19 48:15
76:7,17 94:5,6,9,14
94:18
two 16:3 17:12 28:7,12
37:10,24 41:17 44:24
45:19,19 51:5 59:21
60:6,13,14,19,21
61:6 63:17 76:13,19
76:22 77:12,15 83:20
86:10 88:14,14
113:11 117:11,17,19
117:20 121:25
128:18 129:8,8
type 23:13


U

uh-huh 19:3 25:7,19
30:9,11,19 31:14
36:14 40:4 42:8,17
45:1,14 47:10 49:5
52:8 54:16 59:25
73:2,24 74:10,18,23
75:2 76:23 77:23
78:11 79:12 80:22
86:6,13 87:11 88:18
89:3,5 93:7 106:6
107:14 112:17
124:14 126:22,25
135:7
Ultima 43:6,14
understand 5:25 7:18
10:3 46:23 53:1,3
67:14 73:23
understands 33:8

|

understood 53:8
underwear 137:17
Unh-unh 111:4
United 1:1 116:23
118:4,7
university 16:2 22:1,11
38:17,22 43:22,23
44:8 45:16,22 46:22
74:9,19,25 75:10,18
111:20 114:25 115:4
120:25 125:17 128:9
128:12,14
upstairs 79:19,20
92:14,16
use 32:16 40:2 124:2,3
U.S 114:9 118:13


V

Vanessa 127:7,8
129:24 130:17
Vanessa's 127:10
vehicle 82:1 120:13,16
verbal 65:21 99:2
versus 4:11
vibrating 122:20
vibrator 32:16 122:18
136:20,21
Victoria 122:18
video 2:24
videographer 2:24 4:8
4:15 72:11,14 138:6
videotape 4:10
VIDEOTAPED 1:12
VIDEO-CONFERE...
1:12
Villafana 117:3 118:16
Vinyard 24:21 27:2,6
27:13 28:1,13 31:12
33:15,17 34:1 88:17
violating 7:22
violent 29:20,21
visit 79:13 93:24 133:4
133:11 137:1,1,3,4,6
137:14,15,19,20,21
137:23
visits 135:17
Visual 2:25 4:15
voice 29:19
VOLUME 1:6
voluntarily 78:15,18
78:25 93:12
vs 1:6


W

wait 14:4 40:11 49:1
60:16 67:5,5 73:16
81:19 89:6 95:21,23
96:12 101:21,23
133:9

|

walk 104:23
want 13:14 14:15,25
15:2,3 51:19,20 52:8
52:13,20,22,25 67:16
67:17 68:7 70:22
95:12 108:2,4,13
111:16 114:3 126:9
129:6 132:3
wanted 23:21 111:22
112:16 121:20
wasn't 12:4 17:13 21:9
27:21 40:25 48:8
49:25 50:2 51:11
52:12 55:2 59:2 63:5
63:9 66:8 75:15
89:23 92:9,9,10,16
101:6 103:16 104:13
104:15 110:12
111:23 132:4
way 37:11 57:22 60:2
82:17 84:16,22 85:7
85:11,12 123:24
136:6
wear 68:22,22 69:6,6
69:10,11,11,14,17,18
69:22 70:1,1
web 124:4
week 45:8,18 47:25
48:12 76:7,13,17,22
77:14 106:12 121:25
weekends 48:4
weeks 45:19
went 13:2 37:9,13,15
38:13 41:15,19,21,24
42:22 43:11 44:14,15
49:13 50:18,25 51:7
59:22 62:8 63:18,20
63:24 69:9 70:10
74:5,7 75:4,8,12
77:11,12,17,21 78:13
78:15,16,18,18,23,25
79:8,13,18,18,18,25
80:24,24 81:2,8,10
88:20,22 90:24 91:17
91:18,20 92:19 93:11
93:11,15,18 94:4,5,7
94:11,15,16,17,21,25
97:12,15,18,22,24
98:3,23,25 99:4,5,10
102:2,15 103:9
104:11,13,20,22
105:8,19 106:11,13
106:17 107:1,2,4,8
108:11 109:1 126:10
127:6 129:13,24
130:23 131:7 135:5
weren't 52:15 64:3
103:14 104:18
West 1:18 2:21 4:13

|

40:5 115:17
we'll 6:1
we're 7:8 36:2 54:3
57:5 67:13,17 72:7
73:16 85:20 94:1
106:7
Wheeler 2:3 19:17,18
when's 25:14
wildest 43:2
wildest 11:2
Willits 2:14,14 5:1,1
6:22
withdrew 128:2
witness 3:4 6:10,16,23
7:23 9:21 10:13 12:7
12:14,23 14:20 16:17
17:5,24 18:13,15
19:19 20:10 21:2
23:1 24:25 28:15,24
30:13,23 32:2,15
33:1,4 40:12,16
42:19 50:18,24 53:16
58:5,23 59:19 60:18
64:6,6,16 66:2,20
68:1,12 70:19 71:4
72:1 73:18 77:3,21
78:23 79:4 81:25
84:2 85:5 90:9 96:11
96:15,24 97:18 98:14
100:24 103:23 104:9
104:14 105:7,25
108:7,15,19 112:8
114:6 115:6 118:7
125:2,4,7 127:3
129:1,8 135:19
137:11
witness's 6:18
women 117:14
wonder 89:14,18 90:6
word 15:5 37:18 63:13
102:1,2
words 40:2 62:11
work 127:24
world 35:9,18 64:13
65:7 132:11
worse 94:7,7 105:11
136:8,10,11,18,24
137:7
Worth 2:16
wouldn't 35:25 52:4,14
65:12 66:7 91:14
104:25
write 9:21 26:9
writing 38:9 110:1
written 5:4 34:23,25
66:23 97:25
wrote 35:6 109:6


X

| +|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +|

X 3:2,10

Y

Yahoo 124:9

yeah 7:13,14,17 8:1,4

8:11,19,20,21 9:3,5

10:1,8,13 11:15,19

11:25 12:23 14:24

18:11,15 20:1 21:7

21:19,23 22:12 23:1

23:18,23 24:8,25

25:4 26:12 27:15,16

27:16,18,23 30:7,17

31:1,3 32:5 33:19

34:4,9,12 35:23

36:24 37:6 38:14,20

38:24 39:23 40:6,13

42:4 44:10 46:6,24

49:2 50:15,24 52:16

54:9,20 56:25 60:8

60:24 62:19 63:23

64:9,11 65:3 66:22

66:23 68:8,19 69:3

69:14 70:19 71:17

72:4,19 73:22 74:1

75:8 76:2 77:12 78:3

78:8,16,23 79:4

80:12,20 81:3,19,21

83:21 84:21 87:3

89:1,8,10,13,21

90:17,20 92:1,4,6,8

92:18 93:1,9,13

94:12 101:21,21,23

104:4,11,19 106:4

107:12,14,17,21

109:22 110:9,18,20

111:17 112:5,10,12

112:14,20,22 113:3,3

113:8 116:3,6 119:10

120:16 121:2,11,24

122:10,13 123:23

124:2,3,6,24 125:11

125:18,22,24 126:15

127:13,17 128:2,13

129:22 130:14,24

131:4,19 133:1,6

134:21 135:4,12

137:5,24 138:2

year 19:19,21 22:1,6

25:23 33:22 34:16,16

34:18 35:14 36:10

39:12 45:13,15,16,17

45:22,23,25 46:1,3

46:24 47:13,14,14,15

47:20 48:2,16 49:11

55:11,19,21,22 56:20

56:20,24,25 57:8,9

57:18,18 59:15 73:20

74:4,8,11 75:22 81:4

|

81:5,8 86:10 96:4

98:17 106:16,18,21

106:25 107:2,3,5,6,9

107:16,19 109:18

111:11 114:25 115:4

125:13,14,16,23,24

126:1,3,4 133:16,17

133:21,22 134:20,24

134:25 135:3,6

years 13:25 15:8,15,18

34:12,16 45:11 49:1

49:2,10 54:1 78:6,10

88:14 102:3,20,24

103:4,9 109:14,18

110:7,9 126:20

Yep 35:1 37:5

young 10:22 102:11

\$

\$200 61:15 63:7 70:17

80:14,18 83:7 84:10

85:1 89:4,9 90:11

91:13,14,15,19 92:11

106:5 107:25 132:24

0

0 125:20,20

03 33:24

04 33:24 96:20 97:9,9

99:1

05 22:9 33:24 74:15,16

74:20 75:11,17,20

76:4,5,5,6,9,14,14,15

76:15,15 77:1,1,7

78:6 79:8 95:22

96:18,20,21,21 97:6

97:6 101:20,23

125:23

06 33:23 101:23 125:21

125:25

07 126:3,5

08 39:13,19,20,23 40:1

43:19,21 47:16,22,23

48:21 125:21,22

126:4,8,13,14,16

127:20

08-CV-80119-MAR...

1:3

08-08380 1:10

08-80232 1:10

08-80381 1:10

08-80811 1:10

08-80893 1:10

08-80993 1:10

08-80994 1:10

09 39:13,23 40:2 43:19

47:16 125:21

09-80469 1:10

09-80591 1:11

|

09-80656 1:11

09-80802 1:11

09-81092 1:11

1

1 2:7 3:14 71:25 72:8,9

72:17 138:7

1st 77:1,18 78:14

1:10 138:6,8

1:59 138:9

10th 2:15

11:11 1:15 4:9

115 1:17

12:07 72:12

12:15 72:14

13 102:3,20,24 103:4,9

15 34:12,16 36:9

16 107:13

1650 2:4

17 25:8,18,18,23

18 25:18 74:17 78:6,10

134:16

18205 2:9

1987 6:21

2

2 1:4 3:15

20 92:11

2004 98:17,20 99:14,16

99:18,20,22,24 100:1

100:3,5,7,9 125:9

2005 15:19 22:3 74:11

74:12 77:18,19 78:9

78:10,14,14 100:11

100:13,15,17,19

2006 74:12

2008 39:13,15 45:13,15

45:22,25 47:12,20

48:17 86:12

2009 1:14 4:9 39:13,15

2218 2:10

2290 2:15

232 3:15

250 1:17 4:12

27 1:14

27th 4:8

3

3 3:16 81:13,14,16,19

82:3,5,7,13,14,17

83:22 84:10 89:6,21

102:19 103:5

3's 81:15

30 50:8 77:24,25

30s 130:12

303 2:20

305.931.2200 2:11

31st 77:19 78:6,9,14

33160 2:10

|

33301 2:5

33401 1:18 2:21

33461 2:16

348 3:16

384 3:17

394 3:18

4

4 1:13 3:5,6,17 4:10,11

4:20 6:7,14,20 96:10

124:11

40s 130:12

400 2:21

401 2:4

404 2:15

412 5:8,8,14

5

5 3:18

50 77:25

50s 131:11

561.582.7600 2:16

561.842.2820 2:22

6

6 6:21 25:16

6th 78:5,9

6:05 1:15

7

7 102:17,17,18 103:3,5

104:5 126:2 127:7

129:15 130:1,6,16

132:18,19,22

7's 104:6 129:16,21

130:4,7

72 3:14

8

8 2:7 126:2

9

954.522.3456 2:5

| +|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748259/EFTA02748259.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748259/EFTA02748259.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5cd2eb606cf405c638094f893174d8143a973921 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748259/EFTA02748259.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1526 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748259.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 45, + "chars": 254249, + "elapsed_seconds": 111.6, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 51.04999542236328, + 68.85000000000001 + ], + [ + 443.0581970214844, + 68.85000000000001 + ], + [ + 443.0581970214844, + 99.463134765625 + ], + [ + 51.04999542236328, + 99.463134765625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 85 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 21 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "Form", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 269 + ], + [ + "Line", + 134 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 215 + ], + [ + "Line", + 108 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 269 + ], + [ + "Line", + 134 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 215 + ], + [ + "Line", + 108 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 802 + ], + [ + "Line", + 110 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 267 + ], + [ + "Line", + 133 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 225 + ], + [ + "Line", + 109 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 221 + ], + [ + "Line", + 109 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 403 + ], + [ + "Line", + 199 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 883 + ], + [ + "Line", + 135 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 942 + ], + [ + "Line", + 134 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 907 + ], + [ + "Line", + 108 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 313 + ], + [ + "Line", + 157 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 267 + ], + [ + "Line", + 132 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 806 + ], + [ + "Line", + 68 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 966 + ], + [ + "Line", + 134 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 872 + ], + [ + "Line", + 109 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 903 + ], + [ + "Line", + 109 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 286 + ], + [ + "Line", + 143 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 265 + ], + [ + "Line", + 133 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 754 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 967 + ], + [ + "Line", + 133 + ], + [ + "Text", + 56 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 989 + ], + [ + "Line", + 165 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 912 + ], + [ + "Line", + 134 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 910 + ], + [ + "Line", + 139 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1000 + ], + [ + "Line", + 109 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 887 + ], + [ + "Line", + 109 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 855 + ], + [ + "Line", + 141 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 890 + ], + [ + "Line", + 109 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 970 + ], + [ + "Line", + 109 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 146 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1002 + ], + [ + "Line", + 299 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 996 + ], + [ + "Line", + 297 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 38, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 39, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 992 + ], + [ + "Line", + 296 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 40, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 41, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1007 + ], + [ + "Line", + 297 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 42, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1048 + ], + [ + "Line", + 298 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 43, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 44, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 697 + ], + [ + "Line", + 210 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748259" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748304/EFTA02748304.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748304/EFTA02748304.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2e2bb4bbfc7bdf2730c8d4ba6bd4926885cee5d8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748304/EFTA02748304.md @@ -0,0 +1,3386 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +-vs- + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +VOLUME II OF III + +# Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## VIDEO-CONFERENCED AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO. 4 + +Tuesday, October 27, 2009 + +11:11 - 6:05 p.m. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 115 + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Reported By: + +Cynthia , RPR, FPR + +Notary Public, State of Florida + +Prose Court Reporting + +1 APPEARANCES: + 2 On behalf of the Plaintiff, L.M. and E.W.: + 3 MICHAEL J. WHEELER, ESQUIRE + 4 ROTHSTEIN, ROSENFELDT, ADLER + 501 East Las Olas Boulevard + Suite 1650 + 5 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 + Phone: 954.522.3456 + +6 On behalf of Jane Does 1 through 8: + 7 ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQUIRE + 8 STUART S. MERMELSTEIN, ESQUIRE + 9 MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. + 18205 Biscayne Boulevard + Suite 2218 + Miami, Florida 33160 + Phone: 305.931.2200 + E-mail: Ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +10 On behalf of C.M.A.: + 11 RICHARD HORACE WILLITS, ESQUIRE + 12 RICHARD H. WILLITS, P.A. + 1190 10th Avenue North + Suite 404 + Lake Worth, Florida 33461 + Phone: 561.582.7600 + (Via Telephone) + +13 On behalf of the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein: + 14 ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE + 15 MARK T. LUTTIER, ESQUIRE + 16 BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP + 303 Banyan Boulevard + Suite 400 + West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + Phone: 561.842.2820 + +17 ALSO PRESENT: Jeffrey Epstein, via video conference + 18 Jeff [REDACTED], Videographer + 19 Visual Evidence, Incorporated + +20 Page 141 + +1 IN DE X + 2 + 3 + 4 WITNESS: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS + 5 JANE DOE NO. 4 + 6 CONTINUED + 7 BY MR. LUTTIER 142 + 8 + 9 + 10 EX H I B I T S + 11 + 12 + 13 EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE + 14 DEFENDANT'S EX. 1 Proposal for Settlement 72 + 15 DEFENDANT'S EX. 2 Answers to Interrogatories 232 + 16 DEFENDANT'S EX. 3 Petition for Injunction 348 + 17 DEFENDANT'S EX. 4 Handwritten Note 384 + 18 DEFENDANT'S EX. 5 Psychological/Social History 394 + 19 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23 + 24 + 25 + +1 + 2 \* \* \* + 3 CONTINUED DIRECT EXAMINATION + 4 \* \* \* \* \* + 5 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the beginning + 6 of Tape Number 2. We're back on the record at + 7 1:59. + 8 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 9 Q. I think when we broke I was talking about + 10 your fourth visit with Mr. Epstein. What occurred + 11 on the fourth visit? + 12 A. Went there to get, give a massage, that + 13 Sarah brought me upstairs. + 14 MR. CRITTON: You need to -- excuse me + 15 just a moment. You need to hit the button. + 16 THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you. + 17 MR. CRITTON: Thank you. + 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: All right. + 19 MR. LUTTIER: And is this other guy + 20 calling in or -- + 21 MR. CRITTON: No, no, it's part of the + 22 video feed. + 23 MR. LUTTIER: No, but this, whoever was on + 24 this, Willits -- + 25 THE COURT REPORTER: He said he was going + +1 to call back in. + 2 MR. CRITTON: Was he going to call back? + 3 MR. WHEELER: Yes. + 4 THE COURT REPORTER: He did say he was + 5 going to call back. Did he -- + 6 MR. WHEELER: He said he would call right + 7 back. + 8 MR. CRITTON: All right. Well, we're + 9 still going to start. + 10 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 11 Q. Okay. Go ahead, fourth visit. + 12 A. Whenever the massage, he was, like, not + 13 this time he was on the phone the first time. Like + 14 it was more conversation between me and Mr. Epstein. + 15 Q. Did you remain dressed the whole time? + 16 A. Yeah. They, I took my shirt like -- it + 17 progressively got worse. + 18 Q. I am talking about the fourth visit. + 19 A. I think I took my shirt off. + 20 Q. On the fourth visit? + 21 A. Yeah, like, or -- + 22 MR. MERMELSTEIN: If you remember. + 23 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I don't remember. + 24 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 25 Q. So, you don't really know if you were -- + +1 A. I remember after the first, like, four 2 visits, it from after like, after like the first 3 four visits, it progressively got worse starting 4 with taking my shirt off, and taking my bra off and 5 taking my pants off, taking my underwear off. It 6 just progressively got worse. I can't — I don't 7 remember exactly fifth visit, sixth visit, seventh 8 visit, eighth visit, ninth visit, tenth visit. I 9 don't it-member. + +10 Q. And you don't know when the fourth visit 11 was, right? + +12 A. No. 13 Q. And you don't know when the fifth visit 14 was, right? + +15 A. Unh-unh. 16 MR. MERMELSTEIN: You are asking specific 17 dates? + +18 MR LUTHER: Yep. + +19 BY MR. LUTTIER: 20 Q. You need to - + +21 A. I do remember it was my sophomore year. + +22 Q. You mincinber specifically — + +23 A. My first visit. My first visit was - + +24 Q. No, I said the fifth visit. + +25 A. M, towards the — let's see. It got + +Page 145 + +1 progressively worse. + +2 (Telephone interruption.) + +3 MR. WILLITS: Is this the deposition? + +4 MR LUTITER: Yes, we just started. + +5 MR. WILLITS: Okay. Willits here. + +6 MR. LUTHER: All right. + +7 MR WILLITS: rm going to put the mute 8 button on. + +9 MR. LUTHER: Okay. + +10 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Do you remember the 11 question? + +12 TIIE WITNESS: No, sorry. + +13 BY MR LUTTIER: + +14 Q You don't recall when the fourth visit 15 was, do you, the date? + +16 A. Well, if it progressively got worse after 17 the fourth visit, then probably beginning of my + +18 junior year. Beginning of my junior - + +19 Q. The fourth visit was the beginning of - + +20 A. It must have been the beginning of my 21 junior year. It progressively got worse. + +22 Q. My question was, you don't remember when 23 the fourth visit was? + +24 A. No. It was the beginning of my junior 25 year. + +1 Q. The fourth visit was the beginning of your 2 junior year. And how do you know it was the 3 beginning of your junior year? + +4 A. Because I know after the fourth visit that 5 that's, the beginning of my junior year is whenever 6 Mr. Epstein started -- things started getting to the 7 point where I would take my shirt off and so on. + +8 Q. And how do you know that it was the 9 beginning of your junior year when you began to take 10 your shirt off? + +11 A. Because in the -- after the fourth visit, 12 I would start taking - I took my shirt off, and 13 then from — after the fourth visit, after I took my 14 shirt off, the fifth visit I would take my pants + +15 off, and then rd be in my bra and underwear, and 16 then the next visit, I would be -- I would take my 17 bra off and I would just be in my underwear. And + +18 then after that visit I would take my underwear off, 19 and then after that visit it was him fingering me, 20 or him using a vibrator on me. And then after that 21 visit was him fingering me, or him using a vibrator 22 and fingering me. + +23 MR. MERMELSTEIN: He is trying to get the 24 time frame. + +25 THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +Page 147 + +1 MR. LUTTIER: My question was how do you 2 know - + +3 MR. MERMELSTEIN: So if you don't remember 4 the exact time or the date that's — + +5 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I don't know. + +6 BY MR. LUTHER: + +7 Q. You say it was the beginning of your 8 junior year when you first took your shirt off, 9 right? + +10 A. Yeah. + +11 Q How do you know that's when it was, and it 12 wasn't the middle of your junior year or the end of 13 your junior year? + +14 A. Because I remember things got sexual, it 15 was like the middle — or the beginning and the 16 middle of my junior year. + +17 Q. Was it the beginning or the middle? + +18 A. It was like October, October, like tight 19 before the beginning of the new year. + +20 Q flow do you 'mow that? + +21 A. Because that's whenever like things got 22 more, like, like, more like sexual, I guess. I 23 don't know. + +24 Q. Well, I'm asking you how you can identify 25 that things + +1 2 3 4 5 6 A. I don't know what the date is. rm sorry. Q. You've got to wait for me to ask the question. How can you identify when things, to, to use your words, got more sexual, and say that that happened in the middle of your junior year? What is — is there an event that you recall? + +7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 A. Yeah. Q. Well, what, what set of circumstances allows you to conclude that that happened at the beginning of your junior year or in October — A. He started using a vibrator on me. Q. — as opposed to March of the next year? A. Because he started using a vibrator on me. Q. Okay. But what event let's you recall that that, that is the use of a vibrator, happened at the beginning of your junior year, for example? A. Because you don't forget something like that. + +19 20 21 22 Q. Well, do you have it recorded anywhere? A. No. Q. And during this deposition, you told us you cannot remember dates, right? + +23 24 25 A. Not specific dates, no. Q. So, would it be a fair statement to say that you don't know exactly when this happened? + +1 THE WITNESS: Do you have a napkin. Thank 2 you. + +3 MR. MERMELSTEIN: You're okay. You're 4 okay. + +S MR. CR1TTON: Let me just put on the 6 record, we have been pretty good about the 7 legal objections and everyone has been very restrictive about the, you know, stick with 9 form and if ifs leading or stuff + +10 You don't need to tell her, you know, if 11 you don't remember, you don't remember. I 12 assume that that's probably what she's been 13 told before. So let's stick with form and what 14 your legal objection is as distinct from 15 coaching by any of us, including me and any 16 other. + +17 You know, we have been pretty good on 18 these witnesses, and she's no different than 19 any other witness in this case. + +20 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Okay. I was just trying 21 to help. She wasn't understanding the question 22 that was asked. + +23 MR. CRITTON: She's been here for two 24 hours, three hours. She understands really 25 well what's going on. So, you 'mow, you + +Page 149 + +1 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. She said 2 that -- + +3 BY MR. LUFFIER: + +4 Q Correct? + +5 A Yeah. + +6 Q Could have been — + +7 MR. MERMELSTEIN: She said she doesn't 8 remember the date. + +9 BY MR. LUMER: + +10 Q. at the end of your junior year was the 11 first time it — + +12 A. No, I 'mow it wasn't the end of my junior 13 year. + +14 Q. How do know it wasn't the end of your 15 junior year? + +16 A. Because you don't forget something as 17 significant like that happens to you like that. + +18 Q. Well, wait, what you're calling is 19 significant is removing your shirt to give a + +20 massage, is that what you're calling significant? 21 A. No, using a vibrator on you. + +22 MR. MERMELSTE1N: Let's take a minute. + +23 Lees take a minute. Okay. Okay. Take your 24 time. Let us know when you're ready. Take + +25 your time. + +1 2 haven't been here, Stuart. She, she knows the drill, so — + +3 BY MR. LUTHER: + +4 5 Q. So, can you tell me specifically when the first time you removed your top was? + +6 A. No, I don't know the exact date. + +7 8 Q. Was it more than ten times after you had gone to Mr. Epstein? + +10 11 Q. And how can you conclude it was after four visits as opposed to after ten visits? + +12 13 A. Because I remember going there the beginning to the fourth visit, and that's why I went + +14 15 back because it wasn't where I had to take my shirt off. + +16 17 Q. Yeah. Now, on whatever visit it was when you first removed your top, how did that occur? + +18 What was the sequence of events? + +19 20 A. Nothing like he would — what do you mean, the sequence of events? + +21 22 Q. Well, when you went on this — whatever visit it was that you claim was the first time you + +23 24 removed your top, did you — first of all, did you voluntarily go to the house on that • casion? + +25 A. Yeah. Page 151 + +A. No, it's after like the fourth visit. + +1 Q. Did you go up to the room as you had done 2 on all the prior occasions? + +3 A. Yeah. + +4 Q. And was Mr. Epstein when you got there, 5 was he there when you got there? + +6 A. No, he was — no, the room was empty, but 7 the massage table was there. + +8 Q. So when you got up there were you fully 9 clothed? + +10 A. Yeah. + +11 Q. What were you wearing? + +12 A. Different clothes every single time. Like 13 shorts, jeans, tank tops. + +14 Q. I'm talking about this event that you 15 recall now, that you say you recall the first time 16 you removed your top. What were you wearing that 17 time? + +18 A. I don't exactly remember what outfit I was 19 wearing. + +20 Q. You don't, because you cannot specifically 21 pinpoint this occasion, can you? + +22 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +23 BY MR. LUTTIER: + +24 Q. All you know is at some point in time you 25 took your top off; isn't that right? + +Page 153 + +1 A. Yeah. + +2 Q. And is it fair, to be honest with + +3 everybody, you don't know if it was after five + +4 visits or ten visits. You just know at some + +5 point - + +6 A. It was at the beginning — + +7 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to the form. + +8 THE WITNESS: At the beginning of the — + +9 when I first started — + +10 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Asked and answered. Go 11 ahead. + +12 BY MR. LUTHER: + +13 Q. All right. You don't — you can't really + +14 tell us, can you? + +15 A. I don't know the exact date, but I know it + +16 was in the beginning after like the fourth visit. 17 Q. Well, all right. All right. So at some + +18 point Mr. Epstein comes in the room and you're going 19 to give him a massage; is that right? + +20 A. Ub-huh. + +21 Q. You've got to say yes. + +22 A. Yes. + +23 Q. So how is it that you got your — you took + +24 your top off? + +25 A. Well, after going there the first couple + +1 2 3 of times, he was just more friendly and talk, more talkative. I — he asked me to take my top off. It was — + +4 Q. And what did you say? + +5 A. Yeah. + +6 Did you say, no? + +7 A. No. + +8 Q. He asked you, right? + +9 A. Uh-huh. + +10 Q. What did he say specifically? + +11 A. Will you take your shirt off. + +12 And what did you say to him? + +13 A. Yeah. + +14 Q. All right. You could have said no, right? + +15 A. Yes. + +16 17 Q. All right. So you said yes, and what did you do, take your shirt off? + +18 A. Yes. + +19 Q. And what did you have on under your shirt? + +20 A. A bra. + +21 22 Q. All right. And then what did you do, give him a massage? + +23 A. Yeah. + +24 Q. Did you do anything else on that occasion? + +25 A. No. + +Page 155 + +1 Q. All right. Did you put your shirt on when 2 you got done? + +3 A. Yeah. + +4 Q. Then did you leave? + +5 A. Yeah. + +6 Q. Did you get paid 200 bucks? + +7 A. Yeah. + +8 Q. By the way, this money that you made doing 9 this, did you keep a record of how much you made? + +10 A. No. + +11 Q. Why not? + +12 A. I don't know. I didn't. + +13 Q. Did you report it on your tax return? + +14 A. Tax return? + +15 Q. Yeah, tax return. + +16 A. Yeah, I know what that is. But at that 17 time, no. I didn't even think about that. I didn't + +18 think that. 19 Q. Why didn't you report the income you were + +20 making? + +21 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked and 22 answered. + +23 MR. LUTTIER: No, she didn't answer that. + +24 BY MR. LUTTIER: + +25 Q. Why didn't you report the income that you + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 were making? A. I didn't even know anything about taxes. I was 15 years old, 16 years old. Q. Well, you were at least — A. I didn't know anything about -- Q. You were at least 16 by then, right? A. Yeah, I didn't have a job. I played soccer. I didn't, I didn't know anything about taxes or anything else like that. Q. Where did you put this money? A. I spent it. Q. Did you put it in the bank? A. No. I don't even think I had a bank account. Q. So did you get cash? A. Yeah. Q. What did you spend the money on? A. Clothes. Q. And did you tell — did you split it up with your friends? A. Split what up with my friends? Q. The money that you were getting paid for this? A. No, why would I — no. Q. Did you -- the 200 bucks that you got when + +1 to Mr. Epstein be a significant event in your 2 life, or was it just a casual thing? 3 A. I thought at that point it was casual. 4 . Oka . So, who went with you when you took 5 there? 6 A. Just me and her. 7 Q. Who drove? 8 A. I think she did. I don't remember. 9 Q. And what did you tell — 10 A. I didn't have a vehicle. 11 Q. And what did you tell 12 you took her there? 13 A. I don't remember. 14 Q. And what did you tell her about what to 15 expect? 16 A. I don't remember. 17 Q. By that point in time, what had you been 18 doing with Mr. Epstein during your massages? 19 A. I don't remember when I, when she first 20 went, so I don't know what I was doing with 21 Mr. Epstein. 22 Q. Well, had you taken your top off yet for 23 Mr. Epstein? 24 A. I don't know because I don't know when 25 first brought her there. before + +1 you took 2 of that? 3 A. No. there, did you give her part 4 Q. What did you s the money on that you 5 got paid for taking there? 6 A Went to the mall with her and went 7 shopping. 8 Q. With — and she had the money she had just 9 gotten from Mr. Epstein? 10 A. Yeah. 11 Q. Did you guys have a good time shopping at 12 the mall that time? 13 A. Yeah. We were — 14 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, 15 argumentative. 16 TI-IE WITNESS: — having a good time. We 17 went shopping. 18 BY MR. LUTHER: 19 Q. Did you go right after had, 20 had been to Mr. Epstein's on that first occasion to 21 give him a massage? 22 A. Pm sure — I don't remember. I know we 23 went shopping with the money. I don't know if it 24 was nett afterward or if it was the next day. 25 Q. Well, would, would you taking Lauren + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. Did you tell Lauren at that time Lauren was your best friend? A. No. She was one of my friends that I just met. Q.., she was one of your friends? A. Uh-huh. Q. You wanted to be honest with her, didn't you, and tell her what to expect? A. If you're friends. Q. Right? A. Yeah. Q. So, what did you tell her about — A. I don't remember. Q. I mean, did you just run into her one day and say, do you want to jump in my car with me and ride over to somebody's house? A. Did I say that? No. Q. Well, what did you tell her? A. I don't remember. Q. Did you tell her what she was going to do? A. I don't remember. Q. Did you even tell her a massage was involved? A. I don't remember our conversation about it. + +Q. Did you tell her we're going to go 2 fishing? 3 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, 4 argumentative. 5 THE WITNESS: Did I tell her that we were 6 going fishing? No. 7 BY MR. LUTHER: 8 Q. Pm trying to — I'm trying to — help me 9 understand what — how it is that, that you get 10 and take her to Jeffrey Epstein's 11 house. Why, why did you do that? 12 A. Why, why did I bring her there? 13 Q. Yeah. 14 A. Because Jeffrey wanted asked me if I 15 would bring somebody, another H. He said, I will 16 give you \$200, like I'm giving money to 17 bring new girls up to the house. And he said I 18 will, if you bring in, if you do, if — he asked me 19 to do the same thing that Haley was doing. 20 Q. So what did you do, just bump into 21 walking around the halls of your 22 school one afternoon? 23 A. I asked her if she wanted to go, and she 24 said yeah. 25 Q. so now you remember that you asked — + +2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Well, if she went there, apparently. Q. Let me finish m uestion. Now you recall that you asked if she wanted to go to Mr. Epstein's, correct? A. I took her there. I didn't drive — I don't know, I don't know if I drove. I don't know if she drove, but she went there, and — Q. Well, did you ask her if she wanted to go? A. I don't remember the conversation. Q. What I'm trying to find out is, was she just in the car with you and you guys were heading off to McDonald's — A. I don't remember. Q. - and deviated and decided to drive to Mr. Epstein's, or did you give her some advanced knowledge that what were going to do is go to Mr. Epstein's? A. I don't remember our conversation, how I got her to go to Jeffrey Epstein's. I am guessing. And of course I had asked her if I took her there. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Don't guess. THE WITNESS: I don't know. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Don't speculate. THE WITNESS: I don't know. + +1 BY MR. LUTHER: 2 Q. Can we assume that you told her that 3 nothing bad was going to happen? 4 A. I don't know what I told her, so I don't 5 know. 6 Q. Do you know whether or not you were honest 7 with her? 8 A. Yeah. Well, I don't know, like — I don't 9 understand the question. Like, I don't understand 10 what you're asking. Can you ask it again? 11 Q. Yeah. Is there something you don't 12 understand about the word honest? And I can 13 understand if ifs — 14 A. Yeah, I understand. 15 Q. Do you know what honest means? 16 A. Yeah. 17 Q. It means to tell the truth. 18 A. Uh-huh. 19 it Okay. Did you tell your friend the truth before you took her to F.pstein's? 21 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 22 THE WITNESS: I am sure. 23 BY MR. LUTHER: 24 Q. And you thought it was okay, right? 25 A. There was a — at that time? + +1 Q. Yep. 2 A. I think all of Palm Beach High 3 School was going at that time, so yeah. 4 Q. That's not my question. 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. You thought it was okay? You thought it 7 was the right thing to do, right? 8 A. At that time I thought it was — I didn't 9 think it was a bad thing. I didn't think — I 10 thought it was normal. 11 Q. So, you thought it was a good — M, you 12 thought it was normal? 13 A. Not nonnal, no. I'm sorry, I take that 14 back. Not normal, but there was a lot of girls that 15 were going, and so it was something, not something 16 that — I don't know. It was — I don't even know 17 how to explain it to tell you the truth 18 Q. You were happy to do it to get 200 bucks, 19 weren't you? 20 A. No. I was making — at that time, not — 21 making \$200, yeah, I was happy. 22 Q. And you didn't think there was anything 23 wrong with it, right? 24 A. Not the way it started, no. 25 Q. Mr. Epstein never asked you to do a single + +2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 thing that you didn't agree to do, did he? A. Every once in a while, yeah, he would. And when I wouldn't do it he said, Jane Doe No. 4, what's wrong with you? You have two different personalities, Jane Doe No. 4 (short form) and Jane Doe No. 4, like, meaning like, I would do one thing one minute, and then I was like, no, no, I go. And he was like,,, well, what's wrong with you. Do you have two different personalities? Q. Listen to my question. Mr. Epstein never asked you to do anything that you didn't agree to — A. Yes, sometimes he would, and I wouldn't. Q. Would you wait until I ask the question? You can't possibly know what I am going to ask before I ask it, can you? A. No. Q. Mr. Epstein never asked you to do anything that you refused to do, did he? A. No. Q. No. And if you said you didn't want to do something, Mr. Epstein didn't push it, did he? A. No, he asked me and I would say, no. And then he would -- Q. And then he respected it? A. No, and then he would say, well, why not? + +2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 He said, what's wrong? He is like, it's like you have two different personalities. When I would say no, he would be like,O, well, that's your other personality, and then he would go I like Jane Doe No.4 (short form) better. Q. And if he (sic) said no, he didn't push it, did he? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Other than what she just said? MR. LUTTIER: Right. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. I mean, if you said no, I don't want to do something, he didn't make you do it, did he? A. No, but then the next time I went,1— Q. All right. I'm talking about the time — A. No, no. Q. — that you say he asked you to do something you didn't want to do. You said no, and that was the end of it, wasn't it? A. Yeah. Q. So when you took your top off, whenever you went to give him a massage and took your top off you did that voluntarily, correct? A. Yeah. Q. Did there come a time that you went, and + +1 automatically before you did the massage, you took 2 your top off without Mr. Epstein even asking you to 3 do that? 4 A. After the rust time, yes. 5 Q. You did it, you were able — when 6 Mr. Epstein came into the room, were you already 7 without your top on? 8 A. No. 9 Q. So, it wasn't even the situation that he 10 was asking you to take your top off. You just 11 voluntarily took it off; isn't that correct? 12 MR. MEFtMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 13 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 14 BY MR. LUTTIER: 15 Q. Now, when you say that — or what you 16 think was around the fourth time you took your top 17 off. And on how many occasions did you do massages 18 for Mr. Epstein where what you did was you removed 19 your top, not your bra, but just your top? 20 A. Onetime. 21 Q. Just once, is that right? 22 A. Yeah. 23 Q. And how can you recall it only happened 24 onetime? 25 A. Because after that one time of just taking + +1 my shirt off, every single time I went it was 2 another piece of clothing that was dropping. 3 Q. All right. So the next time that you went 4 to Mr. Epstein, after the time that you took your 5 top off, what occurred? 6 A. After I took my top off, then I would take 7 my bra off 8 Q. Did he ask you to take your bra off? 9 A. Yeah. 10 Q. Did you agree to take it off? 11 A. Yeah. 12 Q. Did you tell him no, I don't want to take 13 my bra off? 14 A. Yeah — no. 15 Q. So he asked and you said okay, right? 16 A. Yeah. 17 Q. All right. And then on that occasion when 18 you took your, your top and your bra off, did 19 anything else happen or did you just do a massage? 20 A. Are you talking about the next time or are 21 you talking — 22 Q. No, I am talking about the occasion when 23 you first took your bra off. 24 A. No. 25 Q. You just gave him a massage and you picked + +1 up another 200 bucks, right? + +2 A. Uh-huh. + +3 Q. All right. Now -- + +4 A. Yes, sorry. + +5 Q. -- you didn't think there was anything + +6 wrong with taking your top off the first time you + +7 took your top off, did you? + +8 A. No. + +9 Q. And Mr. Epstein, as you said before lunch, + +10 was very nice towards you, was he not? + +11 A. Yeah. + +12 Q. You, you had begun to, to get to know him, + +13 and you would talk with him when you went, right? + +14 A. Yeah. + +15 Q. You never told him that you didn't want to + +16 do what you were doing, did you? + +17 A. No. + +18 Q. Okay. And you kind of liked Mr. Epstein, + +19 didn't you? + +20 A. He was really nice, like friendly. + +21 Q. Never hurt you in any manner physically, + +22 did he? + +23 A. Sexually, yeah. + +24 Q. Physically did he ever injure you in any + +25 manner whatsoever? + +1 Q. Didn't he build up your ego? + +2 A. Yeah. + +3 Q. And you didn't think there was anything + +4 wrong with anything that you were doing with + +5 Mr. Epstein, did you? + +6 A. No. + +7 Q. And that -- and if there -- if you did + +8 think there was something wrong with what you were + +9 doing with Mr. Epstein, you wouldn't have asked your + +10 friend [REDACTED] to go, would you? + +11 A. No. + +12 Q. You certainly wouldn't subject your + +13 friends to something that you didn't think was right + +14 or dangerous, would you? + +15 A. No. + +16 Q. Okay. Now, so there came a time that you + +17 took your bra off and you did that voluntarily, and + +18 on that occasion did you then give Mr. Epstein a + +19 massage topless? + +20 A. Yeah. + +21 Q. Anything else happen on that occasion? + +22 A. No. + +23 Q. The next time that you went to visit + +24 him -- + +25 A. Yeah. + +1 A. No. + +2 Q. Did he ever hit you? + +3 A. No. + +4 Q. Did he ever spit in your face? + +5 A. No. + +6 Q. Did he ever call you any vile names? + +7 A. No. + +8 Q. Did he ever call you a bitch? + +9 A. No. + +10 Q. Did he ever call you a whore? + +11 A. No. + +12 Q. Did he ever call you a cunt? + +13 A. No. + +14 Q. Ever call you anything like that? + +15 A. No. + +16 Q. Did he ever physically hurt you in any + +17 manner whatsoever? + +18 A. No. + +19 Q. Did he ever demean you in any manner + +20 whatsoever? + +21 A. Demean you? What does that mean? + +22 Q. Yeah, say, say bad things about you or + +23 make you feel like you were unintelligent or not + +24 worthy. + +25 A. No. + +1 Q. -- what occurred? + +2 A. My top, my bra and my shorts were off. + +3 Q. Do you know that you were wearing shorts + +4 the next time? + +5 A. Yeah. + +6 Q. How do you know you were wearing shorts? + +7 A. My pants, sorry. I don't know. Like, I'm + +8 just saying, I was just frustrated with everything, + +9 so it was pants -- + +10 Q. You don't really know what you were + +11 wearing, do you? + +12 A. -- capris. + +13 Q. Honestly, you don't really know what you + +14 were wearing, do you? + +15 A. No. + +16 Q. Okay. I appreciate the honesty. All you + +17 can really say is that at some point in time when + +18 you were going to give these massages, there came a + +19 point in time, although you don't know exactly when + +20 it was, that you removed your pants. Would that be + +21 a fair statement? + +22 A. It was after -- it was the fourth time. + +23 First time I took my shirt off, second time my bra + +24 off. Wait, fourth, fifth, sixth -- it was the + +25 seventh occasion. + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Q. Seventh occasion. Now, arc we into your, the latter part of your junior year? A. I — after I went there the first time or after I went there the second time, instead of Haley making my appointments, he got my number, so I would just make the appointments through Sarah instead of Haley, so I was going like a lot after my second visit. + +9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. Well — A. It was probably around my — can I finish — it was probably around my it was like middle of like my, like my junior year, like October or like October through January. October, December. Yeah, January, my junior year. + +15 16 Q. Did you and Haley have a little argument about the money situation? + +17 18 19 A. No. Q. Did you wonder why you were making your appointments directly with Sarah to go see + +20 21 Mr. Epstein as opposed to through Haley where she was — + +22 A Because -- + +23 Q — getting paid money? + +24 25 A. Because Haley only got paid money for every new person that she brought So that's why + +Page 173 + +1 there were so many girls that had gone there. + +2 Q. Who else did you get paid for bringing 3 besides + +Lauren is the only person that I 5 can remember. I don't think I brought anybody else. + +6 Q. Okay. So there came a time you were 7 performing massages with, for Mr. Epstein topless. + +8 Did — were there any occasions after the first 9 topless massage that you performed a massage for 10 Mr. Epstein and you weren't topless? + +11 A. After the first, wait, sorry. Ask that 12 question again. + +13 Q. Once you had gone topless the first time, 14 was there any massage that you gave him after that 15 where you were not topless? + +16 A. No. + +17 Q. Okay. So you say there came a time that 18 you gave Mr. Epstein a massage and you removed your, 19 either your shorts or your pants? + +20 A. 1Jh-huh. + +21 Q. Is that a yes? + +22 A. Yes, sorry. + +23 Q. And did — did you volunteer to do that? + +24 A. Did I volunteer? What do you mean, 25 volunteer? + +1 Q. I mean, did you volunteer without him even 2 asking, did you do — did you volunteer? + +3 A. Volunteer what? + +4 Q. To remove your pants. + +5 A. He asked me, and I said yes. + +6 Q. And my question is, did you volunteer to 7 remove your pants at any point without him asking 8 you? + +9 A. After the first time that I removed my 10 pants, it was just kind of like routine. It was 11 just like — + +12 Q. So, now let's go back — + +13 A. — so then the answer to that would be no. 14 Is that what you asked? Is that what you want to 15 hear? + +16 Q. I will cover this. Lets go back. The 17 first time Mr. Epstein asked you to remove your bra, 18 you told us that you removed the bra voluntarily, 19 right? + +20 A. He asked me, and yes, I did. + +21 Q. And you said yes. Okay. At any point 22 after that, did he ask you to take your bra off, or 23 did you just simply take it off? + +24 A. No, I - sometimes I would take it off and 25 sometimes he would ask me. + +Page 175 + +1 Q. So, sometimes you went there and you just 2 took your bra off without him even asking, right? + +3 A. Yeah, it was kind of like known that's 4 what you do. + +5 Q. Well, he didn't tell you that from now on 6 whenever you come, you're supposed to take your bra 7 off, did he? + +8 A. No. + +9 Q. Okay. So you just assumed, or you said, 10 I'm going to — part of the experience here is I'm 11 going to take my top and my bra off, right? + +12 A. Yeah. + +13 Q. Okay. So, there comes a point in time you 14 say he asks you to remove your pants? + +15 A. Oh-huh. + +16 Q. And you say okay? + +17 A. Yeah. + +18 Q. You didn't tell him no, I don't want to do 19 that? + +20 A. No. + +21 Q. All right. And you removed your pants 22 that then gave him a massage wearing what? + +23 A. My underwear. + +24 Q. What kind of underwear were you wearing? + +25 A. I don't remember. Thong. I always wear a + +1 thong. + 2 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Don't speculate. If you + 3 remember, answer. + 4 THE WITNESS: All I wear -- I always, + 5 that's all I wear is a thong. + 6 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 7 Q. And this is -- you're 16 now, 17? Which + 8 are you 16 or -- + 9 A. I was 16. + 10 Q. Sixteen, okay. And then you gave him a + 11 massage that time in your thong? + 12 A. Yeah. + 13 Q. Anything else happen on that occasion? + 14 A. No. He asked me to take my thong off, and + 15 I said no. + 16 Q. Okay. On, on the same occasion that he -- + 17 when he first requested you to take your pants off, + 18 you say on that same occasion he asked you to take + 19 your thong off? + 20 A. Yeah. + 21 Q. And you said, no? + 22 A. No. + 23 Q. And he didn't push it, right? + 24 A. No. + 25 Q. Okay. So you gave him a massage, you got + +1 A. Yeah, but he was like -- he was different. + 2 Q. Now, you're -- by the way, when you are + 3 going to see Mr. Epstein during this period of time + 4 that you're describing, you had a boyfriend, didn't + 5 you? + 6 A. A boyfriend on and off. + 7 Q. And you told Mr. Epstein you had a + 8 boyfriend, right? + 9 A. Yeah. + 10 Q. Okay. And that was this fellow + 11 Preston Vinyard? + 12 A. Uh-huh. + 13 Q. Okay. Was he being nice to you, too, like + 14 Mr. Epstein was? + 15 A. I mean, we were boyfriend and girlfriend. + 16 There was moments where he was nice, but there was + 17 moments where we weren't together. So, no, + 18 Mr. Epstein was nice to me. + 19 Q. Okay. Well, you -- and you're dating + 20 Preston Vinyard, right? + 21 A. On and off. We were never, like. It was + 22 one week we are on, one week off, one week on. + 23 Q. You're spending the night with + 24 Preston Vinyard during this period of time? + 25 A. I was spend -- at my house. + +Page 177 + +1 200 bucks and you left, right? + 2 A. Yeah. + 3 Q. Okay. Now, are we up over 10 or 15 visits + 4 by now? + 5 A. I'm sure. + 6 Q. So, you have made what, 3,000 bucks doing + 7 this by now, right? + 8 A. Probably. I don't, I don't have a + 9 calculator. + 10 Q. Well, 15 times 200 would be 3,000. + 11 A. Yeah. + 12 Q. Was that the most money you'd ever made? + 13 A. Yeah. + 14 Q. You liked the money, didn't you? + 15 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, + 16 argumentative. + 17 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 18 Q. Did you like the money? + 19 A. Yeah. + 20 Q. You kept going back to get the money, + 21 didn't you? + 22 A. That and like he was always like promising + 23 me things and like friendly to me. + 24 Q. Well, you, you had all kinds of friends, + 25 didn't you? + +Page 179 + +1 Q. Were you spending the night -- + 2 A. No. + 3 Q. -- with Preston Vinyard at any time during + 4 the period of time you've described thus far while + 5 you were doing these massages for Mr. Epstein? + 6 A. Spending the night with him, no. I stayed + 7 in my house. + 8 Q. Now, do you know we took Mr. Vinyard's + 9 deposition yesterday? + 10 A. No. + 11 Q. You were having sex with Mr. Vinyard + 12 during this time that you were giving massages to + 13 Mr. Epstein, weren't you? + 14 A. I had gone to Mr. Epstein's before I had + 15 started physically doing anything with Preston. + 16 Q. We're talking about now you've described + 17 that you were in the, in your junior year of high + 18 school? + 19 A. Yeah, I was. + 20 Q. I just want to make sure we're clear. + 21 Which would be what calendar year, the junior year + 22 of high school? + 23 A. I graduated '05. + 24 Q. 2004, 2003-2004? + 25 A. 2003. + +1 2 3 4 Q. Okay. That would be the 2003-2004 school year, right? A. Yeah. Q. That is from about August of 2003 to June 5 of 2004; is that right? 5 Evidence 412 on questions of sexual conduct 6 A. Yeah, junior year, 2003-2004, yeah. 6 with persons other than Epstein. So, you're 7 Q. Now, it's a fact, is it not, that by the 7 getting into an area here that, that I am going 8 beginning of your junior year, by the beginning of, 8 to have to direct her not to answer. I am 9 let's say, August of '03, you were having sexual 9 warning you. 10 relations with a Preston Vinyard, weren't you? 10 MR. LUTTIER: Well, I don't I don't 11 A. Yeah. 11 think there's a court order that prohibits us 12 Q. Didn't have any sexual relations with 12 from doing anything. I think there are some 13 Mr. Epstein, did you? 13 subsequent orders that have come out that 14 A. No. 14 pretty clearly indicate that it's an area of 15 Q. Okay. And so getting naked in front of a 15 appropriate inquiry, and certainly after 16 man was not a problem for you, right? You had done 16 Mr. Kliman's inquiry, it's fair game, but, you 17 that before? 17 know, so that's our position. 18 A. Yeah. 18 BY MR. LLTTIER: 19 Q. Okay. And were you doing things with 19 Q. Okay. Let's go back to — 20 Mr. Vinyard before your soph, your junior year of 20 MR. CR1TTON: Wait a minute. I don't know 21 high school that you never did with Mr. Epstein? 21 whether — are you instructing her not just 22 A. With Preston? 22 so the record — 23 Q. Yeah. 23 MR. LITTLER: No, she answered that 24 A. I met him, like, I met him my sophomore 24 question. 25 year. I met Mr. Epstein before I met Preston. 25 MR. MERMELSTEIN: 'don't, I don't thinlc + +1 2 3 4 A. Yeah. Q. junior year of high school? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Again, you know, we have a standing objection here pursuant to Federal + +Page 181 Page 183 + +1 Q. That wasn't my question. Were you doing 1 there was a question she hasn't answered. So I 2 things with Mr. Vinyard before your junior year of 2 was just stopping him from the next question, I 3 high school that you never did with Mr. Epstein? 3 guess. 4 A. I don't remember. 4 MR. LUTTIER: We'll come back to that in a 5 Q. Well, you had sexual intercourse with 5 minute. 6 Mr. Vinyard before your junior year of high school, 6 BY MR. LUrT1F.R: 7 didn't you? 7 Q. Had you been naked in front of any other 8 A. I don't remember. I remember I waited for 8 male person other than Preston Vinyard before the 9 like a while before I had sexual intercourse with 9 first time you took your bra off in front of 10 Mr. Vinyard. 10 Mr. Epstein? 11 Q. Well, I just asked you five questions ago 11 A. Naked? 12 whether or not you had had sexual relations with 12 Q. Yeah, naked. 13 Mr. Vinyard - 13 A. No. Preston, no. 14 A. I said, yeah. 14 Q. Had you been topless in front of any other 15 Q. -- before you started your junior year of 15 male person before the first time you took your bra 16 high school, and you said, yes. 16 off in front of Mr. Epstein other than 17 A. Yeah. 17 Preston Vinyard? 18 Q. Okay. What do you understand the word 18 A. No. 19 sexual relations to mean? 19 Q. Are you — did you — are you claiming you 20 A. Intercourse means sexual. 20 lost your virginity to Preston Vinyard? 21 Q. Okay. So, Mr. Vinyard had taken his penis 21. A. Yeah. 22 and inserted it in your vagina before your junior 22 Q. Okay. On the ocrision that you first 23 year of high school; isn't that right? 23 removed your pants and giving Mr. Epstein a massage, 24 A. Yeah. I think so, yeah. 24 did anything else occur on that or-cqsion? 25 Q. Had you given him oral sex before your — 25 A. Wait. Repeat that question. + +1 Q. On the first time you took your pants off + 2 and you were giving Mr. Epstein a massage in your + 3 thong, did anything else occur during that massage + 4 other than just a massage? + 5 A. No. + 6 Q. All right. + 7 A. He asked me to take my underwear off, and + 8 I said no. + 9 Q. Okay. + 10 A. Did anything else occurred. + 11 Q. All right. Did there come a time that you + 12 came back after that massage and gave Mr. Epstein + 13 another massage? + 14 A. Yeah. + 15 Q. Why did you come back? + 16 A. I don't know. + 17 Q. Isn't it true that you contacted Sarah and + 18 told her you were looking for more work? + 19 A. No. + 20 Q. Do you deny that you ever contacted Sarah + 21 and asked if you could come give Mr. Epstein a + 22 massage? + 23 A. If I called her and asked? + 24 Q. Yeah, so -- + 25 A. She always called me whenever she was in + +1 Q. That's when you were at [REDACTED] University? + 2 A. Yeah. + 3 Q. Okay. Did you ever tell anybody that you + 4 were having a good time at Mr. Epstein's? + 5 A. I don't, I don't know. I don't -- + 6 Q. Is it possible you did? + 7 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 8 THE WITNESS: Maybe. I don't know. + 9 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 10 Q. In fact, when you were doing it, not now + 11 that you filed a lawsuit, but back when it was going + 12 on, you did tell people that you were having a good + 13 time at Mr. Epstein's, didn't you? + 14 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 15 THE WITNESS: No, I didn't. I mean, no, + 16 who's going to, like, go out and mom and dad, + 17 guess what? No. + 18 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 19 Q. Well, did you tell your mom and dad about + 20 this, by the way? + 21 A. Yeah. + 22 Q. When did you tell them about this? + 23 A. When everything was going on, whenever, + 24 whenever Jeffrey -- when cops were getting involved + 25 and the lawyers and FBI. + +Page 185 + +1 town. I never knew when Jeffrey was in town. + 2 Q. Listen carefully to my question. Are you + 3 denying -- + 4 A. I don't remember. I don't think. I want + 5 to say no, because I don't think I did, but I don't + 6 remember and I don't know. + 7 Q. Isn't it -- well, I mean, would you have + 8 any reason to call Mr. Epstein other than, his + 9 number other than to schedule a time to come give + 10 him a massage? + 11 A. Wait. What was that? + 12 Q. Would you have any reason to call + 13 Mr. Epstein other than -- + 14 A. No. + 15 Q. -- to schedule a massage? + 16 A. No. + 17 Q. You're aware that your cellphone records + 18 can be subpoenaed, right? + 19 A. Yeah. + 20 Q. Is there any other reason why + 21 Mr. Epstein's phone numbers would appear on your + 22 cellphone? + 23 A. He rented me, he rented me a car. + 24 Q. And that was when? + 25 A. My freshman year in college. + +Page 187 + +1 Q. Well, when was the first time you told + 2 your mother about this? + 3 A. I don't remember. Probably freshman year + 4 in college. + 5 Q. After you had a visit from the Palm Beach + 6 Police Department? + 7 A. No. I don't remember. I don't remember + 8 right now if -- + 9 Q. Which is it? + 10 A. -- it was my freshman year in college. I + 11 don't know. + 12 Q. Is it no, or I don't know? + 13 A. I don't know. + 14 Q. When did you first tell your dad about it? + 15 A. I don't know. + 16 Q. Was it after the Palm Beach Police visited + 17 you? + 18 A. I don't know. + 19 Q. Isn't it true you only told your folks + 20 after you thought it was going to come out? + 21 A. Yeah. + 22 Q. Why didn't you want your folks to know + 23 what you had been doing for the last, according to + 24 you, couple of years? + 25 A. I don't know. It isn't something that I + +1 2 3 would tell my parents. Q. Your parents were good to you, weren't they? + +4 5 A. Yeah. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + +6 7 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. They raised you well, didn't they? + +8 9 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +10 11 12 BY MR. LUITIER: Q. Taught you the difference between right and wrong? + +13 14 15 A. Uh-huh. Yeah. Sorry. Q. Did you have any religion when you were brought up? + +16 17 18 A. Uh-huh. Q. What religion are you? A. Catholic. + +19 20 Q. Roman Catholic? A. (Witness nods head.) + +21 22 Q. If you could, is that a yes? A. Yes. + +23 24 Q. Did you go to church when you were a kid? A. Yeah. + +25 Q. Did you go to church right on through + +Page 189 + +1 college? + +2 A. No. + +3 Q. Did there come a time you stopped going to 4 church? + +5 A. I was traveling a lot for soccer, so + +6 soccer, like, sometimes whenever we were out + +7 somewhere, or we weren't going every Sunday like I 8 was when I was younger. + +9 Q. But if you didn't go to church it was only 10 because you were out of town? + +11 A. Yeah, out of town or at a per game at 12 like 9:00 in the morning. + +13 Q. Are you still a Roman Catholic? + +14 A. Yeah. + +15 Q. Huh? + +16 A. Yeah. + +17 Q. I mean, you didn't give up your religion + +18 sometime along the way. It was just that if you 19 were traveling for soccer and you couldn't make + +20 church, you didn't go? + +21 A. Uh-huh. + +22 Q. But when you were at — down at — + +23 A. I go to church every once in a while now, 24 too. + +25 Q. Do you now at University go to church + +1 on Sunday? + +2 A. No. + +3 Q. Did you have any — + +4 5 A. When I would go home and visit family and stuff like that, we would go together as a family. + +6 Q. Okay. Your mom and your dad and you? + +7 A. Yeah. + +8 9 10 Q. Did they provide well for you? Did they give you the, you know, food, clothing and shelter when you were, throughout your high school days? + +11 A. Yeah. + +12 13 14 Q. Did you want for anything? By that I mean did you ever have anything that you wanted that they wouldn't give to you or couldn't give to you? + +15 16 17 18 A. I mean, I never really like asked for much. I was always playing sports. Maybe I would ask for a pair of soccer cleats, and dad would give me. + +19 20 Q. You were a big soccer player, weren't you? A. Yeah. + +21 22 Q. You've been a big soccer player all your life, haven't you? + +23 A. Uh-huh. Yes. + +24 25 Q. You played high-level competitive soccer your whole life? + +Page 191 + +1 A. Yeah. + +2 Q. And by high-level competitive soccer, you + +3 were, you were always a member of what we would call 4 travel teams, were you not? + +5 A. Uh-huh, yes. + +6 Q. And the travel team was something beyond 7 just playing in the city league. This was the best 8 of the best that would be on travel teams; isn't 9 that right? + +10 A. Yes. + +11 Q. And you would travel — did you travel all 12 over the State playing soccer tournaments? + +13 A. Yes. + +14 Q. And for how long did you do that? + +15 A. I don't know. Couple of, couple of years. + +16 Q. Okay. While you were in high school or 17 before you were in high school? + +18 A. Before I was in high school. + +19 Q. Okay. And then you went to high school 20 and played soccer throughout high school? + +21 A. Yes. + +22 Q. Kept, did you keep playing soccer in + +23 travel leagues even while you were in high school? + +24 A. Yes. + +25 Q. Played on some Olympics development team + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 as well, did you not? A. Yes. Q. Dad volunteered for all these soccer events that you had, did he not? A. Yes. Q. They would go on all these soccer events with you? A. Yes. Q. Okay. When you went -- you went to Palm High School. That was a school that didn't require you to wear a uniform, did it? A. No. Q. You always had nice clothes though that you could wear to go to school? A. Yeah. Q. Always got fed well? A. Yeah. Q. Always had a warm bed to stay in? A. Yes. Q. Did there come a point in time that you and your parents fell apart? A. Yes. Q. And about when was that? A. About my sophomore year in high school. Q. And was that about the time you took up + +Page 193 + +1 with this fellow, Preston Vinyard? 2 A. That's when I started going to Jeffrey 3 Epstein's. 4 Q. Well, you actually had taken up with 5 Preston Vinyard before you ever went to Jeffrey 6 Epstein's house, correct? 7 A. First time I went — first time before I 8 knew Preston, !went to Jeffrey Epstein's. I went 9 to Jeffrey Epstein's first before I ever knew 10 Preston Vinyard. 11 Q. And how do you blow that's true? 12 A. Because when I first met Preston, I dated 13 him for, on and off for a couple of years. Like it 14 was my first love. So, of course, I am going to 15 remember when I met my first love compared to when I 16 went to Mr. Epstein's. 17 Q. Where did you meet your — as you 18 described him, because we'll come back to this — 19 A. It was like — 20 Q. Wait a minute. We're going to come back 21 to this. When did you meet what you've now 22 described as your first love being Preston Vinyard? 23 A. Uh-huh. 24 Q. When was that, what year? 25 A. My sophomore year. + +1 Q. What year, calendar year? What year? 2 A. It was the — freshman year is '02, '03, 3 '04, 2002, 2003. Wait, wait. Am I saying this 4 right? Freshman, sophomore, junior, senior. 5 MR. MERMELSTEIN: T03, right? 6 THE WITNESS: 2'03, yeah. 2'03. 7 BY MR. LUTITER: 8 Q. 2003? 9 A. Uh-huh. Yes. 10 Q. In fact, you started dating Preston 11 Vinyard in January of '02, didn't you? 12 A. I started dating him the ending of my 13 sophomore year. 14 Q. January of '02, to be specific; isn't that 15 right? 16 A. '02? 17 Q. Yeah. 18 A. January? 19 Q. That's right 20 A. No. I didn't start dating him until my 21 summer, like right whenever I was done with school. 22 Q. And when did you first have sex with 23 Mr. Vinyard? 24 A. When I, probably — I don't remember. 25 Q. Well, a girl generally remembers the first + +Page 195 + +1 time she lost her virginity, doesn't she? 2 A. I don't ienowilber the exact date. 3 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, 4 argumentative. 5 THE WITNESS: I don't remember the exact 6 date, but it was sometime the ending of my 7 sophomore — well, done with my sophomore year. 8 It was the end of my sophomore year, beginning 9 of my junior year. 10 BY MR. LUrITER: 11 Q. Would your recollection about what dates 12 were involved have been better back in 2004 than it 13 is now? 14 A. Yeah, depending on the situation, yeah. 15 Q. You're, you're aware of the fact that — 16 maybe this will refresh your recollection. You are 17 aware of the fact that you have provided sworn 18 testimony about when you first dated Mr. Vinyard and 19 when you first had sex with him, aren't you? 20 A. No. 21 Q. So, you've forgotten that? 22 A. Yeah. 23 Q. But whatever you gave, in terms of sworn 24 testimony, whenever you gave it, that was true, was 25 it not? + +7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, form, 2 predicate. 3 THE WITNESS: I don't know. I don't know 4 the statement. I don't know. 5 BY MR. LUTTIER: 6 Q. And when you took up with this fellow Preston, your parents weren't too happy about that, were they? A. No. Q. And Preston, did he really just get out of prison? A. I don't know. Q. You don't know if he just got out of prison? A. No. Q. Do you know if he went to prison? A. I know he went to jail. Q. Okay. All right. Well, did he just get out of jail? A. I think so. I don't remember. Q. And was — A. He went what? Q. Go ahead. A. No, I said I think so. I don't remember. Q. Did your parents have to do some kind of + +Page 1 97 + +1 formal intervention to try to get you and 2 Mr. Vinyard split up? 3 A. No. 4 Q. How disappointed or how upset was your 5 about your relationship with Mr. Vinyard? 6 A. He was upset. 7 Q. And Mr. Vinyard lived down the street from 8 you, didn't he? 9 A. He was staying down the street. 10 Q. And he was what, how old was he when you 11 met him? 12 A. How old is he now? Hold on. Give me a 13 second. 23. 14 Q. When you first met him he was 23; is that 15 right? 16 A. Yeah, l think so, yeah. 17 Q. Okay. And you were how old? 18 A. I was 15. 19 Q. So, it was a 15-year-old dating a 20 23-year-old? 21 A. I didn't date him when I was 15. 22 Q. Say what? 23 A. I wasn't dating him when I was 15. 24 Q. Well, you were — 25 A. He had another girlfriend. + +1 Q. Were you going over to his house? 2 A. No. 3 Q. When was the first time you went over to 4 his house? 5 A. When I was 16. 6 Q. Sixteen. Okay. He's 23 and you're 16 7 when you first started dating him, right? 8 A. (No verbal response.) 9 Q. Correct? 10 A. Yes, somewhere in that time — I'm pretty 11 sure it's somewhere in that time frame. 12 Q. When you went over to his house, where did 13 you go? Do you remember the address? 14 A. I don't think the first time I went was to 15 that address, but I hung out there. 16 Q. Okay. Well, what was the address? 17 A. I don't remember the address, but I just 18 know it was in La Manche. 19 Q. And that's the same neighborhood you lived 20 in? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. And by the way, who was living there with 23 him? 24 A. Tony. 25 Q. And it was just he and his buddy living + +Page 199 + +1 there, right? 2 A. And his buddy's mother. 3 Q. And then his buddy's mother left, right? 4 A. Yeah. 5 Q. So, you would go over and visit with him, 6 when it was just him over there, and your dad didn't 7 like that, did he? 8 A. When it was just him over there? 9 Q. Yep. 10 A. No, like if Tony would be there, his mom 11 would be there. 12 Q. And your dad didn't like that, did he? 13 A. No. No, probably not. I'm sure — 14 Q. There's no probably about it. He let you 15 know he didn't like that, didn't he? 16 A. He didn't approve of it. 17 Q. How did you know he didn't approve of it? 18 A. Well, when I fast started dating him, he 19 didn't know, he didn't really know that — how old 20 Preston was. He didn't know that he had a criminal 21 background until later on — 22 Q. But you did? 23 A. — in our relationship. So in the 24 beginning, if you're talking about when I first went 25 over there, did my dad like it then? I don't think + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 my dad would mind then. Q. Well, when did you let your dad know how old old Preston was? A. Probably by junior year, maybe. Q. And when did you let him know he had a criminal background? A. I didn't let him know. Q. flow did your dad — A. Yeah, I did. I don't think he lured that. He wasn't happy about it. Q. And you and he fought about that, didn't you? A. Well, no, not fought about it, but got in arguments about it. Q. By the way, when you were talking about being topless in front of men, there were occasions in your life when you voluntarily got in front of strange men with no top on, weren't there? A. No. Q. Do you recall doing that for the police on one occasion? A. No. The police, if I think I know what you are talking about, I had a restraining order on Preston, and he had entered my house. And I didn't know he was in my house and the door was open. When + +Page 201 + +I was changing in my bedroom out of my clothes, I 2 walked out to the front because the police were — 3 my door was open and the police were standing out 4 front. And I heard somebody in my bedroom. 5 So I walked out there covering my chest, 6 like freaked out, who is at my house and why, like 7 what is going on. And I walked out and I, and I 8 realized it was the cops. And I'm like, how, what 9 are you doing in my house, and they said, well the 10 door was open. And I said, excuse me, and I like 11 put my clothes on. 12 Q. When did this happen? What year was this? 13 A. I don't remember what year it was. 14 Q. Why were the police at your house? 15 A. Because Preston, we had got, we were in 16 a cab — or, I had gotten a cab ride back to my 17 house, and Preston was supposed to get a ride back 18 to his house because he lives in La Manche staying 19 like right around the corner from me. 20 And instead of getting — well, I didn't 21 know that he didn't pay for the cab, I guess, like, 22 down the street. They had dropped me off first, and 23 I guess down the street — whenever they were going 24 to drop him off, he like jumped out of the cab, and 25 I — they knew where — they dropped me off at m + +1 house, so the cab driver came back to my house, and 2 I was already at my house in my, my room changing. 3 And I guess I must have left the door open and 4 Preston must have came into my, my house. And the 5 cops, I don't even — I don't know. I don't even 6 know. 7 Q. Wait a minute. 8 Preston Vinyard? 9 A. Yeah. 10 Q. Did you say you got a restraining order 11 against him? 12 A. Yeah. 13 Q. Why would — well, what did you get a 14 restraining order against him for? 15 A. Because he, because he was abusive. 16 Q. And what year of high school were you in 17 when you got the restraining order against the first 18 love of your life, Mr. Vinyard, who you now say is 19 abusive to you? 20 MR. MERMEISTEIN: Objection to form. 21 THE WITNESS: I think it was my junior or 22 senior year. 23 BY MR. LUTTTER: 24 Q That's while you were going to see 25 Mr. Epstein, right? You were in a cab with + +Page 203 + +1 A. That's why I was going to see him? 2 Q. That's while you were going to see 3 Mr. Epstein. 4 A. Yeah. 5 Q. Mr. Epstein was never abusive towards you, 6 was he? 7 A. No. 8 Q. Okay. So, tell me more about why you got 9 a restraining order against Mr. Vinyard. What 10 occurred that made you get that restraining order? 11 A. Because we were broken up, and 1 would try 12 to go leave my house and he would be waiting for me 13 at my, like, house. Like, I would go try to leave 14 to go somewhere, and like he would be in another 15 vehicle with his friend, like wait like not 16 letting me like go somewhere where I want — like, 17 letting me go somewhere where I would want to go, 18 but I mean, like pretty much stalking me. 19 Q. Did it scare you? 20 A. No. Well, at the time, yeah. I would 21 just call his boss and his boss would come pick him 22 up. It happened one time. 23 Q. Did you fear it? 24 A. Did I fear it at the time? Yeah. 25 Q. Did you tell the court you were in fear of + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 your life? A. Yes. Q. And it was true when you told the court that? A. Yeah. Q. Jeffrey Epstein never put you in fear of your life, did he? A. No. Q. Now, you say this happened one time that Mr. Vinyard was, you say, stalking you? A. Yeah, I think, Pm pretty sure, yeah. Q. What else? Did Mr. Vinyard do anything else to you that caused you fear? A. We -- it was a, an unhealthy relationship. We got in a lot of arguments, but I don't remember every single one. Q. And do you remember my question? A. Sony. Say it one more time. Q. Did Mr. Vinyard do anything else that caused you any fear? A. When we argued, yeah. Q. Well, what did he do? A. Nothing. He was a big guy, real muscular. He's big. When someone is arguing in your face, it kind of throws you. I mean, you get scared, just + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. No. A lot worse. Q. Now, this is what, you're a what, 16-year-old girl when Mr. Vinyard's doing this to you? A. When I dated him through high school? Q. Yeah, when he is doing this, when he's throwing you up against the wall. A. Junior — yeah, junior year and senior year, imk Q. I mean, that scared you, didn't it? A. Yeah. Q. It was traumatic to you, wasn't it? MR. MERMEISIEN: Objection to form, argumentative. BY MR. LUTITER: Q. It was traumatic to you, was it not? A. At the time, yeah. Q. You didn't have — were all your friends off getting restraining orders against boyfriends that were six, seven years older than them? A. No. Q. And did you have some other traumatic things that happened to you in your lifetime? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. Calls for a legal conclusion. + +Page 205 + +1 arguing. 2 Q. Just arguing? 3 A. Yeah, arguing. 4 Q. Was he nice to you? 5 A. Yeah, when he wasn't drinking. 6 Q. Did he call you any names? 7 A. Yeah. 8 Q. What did he call you? 9 A. Probably every name in the book you can 10 think of 11 Q. Did he ever hurt you physically? 12 A. Bit my finger. 13 Q. Anything else? 14 A. Probably grabbed me to move me. Like, 15 grabbed me. 16 Q. Did he ever choke you? 17 A. Yeah, I think there was an incident where 18 he choked me. 19 Q. Did he ever throw you against a wall? 20 A. Yeah. 21 Q. Did he ever grab you by your shoulders and 22 throw you down in your front yard? 23 A. Yeah. 24 Q. Did Mr. Epstein do anything like that, 25 ever? + +Page 207 + +1 THE WITNESS: At the time, yeah. I have 2 had a few friends die. 3 BY MR LUTTIER: 4 Q. A few friends? 5 A. Yeah, well. One friend die, yeah. 6 Q. Who died? 7 A. My good friend, or a friend of mine, 8 Chris. 9 Q. What happened to him? 10 A. Got into a DUI accident. 11 Q. And when did that happen? 12 A. When did that happen? It might have 13 happened my freshman year or sophomore -- freshman 14 year in — in high school. 15 Q. That was before you met Mr. Epstein, 16 right? 17 A. Yeah. 18 Q. How well did you know this fellow Chris? 19 A. I met him my freshman year in high school, 20 and I think he died when — my freshman year. I 21 probably knew him for — I don't !mow how long. I 22 don't remember how long I knew him, but maybe a 23 couple of months. 24 Q. Did you date him? 25 A. Boyfriend-girlfriend, no, but I'd go out + +1 on a — I went on a date with him once. 2 Q. For two or three months didn't you date 3 him? 4 A. No. I went on a date with him. 5 Q. Did you ever tell anybody ever, at any 6 time from the day you were born until now that you 7 dated him for several months? 8 A. No, he was never my boyfriend. 9 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. 10 BY MR. LUTHER: 11 Q. Did you hear my question? Did you ever 12 tell anyone, from the time you were born -- 13 A Ycah, I dated him. 14 Q. Wait a minute — from the time you were 15 born until now that you dated him for several 16 months? 17 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 18 THE WITNESS: No. I dated — I went on a 19 date with him. 20 BY MR. LUTHER: 21 Q. Listen carefully to my question. 22 A. No. 23 Q. Is your answer to my question no, you 24 never told anybody that you dated him for several 25 months? + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 somewhere along the way? A. Yeah, I had another friend die. Q. Who was that? A. Jennifer. I don't even remember her last name, though. So that's bad. Q. When did she die? A. I don't even — I don't — I don't know. Q. Well, it was after the point in time that you got into the accident -- A. It was afterwards. Q. — with Mr. Vinyard driving the car drunk, wasn't it? A. Yeah. Q. So, let's talk about that for a while. You got into a car with Mr. Vinyard one time, your first love of your life, when he was drunk, right? A. Uh-huh. Q. And he was driving down a road at an excessive rate of speed, was he not? A. Yes. Q. And I think it was what, 65 miles an hour? A. It was fast. Q. And were you drunk too? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And you were how old? + +Page 209 + +1 A. I mean, I don't know. I don't think so. 2 I don't know. I mean, maybe, yeah. 3 Q. Well, which is it? 4 A. I don't know. 5 Q. You don't know? 6 A. I don't know. 7 Q. You don't think so? You don't know? 8 A. I don't know. 9 Q. So, anyway, this, this young man got 10 killed, you say, in some kind of accident? 11 A. Yeah, he got into a -- yeah, a DUI 12 accident. 13 Q. And who was driving that car? 14 A. Preston's brother, Brad. 15 Q. Preston Vinyard, is that your first love's 16 brother? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Okay. And that kind of took you — you 19 took that kind of hard, your, your friend Chris 20 being killed, didn't you? 21 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 22 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I mean, that was a 23 friend of mine, yeah. 24 BY MR. LUTHER: 25 Q. Oka/. And did you lose another friend + +Page 211 1 A. I don't remember. 2 Q. Well, you were 17 or less, weren't you? 3 A. I don't know. I don't remember. 4 Q. Well, you know — you know, you were — 5 that it happened during your, what, sophomore year 6 in high school? 7 A. I don't know when it happened. I don't 8 remember when it happened. 9 Q. You can't — you are telling us you don't 10 remember what year it happened? 11 A. No, I don't 12 Q. Well, when did you stop dating Preston? 13 A. I remember it was around Christmas time, 14 but I don't remember what year it was. 15 Q. Okay. And when did you stop dating 16 Preston? 17 A. Me and him were on and off for years, so. 18 Q Okay. 19 A There was plenty of times when we weren't 20 dating and plenty of times when we were on. 21 Q. In any event, you were, as we say, 22 underage. You were under 21 years of age on this 23 thermion. 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. And by the way, didyou have a fake ID? + +2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. At that time, no. Q. When did you first get your first fake ID? A. My senior year or I don't even remember. Q. Well, which is it? You don't remember or your senior year? A. I don't remember. I was going to try to guess, but I don't remember. Q. As a matter of fact, your sophomore year in high school you had a fake ID, didn't you? A. I don't know. Did I? Q. Well, I am asking you,=. A. No, I don't know. Q. How did you get the fake ID? A. I don't know what you are talking about, so are you asking me? Q. I am talking about a fake ID. A. I don't know. My fake — or Lauren gave it to me. Q. Lauren gave it to you. And how did she get it for you? A. She was 18. She was — it was for an ID for being, to be 18. Q. And, and how did she get it for you? A. It was her, it was her picture. Q. And you and you were with your name + +1 BY MR. LUTTIER: 2 Q. Okay. And that went on for how long a 3 period? 4 A. I don't know. 5 Q. I'm going to ask you, I think I asked you 6 this-7 A. I don't even know how that was twice a 8 week, beVIIKP I was playing soccer Tuesday, 9 Wednesday, Thursday. Friday I'd be gone traveling, 10 on the weekends I would be gone playing soccer 11 games. So the only night I had off was Monday. And 12 I wouldn't even like, I never missed school. So I 13 don't see how it would be twice a week. 14 Q. Well, that was while the soccer season was 15 going on, right? 16 A. Yeah, I think, whenever I had free time or 17 whatever, since I was playing soccer and was always 18 busy, whenever I had a day off I would go hang out 19 with my friends. 20 Q. Now, I want to go back and ask a question 21 that I asked you about earlier now that we're 22 talking about Mr. Vinyard. 23 A. Yeah. 24 Q. I want to ask you again, did you ever do 25 any drug with Mr. Vinyard that you didn't have any + +1 on it? 2 A. No with her. It's a picture of her, 3 4 Q. My question was, did you ever have a fake 5 ID, that is an ID that identified it as being you 6 but the wrong birth date? 7 A. No. 8 Q. And you were drinking before you were 21, 9 were you not? 10 A. Yeah. 11 Q. And do you recall when you first started 12 drinking? 13 A. No. I don't remember the first time I 14 started drinking but — no, I don't. 15 Q. Was it before you were 16? 16 A. Maybe, yeah. 17 Q. And how many times were you drunk with old 18 Preston? 19 A. I don't even know that answer. I don't 20 know. 21 Q. Well, Preston testified yesterday that you 22 were drunk about twice a week with him. Would you 23 agree with that estimate from him? 24 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. ( 25 THE WITNESS: Yeah, probably. + +1 prescription for? 2 A. Yeah. 3 Q. What drugs? 4 A. Coke. 5 Q. Now, can you tell me why earlier in this 6 deposition when I asked you if you had done any 7 illegal drugs, you told me no? 8 A. Because I don't do drugs now. I didn't 9 know — when you asked me the question, I didn't 10 think it was have you ever done. It was, like, do 11 you do drugs. No, I don't. 12 Q. And my question to you was whether you had 13 ever done any drugs, and you said no. 14 A. Sony. I didn't understand your question, 15 then. 16 Q. Any other questions you didn't understand 17 this morning? 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, to form, 19 argumentative. 20 THE WITNESS: No. 21 BY MR. LUTTIER: 22 Q. Do you know of any testimony that you have 23 given thus far in this deposition that is inaccurate 24 that you now need to correct? 25 A No. + +1 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 2 MR. LUTTIER: And you're sure? 3 MR. MERMELSTEIN: She doesn't have to make 4 that determination now. She has the right to 5 read the transcript and make it then. 6 BY MR. LUTHER: 7 Q. I just want to make sure you understand 8 there's no tricks. 9 A. Yeah. 10 Q. So if you said something you think you 11 need to correct, I want to give you the opportunity 12 to do it. 13 A. Okay. Thank you. 14 Q So if there is anything — 15 MR. MERMELSTEIN: She will have that 16 opportunity well after this, so — 17 BY MR. LUTTIER: 18 Q. If there is anything that you said that 19 you either need to correct or supplement, just let 20 me know. All right? 21 A. All right. Thank you. 22 Q. Okay. Now, any other drugs that you did 23 with Preston besides cocaine? 24 A. No. 25 Q. How about any drugs you have done with + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 anybody else besides Preston other than cocaine. A. I, I have smoked pot before, but I don't smoke — I've just tried pot. Q. Any pills that you have taken before that you didn't have a prescription for? A. Yeah, I have tried Ecstasy. Q. Okay. And tell us when you took the Ecstasy? A. What do you mean, tell you what? Q. When was the first time you took Ecstasy? A. I don't know. I don't know. Q. Well, what year in high school were you when you first started taking Ecstasy? A. I don't know. Q. Was it your junior year? A. I don't know. Q. Was it your sophomore year? A. I don't know. Q. For what period of time did you take Ecstasy? A. I didn't. It's not like I took it every day. Ws not like I took it every day. On occasion I tried it. Q. How many times did you take it? More than once, didn't ou? + +Page 217 + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. You know, like two, two or three times I tried it in my life. Q. Where did you get it? A. I don't even —1 don't know, because I have only been able — whenever — wait, when — I don't know. Q. You just know you got it, but you don't remember when? A. With friends. Yeah, when I was hanging out with friends that did it. mliid you ever do any drugs with A I am trying to think. Q I am going let you think about that while l go take a break and go to the restroom. A. All right. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Why don't we take five minutes. THE V1DEOGFtAPHER: Off the record at 2:58. (A brief recess was held.) THE VIDEOG1RAPHER: We're back on the record at 3:10. MR. LUTHER: Okay. Would you read the last question back? (The requested portion of the record was + +Page 219 + +1 read by the reporter.) 2 THE WITNESS: I don't remember. I am 3 sure. I'm not sure what specifically doing 4 drugs, but she's my friend. I hung out with 5 her a lot. 6 BY MR. LOITER: 7 Q. Well, you did Xanax with her, didn't you? 8 A. Xanax? 9 Q. Xanax. 10 A. Not that I remember. 11 Q. And you did Ecstasy with her, right? 12 A. No, not that I remember. I mean, I've 13 done it. I've done Ecstasy before, I don't -- maybe 14 it was with her. 15 Q. And you've done cocaine with her, haven't 16 you? 17 A. Yeah. I know I've done cocaine with her, 18 but I don't think I've done Xanax with her or 19 Ecstasy. Maybe, I don't -- I mean — 20 Q. When was the first time you did cocaine 21 with Lauren? 22 A. I don\* remember. 23 Q. Well, what year in high school were you? 24 A. I don't even know if I — I don't even 25\_ know if I was in high school whenever I did it. + +1 Q. Before you were in high school? 2 A. No. 3 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. 4 THE WITNESS: I said I don't think — I 5 don't, I don't know. 6 BY MR. LUTTIER: 7 Q. All right. Do pot while? 8 A. No, I don't smoke no. 9 Q. Other than with, you did 10 Ecstasy, correct? 11 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked and 12 answered. You can answer. 13 BY MR. LUTTIER: 14 Q. When was the last time you did Ecstasy? 15 A. Probably like when I graduated high school 16 or high school. 17 Q. And were you doing Ecstasy throughout the 18 time period that you were in high school? 19 A. No, I have don; no, I've done it like two 20 or three times. 21 Q. Okay. And was that before or after you 22 first met Mr. Epstein? 23 A. That was — I don't remember whenever, I 24 don't remember when I did it. I don't know. 25 Q. So, you don't know if you did it before + +2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you met Mr. Epstein? A. No, I don't remember. Q. You had smoked pot before you met Mr. Epstein, had you not? A. Yeah. Q. You had used cocaine before you met Mr. Epstein, had you not? A. No, I don't think so. I don't remember. Q. And how about Xanax, did you do that before you met Mr. Epstein? A. No. Q. Mr. Epstein never gave you any drugs, correct? A. No. Q. Did you ever have any discussions with him about drug use? A. No. Q. Did you ever have discussions with him about alcohol use? A. No. Q. As a matter of fact, Mr. Epstein told you he doesn't drink any alcohol, didn't he? A. Did he? I don't remember. Q. Did you tell others including but not limited to the police that Mr. Epstein told you he + +Page 221 + +1 didn't use alcohol? 2 A. Yeah, maybe he told me he didn't do — 3 drink or do drugs, yeah. 4 Q. He did tell you those things? 5 MR MERMEISTEIN: Don't speculate. If you 6 know. 7 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 8 BY MR. LUTHER: 9 Q. Okay. Now, did you tell your — the first 10 love of your life, Mr. Vinyard, about going to 11 Mr. Epstein's? 12 A. Did I ten him about it? 13 Q. Yeah, he was aware that you were going to 14 Mr. Epstein's, was he not? 15 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. 16 THE WITNESS: Was he aware? 17 BY MR. LUTTIER: 18 Q. Yes. 19 A. I don't know. 20 Q. Well, didn't you tell him about it? 21 A. It was all in the papers. 22 Q. No. At the time that you were going to 23 Mr. Epstein's — 24 A. No, I didn't. 25 Q. — you were supposedly dating Mr. Vinyard, + +Page 223 1 right? 2 A. On and off, yes. 3 Q. All right. Did, did Mr. Vinyard know that 4 you were going to sec Mr. Epstein? 5 A. No. 6 Q. Did you tell him that you were going to 7 see Mr. Epstein? 8 A. No. 9 Q. Did you intentionally not tell him that 10 you were going to see Mr. Epstein? 11 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 12 THE WITNESS: No. 13 BY MR. LUTHER: 14 Q. Why didn't you tell him you were going to 15 see Mr. Epstein? 16 A. When we weren't together I would go. 17 Q. Say what? 18 A. I didn't tell him. 19 Q. Did you say when you weren't together you 20 would go to Mr. Epstein? 21 A. I would go, like, I don't know. I just — 22 ask the question again. If what? 23 Q. Why didn't you tell — 24 A. Previous to that. 25 Q. Why didn't you tell Preston that you were + +1 going to Mr. Epstein? + 2 A. I didn't because he would probably freak + 3 out. + 4 Q. While you and Preston Vinyard were + 5 together, you didn't go to Mr. Epstein, did you? + 6 A. No, I did. + 7 Q. Now, do you recall in high school there + 8 being any incident of you being in a videotape that + 9 was circulated around the high school? + 10 A. A videotape? + 11 Q. Uh-huh. + 12 A. No. + 13 Q. Do you recall there being something on the + 14 Internet involving you when you were in high school? + 15 A. Picture. + 16 Q. And that was a picture of whom? + 17 A. Me and my friend Tammy. + 18 Q. And what was that picture depicting? + 19 A. I think a picture of me in my underwear + 20 and bra. I don't remember. + 21 Q. And what was Tammy in? + 22 A. Her underwear. + 23 Q. Okay. And -- + 24 A. I don't even remember. + 25 Q. Her underwear or her underwear and bra? + +1 know how the person got the picture. I mean, it was + 2 just -- I mean, everybody seeing you in your bra and + 3 underwear, it was like abase now, but at the time it + 4 was something just like, wow, I don't -- + 5 Q. You, you appeared in videos before, + 6 haven't you? + 7 A. In videos? + 8 Q. Yeah, videos. + 9 A. What kind of videos? + 10 Q. Videos of sexual performances. + 11 A. I have made a homemade video before. + 12 Q. You made one? + 13 A. Yes. + 14 Q. And did you ever make a homemade video + with Mr. Epstein? + 15 A. No. + 16 Q. Okay. When did you make this homemade + 17 video? + 18 A. I don't remember. + 19 Q. Well, how old were you? + 20 A. I don't remember. + 21 Q. Well, you remember the video, right? + 22 A. Yeah. + 23 Q. And, and I assume making a homemade -- + 24 what did this homemade video depict? + 25 + +1 A. Her underwear -- I don't remember. I + 2 don't remember what the exact picture was. + 3 Q. But you remember the incident though, + 4 don't you? + 5 A. Yeah, I remember the incident. + 6 Q. And what year in high school were you? + 7 A. A freshman. + 8 Q. Okay. And -- and what was the result of + 9 that picture appearing on the Internet? + 10 A. It was embarrassing. + 11 Q. Embarrassing to you? + 12 A. Yeah. + 13 Q. Was everybody in the school talking about + 14 it? + 15 A. For like two days, and then something else + 16 happened in high school. It was over, dropped. + 17 Q. Were, were people accusing you of being a + 18 lesbian? + 19 A. I don't, I don't -- I don't know. + 20 Q. You mean, nobody, nobody -- to your + 21 knowledge, nobody accused you of being a lesbian? + 22 A. No. + 23 Q. And when you say it was embarrassing to + 24 you, what do you mean? + 25 A. Well, it was embarrassing. I don't even + +1 A. Me and my boyfriend -- + 2 Q. At the beach or -- + 3 A. -- making out together. + 4 Q. -- having sex? + 5 A. Yeah. + 6 Q. Having sexual intercourse? + 7 A. Yeah. + 8 Q. Okay. So that would be -- I would assume + 9 that would be an event you remember? + 10 A. Yeah, but I don't remember whenever I made + 11 the -- when I took the video. + 12 Q. And do you remember if you made it before + 13 you went to see Mr. Epstein? + 14 A. I made it while I was going there. + 15 Q. Okay. Mr. Epstein didn't ask you to make + 16 the video, did he? + 17 A. No. + 18 Q. Okay. So, what, this would make you 16 + 19 years old? + 20 A. I don't remember how old I was. + 21 Q. Was it before your third visit to + 22 Mr. Epstein? + 23 A. I don't remember. + 24 Q. When did you show it to Mr. Epstein? + 25 A. Part of my senior -- I don't even + +2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 remember. I mean, I don't even — I don't know. Q. You, you remember when you showed it, don't you? A. No, I don't. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. BY MR. LUTrIER: Q. Was it your second visit to Mr. Epstein? A. No, I don't remember. Q. But it could have been? A. Maybe. I don't know. I don't — why would it be — no, it definitely wasn't my second visit, because my second visit I wouldn't even — I didn't even take any clothes off, so why would I bring a video? Q. I was actually wing to ask you that question myself, A. No. Q. You're the only one that can answer that. A. So, it wasn't my second visit. Q. Why would you take a video — A. It wasn't that — Q. Wait, let me finish. A. Yeah. Q. — of you having sex with another person to show Mr. Epstein? + +Page 229 + +1 A. Because after I had gone there several 2 times, Mr. Epstein was a very like sexual, like, 3 like, funny person. And he would always igif, like, 4 like talk about like, like, for example, like, M, 5 go ask Nadia what's her favorite toy or tell me 6 about like these sexual classes and like tell me 7 about how to give a guy head, or like, he would — 8 he was always talking sex — like talking sexual 9 things with me. 10 So I, I brought it. I had mentioned to 11 him about the video, and I brought it in. I think 12 he asked me to bring it in, or maybe I asked him, do 13 you want me to bring it in, and he said yes, or if I 14 brought it in, I don't remember, but that's why I 15 brought it in, because we would always joke around, 16 like, sexual — like he would joke around with me 17 like sexual, like, things about like, like, I don't 18 know, just thought it was funny. 19 Q. So it was joking around with Mr. Epstein? 20 A. Yeah. 21 Q. And you were perfectly comfortable doing 22 that, right? 23 A. Yeah, at the time, yeah. 24 Q. You weren't embarrassed by any of it, 25 right? + +1 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. 2 BY MR. LUTHER: 3 Q. Correct? You weren't embarrassed by any 4 of it, correct? A. Yeah. 6 Q. You weren't traumatized by it, correct? 7 A. Traumatized now, yeah. 8 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 9 BY MR. LUYITER: 10 Q. At the time you weren't traumatized, were 11 you? 12 A. No. 13 Q. You only got traumatized after you filed 14 this lawsuit, right? 15 MR. MERMEISTEIN: Objection to form. 16 BY MR. LUITIER: 17 Q. Right? 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Argumentative. 19 BY MR. LUTTLER: 20 Q. Right? 21 A. Traumatized afterwards? 22 Q. Yeah. 23 A. About the situation he put me in? Yeah. 24 Q. Yeah, after you filed the lawsuit? 25 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +Page 231 + +1 THE WITNESS: No. 2 BY MR. LUTHER: 3 Q. You never went — 4 A. It wasn't after I filed the lawsuit. 5 Q. By the way, before you filed this lawsuit, 6 did you ever seek any kind of psychological help as 7 a result of having gone to Mr. Epstein? 8 A. I was having problems that, when I was 9 younger, yeah, I went and saw two psychiatrists. 10 Q. No, I said, did it — did you go see those 11 psychiatrists before you went to Mr. Epstein? 12 A. Before I went to Epstein? 13 Q. Yeah. 14 A. No, after. 15 Q. Are you sure? 16 A. I don't remember. I don't — I don't 17 remember what exact dates. I know I went and saw 18 two psychiatrists, but I don't remember the exact 19 date whenever I went there. 20 Q. Well, you went to see two psychiatrists 21 about the problems you were having with your 22 parents, didn't you? 23 A. No. Well, me and my parents were arguing 24 a lot, but that's because I didn't — my boyfriend, 25 and plus, I was being supported by another — + +1 another man — another father-like person that was 2 sitting there paying me money. So I didn't, you 3 know, my parents and me were arguing about my 4 boyfriend. I kind of like, you know, my parents 5 were just — I don't know, we weren't getting along 6 and my parents just — yeah. + +7 Q. I can't even make out what your answer to 8 the question was, . 9 A. Sorry. I am confused. I don't know like 10 what - + +11 Q. This is a simple question. 12 MR MERMELSTEIN: Why, why don't you ask 13 the question again. + +14 BY MR. LUTHER: 15 Q. You went to — the psychiatrists that you 16 went to, you went to them before you ever went to 17 Mr. Epstein, didn't you? + +18 A. I don't remember when I went. 19 Q. And you went to see two people, and you 20 went to see them about problems that you had with 21 your parents, did you not? 22 A. Yeah, I went + +23 Q. Didn't say a single thing about Epstein at 24 the time because you hadn't even met him, had you? 25 A. I think I had met him then. + +Page 233 + +1 MR. LUTTIER: Let me see show you your 2 interrogatories. 3 Let's mark this as Exhibit 2. These are 4 just the Answers to Interrogatories, that 5 she — + +6 MR. MERMELSTEIN: I understood. 7 (Defendant's Exhibit No. 2 was marked for 8 identification.) 9 BY MR. LUTHER: + +10 Q. All right. I've handed you, M, what 11 is marked as Exhibit 2, your Answers to Defendant's 12 First Interrogatories. And the first question I 13 want to ask you is if you turn to the 14 third-to-the-last page, which would be — contains 15 Interrogatory 25 on it + +16 A. Uh-huh. 17 Q. Is that your signature? 18 A. Yeah. 19 Q. All right. And you see what that 20 verification clause says above there? + +21 A. What? 22 Q. Can you read that, what it says? 23 MR. MERMELSTEIN: No, no, no. He's 24 talking about this. + +25 THE WITNESS: KR Wait, what am I + +1 supposed to do, just read? 2 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Do you want her to read 3 it or, to herself or do you want her to read it 4 out loud? + +5 BY MR. LU'ITIER: 6 Q. I mean, you can read it to yourself. You 7 swore that these answers were correct, right? 8 A. Yeah. 9 Q. Okay. So, these are your statements under 10 oath, and they're all true, right? + +11 A. Yeah. 12 Q. Okay. Let's look at Page 7, Interrogatory 13 No. II. And in Answer to Interrogatory II you list 14 three psychiatrists. + +15 A. Uh-huh. 16 Q. & Associates Counseling & 17 Consulting, a Dr. Lisa Niebling and a Dr. Gilbert 18 Kliman. Now, when you referred — referenced 19 earlier that you had been to two psychiatrists, were 20 you referring to & Associates and Dr. Lisa 21 Niebling? 22 A. Yeah. + +23 Q. And it says in these answers to 24 interrogatories that you went to & Associates 25 one time in 2003. Do you see that? + +Page 235 1 A. Yes, that's when I was trying to figure 2 out a good psychiatrist to go and talk to where I 3 was going to be comfortable. + +4 Q. And, and was your first visit to 5 Associates, in fact, before you went to see 6 Mr. Epstein? + +7 A. I don't know. I don't remember when I 8 went. 9 Q. And did you discuss with anyone at 10 & Associates when you went there one time anything 11 at all about Mr. Epstein? + +12 A. I don't i tam-Luber. I don't think so. I 13 don't know. + +14 Q. In fact you talked to them about the 15 conflict you were having with your parents, didn't 16 you? 17 A. I don't remember. + +18 Q. And then Lisa Niebling, it says here that 19 you went to two to three sessions with her in 2003. 20 Do you see that? + +21 A. Where? 22 Q. Number 2. 23 A. Uh-huh. 24 Q. And, in fact, did you go to her before you 25 had gone to see Mr. Epstein? + +1 A. I don't remember when I went to her. 2 Q. You didn't say a single thing to her about 3 Mr. Epstein, did you? 4 A. No, I don't remember. 5 Q. You were there to see her about the 6 conflict you were having with your parents, weren't 7 you? 8 A. I don't remember. 9 Q. And the reason you went to these people is 10 because you and your parents were having problems; 11 isn't that right? 12 A. I don't remember. 13 Q. Now, although you don't teurember any of 14 these answers now, have you told anyone else at 15 time in your life that the reason you went to 16 & Associates and Dr. Lisa Niebling was because of 17 conflict you had with your parents? 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 19 TILE WITNESS: No, I don't think I told 20 anybody that I went there. 21 BY MR. LUTTEER: 22 Q. Are you sure about that? 23 A. Like friends, family. I don't know. 24 Q By the way-25 A I don't remember. + +Page 237 + +1 Q. Who's this Dr. Kliman? 2 A. Who is that? 3 Q. Yeah, who is that? 4 MR. MERMELSTEIN: It's Plaintiffs expert. 5 BY MR. LUITIER: 6 Q Dr. Kliman, how did you meet Dr. Kliman? 7 MR. MERMELSTEIN: As, as Plaintiffs 8 forensic expert. • 9 MR. CRITTON: Whoa, whoa, whoa. No, no, 10 no. Have you ever heard of form? 11 MR. LUTTIER: Just wait. Let her answer. 12 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Okay. 13 MR. CRITTON: Give me a break. 14 BY MR. LUTHER: 15 Q. How did you meet Dr. Kliman? 16 A. How did I meet him? 17 Q. Yeah, how did you meet him? 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: I have never heard this 19 question asked about an expert retained for 20 purposes of litigation. You can answer the 21 question, but — 22 BY MR. LUITIER: 23 Q. How did you meet — 24 A. Through my lawyers. 25 Q. Well, had you ever heard of him before + +1 your lawyer gave you his name? 2 A. No. 3 Q. And when you say through your lawyers, who 4 are you referring to? 5 A. Stuart 6 Q. Okay. And, and were you told to go see 7 Dr. Kliman? 8 A. I was looking for a psychiatrist at the 9 time, and I had to schedule an appointment with 10 Dr. Kliman, yes. 11 Q. Well, Dr. Kliman lives in San Francisco. 12 A. Uh-huh. 13 Q. You're not telling us that you looked him 14 up yourself, are you? 15 A. No. 16 Q. Okay. So, when you say you were looking 17 for a psychiatrist, how long had you been looking 18 for a psychiatrist? 19 A. Fora while. 20 Q. Well, let's see, you went to see 21 Dr. Kliman in what year? 2009 — 22 A. 2009. 23 Q. — is that right? 24 A. I don't 'mow what the exact dates are. 25 Yes, maybe. + +Page 239 1 Q. It was after you filed this lawsuit, 2 right? 3 A. Yeah. 4 Q. So, from 2003, which would have been the 5 last session with either Niebling or 6 Associates, until 2009 is six years. 7 A. Uh-huh. 8 Q. And you couldn't find a psychiatrist in 9 six years? 10 A. I wasn't looking for one. 11 Q. Asa matter of fact, your lawyer — 12 A. Whenever - 13 Q. Go ahead. 14 A. I wasn't looking for one my freshman — or 15 what was it, my sophomore, junior or senior year in 16 high school. I wasn't looking for one until 17 probably my freshman year in college. 18 Q. Are you sure you were looking for a 19 psychiatrist in your freshman year at college? 20 A. Yes. I was going to go to the one in 21 Boca. I made appointments to go. I just never 22 ended up showing up. 23 Q. Did represent in any of your health 24 forms at =University that you had no 25 psychological or psychiatric — + +1 A. No. 2 Q. — problem whatever? 3 A. At University? No. 4 Q. At University, that's right. 5 A. No. 6 MR. MERMELSTEIN: No to what? 7 BY MR. LUTHER: 8 Q. You never made that representation? 9 A. You mean, gcS to — going to — 10 like getting help at University? Is that what 11 you mean? 12 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Can you ask the question 13 again, because I don't — I'm not —1 wasn't 14 clear what she was answering no to. Can you 15 ask the question again? 16 MR. LUTHER: Read that back. 17 MR- MERMELSTEIN: Take your time, by the 18 way. Just make sure — 19 (The requested portion of the record was 20 read by the reporter.) 21 THE WITNESS: So, had MI University ever 22 helped me psychologically? 23 MR. LUTTIER: No. 24 MR. MERMELSTEIN: No, no. Listen to the 25 question again, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Take + +Page 241 + +1 your time. Listen to the question. 2 (The requested portion of the record was read by 3 the reporter.) 4 THE WITNESS: Well, what do you, what do 5 you mean? 6 BY MR. LUTTIER: 7 Q. Well, like when you go to school, they 8 make you fill out some health questionnaires a lot 9 of times. Did you ever fill out any questionnaires 10 at IM and represent you had no psychological 11 problems at all? 12 A. Yeah. 13 Q. Okay. Those were true statements when you 14 made them, right? 15 A. Yeah. 16 Q. You wouldn't lie to people that were 17 giving you health information, would you? 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, 19 argumentative. You can answer. 20 THE WITNESS: No. 21 BY MR. LUTTIER: 22 Q. Right? 23 A. Well, I, no. 24 Q. Okay. So that was your freshman year at 25 a, right? + +1 A. Yeah. 2 Q. So, we know at least as of the time you 3 were a freshman at you had represented to 4 other third parties that you had no psychological or 5 psychiatric problem, right? 6 A. Uh-huh. 7 Q. So you weren't looking — 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. So you weren't looking for a psychiatrist 10 then, were you? 11 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, form. 12 THE WITNESS: No. 13 BY MR. LUTTIER: 14 Q. So, you only began to look for a 15 psychiatrist after you filed this lawsuit; isn't 16 that right? 17 A. Yeah. 18 Q. And you only did that because your lawyers 19 told you to do it, right? 20 A. No, it wasn't just because of that. I was 21 looking for one, but why would I tell my school 22 that? Why would I tell my school or anybody — like 23 anybody? That's something personal, you don't want 24 anybody to know anything about that, do you know 25 what I mean? + +Page 243 + +1 Q. How about the truth, how about you want to 2 be truthful when they give you a health form and ask 3 you if you have any problems? 4 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, 5 argumentative. 6 MR. LUTTIER: That would be — 7 MR. MEFtMEISTEIN: We don't have the health 8 form in front of us. 9 MR. LUTHER: That would be — 10 MR. MERMELSTEIN: If you want to show it 11 to us, that would be helpful. 12 BY MR. LUTHER: 13 Q. If, if they gave you a health form and ask 14 you if have any health problems, you'd want to be 15 truthful in answering that, wouldn't you? 16 A. Yeah, I go to a small private school. Do 17 you think I want somebody knowing that I have been 18 sexually abused at my school, like a small amount, 19 you think I want that getting around school? 20 Q. So, what you're telling me — 21 A. Why would I, why would I -- 22 Q. So, what you are telling me is you're not 23 truthful in health forms when you fill them out. 24 MR MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, 25 argumentative. + +8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 BY MR. LUTHER: 2 Q. And, in fact, is that what you're telling 3 me, you're not truthful in your health forms when 4 you fill them out? 5 MR MERMELSTEIN: Same objection. 6 THE WITNESS: Yeah, Pm truthful. 7 BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Well, that's not exactly right, is it? As a matter of fact, there's some things you haven't told anybody on your side of the case about your health background, aren't there? THE WITNESS: What's that? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. BY MR. LUTTLER: Q. Let's talk about Dr. Kliman. You had a very intensive and exhaustive interview process with him, did you not? A. Yeah. Q. And you went to him after your lawyer told you to make an appointment with him, right? A Yeah. Q. And he flew all the way from California, the other side of the country, to come here just to see you, right? A. Yeah. + +Page 245 + +1 Q. And you knew your other friends that have 2 lawsuits against Jeffrey Epstein had gone to him 3 too, didn't you? 4 A. Yeah. 5 Q. And they told you they'd been there and 6 that you needed to do that as part of your lawsuit? 7 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 8 THE WITNESS: No, they didn't know. 9 BY MR LUTHER: 10 Q. And you talked to Jane Doe No. 7 about 11 going to see a psychologist, didn't you, your friend 12 Jane Doe No. 7? 13 A. Yes, I talked to Jane Doe No. 7 about it. 14 Q. Okay. And that would be Jane Doe No. 7, 15 so we're sure who that is, that's Jane Doe No. 7, 16 I'm going to make sure I pronounce her last name, 17 Doe, right? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Well, tell me what Jane Doe No. 7 told you 20 about the psychological exam. 21 A. Nothing. She just told me she was going 22 there. She was flying from Orlando to go there. 23 That's it. 24 Q. Yeah. And what else did she tell you 25 about what she was supposed to do when she got + +1 there? 2 A. Nothing, she didn't tell me anything. 3 Q. And did she tell you who told her to go 4 there? 5 A. No. 6 Q. She just one day out of the blue said, • 7 by the way, I'm flying — 8 A. I'm assuming it was her lawyer. I don't 9 know. 10 Q. She told you that, didn't she? 11 A. No, she didn't. I don't know who told 12 her. 13 Q. Did she, she communicate with you at any 14 time before or after her examination by the 15 psychologist in this case as to what she had been 16 instructed to do? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Did she talk to you after she went to the 19 psychologist in this case? 20 A. Yes, 'talked to her after. 21 Q. And that was before you went to the 22 psychologist, right? 23 A. I don't know when she went. I know she 24 went and I know she was going, but I don't know 25 about her, about, anything about her psychologist. + +Page 247 + +1 Q. Listen to my question. You talked to her 2 after she went to her psychological examination in 3 her lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein, correct? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. That discussion — 6 A. I talk to her every day. 7 Q. That discussion happened before you went 8 to your psychological examination, didn't it? 9 A. I don't know when hers was. 10 Q. That's not my question. 11 A. I don't know. 12 Q. The discussion — 13 A. Then, I don't know. 14 Q. Listen to me. 15 A. I don't know when hers was, and I don't — 16 I know — I don't even remember the exact day when 17 mine was, so I don't know whenever hers — if hers 18 was before mine or if mine was before hers. I don't 19 know when hers was. 20 Q. I want to mac sure you answer my 21 question. Okay? I don't want to get it gummed up 22 with what you knew or don't know. You had a 23 conversation with Jane Doe No. 7 about her 24 examination with the psychologist in her lawsuit 25 against Jeffrey Epstein before you went to see + +1 Dr. Kliman, did you not? + 2 A. No. I don't -- I don't know. + 3 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked and + 4 answered. + 5 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 6 Q. You don't know or no; which is it? + 7 MR. MERMELSTEIN: She just said it. + 8 THE WITNESS: No, I don't know. + 9 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 10 Q. You don't know. So it may have happened? + 11 A. Yeah. + 12 Q. Okay. And Jane Doe No. 7 told you what + 13 occurred during her psychological exam, did she not? + 14 A. Yeah. + 15 Q. So you had that knowledge before you saw + 16 Dr. Kliman. + 17 A. I don't know whenever -- I don't -- I + 18 don't even know whenever her thing was. It wasn't + 19 before I went. It was after both of us were done + 20 with everything. + 21 Q. Well, done with everything, you guys are + 22 in the middle of lawsuits, aren't you? + 23 A. Yeah, but we don't discuss it 24/7. It's + 24 not like that's our topic of our conversation every + 25 day. + +1 Q. Okay. And he is a lawyer at the law firm? + 2 A. Yeah. + 3 Q. And is that -- is that Mr. Herman? + 4 A. Yes. + 5 Q. Okay. And what did he say when he + 6 contacted you? + 7 A. I don't remember. + 8 Q. Well, did he ask you if you wanted to + 9 become a Plaintiff? + 10 A. Yeah, I'm sure. I'm here. I'm sitting + 11 here now. + 12 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Just -- + 13 THE WITNESS: I don't know if victims -- + 14 or if I'm a Plaintiff. + 15 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 16 Q. Yep. + 17 MR. MERMELSTEIN: And to the extent that + 18 you decided to ask Mr. Herman about legal + 19 advise or to retain him as your lawyer, any + 20 conversations after that point are privileged, + 21 so you can't talk about what was said. All + 22 right? + 23 THE WITNESS: Okay. + 24 MR. MERMELSTEIN: So, so don't talk about + 25 anything, you know, once you've either decided + +1 Q. Did you tell me you talk to her every day? + 2 A. Pretty much every single day, not every + 3 day, but I -- I'm getting to a point where I'm good + 4 friends with her. I talk to her frequently, not + 5 every single day. + 6 Q. And you and Jane Doe No. 7, both of you + 7 got lawsuits going again Mr. Epstein, right? + 8 A. Yeah, yeah. + 9 Q. Both of you are represented by the same + 10 lawyers? + 11 A. Yeah. + 12 Q. And did she tell you to go to the lawyer + 13 after she had already -- + 14 A. No, she didn't tell me anything. + 15 Q. How did you find your lawyer in this case? + 16 A. Because they contacted me. + 17 Q. ██████████ the law firm contacted you? + 18 A. Yeah. + 19 Q. And what did they say to you when they + 20 contacted you? + 21 A. A lot of lawyers did at that time. + 22 Q. Well, the law firm that's representing you + 23 now, when they contacted you, who was it that + 24 contacted you? + 25 A. It was Jeffrey or Jeff. + +1 to ask for legal advice or retain Mr. Herman. + 2 Okay? + 3 THE WITNESS: All right. + 4 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 5 Q. So, but we're talking about before you + 6 retained him. You weren't looking for a lawyer + 7 initially, were you? + 8 A. Yeah, I -- I was getting a lot, yeah, the + 9 FBI gave me a -- somebody, I mean, not gave me, I + 10 asked for somebody's number. And she said she can't + 11 tell me anything, that she can give me this lady's + 12 number to call because I didn't, I didn't know what + 13 to do at all. I called that lady. I didn't do + 14 anything about it. + 15 He had called -- my lawyer -- or, my + 16 lawyer contacted me now, and I met with him and that + 17 was it. + 18 Q. Let's go back to the FBI. Who gave you a + 19 number to call? + 20 A. I don't remember who gave me the number. + 21 Somebody that I met with. + 22 Q. The U.S. Attorney? + 23 A. Who is the U.S. Attorney? + 24 Q. The lady -- + 25 A. One of the ladies that I was speaking -- + +1 Q. Mellafano (phonetic) or Velafano 2 (phonetic) or Villafana or — 3 A. I don't know. One of the ladies that I 4 was speaking to, !said, !need help. I said can 5 you please give me anybody's number that can better 6 assist me because she said, look, she said I can't 7 tell you anything. She wouldn't give me any 8 information. + +9 Q. And you — was it this — the Assistant 10 U.S. Attorney, Ms. Villfana? + +11 A. I don't think — I don't remember who it 12 was. + +13 Q. What name did they give you? 14 A. I don't even remember if they gave me a 15 number. I don't even — they gave me a number, and 16 I called the lady and she said that she — she could 17 - she wants to, like, help me the best she could, 18 but I don't even remember. + +19 Q. Was that a lawyer at the office at Bob 20 Josefsberg? + +21 A. I don't know. + +22 Q. A lawyer in Miami? + +23 A. No, I don't I don't know where their — 24 their office was at. + +25 Q. Did they tell you that your name was on a + +Page 253 + +1 list? 2 A. No, they didn't tell me anything. 3 Q. So, you called this person, this number 4 they gave you. Was it a lawyer whose number they + +5 gave you? 6 A. I don't know who it was. She, I asked her 7 if she could — I was like, because I wanted to find 8 out information because I wanted help. And she 9 said, well, I can't really give you any information, 10 she said, but you could call this person. + +11 And I don't know who the person was. I 12 don't know — I don't know the number. I don't know 13 if it was a lawyer. I don't know anything. And my 14 lawyer contacted me and I met with my lawyer and 15 that was it. + +16 Q. Whoa, whoa, whoa. Let's backup. The, 17 the — someone from the U.S. Attorney's office 18 originally gave you a number to call; is that right? + +19 A. Uh-huh. + +20 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked and 21 answered. + +22 BY MR. LUTHER: + +23 Q. But you don't know their name? + +24 A. No, I don't know their name. + +25 Q. Okay. But you know they were from that + +1 office. + +2 A. Yeah, from — + +3 Q. Okay. Now — + +4 5 6 A. I don't know, I don't know — MR. MERMELSTEIN: No, let her finish the answer. + +7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 THE WITNESS: I don't know if it was from that office. I don't know what level of the degree they are in. There was people in a room. There was three people in the room, including myself. Or not including myself. Three people, four, four people in the room. I don't know which person, if she was a psychiatrist, and like if she was giving me, like I don't know what, what they were, like I don't know what their level of — like, if they are State, like, what are you saying, like State attorney or something or I don't know what the law, legal term that you guys are trying to get to, but — + +21 BY MR. LUTTIER: + +22 23 Q. This was during your meeting with the FBI, right? + +24 A. Well, when I went down to the court, yeah. + +25 Q. This was your meeting with — + +1 A. When I called them and asked them — + +2 Q. — the FBI, correct? + +3 A. Yeah. + +4 5 Q. All right. So during your meeting with the FBI -- + +6 7 A. But there was two other people in that room. + +8 9 10 Q. During your meeting with the FBI, there wasn't anybody there that wasn't associated with the FBI, was there? + +11 A. I don't know. + +12 Q. Well, did you ask? + +13 A. No. + +14 Q. Did you say who are all you people? + +15 16 A. No, berms. they, they were there to help me. + +17 18 Q. And one of these people give you a number and you call that number, right? + +19 A. Yeah. + +20 Q. Tell me what discussions you had — + +21 A. It was — + +22 23 Q. -- with whoever answered the phone at the other end of this number. + +24 25 A. It was like a five — she asked, I said, can you give me. like. information, can you hell) me, + +Page 255 + +1 like, what's going to happen. And she said that 2 sorry, she can't, like, do anything about it, and 3 that was it. It was like a five-second 4 conversation. I didn't even speak to her that long. 5 Q. Wait a minute. I want to make sure we're 6 clear. When you keep saying she -- 7 A. Or he. I don't know, sorry. That person, 8 it. 9 Q. This is the person whose number was given 10 to you by somebody at this FBI meeting, that's the 11 person we're talking about, you called that number? 12 A. Yeah. 13 Q. And you don't remember if the person you 14 talked to was a male or a female, right? 15 A. No. 16 Q. And you don't remember anything about what 17 was said? 18 A. No. 19 Q. But it was a short conversation? 20 A. Yeah. 21 Q. And, and you didn't retain whoever it was 22 you were talking to? 23 A. What do you mean retain? 24 Q. You didn't hire them to do anything for 25 you? + +Page 257 + +1 A. No. 2 Q. Okay. And, and that was the only 3 conversation you had with this person, right? 4 A. Yeah. 5 Q. Did they give you another phone number to 6 call? 7 A. No. 8 Q. Did they refer you to anybody? 9 A. No. 10 Q. Okay. So, after that point in time, you, 11 did you do anything to go out and find a lawyer? 12 A. No. Literally the next day I met with 13 Jeffrey Herman. 14 Q. Well, Jeffrey Herman. Now, how did — how 15 did Mr. Herman come into the picture? How did he 16 get ahold of you? 17 A. I don't know. 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, form. 19 BY MR. LUIIIER: 20 Q. Mr. Herman just called you out of the 21 blue, so to speak? 22 A. I don't remember how -- I don't know if I, 23 if he called me or if I got a letter. I don't 24 remember. 25 Q. Well, you didn't contact him first, right? + +1 A. I might have gotten a letter and I might 2 have contacted him. 3 Q. You — 4 A. I don't remember how we first, how we 5 first made contact. 6 Q. Let's go through this slow. Okay? You 7 did not contact Mr. Herman first, did you? 8 A. I don't remember. I don't know who 9 contacted who. 10 Q. Do you know what I mean by contacting him? 11 A. Yes, if I called him up or if he called me 12 up, like, I don't remember. 13 Q. Well, where did you get his number if you 14 contacted him first? 15 A. In the mail maybe. I don't know. 16 Q. So, you got something from Mr. Herman 17 advertising to be your lawyer? 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. 19 THE WITNESS: I don't know. I don't know 20 if I got something — I don't know. I don't 21 know if I got something in the mail, I don't 22 know. 23 BY MR. LUTTIER: 24 Q. Well, if you didn't get something in the 25 mail, how would you have known to call him? + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. I don't know if I got something in the mail or not. I don't know — I don't know how me and him first started talking. Q. Well, how did you — A. I don't remember. Q. How did you know to contact Mr. Herman at all? A. I don't know. Q. The fact of the matter is, you were solicited by him — A. No. Q. — were you not? MR MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Mr. Herman, do you know if he's a lawyer in good standing in the Florida Bar? A. Yeah. I mean, Pve heard he's done some good stuff. Q. Do you know if he's a lawyer in good standing in the Florida Bar — A. What do you mean, good standing? Q. — or if he has been disbarred? MR. MERMELSTE1N: Ile hasn't been disbarred. Objection to fore. + +Page 259 + +1 BY MR. LUTT1ER: + +2 Q. Do you know if he's a lawyer in good 3 standing? + +4 A. What do you mean? + +5 Q. By that I mean is he's not suspended, he's 6 not disbarred. + +7 A. I know he's suspended. + +8 Q. Okay. When did you find out he was a 9 suspended lawyer? + +10 A. I don't remember. A while ago. + +11 Q. In the first conversation with him? + +12 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +13 THE WITNESS: No. + +14 BY MR. LUTHER: + +15 Q. In the second conversation with him? + +16 A. I don't remember. + +17 Q. Did you sign a contract with him? + +18 A. Yeah. + +19 Q. Okay. And did he come meet you? + +20 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked and 21 answered. + +22 THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +23 BY MR. LUTTIER: + +24 Q. Okay. So it wasn't until that happened + +25 that you had any idea of getting a lawyer and filing + +1 a lawsuit against Mr. Epstein, was there? + +2 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +3 THE WITNESS: No, those were my + +4 intentions. That's why I called that number. + +5 BY MR. LUTTTER: + +6 Q. Now, at that time -- + +7 A. My intentions were, like, I had already + +8 called somebody because I wanted help. I didn't 9 know what to do. + +10 Q. Well, and that was what year? + +11 A. That was before I met with Jeffrey, or + +12 Jeffrey Herman. + +13 Q. Yeah. Well, what year is what my question 14 was. + +15 A. '05. + +16 Q. '05? + +17 A '05-'06. + +18 Q. '06? + +19 A. '05-'06, like in between that time. + +20 Q. Before or after you got interviewed by -- + +21 A. I don't know. + +22 Q. We know it was after you got interviewed 23 by the FBI, right? + +24 A. Yeah. So, '05-'06, somewhere in that time 25 frame. I don't know when. + +1 Q. And by then had you had any discussions 2 with any of your friends like Jane Doe No. 7 about 3 whether they had filed a lawsuit? + +4 A. No. + +5 Q. You had no discussions with her? + +6 A. I'm slue — I don't rum-saber. + +7 Q. Wasn't it Jane Doe No. 7 that told you who 8 her lawyers were and put you in contact with your 9 lawyers? + +10 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, form. + +11 THE WITNESS: No, no, I don't temember. + +12 BY MR. LUTHER: + +13 Q. Well, which is it, no or I don't remember? + +14 A. No. I mean, there's — no, I don't !mow. 15 I don't }mow. + +16 Q. Well, did you have — + +17 A. It was such a long while ago, that — that 18 wasn't even something that I would even begin to 19 like -- no, I don't know. + +20 Q. You, you are giving me more than one 21 answer. What's the answer to this question? + +22 A. There was so much going on in that time 23 fine. + +24 MR. MERMELSTEIN: She didn't give you more 25 than one answer. Objection. + +1 THE WITNESS: I don't know. There was so + +2 much going on in that, that whole situation, + +3 the only people that I had to talk to was my 4 friend Jane Doe No. 7, so I don't know what we + +5 tallied about. I'm sure, I don't know — I + +6 don't know. I don't know what we talked about. + +7 I'm sure I talked to her. She was my best + +8 friend. She was going there, too. + +9 BY MR. LUTHER: + +10 Q. Was she going there — + +11 A. I don't think so. I don't think I talked + +12 to her about it. I don't ft-member what I talked to + +13 her about it. I'm sure, like, things were brought + +14 up. I don't remember, and I don't know. + +15 Q. She was going to the lawyers that you 16 eventually selected before you were going to them, 17 wasn't she? + +18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +19 THE WITNESS: I don't know. I don't think + +20 I knew at that time, no. + +21 BY MR. LUTHER: + +22 Q. Well, you know of somebody named Jane Doe 23 No. 6? + +24 A. Jane Doe No. 67 + +25 Q. Yeah, do you know her? + +1 A. That name does not ring a bell. + 2 Q. Do you know a Jane Doe No. 8? + 3 A. No. + 4 Q. Do you know an Jane Doe No. 5 or Jane Doe + 5 No. 5? + 6 A. I am awful with names. + 7 Q. Do you know an Jane Doe No. 5? + 8 A. No. + 9 Q. Do you know Jane Doe No. 5? + 10 A. No. + 11 Q. Do you know -- you know Jane Doe No. 3, + 12 right? + 13 A. Yeah. + 14 Q. Because we have talked about her. And you + 15 know that she's represented by the same lawyer as + 16 you are, right? + 17 A. Uh-huh. + 18 Q. Did you tell her -- you've got to say yes. + 19 MR. MERMELSTEIN: The question is do you + 20 know that. + 21 THE WITNESS: Do I know that? Yeah. + 22 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 23 Q. And how do you know that? + 24 A. Because I'm friends with her. + 25 Q. Have you had discussions with her about + +1 you were, that you found out that you -- + 2 A. I don't -- + 3 Q. -- were being represented by the same + 4 lawyer? + 5 A. Well, I didn't know who she was being + 6 represented by. I don't know who she's being -- I + 7 know she was in a lawsuit for the whole situation + 8 that went down. + 9 Q. Did you give her name to your lawyers for + 10 them to go consult with her? + 11 A. No. + 12 Q. Did you give the names of any of your + 13 friends to your lawyers to go consult with your + 14 friends? + 15 A. No. + 16 Q. Are you sure? + 17 A. Is that like, ██████, yeah, you need to go + 18 talk to this girl. No. + 19 Q. That's exactly what I'm talking about. + 20 A. No. + 21 Q. Did you say here's some other friends of + 22 mine -- + 23 A. No. + 24 Q. -- that went to Jeffrey Epstein, you ought + 25 to go seem them? + +1 it? + 2 A. I just, no, I haven't. I just found out + 3 through -- I am friends with her. I haven't spoke + 4 to her in years. I just hung out with her a month + 5 ago and I found out. + 6 Q. So, a month ago -- + 7 A. I found out. + 8 Q. How did you find out? Did she tell you + 9 she was going to the same lawyer you were? + 10 A. No, we -- I mean, speaking like a couple + 11 years later, I mean, this whole thing is something + 12 that nobody ever wants to experience, so having + 13 somebody else that's experienced the same thing that + 14 you have and being a friend, you sit there and talk + 15 to that person about it. + 16 Q. Did you understand what my question was? + 17 A. Yes. So, yeah, of course we've talked + 18 about it, yeah. + 19 Q. Did she tell you she was represented by + 20 the same lawyer? + 21 A. No, she didn't tell me. + 22 Q. Did you tell her who you were represented + 23 by? + 24 A. No. + 25 Q. Well, how did it come up that the two of + +1 A. No. + 2 Q. Did anybody come to you and tell you that + 3 you ought to go see this particular lawyer that you + 4 selected, like any of your friends? + 5 A. No. + 6 Q. Do you know Jane Doe No. 2? + 7 A. No. + 8 Q. Never heard of her? + 9 A. No. + 10 Q. Okay. Okay. Back to Dr. Kliman. The + 11 appointment that you had with Dr. Kliman was all + 12 arranged through your lawyer, wasn't it? + 13 A. Yeah. + 14 Q. You didn't know Dr. Kliman from, as they + 15 would said, the man on the moon, did you? + 16 A. No. + 17 Q. And your lawyer's found him for you and + 18 told you that they had scheduled an appointment for + 19 you to go see him, right? + 20 A. Yeah. + 21 Q. Was the first time you knew anything about + 22 going to any kind of psychologist or psychiatrist, + 23 right? + 24 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, form. + 25 THE WITNESS: What do you mean by that? + +1 BY MR. LUTTIER: 2 Q. The first time you had any appointment 3 with anybody about Jeffrey Epstein, wasn't it? 4 A. Yeah. 5 Q. Asa matter of fact, from the point in 6 time that you first went to Jeffrey Epstein until 7 the point in time that you walked in and saw 8 Mr. Kliman for the first time, you'd never been to 9 any psychologist or psychiatrist and discussed 10 anything about Jeffrey Epstein, had you? 11 A. No. 1.2 Q. And had you ever sought any kind of 13 medical care or attention, whether it was 14 psychiatric, psychological, mental health counselor, 15 or any other kind of medical care from the last time 16 you saw Jeffrey Epstein until the day you walked in 17 to see Dr. Kliman? 18 A. Had I seen — 19 Q. Any kind of medical care at all as a 20 result of having gone to see Mr. Epstein? 21 A. Yeah, yeah. 22 Q. What medical care did you seek between the 23 time you last saw Mr. Epstein and the first time you 24 walked in and met Mr. Kliman? 25 A. My, my psychiatrist I am seeing now. + +Page 269 + +1 Q. Who is that? 2 A. Rich Ruepto. 3 Q. Who? 4 A. Rich Ruepto. 5 Q. Rich. What's the last name? 6 A. I, I don't know how to spell it, but I'll 7 pronounce it, Rich Ruepto 8 Q. Well, how do you -- 9 A. -- or Ricky Ruepto. Rick, call him Rick. 10 Q. Well, how do you spell — what's your best 11 spelling of his last name? 12 A. R-u-e-p-t-o. 13 Q. R-u-e -- 14 A. P-t-o. 15 Q. And when did you first go to Rick Ruepto? 16 A. I don't know. Maybe July. 17 Q. Of what year? 18 A. Of '09. 19 Q. And that was — was that after you had 20 been to Dr. Kliman? 21 A. Uh-huh. Yes. 22 Q. Okay. And why did you suddenly decide to 23 go to Rick Ruepto after you'd been to Dr. Kliman? 24 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 25 THE WITNESS: I was trying to make + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 appointments before Dr. Kliman, but I was always busy with soccer and school that I was never able to see a psychiatrist while I was in school. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Well, where is -- A. So, whenever I was out of school, I then had the time to be able to, to make time to go see one. Q. Okay. Well, let's, let's digest that statement. I want to make sure I understood it. The only reason you hadn't been to Dr. Ruepto before July of '09 was your soccer schedule was such that you couldn't see him; is that right? A. Well, I didn't want anybody to know what had ha pened and had gone on with me, so I can't be like, hey, coach, I'm sorry, can you -- I can't make it to the game, am I — I have a psychiatrist appointment. No, I couldn't. Q. Did you understand my question? A. Yeah. Q. I just need you to answer my question. A. Okay. MR. LUTTIER: Would you read the question back? + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I didn't understand it. (The requested portion of the record was read by the reporter.) THE WITNESS: Yeah. BY MR. LUTTIER Q. Okay. So you play soccer from when to when? A. September, what is it, August to like October. Q. You play during the summer? A. For the summer league. I don't — ,Okay. You started in about August of'05 at — A. No, I have summers off. Q. You started in August of'05 at University, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. You sanu played soccer then for what period in '05 at M? A. For what? Q. Did you — were you playing in August? A. August of August to October — Q. Okay. So in October of '05, you were done — + +Page 271 + +1 A. — of '05 to November, and maybe, like, 2 maybe a little bit in November. 3 Q. Okay. By November of ICStou i were done 4 with soccer for your first year at=? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. From December until — school is out, 7 what, in June? 8 A. Yeah. 9 Q. From December until June of '06, you 10 weren't playing soccer, right? 11 A. Yeah. 12 Q. So, why didn't you make an appointment to 13 see Dr. Ruepto sometime between December and June of 14 '06? 15 A. Of going into my sophomore year? 16 Q. No. Of your freshman year, from December 17 of'06 - from January of'06 to June of'06, why 18 didn't you make an appointment to go see Dr. Ruepto? 19 A. I don't know. 20 Q. Your schedule would have pemfitted it, 21 right? 22 A. Wait. This is my sophomore year? 23 Q. No, your freshman year. You started in 24 about August of '05, right? 25 A. Yeah. + +- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 +- Q. You played soccer until November of '05? +- A. Uh-huh. +- Q. Right? +- A. Yeah. +- Q. Okay. So starting in January of'06 until June of '06, you could have gone to see Dr. Ruepto without any conflict — + - A. I don't know. + - Q. in your, your soccer schedule, right? + - A. Yeah. +- Q. So, why didn't you make an appointment to go see him? + - A. I don't know. +- Q. You just told me the only reason you didn't go see Ruepto earlier than after July of '09 was — + - A. I didn't even realize — +- Q. Wait a minute -- was because of your cocrer schedule. Is that, was that a true statement? + - A. Yeah. +- Q. Oka low, starting in June of'06, you didn't go to= University in the summers, did you? + - A. No. + +Page 273 + +1 Q. So, from June of'06 until about August of 2 '06, for that two-month period, you were out of 3 school - 4 A. Yeah. 5 Q. Where did you, where did you live during 6 that period of time? 7 A. I think I was staying with Lauren at the 8 time. 9 Q. Where? 10 A. I said I was staying with Lauren during 11 the summer. 12 Q. Where? 13 A. 14 Q. 15 A. Yeah. 16 Q. Okay. By the way, during that time you 17 were actually living with Lauren at her house, did 18 you-all talk about Jeffrey Epstein for that 19 two-month period in the summer of'06? 20 A. I'm sure. 21 Q. Had you filed any lawsuit against Jeffrey 22 Epsteirkg that tin 7 23 A. M, wait. M, wait, '06. Pm thinking of 24 '08. All right. This is my sophomore year. I am 25 so confused by everything now. '06, repeat your + +Page 275 1 question or ask the question. 2 Q. You said you lived with from 3 June to July of '0L.during the summer after your 4 freshman year at.. University. 5 A. No. Yeah, me and Lauren, like, yeah. 6 Q. You said you lived with her at her 7 parents' house. 8 A. Yeah, we stayed at her parents' house, 9 yeah. 10 Q. Well, had you filed a lawsuit against 11 Jeffrey Epstein then? 12 A. Yeah, I think so. Wait. Yeah, yeah, I 13 think so. 14 Q. Did you talk to about it? 15 A. I'm sure, yeah. 16 Q. What did you tell her about it? 17 A. I don't remember. 18 Q. Did you ever, at any point in your life 19 right up until today tell anyone that you thought it 20 was outrageous that anyone would file a lawsuit 21 against Jeffrey Epstein because everybody knew what 22 the deal was and knew what they were doing or words 23 to that effect? 24 A. I think when everything first happened, me 25 and Lauren were going a lot. Me and her, we were + +Page 276 1 just like, !mean, !didn't, I didn't even realize, 2 like, I didn't even know. And I was like defending 3 Mr. Epstein. I didn't even, like, think I - I 4 didn't even, I didn't even — I didn't — I didn't 5 even realize I was, like -- 6 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Take your time. 7 BY MR. LUTTIER: 8 Q. 'jug need you to answer my question. 9 A. I know. 10 MR MERMELSTEIN: Well, she's getting 11 emotional. Let her take her time. Okay? 12 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I said that to Lauren, 13 became I didn't even think I was doing 14 anything wrong at the time. I didn't even 15 realize. 16 MR MERMELSTEIN: Okay. If you need a 17 minute, take a minute. Okay. 18 THE WITNESS: Can I have a napkin or do — 19 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Yes. Slue. 20 BY MR. LIMIER: 21 Q. Now, what was your answer? You did say to 22 Lamm that you would be outrageous — 23 A. We, she said we both said it to each 24 other. We were just, like, I can't believe this is 25 happening, like, Jeffrey is such a great guy, like, + +Page 27 1 you know, like, saying all this stuff about, about 2 him. We didn't — I didn't realize, like, I didn't 3 even think I was doing anything wrong. I, I didn't 4 even think I was doing anything wrong. 5 Q. Wait a minute now. I want to go through 6 this slowly. You say you and Lauren said this to 7 each other? 8 A. Uh-huh. Whenever it first happened, 9 probably like in my freshman year in college when 10 everything went down, and we had no yeah, I think 11 I said it to her maybe once. 12 Q. Now, wait a minute now. You last went to 13 see Mr. Epstein in October of '05, right? 14 A. Yeah. 15 Q. So, now we're talking about June of '06. 16 A. No, it was not June of'06. That's not 17 whenever — whenever it first happened I said that 18 to her. It was like in '05 when everything was 19 going down. When everything was, like, when the 20 cops were starting to interview girls and were 21 starting to get interviewed, that's whenever I said 22 something. And I never said something to her in '06 23 about it. 24 Q. Did you ever say anything to anyone from 25 January of '06 until January of '09- 7 + +Page 278 1 A. No. 2 Q. Wait a minute. 3 A. Sony. 4 Q. — from January of '06 to January of '09 5 to the effect that it was outrageous for anybody to 6 sue Jeffrey Epstein, that everybody knew what they 7 were getting into and did everything voluntarily, or 8 words-9 A. No. 10 Q. — to that effect? 11 MR MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 12 THE WITNESS: No. 13 BY MR. LUITIER: 14 Q. Are you sure? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Would you stake your life on it? 17 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, 18 argumentative. 19 TIIE WITNESS: Yeah, I said it to Lauren. 20 BY MR. LUITIER: 21 Q In that time period? 22 A. I don't, I don't remember what time 23 period it was. 24 Q. Okay. Well, now are you telling me now 25 maybe you did say that during that time period? + +Page 279 1 A. Maybe I did — I don't remember what time 2 period. I know I've said it to Lauren before. I 3 don't remember exactly what time, what date, like, 4 what year. 5 Q. Here is your choices. You can either say 6 you did it, you can say you didn't do it, or you can 7 say you don't remmaber, right? Those are the only 8 three choices that there are. Do you agree with me? 9 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 10 You're asking her when or are you asking her 11 if? 12 MR. LUTHER: I am saying during that time 13 period. 14 THE WITNESS: I said that. 15 MR. MERMEISTEIN: Or during the time 16 period. 17 BY MR LUTHER: 18 Q. If you don't remember, just tell me -- 19 A. I don't remember. 20 Q. — you don't remember. 21 A. I don't remember. 22 Q. Which means, just so we're clear so we 23 don't have a problem with our language, when you say 24 you don't remember, you're not denying it, you are 25 just saying you have — . + +1 A. I don't remember — 2 Q. — no recollection one way or the other. 3 A. — of the time frame. 4 Q. Is that right? 5 A. Yeah, I don't remember the time frame. 6 Q. Is my statement correct? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Okay. So every time in this deposition 9 when you say I don't remember, what that means is it 10 may have happened, it may not have happened, you 11 have no recollection, correct? 12 MIL MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 13 THE WITNESS: Yeah, yeah. 14 BY MR. LUTTIER: 15 Q. Okay. I just want to make sure we're 16 clear. If we're not clear, I will — clear it up 17 for me right now. I want to make sure we have a 18 clear understanding on this record about what it 19 means when you say I don't remember. 20 A. Well, I've already said that I know I have 21 said that to Lauren, so that's not something that I 22 don't remember. 23 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Okay. Okay. 24 BY MR LUTTIER: 25 Q. That's not my question. I want to make + +1 A. Jane Doe No. 7. 2 Q. Uh-huh. And tell us when you told Jane 3 Doe No. 7 that. 4 A. I don't remember. 5 Q. You told her that before you filed this 6 lawsuit, though, didn't you? 7 A. No, I don't remember. 8 Q. Now, I want to tell you that you filed 9 your lawsuit in 2008. Okay. You can assume that 10 and I'm sure your counsel will correct me if I'm 11 wrong, but you didn't file this lawsuit until 2008. 12 You had a lot of discussions with your fiends that 13 had gone to Jeffrey Epstein before you filed this 14 lawsuit, didn't you? 15 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 16 BY MR LUTHER: 17 Q. Didn't you? 18 A. Yeah. 19 Q. And all those conversations were that 20 everybody knew what they were getting into, and it 21 was all done voluntarily, and at that time you-all 22 thought it was crazy that anybody would sue Jeffrey 23 Epstein, didn't you? 24 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 25 THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +Page 281 1 sure we're clear on 2 A. Yeah. 3 Q. — this record. 4 A. Yeah. 5 Q. Let me ask the question. I want to make 6 sure we're clear on this record that when you say I 7 don't remember, what you mean is you have no 8 recollection of the event. You're not denying it 9 and you're not admitting it; you're saying you have 10 no recollection at all; is that correct? 11 A. Yeah. 12 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 13 BY MR. LUTTIER: 14 Q. All right. Now, isn't it a fact that you 15 have made this statement to people other than M, between January of '06 and January of '09, 17 that everybody that went to see Jeffrey Epstein knew 18 exactly what they were getting into, did it 19 voluntarily, and it's outrageous that they would sue 20 him? 21 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 22 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 23 BY MR LUTTIER: 24 Q. Yeah. And who else did you make that 25 statement to? + +Page 283 1 BY MR. LUTTIER: 2 Q. That's what you told each other, didn't 3 you? 4 A. Some people did. Some people — I don't 5 remember. I mean, I don't remember who, like, yeah. 6 Q. And then what happened — 7 MR. MERMELSTEIN: If you don't remember 8 say you don't remember. 9 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I don't remember, 10 like — 11 BY MR. LUTTIER: 12 Q. Well, you said yeah, right? 13 A. No, but you're, you're, you're — I don't 14 even know if it was a question. 15 MR. LUTTIER: Well, here, well, let's just 16 go back and read my question and her answer. 17 Listen carefully now. 18 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 19 (The requested portion of the record was 20 read by the reporter.) 21 THE WITNESS: No, not in all of those 22 conversations. 23 BY MR. LUTTIER: 24 Q. In many of them? 25 A. No. + +1 Q. In any of them? + 2 A. Yeah. + 3 Q. Okay. That is you represented to your + 4 friends, and you-all sat around and discussed it, + 5 did you not? + 6 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 7 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 8 Q. Didn't you? + 9 A. Yeah, we brought it up. + 10 Q. Yeah. And when you brought -- tell me + 11 some of the people that were in these groups that + 12 you would discuss it. + 13 A. I don't remember. + 14 Q. You know Jane Doe No. 7 was there, don't + 15 you? + 16 A. Yeah. + 17 Q. You know Lauren was there, don't you? + 18 A. Yeah. + 19 Q. You know that some more people were there, + 20 don't you? + 21 A. No, I don't remember who was all there. + 22 Q. You know that at least the three of you + 23 had the discussion? + 24 A. Yeah. + 25 Q. And in -- + +1 that they've said that and that -- that they've + 2 agreed upon what I said. + 3 Q. Okay. But we now have established that + 4 you have said that? + 5 A. Yeah, I've said that, yeah. + 6 Q. And it was true when you said it, wasn't + 7 it? + 8 A. Was it true? + 9 Q. Yeah. + 10 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + 11 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I, I mean -- + 12 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 13 Q. Okay. + 14 A. -- at that time whenever -- + 15 Q. And, and you didn't change your mind about + 16 that until you were interviewed by the FBI and then + 17 a lawyer contacted you about suing Jeffrey Epstein; + 18 isn't that right? + 19 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 20 THE WITNESS: No. + 21 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 22 Q. Isn't that right? + 23 A. Wait. Before the FBI -- like you're + 24 talking like -- I don't even remember whenever I + 25 brought up this conversation, so I don't even know + +1 A. There might have been more, but I don't + 2 remember. + 3 Q. And in that discussion, you-all said that + 4 you-all knew what you were getting into and you did + 5 it voluntarily, didn't you? + 6 A. That's what I said. I don't know -- + 7 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 8 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 9 Q. You said it? + 10 A. I know I've said that before. + 11 Q. All right. + 12 A. I don't know if it was -- + 13 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 14 Q. And when you said -- + 15 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Wait. Hold it. She's + 16 in the middle of her answer. + 17 MR. LUTTIER: Okay. + 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Please finish your + 19 answer. + 20 THE WITNESS: I know I have said that + 21 before. I am not saying that I said that I've + 22 said that in every single -- + 23 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 24 Q. Okay. + 25 A. -- every conversation, and I'm not saying + +1 if it was before or after the FBI. You're bringing + 2 up my, like, lawyer. You're bringing FBI lawyer + 3 caught, like, bringing up all this stuff. I don't + 4 remember whenever I made the statement, so I don't + 5 know if it was before or after I had talked to these + 6 people. + 7 Q. So, you may have made the statement that + 8 everybody knew what they were getting into and did + 9 it voluntarily and it was outrageous to sue + 10 Jeffrey Epstein, even after the point in time -- + 11 A. I don't remember whenever I -- + 12 Q. -- you went to you are lawyer; is that + 13 right? + 14 A. I don't remember whenever I made that + 15 statement, so I don't know whether it was before or + 16 after my, my lawyers, and I don't know if it was + 17 before or after I had spoken to the FBI. + 18 Q. Before you filed this lawsuit, you had + 19 represented that everything you did with Jeffrey + 20 Epstein was up front, you knew about it and you did + 21 it voluntarily, didn't you? + 22 A. Yeah. + 23 Q. And that was the truth, wasn't it? + 24 A. Yeah. + 25 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +1 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 2 Q. Jeffrey Epstein never asked you to do + 3 anything that you didn't want to do, did he? + 4 A. He asked me to take my underwear off one + 5 time. + 6 Q. And you said, no, and he didn't press it, + 7 right? + 8 A. No. + 9 Q. Then you went back to him again after + 10 that? + 11 A. Yeah. + 12 Q. And you took your top off without even -- + 13 him even asking, right? + 14 A. Yeah. + 15 MR. MERMELSTEIN: This has all been asked + 16 and answered. + 17 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 18 Q. Then you took your, you actually took your + 19 underwear off after that, that is your panties, + 20 didn't you? + 21 A. Yeah. + 22 MR. MERMELSTEIN: All been asked and + 23 answered. + 24 BY MR. MERMELSTEIN: + 25 Q. Did you do it without him asking? + +1 he asked you to take your panty's off? + 2 A. Yeah. + 3 Q. Is that right? + 4 A. (No verbal response.) + 5 Q. Is that right? + 6 A. Yeah. + 7 Q. And then did you agree to do it? + 8 A. Yeah. + 9 Q. Voluntarily? + 10 A. Yeah. + 11 Q. Okay. And then did you come back another + 12 time? + 13 A. Yeah. + 14 Q. And did you take your bra off and take + 15 your panties off? + 16 A. Yeah. + 17 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked and + 18 answered. + 19 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 20 Q. And give him a massage in the nude? + 21 A. Yeah. + 22 Q. You did it voluntarily without him even + 23 asking on that occasion, didn't you? + 24 A. Yeah. + 25 Q. And thereafter, did you come and give him + +1 A. He asked and I did it -- + 2 Q. You didn't say no, did you? + 3 A. -- after, after, after saying no several + 4 times. + 5 Q. And each time you said no, he didn't press + 6 it. You left your panties on, right? + 7 A. Finally I, I gave in and I said fine. + 8 Yeah. + 9 Q. Well, that was after you got paid \$200 and + 10 then you came back again, and you said no, and he + 11 didn't have you take your panties off, right? + 12 A. (No verbal response.) + 13 Q. Correct? + 14 A. Yeah. + 15 Q. And you got \$200 and you came back again, + 16 and you said no, and he didn't have you take your + 17 panties off, right? + 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked and + 19 answered. + 20 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 21 Q. Right? + 22 A. Yeah. + 23 Q. And you got paid \$200, right? + 24 A. Yeah. + 25 Q. And you came back a fourth time, and again + +1 massages in the total nude without him even asking + 2 you to take your clothes off? + 3 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked and + 4 answered. + 5 THE WITNESS: Yeah, some -- every other + 6 time. I'm sure he asked several others. I + 7 mean, I'm not saying I was just like -- yeah. + 8 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 9 Q. Got to the point were you came and just + 10 voluntarily got naked before you gave him the + 11 massage, didn't you? + 12 A. No. + 13 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked and + 14 answered. + 15 THE WITNESS: Sometimes I'd have my + 16 clothes on, and then he'd ask me take them off, + 17 but after the, after I had my shirt off that + 18 one time, you know, maybe he asked me to take + 19 my shirt off but I would because I already had + 20 my shirt off the other time. I'm not saying + 21 that every single time I was just like taking + 22 my shirt off before he even got into the room. + 23 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 24 Q. But you -- + 25 A. But when he asked, I did it, because the + +1 time before I had already taken my shirt off. + 2 Q. But there were times that you came and + 3 voluntarily took all your clothes off without him + 4 even asking you, weren't there? + 5 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked and + 6 answered. + 7 THE WITNESS: I don't know. I don't + 8 remember. + 9 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 10 Q. Now you don't know? + 11 A. I'm sure. I -- + 12 Q. So, it did happen? + 13 A. I don't remember, so I don't know. + 14 Q. Well, was this a significant, were these + 15 significant events in your life or not? + 16 A. Yeah, they were. + 17 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, + 18 argumentative. + 19 THE WITNESS: But I had gone there -- + 20 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 21 Q. But you can't remember what happened -- + 22 THE COURT REPORTER: One at a time. + 23 MR. LUTTIER: Huh? + 24 THE COURT REPORTER: One at a time. + 25 MR. LUTTIER: Okay. + +1 what you just said. You don't remember what + 2 happened each time, do you? + 3 A. Yes, I do. + 4 Q. Well, I thought you just said you don't + 5 remember. + 6 A. After -- no, I do remember. + 7 Q. [REDACTED], okay. + 8 A. But I don't remember if he asked me to + 9 take my clothes off every single time, or if I + 10 voluntarily did it. + 11 Q. Do you remember -- + 12 A. Yeah, I -- + 13 Q. -- or do you not remember? + 14 A. Yeah, I -- yes, I voluntarily -- + 15 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked and + 16 answered. + 17 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 18 Q. Okay. You volunteered to take your + 19 clothes off, right? + 20 A. If he asked me, yes. + 21 Q. Well, there were times you came and he + 22 didn't even ask you anything and you took them off, + 23 right? + 24 A. Yeah. + 25 Q. Okay. And you were comfortable being + +1 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 2 Q. You can't remember what happened -- + 3 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Take your time. + 4 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 5 Q. -- on these significant events? + 6 A. Yeah, I do, I remember, but it's, I was + 7 going there two or three times a week. So after + 8 going there the first time and it getting + 9 progressively worse, I mean, it was the same, it was + 10 like the same thing every single time I went after + 11 that moment I had taken my clothes off. + 12 So, after I had taken -- I remember, so + 13 when I had -- finally when I had all my clothes off, + 14 of course I remember -- I mean, I don't remember, + 15 you know, I took all my clothes off that one time + 16 I'm not going to remember the next time, what + 17 happened the three times after you took off your + 18 clothes, did he ask you that time? + 19 Maybe he did. I don't remember, but I'm + 20 sure, maybe I took some of my clothes off without + 21 him asking. Maybe he, you know, after I took all my + 22 clothes off, you know, it was just kind of like + 23 known and given that that is what goes on, like, + 24 that's what happens. + 25 Q. Let, let me make sure that I understood + +1 naked in front of him. + 2 A. Yeah. + 3 Q. Wasn't the first time you had been naked + 4 in front of a man. + 5 A. Not the first time I was naked in front of + 6 him, I wasn't comfortable. + 7 Q. Did you tell him you weren't comfortable? + 8 A. No. + 9 Q. So, how was he supposed to know? + 10 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, + 11 argumentative, speculation. + 12 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 13 Q. How was he supposed to know? + 14 A. I don't know. + 15 Q. Because every time you said you were + 16 uncomfortable about something or didn't want to do + 17 it, he respected your wishes, did he not? + 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 19 THE WITNESS: Yeah, but he was also, like, + 20 complimenting me and saying how beautiful I am, + 21 and saying that I shouldn't be, like, like + 22 embarrassed or uncomfortable, like, you know. + 23 If I, if I would look like it. If I had my + 24 other side, if I looked like I was Jane Doe + 25 No. 4 (short form) instead of Jane Doe No. 4, + +1 then he would be, like, █, well, you're + 2 beautiful. + 3 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 4 Q. Would you agree with me, you weren't + 5 traumatized because the man said you were beautiful, + 6 were you? + 7 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, + 8 argumentative. + 9 THE WITNESS: No. + 10 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 11 Q. He treated you better than the person that + 12 you described as the first love of your life, + 13 Preston Vinyard, didn't he? + 14 A. Yeah. + 15 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 16 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 17 Q. Preston Vinyard called you a whore, a slut + 18 and a cunt, didn't he? + 19 A. Yeah. + 20 Q. Jeffrey Epstein never did that, did he? + 21 A. No. + 22 Q. He spit in your -- that's Mr. Vinyard spit + 23 in your face, dumped beer all over you -- + 24 A. Yeah. + 25 Q. -- didn't he? Jeffrey Epstein never did + +1 that, did he? + 2 A. No. + 3 Q. And it was traumatizing to you what + 4 Preston Vinyard did to you, wasn't it? + 5 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, calls + 6 for a conclusion. + 7 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 8 Q. It would be to anybody. + 9 A. It would be to anybody, yeah. + 10 Q. Okay. All right. + 11 MR. CRITTON: The time. How much time do + 12 you have left? + 13 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: About three. + 14 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 15 Q. Now, there were some other traumatic + 16 events that had occurred in your life, haven't there + 17 been? + 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, that's been + 19 asked and answered. + 20 THE WITNESS: Yeah. + 21 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 22 Q. When you went to see Dr. Kliman, did you + 23 understand that you were -- what did you understand + 24 about what you were to tell him? + 25 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + +1 THE WITNESS: I wasn't told to tell him + 2 anything. + 3 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 4 Q. What did you understand about what you + 5 were supposed to do when he asked you a question? + 6 A. Nobody told me to tell him anything. + 7 Q. So, when he asked a question, you didn't + 8 know if you were supposed to answer -- + 9 A. I answered honestly. I answered -- + 10 whenever he asked me a question about my personal + 11 life, I, I mean, I was supposed to tell him about my + 12 person life nobody knows. + 13 Q. So, let me make sure we have this. You + 14 answered honestly every question Dr. Kliman asked + 15 you; is that right? + 16 A. Yeah. + 17 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + 18 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 19 Q. Now, I want to be fair to you. We got a + 20 transcript of your interview with Dr. Kliman. Are + 21 you aware of that? + 22 A. Yeah. + 23 Q. Okay. Have you had a chance to review it? + 24 A. No, not like since I've been there. + 25 Q. Now, so now that you know we have a + +1 transcript, I want to make sure we're clear, every + 2 question that Dr. Kliman answered of (sic) you, you + 3 answered truthfully, correct? + 4 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 5 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I think so. I mean, + 6 yeah. + 7 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 8 Q. You told him -- did you tell him about all + 9 the traumatic things that happened to you in your + 10 life? + 11 A. Yeah. + 12 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 13 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 14 Q. You say you're Roman Catholic? + 15 A. Yeah. + 16 Q. How many abortions have you had? + 17 A. How many? + 18 Q. Yeah, how many, as in more than one. + 19 A. Yeah. + 20 Q. How many have you had? + 21 A. Three. + 22 Q. Three abortions. And how many did you + 23 tell Dr. Kliman you had? + 24 A. I don't even know if he asked me the + 25 question. + +2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. How about the question, have you ever been pregnant; do you remember being asked that question? A. No, I don't. Q. Well, if the transcript shows that you were asked that question, and if you were honest with Dr. Kliman like you told us you would, you would have told him that you had three pregnancies, wouldn't you? A. I would have stated that to like my lawyer though, henutse Q. No, no, no. I want to know about Dr. Kliman. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Don't talk about what you told your lawyer. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Yeah, I don't want to ask you about your lawyer. I know you tell your lawyer all kinds of stuff. A. Uh-huh. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. I want to know whether or not if Dr. Kliman asked you if you'd ever had any pregnancies — A. That is — + +Page 300 + +Page 301 + +1 Q. -- you would have answered him truthfully, 2 and you would have told him you had three 3 pregnancies, wouldn't you? 4 A. I don't — It's something I don't want 5 anybody to know, in fact, no. 6 Q. Why not? Why don't you want people to 7 know - 8 A. Why not? 9 Q. — you went and aborted three kids? Why 10 wouldn't you want people to know that? 11 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, 12 argumentative. 13 BY MR. LUTHER: 14 Q. Tell me why you wouldn't want them to know 15 that. 16 A. Because it's none of their business. 17 Q. Does it cause you any upset to know that 18 you aborted three kids in your life? 19 A. Of course. 20 Q. Why does it cause you upset? 21 A. Because, somebody's life. 22 Q. Were you told before each of these 23 abortions that you had what they call viable 24 fetuses? 25 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. —mrl 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE WITNESS: What is viable? BY MR. LUTHER: Q. That is there was a heartbeat in the fetus. A. No. Q. Are you sure? A. I didn't want to know anything about it. Q. Are your sure you weren't told you had a viable fetus? A. It might have been in the papers that I signed. I don't — I'm not sure that I — Q. I vault to be fair to you. I want to tell you we've got your medical records, too, okay? A. Yeah. Q. So, the records from your gynecologist, we have those too. A. Okay. Q. Now, were you told before you aborted these three children — A. I don't know. Q. — that you had a viable fetus? A. I don't know. I don't remember. Q. Does it give you any, any emotional pain that you aborted three fetuses? A. Yeah, I have had emotional pain about it. + +Page 303 + +1 Q. It's contrary to everything you ever 2 learned as a child as a Roman Catholic, isn't it? 3 A Yeah. 4 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, 5 argumentative. 6 BY MR. LUTHER: 7 Q. Does your mom know you aborted three kids? 8 A. No. 9 Q. Does your dad know you aborted three kids? 10 A. No. 11 Q. What do you think they'd think? 12 MR MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, 13 argumentative. 14 111E WITNESS: I don't know. 15 BY MR LUTHER: 16 Q. Do you think they're going to be happy 17 about that? 18 MR MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, 19 argumentative. 20 THE WITNESS: No. 21 BY MR. LUTHER: 22 Q. Is it going to cause you a little 23 emotional upset? 24 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 25 THE WITNESS: I mean, I have -- I have to + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 304 deal with it when I talk to, when I speak to them. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. My question is, is it going to cause you any emotional upset? MR. MERMEISTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: I don't know because I haven't experienced it. I'm sure. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Wouldn't you agree with me that aborting three fetuses — A. Yeah. Q. -- would be far more traumatic — A It is. Q -- than giving a man a massage in the nude? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, argumentative. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Wouldn't you agree with me? MR MERMELSTEIN: Objection. BY MR. LU'FTTER: Q. I want you to tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury whether or not aborting three fetuses is more traumatic than giving a man a + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. Did you tell him -- A I don't — Q — the first visit? A. I don't remember what visit I told him, but I know I told him. Q. Okay. He is the first guy you ever told, right? A. First guy that I ever told? Q. The first doctor, medical health professional that you told you had, you aborted three fetuses, didn't you? A. Yeah. Q. You didn't tell Kliman, did you? A. Q. A. Q. it? A. Yeah. Q. It makes you feel bad, doesn't it? A. Yeah. Q. Tell me how it makes you feel. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. How do you feel that you aborted three No. Didn't want Kliman to know. I didn't want anybody to know that, no. Because it's embarrassing to you, isn't + +Page 305 1 massage in the nude. 2 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 3 BY MR. LUTI1ER: 4 Q. Just tell the ladies and gentlemen in the 5 camera, yes or no. 6 A. Yeah. 7 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. BY MR. LIJTITER: 9 Q. Did you go get any psychological help for 10 the fact that you aborted three kids? 11 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 12 THE WITNESS: No. 13 BY MR. LUTI1ER: 14 Q Are you telling Dr. Ruepto, Rubello (sic), 15 whatever his name is, that you had three abortions? 16 A. Have I told him? 17 Q. Yeah. 18 A. Yeah. 19 Q. And did you tell him how you felt about 20 that? 21 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. 22 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 23 BY MR. LUTHER: 24 Q. And when did you tell him that? 25 A. I don't remember. + +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 307 babies? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, asked and answered. THE WITNESS: How do I feel? BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Tell me how you feel. A. How would you feel? Q. Well, I know how I'd feel, but that's not the question. A. Yeah. Q. I want to know how you feel. A. It was very upsetting and emotional. Q. How upsetting? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, argumentative. MR. CRITTON: Mark, you have no time. MR. LUTHER: Okay. THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're off the record at 4:10. This is the end of Tape 2. (A brief recess was held.) • • • • • + +| A | | allows 148:9 | | appointments | | asking 144:16 | | background | | +|---------------------------|--|--------------------------|--|---------------------------|--|---------------------------|--|----------------------------|--| +| abase 226:3 | | amount 243:18 | | appreciate 171:16 | | asks 175:14 | | backup 253:16 | | +| able 166:5 218:5 | | answer 155:23 | | appropriate 182:15 | | assist 252:6 | | bad 162:3 163:9 | | +| 270:3,8 | | 174:13 176:3 | | appropriate 182:15 | | associated 255:9 | | bank 156:12,13 | | +| aborted 301:9,18 | | 182:8 208:23 | | approve 199:16,17 | | assume 150:12 | | banyan 140:20 | | +| 302:18,24 303:7,9 | | 213:19 220:12 | | appropriate 182:15 | | assume 150:12 | | Bar 259:16,20 | | +| 305:10 306:10,25 | | 228:18 232:7 | | approve 199:16,17 | | attorney 251:22,23 | | beach 139:18 | | +| aborting 304:10,24 | | 234:13 237:11,20 | | argued 204:21 | | attorney 251:22,23 | | beach 139:18 | | +| abortions 299:16 | | 254:6 262:21,21 | | arguing 204:24 | | attention 268:13 | | beautiful 295:20 | | +| 299:22 301:23 | | 262:25 270:22 | | arguing 204:24 | | attorney 251:22,23 | | bed 192:18 | | +| 305:15 | | 276:8,21 283:16 | | argument 172:15 | | attorney 251:22,23 | | bedroom 201:1,4 | | +| abused 243:18 | | 285:16,19 298:8 | | arguments 200:14 | | Attorney's 253:17 | | beer 296:23 | | +| abusive 202:15,19 | | 155:22 182:23 | | arguments 200:14 | | August 180:4,9 | | began 146:9 242:14 | | +| 203:5 | | 183:1 220:12 | | argumentative | | Australian 139:17 | | beginning 142:5 | | +| accident 207:10 | | 248:4 253:21 | | arranged 267:12 | | Avenue 139:17 | | begun 168:12 | | +| 209:10,12 210:9 | | 255:22 260:21 | | asked 150:22 | | behalf 140:2,7,13 | | believe 276:24 | | +| account 156:14 | | 288:16,23 289:19 | | asked 150:22 | | bell 264:1 | | believe 276:24 | | +| accused 225:21 | | 290:18 291:4,14 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | bell 264:1 | | +| accusing 225:17 | | 292:6 294:16 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | better 165:5 195:12 | | +| ADAM 140:8 | | 297:19 298:9,9,14 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | better 165:5 195:12 | | +| address 198:13,15 | | 299:2,3 301:1 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| 198:16,17 | | 307:3 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| ADLER 140:3 | | answering 240:14 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| admitting 281:9 | | answers 141:15 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| advanced 161:15 | | answers 141:15 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| advertising 258:17 | | answers 141:15 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| advice 251:1 | | answers 141:15 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| advise 250:19 | | answers 141:15 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| afternoon 160:22 | | anybody 173:5 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| afterward 157:24 | | 186:3 208:5,24 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| age 211:22 | | 217:1 236:20 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| ago 181:11 260:10 | | 242:22,23,24 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| 262:17 265:5,6 | | 244:10 255:9 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| agree 164:1,11 | | 257:8 267:2 268:3 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| 167:10 213:23 | | 270:15 278:5 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| 279:8 290:7 296:4 | | 282:22 297:8,9 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| 304:10,20 | | 301:5 306:16 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| agreed 286:2 | | anybody's 252:5 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| ahead 143:11 | | anyway 209:9 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| 153:11 196:23 | | apart 192:21 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| 239:13 | | apparently 161:1 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| ahold 257:16 | | appear 185:21 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| Ahorowitz@sexa... | | APPEARANCES | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| 140:11 | | 140:1 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| alcohol 221:19,22 | | appeared 226:5 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| 222:1 | | appearing 225:9 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | +| | | appointment 238:9 | | asked 150:22 | | beck 159:2 191:7,8 | | beyond 191:6 | | + +| big 190:19,21
204:23,24 | bucks 155:6 156:25
163:18 168:1
177:1,6 | cases 139:9
cash 156:15
casual 158:2,3
Catholic 188:18,19
189:13 299:14
303:2
caught 287:3
cause 301:17,20
303:22 304:4
caused 204:13,20
cellphone 185:17
185:22
certainly 170:12
182:15
chance 298:23
change 286:15
changing 201:1
202:2
chest 201:5
child 303:2
children 302:19
choices 279:5,8
choke 205:16
choked 205:18
Chris 207:8,18
209:19
Christmas 211:13
church 188:23,25
189:4,9,20,23,25
circulated 224:9
circumstances
148:8
city 191:7
claim 151:22
claiming 183:19
classes 229:6
clause 233:20
clear 179:20 240:14
256:6 279:22
280:16,16,16,18
281:1,6 299:1
clearly 182:14
cleats 190:17
clothed 152:9
clothes 152:12
156:18 192:13
201:1,11 228:13 | 291 :2,16 292:3
293 :11,13,15,18
293 :20,22 294:9
294 :19
clothing 167:2
190:9
coach 270:17
coaching 150:15
cocaine 216:23
217:1 219:15,17
219:20 221:6
Coke 215:4
COLEMAN
140:20
college 185:25
187:4,10 189:1
239:17,19 277:9
come 165:25 175:6
182:13 183:4
184:11,15,21
185:9 187:20
189:3 192:20
193:18,20 203:21
244:23 257:15
260:19 265:25
267:2 290:11,25
comes 153:18
175:13
comfortable 229:21
235:3 294:25
295:6,7
communicate
246:13
compared 193:15
competitive 190:24
191:2
complimenting
295:20
conclude 148:9
151:10
conclusion 206:25
297:6
conduct 182:5
conference 140:24
conflict 235:15
236:6,17 273:7
confused 232:9
274:25 | consult 266:10,13
Consulting 234:17
contact 257:25
258:5,7 259:6
262:8
contacted 184:17
184:20 249:16,17
249:20,23,24
250:6 251:16
253:14 258:2,9,14
286:17
contacting 258:10
contains 233:14
CONTINUED
141:6 142:3
contract 260:17
contrary 303:1
conversation
143:14 159:24
161:9,18 247:23
248:24 256:4,19
257:3 260:11,15
285:25 286:25
conversations
250:20 282:19
283:22
cops 186:24 201:8
202:5 277:20
corner 201:19
correct 149:4 161:4
165:23 166:11
193:6 198:9
215:24 216:11,19
220:10 221:13
230:3,4,6 234:7
247:3 255:2 280:6
280:11 281:10
282:10 289:13
299:3
counsel 282:10
Counseling 234:16
counselor 268:14
country 244:23
couple 153:25
187:24 191:15,15
193:13 207:23
265:10
course 161:20 | +|-----------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| big 190:19,21
204:23,24 | bucks 155:6 156:25
163:18 168:1
177:1,6 | cases 139:9
casual 158:2,3
Catholic 188:18,19
189:13 299:14
303:2
caught 287:3
cause 301:17,20
303:22 304:4
caused 204:13,20
cellphone 185:17
185:22
certainly 170:12
182:15
chance 298:23
change 286:15
changing 201:1
202:2
chest 201:5
child 303:2
children 302:19
choices 279:5,8
choke 205:16
choked 205:18
Chris 207:8,18
209:19
Christmas 211:13
church 188:23,25
189:4,9,20,23,25
circulated 224:9
circumstances
148:8
city 191:7
claim 151:22
claiming 183:19
classes 229:6
clause 233:20
clear 179:20 240:14
256:6 279:22
280:16,16,16,18
281:1,6 299:1
clearly 182:14
cleats 190:17
clothed 152:9
clothes 152:12
156:18 192:13
201:1,11 228:13 | 291 :2,16 292:3
293 :11,13,15,18
293 :20,22 294:9
294 :19
clothing 167:2
190:9
coach 270:17
coaching 150:15
cocaine 216:23
217:1 219:15,17
219:20 221:6
Coke 215:4
COLEMAN
140:20
college 185:25
187:4,10 189:1
239:17,19 277:9
come 165:25 175:6
182:13 183:4
184:11,15,21
185:9 187:20
189:3 192:20
193:18,20 203:21
244:23 257:15
260:19 265:25
267:2 290:11,25
comes 153:18
175:13
comfortable 229:21
235:3 294:25
295:6,7
communicate
246:13
compared 193:15
competitive 190:24
191:2
complimenting
295:20
conclude 148:9
151:10
conclusion 206:25
297:6
conduct 182:5
conference 140:24
conflict 235:15
236:6,17 273:7
confused 232:9
274:25 | consult 266:10,13
Consulting 234:17
contact 257:25
258:5,7 259:6
262:8
contacted 184:17
184:20 249:16,17
249:20,23,24
250:6 251:16
253:14 258:2,9,14
286:17
contacting 258:10
contains 233:14
CONTINUED
141:6 142:3
contract 260:17
contrary 303:1
conversation
143:14 159:24
161:9,18 247:23
248:24 256:4,19
257:3 260:11,15
285:25 286:25
conversations
250:20 282:19
283:22
cops 186:24 201:8
202:5 277:20
corner 201:19
correct 149:4 161:4
165:23 166:11
193:6 198:9
215:24 216:11,19
220:10 221:13
230:3,4,6 234:7
247:3 255:2 280:6
280:11 281:10
282:10 289:13
299:3
counsel 282:10
Counseling 234:16
counselor 268:14
country 244:23
couple 153:25
187:24 191:15,15
193:13 207:23
265:10
course 161:20 | + +| 193:14 265:17 | 199:18 211:12,15 | different 150:18 | 236:16 237:1,6,6 | ego 170:1 | +|---------------------------|----------------------------|---------------------------|----------------------------|-------------------------| +| 293:14 301:19 | 211:20 222:25 | 152:12 164:4,9 | 237:15 238:7,10 | eighth 144:8 | +| court 139:1,22 | day 157:24 159:14 | 165:2 178:1 | 238:11,21 244:15 | either 173:19 | +| 142:16,25 143:4 | 208:6 214:18 | digest 270:10 | 248:1,16 267:10 | 216:19 239:5 | +| 182:11 203:25 | 217:22,22 246:6 | direct 141:4 142:3 | 267:11,14 268:17 | 250:25 279:5 | +| 204:3 254:24 | 247:6,16 248:25 | 182:8 | 269:20,23 270:1 | embarrassed | +| 292:22,24 | 249:1,2,3,5 | directly 172:19 | 270:12 272:13,18 | 229:24 230:3 | +| cover 174:16 | 257:12 268:16 | disappointed 197:4 | 273:6 297:22 | 295:22 | +| covering 201:5 | days 190:10 225:15 | disbarred 259:22 | 298:14,20 299:2 | embarrassing | +| crazy 282:22 | deal 275:22 304:1 | 259:24 260:6 | 299:23 300:6,12 | 225:10,11,23,25 | +| criminal 199:20 | December 172:13 | discuss 235:9 | 300:23 305:14 | 306:17 | +| 200:6 | 272:6,9,13,16 | 248:23 284:12 | dressed 143:15 | emotional 276:11 | +| CRITTON 140:19 | decide 269:22 | discussed 268:9 | drill 151:2 | 302:23,25 303:23 | +| 140:20 142:14,17 | 250:18,25 | 284:4 | drink 221:22 222:3 | 304:5 307:12 | +| 142:21 143:2,8 | Defendant 139:8 | discussion 247:5,7 | drinking 205:5 | empty 152:6 | +| 150:5,23 182:20 | 140:18 | 247:12 284:23 | 213:8,12,14 | ended 239:22 | +| 237:9,13 297:11 | Defendant's 141:14 | 285:3 | drive 161:5,14 | entered 200:24 | +| 307:16 | 141:15,16,17,18 | discussions 221:15 | driver 202:1 | Epstein 139:7 | +| CROSS 141:4 | 233:7,11 | 221:18 255:20 | driving 209:13 | 140:18,24 142:10 | +| cunt 169:12 296:18 | defending 276:2 | 262:1,5 264:25 | 210:11,18 | 143:14 146:6 | +| Cynthia 139:21 | definitely 228:11 | 282:12 | drop 201:24 | 151:8 152:4 | +| C.M.A 140:13 | degree 254:9 | distinct 150:14 | dropped 201:22,25 | 153:18 157:9 | +| D | demean 169:19,21 | DISTRICT 139:1,1 | 225:16 | 158:1,18,21,23 | +| D 140:8,19 141:2 | deny 184:20 | doctor 306:9 | dropping 167:2 | 163:25 164:10,17 | +| dad 186:16,19 | denying 185:3 | Doe 139:4,12 141:5 | drove 158:7 161:6 | 164:21 166:2,6,18 | +| 187:14 190:6,17 | 279:24 281:8 | 164:3,5,6 165:4 | 161:7 | 167:4 168:9,18 | +| 192:3 197:4 199:6 | Department 187:6 | 245:10,12,13,14 | drug 214:25 221:16 | 170:5,9,18 172:20 | +| 199:12,25 200:1,2 | depending 195:14 | 245:15,17,19 | drugs 215:3,7,8,11 | 173:7,10,18 | +| 200:8 303:9 | depict 226:25 | 247:23 248:12 | 215:13 216:22,25 | 174:17 178:3,7,14 | +| dad's 274:13 | depicting 224:18 | 249:6 262:2,7 | 218:11 219:4 | 178:18 179:5,13 | +| dangerous 170:14 | deposition 139:12 | 263:4,22,24 264:2 | 221:12 222:3 | 180:13,21,25 | +| date 145:15 147:4 | deposition 139:12 | 264:4,4,7,9,11 | drunk 210:11,16 | 181:3 182:6 | +| 148:1 149:8 151:6 | 145:3 148:21 | 267:6 282:1,3 | 210:23 213:17,22 | 183:10,16,23 | +| 153:15 195:2,6 | 179:9 215:6,23 | 284:14 295:24,25 | DUI 207:10 209:11 | 184:2,12,21 185:8 | +| 197:21 207:24 | 280:8 | doing 155:8 158:18 | dumped 296:23 | 185:13 202:25 | +| 208:1,2,4,19 | described 179:4,16 | 158:20 160:19 | | 203:3,5 204:6 | +| 213:6 231:19 | 193:18,22 296:12 | 168:16 170:4,9 | E 141:2,10 | 205:24 207:15 | +| 279:3 | describing 178:4 | 177:6 179:5,15 | earlier 214:21 | 220:22 221:1,4,7 | +| dated 193:12 | DESCRIPTION | 180:19 181:1 | 215:5 234:19 | 221:10,12,21,25 | +| 195:18 206:5 | 141:13 | 182:12 186:10 | 273:15 | 223:4,7,10,15,20 | +| 208:7,13,15,18,24 | determination | 187:23 200:20 | East 140:4 | 224:1,5 226:15 | +| dates 144:17 | 216:4 | 201:9 206:3,6 | Ecstasy 217:6,8,10 | 227:13,15,22,24 | +| 148:22,23 195:11 | development | 219:3 220:17 | 217:13,20 219:11 | 228:7,25 229:2,19 | +| 231:17 238:24 | 191:25 | 229:21 275:22 | 219:13,19 220:10 | 231:7,11,12 | +| dating 178:19 | deviated 161:14 | 276:13 277:3,4 | 220:14,17 | 232:17,23 235:6 | +| 194:10,12,20 | die 207:2,5 210:2,6 | door 200:25 201:3 | effect 275:23 278:5 | 235:11,25 236:3 | +| 197:19,23 198:7 | died 207:6,20 | 201:10 202:3 | 278:10 | 245:2 247:3,25 | +| | difference 188:11 | Dr 234:17,17,20 | | 249:7 261:1 | + +| 266:24 268:3,6,10 | 246:14 247:2,8,24 | 256:10 261:23 | first 143:13 144:1,2 | form 150:9,13 | +|---------------------------|--------------------|----------------------------|----------------------------|----------------------------| +| 268:16,20,23 | example 148:16 | 286:16,23 287:1,2 | 144:23,23 147:8 | 152:22 153:7 | +| 274:18,22 275:11 | 229:4 | 287:17 | 149:11 151:5,17 | 162:21 164:5 | +| 275:21 276:3 | excessive 210:19 | fear 203:23,24,25 | 151:22,23 152:15 | 165:5 166:12 | +| 277:13 278:6 | excuse 142:14 | 204:6,13,20 | 153:9,25 157:20 | 186:7,14 196:1 | +| 281:17 282:13,23 | 201:10 | fed 192:16 | 158:19,25 166:4 | 202:20 206:13,24 | +| 286:17 287:10,20 | exhaustive 244:16 | Federal 182:4 | 167:23 168:6 | 208:17 209:21 | +| 288:2 296:20,25 | Exhibit 141:13 | feed 142:22 | 171:23 172:3 | 213:24 215:18 | +| Epstein's 157:20 | 233:3,7,11 | feel 169:23 306:20 | 173:8,11,13 174:9 | 216:1 223:11 | +| 160:10 161:4,15 | expect 158:15 | 306:22,25 307:4,6 | 174:17 176:17 | 230:8,15,25 | +| 161:17,19 162:20 | 159:8 | 307:7,8,11 | 183:9,15,22 184:1 | 236:18 237:10 | +| 179:14 185:21 | experience 175:10 | fell 192:21 | 187:1,14 193:7,7 | 242:11 243:2,8,13 | +| 186:4,13 193:3,6 | 265:12 | fellow 178:10 193:1 | 193:9,12,14,15,22 | 243:24 245:7 | +| 193:8,9,16 222:11 | experienced 265:13 | 196:6 207:18 | 194:22,25 195:18 | 257:18 259:13,24 | +| 222:14,23 | 304:8 | felt 305:19 | 195:19 197:14 | 260:12 261:2 | +| ESQUIRE 140:3,8 | expert 237:4,8,19 | female 256:14 | 198:3,7,14 199:18 | 262:10 263:18 | +| 140:8,14,19,19 | explain 163:17 | fetus 302:4,9,21 | 199:24 201:22 | 267:24 269:24 | +| established 286:3 | extent 250:17 | fetuses 301:24 | 202:17 209:15 | 278:11,17 279:9 | +| estimate 213:23 | E-mail 140:11 | 302:24 304:11,25 | 210:16 212:2,2 | 280:12 281:12,21 | +| event 148:6,14 | E.W 140:2 | 306:11 | 213:11,13 217:10 | 282:15,24 284:6 | +| 152:14 158:1 | | fifth 144:7,13,24 | 217:13 219:20 | 285:7 286:19 | +| 211:21 227:9 | | 146:14 171:24 | 220:22 222:9 | 287:25 295:10,18 | +| 281:8 | | figure 235:1 | 233:12,12 235:4 | 295:25 296:7,15 | +| events 151:18,20 | | file 275:20 282:11 | 257:25 258:4,5,7 | 297:5 299:4,12 | +| 192:4,6 292:15 | | filed 186:11 230:13 | 258:14 259:3 | 301:11,25 303:12 | +| 293:5 297:16 | | 230:24 231:4,5 | 260:11 267:21 | 303:18,24 304:6 | +| eventually 263:16 | | 239:1 242:15 | 268:2,6,8,23 | 305:2,7,11 307:2 | +| everybody 153:3 | | 262:3 274:21 | 269:15 272:4 | 307:14 | +| 225:13 226:2 | | 275:10 282:5,8,13 | 275:24 277:8,17 | formal 197:1 | +| 275:21 278:6 | | 287:18 | 293:8 295:3,5 | forms 239:24 | +| 281:17 282:20 | | filing 260:25 | 296:12 306:3,6,8 | 243:23 244:3 | +| 287:8 | | fill 241:8,9 243:23 | 306:9 | Fort 140:5 | +| Evidence 140:25 | | 244:4 | fishing 160:2,6 | fought 200:11,13 | +| 182:5 | | finally 289:7 | five 153:3 181:11 | found 265:2,5,7 | +| EX 141:14,15,16,17 | | 293:13 | 218:17 255:24 | 266:1 267:17 | +| 141:18 | | find 161:10 239:8 | five-second 256:3 | four 144:1,3 151:10 | +| exact 147:4 151:6 | | 249:15 253:7 | flew 244:22 | 254:12,12 | +| 153:15 195:2,5 | | 257:11 260:8 | Florida 139:1,18 | 143:11,18,20 | +| 225:2 231:17,18 | | 265:8 | 139:22 140:5,10 | 144:10 145:14,17 | +| 238:24 247:16 | | fine 289:7 | 140:16,21 259:16 | 145:19,23 146:1,4 | +| exactly 144:7 | | finger 205:12 | 259:20 | 151:13 153:16 | +| 148:25 152:18 | | fingering 146:19,21 | flying 245:22 246:7 | 166:16 171:22,24 | +| 171:19 244:8 | | 146:22 | folks 187:19,22 | 189:11 261:25 | +| 266:19 279:3 | | finish 161:2 172:11 | food 190:9 | | +| 281:18 | | 228:22 254:5 | forensic 237:8 | | +| exam 245:20 | | 285:18 | forget 148:17 | | +| 248:13 | | firm 249:17,22 | 149:16 | FPR 139:21 | +| examination 142:3 | | 250:1 | forgotten 195:21 | frame 146:24 | + +| 262:23 280:3,5 | 305:4 | 174:12,16 182:19 | 263:2,8,10,15,16 | happened 148:5,9 | +|----------------------------|----------------------------|---------------------------|---------------------------|---------------------------| +| Francisco 238:11 | getting 146:6 | 186:16 188:23,25 | 265:9 267:22 | 148:15,25 166:23 | +| freak 224:2 | 156:22 172:23 | 189:9,20,23,25 | 272:15 275:25 | 203:22 204:9 | +| freaked 201:6 | 180:15 182:7 | 190:4,5 192:6,14 | 277:19 293:7,8,16 | 206:23 207:9,13 | +| free 214:16 | 186:24 201:20 | 196:23 198:13 | 303:16,22 304:4 | 211:5,7,8,10 | +| frequently 249:4 | 206:19 232:5 | 199:5 203:12,13 | good 150:6,17 | 225:16 247:7 | +| freshman 185:25 | 240:10 243:19 | 203:14,16,17,17 | 157:11,16 163:11 | 248:10 260:24 | +| 187:3,10 194:2,4 | 249:3 251:8 | 207:25 214:18,20 | 186:4,12 188:2 | 270:16 275:24 | +| 207:13,13,19,20 | 260:25 276:10 | 218:15,15 223:16 | 207:7 235:2 249:3 | 277:8,17 280:10 | +| 225:7 239:14,17 | 278:7 281:18 | 223:20,21 224:5 | 259:16,18,19,21 | 280:10 283:6 | +| 239:19 241:24 | 282:20 285:4 | 229:5 231:10 | 260:2 | 292:21 293:2,17 | +| 242:3 272:16,23 | 287:8 293:8 | 235:2,24 238:6 | gotten 157:9 | 294:2 299:9 | +| 275:4 277:9 | Gilbert 234:17 | 239:13,20,21 | 201:16 258:1 | happening 276:25 | +| Friday 214:9 | girl 160:15 194:25 | 241:7 243:16 | grab 205:21 | happens 149:17 | +| friend 159:2 162:19 | 206:3 266:18 | 245:22 246:3 | grabbed 205:14,15 | 293:24 | +| 170:10 203:15 | girlfriend 178:15 | 249:12 251:18 | graduated 179:23 | happy 163:18,21 | +| 207:5,7,7 209:19 | 197:25 | 257:11 258:6 | 220:15 | 196:7 200:10 | +| 209:23,25 210:2 | girls 160:17 163:14 | 266:10,13,17,25 | great 276:25 | 303:16 | +| 219:4 224:17 | 173:1 277:20 | 267:3,19 269:15 | groups 284:11 | hard 209:19 | +| 245:11 263:4,8 | give 142:12 149:19 | 269:23 270:8 | guess 147:22 | head 188:20 229:7 | +| 265:14 | 153:19 154:21 | 272:18 273:12,15 | 161:21 183:3 | heading 161:11 | +| friendly 154:1 | 157:1,21 160:16 | 273:23 277:5 | 186:17 201:21,23 | health 239:23 | +| 168:20 177:23 | 161:15 165:22 | 283:16 305:9 | 202:3 212:7 | 241:8,17 243:2,7 | +| friends 156:20,21 | 170:18 171:18 | goes 293:23 | guessing 161:19 | 243:13,14,23 | +| 159:3,5,9 170:13 | 184:21 185:9 | going 142:25 143:2 | gummed 247:21 | 244:3,11 268:14 | +| 177:24 206:18 | 189:17 190:9,14 | 143:5,9 145:7 | guy 142:19 204:23 | 306:9 | +| 207:2,4 214:19 | 190:14,17 197:12 | 150:25 151:12 | 229:7 276:25 | hear 174:15 208:11 | +| 218:9,10 236:23 | 216:11 229:7 | 153:18,25 159:20 | 306:6,8 | heard 201:4 237:10 | +| 245:1 249:4 262:2 | 237:13 243:2 | 160:1,6 161:16 | guys 157:11 161:11 | 237:18,25 259:17 | +| 264:24 265:3 | 251:11 252:5,7,13 | 162:3 163:3,15 | 248:21 254:19 | 267:8 | +| 266:13,14,21 | 253:9 255:17,25 | 164:14 171:18 | gynecologist | heartbeat 302:3 | +| 267:4 282:12 | 257:5 262:24 | 172:7 175:10,11 | 302:15 | held 218:20 307:20 | +| 284:4 | 266:9,12 290:20 | 177:20 178:3 | | help 150:21 160:8 | +| front 180:15 183:7 | 290:25 302:23 | 182:7 186:11,16 | H | 231:6 240:10 | +| 183:9,14,16 | given 181:25 | 186:23 187:20 | H 140:14 141:10 | 252:4,17 253:8 | +| 200:16,17 201:2,4 | 215:23 256:9 | 189:3,7 193:2,14 | Haley 160:16,19 | 255:15,25 261:8 | +| 205:22 243:8 | 293:23 | 193:20 198:1 | 172:4,7,15,20,24 | 305:9 | +| 287:20 295:1,4,5 | giving 160:16 | 201:7,23 202:24 | halls 160:21 | helped 240:22 | +| frustrated 171:8 | 179:12 183:23 | 203:1,2 212:6 | handed 233:10 | helpful 243:11 | +| fully 152:8 | 184:2 241:17 | 214:5,15 218:14 | Handwritten | Herman 250:3,18 | +| funny 229:3,18 | 254:14 262:20 | 222:10,13,22 | 141:17 | 251:1 257:13,14 | +| | 304:15,25 | 223:4,6,10,14 | hang 214:18 | 257:15,20 258:7 | +| G | go 143:11 151:24 | 224:1 227:14 | hanging 218:9 | 258:16 259:6,15 | +| game 182:16 | 152:1 153:10 | 228:15 235:3 | happen 162:3 | 261:12 | +| 189:11 270:18 | 157:19 160:1,23 | 239:20 240:9,9 | 167:19 170:21 | hey 270:17 | +| games 214:11 | 161:3,8,16,19 | 245:11,16,21 | 176:13 201:12 | high 163:2 179:17 | +| generally 194:25 | 164:7 165:4 | 246:24 249:7 | 207:11,12 256:1 | 179:22 180:21 | +| gentlemen 304:24 | 170:10 172:19 | 256:1 262:22 | 292:12 | 181:3,6,16,23 | + +| 182:2 190:10 | 213:5,5 | interviewed 261:20 | JR 140:19 | 297:22 298:14,20 | +|--------------------------|----------------------|--------------------|----------------------|------------------------| +| 191:16,17,18,19 | idea 260:25 | 261:22 277:21 | July 269:16 270:13 | 299:2,23 300:6,12 | +| 191:20,23 192:10 | identification | 286:16 | 273:15 275:3 | 300:23 306:13,15 | +| 192:24 202:16 | 233:8 | involved 159:23 | jump 159:15 | Kliman's 182:16 | +| 206:5 207:14,19 | identified 213:5 | 186:24 195:12 | jumped 201:24 | knew 185:1 193:8,9 | +| 211:6 212:9 | identify 147:24 | involving 224:14 | June 180:4 272:7,9 | 201:25 207:21,22 | +| 217:12 219:23,25 | 148:3 | | 272:13,17 273:6 | 245:1 247:22 | +| 220:1,15,16,18 | II 139:6 | | 273:22 274:1 | 263:20 267:21 | +| 224:7,9,14 225:6 | III 139:6 | | 275:3 277:15,16 | 275:21,22 278:6 | +| 225:16 239:16 | illegal 215:7 | | junior 145:18,18 | 281:17 282:20 | +| high-level 190:24 | inaccurate 215:23 | | 145:21,24 146:2,3 | 285:4 287:8,20 | +| 191:2 | incident 205:17 | | 146:5,9 147:8,12 | know 143:25 | +| hire 256:24 | 224:8 225:3,5 | 140:7 141:5 164:3 | 147:13,16 148:5 | 144:10,13 146:2,4 | +| History 141:18 | including 150:15 | 164:5,5 165:4 | 148:10,16 149:10 | 146:8 147:2,5,11 | +| hit 142:15 169:2 | 221:24 254:11,11 | 245:10,12,13,14 | 149:12,15 172:2 | 147:20,23 148:1 | +| Hold 197:12 285:15 | income 155:19,25 | 245:15,19 247:23 | 172:12,14 179:17 | 148:25 149:12,14 | +| home 190:4 | information 241:17 | 248:12 249:6 | 179:21 180:6,8,20 | 149:24 150:8,10 | +| homemade 226:11 | incorporated | 262:2,7 263:4,22 | 181:2,6,15,22 | 150:17,25 151:6 | +| 226:14,17,24,25 | 140:25 | 263:24 264:2,4,4 | 182:2 194:4 195:9 | 152:24 153:3,4,15 | +| honest 153:2 159:7 | indicate 182:14 | 264:7,9,11 267:6 | 200:4 202:21 | 153:15 155:12,16 | +| 162:6,12,15 300:5 | information 241:17 | 282:1,2 284:14 | 206:8,8 217:15 | 156:2,5,8 157:22 | +| honestly 171:13 | 252:8 253:8,9 | 295:24,25 | 239:15 | 157:23 158:20,24 | +| 298:9,14 | 255:25 | January 172:13,14 | jury 304:24 | 158:24 161:6,6,6 | +| honesty 171:16 | 234:16,20 | 194:11,14,18 | | 161:22,24 162:4,5 | +| honestly 139:21 | 234:24 235:4,9 | 272:17 273:5 | | 162:6,8,15 163:16 | +| HORACE 140:14 | 236:15 239:5 | 277:25,25 278:4,4 | | 163:16 164:14 | +| HOROWITZ | initially 251:7 | 281:16,16 | | 168:12 171:3,6,7 | +| 140:8,9 | Injunction 141:16 | jeans 152:13 | | 171:10,13,19 | +| hour 210:21 | injure 168:24 | Jeff 140:24 249:25 | | 179:8 182:3,17,20 | +| hours 150:24,24 | inquiry 182:15,16 | Jeffrey 139:7 | | 184:16 185:6 | +| house 151:24 | inserted 181:22 | 140:18,24 160:10 | kids 301:9,18 303:7 | 186:5,8 187:11,12 | +| 159:16 160:11,17 | instructed 246:16 | 160:14 161:19 | 303:9 305:10 | 187:13,15,18,22 | +| 178:25 179:7 | instructing 182:21 | 185:1 186:24 | killed 209:10,20 | 187:25 190:9 | +| 193:6 198:1,4,12 | intensive 244:16 | 193:2,5,8,9 204:6 | kind 168:18 174:10 | 191:15 193:11 | +| 200:24,25 201:6,9 | intentionally 223:9 | 245:2 247:3,25 | 175:3,24 196:25 | 196:3,3,4,12,13 | +| 201:14,17,18 | intentions 261:4,7 | 249:25 257:13,14 | 204:25 209:10,18 | 196:16,17 198:18 | +| 202:1,1,2,4 | intercourse 181:5,9 | 261:11,12 266:24 | 209:19 226:9 | 199:15,17,19,19 | +| 203:12,13 274:13 | 181:20 227:6 | 268:3,6,10,16 | 231:6 232:4 | 199:20 200:2,5,7 | +| 274:17 275:7,8 | Internet 224:14 | 274:18,21 275:11 | 267:22 268:12,15 | 200:22,25 201:21 | +| Huh 189:15 292:23 | 225:9 | 275:21 276:25 | 268:19 293:22 | 202:5,6 207:18,21 | +| hung 198:15 219:4 | interrogatories | 278:6 281:17 | kinds 177:24 | 209:1,2,4,5,6,7,8 | +| 265:4 | 141:15 233:2,4,12 | 282:13,22 286:17 | 300:17 | 210:7 211:3,4,4,7 | +| hurt 168:21 169:16 | 234:24 | 287:10,19 288:2 | Kliman 234:18 | 212:10,12,14,17 | +| 205:11 | Interrogatory | 296:20,25 | 237:1,6,6,15 | 213:19,20 214:4,7 | +| | 233:15 234:12,13 | Jennifer 210:4 | 238:7,10,11,21 | 215:9,22 216:20 | +| | interruption 145:2 | job 156:7 | 244:15 248:1,16 | 217:11,11,14,16 | +| | intervention 197:1 | joke 229:15,16 | 267:10,11,14 | 217:18 218:1,4,6 | +| | interview 244:16 | joking 229:19 | 268:8,17,24 | 218:7 219:17,24 | +| | 277:20 298:20 | Josefsberg 252:20 | 269:20,23 270:1 | | + +219:25 220:5,24 + 220:25 222:6,19 + 223:3,21 225:19 + 226:1 228:1,10 + 229:18 231:17 + 232:3,4,5,9 235:7 + 235:13 236:23 + 238:24 242:2,24 + 242:24 245:8 + 246:9,11,23,23,24 + 246:24 247:9,11 + 247:13,15,16,17 + 247:19,22 248:2,6 + 248:8,10,17,18 + 250:13,25 251:12 + 252:3,21,23 253:6 + 253:11,12,12,12 + 253:13,23,24,25 + 254:4,4,7,8,13,15 + 254:16,18 255:11 + 256:7 257:17,22 + 258:8,10,15,19,19 + 258:20,21,22 + 259:1,2,2,6,8,15 + 259:19 260:2,7 + 261:9,21,22,25 + 262:14,15,19 + 263:1,4,5,6,6,14 + 263:19,22,25 + 264:2,4,7,9,11,11 + 264:15,20,21,23 + 266:5,6,7 267:6 + 267:14 269:6,16 + 270:15 272:19 + 273:8,13 276:2,9 + 277:1 279:2 + 280:20 283:14 + 284:14,17,19,22 + 285:6,10,12,20 + 286:25 287:5,15 + 287:16 291:18 + 292:7,10,13 + 293:15,21,22 + 295:9,13,14,22 + 298:8,25 299:24 + 300:11,17,22 + 301:5,7,10,14,17 + 302:7,20,22 303:7 + +303:9,14 304:7 + 306:5,15,16 307:8 + 307:11 +**knowing** 243:17 +**knowledge** 161:16 + 225:21 248:15 +**known** 175:3 + 258:25 293:23 +**knows** 151:1 + 298:12 + +--- + +**L** + +--- + +**La** 198:18 201:18 +**ladies** 251:25 252:3 + 304:23 305:4 +**lady** 251:13,24 + 252:16 +**lady's** 251:11 +**Lake** 140:16 +**language** 279:23 +**Las** 140:4 +**Lauderdale** 140:5 +**Lauren** 157:1,5,19 + 157:25 158:5,11 + 159:1,1 160:10,21 + 161:3 162:19 + 170:10 173:3,4,4 + 212:17,19 213:3 + 218:11 219:21 + 220:7,9 274:7,10 + 274:14,17 275:2,5 + 275:14,25 276:12 + 276:22 277:6 + 278:19 279:2 + 280:21 281:15 + 284:17 +**law** 249:17,22 + 250:1 254:19 +**lawsuit** 186:11 + 230:14,24 231:4,5 + 239:1 242:15 + 245:6 247:3,24 + 261:1 262:3 266:7 + 274:21 275:10,20 + 282:6,9,11,14 + 287:18 +**lawsuits** 245:2 + 248:22 249:7 + +**lawyer** 238:1 + 239:11 244:19 + 246:8 249:12,15 + 250:1,19 251:6,15 + 251:16 252:19,22 + 253:4,13,14,14 + 257:11 258:17 + 259:15,19 260:2,9 + 260:25 264:15 + 265:9,20 266:4 + 267:3,12 286:17 + 287:2,2,12 300:9 + 300:14,17,17 +**lawyers** 186:25 + 237:24 238:3 + 242:18 249:10,21 + 262:8,9 263:15 + 266:9,13 287:16 +**lawyer's** 267:17 +**leading** 150:9 +**league** 191:7 + 271:12 +**leagues** 191:23 +**learned** 303:2 +**leave** 155:4 203:12 + 203:13 +**left** 177:1 199:3 + 202:3 289:6 + 297:12 +**legal** 150:7,14 + 206:25 250:18 + 251:1 254:19 +**lesbian** 225:18,21 +**letter** 257:23 258:1 +**letting** 203:16,17 +**let's** 144:25 148:14 + 149:22,23 150:13 + 174:12,16 180:9 + 182:19 210:14 + 233:3 234:12 + 238:20 244:15 + 251:18 253:16 + 258:6 270:10,10 + 283:15 +**level** 254:8,16 +**lie** 241:16 +**life** 158:2 190:22,25 + 200:17 202:18 + +204:1,7 210:16 + 218:2 222:10 + 236:15 275:18 + 278:16 292:15 + 296:12 297:16 + 298:11,12 299:10 + 301:18,21 +**lifetime** 206:23 +**liked** 168:18 177:14 + 200:9 +**limited** 221:25 +**Lisa** 234:17,20 + 235:18 236:16 +**list** 234:13 253:1 +**Listen** 164:10 + 185:2 208:21 + 240:24 241:1 + 247:1,14 283:17 +**Literally** 257:12 +**litigation** 237:20 +**little** 172:15 272:2 + 303:22 +**live** 274:5 +**lived** 197:7 198:19 + 275:2,6 +**lives** 201:18 238:11 +**living** 198:22,25 + 274:17 +**LLP** 140:20 +**long** 191:14 207:21 + 207:22 214:2 + 238:17 256:4 + 262:17 +**look** 234:12 242:14 + 252:6 295:23 +**looked** 238:13 + 295:24 +**looking** 184:18 + 238:8,16,17 + 239:10,14,16,18 + 242:7,9,21 251:6 +**lose** 209:25 +**lost** 183:20 195:1 +**lot** 163:14 172:7 + 189:5 204:15 + 206:1 219:5 + 231:24 241:8 + 249:21 251:8 + +275:25 282:12 +**loud** 234:4 +**love** 193:14,15,22 + 202:18 210:16 + 222:10 296:12 +**love's** 209:15 +**lunch** 168:9 +**LUTTIER** 140:19 + 140:20 141:6 + 142:8,19,23 + 143:10,24 144:18 + 144:19 145:4,6,9 + 145:13 147:1,6 + 149:3,9 151:3 + 152:23 153:12 + 155:23,24 157:18 + 160:7 162:1,23 + 165:10,11 166:14 + 176:6 177:17 + 182:10,18,23 + 183:4,6 186:9,18 + 188:6,10 194:7 + 195:10 196:5 + 202:23 206:15 + 207:3 208:10,20 + 209:24 214:1 + 215:21 216:2,6,17 + 218:23 219:6 + 220:6,13 222:8,17 + 223:13 228:6 + 230:2,9,16,19 + 231:2 232:14 + 233:1,9 234:5 + 236:21 237:5,11 + 237:14,22 240:7 + 240:16,23 241:6 + 241:21 242:13 + 243:6,9,12 244:1 + 244:7,14 245:9 + 248:5,9 250:15 + 251:4 253:22 + 254:21 257:19 + 258:23 259:14 + 260:1,14,23 261:5 + 262:12 263:9,21 + 264:22 268:1 + 270:5,24 271:6 + 276:7,20 278:13 + +| 278:20 279:12,17 | 307:16 | 299:5 303:25 | 254:5 257:18 | 164:7 182:20 | +|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|--------------------| +| 280:14,24 281:13 | marked 233:7,11 | meaning 164:6 | 258:18 259:13,23 | 183:5 193:20 | +| 281:23 282:16 | massage 142:12 | means 162:15,17 | 260:12,20 261:2 | 202:7 208:14 | +| 283:1,11,15,23 | 143:12 149:20 | 181:20 279:22 | 262:10,24 263:18 | 256:5 273:18 | +| 284:7 285:8,13,17 | 152:7 153:19 | 280:9,19 | 264:19 267:24 | 276:17,17 277:5 | +| 285:23 286:12,21 | 154:22 157:21 | medical 268:13,15 | 269:24 276:6,10 | 277:12 278:2 | +| 288:1,17 289:20 | 159:22 165:22 | 268:19,22 302:13 | 276:16,19 278:11 | minutes 218:18 | +| 290:19 291:8,23 | 166:1 167:19,25 | 306:9 | 278:17 279:9,15 | missed 214:12 | +| 292:9,20,23,25 | 170:19 173:9,9,14 | 237:6,15,16,17,23 | 280:12,23 281:12 | mom 186:16,19 | +| 293:1,4 294:17 | 176:11,25 183:23 | 260:19 | 281:21 282:15,24 | 190:6 199:10 | +| 295:12 296:3,10 | 184:2,3,4,12,13 | 257:4,8 256:10 | 283:7 284:6 285:7 | 303:7 | +| 296:16 297:7,14 | 184:22 185:10,15 | Mellafano 252:1 | 285:15,18 286:10 | moment 142:15 | +| 297:21 298:3,18 | 290:20 291:11 | member 191:3 | 286:19 287:25 | 293:11 | +| 299:7,13 300:15 | 304:15 305:1 | men 200:16,18 | 288:15,22,24 | moments 178:16,17 | +| 302:2 303:6,15,21 | 166:17 171:18 | mental 268:14 | 291:3,13 292:5,17 | Monday 214:11 | +| 305:3,8,13,23 | 173:7 179:5,12 | mentioned 229:10 | 293:3 294:15 | money 155:8 | +| 306:24 307:5,17 | 291:1 | MERMELSTEIN | 295:10,18 296:7 | 156:10,17,22 | +| 186:1 189:22 | matter 212:8 | MERMELSTEIN | 296:15 297:5,18 | 157:4,8,23 160:16 | +| 189:25 239:24 | 221:21 239:11 | 140:8,9 142:18 | 296:15 297:5,18 | 172:16,23,24 | +| 240:3,4,9,10,21 | 244:9 259:9 268:5 | 143:22 144:16 | 297:25 298:17 | 172:12,14,18,20 | +| 241:10,25 242:3 | 212:11 | 145:10 146:23 | 299:4,12 300:13 | 232:2 | +| 271:14,16,20 | 228:16 232:8 | 147:3 149:1,7,22 | 300:20 301:11,25 | month 265:4,6 | +| 272:4 273:23 | 233:10 | 150:3,20 152:22 | 303:4,12,18,24 | months 207:23 | +| 275:4 | 233:10 | 153:7,10 155:21 | 304:6,17,21 305:2 | 208:2,7,16,25 | +| L.M 140:2 | | 157:14 160:3 | 305:7,11,21 | moon 267:15 | +| M | | 157:14 160:3 | 306:23 307:2,14 | morning 189:12 | +| mail 258:15,21,25 | 161:12 | 161:21,23 162:21 | met 159:4 180:24 | 215:17 | +| 259:2 | 159:14 165:12 | 165:8 166:12 | 180:24,25,25 | mother 187:2 199:2 | +| making 155:20 | 169:21 173:24 | 176:2 177:15 | 193:12,15 197:11 | 199:3 | +| 156:1 163:20,21 | 174:1 178:15 | 182:3,25 186:7,14 | 197:14 207:15,19 | move 205:14 | +| 172:5,18 226:24 | 181:19 185:7 | 188:5,8 194:5 | 220:22 221:1,3,6 | 157:1,5,19 | +| 227:3 | 186:15 189:17 | 195:3 196:1 | 221:10 232:24,25 | 158:1,5,11 160:10 | +| male 183:8,15 | 190:12,15 203:18 | 202:20 206:13,24 | 251:16,21 253:14 | 160:21 161:3 | +| 256:14 | 204:25 206:10 | 208:9,17 209:21 | 257:12 261:11 | 162:20 170:10 | +| mail 157:6,12 | 209:1,2,22 217:9 | 213:24 215:18 | 268:24 | 173:3 213:3 | +| man 180:16 209:9 | 219:12,19 225:20 | 216:1,3,15 218:17 | Miami 140:10 | 218:12 220:7,9 | +| 232:1 267:15 | 219:12,19 225:20 | 220:3,11 222:5,15 | 252:22 | 274:14 275:2,14 | +| 295:4 296:5 | 225:24 226:1,2 | 223:11 228:5 | MICHAEL 140:3 | 281:16 | +| 304:15,25 | 228:1 234:6 240:9 | 230:1,8,15,18,25 | middle 147:12,15 | muscular 204:23 | +| Manche 198:18 | 240:11 241:5 | 232:12 233:6,23 | 147:16,17 148:5 | mute 145:7 | +| 201:18 | 242:25 251:9 | 234:2 236:18 | 172:12 248:22 | | +| manner 168:21,25 | 256:23 258:10 | 237:4,7,12,18 | 285:16 | | +| 169:17,19 | 259:17,21 260:4,5 | 240:6,12,17,24 | miles 210:21 | | +| March 148:12 | 262:14 265:10,11 | 241:18 242:11 | mind 200:1 286:15 | | +| mark 140:19 233:3 | 267:25 276:1 | 243:4,7,10,24 | mine 207:7 209:23 | 183:11,12 291:10 | +| | 281:7 283:5 | 244:5,13 245:7 | 247:17,18,18 | 295:1,3,5 | +| | 286:11 291:7 | 248:3,7 250:12,17 | 266:22 | name 205:9 210:5 | +| | 293:9,14 298:11 | 250:24 253:20 | minute 149:22,23 | | + +| 212:25 238:1
245:16 252:13,25
253:23,24 264:1
266:9 269:5,11
305:15 | 272:3 273:1
nude 290:20 291:1
304:16 305:1
number 142:6
172:5 185:9
235:22 251:10,12
251:19,20 252:5
252:15,15 253:3,4
253:12,18 255:17
255:18,23 256:9
256:11 257:5
258:13 261:4
numbers 185:21 | 297:25 298:17
299:4,12 300:20
301:11,25 303:4
303:12,18,24
304:6,17,21 305:2
305:7,11,21
306:23 307:2,14
objections 150:7
occasion 151:24
152:21 154:24
157:20 167:17,22
170:18,21 171:25
172:1 176:13,16
176:18 183:22,24
200:21 211:23
217:23 290:23
occasions 152:2
166:17 173:8
200:16
occur 151:17
183:24 184:3
occurred 142:10
167:5 171:1
184:10 203:10
248:13 297:16
October 139:14
147:18,18 148:10
172:12,13,13
271:10,23,24
277:13
office 252:19,24
253:17 254:1,8
okay 143:11 145:5
145:9 148:14
149:23,23 150:3,4
150:20 158:4
162:19,24 163:6
167:15 168:18
170:16 171:16
173:6,17 174:21 | 175:9,13,16
176:10,16,25
177:3 178:10,13
178:19 180:1,15
180:19 181:18,21
182:19 183:22
184:9 186:3 190:6
191:16,19 192:9
196:18 197:17
198:6,16 203:8
209:18,25 210:25
211:15,18 214:2
216:13,22 217:7
218:23 220:21
222:9 224:23
225:8 226:17
227:8,15,18 234:9
234:12 237:12
238:6,16 241:13
241:24 245:14
247:21 248:12
250:1,5,23 251:2
253:25 254:3
257:2,10 258:6
260:8,19,24
267:10,10 269:22
270:10,23 271:7
271:13,19,24
272:3 273:5,22
274:16 276:11,16
276:17 278:24
280:8,15,23,23
282:9 284:3
285:17,24 286:3
286:13 290:11
292:25 294:7,18
294:25 297:10
298:23 302:13,17
306:6 307:17
Olas 140:4
old 156:3,3 197:10
197:12,17 199:19
200:3,3 210:25
213:17 226:20
227:19,20
older 206:20
Olympics 191:25
once 164:2 166:21 | 173:13 189:23
208:1 217:25
250:25 277:11
open 200:25 201:3
201:10 202:3
opportunity 216:11
216:16
opposed 148:12
151:11 172:20
oral 181:25
order 182:11
200:23 202:10,14
202:17 203:9,10
orders 182:13
206:19
originally 253:18
Orlando 245:22
ought 266:24 267:3
outfit 152:18
outrageous 275:20
276:22 278:5
281:19 287:9 | +|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +| O | | P | | | +| needed 245:6 | oath 234:10 | page 141:13 233:14 | paid 155:6 156:22 | | +| neighborhood | objection 149:1 | panties 288:19 | pain 302:23,25 | | +| 198:19 | 150:14 152:22 | pair 190:17 | palm 139:18 | | +| never 163:25 | 153:7 155:21 | palm 139:18 | 140:21 163:2 | | +| 164:10,17 168:15 | 157:14 160:3 | panties 288:19 | 187:5,16 192:10 | | +| 168:21 178:21 | 162:21 166:12 | pants 144:5 146:14 | 173:23 184:1 | | +| 180:21 181:3 | 177:15 182:4 | panty's 290:1 | 183:23 184:1 | | +| 185:1 190:15 | 186:7,14 188:5,8 | papers 222:21 | 302:10 | | +| 203:5 204:6 208:8 | 195:3 196:1 | papers 222:21 | parents 188:1,2 | | +| 208:24 214:12 | 202:20 206:13,24 | panty's 290:1 | 192:21 196:7,25 | | +| 221:12 231:3 | 208:9,17 209:21 | pants 144:5 146:14 | 231:22,23 232:3,4 | | +| 237:18 239:21 | 213:24 215:18 | panties 288:19 | | | +| 240:8 267:8 268:8 | 216:1 220:3,11 | panty's 290:1 | | | +| 270:3 277:22 | 222:15 223:11 | papers 222:21 | | | +| 288:2 296:20,25 | 228:5 230:1,8,15 | papers 222:21 | | | +| new 147:19 160:17 | 230:25 236:18 | papers 222:21 | | | +| 172:25 | 241:18 242:11 | pants 144:5 146:14 | | | +| nice 168:10,20 | 243:4,24 244:5,13 | panty's 290:1 | | | +| 178:13,16,18 | 245:7 248:3 | panty's 290:1 | | | +| 192:13 205:4 | 253:20 257:18 | papers 222:21 | | | +| Niebling 234:17,21 | 258:18 259:13,24 | pants 144:5 146:14 | | | +| 235:18 236:16 | 260:12,20 261:2 | panty's 290:1 | | | +| 239:5 | 262:10,25 263:18 | papers 222:21 | | | +| night 178:23 179:1 | 267:24 269:24 | pants 144:5 146:14 | | | +| 179:6 214:11 | 278:11,17 279:9 | panty's 290:1 | | | +| ninth 144:8 | 280:12 281:12,21 | panty's 290:1 | | | +| nods 188:20 | 282:15,24 284:6 | papers 222:21 | | | +| normal 163:10,12 | 285:7 286:10,19 | papers 222:21 | | | +| 163:13,14 | 287:25 289:18 | pants 144:5 146:14 | | | +| North 140:15 | 290:17 291:3,13 | panty's 290:1 | | | +| Notary 139:22 | 292:5,17 294:15 | papers 222:21 | | | +| Note 141:17 | 295:10,18 296:7 | pants 144:5 146:14 | | | +| November 272:1,2 | 296:15 297:5,18 | panty's 290:1 | | | + +| 232:6,21 235:15
236:6,10,17 275:7
275:8
part 142:21 157:1
172:2 175:10
227:25 245:6
particular 267:3
parties 242:4
pay 201:21
paying 232:2
penis 181:21
people 186:12
225:17 232:19
236:9 241:16
254:9,10,12,12
255:6,14,17 263:3
281:15 283:4,4
284:11,19 287:6
301:6,10
perfectly 229:21
performances
226:10
performed 173:9
performing 173:7
period 178:3,24
179:4 214:3
217:19 220:18
271:20 274:2,6,19
278:21,23,25
279:2,13,16
permitted 272:20
person 172:25
173:4 183:8,15
226:1 228:24
229:3 232:1 253:3
253:10,11 254:13
256:7,9,11,13
257:3 265:15
296:11 298:12
personal 242:23
298:10
personalities 164:5
164:9 165:2
personality 165:4
persons 182:6
Petition 141:16
phone 140:5,11,16
140:22 143:13 | 185:21 255:22
257:5
phonetic 252:1,2
physically 168:21
168:24 169:16
179:15 205:11
pick 203:21
picked 167:25
picture 212:24
213:2 224:15,16
224:18,19 225:2,9
226:1 257:15
piece 167:2
pills 217:4
pinpoint 152:21
Plaintiff 139:5
140:2 250:9,14
Plaintiff's 237:4,7
play 271:7,11
played 156:7
190:24 191:20,25
271:19 273:1
player 190:19,21
playing 190:16
191:7,12,22 214:8
214:10,17 271:22
272:10
please 252:5 285:18
plenty 211:19,20
plus 231:25
point 146:7 152:24
153:5,18 158:3,17
171:17,19 174:7
174:21 175:13
192:20 210:8
249:3 250:20
257:10 268:5,7
275:18 287:10
291:9
police 187:6,16
200:20,22 201:2,3
201:14 221:25
portion 218:25
240:19 241:2
271:3 283:19
position 182:17
possible 186:6
possibly 164:14 | pot 217:2,3 220:7
221:3
predicate 196:2
pregnancies 300:7
300:24 301:3
pregnant 300:2
prescription 215:1
217:5
PRESENT 140:24
press 288:6 289:5
Preston 178:11,20
178:24 179:3,15
180:10,22,25
183:8,13,17,20
193:1,5,8,10,12
193:22 194:10
196:7,10 199:20
200:3,24 201:15
201:17 202:4,8
209:15 211:12,16
213:18,21 216:23
217:1 223:25
224:4 296:13,17
297:4
Preston's 209:14
pretty 150:6,17
182:14 198:10
203:18 204:11
249:2
Previous 223:24
prior 152:2
prison 196:11,14
196:16
private 243:16
privileged 250:20
probably 145:17
150:12 172:10,11
177:8 187:3
194:24 199:13,14
200:4 205:9,14
207:21 213:25
220:15 224:2
239:17 277:9
problem 180:16
240:2 242:5
279:23
problems 231:8,21
232:20 236:10 | 241:11 243:3,14
process 244:16
professional
306:10
progressively
143:17 144:3,6
145:1,16,21 293:9
prohibits 182:11
promising 177:22
pronounce 245:16
269:7
Proposal 141:14
Prose 139:22
provide 190:8
provided 195:17
psychiatric 239:25
242:5 268:14
psychiatrist 235:2
238:8,17,18 239:8
239:19 242:9,15
254:14 267:22
268:9,25 270:3,18
psychiatrists 231:9
231:11,18,20
232:15 234:14,19
psychological
231:6 239:25
241:10 242:4
245:20 247:2,8
248:13 268:14
305:9
psychologically
240:22
Psychological/So...
141:18
psychologist
245:11 246:15,19
246:22,25 247:24
267:22 268:9
Public 139:22
purposes 237:20
pursuant 182:4
push 164:21 165:6
176:23
put 145:7 150:5
155:1 156:10,12
201:11 204:6
230:23 262:8 | P-t-o 269:14
P.A 140:9,14
p.m 139:14

Q
question 145:11,22
147:1 148:3
150:21 161:2
162:9 163:4
164:10,13 173:12
174:6 181:1
182:24 183:1,2,25
185:2 204:17
208:11,21,23
213:4 214:20
215:9,12,14
218:24 223:22
228:16 232:8,11
232:13 233:12
237:19,21 240:12
240:15,25 241:1
247:1,10,21
261:13 262:21
264:19 265:16
270:20,22,24
275:1,1 276:8
280:25 281:5
283:14,16 298:5,7
298:10,14 299:2
299:25 300:1,2,5
304:4 307:9
questionnaires
241:8,9
questions 181:11
182:5 215:16

R
raised 188:7
rate 210:19
read 216:5 218:23
219:1 233:22
234:1,2,3,6
240:16,20 241:2
270:24 271:4
283:16,20
ready 149:24
real 204:23
realize 273:17 | +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +| 276:1,5,15 277:2 | remember 143:22 | 287:4,11,14 292:8 | 202:10,14,17 | 230:14,17,20 | +|---------------------|-------------------|--------------------|---------------------|--------------------| +| realized 201:8 | 143:23 144:1,7,9 | 292:13,21 293:2,6 | 203:9,10 206:19 | 233:10,19 234:7 | +| really 143:25 | 144:21,22 145:10 | 293:12,14,14,16 | restrictive 150:8 | 234:10 236:11 | +| 150:24 153:13 | 145:22 147:3,14 | 293:19 294:1,5,6 | restroom 218:15 | 238:23 239:2 | +| 168:20 171:10,13 | 148:22 149:8 | 294:8,11,13 300:2 | result 225:8 231:7 | 240:4 241:14,22 | +| 171:17 190:15 | 150:11,11 151:12 | 302:22 305:25 | 268:20 | 241:25 242:5,16 | +| 196:10 199:19 | 152:18 157:22 | 306:4 | retain 250:19 251:1 | 242:19 244:8,20 | +| 253:9 | 158:8,13,16,19 | remembers 194:25 | 256:21,23 | 244:24 245:17 | +| reason 185:8,12,20 | 159:13,19,21,24 | remove 174:4,7,17 | retained 237:19 | 246:22 249:7 | +| 236:9,15 270:12 | 160:25 161:9,13 | 175:14 | 251:6 | 250:22 251:3 | +| 273:14 | 161:18 173:5 | removed 151:5,17 | return 155:13,14 | 253:18 254:23 | +| recall 145:14 148:6 | 175:25 176:3 | 151:23 152:16 | 155:15 | 255:4,18 256:14 | +| 148:14 152:15,15 | 181:4,8,8 185:4,6 | 166:18 171:20 | review 298:23 | 257:3,25 261:23 | +| 161:2 166:23 | 187:3,7,7 193:15 | 173:18 174:9,18 | Rich 269:2,4,5,7 | 264:12,16 267:19 | +| 200:20 213:11 | 194:24 195:2,5 | 175:21 183:23 | RICHARD 140:14 | 267:23 270:14 | +| 224:7,13 | 196:20,24 198:13 | removing 149:19 | 140:14 | 271:17 272:10,21 | +| recess 218:20 | 198:17 201:13 | rented 185:23,23 | Rick 269:9,9,15,23 | 272:24 273:3,9 | +| 307:20 | 204:15,17 207:22 | repeat 183:25 | Ricky 269:9 | 274:24 275:19 | +| recollection 195:11 | 210:4 211:1,3,8 | 274:25 | ride 159:16 201:16 | 277:13 279:7 | +| 195:16 280:2,11 | 211:10,13,14 | report 155:13,19 | 201:17 | 280:4,17 281:14 | +| 281:8,10 | 212:3,4,6,7 | 155:25 | right 142:18 143:6 | 283:12 285:11 | +| record 142:6 150:6 | 213:13 218:8 | Reported 139:21 | 143:8 144:11,14 | 286:18,22 287:13 | +| 155:9 182:22 | 219:2,10,12,22 | reporter 142:16,25 | 145:6 147:9,18 | 288:7,13 289:6,11 | +| 218:19,22,25 | 220:23,24 221:2,8 | 143:4 219:1 | 148:22 152:25 | 289:17,21,23 | +| 240:19 241:2 | 221:23 224:20,24 | 240:20 241:3 | 153:13,17,17,19 | 290:3,5 294:19,23 | +| 271:3 280:18 | 225:1,2,3,5 | 271:4 283:20 | 154:8,14,14,16,21 | 297:10 298:15 | +| 281:3,6 283:19 | 226:19,21,22 | 292:22,24 | 155:1 156:6 | 306:7 | +| 307:18 | 227:9,10,12,20,23 | Reporting 139:22 | 157:19,24 159:10 | ring 264:1 | +| recorded 148:19 | 228:1,2,8 229:14 | represent 239:23 | 162:24 163:7,7,23 | road 210:18 | +| records 185:17 | 231:16,17,18 | 241:10 | 165:10,15 166:21 | ROBERT 140:19 | +| 302:13,15 | 232:18 235:7,12 | representation | 167:3,15,17 168:1 | ██████ 160:16 | +| RECROSS 141:4 | 235:17 236:1,4,8 | 240:8 | 168:3,13 170:13 | Roman 188:19 | +| REDIRECT 141:4 | 236:12,13,25 | represented 242:3 | 174:19 175:2,11 | 189:13 299:14 | +| refer 257:8 | 247:16 250:7 | 249:9 264:15 | 175:21 176:23 | 303:2 | +| referenced 234:18 | 251:20 252:11,14 | 265:19,22 266:3,6 | 177:1,7 178:8,20 | room 152:1,6 | +| referred 234:18 | 252:18 256:13,16 | 284:3 287:19 | 180:2,5,16 181:23 | 153:18 166:6 | +| referring 234:20 | 257:22,24 258:4,8 | representing | 184:6,11 185:18 | 202:2 254:10,10 | +| 238:4 | 258:12 259:5 | 249:22 | 187:8 188:11,25 | 254:12 255:7 | +| refresh 195:16 | 260:10,16 262:6 | requested 176:17 | 191:9 194:4,5,15 | 291:22 | +| refused 164:18 | 262:11,13 263:12 | 218:25 240:19 | 194:19,21 196:18 | ROSENFELDT | +| Related 139:9 | 263:14 275:17 | 241:2 271:3 | 197:15 198:7 | 140:3 | +| relations 180:10,12 | 278:22 279:1,3,7 | 283:19 | 199:1,3 201:19 | ROTHSTEIN | +| 181:12,19 | 279:18,19,20,21 | require 192:11 | 202:25 207:16 | 140:3 | +| relationship 197:5 | 279:24 280:1,5,9 | respected 164:24 | 210:16 214:15 | routine 174:10 | +| 199:23 204:14 | 280:19,22 281:7 | 295:17 | 216:4,20,21 | ██████ 163:2 192:9 | +| religion 188:14,17 | 282:4,7 283:5,5,7 | response 198:8 | 218:16 219:11 | RPR 139:21 | +| 189:17 | 283:8,9 284:13,21 | 289:12 290:4 | 220:7 223:1,3 | Rubello 305:14 | +| remain 143:15 | 285:2 286:24 | restraining 200:23 | 226:22 229:22,25 | Ruepto 269:2,4,7,9 | + +| 269:15,23 270:12 | 270:2,4,7 272:6 | 227:6 229:2,6,8 | situation 166:9 | South 139:17 | +|--------------------|---------------------|---------------------|--------------------|-----------------------| +| 272:13,18 273:6 | 274:3 | 229:16,17 | 172:16 195:14 | SOUTHERN 139:1 | +| 273:15 305:14 | season 214:14 | sexually 168:23 | 230:23 263:2 | speak 256:4 257:21 | +| run 159:14 | second 171:23 | 243:18 | 266:7 | 304:1 | +| R-u-e 269:13 | 172:4,7 197:13 | shelter 190:9 | six 206:20 239:6,9 | speaking 251:25 | +| R-u-e-p-t-o 269:12 | 228:7,11,12,19 | shift 291:20 | Sixteen 176:10 | 252:4 265:10 | +| S | 260:15 | shirt 143:16,19 | 198:6 | specific 144:16 | +| S 140:8 141:10 | see 144:25 172:19 | 144:4 146:7,10,12 | sixth 144:7 171:24 | 148:23 194:14 | +| San 238:11 | 178:3 202:24 | 146:14 147:8 | slow 258:6 | specifically 144:22 | +| Sarah 142:13 172:6 | 203:1,2 214:13 | 149:19 151:14 | slowly 277:6 | 151:4 152:20 | +| 172:19 184:17,20 | 223:4,7,10,15 | 154:11,17,19 | slut 296:17 | 154:10 219:3 | +| sat 284:4 | 227:13 231:10,20 | 155:1 167:1 | small 243:16,18 | speculate 161:23 | +| saw 231:9,17 | 232:19,20 233:1 | 171:23 291:17,19 | smoke 217:3 220:8 | 176:2 222:5 | +| 248:15 268:7,16 | 233:19 234:25 | 291:22 292:1 | smoked 217:2 | speculation 295:11 | +| 268:23 | 235:5,20,25 236:5 | shopping 157:7,11 | 221:3 | speed 210:19 | +| saying 171:8 194:3 | 238:6,20,20 | 157:17,23 | soccer 156:8 189:5 | spell 269:6,10 | +| 254:17 256:6 | 244:24 245:11 | short 164:5 165:5 | 189:6,11,19 | spelling 269:11 | +| 277:1 279:12,25 | 247:25 267:3,19 | 256:19 295:25 | 190:17,19,21,24 | spend 156:17 157:4 | +| 281:9 285:21,25 | 268:17,20 270:3,8 | shorts 152:13 171:2 | 191:2,12,20,22 | 178:25 | +| 289:3 291:7,20 | 270:14 272:13,18 | 171:3,6 173:19 | 192:3,6 214:8,10 | spending 178:23 | +| 295:20,21 | 273:6,12,15 | shoulders 205:21 | 214:14,17 270:2 | 179:1,6 | +| says 233:20,22 | 277:13 281:17 | show 227:24 | 270:13 271:7,19 | spent 156:11 | +| 234:23 235:18 | 297:22 | 228:25 233:1 | 272:4,10 273:1,9 | spit 169:4 296:22 | +| scare 203:19 | 226:2 268:25 | 243:10 | 273:19 | 296:22 | +| scared 204:25 | seek 231:6 268:22 | showed 228:2 | solicited 259:10 | split 156:19,21 | +| 206:10 | seen 268:18 | showing 239:22 | somebody 160:15 | 197:2 | +| schedule 185:9,15 | selected 263:16 | shows 300:4 | 201:4 243:17 | spoke 265:3 | +| 238:9 270:13 | 267:4 | sic 165:6 299:2 | 251:9,21 256:10 | spoken 287:17 | +| 272:20 273:9,19 | senior 194:4 202:22 | 305:14 | 261:8 263:22 | sports 190:16 | +| scheduled 267:18 | 206:8 212:3,5 | side 244:10,23 | 265:13 | stake 278:16 | +| school 160:22 | 227:25 239:15 | 295:24 | somebody's 159:16 | stalking 203:18 | +| 163:3 179:18,22 | September 271:9 | sign 260:17 | 251:10 301:21 | 204:10 | +| 180:1,21 181:3,6 | sequence 151:18,20 | signature 233:17 | soph 180:20 | standing 182:4 | +| 181:16,23 182:2 | session 239:5 | signed 302:11 | sophomore 144:21 | 201:3 259:16,20 | +| 190:10 191:16,17 | sessions 235:19 | significant 149:17 | 180:24 192:24 | 259:21 260:3 | +| 191:18,19,20,23 | set 148:8 | 149:19,20 158:1 | 193:25 194:4,13 | start 143:9 146:12 | +| 192:10,10,14,24 | Settlement 141:14 | 292:14,15 293:5 | 195:7,7,8 207:13 | 194:20 | +| 194:21 202:16 | seven 206:20 | simple 232:11 | 211:5 212:8 | started 145:4 146:6 | +| 206:5 207:14,19 | seventh 144:7 | simply 174:23 | 217:17 239:15 | 146:6 148:11,13 | +| 211:6 212:9 | 171:25 172:1 | single 152:12 | 272:15,22 274:24 | 153:9 163:24 | +| 214:12 217:12 | sex 179:11 181:25 | 163:25 167:1 | sorry 145:12 148:1 | 179:15 181:15 | +| 219:23,25 220:1 | 194:22 195:19 | 204:16 232:23 | 163:13 168:4 | 193:2 194:10,12 | +| 220:15,16,18 | 227:4 228:24 | 236:2 249:2,5 | 171:7 173:11,22 | 198:7 199:18 | +| 224:7,9,14 225:6 | 229:8 | 285:22 291:21 | 188:13 204:18 | 213:11,14 217:13 | +| 225:13,16 239:16 | sexual 147:14,22 | 293:10 294:9 | 215:14 232:9 | 259:3 271:13,16 | +| 241:7 242:21,22 | 148:4 180:9,12 | sit 265:14 | 240:25,25 256:2,7 | 272:23 | +| 243:16,18,19 | 181:5,9,12,19,20 | sitting 232:2 | 270:17 278:3 | starting 144:3 | +| | 182:5 226:10 | 250:10 | sought 268:12 | 273:5,22 277:20 | + +| 277:21 | 245:25 295:9,13 | 217:4 292:1 | 208:5,12 215:5 | think 142:9 143:19 | +|---------------------------|---------------------------|--------------------------|----------------------------|---------------------------| +| State 139:22 | 298:5,8,11 | 293:11,12 | 217:7,9 221:24 | 155:17,18 156:13 | +| 191:12 254:17,18 | supposedly 222:25 | talk 154:1 168:13 | 222:4,9,12,20 | 158:8 163:2,9,9 | +| stated 300:9 | sure 157:22 162:22 | 210:14 229:4 | 223:6,9,14,18,23 | 163:22 166:16 | +| statement 148:24 | 177:5 179:20 | 235:2 244:15 | 223:25 229:5,6 | 168:5 170:3,8,13 | +| 171:21 196:4 | 198:11 199:13 | 246:18 247:6 | 242:21,22 245:19 | 173:5 181:24 | +| 270:11 273:20 | 204:11 216:2,7 | 249:1,4 250:21,24 | 245:24 246:2,3 | 182:11,12,25 | +| 280:6 281:15,25 | 219:3,3 231:15 | 263:3 265:14 | 249:1,12,14 | 185:4,5 196:20,24 | +| 287:4,7,15 | 236:22 239:18 | 266:18 274:18 | 251:11 252:7,25 | 197:16 198:14 | +| statements 234:9 | 240:18 245:15,16 | 275:14 300:13 | 253:2 255:20 | 199:25 200:9,22 | +| 241:13 | 247:20 250:10 | 304:1 | 264:18 265:8,19 | 202:21 204:11 | +| STATES 139:1 | 256:5 262:6 263:5 | talkative 154:2 | 265:21,22 267:2 | 205:10,17 207:20 | +| stay 192:18 | 263:7,13 266:16 | talked 235:14 | 275:16,19 279:18 | 209:1,7 210:21 | +| stayed 179:6 275:8 | 270:11 274:20 | 245:10,13 246:20 | 282:2,8 284:10 | 214:5,16 215:10 | +| staying 197:9 | 275:15 276:19 | 247:1 256:14 | 295:7 297:24 | 216:10 218:13,14 | +| 201:18 274:7,10 | 278:14 280:15,17 | 263:5,6,7,11,12 | 298:1,6,11 299:8 | 219:18 220:4 | +| stick 150:8,13 | 281:1,6 282:10 | 264:14 265:17 | 299:23 300:17 | 221:8 224:19 | +| stop 211:12,15 | 291:6 292:11 | 287:5 | 301:14 302:12 | 229:11 232:25 | +| stopped 189:3 | 293:20,25 298:13 | talking 142:9 | 304:23 305:4,19 | 235:12 236:19 | +| stopping 183:2 | 299:1 302:6,8,11 | 143:18 152:14 | 305:24 306:1,13 | 243:17,19 252:11 | +| strange 200:18 | 304:8 | 165:15 167:20,21 | 306:22 307:6 | 263:11,11,19 | +| street 197:7,9 | suspended 260:5,7 | 167:22 179:16 | telling 211:9 | 274:7 275:12,13 | +| 201:22,23 | 260:9 | 199:24 200:15,23 | 238:13 243:20,22 | 275:24 276:3,13 | +| Stuart 140:8 151:1 | swore 234:7 | 212:14,16 214:22 | 244:2 278:24 | 277:3,4,10 299:5 | +| 238:5 | sworn 195:17,23 | 225:13 229:8,8 | 305:14 | 303:11,11,16 | +| stuff 150:9 190:5 | | 233:24 251:5 | ten 151:7,11 153:4 | thinking 274:23 | +| 259:18 277:1 | | 256:11,22 259:3 | tenth 144:8 | third 227:21 242:4 | +| 287:3 300:18 | T 140:19 141:10 | 266:19 277:15 | term 254:19 | third-to-the-last | +| subject 170:12 | table 152:7 | 286:24 | terms 195:23 | 233:14 | +| subpoenaed 185:18 | take 146:7,9,14,16 | Tammy 224:17,21 | testified 213:21 | thong 175:25 176:1 | +| subsequent 182:13 | 146:18 149:22,23 | tank 152:13 | testimony 195:18 | 176:5,11,14,19 | +| suddenly 269:22 | 149:23,24 151:14 | Tape 142:6 307:19 | 195:24 215:22 | 184:3 | +| sue 278:6 281:19 | 154:2,11,17 | Taught 188:11 | Thank 142:16,17 | thought 158:3 | +| 282:22 287:9 | 160:10 163:13 | tax 155:13,14,15 | 150:1 216:13,21 | 162:24 163:6,6,8 | +| suing 286:17 | 166:10 167:6,8,10 | taxes 156:2,9 | they'd 245:5 | 163:10,11,12 | +| Suite 139:17 140:4 | 167:12 174:22,23 | team 191:6,25 | 303:11 | 187:20 229:18 | +| 140:10,15,21 | 174:24 175:6,11 | teams 191:4,8 | thing 158:2 160:19 | 275:19 282:22 | +| summer 194:21 | 176:14,17,18 | Telephone 140:17 | 163:7,9 164:1,6 | 294:4 | +| 271:11,12 274:11 | 184:7 217:19,24 | 145:2 | 232:23 236:2 | three 150:24 208:2 | +| 274:19 275:3 | 218:15,17 228:13 | tell 150:10 151:4 | 248:18 265:11,13 | 218:1 220:20 | +| summers 271:15 | 228:20 240:17,25 | 153:14 156:19 | 293:10 | 234:14 235:19 | +| 273:23 | 276:6,11,17 288:4 | 158:9,11,14 159:1 | things 146:6 147:14 | 254:10,12 279:8 | +| Sunday 189:7 | 289:11,16 290:1 | 159:8,12,18,20,22 | 147:21,25 148:3 | 284:22 293:7,17 | +| 190:1 | 290:14,14 291:2 | 160:1,5 162:17,19 | 169:22 177:23 | 297:13 299:21,22 | +| supplement 216:19 | 291:16,18 293:3 | 163:17 167:12 | 180:19 181:2 | 300:7 301:2,9,18 | +| supported 231:25 | 294:9,18 | 175:5,18 186:3,12 | 206:23 222:4 | 302:19,24 303:7,9 | +| supposed 175:6 | taken 158:22 | 186:19,22 187:14 | 229:9,17 244:9 | 304:11,24 305:10 | +| 201:17 234:1 | 181:21 193:4 | 188:1 203:8,25 | 263:13 299:9 | 305:15 306:11,25 | + +| throw 205:19,22 | 274:6,8,16,22 | 168:7 171:2 | 161:10 218:13 | understood 233:6 | +|--------------------------|-----------------------------|----------------------------|------------------------------------|-----------------------------| +| throwing 206:7 | 276:6,11,14 | 175:11 200:18 | 235:1 254:20 | 270:11 293:25 | +| throws 204:25 | 278:21,22,25 | 288:12 | 269:25 | underwear 144:5 | +| Thursday 214:9 | 279:1,3,12,15 | topic 248:24 | Tuesday 139:14 | 146:15,17,18 | +| time 143:13,13,15 | 280:3,5,8 282:21 | topless 170:19 | 214:8 | 175:23,24 184:7 | +| 146:24 147:4 | 286:14 287:10 | 173:7,9,10,13,15 | turn 233:13 | 224:19,22,25,25 | +| 149:11,24,25 | 288:5 289:5,25 | 183:14 200:16 | twice 213:22 214:7 | 225:1 226:3 288:4 | +| 151:5,22 152:12 | 290:12 291:6,18 | tops 152:13 | 214:13 | 288:19 | +| 152:15,17,24 | 291:20,21 292:1 | total 291:1 | two 150:23 164:4,9 | unhealthy 204:14 | +| 155:17 157:11,12 | 292:22,24 293:3,8 | tournaments 191:12 | 165:2 208:2 218:1 | Unh-unh 144:15 | +| 157:16 158:17 | 293:10,15,16,18 | town 185:1,1 | 218:1 220:19 | uniform 192:11 | +| 159:1 162:25 | 294:2,9 295:3,5 | town 185:1,1 | 225:15 231:9,18 | unintelligent 169:23 | +| 163:3,8,20 165:14 | 295:15 297:11,11 | toy 229:5 | 231:20 232:19 | UNITED 139:1 | +| 165:15,25 166:4 | 307:16 | transcript 216:5 | two 155:23 164:4,9 | University 186:1 | +| 166:16,20,24,25 | 177:10 211:19,20 | transcript 216:5 | two-month 274:2 | 189:25 239:24 | +| 167:1,3,4,20 | 213:17 217:24 | traumatic 206:12 | 274:19 | 240:3,4,10,21 | +| 168:6 170:16,23 | 218:1 220:20 | traumatized 230:6 | U | 271:17 273:23 | +| 171:4,17,19,22,23 | 229:2 241:9 289:4 | traumatized 230:6 | Upset 197:4,6 | 275:4 | +| 171:23 172:3,4 | 292:2 293:7,17 | traumatizing 297:3 | Uh-huh 153:20 | upsetting 307:12 | +| 173:6,13,17 174:9 | 294:21 | travel 191:4,6,8,11 | 154:9 159:6 | upstairs 142:13 | +| 176:11 178:3,24 | today 275:19 | traveling 189:5,19 | 162:18 168:2 | use 148:4,15 | +| 179:3,4,12 183:9 | told 148:21 150:13 | treated 296:11 | 173:20 175:15 | U.S 251:22,23 | +| 183:15 184:1,11 | 162:2,4 168:15 | tricks 216:8 | 224:11 233:16 | v | +| 185:9 186:4,13 | 174:18 178:7 | tried 217:3,6,23 | 234:15 235:23 | vagina 181:22 | +| 187:1 189:3 | 184:18 187:1,19 | true 184:17 187:19 | 264:17 269:21 | vehicle 158:10 | +| 192:20,25 193:7,7 | 204:3 208:24 | truth 162:17,20 | 273:2 277:8 282:2 | velafano 252:1 | +| 195:1 198:3,10,11 | to 226:2 236:14,19 | truthful 243:2,15 | uncomfortable 295:16,22 | verbal 198:8 | +| 198:14 203:20,22 | top 215:7 221:21,25 | truthful 243:2,15 | underage 211:22 | verification 233:20 | +| 203:24 204:9,18 | 238:6 242:19 | truthfully 299:3 | understand 160:9 | viable 301:23 302:1 | +| 206:17 207:1 | 244:10,19 245:5 | truth 162:17,20 | 162:9,9,12,13,14 | vibrator 146:20,21 | +| 208:6,12,14 210:8 | 245:19,21 246:3 | truthful 243:2,15 | understanding 150:21 280:18 | vibrator 146:20,21 | +| 210:15 211:13 | today 275:19 | truthfully 299:3 | understands 150:24 | victims 250:13 | +| 212:1 213:13 | told 148:21 150:13 | truthful 243:2,15 | video 140:24 | 241:1 149:21 | +| 214:16 217:10,19 | top 151:5,17,23 | try 197:1 203:11,13 | understanding 150:21 280:18 | victims 250:13 | +| 219:20 220:14,18 | top 152:16,25 153:24 | tried 217:3,6,23 | understands 150:24 | video 140:24 | +| 222:22 226:3 | today 275:19 | truthfully 299:3 | understands 150:24 | video 140:24 | +| 229:23 230:10 | top 151:5,17,23 | truthful 243:2,15 | vibrator 146:20,21 | video 140:24 | +| 232:24 234:25 | top 152:16,25 153:24 | truthful 243:2,15 | vibrator 146:20,21 | victims 250:13 | +| 235:10 236:15 | top 152:16,25 153:24 | truthful 243:2,15 | video 140:24 | video 140:24 | +| 238:9 240:17 | top 151:5,17,23 | truthful 243:2,15 | video 140:24 | video 140:24 | +| 241:1 242:2 | top 151:5,17,23 | truthful 243:2,15 | video 140:24 | video 140:24 | +| 246:14 249:21 | top 152:16,25 153:24 | truthful 243:2,15 | video 140:24 | video 140:24 | +| 257:10 261:6,19 | top 151:5,17,23 | truthful 243:2,15 | video 140:24 | video 140:24 | +| 261:24 262:22 | top 151:5,17,23 | truthful 243:2,15 | video 140:24 | video 140:24 | +| 263:20 267:21 | top 151:5,17,23 | truthful 243:2,15 | video 140:24 | video 140:24 | +| 268:2,6,7,8,15,23 | top 151:5,17,23 | truthful 243:2,15 | video 140:24 | video 140:24 | +| 268:23 270:8,8 | top 151:5,17,23 | truthful 243:2,15 | video 140:24 | video 140:24 | + +| 228:20 229:11 | visits 144:2,3 | 233:13 234:2,3 | 152:19 171:3,6,11 | 140:21 | +|---------------------------|---------------------------|--------------------------|---------------------------|---------------------------| +| Videographer | 151:11,11 153:4,4 | 242:23 243:1,10 | 171:14 175:22,24 | we'll 183:4 193:18 | +| 140:24 142:5 | 177:3 | 243:14,17,19 | Wednesday 214:9 | we're 142:6 143:8 | +| 218:19,21 297:13 | Visual 140:25 | 247:20,21 256:5 | week 178:22,22,22 | 160:1 161:16 | +| 307:18 | VOLUME 139:6 | 270:11,15 277:5 | 213:22 214:8,13 | 179:16,20 193:20 | +| videos 226:5,7,8,9 | voluntarily 151:24 | 280:15,17,25 | 293:7 | 214:21 218:21 | +| 226:10 | 165:23 166:11 | 281:5 282:8 288:3 | weekends 214:10 | 245:15 251:5 | +| videotape 224:8,10 | 170:17 174:18 | 295:16 298:19 | went 142:12 151:13 | 256:5,11 277:15 | +| VIDEOTAPED | 200:17 278:7 | 299:1 300:11,16 | 151:21 157:6,6,17 | 279:22 280:15,16 | +| 139:12 | 281:19 282:21 | 300:22 301:4,6,10 | 157:23 158:4,20 | 281:1,6 299:1 | +| VIDEO-CONFE... | 285:5 287:9,21 | 301:14 302:7,12 | 161:1,7 165:14,22 | 307:18 | +| 139:12 | 290:9,22 291:10 | 302:12 304:23 | 165:25 167:1,3 | we've 265:17 | +| vile 169:6 | 292:3 294:10,14 | 306:15,16 307:11 | 168:13 170:23 | 302:13 | +| Villafana 252:2 | volunteer 173:23 | wanted 159:7 | 172:3,4 175:1 | whatsoever 168:25 | +| Villfana 252:10 | 173:24,25 174:1,2 | 160:14,23 161:3,8 | 191:19 192:9,9 | 169:17,20 | +| Vinyard 178:11,20 | 174:3,6 | 190:13 250:8 | 193:5,7,8,8,16 | WHEELER 140:3 | +| 178:24 179:3,11 | volunteered 192:3 | 253:7,8 261:8 | 196:16,17,22 | 143:3,6 | +| 180:10,20 181:2,6 | 294:18 | wants 252:17 | 198:3,12,14 | whoa 237:9,9,9 | +| 181:10,13,21 | vs 139:6 | 265:12 | 199:24 208:1,4,18 | 253:16,16,16 | +| 183:8,17,20 193:1 | | warm 192:18 | 214:2 227:13 | whore 169:10 | +| 193:5,10,22 | | warning 182:9 | 231:3,9,11,12,17 | 296:17 | +| 194:11,23 195:18 | wait 148:2 149:18 | wasn't 147:12 | 231:19,20 232:15 | Willits 140:14,14 | +| 197:2,5,7 202:8 | 164:13 171:24 | 149:12,14 150:21 | 232:16,16,16,18 | 142:24 145:3,5,5 | +| 202:18 203:9 | 173:11 182:20 | 151:14 165:19 | 232:19,20,22 | 145:7 | +| 204:10,12,19 | 183:25 185:11 | 166:9 181:1 | 234:24 235:5,8,10 | wishes 295:17 | +| 209:15 210:11,15 | 193:20 194:3,3 | 197:23 200:10 | 235:19 236:1,9,15 | witness 141:4 | +| 214:22,25 222:10 | 202:7 203:15 | 205:5 206:12 | 236:20 238:20 | 143:23 145:12 | +| 222:25 223:3 | 208:14 218:5 | 210:12 228:11,19 | 244:19 246:18,21 | 146:25 147:5 | +| 224:4 296:13,17 | 228:22 233:25 | 228:21 231:4 | 246:23,24 247:2,7 | 150:1,19 153:8 | +| 296:22 297:4 | 237:11 256:5 | 239:10,14,16 | 247:25 248:19 | 157:16 160:5 | +| Vinyard's 179:8 | 272:22 273:18 | 240:13 242:20 | 254:24 266:8,24 | 161:22,24 162:22 | +| 206:3 | 274:23,23 275:12 | 248:18 255:9,9 | 268:6 277:10,12 | 166:13 176:4 | +| virginity 183:20 | 277:5,12 278:2 | 260:24 262:7,18 | 281:17 287:12 | 186:8,15 188:9,20 | +| 195:1 | 285:15 286:23 | 263:17 267:12 | 288:9 293:10 | 194:6 195:5 196:3 | +| visit 142:10,11 | waited 181:8 | 268:3 286:6 | 297:22 301:9 | 202:21 207:1 | +| 143:11,18,20 | waiting 203:12 | 287:23 295:3,6 | weren't 163:19 | 208:18 209:22 | +| 144:7,7,8,8,8,8,10 | walked 201:2,5,7 | 297:4 298:1 | 173:10 178:17 | 213:25 215:20 | +| 144:13,23,23,24 | 268:7,16,24 | way 155:8 163:24 | 179:13 180:10 | 219:2 220:4 222:7 | +| 145:14,17,19,23 | walking 160:21 | 178:2 186:20 | 188:2 189:7 | 222:16 223:12 | +| 146:1,4,11,13,14 | wall 205:19 206:7 | 189:18 198:22 | 190:19 196:7 | 231:1 233:25 | +| 146:16,18,19,21 | want 159:15 164:20 | 200:15 210:1 | 200:18 211:2,19 | 236:19 240:21 | +| 151:9,13,16,22 | 165:12,18 167:12 | 211:25 231:5 | 223:16,19 229:24 | 241:4,20 242:12 | +| 153:16 170:23 | 168:15 174:14 | 236:24 240:18 | 230:3,6,10 232:5 | 244:6,12 245:8 | +| 172:8 187:5 190:4 | 175:18 179:20 | 244:22 246:7 | 236:6 242:7,9 | 248:8 250:13,23 | +| 199:5 227:21 | 185:4 187:22 | 274:16 280:2 | 251:6 272:10 | 251:3 254:7 | +| 228:7,12,12,19 | 190:12 203:16,17 | wear 175:25 176:4 | 292:4 295:7 296:4 | 258:19 260:13,22 | +| 235:4 306:3,4 | 214:20,24 216:7 | 176:5 192:11,14 | 302:8 | 261:3 262:11 | +| visited 187:16 | 216:11 229:13 | wearing 152:11,16 | West 139:18 | 263:1,19 264:21 | + +| 267:25 269:25 | yeah 143:16,21,23 | 225:5,12 226:8,23 | 305:6,17,18,22 | \$200 160:16 163:21 | +|--------------------|-------------------|-------------------|--------------------|---------------------| +| 271:1,5 276:12,18 | 146:25 147:5,10 | 227:5,7,10 228:23 | 306:12,19,21 | 289:9,15,23 | +| 278:12,19 279:14 | 148:7 149:5 | 229:20,23,23 | 307:10 | | +| 280:13 281:22 | 151:16,25 152:3 | 230:5,7,22,23,24 | year 144:21 145:18 | 0 | +| 282:25 283:9,18 | 152:10 153:1 | 231:9,13 232:6,22 | 145:21,25 146:2,3 | 02 194:2,11,14,16 | +| 283:21 285:20 | 154:5,13,23 155:3 | 233:18 234:8,11 | 146:5,9 147:8,12 | 03 180:9 194:2 | +| 286:11,20 291:5 | 155:5,7,15,16 | 234:22 237:3,17 | 147:13,16,19 | 04 194:3 | +| 291:15 292:7,19 | 156:7,16 157:10 | 239:3 241:12,15 | 148:5,10,12,16 | 05 179:23 261:15 | +| 295:19 296:9 | 157:13 159:11 | 242:1,17 243:16 | 149:10,13,15 | 261:16,17,19,24 | +| 297:20 298:1 | 160:13,24 162:8 | 244:6,18,21,25 | 172:2,12,14 | 271:13,16,20,24 | +| 299:5 302:1 | 162:11,14,16 | 245:4,24 248:11 | 179:17,21,21 | 272:1,3,24 273:1 | +| 303:14,20,25 | 163:3,21 164:2 | 248:14,23 249:8,8 | 180:2,6,8,20,25 | 277:13,18 | +| 304:7 305:12,22 | 165:20,24 166:13 | 249:11,18 250:2 | 181:2,6,15,23 | 06 261:17,18,19,24 | +| 307:4 | 166:22 167:9,11 | 250:10 251:8,8 | 182:2 185:25 | 272:9,14,17,17,17 | +| witnesses 150:18 | 167:14,16 168:11 | 254:2,24 255:3,19 | 187:3,10 192:24 | 273:5,6,22 274:1 | +| wonder 172:18 | 168:14,23 169:22 | 256:12,20 257:4 | 193:24,25 194:1,1 | 274:2,19,23,25 | +| word 162:12 | 170:2,20,25 171:5 | 259:17 260:18,22 | 194:1,2,13 195:7 | 275:3 277:15,16 | +| 181:18 | 172:14 175:3,12 | 261:13,24 263:25 | 195:8,9 200:4 | 277:22,25 278:4 | +| words 148:4 275:22 | 175:17 176:12,20 | 264:13,21 265:17 | 201:12,13 202:16 | 281:16 | +| 278:8 | 177:2,11,13,19 | 265:18 266:17 | 202:22 206:8,9 | 08 274:24 | +| work 184:18 | 178:1,9 179:19 | 267:13,20 268:4 | 207:13,14,19,20 | 08-CV-80119-M... | +| worse 143:17 144:3 | 180:3,6,6,11,18 | 268:21,21 270:21 | 211:5,10,14 212:3 | 139:2 | +| 144:6 145:1,16,21 | 180:23 181:14,17 | 271:1,5 272:8,11 | 212:5,8 217:12,15 | 08-08380 139:9 | +| 206:1 293:9 | 181:24,24 182:1 | 272:25 273:4,10 | 217:17 219:23 | 08-80232 139:9 | +| Worth 140:16 | 183:12,21 184:14 | 273:21 274:4,15 | 225:6 238:21 | 08-80381 139:9 | +| worthy 169:24 | 184:24 185:19 | 275:5,5,8,9,12,12 | 239:15,17,19 | 08-80811 139:10 | +| wouldn't 164:3,12 | 186:2,21 187:21 | 275:12,15 276:12 | 241:24 261:10,13 | 08-80893 139:10 | +| 170:9,12 190:14 | 188:4,9,13,24 | 277:10,14 278:19 | 269:17 272:4,15 | 08-80993 139:10 | +| 214:12 228:12 | 189:11,14,16 | 280:5,13,13 281:2 | 272:16,22,23 | 08-80994 139:9 | +| 241:16 243:15 | 190:7,11,20 191:1 | 281:4,11,22,24 | 274:24 275:4 | 09 269:18 270:13 | +| 252:7 300:8 301:3 | 192:15,17 194:6 | 282:18,25 283:5,9 | 277:9 279:4 | 273:15 277:25 | +| 301:10,14 304:10 | 194:17 195:14,14 | 283:12,18 284:2,9 | | 278:4 281:16 | +| 304:20 | 195:22 197:16,16 | 284:10,16,18,24 | 187:24 191:15 | 09-80469 139:10 | +| wow 226:4 | 199:4 200:9 202:9 | 286:5,5,9,11 | 193:13 206:20 | 09-80591 139:10 | +| wrong 163:23 | 202:12 203:4,20 | 287:22,24 288:11 | 211:17,22 227:19 | 09-80656 139:10 | +| 164:4,8 165:1 | 203:24 204:5,11 | 288:14,21 289:8 | 239:6,9 265:4,11 | 09-80802 139:10 | +| 168:6 170:4,8 | 204:11,21 205:3,5 | 289:14,22,24 | Yep 144:18 163:1 | 09-81092 139:10 | +| 188:12 213:6 | 205:7,17,20,23 | 290:2,6,8,10,13 | 199:9 250:16 | | +| 276:14 277:3,4 | 206:6,8,9,11,17 | 290:16,21,24 | yesterday 179:9 | 1 | +| 282:11 | 207:1,5,5,17 | 291:5,7 292:16 | 213:21 | 1 140:7 141:14 | +| | 208:13 209:2,11 | 293:6 294:12,14 | young 209:9 | 1:59 142:7 | +| | 209:11,22,23 | 294:24 295:2,19 | younger 189:8 | 10 177:3 | +| | 210:2,13 213:10 | 296:14,19,24 | 231:9 | 10th 140:15 | +| X 141:2,10 | 213:16,25 214:16 | 297:9,20 298:16 | you-all 274:18 | 11 234:13,13 | +| Xanax 219:7,8,9,18 | 214:23 215:2 | 298:22 299:5,6,11 | 282:21 284:4 | 11:11 139:14 | +| 221:9 | 216:9 217:6 218:9 | 299:15,18,19 | 285:3,4 | 115 139:17 | +| | 219:17 221:5 | 300:16 302:14,25 | | 142 141:6 | +| | yard 205:22 | 303:3 304:12 | \$ | 15 156:3 177:3,10 | + +| 197:18,21,23 | 305.931.2200 | | | | +|---------------------------|---------------------------|--|--|--| +| 15-year-old 197:19 | 140:11 | | | | +| 16 156:3,6 176:7,8 | 33160 140:10 | | | | +| 176:9 198:5,6 | 33301 140:5 | | | | +| 213:15 227:18 | 33401 139:18 | | | | +| 16-year-old 206:3 | 140:21 | | | | +| 1650 140:4 | 33461 140:16 | | | | +| 17 176:7 211:2 | 348 141:16 | | | | +| 18 212:21,22 | 384 141:17 | | | | +| 18205 140:9 | 394 141:18 | | | | +|
| | | | | +| 2 | 4 | | | | +| 2 139:4 141:15 | 4 139:12 141:5,17 | | | | +| 142:6 233:3,7,11 | 164:3,5,6 165:5 | | | | +| 235:22 267:6 | 295:25,25 | | | | +| 307:19 | 4:10 307:19 | | | | +| 2'03 194:5,6,6 | 400 140:21 | | | | +| 2:58 218:19 | 401 140:4 | | | | +| 200 155:6 156:25 | 404 140:15 | | | | +| 163:18 168:1 | 412 182:5 | | | | +| 177:1,10 |
| | | | +| 2002 194:3 | 5 | | | | +| 2003 179:25 180:4 | 5 141:18 264:4,5,7 | | | | +| 194:3,8 234:25 | 264:9 | | | | +| 235:19 239:4 | 561.582.7600 | | | | +| 2003-2004 179:24 | 140:16 | | | | +| 180:1,6 | 561.842.2820 | | | | +| 2004 179:24 180:5 | 140:22 | | | | +| 195:12 |
| | | | +| 2008 282:9,11 | 6 | | | | +| 2009 139:14 238:21 | 6 263:23,24 | | | | +| 238:22 239:6 | 6:05 139:14 | | | | +| 21 211:22 213:8 | 65 210:21 | | | | +| 2218 140:10 |
| | | | +| 2290 140:15 | 7 | | | | +| 23 197:13,14 198:6 | 7 234:12 245:10,12 | | | | +| 23-year-old 197:20 | 245:13,14,15,19 | | | | +| 232 141:15 | 247:23 248:12 | | | | +| 24/7 248:23 | 249:6 262:2,7 | | | | +| 25 233:15 | 263:4 282:1,3 | | | | +| 250 139:17 | 284:14 | | | | +| 27 139:14 | 72 141:14 | | | | +|
| | | | | +| 3 | 8 | | | | +| 3 141:16 264:11 | 8 140:7 264:2 | | | | +| 3,000 177:6,10 |
| | | | +| 3:10 218:22 | 9 | | | | +| 303 140:20 | 9:00 189:12 | | | | +| | 954.522.3456 140:5 | | | | \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748304/EFTA02748304.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748304/EFTA02748304.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d6c050666733a66e066929ad7a9dbbba3e16605f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748304/EFTA02748304.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1974 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748304.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 60, + "chars": 343441, + "elapsed_seconds": 95.58, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 67.23 + ], + [ + 429.2277526855469, + 67.23 + ], + [ + 429.2277526855469, + 96.21209716796875 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 96.21209716796875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Related cases:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 106.66000366210938, + 275.40000000000003 + ], + [ + 225.06475830078125, + 275.40000000000003 + ], + [ + 225.06475830078125, + 290.08209228515625 + ], + [ + 106.66000366210938, + 290.08209228515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VIDEO-CONFERENCED AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF \nJANE DOE NO. 4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 121.17600000000002, + 355.59000000000003 + ], + [ + 493.04754638671875, + 355.59000000000003 + ], + [ + 493.04754638671875, + 384.5820617675781 + ], + [ + 121.17600000000002, + 384.5820617675781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 223 + ], + [ + "Line", + 109 + ], + [ + "Text", + 54 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 324 + ], + [ + "Line", + 158 + ], + [ + "Text", + 47 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 301 + ], + [ + "Line", + 144 + ], + [ + "Text", + 82 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 322 + ], + [ + "Line", + 161 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 268 + ], + [ + "Line", + 131 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 317 + ], + [ + "Line", + 157 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 76 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 10 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 276 + ], + [ + "Line", + 135 + ], + [ + "Text", + 54 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 189 + ], + [ + "Line", + 71 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 319 + ], + [ + "Line", + 159 + ], + [ + "Text", + 66 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 274 + ], + [ + "Line", + 135 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 259 + ], + [ + "Line", + 129 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 289 + ], + [ + "Line", + 134 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 318 + ], + [ + "Line", + 158 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 265 + ], + [ + "Line", + 133 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 267 + ], + [ + "Line", + 133 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 327 + ], + [ + "Line", + 157 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 280 + ], + [ + "Line", + 132 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 9 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 270 + ], + [ + "Line", + 133 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 219 + ], + [ + "Line", + 109 + ], + [ + "Text", + 28 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 223 + ], + [ + "Line", + 109 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 221 + ], + [ + "Line", + 108 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 252 + ], + [ + "Line", + 126 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 8 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 315 + ], + [ + "Line", + 158 + ], + [ + "Text", + 50 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 267 + ], + [ + "Line", + 133 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 281 + ], + [ + "Line", + 109 + ], + [ + "Text", + 78 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 8 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 318 + ], + [ + "Line", + 159 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 277 + ], + [ + "Line", + 133 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 224 + ], + [ + "Line", + 110 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 219 + ], + [ + "Line", + 109 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 8 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 38, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 8 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 39, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 40, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 41, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 324 + ], + [ + "Line", + 159 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 42, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 370 + ], + [ + "Line", + 185 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 43, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 44, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 45, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 46, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 47, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 48, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 49, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 50, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 51, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 52, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 53, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 54, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 55, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 321 + ], + [ + "Line", + 160 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 56, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 57, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 58, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 59, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 126 + ], + [ + "Line", + 60 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748304" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748364/EFTA02748364.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748364/EFTA02748364.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a069eb4afbed14ba9737e134a5d844545df0912f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748364/EFTA02748364.md @@ -0,0 +1,1548 @@ +2 + +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAMaill + +JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, -vs-JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +VOLUME III OF III + +9Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 1008-80993, 08-80811, 09-80591, 09-80656, 08-80381, 08-80893, 09-80802, 08-80994, 09-80469, 09-81092 + +11 + +## 12VIDEO-CONFERENCED AND JANE VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF DOE NO. 4 + +13 14 + +15 16 17 + +Tuesday, October 27, 2009 + +11:11 - 6:05 p.m. + +250Australian Avenue South Suite 115 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Reported By: + +Cynthia , RPR, FPR 22Notary Public, State of Florida Prose Court Reporting + +23 24 25 + +Page 309 Page 311 IAPPEARANCES: 1 \* \* \* \* \* 1On behalf of the Marti, LM. and E.W.: 401East ISS Olas Boatyard 3 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: It is the beginning of Suite 1650 5Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 4 Tape Number 3. We're back on the record at Miami, Florida 33160 10 Q. Which would have been -- what year was Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein: 18 A. It might have been my sophomore or junior JR., ESQUIRE 303Banyan Boulevard 20 Q. Sophomore or junior year in high school? Incorporated 25 Q. Presidential Women's Clinic? + +3MICHAEL 1 WHEELER, ESQUIRE 2 CONTINUED DIRECT EXAMINATION 4 ROTHSTEIN, ROSENFELDT, ADLER Phone: 959.522.3456 5 4:19. 6 7On behalf of 6 BY MR. LUTHER: Jane Does 1 through 8: 8ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQUIRE 7 Q. All right. When did you have your first 9 STUART S. MERMELSTEIN, ESQUIRE MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. 8 abortion? 113205Biscayne Boulevard 9 A. Sixteen. 10Suite 2218 11Phone: 305.931.2200 11 that? (-mat Ahorowitralsccobuseattorney.oam 1212 A. I think it was, I don't remember, but I 13 On behalf a C.MA.: 14RIO4ARD HORACE WILMS, 13 think it was when I was 16. ESQUIRE RICHARD H. WILLITS, PA. 14 Q. Let's see, you were a senior -- IS 229010th Avenue North Sure 40415 A. A sophomore. 16rake Worth, Florida 33461 16 Q. -- you were 17 when you were asenior, 17 Phone: 561.582.7600 (Via Telephone) 17 right? 19 18 Cn ROBERT Otte of D. the CRITION, MARK T. LUTI1ER, ESQUIRE 19 year. I don't remember. 20 BURMAN, CRUTCH, LUTHER A COLEMAN. UP 21Suite 400 21 A. Yeah. West Palm Beach, noriaa 33401 22Phone: 561.842.2820 22 Q. And where did you have that abortion? 2323 A. I don't remember what the place was 24 ALSO PRESENT: Jeffrey Epstein, via video conference 24called, The Pres -- Pres -- 25 V JeLrle:cei tdeogra + +Page 310 Page 312 118DEFENDANTS EX. 5 Psychological/Social History 394 18 Q. And would you agree with me, that age 16 19 19 to have to go have an abortion was traumatic to you? 20 20 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 21 21 THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +\_ \_ \_ 1 A. Yeah, I think so. INDEX 2 Q. Over on Congress Avenue? 3 \_ 3 A. Yeah. WITNESS: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS 4 Q. And did you register under your real name? JANE DOE NO. 4 5 A. Yeah. CONTINUED 6 Q. Did anybody go with you? BY MR. LUTTIER 311 7 A. Yeah. 8 8 Q. Who? 9 9 A. Preston. EXHIBITS 10 Q. And who was the daddy of that baby? 11\_ \_ \_ 11 A. Preston. 12 Q. And who paid for it? EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE 13 A. Preston. DEFENDANTS DC 1 Proposal for Settlement 72 14 Q. Do you know what it cost? DEFENDANTS EX. 2 Answers to Interrogatories 232 15 A. \$300, I think. DEFENDANTS EX. 3 Petition for Injunction 348 16 Q. Was that the first time you were pregnant? 17 DEFENDANTS EX. 4 Handwritten Note 384 17 A. Yeah. 22 BY MR. LUTHER: 23 Q. When was your second abortion? 24 24 A. In my senior year in high school. 25 25 Q. That was when you were 17? + +Page 313 A. Yes. Q. And where did you get that one? A. Same place. Q. You registered under your real name? A. Yes. Q. Did anybody go with you? A. Yes. Q. Who? A. Preston. Q. Who was the daddy? A. Preston. Q. Who paid for it? A. Preston. Q. Now, I, I assume at some point in your life somebody explained to you what birth control was. A. Yeah. Q. After you aborted one child, didn't you use birth control to keep from getting pregnant? A. Yeah, I did. I was using birth control. Q. And so, obviously, if you had the baby, your first baby if you were pregnant at 16 -- A. I wasn't using birth control then. MR. MERMELSTEIN: How about letting him finish. Let him finish. + + Page 315 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did you have -- do you know a guy named Mister -- a guy by the name of Morales, last name Morales? A. Yes. Q. Did you have oral sex with him? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Don't answer the question. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. When you -- how old were you when you -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: Same objection. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. How old were you when you knew Mr. Morales? A. I was in middle, or middle school. Q. What, middle school? A. Yeah, I know him. Q. Middle school? A. Yeah. Q. Do you know a John Vilanto (phonetic)? A. Yeah. They were best friends. MR. MERMELSTEIN: The question is, do you know him. THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +Page 314 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. If you were pregnant at 16, would you, would you agree with me that you had begun your sexual relations with, at least with Preston, when you were 15 -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked -- BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. -- at least? A. No. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Asked and answered. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did you get pregnant the first time you had sex? A. No. Q. Had you been having sex with Preston for a while before you got pregnant? A. I don't remember. I know we were dating for a while. I don't remember -- I don't -- I don't know. Q. Prior to having sexual intercourse with Preston, did you have other types of sex with him? Specifically did you have oral sex with Preston? MR. MERMELSTEIN: I'm going to object. This applies to our Rule 412 objection. Don't answer the question. + +Page 316 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q And do you know what the relationship between John Vilanto and Mr. Morales was? A. Friends. Q. Okay. They pals or pal around together? A. Friends. Q. You knew them both? A. Yeah. Q. Did you have oral sex with both of them? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Don't -- again, Rule 412 objection. Do not answer that question. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. And, and did you associate with either of these individuals once you got to high school? A. Yeah. Q. Did you have oral sex with Mr. Morales and/or Mr. Vilanto before you went to see Mr. Epstein? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, Rule 412. Do not answer that question. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Do you know a fellow by the name of Joey? A. That's Joe Morales. Q. Okay. Did you have sexual intercourse with either Mr. Morales or Mr. Vilanto at any time? + +Page 317 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, Rule 412. Do not answer that question. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did you have sexual intercourse with Mr. Morales or Mr. Vilanto before you went to see Jeffrey Epstein? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, Rule 412. Do not answer the question. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. All right. When did you have your third abortion? A. Sophomore or junior year in college. Q. That would be, let's see, you started in '05; so you started in August '05 through June of '06 would have been your freshman year, right? A. (No verbal response.) Q. Right? A. Sophomore, Sophomore year. Q. So -- A. Sophomore year in college. Q. -- it would have been sometime between August of '06 -- A. And '07. Q. -- and June of '07? A. Yeah. + +Page 319 A. Yeah. Q. Were you using birth control? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. When was the -- let's see, that was the last abortion? A. Yeah. Q. Now, in addition to the abortions, were you getting prescriptions for what they call the Morning After pill? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. And how many times did you get prescriptions for that? A. Probably like four times. Q. And on each of those occasions, were you sucix,sful in avoiding pregnancies? A. Yeah. Q. Do you recall when you got the four prescriptions for -- A. No. Q. -- the Morning After? A. No. Q. And who did you get the scripts from? A. My doctor. Q. SS A. + + Q. A. Okay. When was it in that period? I don't remember. Q. Well, was it '06 or '07? A. I don't -- '06. I don't remember. I don't remember. Q. Okay. And where did you have that abortion? A. Same place. Q. And anybody go with you? A. Lauren. Page 318 I Q. Who was the dad of that child? A. Preston. Q. So, at least through '06 you were still having sex with Preston? A. Yeah. Q. Who paid for it? A. Preston. Q. Did you tell him that he was the dad? A. Yeah. Q. What did he say? A. He knew. Q. And this would have been the third time you were pregnant by the same guy? + +Page 320 Q. The same doctor each time? A. Yeah. Q. Do You -- A. Maybe once, I don't even, no -- yeah. Q. Well, did you? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Be certain of your answer. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Yeah, take your time. A. Yeah, I think so. Yeah. I think maybe Planned -- a total of maybe --irsdSe.r-nthood may be one before I went to a. I don't remember. Q. Okay. A. I am just saying just in case because I know they were offering it, but I don't think -- I don't know. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Make sure you're sure of your answer before you give it. If you need to pause for a minute after the question is asked, do so, but make, make sure you're -- you know, before you blurt out your answer, make, make sure you, you recall correctly. Okay? BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. So, it's possible that you might have + +(561 Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by Cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia 832-7500 PROSE COURT REPORTING AGENCY, INC. (601-051.976-2934) (601-051.976-2934) + +Page 321 gotten some from Planned Parenthood, and you know you got some from A. Yeah. Q. Those are the only two that you can recall? A. Yeah. Q. And where did you fill the scripts, or did you fill them right there? A. There. What you mean, there? Q. Well, you've got to get the actual -- A. No, Walgreen's. Q. Okay. Is that where you fill all your scripts? A. Yeah. Q. And which Walgreen's? A. The one closest to me. Q. Where is that? A. Once I'm leaving the store, or I don't know, anywhere in Palm. Q. Well, which, which -- is it one in Palm or one near your Univa? A. No, I went to one off of Palm Beach Boulevard. Q. Is that the only Walgreen's you've filled scripts at? + +Page 323 A. Yeah. Q. And the doctor told you you had herpes, didn't she? A. Yeah, but I got -- yeah. Q. And she said you were at the end of an outbreak, didn't she? A. No. Well, yeah, she told me that, but I have never had anything after that, and I've gotten tested after that. Q. Well, she gave you Acyclovir at that time, didn't she? A. No. She gave me ascript of Valtrex. Q. And she -- and you, and do you still take the Valtrex? A. No. Q. And she told you, did she not, when she diagnosed you, that the disease can become dormant. A. Yeah. Q. And she told you -- A. What do you mean dormant? Dormant Is like with --Q. Dormant. You don't have any lesions. You don't have any signs of the disease. A. No. I mean, I don't remember what she told me, but I remember reading about stuff like + +Page 322 A. No. There's other Walgreen's. I just don't remember where. I know that I've gone to other Walgreen's though. Q. Which scripts have you had in the last five -- well, what scripts have you had since 2003 other than for the Morning After pill? A. Valtrex. Q. Valtrex? A. Yeah. Q. V-a-1-t-r-a-x [sic]? A. Yeah. Q. And what's that for? A. Genital herpes. Q. That's -- do you have herpes? A. No. Q. Have you ever had herpes? A. I was scripted for it. I was given medicine for it, but I've never had the outbreaks. I've never gotten any, like, medicine. Yeah. What do you want -- what are you asking me? Q. The question was have you ever had herpes? A. No. Q. As a matter of fact, you went to the doctor because you had lesions on your vagina, didn't you? + +Page 324 information about it. Q. So, when you were asked if you had a sexually transmitted disease, the answer is, yes, you have, right? A. Yeah, but like -- Q. Right? A. Yeah. Q. But you haven't been telling the doctors that you had asexually transmitted disease, have you? A. I haven't had an outbreak and I haven't been, like, I know -- okay. Yeah. Q. You've been lying to your doctors, right? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, form. Objection, argumentative. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. You've been lying to your doctors? A. Yeah. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, argumentative again. BY MR. LW-TIER: Q. Is that correct? A. Yeah. Q. Who did you get the herpes from? A. The one person that I was sleeping with. + +Page 325 + +Q. Well, who is that? A. Preston, Q. Are you sure you got it from him? A. Yeah. Q. When -- did you confront him about that? A. When? I don't remember. I am sure. Q. Do you remember when you got the herpes? A. Yeah. Q. Still in high school at the time? A. Yeah. Q. Before you got pregnant the first time? A. I don't remember. Q. Do you remember if it was -- you don't remember if it was before your first pregnancy? A. No. Yeah, it was. Q. Okay. And tell me about how you, how you found out that you had herpes. A. I was on, I was in Pennsylvania with my parents, and I told my dad about it. And when I came home they -- my dad made me an appointment with my gynecologist. Q. Did you tell your dad? Did you tell him that you had some symptoms; is that what you told him? A. No, I told my dad about what was, what, + +Page 327 + +A. I don't remember. + +Q. Well, that was before you got pregnant + +right? + +A. Yeah. Could have been like when I was 16. + +Q. Okay. So 15 or 16? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, + +argumentative. BY MR. LUTHER: + +Q. One of those two? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Did you tell your dad you had been + +sexually active and you got asore on your vagina? + +A. Yeah. + +Q. Or your vulva, actually, would be + +technically correct. + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Correct? A. Yeah. + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. And was that embarrassing to you? A. Yeah. Well, I didn't know what it was so, + +yeah. + +Page 326 + +like, what was happening, like about like the sores down there. So my dad was concerned, and when we came back to the States, he made agynecologist appointment for me, him and my mom. Q. Did you, did you tell your dad before your morn? A. I told them at the same time. I was on a vacation with them. Q. Okay. And so you told -- what did you tell them? A. Nothing. I told them, like, I didn't know what was going on with my body. I've never experienced anything like that, so I told them, look, I said that there's a sore down there. It doesn't look right, and I don't know what It's from. And my dad made an appointment for me. Q. Did you tell him you had been having sex with people? A. Yeah, I told my dad about Preston. Q. Was that the first time you told him that you had been having sex? A. No, my dad -- no. Q. How old were you at that time? A. No, I don't remember. Q. Fifteen? + +Page 328 Q. I mean, it must have been embarrassing for a 16-year-old girl to say to her dad, gee, I've got 3 sores on my vagina, dad. A. Yeah. Q. Did it take a lot of courage for you to tell him that? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: Yeah, me and my dad are close. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did you -- did he -- had you told him prior to that or before that occasion that you had been sexually active with men? A. I told him, yeah. Q. When did you first tell your dad you were being sexually active with men? A. Well, I think my dad kind of -- they -- I think my dad asked me, and I told him the truth. Q. This was when? A. I don't remember. Q. At 15, at 14, at 12? A. I don't remember. Q. When did you first become sexually active? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to the form. Its been asked and answered so many times + +Electronically signed by Cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia (601-051-976-2934) (601-051-976-2934) (Pages 325 to 328) + +Page 329 already. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Just an age is all I'm looking for. A. I don't remember. I've already told you. 5 Q. How long were you sexually active before you told your dad you were sexually active? A. I don't remember because I don't remember when my dad told me. Q. You were telling your dad, remember? A. Yeah, when I asked -- when I told my dad, sorry. Q. Did you -- you've had acouple of boyfriends since then, right? A. Yeah. Q. Did you tell these other boyfriends that 16 you had herpes? A. Yeah. Well, yeah. Q. Are you sure? A. Yeah. Q. Tell your current boyfriend you had herpes? A. Yes. Q. Have you had oral sex with your current boyfriend? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, Rule 412. Do + +Page 331 Q. All simultaneously? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Just listen to the -- THE WITNESS: Wait. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Listen to the question 5 that he -- make sure you listen -- before you answer, make sure you listen to the question 7 and answer it. Can you read back -- THE WITNESS: Sorry. MR. MERMELSTEIN: -- the prior question? (The requested portion of the record was 12 read by the reporter.) MR. MERMELSTEIN: Well --THE WITNESS: What is -- BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. if you need to correct something, go ahead. There's no tricks here. A. Yeah, can you ask the question one more time? MR. MERMELSTEIN: We'll go to the first 21 question there and answer. I just wanted to 22 make sure you think about it before you blurt it out. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Is the answer, correct? If you want to + +Page 330 not answer that question. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did you tell the baseball player you're dating down at that you had herpes? A. Yeah. Q. How about Jeffrey Epstein; did you tell him you had herpes? A. No. Q. Didn't bother to let him know, did you? A. Never asked. Q. Well, did all these other boys that you were out with --A. I didn't have sex with him. Q. Did all these other boys that you were out with ask if you had herpes? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. THE WITNESS: No, I've never, like gone out with -- no, I mean -- BY MR. LUTTIER: Q So, if I, if I understand your testimony correct, during the period of time that you were 22 going to Jeffrey Epstein and giving him massages, at 23 the same time you were having sex with Preston and you had three abortions? A. Yes. + +Page 332 change it, go ahead and change it if it's wrong. I'm not trying to trick you or anything. You had three, while you were going to see Jeffrey Epstein and giving his -- giving him these massages, during that same period of time you had three abortions with Preston as the father, right? A. No, not a third one. Q. Two of them were, were while you were -- A. Yeah. Q. Okay. Now -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: That's why you have to be careful when you're answering the question. Make sure you understand the question, and, and, and think about it before you answer it. Okay? THE WITNESS: Uh-huh. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Now, your parents know about this lawsuit, right? A. Yeah. Q. Did you tell your parents about the lawsuit before you filed it? A. Yes. Q. Does your sister know about the lawsuit? A. Yes. + +Page 333 .1 Q. Did you tell her before you filed it? A. No. Q. And why did you tell your sister? A. Why didn't I? Q. Why did you? A. Because it was something I didn't -- well, 7 something that I thought she should know. Q. Now, you mentioned that in Palm Beach there's a close group of all you girls that were going to see Mr. Epstein; is that right? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Correct? You said all of you were, that you went to school together and you were all friends? A. I wasn't friends with everyone that went there, no. Q. Okay. But, but all the girls that went to 19 Epstein that you know, they all know you filed this lawsuit, right? A. I don't know. Q. People down at- University know you filed the lawsuit, right? A. No. Q. Well, didn't they come to the of + + A. My mom and my dad, my sister, my current boyfriend. Q. Current boyfriend is who? A. Ricky. Q. Okay. A. My ex-boyfriend Alan, and who else -- and friends, Jane Doe No. 7, Lauren. That's it. Q. Who is your closet friend? A. Jane Doe No. 7. Q. Okay. So she knows? A. Yeah. Q. Who's your second-closest friend? A. My boyfriend. Q. He knows? A. Yeah. Q. Who's your third-closest friend? A. I don't hang out -- I just have a click. That's it. That's all. I already told you the people that I -- Q. Is there any -- doesn't everybody that's dose to you or you're dose to know that you filed the lawsuit? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: I don't know. + +Page 335 + +Page 334 + +Police to interview you? A. Yeah, they went -- well, then, yeah, the III knows. Q. Okay. And, then weren't you babysitting or taking care of the child or something during the summer? A. I did, I worked at Pine Tree Camp. She was one of my students. Q. So, so he knew because the cops came and -- A. I don't know. Q. -- had to tell him why they were there to see you, right? A. I don't know what the cops told him, so I don't know what information he knew. Q. Well, you eventually told him what was going on, didn't you? A. No. Q. You never told him? A. No. Q. You never told him you were in the lawsuit? A. Never. I don't -- no. Q. Who else now have you told that you're in the lawsuit? + +Page 336 + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Well, who is it that you consider to be very close to you that doesn't know you filed the lawsuit? A. My -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. Go ahead. THE WITNESS: My boyfriend and my family and my best friend, which is Jane Doe No. 7. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. I thought you said they all knew? A. What do you mean? Q. My question was who -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: Be careful. THE WITNESS: Sorry. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Who that you're close to does not know that you filed this lawsuit, if anybody? A. I don't know. Q. I mean, the word spread out in Palm Beach among the people that live there that these lawsuits were filed and that you were involved, correct? A. Yeah. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia is832-7500 PROSE COURT REPORTING AGENCY, INC. (561) 832-7506 (601-051-976-2934) (601-051.976-2934) (601-051.976-2934) + +Page 337 BY MR. LUTTIER: 2Q. If you went back to your old neighborhood, 3 pretty much everybody knows that you are in this lawsuit, correct? A. Yeah. + +6Q. Pretty much everybody knows that these 7 other people, Jane Doe No. 7 and these other girls 8 are Involved in this lawsuit, correct? 9 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. I0 THE WITNESS: I don't, I don't know if 11 they know, but if you are the -- I don't know 12 if they know. I don't know who knows, but I'm 13 sure if you go back in Palm, they know 14 who used to hang out. And what was it, 15 whenever the cop made statements, it's like 16 Palm Beach soccer player, well, hmm, like 17 who, who in Palm that hung out that was 18 acquaintances with Haley played soccer? Well, it's kind of commonsense. 20So I don't know who knows and who doesn't know, but if I went back to my hometown, people 22 aren't idiots. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. They would -- A. They would put two and two, two and two + +Page 339 1 A. Last weekend. Or, no, not last weekend. 2 I don't know, like two weeks ago, maybe. 3 Q. You were arrested two weeks ago? A. Uh-huh. Q. Who were you arrested by? A. Jupiter cops. Q. What for? A. Domestic violence. Q. Well, if you were arrested, you must have been the person that committed the act of domestic 11 violence. + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Well, you're assuming she was guilty. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Someone thought you were -- A. I can't --MR. MERMELSTEIN: Its apresumption of innocence, right? THE WITNESS: And I can't talk about it either. All right? BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Who told you you can't talk about it? It's a matter of public record. A. I don't know. I don't know. Q. So, who told you couldn't talk about it? + +Page 338 together. Q. They know that you filed alawsuit and you're involved in this? A. I don't know if they're -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. Calls for speculation. Go ahead. THE WITNESS: I don't know. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. So, who, who that you care about doesn't 10 know, if anybody, that you're in this lawsuit? 11 A. People that I care about know that I am. 12 Q. Okay. Now, you mentioned this current boyfriend, Ricky. A. Yes. Q. What's his last name? A. Bullard. Q. Bullard. And you are saying he's -- do 18 you know whether or not he's adrug dealer? A. No. Q. You don't know or you're saying he's not? A. He's not. Q. Okay. And you're sure of that? A. Yeah. Q. By the way, when's the last time you were arrested? + +Page 340 1 A. Nobody did. I'm just assuming that myself. Q. So, you were arrested --MR. MERMELSTEIN: He can ask you questions S about it. THE WITNESS: ■ **BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Tell me, this event happened on what day of the week? A. On aFriday. Q. Friday night? A. Yeah. Q. And, and can we assume that because the 14 Jupiter police were summoned, it happened someplace 1S in Jupiter? A. Yeah. Q. And what time did it happen? A. Probably like around 1:00. Q. A.m.? A. Yeah. Q. And where did it happen? A. Ricky's house. Q. Which is where? A. In Jupiter. Q. Okay. I mean, do you have an address?** + +**(561 Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia 832-7500 PROSE COURT REPORTING AGENCY, INC. (561) 832-7506 (601.051-976.2934) (601-051-976-2934) (601-051.976-2934)** + +Page 341 A. Off Center Street. Q. Do you know anything more than Center Street? It's abig street. A. 249. Q. 249 Center Street. Do you live with him? A. No. Q. Were you staying there? A. Yes. Q. Do you stay there with any degree of regularity? A. What do you mean, regularity? Q. On any kind of regular basis, like, Igo 13 up there for the weekends, or -- A. Yeah. Q. Is that where go on the weekends when you're not down at= University? A. Why would I be at. University? Q. Well, I don't know if you were still 19 there. Are you still a student there? A. No, I graduated. Q. Okay. When did you graduate? A. '09. Q. June of '09? A. May, yeah. Q. May? What did you get a degree in? + +Page 343 Q. Sgre? A. a. Q. Been accepted? A. Yes. Q. When will you start? A. lam not going to go to. -- or I was -- maybe spring. Q. Spring. By the way, you went to. University undergrad on ascholarship? A. Yeah. Q. Who paid for this? Who sponsored you? Who ga u the scholarship? A. University. Q. S ire you going to be scholarshipped for your A. No. I signed up for my graduate assistance program. Q ou plan to teach while you're taking your A. No, it's where you work for the sys for the School Board and they pay for your... a il And do you have plans after you get your A. Yeah, to work. Q. Okay. And you've got some plan -- + +Page 342 A. Business. Q. BA? A. What do you mean, BA? Q. Business Administration. A. Yeah. Q. And -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: A Bachelor of Arts? BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Wait. Okay. Business Admin, all right. We'll settle for that. Bachelor's Degree in Business Administration, right? A. Uh-huh. Q. How did you do? Did you do well? A. Yeah. Q. Do you know what your GPA was? A. Like a 3.3 or 3.2. Q. And do you have plans to go further with your education? A. Yes. Q. What are als? A. Tosany Q. IMO? A. Yes. Q. Have you applied? A. Yes. + +Page 344 A. Yeah. Q. -- kind of ageneral plan of what you want to do in life? A. Yeah, yeah, I want to be a school teacher. Q. Okay. What level? A. Kindergarten or kindergarten or second grade. Q. Okay. Let's go back to this domestic violence thing. Had you and your boyfriend been someplace on this Friday night when this happened? A. At home. Q. And were you anyplace earlier that night? A. Yeah. Q. Where were you? A. Noche. Q. Where? A. Noche. Q. Noche's, is that the name of a bar or something? A. Yeah. Q. Where? A. Gardens, downtown Gardens. Q. Had you been anyplace else? A. Yeah, we went to Ra Bar for dinner. Q. Ra Bar, where is that? + +Page 345 + +A. In Gardens. Q. Anyplace else? A. No. Q. Had you been out looking for anybody that night? A. No. Q. Had you been down south to West Palm Beach that night? A. No. Q. Had you been down south to West Palm Beach at any time in the week prior to that? A. No. Q. Okay. So tell me what happened. What was the -- what, what occurred at this Incident that occurs at 1:00 at Ricky's house? A. It was just, it was over something silly. I don't -- it was -- just got in an argument about being out in the beginning of the night. Q. What do you mean? A. Nothing. It was just, like, like, real -- being in a relationship you fight over stupid things, and whenever he was -- I don't know, whenever you have alcohol in your system, you know, it brings up, like, silly little fights become big dramatic. + +Page 347 know. You said, I'm sorry, I just realized I should ask you, somebody told you not to talk about what happened? THE WITNESS: Yeah. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Was it alawyer? THE WITNESS: Yeah. MR. MERMELSTEIN: All right. I -- I'm going to plead the Fifth then. If she's already gotten advice by a lawyer, I'm going to plead the Fifth. MR. LUTTIER: Well, she has to -- she's going to -- THE WITNESS: I'm going to have to plead the Fifth. I have alawyer and I'm not supposed to talk about it. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Are you charged with criminal -- a crime? A. Yeah, well, the State's picking up -- he's not charging -- press, he's not press -- charging these things, but I'm sure this automatically in domestic violence in the State of Florida, they automatically -- it doesn't get dropped, the State automatically picks it up. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Is it civil or is it criminal? + +Page 346 Q. What was the fight about? A. Him -- I don't know, over a bunch of small little silly things about him not eating enough, enough food before we went out to not even wanting to go out in the beginning of the night to him leaving his ID to -- I mean, there's just abunch of small things that built up into one big argument. Q. So, did this argument turn physical? A. Yeah. Q. What happened? A. Nothing. I was leaving, or he asked me to leave, so I was leaving to go outside of his house. And he took my purse from me and wouldn't let me leave, so he never wanted me to leave, so he -- so then I was like, well, you need to let me leave, so he took my car keys out of my purse. After he took my car keys out of my purse, he threw my purse out. And I went out and I didn't realize I had his car keys in my hand, so I went and got all my stuff, and I came back and I was, like, look, I think you need to give me my car keys, give me my car keys -- I was like -- I was like give me my car keys. It was just fighting about me and him leaving. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Before you go on, let me + +Page 348 THE WITNESS: Civil, I think. I don't know. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Well, I'm going to -- I'm going to -- BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. The State attorney -- has the State attorney advised you whether they're going to charge you or not? A. Not -- no, I think -- well, I don't know. They said that he's not charging me. I have a lawyer. Am I allowed to talk about it? I don't know. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Well, he's not -- if your lawyer -- if you could talk about it, you should have your lawyer, yeah. THE WITNESS: Yeah, I have alawyer. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Who is your lawyer? A. Ira DeCarlin (phonetic). Q. Okay. When you say he's not charging me, he didn't go get an injunction against -- A No. Q -- domestic violence against you? A. No. Q. While we're speaking about injunctions + +(561 Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia 832-7500 PROSE COURT REPORTING AGENCY, INC. (561) 832-7506 (601-051-976-2934) (601.051.978-2934) (601.051-976-2934) cc1ec48b-6510-487e-8b01-b2f478edOedd + +Page 349 + +.1 against domestic violence, let me get you something. A. I mean, what is that? I don't know. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Let him follow up and ask a question. MR. LUTTIER: Is this Exhibit 3? THE COURT REPORTER: Yes. MR. LUTTIER: Let me just -- (Defendants Exhibit No. 3 was marked for identification.) BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Let me show you what has been marked as Exhibit 3 which purports to be a Petition for Injunction for a Protection Against Dating Violence. And referring to the first page, it says, I, full name, Jane Doe No. 4, do you see the first page? A. Yeah. Q. All right. Is this, is this handwriting on here yours? A. Yeah. Q. Let's go to the second page. Is this your handwriting? A. Yeah. Q. Third page your handwriting? A. Yeah. Q. Fourth page? + +Page 351 Section 1. It says down here in section, section Roman Numeral III, No. 1, where it says, describe the nature of your relationship. It says, January 1st, 2002, relationship began. That was you writing to the court that your relationship with Preston Vinyard began January 1st, 2002, correct? A. Yeah. Q. And then you wrote, July 15th, 2002, relationship became intimate. That is you were writing to the court, that on July 15th, 2002, your relationship with Preston Vinyard became intimate, right? A. Yeah. Q. That's aspecific date, July 15th, 2002. A. Uh-huh. Q. Well, what did you mean when you say, relationship became intimate? A. I don't know. Kissing, I'm going to say. I mean, kissing, holding hands, like, cuddling. I don't know. Q. Well, what you meant when you wrote this was you were having sexual relations with him -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, argumentative. THE WITNESS: I don't remember. + +Page 350 + +A. Yeah. Q. Fifth page? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. So did you complete this whole form? A. Yeah. Q. And was it true and correct when you completed it? A. Yeah. Q. Those were the representations you were making to The Court, right? A. Yeah. Q. And then you had ahearing? You went to court? A. Yeah. Q. And Preston was there at court, Vinyard? A. I don't remember. Q. And you got an order that for a year, that was an injunction against domestic violence against him, correct? A. Yeah. Q. So he couldn't come around you for a year; isn't that right? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. Let's take a look at Page 2, + +Page 352 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Is that true or false? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. So as of July 15th, 2002, you had sexual relations with Preston Vinyard, correct? A. No. I don't remember. No. Q. Well, why did you write on here intimate? A. Intimate --MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked and answered. THE WITNESS: Intimate, I mean, intimate can mean anything, like holding hands. When I'm intimate with somebody that means, I mean, anybody. I mean, it's not like, it's not sex. I don't see where it says, I became -- had started having sex with him. At that time I was 15, so intimate meant making out in the movies. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Now, do you recall previously you testified that about four or five months after you first dated Preston Vinyard you began having sexual relations with him? A. What? Repeat that. Q. Do you remember earlier you testified that + +(561 832-7500 PROSE COURT REPORTING AGENCY, INC. (561) 832-7506 + +Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by Cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia (601.051-976-2934) (601.051-976-2934) (Pages 349 to 352) + +Page 353 + +1 about four or five months after you began dating + 2 Preston Vinyard, you had sexual relations with him? + 3 A. Yeah, about four or five months. + 4 Q. So that would be about the same as this + 5 time period here from January to July 2002, wouldn't + 6 it? + 7 A. Yeah, but, I mean, intimate, like, to me, + 8 when I was that young, intimate, like, meant like + 9 going to the movies and making out with your + 10 boyfriend in the movie theater. Intimate to me back + 11 then wasn't sexual intercourse. + 12 Q. Okay. I just want to make sure we're + 13 clear. I want you to tell the ladies and gentlemen + 14 of the jury in that camera that when you filled this + 15 form out that's been marked as Exhibit 3, and you + 16 wrote July 15th, 2002, relationship became intimate, + 17 that you didn't mean sexual intercourse. Is that + 18 right? + 19 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 20 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 21 Q. Tell the ladies and the gentlemen of the + 22 jury that's not what you meant. + 23 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to the form + 24 again. Go ahead. + 25 THE WITNESS: Yeah, that's not what I + +1 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 2 Q. All right. So tell me, if July 15th, + 3 2002, wasn't when you started having sexual + 4 relationships with him, or sexual relations, when + 5 did you start having a sexual relationship with him? + 6 THE WITNESS: I don't remember. + 7 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked and + 8 answered. + 9 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 10 Q. When was the first time you gave him oral + 11 sex? + 12 A. I don't remember. + 13 Q. When was the first time he stuck his penis + 14 in you and ejaculated? + 15 A. I don't remember. + 16 Q. Was it a significant event -- + 17 A. Was that even a question? + 18 Q. Yeah. + 19 A. What did you say? + 20 Q. When -- + 21 A. Can you repeat that question? + 22 Q. When did he stick his penis in you and + 23 ejaculate -- + 24 A. I don't remember. + 25 Q. -- in any orifice? + +Page 354 + +1 meant. + 2 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 3 Q. Not what you meant. Now, when we ask your + 4 mom what you meant, what's she going to say? + 5 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 6 That's speculative. + 7 THE WITNESS: I don't know. + 8 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 9 Q. Just coincidental that you ended up + 10 getting pregnant shortly after this? + 11 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Speculative. Objection. + 12 MR. LUTTIER: Can we agree -- + 13 THE WITNESS: Is that a question? + 14 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 15 Q. Can we agree you must have had sexual -- + 16 MR. MERMELSTEIN: I think it was. + 17 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 18 Q. -- intercourse with Mr. Vinyard before he + 19 got you pregnant? + 20 A. That what? + 21 Q. You must have had sexual intercourse with + 22 Mr. Vinyard before he got you pregnant. + 23 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, + 24 argumentative. + 25 THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +1 A. I don't remember. + 2 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + 3 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 4 Q. But he did that, right, otherwise you + 5 couldn't have got pregnant. Can we agree with that? + 6 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 7 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 8 Q. Can we agree with that? + 9 A. Yeah. + 10 Q. So, you still want to stand on your answer + 11 to the jury that when you said, became intimate, you + 12 weren't referring to sexual intercourse? + 13 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 14 THE WITNESS: Yeah. + 15 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 16 Q. Okay. Now, let's go to Paragraph 6, the + 17 next page. Can you read out loud what you told the + 18 court occurred on September the 20th of 2004 at 147 + 19 Riviera Avenue. First it says, respondent, that + 20 means Preston Vinyard, right? + 21 A. Hold on. I'm not following what page + 22 you're on. + 23 Q. Paragraph 6, Page 3. This is in your + 24 handwriting, right? + 25 A. (No verbal response.) + +13 (Pages 353 to 356)Page 357 + +Q. Correct? A. Uh-huh. Q. All right. It says, respondent; that's Preston Vinyard, right? A. Uh-huh. Q. Now, read to the ladies and gentlemen of the jury what you wrote occurred on September 20th, 2004 with Mr. Vinyard. A. Preston and I were laying in bed. When a guy friend called my cell phone, Preston said that I was a slut, whore, cunt that was cheating on, that I was cheating on him. Preston started checking, checking, I don't even -- Q. Choking? A. -- yeah, choking me into the mattress, and then when I went into my purse, he threw me against the wall and started yelling at me. Then Preston pushed me out the door. And whenever I asked for the rest of my belongings, he told me to wait. Whenever he came back, he spilled a beer all over and threw cigarettes it in my face and slammed me into the ground. I got up. I went to my car and he followed me. Q. And then did you continue it onto the next page? + +Page 359 + +Q. Do you know what humiliation is? A. Is that your -- Q. Yes. A. Yeah, I do, but in, in front of who? Q What --ALike humiliation is humiliating in front of a crowd of people. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Don't argue with him. Just, just answer. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Just humiliate. To yourself, what's humiliate mean to you? A. Yeah, embarrassing. Q. Is that all it means? A. Yeah. Q. I mean, he treated you worse than an animal, didn't he? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, argumentative. THE WITNESS: An animal? BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Would you treat a dog like this? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: No. + +Page 358 + +A. We were --Q. No, onto the next page. Turn onto what's called a continuation. What else did you write? A. Shut my door and he opened it. He spit in my face and he continued to call me awhore, a slut, and cunt. I shut the door, and he opened it again, and he got in my face, grabbed my arms very hard to make him let go. I bit his arm. I bit his arm and he bit me back on my finger and cut it open. He was, he was biting so hard that he was repeating -- he repeatedly harassed me since last night -- or incodent (sic) or incoherent, or incodent. This morning when I woke up my top, or my top lip was swollen and my neck and jaw were in pain. Q. He humiliated you on September 20th, 2004, didn't he? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: Humiliated me in front of -- BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. He humiliated you, didn't he? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form again. THE WITNESS: For what? Is that your -- BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Do you know -- A. Is that your opinion? + +Page 360 + +BY MR. LUTHER: Q. No human being ought to be treated like this, should they? A. No. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. So, were you humiliated by his -- A. Yeah. Q. -- conduct toward you? Did it make you feel bad? A. Of course. Q. Did it make you feel low? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: Yeah. BY MR, LUTTIER: Q. Did it make you feel like you were worthless? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: Yeah. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did it make you feel so bad that you went and got a court order that said he couldn't come near you for a year? A. Yeah. Q. Jeffrey Epstein never made you feel like + +Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia (601-051-976-2934) (601-051.976-2934) + +1 that, did he? + 2 A. No, but just a lot worse. + 3 Q. He was nice to you, wasn't he? + 4 A. Yeah, really nice. + 5 Q. And by the way, did you -- did you ever + 6 touch Mr. Epstein's penis? + 7 A. No. + 8 Q. You had seen a man's penis before you went + 9 to Jeffrey Epstein the first time, hadn't you? + 10 A. Yes. + 11 Q. Matter of fact, had you touched a man's + 12 penis before you went to Jeffrey Epstein? + 13 A. I don't remember. + 14 Q. Had you placed a man's penis in your mouth + 15 before you had gone to see Jeffrey Epstein? + 16 A. I don't remember. + 17 Q. Had you placed a man's penis in your + 18 vagina before you went to Jeffrey Epstein? + 19 A. I don't remember. + 20 Q. When you made the videotape of you and + 21 Preston having sexual relations, what acts were + 22 recorded on the videotape? + 23 A. On the tape? + 24 Q. Yeah. The tape -- + 25 A. Sex. + +1 A. I don't remember. + 2 Q. But you remember whether you were older + 3 than 17, don't you? + 4 A. No, I don't remember. + 5 Q. Did you make the tape before he got you + 6 pregnant? + 7 A. I don't remember. + 8 Q. Did you make the tape before you -- + 9 A. I don't remember when I took the tape. I + 10 don't remember when, and when, I am -- like you + 11 already stated, I have been -- + 12 Q. Okay. Did you -- + 13 MR. MERMELSTEIN: You're okay. You're + 14 doing fine. + 15 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 16 Q. Did you make the tape before you aborted + 17 the first baby? + 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 19 THE WITNESS: I don't remember. + 20 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 21 Q. Did you make it before you aborted the + 22 second baby? + 23 A. I don't remember. + 24 Q. So, you're in your parents' house. You're + 25 using your parents' video machine. And you're + +1 Q. -- you made. And you made that tape, + 2 right? + 3 A. Yeah. + 4 Q. Was it with your video camera? + 5 A. No. + 6 Q. Whose video camera? + 7 A. My, my parents. + 8 Q. You used your parents' video camera -- + 9 A. Yeah. + 10 Q. -- to record you and this fellow, + 11 Preston Vinyard, engaged in sexual relations? + 12 A. Yeah. + 13 Q. Where did the actual filming take place? + 14 A. In my, my house. + 15 Q. What house? + 16 A. My room. + 17 Q. The room, the house your parents owned? + 18 A. Yeah. + 19 Q. And how old were you at the time? + 20 A. I don't remember. + 21 Q. Sixteen? + 22 A. I don't remember. + 23 Q. Seventeen? + 24 A. I don't remember. + 25 Q. No more than 17, right? + +1 recording having sex with Preston Vinyard when + 2 you're some age that you don't remember, right? + 3 A. Yes. + 4 Q. But we know it's while you were in high + 5 school? + 6 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + 7 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 8 Q. Tell the ladies and gentlemen, look in the + 9 camera and tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury + 10 you don't know if you were in high school when you + 11 made this tape. + 12 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, + 13 argumentative. + 14 THE WITNESS: I was in high school when I + 15 made this with Preston. + 16 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 17 Q. Okay. All right. Way too young to be + 18 doing this kind of stuff, right? + 19 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, + 20 argumentative. + 21 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 22 Q. Right? Do you agree with me? + 23 A. Yeah. + 24 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + +1 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 2 Q. All right. Now, how did you make the tape + 3 physically? Where did you put the camera? + 4 A. On my dresser. + 5 Q. Was it in your bedroom? + 6 A. Yeah. + 7 Q. And you turned the camera on? + 8 A. Yes. + 9 Q. Whose idea was it to make the tape? + 10 A. Preston's. + 11 Q. Think it would be a good idea. You + 12 thought that was okay, went along with it? + 13 A. I went on it, yeah. I agreed with him. + 14 Q. So, tell me what specific acts you engaged + 15 in with Mr. Vinyard that you then recorded on this + 16 video, to your parents' videotape machine in your + 17 parents' home? + 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: You know, I'm going to + 19 object to that, again Rule 412, and ask you not + 20 to -- It's just going too far. + 21 MR. LUTTIER: Well, this is a videotape + 22 that she admitted she showed Mr. Epstein, so -- + 23 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Yeah, but you're -- + 24 MR. LUTTIER: -- it's clear -- + 25 MR. MERMELSTEIN: -- asking her to + +1 Preston Vinyard's penis in your mouth? + 2 A. Yeah. + 3 Q. Were you giving him what we would -- a + 4 typical vernacular, that would be giving him a head + 5 job, right? + 6 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Come on. I mean, come + 7 on. She just -- + 8 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 9 Q. -- in the slang? + 10 MR. MERMELSTEIN: There is no need to go + 11 to slang. She just told you what they -- + 12 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 13 Q. Did it -- did it show him licking your + 14 vagina? + 15 A. Yeah. + 16 Q. Did, did he ejaculate in your mouth? + 17 A. I don't remember. + 18 Q. Did it show that on the tape? + 19 A. I don't remember. + 20 Q. Do you recall him ever ejaculating in your + 21 mouth? + 22 A. Ever? What does that have to do with the + 23 tape? + 24 Q. Ever. Ever. + 25 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Okay. Ever, whether + +1 describe the acts -- + 2 MR. LUTTIER: Yeah. + 3 MR. MERMELSTEIN: -- on the videotape? + 4 MR. LUTTIER: It's clear. It's within the + 5 gambit. We're coming back. And I mean, I am + 6 not going to argue, but I mean you're going + 7 to -- we're going to come for fees and costs, + 8 because there isn't any question about whether + 9 that's a legitimate area of inquiry. So I + 10 would respectfully suggest you rethink your + 11 position on that. + 12 MR. MERMELSTEIN: You're asking her what + 13 was on the videotape in terms of sex acts. + 14 MR. LUTTIER: You bet. You bet. The tape + 15 that she showed Jeffrey Epstein. And there is + 16 no question about whether that's fair game. + 17 MR. MERMELSTEIN: I'm going to give you a + 18 little bit of leeway. + 19 MR. LUTTIER: Okay, fair enough. + 20 THE WITNESS: Of us having sex. + 21 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 22 Q. I want to know the specific acts. Did it + 23 reflect oral sex? + 24 A. Sure. + 25 Q. Were you, did it reflect you having + +1 it's on the tape or not? + 2 MR. LUTTIER: Any time. + 3 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Okay. Don't answer that + 4 question. Rule 412. + 5 BY MR. LUTTIER: + 6 Q. Did it -- did he insert his penis in your + 7 vagina on this tape? + 8 A. Yeah. + 9 Q. And what position were you in at the time? + 10 A. I don't know. I don't remember. + 11 Q. Do you remember being on all -- what they + 12 call all fours? + 13 A. Could have been on all fours. Could have + 14 been on my back. I don't remember. + 15 Q. And, and other than him inserting his + 16 penis in your vagina and in your mouth, did he + 17 insert his penis in any other orifice of yours? + 18 A. No. + 19 Q. And did you perform any other sex acts on + 20 him other than giving him oral sex on this tape? + 21 A. No. + 22 Q. What -- is there anything else depicted on + 23 this tape? + 24 A. No, not that I -- + 25 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, + +Page 369 + +overbroad. THE WITNESS: Not that I remember, no. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. And you took this tape after you made it on your parents' video in your parents' house, and you took it over to show it to Jeffrey Epstein, right? A. Yeah. Q. Was there anybody else that you showed the tape to? A. No. Q. Show it to any of your girlfriends? A. No. Q. Was there anybody else present when you showed it --A. No. Q. -- to Mr. Epstein? MR. MERMELSTEIN: You got -- you got to wait until he finishes the question. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Did you ever show it to your parents? A. No. Q. Do they know about? A. Yeah. Q. When did you tell your parents that you + +Page 371 A. No, the word wasn't out. I think my -- I think my dad found it in my bedroom, and my dad asked me about it and asked me If I had ever made any videotapes, and I was honest with him and I told S him, yes. Q. As in, your dad found it and played it and saw it? A. No, he asked me about atape that was in my bedroom, and he asked me questions about it, and I told him. Q. Well, what did he ask you about It? A. He asked me what was on the tape and why it's not in with all the other tapes in the family room. And I said, and I was honest with him, I told hlm it was a sexual tape with me and Preston. Q. And what was his reaction? A. He was upset. Q. Now, was it embarrassing to you to have to talk to your dad about the fact that you made a videotape having sex with Preston Vinyard in their house with their videotape machine? A. Yeah, it was embarrassing. Q. Okay. And was it Preston's idea or your idea? A. Preston's idea. + + Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. you'd made this tape? Q. Page 370 took their video camera and made this videotape in their house? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: When I told -- I told them about it, they, being respectful parents, they're not going to sit there and question me about every single act that was on the tape. MR. MERMELSTEIN: No. The question was when, I think. MR. LUTTIER: Yeah. MR. MERMELSTEIN: When did you tell your parents? BY MR. LUTTIER: Q When did you tell your parents? A. S they have known about it. I don't -- I don't remember when I told them. I don't -- I don't remember. Was it before you filed this lawsuit? Yeah, I think so. Yeah. Was it before the police came to see you? It was before, yeah. Well, why did you tell them about it? I don't remember. I told them about it. Was the word out in the community that + +Page 372 Q. Where is that tape today? A. I don't have it. It's ruined. Q. Who ruined it? A. I did. Q. And when did you ruin it? A. A while, I don't remember. A while ago. Q. You didn't ruin it until after you filed this lawsuit, did you? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: No, I did. It was before. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. But how do you know that? A. Because I don't -- I just -- it was definitely not after. I don't even know, no. Q. Well, I don't understand. First you're saying you don't know when you did it, now you're saying you did it -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: No, no. no. THE WITNESS: No, I, I was -- I remember it was before I filed my lawsuit, but I don't remember the exact date that I ruined it, but it was before I was even in this lawsuit. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Other than the videotape you made of having sex and other sexual acts with + +Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia (601-051.976.2934) (601-051.976.2934) (601-051.976.2934) + +. 1 Preston Vinyard, and the photograph of you in your underwear with this other girl when you were in high school, have you been depicted in any other videotapes performing sex acts? A. No. Q. Have you been depicted in any other photographs in any state of undress, that is, either topless or completely naked? A. No. Q. You said that at some point in time after you went to Mr. Epstein's and you, you voluntarily removed your under pants, correct? Remember that testimony? A. Yes. Q. And do you recall at what point whether you were a junior in high school when you were removing your pants and doing complete nude massages to -- A. No, I was, I was -- yeah. Sorry. Ask the question. I completely interrupted you. Q. Where in high school were you when you were giving complete nude massages to Mr. Epstein? A. Like October, like, middle of my junior - junior year. Q. Okay. You said there came apoint in + +Page 373 + +Page 375 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q Did he ask you to use the vibrator on you? A. Yeah. Q. And did you say okay? A. Yeah. Q. So, you did that voluntarily, too, correct? A. Yeah. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Was there ever apoint in time that you said no to the use of a vibrator? A. No. Q. You, you know what an orgasm is, I assume? A. Yeah. Q. Did you ever have an orgasm while you were at Mr. Epstein's? A. Yeah. Q. More than once? A. Yeah. Q. You enjoyed those? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, argumentative. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did you not? + + time, something about a vibrator. A. Yeah. Q. What happened with the vibrator? A. He used it on my clit. Q. What do you mean, he used it on your dit? A. He turned the vibrator on and would put it by my vagina. Q. Okay. Did you have your underwear on or off? A. They were -- they were off. Q. Okay. And when did this happen? A. In the middle of my junior year. Q. Everything happened in the middle of your junior year? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, argumentative. THE WITNESS: Yeah, it, like I said, first time I visit, second time I visit. It got where, it got to the point where he would use a vibrator on me, and then he started fingering me, then he started using both on me, and then he would ejaculate. I mean, after I had all my clothes off, I mean it was -- I mean, it was always the same thing. It was -- + +Page 374 + +Page 376 A. Yeah. Q. You told him you enjoyed them, didn't you? A. I didn't tell him. It was pretty obvious. Q. You kept coming back because you enjoyed it, didn't you? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Plus you were getting paid money. A. Yeah. Q. All right. Did you have an orgasm when you were at Mr. Epstein's when he used the vibrator on you? A. Yeah. Q. Yeah. And how many occasions did you go back after the first time that he used the vibrator on you? A. Whenever he would call me up I would go. Q. Do you know how many times that was? A. After that, every single time he was in town, two to three times a week. Q. From June of '05 until October of '05, how many times did you go to Mr. Epstein and he used the vibrator on you? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. Objection to form. + +Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by Cynthia (601-051-976.2934) (601-051-976-2934) (601.051.976.2934) + +Page 377 THE WITNESS: From June to when? BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. June of '05 to October of '05. A. I don't -- I don't know. Q. More than once? A. Yeah. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did you have orgasms more than one time between June of '05 and October of '05? A. Yeah. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Now, did there come a time -- sorry. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Focus. You know, he's asking about specific dates, so make sure you're sure of your answer. THE WITNESS: I don't know how many times in '05. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did there come a time that you say -- huh? A. I don't know how many times I've been there. MR. MERMELSTEIN: No, well, he's asking you a very specific date, so make sure you're + +Page 379 + +Q. Did there come a time that Mr. Epstein gave you a vibrator? A. Yeah. Q. Do you remember what kind of vibrator? A. A Rocket Pocket. Q. Okay. And what did you do with the Rocket Pocket? A. I have -- I had the Rocket Pocket in my drawer at school. I don't know. Q. The drawer at school? What school? A. I have it with -- I had it with my -- where I lived. Q. Did you say you had the vibrator at your drawer at school? A. I had it at home and then I had it where I lived. I, it was mine. So, with all my belongings to my current address that I was staying at, that's where I have it. Q. When did he first give it to you? A. I don't remember. I know I had it at my house though when I was in high school. Q. All right. And where did you keep it at home? A. In the drawer. Q. Did your mom and dad know about it? + +Page 378 sure of your answer. THE WITNESS: From like, '05, summer -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: He's now asking you June -- MR. LUTTIER: All right. Let's not have a speaking objection. MR. MERMELSTEIN: -- of '05 to October of '05. MR. LUTTIER: She knows how to answer and that's a speaking objection. MR. MERMELSTEIN: No, she doesn't. MR. LUTTIER: she knows, trust me. She, she is very streetwise and knows exactly what's being asked of her. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Was there ever a time -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to that characterization. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Was there ever a time that you told Mr. Epstein not to use the vibrator on you? A. No. Q. Were there times that you asked him to use the vibrator on you? A. No. + + A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. you? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Page 380 No. Did you tell them about it? No. Did you use it at home? Yeah. Okay. You enjoy it? Yeah. You had orgasms with it? Yeah. Okay. Did you take it to college with Yeah. Did you use it at college? Yeah. Did you enjoy it? Yeah. Have orgasms with it? Yeah. Still have it today? No. Do you have a different one now? A different one? Yeah, a different vibrator. Yeah. Still use a vibrator today? + +Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia (601-051-976-2934) (601-051-976-2934) (601-051-976-2934) + +Page 381 .1 A. Yeah. Page 383 Q. You think there's anything wrong with using a vibrator? A. No. Q. Okay. You went out and bought your own, right? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. All right. Then you said there was atime, came apoint in time that he put his finger in your vagina? A. Yeah. Q. And when was that? A. The next time, next visit after he used the vibrator on me. Q. How do you know that that was before you were afreshman at. University? A. Before I was afreshman? Q. Right. A. Because it was before I had even gone to prom. It was like, I still -- I hadn't even, wasn't even a senior yet. Q. And did he ask to put his finger in your vagina? A. It wasn't quite like after he -- after I was orgasming orgasming me from the vibrator, he + +BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. The reality here, the truth Is that you enjoyed going to Mr. Epstein's and having an orgasm and getting paid \$200 for giving amassage; isn't that the truth? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: Yeah. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Okay. And you weren't traumatized by any of it, were you? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, calls for a conclusion. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. What damages have you suffered as a result of going to Mr. Epstein? A. Honestly? Everything, like, emotionally. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Take your time. THE WITNESS: I mean, how does it make me, emotionally, like, with my parents, disrespect from my parents, family, Mends. It's relationship-wise, like trusting people-wise, I don't know. I couldn't -- a lot of things, a lot of different things emotionally, like, a lot of things. + +Page 382 flipped me around and I was on all fours, and he 2 stuck his finger in my vagina, and he didn't ask 3 questions. I was already orgasming, so it's not like I told him stop. Q. Did you say no? A. No. Q. Did you stop him? A. No. Q. Did you come back any time -- A. He didn't ask me though. Q. Did you come back any time after the first time he put his fingers in your vagina? A. (No verbal response.) Q. Did you ever come back after that? A. Yeah. Q. Did he put his fingers in your vagina any 17 time after that? A. Yeah, pretty much every time after that. Q. Did you ever tell him not to? A. No. Q. You enjoyed it, didn't you? A. Yeah. Q. It was all part of the orgasm, wasn't it? 24 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +Page 384 + +BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Well, you, you kept going back to Mr. Epstein. You never said no, I don't want to come, did you? A. I thought he was my friend. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, argumentative. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. You never once said to Mr. Epstein, I don't want to come, did you? A. No. Q. As a matter of fact, you gave Mr. Epstein a little feedback, didn't you? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Take your time. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. You gave him a little feedback, didn't you? A. What do you mean by that? Q. You told him you liked what he was doing, didn't you? Didn't you? A. I don't know. I don't remember. Q. Do you recall? MR. LUTTIER: What are we on, No. 4? THE COURT REPORTER: Yeah. MR. LUTTIER: Let's mark that as 4. + +Electronicalty signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia (601-051-976.2934) (601-051-976-2934) + +Page 385 (Defendants Exhibit No. 4 was marked for identification.) + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Let me show what's been marked as Exhibit No. 4. Is that your handwriting? + +A. No. Love always, Jane Doe No. 4. This is, this, for agood time, call -- + +Q. Yes. + +A. -- that's not my, that's not handwriting; that's Lauren's, that's Lauren's handwriting. + +Q. Okay. And then below that the hearts and then it's signed Jane Doe No. 4 and Lauren. That's your handwriting, the hearts? + +A. Yeah, the heart, the heart -- + +Q. Right. + +A. -- the heart, and then heart, Jane Doe + +No. 4, Lauren, that's me. But for agood time and then I didn't, like, put my number there. That's for a good time, call 635-3454, that's Lauren's handwriting. And then that's her heart and Lauren. + +Q. Whose number is 635 -- + +A. That was my number. + +Q. Okay. So you were present when this note was created? + +A. Yeah, we both were there. + +sexual, like he was always joking around like sex talk, like, I said, for example, he would -- had me, like, go up to, like, joking around like sexual, like, telling me how to give head to a guy, or like always joking around sexually. + +So with Lauren -- he was that way with a lot of different girls, always joking around sexually with girls. + +So whenever -- I didn't write this, I didn't tell Lauren to write this. This was Lauren's intentions, and I was just joking around and signed it. I didn't -- my intentions weren't to write this, for agood time, call Jane Doe No. 4. This is Lauren's intentions, not mine. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Let's back up. You saw the words and you read the words when it was handed to you to sign, didn't you? + +A. she didn't tell me, sign it, I joking -- + +Q. you did that voluntarily? + +A. eah. + +Q. So, she handed you this piece of paper, + +Q. This is A. Yeah. NNW + +Page 386 + +Q. Okay. And so you both created this note and left it for Mr. Epstein? + +A. She wrote it there, and then I signed it, yeah. + +Q. You knew what you were doing, right? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, form, argumentative. + +THE WITNESS: No. I wasn't the one that wrote it. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. You knew what you were doing when you signed it with hearts and put your name and left it there, didn't you? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Nobody made you do that, did they? + +A. No. + +Q. You were telling him you wanted him to call, you were having a good time, you wanted to come back, weren't you? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +THE WITNESS: Well, he was a very, like, + +that is, Lauren? + +A. No, it was -- she wrote it. There was a notepad -- + +Q. Okay. + +S A. -- on, on the table. She wrote it, and picking up -- I just picked up the pen after she wrote something, joking around, because everybody, like jokes around with Jeffrey Epstein, like, sexually like that, picked it up and signed my name. + +Q. Okay. Let's go through it. When did this happen, by the way? + +A. I don't remember. + +Q. You were already at. University at this time, or before that? + +A. I don't remember. + +Q. So your testimony is that Lauren wrote on a pad at Jeffrey Epstein's house, for agood time call, and put your number, right? + +A. Yeah. + +Q. And did you put her number too? + +A No. + +Q Is that 324-7996 her number? + +A. It might have been her old number. I don't remember. + +Q. Okay. So she wrote all of that, right, + +first? Page 391 + +THE WITNESS: Can I have a tissue? + +never mind. I have it right here. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Did she write all of the words that appear in this notepad before you put anything on it? 7A. Did she write anything before -- wait. Ask me the question again. + +9Q. Did she write all the words that appear in this notepad before you put anything on it? + +A. No, she wrote, for agood time call. Q. So when, when you originally got this + +13note, when you were standing there, this is down in the kitchen of his house? + +15A. Yeah, I think so. I don't remember where we were. + +Q. Both of you were there for some reason? + +A. Yeah. + +19Q. Had you both been there giving Mr. Epstein amassage? + +A. Yeah. She had gone there. + +Q. But you were both there at the same time? + +A. Yeah. + +24Q. Were you there -- were you both giving him amassage at the same time? + +You did it voluntarily. + +Yeah. + +Thought it was funny? + +Yeah. + +And you left it there for Mr. Epstein. + +Yeah. + +Telling him, call me for agood time. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, form. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Right? A. Yeah. + +12Q. And that's what you wanted him to do, was 13 to keep calling and have you come over, wasn't it? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Isn't that right? That's the truth, isn't + +it? + +A. That I wanted him to keep calling me? Q. Yeah, and you wanted to keep going there; + +isn't that the truth? + +A. I knew he was going to keep calling me. 22He told me I was his favorite in Florida, so it wasn't something that I, ever crossed my mind. + +24Q. And you wanted him to keep calling you and you wanted to keep going; isn't that the truth? + +Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. + +A. Q. is? A. + +> A. Q. A. + +Q. That is, like, have you ever engaged in + +those? + +A. No. + +Q. Have you ever had a sexual encounter with + +another woman? A. No. + +Q. Okay. Now, when you were at + +Mr. Epstein's, you and Lauren are there. She writes this pad out. She writes this note on this pad, + +right? + +A. Yeah. + +Q. And then after she writes on it, you take apen and you draw these two hearts and you sign + +your name? A. Yeah. + +Q. Nobody made you do that, right? + +A. No. + +Page 390 + +No. + +By the way, do you know what athree-way + +Yeah. + +Did you ever engage in athree-way? + +A three-way phone call? + +No. Three-way sexual experience. + +Yeah. + +Page 392 1 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, objection to form, asked and answered. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Isn't that the truth, + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. THE WITNESS: That -- yes. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. And the only reason you quit going to + +9Jeffrey Epstein after you were already a freshman at 10 University was because you found out th ati ce were investigating him and they showed up at MI 12 University and interviewed you; isn't that true? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: No. I got in touch with. + +Wait. Ask the question again. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. The only reason you quit going to Jeffax. Epstein was because the police showed up at= University and interviewed you. A. No, because I was still, Jeffrey was still renting me a car. After I knew the police were going to everybody and interviewing questions, like he had rented me. + +(Brief telephone interruption.) THE WITNESS: I was still talking to him + +Page 393 1 after he was interviewing cops. I still talked 2 to him after I got interviewed by the cops. I 3 talked to him about -- I talked to his lawyers. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Well, why didn't you go back and give him more massages after you got interviewed by the -- 7A. Because he, like, he wasn't even -- he didn't stay at his Palm Beach house. He like -- I don't even know where he was at. Q. You would have gone if he had asked you to come back and give him amassage, wouldn't you? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. Calls for speculation. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Would you have gone back? A. I don't know. Probably more than likely. I don't know. Q You would have -- A I thought he was my friend. Q He never did anything to you, right? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. He didn't do anything compared to what Preston Vinyard did to you, got you pregnant three times, aborted three kids -- + +Page 395 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. Don't talk about what your lawyers have explained to you. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. That's the only thing you can get. Are you under the impression that you can get some kind 7 of relief here other than money? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: No. It's not for me. It's so that he can get punished for things that he's done to me and several other girls. MR. LUTTIER: Let me show you the next exhibit. What number is this? THE COURT REPORTER: Five. MR. LIMIER: Okay. (Defendant's Exhibit No. 5 was marked for identification.) BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Let me show you what's been marked as Exhibit 5. It's entitled Psychological/Social History. Do you recognize that document? A. Yeah. Q. Is that your handwriting on it? A. Yeah. Q. Is this adocument that you completed? + +Page 394 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form -- MR. LUTTIER: -- treated you like dirt -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: -- argumentative. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Right? He never did anything like that to you, did he? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. And what you want in this lawsuit is money, right? A. No. Q. That's why you sued him was for money. A. No. Q. And you were offered money to settle the suit, but you don't want that. You want more money; isn't that right? A. No. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Well, if you don't want money, what are you suing for? A. For him to get punished. Q. That's the only thing you can get in this case is money, right? Your lawyers have explained that to you, haven't they? + +Page 396 A. Yeah. Q. And did you complete it on December 2nd of 2008? A. Yeah. Q. And do you remember why you completed this document? A. Yeah. Q. Why? A. Because I was, had an appointment with Dr. Kliman. Q. Okay. Were all of the answers that you gave on this document true and correct? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Look at them carefully. (Ms. Doe and Mr. Mermelstein were conducting a discussion off the record.) THE COURT REPORTER: Is this off the record? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Well, we're kind of on the record right now. So, have you read all these? THE WITNESS: No. I mean there's a few that I have questions about, you know. There's a few that I have questions about that I am kind of like, I am looking at this now and I am like -- + +(561 (601.051-976.2934) (601.051.976-2934) + + MR. MERMELSTEIN: Anything you need to clarify. I think was -- what was the question? BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. My question was are all of the answers that you gave on this document true and correct? MR. MERMELSTEIN: So, now that's just Page 1. The whole thing. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Well, I should -- let me rephrase that. Were all the answers that you gave on this document true and correct as of December 2nd, 2008, or whatever date you completed this document? A. On this one? Q. Yeah. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Okay. Go through each page and look at that and refresh your mind. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. In all due respect, the answer is yes or no. You can't really consult with your lawyer about it. MR. MERMELSTEIN: If you're confused by something then, then you have to qualify your answer. THE WITNESS: Okay. MR. MERMELSTEIN: But, okay. + +Page 397 + +Page 399 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, form. THE WITNESS: Because if you, if you read up above, it says how far did you go in school. MR. LUTTIER: Right. THE WITNESS: I said attended college, but did no graduate college. So I am guessing, like, whenever I looked at this it said did you ever get in trouble while in school, I think while I was in college. I think my mind frame was set to college, not in high school. And that's why I'm looking at this now and I'm thinking, well, I know in high school I got into trouble. So, I know that's not true. MR. LUTTIER: Well, did you -- THE WITNESS: And, like, whenever I look at something, after reading 17, it says, like, I am thinking, I was just thinking while I was in college. I don't know. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q Did Dr. Kliman ask you after you completed this, didn't he ask you whether you had any questions about it? A. I don't remember. Q. Did you tell him you had questions and didn't understand any of these? + +Page 398 + +THE WITNESS: Is everything -- well, there's one thing -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: The question is, is everything true and correct, that's, that's written here, each page. THE WITNESS: Well, I am going -- I already know the answer to that question. I have only gotten to the second page. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Do you want to give your answer and then you can go or -- THE WITNESS: Yeah, well, it says, did you ever get in trouble while in school? Well, yeah, when I was in high school I got a DUI, but I had circled no. But yeah, when I was in high school I got in trouble. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Well, was this paper given to you by Dr. Kliman to complete? A. Yeah. Q. Did he tell you to give honest -- A Yeah. Q -- and truthful answers? A. Yeah. Q. Well, why didn't you give him honest and truthful answers? + + Page 400 A. No, I don't remember. Q. Did you tell him any of the answers weren't right? A. No, I don't remember. Q. So, how is somebody supposed to know whether you're telling the truth or lying? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, argumentative. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. How do, how does one know on what occasions you're telling the truth and when you're lying about something? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, argumentative. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q How does somebody know? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. THE WITNESS: They should know. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Well, first of all, you talked to the police under oath, and you're telling us you lied to the Palm Beach Police, right? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, asked and answered. + +Electronically signed by Cynthia Electronically signed by Cynthia Electronically signed by Cynthia (601-051.976-2934) (601-051.976.2934) + +.1 2 3 4 5 6 Page 401 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Is that right? That's what you're telling us. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Asked and answered. THE WITNESS: Yeah. BY MR. LUTHER: 7Q. So, we don't really know, even when you're 7 BY MR. LUTTIER: 8under oath, whether you're telling the truth or 8 Q. What should the answer have been of those 9 you're lying, do we? 9 choices? 10A. No. 10 A Well, out of all those choices, it would 11 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. 11 be two. 12BY MR. LUTHER: 12 Q. Once or twice ayear? And you didn't want 13 Q. Okay. All right. So what other answers 13 Dr. Kliman to know that, did you? 14 are, do you say are incorrect on here, 14 A. No. 15notwithstanding the fact, that you gave to 15 Q. You knew when you answered that question 16 Dr. Kliman after he told you to answer truthfully? 16 you were giving him a false answer, didn't you? 17 MR. MERMELSTEIN: I'm going to object to 17 A It was -- 18the form of that question. 18 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. 19THE WITNESS: It says have you had any 19 BY MR. LUTTIER: 20major changes in income during the last two 20 Q. You knew that when you answered the 21 years. 21 question you were giving a false answer, didn't you? 22 BY MR. LUTTIER: 22 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. 23Q. What number is that? 23 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 24A. Thirty. 24 MR. LUTTIER: Okay. + +1 2 3 4 5 6 Page 403 Q. You lied to Dr. Kliman, right? A. Yes. Q. What should the answer have been? A. I didn't --MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, that's been asked and answered. 25Q. Okay. 25 MR. CRITTON: You know, you could all go + +Page 402 Page 404 1 A. I said no, but during the summers I worked 1 off the record. at, like, I worked at Pine Tree Camp, so I made a 2 MR. MERMELSTEIN: I suppose. 3 little bit of money, but I put no because if you 3 MR. CRITTON: We're just burning up tape 4 read the question, it says no, increasing 4 there. Just go ahead and finish looking. 5 significantly or decrease significantly. I only had 5 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Are you ready? 6 a summer job. 6 THE WITNESS: No. Q. Okay. Well, in 39 you reflect that you 7 MR. LUTHER: Did you have aquestion? 8 had a summer job, right? 8 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Well -- 9A. I'm sorry. I didn't read that far. 9 THE WITNESS: If he's going to leave, can 10 THE WITNESS: Can I ask aquestion? Yes, 10 I use the bathroom? or no? 11 MR. LUTTIER: Well, no, I am not going to 12 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Huh? 12 leave. Okay. Go ahead. 13 THE WITNESS: Can I ask you a question? 13 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Yeah, because it's kinc 14 MR. MERMELSTEIN: You really can't. 14 of aquestion pending, so let's, let's just 15 THE WITNESS: Okay. 15 finish this and then you can go to the 16 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Again remember to keep 16 bathroom. in mind what the question was that he 17 THE WITNESS: No. 81, which of the 18 originally asked about. 18 following have you experienced in the last two 19 THE WITNESS: Uh-huh. How would you -- 19years. BY MR. LUTTIER: 20 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. What number? 21 Q And, and what did you answer? 22 A. Fifty-five, how would you describe your 22 A. Eleven, none. illegal drug usage. I said I never used drugs. 23 Q. And what should the answer have been? 24 Q. That wasn't true, was it? 24 A. Nine. A. No. 25 Q. Pregnancy? + +(561 Electronically signed by Cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia 832-7500 PROSE COURT REPORTING AGENCY, INC. (561) 832-7506 (601-051.976-2934) (601-051-976-2934) + +Page 405 .1 A. Yeah. Q. And you knew when this question was asked that you had been pregnant in the last two years, didn't you? A. Yeah. Q. So you knew you were giving Dr. Kliman a false answer. A. Yeah. Q. You didn't want him to know you were pregnant, did you? A. I didn't want anybody to know. Q. You didn't want him to know, because you were going to have to tell him you aborted three children, weren't you? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, argumentative. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q And you didn't want to have to do that; isn't that right? A Yeah. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. MR. CRITTON: Just so you know, you're not getting it because she's got the paper in front of her face. MR. LUTTIER: Yeah, you have that. + + Page 407 Q. Contrary to your religious beliefs, wasn't it? A. (No verbal response.) MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Is there any principle that you had in your life that having three abortions was consistent with? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: No. At the same time, I would never want to, doing that instead of raising three kids with a boyfriend that is abusive, in and out of jail, drug addict. I think it's more hurtful to bring a child in this life whenever you can't give them anything. So, at that time, I thought I was making a good decision. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. So, if you were that concerned about it, then after the first abortion you certainly would have insured that you didn't get pregnant twice again by the same person. THE WITNESS: I was taking birth control. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + +Page 406 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. You didn't want to tell Dr. Kliman that you had been pregnant, because you would have had to tell him you aborted three kids, right? A. Yeah. Q. And you didn't want to have to tell him that, right? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: Yeah. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Because it was embarrassing to you? A. Yeah. Q. Because it upset you? A. Yeah. Q. Because you feel bad about it? A. Yeah. Q. Because it's contrary to everything you were ever taught in your life, isn't it? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Think about the question before you answer. Objection to form. THE WITNESS: Yeah. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. It's contrary to everything your parents ever taught you, wasn't it? A. Yeah. + +Page 408 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. By the way, when you went and found out you were pregnant, did they show you the sonogram that they took? A. No. I didn't -- when, the first time I got pregnant, I didn't even know. I found out, because I thought I had acyst or I was playing soccer and I had, and my egg on MRI that said I had a cyst on my ovarian from playing soccer, or acyst. So when I went, I went to go get rid of my cyst, and that's when I found out. Q. Did they ever show you the sonogram of the fetus? A. No. Q. Have you now told me all the questions you answered false? A. What was -- Q. Have you now told me each of the questions that appear in this exhibit that you answered false, falsely? A. Yeah. Q. Well let's look at Question 52. Question 52 says which of the following have you used. And it refers to 12 different drugs. What did you answer? + +Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia (601-051-976-2934) (601-051.976.2934) (601-051-976-2934) + +(Pages 405 to 408) + +Page 409 A. I stated that one. I already said that. Q. And what should the answer -- you, you wrote none, right? A. Right. Q. Or you circled it. And what should it have been? A. Cocaine. Q. That would be two. What else? A. Marijuana. Q. Nine. What else? 11. MR. MERMELSTEIN: You've got the paper in front of your face again. You might want to try to hold it down just a bit. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Two and nine and what else? A. What is barbit -- what is --Q. Barbiturates. A. Yeah, what are those? Q. So if you didn't know, you would ask Dr. Kliman what that meant? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. Go ahead and try. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. At least two of these drugs you'd used, you knew you'd used, and you just, you just gave a + +Page 411 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: Have you ever drank too much alcohol? No, I -- yeah, I drank, but never got to the point where I was, like, wasted. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. You got completely drunk on more than one occasion before this? A. Yeah. I mean -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Just so we're clear, you didn't think that meant that, that there was a time when you drank too much alcohol, those occasions when you got completely drunk? A. I drank more -- yeah, I drank before, but I guess, I am sorry, yeah. Q. Okay. And then over on No. 57, it says -- or 87, I'm sure, what is the primary problem bothering you. You answered other. So none of the first 13 items applied, but there was some other that you answered, but you didn't say what the other was, right? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. That was a truthful answer, right? A. Yeah. + +Page 410 false answer to Dr. Kliman, right? A. Yeah, I already told you that I -- Q. Okay. Let's take -- A. -- already told you that. Q. Let's take 53. The question was, have you ever, have you ever felt there was a time you drank too much alcohol. You answered, yes, on one occasion. A. Yeah. Q. That wasn't truthful, was it? A. Actually, I drank alcohol on more than one occasion. It didn't ask me if I ever thought I did. Q. It says, have you ever felt there was a time you drank too much alcohol, and you had four choices. One of the choices was, yes, on several occasions, one was yes on more than several occasions. But you answered, yes, on one occasion. 18 That's a false answer, wasn't it? A. No. Q. There was more than one time in your life, prior to the time you answered this that you felt you drank too much, wasn't there? A. Apparently not at that time, no. Q. You'd been drunk a bunch of times before you answered this, weren't you? + +Page 412 Q. And then 88 says, how long ago did you begin to be troubled by this problem, and you had circled, does not apply, and then you crossed that out. And you just didn't answer that question, right? A. I didn't answer it. Q. And then 89, rank the degree to which this problem has affected your life. You initially had circled a little, and then you changed it to does not apply, correct, meaning that whatever problem it was wasn't aproblem that affected your life, correct? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, form. THE WITNESS: No. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Why do you say it doesn't apply then? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Same objection. THE WITNESS: I don't know. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. What did you mean by that when it said rate the degree to which this problem has affected your life, and you answered, does not apply. What did you mean? A. I don't know why I didn't answer it. I don't know why I didn't answer that question. + +Page 413 + +• 1 Q. Well, you answered it. You answered with a specific answer, does not apply. So, what were you telling Dr. Kliman? + +A. It means that I don't want to answer that S question. + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Mean what? + +A. That I don't want to answer that question. + +Q. Well, it doesn't say I don't want to + +answer. It says it doesn't apply. + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + +THE WITNESS: That's what I, thats what -- + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + +THE WITNESS: Meaning 1 don't want to answer that question. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Well, let's look at the next one, No. 90. + +20How often do you experience this problem? Again you answered, does not apply, correct? + +A. Yeah. + +Q. Again you're saying it has no application to your life; isn't that right? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +Page 415 A. I don't know. + +2Q. None? You don't know of any drugs that Jane Doe No. 7 has used? + +A. Maybe -- I don't know. + +Q. Well, let's make sure we're clear here. + +Are you telling me under oath that you don't know of 7 any drugs that Jane Doe No. 7 has used? + +A. No, I don't know. + +Q. Never seen her use any drugs? She's never told you she used any drugs? You're sure? + +A. Not like, hey, what kind of drugs do you + +do. It's not like we're drug addicts. It's not like -- + +Q. My question is under oath whether you're 15aware, either from drugs you've seen her use or what she's told you drugs she's used? + +A. I have seen her drink. + +Q. Okay. + +A. Maybe smoke pot, maybe. Other than + +that -- + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Do you remember? + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Well, what do you mean, maybe? + +THE WITNESS: No, I don't remember. + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Okay. + +Page 414 + +THE WITNESS: No. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Then the next one says what other kinds of problems are bothering you, and there's 14 specific items listed. You didn't answer any of those, and you answered No. 15 does not apply. + +A. Yeah. + +Q. Indicating that none of those things applied as aproblem that was bothering you. + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + +THE WITNESS: Because I don't want to answer that question. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Okay, now -- + +A. It doesn't mean that they don't apply. + +Q. -- with respect to Jane Doe No. 7, how + +many abortions has she had? + +A. I don't know. + +Q. How many abortions has Jane Doe No. 3 had? + +A. I don't know. + +Q. You have no knowledge about them? + +A. No. + +Q. Okay. And what drugs do you know from + +your own personal knowledge that Jane Doe No. 7 has used? + +Page 416 + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Your testimony under oath is you've never seen Jane Doe No. 7 smoke pot? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: No, no. + +THE WITNESS: No, I didn't say I've never seen her. I just don't remember. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. You may have seen her smoke pot? + +A. When I was in high school, I hung out with her at high school parties. I don't remember. I + +mean, everybody -- I don't know. I don't remember. + +Q. My question is very simple. You may have seen her smoke pot? + +A. Yeah. + +Q. What other drugs do you know that Jane Doe No. 7 has used? + +A. I don't know. + +Q. Don't have any idea? + +A. No. + +Q. How about Jane Doe No. 3, what other drugs, what drugs have you, do you know that Jane Doe No. 3 has used? + +A. Drinking and smoke pot. + +Q. Any others? + +A. No. + +Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by Cynthia Electronically signed by Cynthia (601-O57-976.2934) + +Page 417 Q. Are you sure? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. And with respect to Jane Doe No. 3, 4 how many abortions has she had? A. I don't know. Q. And what sexually transmitted diseases does Jane Doe No. 3 have? A. I don't know. Q. You filled out a health insurance or a 10 health questionnaire at. University saying that 11 afriend of yours had MRSA. Do you know what MRSA is? + +A. Yeah, it's where you get like in the 14 hospital after having, like, surgery. 15 Q. And who are you referring to when you said you had afriend that had MRSA? A. Alan. Q. Alan, the boy you were dating at the time? A. At his, yeah, or -- yeah. Q. How about any of your girlfriends that 21 went to Jeffrey Epstein's, were you referring to any of them as having MRSA? A. No. Q. Do you know about any of the girls that went to Jeffrey Epstein having MRSA? + +Page 419 BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. And were you a prostitute at one time? A. No. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, form. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did you ever consider yourself to have been aprostitute? A. No. Q. Okay. You mentioned that, you were 10 talking about Mr. Epstein, and one other event that 11 you said was, you said, I think to use your language, he licked your dit. A. Yeah. Q. When did that occur? A. It happened one time. Q. Was it after June of '05? 17 A. Senior year. I was in my senior year. Q. Of high school? A. Yeah. Q. How do you know it was in your senior year in high school? A. Because after that moment, I said I never, never again. Q. Never what again? A. Like he is not, like, licking my cit. + + S Page 418 A. No. Q. Do you know whether or not Jane Doe No. 3 has told -- or has Jane Doe No. 3 ever told you that she has any sexually transmitted diseases? A. No. Q. Have you suffered any economic loss; that is, have you lost any money as a result of going to see Jeffrey Epstein? And, obviously, you got paid for what you went, but have you lost any money as a result of going to see Jeffrey Epstein? A. No. Q. Okay. Do you know what apimp is? A. Yeah. Q. A pimp is someone that gets paid money to prostitute somebody or to, to facilitate the service of aprostitute. Is that what you understand apimp is? A. Yeah. Q. Would you agree with me that you were, in essence, acting as a im that is, you got paid money for taking to Jeff Epstein? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, argumentative. THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +Page 420 Q. Did he ask you -- A. He kept begging me. Q. Did he ask you to lick your dit? 4 A. Yeah, he kept begging me. Q And did you -- A Finally, I gave in. Q. Did you say, no? A. No. Q. Had you said -- A. Yes, I said no. And finally I said, yes. Q. Had you said no on prior occasions? 12 A. No. Q. He never asked you to lick your clit prior 14 to the time that, that he did it the first time? A. No. Q. Okay. So the first time he asked to lick your clit, you said okay? A. No, I said no. And then he kept begging 19 me and asking me to lick it that day. And finally 20 after saying no, like, three or four times, I said, okay. Q. Okay. So every time you said no, he 23 didn't do it, right? When you said no, he didn't lick your clit? A. Yeah. + +Page 421 Q. And then when you said yes, then you say he licked your clit? A. Yeah. Q. And for how long did this go on? A. A couple of seconds. Q. A couple of seconds. Now, you had had your dit licked before that event, had you not? A. Yeah. Q. Preston Vinyard had done it, right? A. Yeah. Q. Other boys had done it, right? A. No. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. And, and then, while he was licking your dit, did you tell him you wanted him to stop? A. Yeah. Q. And did he stop? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. And when you say he licked your dit, did he penetrate your vagina or just lick your clitoris? A. No, he licked my clit. Q. Okay. And, and how were you positioned at the time that this happened? + +Page 423 have been the end of it, right? A. Yeah. Q. You -- at any time while you were going to see Jeffrey Epstein, you could have just said, no, I'm not going back anymore, couldn't you? A. Yeah. Q. Nobody coerced you to do it. You were going voluntarily, correct? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. Did you tell, by the way, before you let Mr. Epstein lick your clit, did you tell him you had herpes? A. No. Q. Why not? A. I didn't think he was going to. After I, after he was doing it, I was like, no, off me. Q. Did you, you told Dr. Kliman that you were uncomfortable with, what you referred to as, your body. I think the words used was "down there"; do you remember that? A. Yeah. Q. Are you talking about your vagina or your crotch area? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. And you said you'd been + +Page 422 A. I was standing. There was ... massage table to the right of me and there was as to the left of me, and I had my right leg lifted up on the massage table, and he was on his knees. Q. So, you had positioned yourself for this? A. Yeah, I was -- yeah, I guess. I didn't position it for me to go like that. He kept begging me and begging me. Q Well, you -- A Yeah, well, then, yes, I did. Q. You had to put your leg up on the massage table, right? A. Yeah. Q. And open up your vagina, right, your legs -- MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q -- so he could lick your clit, right? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. That took you some time to do, right? A. Yeah. Q. So you did all that voluntarily, right? A. Yeah. Q. You could have said, no, and that would + +Page 424 uncomfortable with it for some period of time. A. Yeah. Q. And you said that it didn't -- you, something about you looked at other girls and you thought yours looked different or something like that? A. Yeah. Q. What is it you're referring to? A. The way that my vagina is shaped compared to other girls. Q. And what is it that's different about your vagina that's -- A. My lips are a lot larger than other girls' lips are. They come out more, and that's why lily Epstein said that I was his favorite girl in Palm. Q. Okay. And, and that's whole life? A. Uncomfortable? Yeah. Q. Didn't prevent you from having sex with other men, right? A. You mean with Preston? Q. With anybody else. Your lawyer hadn't let you answered about the other people you've had sex with. been true your + +(561 Electronically signed by Cynthia Electronically signed by Cynthia Electronically signed by Cynthia (601-051-976-2934) (601-051-976.2934) + +Page 425 1 A. Maybe that's -- maybe that's why I've been with him for on and off with him for five or six 3years. So yeah, I was uncomfortable with other guys. + +5Q. Your current boyfriend, you had sex with him, right? + +7A. After being with somebody that's abused me 8 for like seven year, five years, do you think I'm 9 comfortable -- do you think I would go back to being 10 with him if I was comfortable with my body? 11 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Take it easy. Answer the question. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +14Q. By the way, even after you went and got an 15 injunction against domestic violence because of all the horrible things that Preston Vinyard did, you 17then wrote a letter to the court telling him you wanted him to lift the injunction, didn't you? + +A. Because he kept breaking it, breaking it and going back to jail, and I didn't want to see somebody have to go through that. + +Q. You had protection against him. Then you went and told the judge, release it, right? + +A. Yeah. + +Q. This was a guy that had been in jail + +Page 427 1 A. Well, yeah, I mean, I don't remember. We talked about several different things. So I am sure, yeah. + +Q. How many times have you been to him? + +A. How many times have I been? + +Q. Yeah, how many times have you been to him? 7 A. To Rick Ruepto? + +Q. Yeah. + +9A. Yeah. I don't know, but I have been going 10 there since August, maybe once or twice a week I've 11 been going to see him. I don't know, maybe 30 times. + +13Q. Have you, has everything that you told him been the truth? + +A. Yes. + +16Q. I'm going to tell you, we're going to get his records. + +A. Yeah. + +Q. All right. whole truth? And have you told him the + +A. Yeah. + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + +BY MR. LUTHER: + +Q. Told him about your abortions, right? + +A. Yeah. + +Page 426 + +before? + +A. Yeah. + +Q. Guy that had gotten you pregnant three times before? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + +THE WITNESS: Before? No. It wasn't three times. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. So, after you got an injunction against + +domestic violence, you hooked up with Preston + +Vinyard again and got pregnant with him again, and 12 had another abortion with him; is that right? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, form. + +BY MR. LUTHER: + +Q. Is that right? + +A. Yeah. + +Q. I mean, wouldn't -- have you discussed + +that with this psychiatrist that you said you had gone to in July of '09, Roberto (phonetic) or Ruepto? + +A. Rick Ruepto? + +Q. Yeah. Have you talked to him a little bit about that? + +A. I haven't got a chance to. + +Q. Well, how many times have you been to him? + +Page 428 + +Q. Told him about Preston? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection. + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +Q. Did you tell him Preston was violent towards you? Did you tell him that? + +A. Yeah. + +Q. Did you tell him everything that you've told me in this deposition? + +MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection, form, overbroad. + +THE WITNESS: Not every single -- he knows abroad, broad information about certain things. + +BY MR. LUTHER: + +Q. Okay. Who's paying his bill? + +A. I am. + +Q. Okay. And where is his office? + +A. In Fort Pierce. + +Q. Fort Pierce. How would you get to Fort Pierce to get this fellow Ruepto? How did you get to him? Who referred you to him? + +A. I have somebody that I -- my boyfriend's mother. + +Q. Who is that? + +A. Ricky -- or my ex -- yeah, Ricky. + +Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia (601-051.976-2934) (601-051.976.2934) + +Q. Page 429By the way, this guy that you had the 2 domestic violence with that you got arrested 3 for -- A. That was my ex-boyfriend. 4 Q. -- are you still living with him? 5 A. No, I live in Port St. Lucie. . Did ou go hunting recently for A. Hunting for Haley? Q Yeah. A No. Q. Did you go try to find her at her place of employment? A. No. Q. Do you know why anybody would say you were at her place of employment looking for her? A. No. Q. Do you -- do you know where she works? A. Yeah. Q. You know where she works, don't you? Where does she work? A. Ra Bar. Q. Ra Bar located where? A. In Gardens. Q. Okay. And that's where you went Friday night and the domestic violence thing, isn't it? + +A. Page 431 Idon't know her last name. She has been remarried. 3Q. Well, where do you find this lady? 4 A. She lives in Port St. Lucie. I don't know. Q. How, how is it, how is it you got ahold of her? A. I didn't get ahold of her. She didn't 9tell me. She gave Ricky the, the name, and I got the name through Ricky. 11 Q. Well, did you call her and ask her about the guy? 13A. No. She gave information to her son, which her son then gave the information to me. 15Q. Have you ever talked to her on the phone? A. Have I talked to her on the phone? Yeah. 17 Q. Do you know her phone number? 18 A. No. 19Q. Have you got it in your cellphone? A. No. Q. Now, why is it that -- how did this lady, you were never talked to her, how did she even know you looking for apsychiatrist? A. It was somebody that she knew, knows from her church, and her -- she -- her son is seeing him, + + Page 430 A. I didn't go there looking for her. We had to go there because my boyfriend didn't have his ID, so we couldn't get into the Yard House and we needed something to eat, and we were in that area so we went there --Q. Did you tell anybody -- A. to eat because you have to have an ID to get into Yard House --Q Did you tell -- A-- even if you want to eat food at that current time that we went there. Q. Did you tell anybody when you were at the Ra Bar that you were working for A. No, I didn't even bring up Haley's name. Q. Do you know why amessage would have been left if you were looking for her? A. No, because I never even brought up her name. Okay. Now, you say -- what's this Ricky or whatever this boyfriend's name is, what's his mothers name? A. Robby. Q. Bobby (sic) what? A. Robby. Q. Robby. Robby what? + +Page 432 apsychiatrist, too. Q. The guy that you had the domestic violence --A. She got it for her son. Yeah, thegot it for her son. Q. So, what really happened was Ricky was going to this -- A. Uh-huh. Q. -- psychiatrist, and that's really where 10 you got the name was from Ricky, not from his mother --A. Yeah. Q. -- isn't that right? A. Yeah. Well, his mother is the one that 15 referred him, and so I got the name from his mother, not from Ricky. Q. The person that you, first told you about it was Ricky, wasn't it? A. Yeah. Q. Not his mother. going to? A. No, like, yeah. Q. Yeah, right? A. Yeah, Ricky. Ricky and his mother. Q. So, so Ricky then told you that he was Ricky told you who he was + +Electronically signed by Cynthia Electronically signed by Cynthia Electronically signed by Cynthia (601.051-976-2934) (601-051-976-2934) + +832-7500 32 (Pages 429 to 432) PROSE COURT REPORTING AGENCY, INC. (601-051-976-2934) (561) 832-7506 + +Page 433going to this doctor -- A. Me and him started going at the same time, 3 so it wasn't something that he had been going to for 4 years. Me and him started going to see him at the 5 same time. So, it's somebody that his mother 6 referred both of us to because she knows about my situations as well with Mr. Epstein. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Wait for aquestion. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. So, you told Ricky's mom about this 11 situation, too. She's another person that knows about this situation. A. No, she doesn't know about the situation; 14 she knows that I've been in a sex, sexual, like, been sexually abused. Q. I thought you told me you told her about it? A. I didn't tell her about it. She knows, 19 she knows that I've experienced, I've had a bad past 20 and experience. That's what Ricky has told him mom. 21 Q. Well, she's know about Jeffrey Epstein, didn't you say? A. No. Q. Didn't you just say she did? A. No. + +Page 435 ride in the car to the office? A. No, just ride in the -- go ride to the office with him. Q. And did you ever have an appointment with this doctor with Ricky? A. I have gone in there with him, yeah. 7 Q. Okay. So, now, let's not play semantics here. A. No, appointments for me and him? No. I've gone there in with him and listened to his -- 11him talk to the psychiatrist, but not about me and him. Q. You walked in adoctor's office with a 14 doctor there and Ricky there and listened to what 15 was going on. You were part of that conference, right? A. Yeah. Q. Have you done that more than once? A. Yeah. Q. How many times have you done that? A. Maybe three times. Q. When was the last time? A. I don't remember. Q. And how many times have you gone to this doctor alone as just you? + +Page 434 1 Q. Okay. So what really happened was you and 2 Ricky went to this Dr. Ruepto because of problems 3 that you two had; isn't that right? A. No. Q. And the two of you went to see him together? A. No. Q. You didn't do that? A. No. Q. You never discussed any problems -- 11A. I've gone there with him, but we've never 12 gone there to discuss problems, never problems with, about me and him. Q. Okay. Well, why was he going? 15 A. About his parents, like his past with his parents. Q. What about his past? A. Parents are divorced. Q. Okay. So, and he just said, you want to 20 ride along with me one time; I'm going to this doctor? A. He asked me to go with him, and I said yes. Q. When you said, go with him, what do you mean, go in and see the doctor with him, or just + +Page 436 A. Several times. Q. How many? A. I don't know. Q. And how many times have you gone and 5 Ricky's been in the meeting with you and the doctor? 6 A. Like I have, maybe -- I don't know. Q. More than once? BA. Yeah. I don't know. Q. You don't know if it's more than once? 10 A. Yeah, probably more -- yeah, more than 11 once, but 1 don't know how many. Like, what do you mean, more than once? Q. Well, what does more than once mean? 14 A. Yeah, like more than once, yeah. Q. Okay. And how much -- 16A. But how many times, I don't know. 17 Q. And how often do you go for these sessions? A. Like once or twice a week. 20 Q. And where in Fort Pierce is this office? A. Off of AlA. Q. Do you have an address? A. No, I just know exactly where it's at from driving there. Q. Okay. Well, I want to make sure I have + +Page 437 this. It's R-u-e-b-t-o (sic). A. Yeah, best of my knowledge. Q. Is he apsychiatrist or psychologist or neither? A. No, he's, he's apsychiatrist. Q. Is he -- can he prescribe medication? A. I think so, yeah. Q. Has he prescribed any medication for you? A. No. Q. Has he prescribed any medication for Ricky? A. No. Q. Are you on any medication at the present time? A. No. Q. And how much does he charge you for each 17 of these visits? A. Like \$50 a visit. Q. Okay. 45 minute session? A. An hour. Q. An hour session. Have you ever seen Jeffrey Epstein's penis? A. Yes. Q. Had you seen a man's penis before you saw Jeffrey Epstein's penis? + +Page 439 Q. Was anyone else ever present for your sessions between you and Mr. Epstein? A. No. Q. Did you ever tell Mr. Epstein you didn't want him to masturbate? A. No. Q. Did Mr. Epstein ever penetrate any orifice of your body with a vibrator? A. No. Q. He just put it on the top of your clit? A. Yeah. Q. Did Mr. Epstein ever penetrate your anus 13 with any object? A. No. Q. Did he ever penetrate your anus with any organ of his body? A. No. Q. Did you ever tell Mr. Epstein on any of these sessions that you had with him that you enjoyed it? A. Not that I remember. Q. Did you ever use any words to that effect with him --A. Not that I remember. Q. -- saying that that was great or I enjoyed + +Page 438 A. I don't remember. Q. You don't remember? A. You've already asked me this question, and I don't remember whenever I saw Preston's, so I don't remember. Yeah, I think so. Q. Okay. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Make sure of, sure your answer. Don't just answer for the sake of answering. THE WITNESS: For him, yeah, I don't remember. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did -- was there ever anything that you said that you saw Mr. Epstein at some point masturbate. I think your terms were jerking off, to be exact. Do you recall that testimony? A. Yeah. Q. And when did that first occur? A. After I started getting naked after, like, my fifth or sixth visit. After I had already, like, whenever I started taking clothings off. Q. Did he ask you if he could do that? A. No. Q. Did you tell him not to do that? A. No. + + it. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: I don't remember. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Did you ever tell anyone that you wished your boyfriend was more like Mr. Epstein, in particularly that you would like it if your boyfriend was rougher like Mr. Epstein in having sex? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. THE WITNESS: No, I don't remember. BY MR. LUTHER: Q. Do you recall telling Dr. Kliman that? A. No, I don't remember saying that. Q. If, if you told him that, it was true, wasn't it? MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form, speculation. THE WITNESS: I don't remember saying that, so like, I don't know. BY MR. LUTTIER: Q. Do you remember telling Kliman that you -- A. No, 1 don't remember saying that to Dr. Kliman. Q. You and were talking about + +Page 440 + +Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia + +Page 441 1 it, and you and the other girls and you kid that you 2 wished your boyfriends were more like, more like Mr. Epstein. A. I don't remember talking to him about it, no. I'm sorry. Q. But you did talk to your girlfriends about your -- communicatively you-all talked about your sexual experiences with Mr. Epstein? A. Girlfriends? Yeah, we did. Q. Yeah. The other girls that were going to see him. A. Yeah. Q. And you-all knew what each other were doing, right? A. Yeah. Q. You knew who was letting them finger them, to use your words? A. No, not -- not exactly. Q. Who was doing what? A. No, we just knew -- I mean, pretty much, if you got \$200, you weren't doing things. If you got \$300, you're doing more than just giving him a massage and leaving. So If you say, how much money did you get, and then that referred to,., you must have done something -- + +Page 443 did not limit, visa vis it was removed. MR. MERMELSTEIN: I don't think so. Well, the seven-hour time limit is by rule within the Federal Rules. MR. LUTHER: Yeah, but there's an order that's been entered since then. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Yes, it gives you a one-day deposition. And a one-day deposition in the Federal -- in the Federal Rules is seven hours, so our position is you have seven hours. MR. LUTTIER: I understand. MR. CRITTON: I'm telling you that Judge Marra, in the consolidation order, is very specific with regard to the seven-hour rule with regard to this case. MR. MERMELSTEIN: You turn into apumpkin at seven hours. If you want, if you want more, you're going to have to go back to the judge. MR. CRITTON: So the judge has entered an order; you're saying you're not going to obey that order? MR. MERMELSTEIN: I am saying the judge had -- show me an order where he says you get 24 more than seven hours. The consolidation order you refer to, I have it right here in my hand, + +Page 442 + +Q. And you knew -- A. -- and just referring, because you knew what you've done, so not saying,., this is, this is me giving you details, Jane Doe No. 7, of what I've done, no. It was, you know,. how much money did you get,. okay. So then it was kind of like in the back of your mind you're -- you know. MR. LUTTIER: Well, I'm going to have to stop now because I've got another appointment that I have to get to, so this would be agood place to stop as any. THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Going off the record. It is 6:04. It's the end of Tape 3 of 3. MR. LUTHER: We're just adjourning the depo. MR. MERMELSTEIN: We understand that. MR. LUTHER: Okay. MR. MERMELSTEIN: And I understand that you had adiscussion before regarding the seven-hour time limit with Mr. Horowitz here. MR. LUTHER: Well, no, we didn't have any discussions at all before about it. MR. CRITTON: He raised the seven-hour time limit, and I told him if he looked at the consolidation order, the consolidation order + +Page 444 it says you get one day. That to me is seven hours. The Federal Rules provide seven hours. I think it's clear. MR. CRITTON: Let me read it. Let me read it. MR. LUTTIER: I think the only reference to specific hours is when he said that. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Yeah, let me read it. Let me read it. As to each of the ten above styled cases, the Defendant is limited to a single deposition of each Plaintiff. MR. LUTTIER: Single deposition, it doesn't say that. At any rate, everybody knows what the other person's interpretation is. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Right. Well, yeah. I mean, but to say that there's a dear order here which gives you the right to take alonger deposition, that's not the case. MR. CRITTON: This is an order, and just so it's clear, this is Docket Entry 86. There was asubsequent order that he entered. MR. LUTHER: Okay. MR. CRITTON: Or aprior order. MR. MERMELSTEIN: If that's the case, provide it to me. I mean, you refer to the + +Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by Cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia (601-051.976-2934) + +Page 445 + +• 1 consolidation of --MR. CRITTON: I'm not going to provide you that, but I'll refer to you -- I'll send you the document. MR. MERMELSTEIN: We're supposed to cooperate. I mean, if I'm missing something, then --MR. CRITTON: No, no, listen to me, Stuart. MR. MERMELSTEIN: -- let me know. MR. CRITTON: Listen to me, Stuart. MR. MERMELSTEIN: What? MR. CRITTON: I said what I will do is I'll reference the docket number so you can look it up because it will be in your file. MR. MERMELSTEIN: That, that's fine. MR. LUTTIER: Give me a chance. It's like your witness. If you listen to the question, you're going to get an answer. Okay? MR. MERMELSTEIN: All right. MR. CRITTON: You guys are gone. We're going to stay here until I know. I am assuming I am going to give you three minutes to escape from the building. MR. MERMELSTEIN: Five minutes. + + Page 447 CERTIFICATE OF OATH THE STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH I, the undersigned authority, certify that JANE DOE NO. 4 personally appeared before me and was duly sworn on the 27th day of October, 2009. Dated this 6th day of November, 2009. Cynthia RPR, FPR Notary Pu is - ate of Florida My Commission Expires: February 25, 2011 My Commission No.: DD 643788 + + Page 446 MR. CRITTON: Yeah, yeah. THE COURT REPORTER: Are you ordering this? MR. CRITTON: Yes. (Witness excused.) (Deposition was adjourned.) + +CERTIFICATE THE STATE Of FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH I, Cynthia Registered Professional Reporter, al Reporter and Notary 6 Pubk in and for the State of Florida at large, do hereby certify that I was authorlZed to and did 7 report said deposition in stenotype; and that the foregoing pages are a true and correct transcription of my shorthand notes of said deposition. 9I further certify that said dekeition was taken at the time and place hereinabove set forth and that the taking of said deposition was commenced and completed as herelnabove set out. Ifurther certify that I am not attorney or =ask of any of the parties, nor am I a relaWe or employee of any attorney or counsel of party connected with the adlon, nor am I financially interested In the action. The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means unless under the direct control and/or direction of the certifying reporter. Dated this 6th day of November, 2009. 18 Cynthia S RPR, FPR Page 448 + +Electronically Electronically signed by cynthia (601-051-976-2934) Electronically signed by cynthia (601.051.976-2934) + +(561) 832-7500 PROSE COURT REPORTING AGENCY, INC. signed by cynthia (601-051-976.2934) (561) 832-7506 + +(Pages 445 to 448) + +1 DATE: November 6th, 2009 + 2 TO: JANE DOE NO. 4 + 3 C/o Adam D. Horowitz, Esquire + 4 MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. + 5 1805 Biscayne Boulevard + 6 Soft 2218 + 7 Miami, Florida 33160 + 8 IN RE: Jane Doe No. 2 vs. Epstein + 9 CASE NO.: 06 CIV-80119-MARRAY + 10 Please take notice that on Tuesday, the 27th of + 11 October, 2009, you gave your deposition in the + 12 above referred matter. At that time, you did not + 13 waive signature. It is now necessary that you sign + 14 your deposition. + 15 As previously agreed to, the transcript will be + 16 furnished to you through your counsel. Please read + 17 the following instructions carefully: + 18 At the end of the transcript you will find an + 19 errata sheet. As you read your deposition, give + 20 changes or corrections that you wish to make should + 21 be noted on the errata sheet, signing pages and lines + 22 number of said change. DO NOT write on the + 23 transcript itself. Once you have read the + 24 transcript and noted any changes, be sure to sign + 25 and date the errata sheet and return these pages to + 16 me. + 17 If you do not read and sign the deposition + 18 within a reasonable time, the original, which has + 19 already been forwarded to the ordering attorney, may + 20 be filed with the Clerk of the Court. If you wish + 21 to waive your signature, sign your name in the blank + 22 at the bottom of this letter and return it to us. + 23 Very truly yours, + 24 Cynthia [REDACTED] RPR, FPR + 25 I do hereby waive my signature. + JANE DOE NO. 4 + +1 CERTIFICATE + 2 - - - + 3 THE STATE OF FLORIDA + 4 COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + 5 I hereby certify that I have read the foregoing + 6 deposition by me given, and that the statements + 7 contained herein are true and correct to the best of + 8 my knowledge and belief, with the exception of any + 9 corrections or notations made on the errata sheet, + 10 if one was executed. + 11 + 12 Dated this \_\_\_\_ day of \_\_\_\_\_ + 13 2009. + 14 + 15 + 16 + 17 + 18 \_\_\_\_\_ + 19 JANE DOE NO. 4 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23 + 24 + 25 + +1 ERRATA SHEET + 2 IN RE: JANE DOE NO. 2 VS. EPSTEIN + 3 CR: Cynthia [REDACTED] + 4 DEPOSITION OF: JANE DOE NO. 4 + 5 TAKEN: October 27, 2009. + 6 DO NOT WRITE ON TRANSCRIPT - ENTER CHANGES HERE + 7 PAGE # LINE # CHANGE REASON + 8 \_\_\_\_\_ + 9 \_\_\_\_\_ + 10 \_\_\_\_\_ + 11 \_\_\_\_\_ + 12 \_\_\_\_\_ + 13 \_\_\_\_\_ + 14 \_\_\_\_\_ + 15 \_\_\_\_\_ + 16 \_\_\_\_\_ + 17 Please forward the original signed errata sheet to + 18 this office so that copies may be distributed to all + 19 parties. + 20 Under penalty of perjury, I declare that I have read + 21 my deposition and that it is true and correct + 22 subject to any changes in form or substance entered + 23 here. + 24 DATE: \_\_\_\_\_ + 25 SIGNATURE OF + DEPONENT: \_\_\_\_\_ + +|

A

[REDACTED] 309:24

aborted 313:18 363:16
363:21 393:25
405:13 406:4

abortion 311:8,22
312:19,23 317:11
318:7 319:5 407:20
426:12

abortions 319:7 330:24
332:5 407:7 414:17
414:19 417:4 427:24

above-referred 449:8

abused 425:7 433:15

abusive 407:13

accepted 343:3

acquaintances 337:18

act 339:10 370:7

acting 418:20

action 448:13,13

active 327:13 328:13
328:16,23 329:5,6

acts 361:21 365:14
366:1,13,22 368:19
372:25 373:4

actual 321:10 362:13

Acyclovir 323:10

Adam 309:8 449:2

addict 407:13

addicts 415:12

addition 319:7

address 340:25 379:17
436:22

adjourned 446:6

adjourning 442:14

ADLER 309:3

Admin 342:9

Administration 342:4
342:11

admitted 365:22

advice 347:9

advised 348:7

age 312:18 329:3 364:2

ago 339:2,3 372:6
412:1

agree 312:18 314:3
354:12,15 356:5,8
364:22 418:19

agreed 365:13 449:10

ahead 331:17 332:1
336:7 338:6 353:24
404:4,12 409:22

ahold 431:6,8

Ahorowitz@sexabus...
309:11

Alan 335:6 417:17,18

alcohol 345:23 410:7
410:11,14 411:3,13

allowed 348:11

|

and/or 316:17 448:15

animal 359:17,20

answer 314:25 315:7
316:11,20 317:2,8
320:7,19,22 324:3
330:1 331:6,7,21,25
332:14 356:10 359:9
368:3 377:17 378:1,9
397:18,23 398:7,10
401:16 403:3,8,16,21
404:21,23 405:7
406:20 408:25 409:2
410:1,18 411:24
412:4,6,24,25 413:2
413:4,9,11,17 414:5
414:12 425:11 438:8
438:8 445:19

answered 314:10

328:25 352:10 355:8
392:2 400:24 401:4
403:6,15,20 408:16
408:19 410:7,17,21
410:25 411:19,21
412:22 413:1,1,21
414:6 424:24

answering 332:12
438:9

answers 310:15 396:11
397:4,10 398:22,25
400:2 401:13

anus 439:12,15

anybody 312:6 313:6
318:9 336:18 338:10
345:4 352:14 369:9
369:14 405:11
424:23 429:14 430:6
430:12

anymore 423:5

anyplace 344:12,23
345:2

Apparently 410:23

appear 389:5,9 408:19

APPEARANCES
309:1

appeared 447:6

application 413:23

applied 342:24 411:20
414:9

applies 314:24

apply 412:3,10,16,22
413:2,11,21 414:6,15
448:15

appointment 325:20
326:4,16 396:9 435:4
442:9

appointments 435:9

area 366:9 423:23
430:4

argue 359:8 366:6

|

argument 345:17 346:7
346:8

argumentative 324:15
324:19 327:7 351:24
354:24 359:19
364:13,20 374:16
375:23 384:7 386:9
394:3 400:8,14
405:16 418:23

arm 358:8,8

arms 358:7

arrested 338:25 339:3
339:5,9 340:3 429:2

Arts 342:7

asked 314:6,10 320:20
324:2 328:18,25
329:10 330:10
346:11 352:9 355:7
357:18 371:3,3,8,9
371:12 378:14,23
392:2 393:10 400:23
401:4 402:18 403:6
405:2 420:13,16
434:22 438:3

asking 322:20 365:25
366:12 377:16,24
378:3 420:19

assistance 343:17

associate 316:13

assume 313:14 340:13
375:14

assuming 339:12 340:1
445:22

attended 399:5

attorney 348:6,7
448:11,12 449:17

August 317:14,22
427:10

Australian 308:17

authority 447:5

authorized 448:6

automatically 347:20
347:22,23

Avenue 308:17 309:15
312:2 356:19

avoiding 319:15

aware 415:15

A.m 340:19

AIA 436:21

|

337:2,13,21 344:8
346:20 353:10
357:20 358:9 366:5
368:14 376:4,15
382:9,11,14 384:2
386:23 387:18 393:5
393:11,15 423:5
425:9,20 442:7
443:18

bad 360:10,21 406:15
433:19

Banyan 309:20

bar 344:18,24,25
429:21,22 430:13

barbit 409:16

Barbiturates 409:17

baseball 330:3

basis 341:12

bathroom 404:10,16

Beach 308:18 309:21
321:22 333:9 336:21
337:16 345:7,10
393:8 400:22 447:3
448:3 450:4

[REDACTED] 319:25 320:12
321:2

bed 357:9

bedroom 365:5 371:2,9

beer 357:20

began 351:4,6 352:22
353:1

begging 420:2,4,18
422:7,8

beginning 311:3
345:18 346:5

begun 314:3

behalf 309:2,7,13,18

belief 450:8

beliefs 407:1

belongings 357:19
379:16

best 315:21 336:9
437:2 450:7

bet 366:14,14

big 341:3 345:24 346:7

bill 428:15

birth 313:15,19,20,23
319:2 407:23

Biscayne 309:9 449:3

bit 358:8,8,9 366:18
402:3 409:13 426:22

biting 358:10

blank 449:18

blurt 320:22 331:22

Board 343:21

Bobby 430:23

body 326:12 423:19
425:10 439:8,16

bother 330:9

|

bothering 411:19 414:4
414:9

bottom 449:18

bought 381:5

Boulevard 309:4,9,20
321:23 449:3

boy 417:18

boyfriend 329:20,24
335:2,3,13 336:8
338:13 344:9 353:10
407:12 425:5 430:2
440:6,8

boyfriends 329:13,15
441:2

boyfriend's 428:22
430:20

boys 330:11,14 421:11

breaking 425:19,19

Brief 392:24

bring 407:14 430:14

brings 345:24

broad 428:12,12

brought 430:17

building 445:24

built 346:7

Bullard 338:16,17

bunch 346:2,6 410:24

BURMAN 309:20

burning 404:3

Business 342:1,4,9,11

|

C

C 448:1,1 450:1,1

call 319:8 358:5 368:12
376:17 385:7,19
386:22 387:15
388:18 389:11 390:6
391:7 431:11

called 311:24 357:10
358:3

calling 391:13,18,21,24

calls 338:6 383:11
393:13

camera 353:14 362:4,6
362:8 364:9 365:3,7
370:1

Camp 334:7 402:2

car 346:16,17,19,21,22
346:22 357:23
392:21 435:1

care 334:5 338:9,11

careful 332:12 336:14

carefully 396:13
449:11

case 308:2 320:15
394:24 443:15
444:18,24 449:6

cases 308:9 444:10

cell 357:10

| +|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +|

cellphone 431:19
Center 341:1,2,5
certain 320:6 428:12
certainly 407:20
CERTIFICATE 447:1
certification 448:14
certify 447:5 448:6,9
448:11 450:5
certifying 448:16
chance 426:24 445:17
change 332:1,1 449:13 451:5
changed 412:9
changes 401:20 449:12 449:14 451:5,20
characterization 378:18
charge 348:7 437:16
charged 347:17
charging 347:19,19 348:10,20
cheating 357:11,12
checking 357:12,13
child 313:18 318:13
334:5 407:14
children 405:14
choices 403:9,10
410:15,15
choking 357:14,15
church 431:25
cigarettes 357:21
circled 398:14 409:5
412:3,9
citing 449:13
civil 347:24 348:1
clarify 397:2
clear 353:13 365:24
366:4 411:11 415:5 444:3,16,20
Clerk 449:17
click 335:17
Clinic 311:25
clit 374:4,5 419:12,25 420:3,13,17,24 421:2 421:7,16,21,23
422:18 423:11
439:10
clitoris 421:22
close 328:9 333:9
335:21,21 336:3,17
closest 321:16
closet 335:8
clothes 374:23
clothings 438:21
Cocaine 409:7
coerced 423:7
coincidental 354:9
COLEMAN 309:20
college 317:12,20

|

380:10,13 399:5,6,9
399:10,18
come 333:25 350:22
360:22 366:7 367:6,6
377:14,21 379:1
382:9,11,14 384:4,10
386:23 391:13
393:11 424:14
comfortable 425:9,10
coming 366:5 376:4
commenced 448:10
Commission 447:15,15
committed 339:10
commonsense 337:19
communicatively 441:7
community 370:24
compared 393:23
424:9
complete 350:4 373:17
373:22 396:2 398:18
completed 350:8
395:25 396:5 397:12
399:20 448:10
completely 373:8,20
411:6,14
concerned 326:2
407:19
conclusion 383:12
conduct 360:9
conducting 396:15
conference 309:24
435:15
confront 325:5
confused 397:21
Congress 312:2
connected 448:13
consider 336:2 419:6
consistent 407:7
consolidation 442:25
442:25 443:13,24
445:1
consult 397:19
contained 450:7
continuation 358:3
continue 357:24
continued 310:6 311:2
358:5
contrary 406:17,23
407:1
control 313:15,19,20
313:23 319:2 407:23
448:15
cooperate 445:6
cop 337:15
copies 451:17
cops 334:9,14 339:6
393:1,2
correct 324:22 327:16
327:19 330:21

|

331:16,25 333:13
336:23 337:4,8 350:7
350:20 351:6 352:5
357:1 373:12 375:7
396:12 397:5,11
398:4 412:10,12
413:21 423:8 448:7
450:7 451:19
corrections 449:12
450:9
correctly 320:23
cost 312:14
costs 366:7
422:2
counsel 448:12,12
449:10
COUNTY 447:3 448:3
450:4
couple 329:12 421:5,6
courage 328:5
course 360:11
court 308:1,22 349:6
350:11,14,16 351:5
351:10 356:18
360:22 384:24
395:14 396:16
425:17 446:2 449:17
CR 451:2
created 385:24 386:3
crime 347:17
criminal 347:17,25
CRITTON 309:19,20
403:25 404:3 405:22
442:23 443:12,19
444:4,19,23 445:2,8
445:11,13,21 446:1,4
CROSS 310:4
crossed 391:23 412:3
crotch 423:23
crowd 359:7
cuddling 351:19
cunt 357:11 358:6
current 329:20,23
335:1,3 338:12
379:17 425:5 430:11
cut 358:9
Cynthia 308:21 447:14
448:5,21 449:22
451:2
cyst 408:7,9,9,10
C.M.A 309:13
c/o 449:2

|

329:6,8,9,10 335:1
371:2,2,6,19 379:25
daddy 312:10 313:10
damages 383:14
date 351:14 372:21
377:25 397:12 449:1
449:15 451:22
dated 352:22 447:9
448:17 450:12
dates 377:16
dating 314:17 330:4
349:13 353:1 417:18
day 340:8 420:19 444:1
447:7,9 448:17
450:12
DD 447:15
dealer 338:18
333:25 334:3
334:5
DeCarlin 348:19
December 396:2
397:11
decision 407:17
declare 451:19
decrease 402:5
Defendant 308:8
309:18 444:10
Defendant's 310:14,15
310:16,17,18 349:8
385:1 395:16
definitely 372:14
degree 341:9,25 342:10
412:7,21
depicted 368:22 373:3
373:6
depo 442:15
DEPONENT 451:24
deposition 308:12
428:8 443:8,8 444:11
444:12,18 446:6
448:7,8,9,10 449:8,9
449:12,16 450:6
451:3,19
describe 351:2 366:1
402:22
DESCRIPTION
310:13
details 442:4
diagnosed 323:17
different 380:21,22,23
383:23 387:8 408:24
424:5,11 427:2
dinner 344:24
direct 310:4 311:2
448:15
direction 448:16
dirt 394:2
discuss 434:12
discussed 426:17

|

434:10
discussion 396:15
442:19
discussions 442:22
disease 323:17,23
324:3,9
diseases 417:6 418:4
disrespect 383:19
distributed 451:17
DISTRICT 308:1,1
divorced 434:18
docket 444:20 445:14
doctor 319:23,24 320:1
322:24 323:2 433:1
434:21,25 435:5,14
435:25 436:5
doctors 324:8,13,17
doctor's 435:13
document 395:21,25
396:6,12 397:5,10,12
445:4
Doe 308:4,12 310:5
335:7,9 336:9 337:7
349:15 385:6,12,16
387:15 396:14
414:16,19,24 415:3,7
416:3,15,20,22 417:3
417:7 418:2,3 442:4
447:6 449:2,5,25
450:19 451:2,3
dog 359:22
doing 363:14 364:18
373:17 384:19 386:7
386:13 407:11
423:16 441:14,19,21
441:22
domestic 339:8,10
344:8 347:21 348:23
349:1 350:19 425:15
426:10 429:2,25
432:2
door 357:18 358:4,6
dormant 323:17,20,20
323:22
downtown 344:22
Dr 396:10 398:18
399:20 401:16 403:1
403:13 405:6 406:2
409:20 410:1 413:3
423:17 434:2 440:13
440:24
dramatic 345:25
drank 410:6,11,14,22
411:2,3,12,15,15
draw 390:21
drawer 379:9,10,14,24
dresser 365:4
drink 415:17
Drinking 416:23

| +|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +| driving 436:24 | 369:17 373:22 | 405:24 409:12 | 349:14,15 352:22 | Fourth 349:25 | +|------------------------|------------------------|-------------------------|----------------------|------------------------| +| dropped 347:22 | 376:22 378:21 379:1 | facilitate 418:15 | 355:10,13 356:19 | FPR 308:21 447:14 | +| drug 338:18 402:23 | 383:15 384:3,9,12 | fact 322:23 361:11 | 361:9 363:17 372:15 | 448:21 449:22 | +| 407:13 415:12 | 386:4 388:8 389:19 | 371:19 384:12 | 374:17 376:15 | frame 399:9 | +| drugs 402:23 408:24 | 391:5 392:9,18 | 401:15 | 379:19 382:11 389:1 | freshman 317:15 | +| 409:24 414:23 415:2 | 417:25 418:8,10,21 | fair 366:16,19 | 400:20 407:20 408:5 | 381:16,17 392:9 | +| 415:7,9,10,11,15,16 | 419:10 423:4,11 | false 352:2 403:16,21 | 411:20 420:14,16 | Friday 340:10,11 | +| 416:15,21,21 | 424:15 433:7,21 | 405:7 408:16,19 | 432:17 438:18 | 344:10 429:24 | +| drunk 410:24 411:6,14 | 438:14 439:2,4,7,12 | 410:1,18 | 432:17 438:18 | friend 335:8,12,16 | +| due 397:18 | 439:18 440:6,8 441:3 | falsely 408:20 | 353:3 395:14 425:2,8 | 336:9 357:10 384:5 | +| DUI 398:13 | 441:8 449:5 451:2 | family 336:8 371:13 | 445:25 | 393:19 417:11,16 | +| duly 447:7 | Epstein's 361:6 373:11 | 383:20 | flipped 382:1 | friends 315:21 316:4,6 | +| E | 375:17 376:11 383:3 | far 365:20 399:3 402:9 | Florida 308:1,18,22 | 333:15,16 335:7 | +| E 310:2,10 448:1,1 | 378:17 390:16 | father 332:6 | 309:5,10,16,21 | 383:20 | +| 450:1,1 451:1,1,1 | 417:21 437:22,25 | favorite 391:22 424:15 | 347:21 391:22 447:2 | front 358:18 359:4,6 | +| earlier 344:12 352:25 | 450:9 451:17 | February 447:15 | 447:14 448:2,5,6 | 405:23 409:12 | +| East 309:4 | 450:9 451:17 | Federal 443:4,9,9 | 449:4 450:3 | full 349:14 | +| easy 425:11 | escape 445:23 | 444:2 | Focus 377:15 | funny 391:3 | +| eat 430:4,7,10 | Esquire 309:3,8,8,14 | feedback 384:13,16 | follow 349:3 | furnished 449:10 | +| eating 346:3 | 309:19,19 449:2 | feel 360:10,12,16,21,25 | followed 357:23 | further 342:17 448:9 | +| economic 418:6 | essence 418:20 | 406:15 | following 356:21 | 448:11 | +| education 342:18 | event 340:8 355:16 | fees 366:7 | 404:18 408:23 | | +| effect 439:22 | 419:10 421:7 | fellow 316:22 362:10 | 449:11 | G | +| egg 408:8 | eventually 334:16 | 428:20 | | | +| either 316:13,25 | everybody 335:20 | felt 410:6,13,21 | | | +| 339:20 373:7 415:15 | 337:3,6 388:7 392:22 | fetus 408:13 | | | +| ejaculate 355:23 | 416:11 444:13 | Fifteen 326:25 | | | +| 367:16 374:22 | Evidence 309:25 | fifth 347:8,10,14 350:2 | | | +| ejaculated 355:14 | ex 310:14,15,16,17,18 | 438:20 | | | +| ejaculating 367:20 | 428:25 | Fifty-five 402:22 | | | +| Eleven 404:22 | exact 372:21 438:16 | fight 345:21 346:1 | | | +| embarrassing 327:23 | exactly 378:13 436:23 | fighting 346:23 | | | +| 371:22 406:11 | 441:18 | fights 345:24 | | | +| emotionally 383:16,19 | | file 445:15 | | | +| 383:23 | EXAMINATION | filed 332:22 333:1,19 | | | +| employee 448:12 | 311:2 | 333:23 335:21 336:3 | | | +| employment 429:12,15 | example 387:2 | 336:18,22 338:2 | | | +| encounter 390:12 | excused 446:5 | 370:18 372:7,20 | | | +| ended 354:9 | executed 450:10 | 449:17 | | | +| engage 390:5 | exhibit 310:13 349:5,8 | fill 321:7,8,12 | | | +| engaged 362:11 365:14 | 349:12 353:15 385:1 | filled 321:24 353:14 | | | +| 390:9 | 385:4 395:13,16,20 | 417:9 | | | +| enjoy 380:6,15 | 408:19 | filming 362:13 | | | +| enjoyed 375:21 376:2,4 | experience 390:7 | finally 420:6,10,19 | | | +| 382:21 383:3 439:20 | 413:20 433:20 | financially 448:13 | | | +| 439:25 | experienced 326:13 | find 429:11 431:3 | | | +| ENTER 451:5 | experiences 441:8 | 449:11 | | | +| entered 443:6,19 | Expires 447:15 | fine 363:14 445:16 | | | +| 444:21 451:20 | explained 313:15 | finger 358:9 381:9,22 | | | +| entitled 395:20 | 394:24 395:3 | 382:2 441:16 | | | +| Entry 444:20 | ex-boyfriend 335:6 | fingering 374:20 | | | +| Epstein 308:7 309:18 | 429:3 | fingers 382:12,16 | | | +| 309:24 316:18 317:6 | E-mail 309:11 | finish 313:25,25 404:4 | | | +| 330:6,22 332:3 | E.W 309:2 | 404:15 | | | +| 333:10,19 360:25 | | finishes 369:19 | | | +| 361:9,12,15,18 | | first 311:7 312:16 | | | +| 365:22 366:15 369:6 | F 448:1 450:1 | 313:22 314:12 | | | +| | face 357:21 358:5,7 | 325:11,14 326:20 | | | +| | | 328:15,23 331:20 | | | + +|

342:17 343:6 344:8
346:5,12,25 348:21
349:20 353:24
356:16 358:8 367:10
376:14,17,22 387:3
388:10 399:5 397:15
398:10 399:3 403:25
404:4,12,15 408:10
409:21 421:4 422:7
425:9,21 429:6,11
430:1,2 434:22,24,25
435:2 436:17 443:18
going 314:23 326:12
330:22 332:3 333:10
334:17 343:6,14
347:8,9,12,13 348:3
348:4,7 351:18 353:9
354:4 365:18,20
366:6,6,7,17 370:6
383:3,15 384:2
391:19,21,25 392:8
392:17,22 398:6
401:17 404:9,11
405:13 418:7,10
423:3,5,8,15 425:20
427:9,11,16,16 432:7
432:21 433:1,2,3,4
434:14,20 435:15
441:10 442:8,12
443:18,20 445:2,19
445:22,23
good 365:11 385:7,17
385:19 386:22
387:14 388:17
389:11 391:7 407:17
442:10
gotten 321:1 322:19
323:8 347:9 398:8
426:3
GPA 342:15
grabbed 358:7
grade 344:7
graduate 341:21
343:16 399:6
graduated 341:20
great 439:25
ground 357:22
group 333:9
guess 411:16 422:6
guessing 399:6
guilty 339:13
guy 315:2,3 318:25
357:10 387:5 425:25
426:3 429:1 431:12
432:2
guys 425:4 445:21
gynecologist 325:21
326:3

|

H

H 309:14 310:10 451:1
Haley 337:18 429:7,8
430:13
Haley's 430:14
hand 346:19 443:25
handed 387:20,25
hands 351:19 352:12
handwriting 349:17,21
349:23 356:24 385:5
385:9,10,13,20
395:23
Handwritten 310:17
hang 335:17 337:14
happen 340:17,21
374:11 388:11
happened 340:8,14
344:10 345:13
346:10 347:3 374:3
374:13 419:15
421:25 432:6 434:1
happening 326:1
harassed 358:11
hard 358:7,10
head 367:4 387:5
health 417:9,10
hearing 350:13
heart 385:14,14,16,16
385:20
hearts 385:11,13
386:14 390:21
hereinabove 448:9,10
430:20
herpes 322:13,14,16,21
323:2 324:24 325:7
325:17 329:16,21
330:4,7,15 423:12
hey 415:11
high 311:20 312:24
316:14 325:9 364:4
364:10,14 373:2,16
373:21 379:21
398:13,15 399:10,12
416:9,10 419:18,21
History 310:18 395:21
hmm 337:16
hold 356:21 409:13
holding 351:19 352:12
home 325:20 344:11
365:17 379:15,23
380:4
hometown 337:21
honest 371:4,14 398:20
398:24
Honestly 383:16
hooked 426:10
308:21 447:14
448:5,21 449:22
451:2

|

HORACE 309:14
Horowitz 309:8,9
442:20 449:2,3
horrible 425:16
hospital 417:14
hour 437:20,21
hours 443:10,10,17,24
444:2,2,7
house 340:22 345:15
346:12 362:14,15,17
363:24 369:5 370:2
371:21 379:21
388:17 389:14 393:8
430:3,8
huh 377:21 402:12
human 360:2
humiliate 359:11,12
humiliated 358:15,18
358:20 360:7
humiliating 359:6
humiliation 359:1,6
hung 337:17 416:9
hunting 429:6,8
hurtful 407:14

I

ID 346:6 430:2,7
idea 365:9,11 371:23
371:24,25 416:18
identification 349:9
385:2 395:17
idiots 337:22
III 308:6,6 351:2
illegal 402:23
impression 395:6
incident 345:14
incodent 358:12,12
incoherent 358:12
income 401:20
Incorporated 309:25
incorrect 401:14
increasing 402:4
Indicating 414:8
individuals 316:14
information 324:1
334:15 428:12
431:13,14
initially 412:8
injunction 310:16
348:21 349:13
350:19 425:15,18
426:9
injunctions 348:25
innocence 339:18
inquiry 366:9
insert 368:6,17
inserting 368:15
instructions 449:11
insurance 417:9

|

insured 407:21
intentions 387:12,14
387:16
intercourse 314:20
316:24 317:4 353:11
353:17 354:18,21
356:12
interested 448:13
interpretation 444:14
Interrogatories 310:15
interrupted 373:20
interruption 392:24
interview 334:1
interviewed 392:12,19
393:2,6
interviewing 392:22
393:1
intimate 351:9,11,17
352:7,8,11,11,13,17
353:7,8,10,16 356:11
investigating 392:11
involved 336:22 337:8
338:3
Ira 348:19
items 411:20 414:5

J

J 309:3
jail 407:13 425:20,25
Jane 308:4,12 309:7
310:5 335:7,9 336:9
337:7 349:15 385:6
385:12,16 387:15
414:16,19,24 415:3,7
416:3,15,20,21 417:3
417:7 418:2,3 442:4
447:6 449:2,5,25
450:19 451:2,3
January 351:3,6 353:5
jaw 358:14
Jeff 309:24 418:21
Jeffrey 308:7 309:18
309:24 317:6 330:6
330:22 332:3 360:25
361:9,12,15,18
366:15 369:6 388:8
388:17 392:9,17,20
417:21,25 418:8,10
423:4 424:15 433:21
437:22,25
jerking 438:15
job 367:5 402:6,8
Joe 316:23
Joey 316:22
John 315:20 316:3
jokes 388:8
joking 387:1,3,5,8,12
387:22 388:7
JR 309:19

|

judge 425:23 443:12,18
443:19,22
July 351:8,10,14 352:4
353:5,16 355:2
426:19
June 317:14,24 341:23
376:21 377:1,3,10
378:4 419:16
junior 311:18,20
317:12 373:16,23,24
374:12,14
Jupiter 339:6 340:14
340:15,24
jury 353:14,22 356:11
357:7 364:9

K

keep 313:19 379:22
391:13,18,19,21,24
391:25 402:16
kept 376:4 384:2 420:2
420:4,18 422:7
425:19
keys 346:16,17,19,21
346:22,23
kid 441:1
kids 393:25 406:4
407:12
kind 328:17 337:19
341:12 344:2 364:18
379:4 395:6 396:18
396:24 404:13
415:11 442:6
kindergarten 344:6,6
kinds 414:3
kissing 351:18,19
kitchen 389:14
Kliman 396:10 398:18
399:20 401:16 403:1
403:13 405:6 406:2
409:20 410:1 413:3
423:17 440:13,22,24
knees 422:4
knew 315:13 316:7
318:23 334:9,15
336:11 386:7,13
391:21 392:21
403:15,20 405:2,6
409:25 431:24
441:13,16,20 442:1,2
know 312:14 314:17,19
315:2,17,20,23 316:2
316:22 320:16,17,21
321:1,19 322:2
324:12 326:11,15
327:24 330:9 332:18
332:24 333:7,19,19
333:21,22 334:11,14
334:15 335:21,24

| +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +| 336:3,17,19 337:10
337:11,11,12,12,13
337:20,21 338:2,4,7
338:10,11,18,20
339:2,24,24 341:2,18
342:15 345:22,23
346:2 347:1 348:2,9
348:12 349:2 351:18
351:20 354:7 358:24
359:1 364:4,10
365:18 366:22
368:10 369:23
372:12,14,16 375:14
376:18 377:4,15,18
377:22 379:9,20,25
381:15 383:22
384:21 390:2 393:9
393:16,17 396:22
398:7 399:12,13,18
400:5,10,16,18 401:7
403:13,25 405:9,11
405:12,22 408:6
409:19 412:18,24,25
414:18,20,23 415:1,2
415:4,6,8 416:11,15
416:17,21 417:5,8,11
417:24 418:2,12
419:20 427:9,11
429:14,17,19 430:15
431:1,5,17,22 433:13
433:21 436:3,6,8,9
436:11,16,23 440:20
442:5,7 445:10,22
knowledge 414:21,24
437:2 450:8
known 370:15
knows 334:3 335:10,14
337:3,6,12,20 378:9
378:12,13 428:11
431:24 433:6,11,14
433:18,19 444:13 | lawsuit 332:18,22,24
333:20,23 334:22,25
335:22 336:4,18
337:4,8 338:2,10
370:18 372:8,20,22
394:9
lawsuits 336:22
lawyer 347:5,9,14
348:11,14,15,16,18
397:19 424:23
lawyers 393:3 394:24
395:2
laying 357:9
leave 346:12,14,14,15
404:9,12
leaving 321:18 346:6
346:11,12,24 441:23
leeway 366:18
left 386:4,14 391:5
422:2 430:16
leg 422:3,11
legitimate 366:9
legs 422:15
lesions 322:24 323:22
letter 425:17 449:18
letting 313:24 441:16
let's 311:14 317:13
319:4 344:8 349:20
350:25 356:16 378:5
384:25 387:18
388:10 404:14,14
408:22 410:3,5
413:19 415:5 435:7
level 344:5
lick 420:3,13,16,19,24
421:21 422:18
423:11
licked 419:12 421:2,7
421:20,23
licking 367:13 419:25
421:15
lied 400:21 403:1
life 313:15 344:3
406:18 407:7,15
410:20 412:8,11,22
413:24 424:18
lift 425:18
lifted 422:3
liked 384:19
limit 442:20,24 443:1,3
limited 444:10
line 449:13 451:5
lip 358:13
lips 424:13,14
listed 414:5
listen 331:2,4,5,6 445:8
445:11,18
listened 435:10,14
little 345:24 346:3 | 366:18 384:13,16
402:3 412:9 426:22
live 336:21 341:5 429:5
lived 379:12,16
lives 431:4
living 429:4
LLP 309:20
located 429:22
long 329:5 412:1 421:4
longer 444:17
look 326:14,15 346:20
350:25 364:8 396:13
397:16 399:15
408:22 413:19
445:15
looked 399:7 424:4,5
442:24
looking 329:3 345:4
396:24 399:11 404:4
429:15 430:1,16
431:23
loss 418:6
lost 418:7,9
lot 328:5 361:2 383:22
383:23,24 387:8
424:13
loud 356:17
Love 385:6
low 360:12
Lucie 429:5 431:4
LUTTIER 309:19,20
310:7 311:6 312:22
314:1,7,11 315:1,9
315:12 316:1,12,21
317:3,9 320:8,24
324:16,21 327:8,11
327:18,22 328:10
329:2 330:2,19
331:15,24 332:17
333:12 336:1,10,16
337:1,23 338:8
339:14,21 340:7
342:8 347:11,16
348:5,17 349:5,7,10
352:1,19 353:20
354:2,8,12,14,17
355:1,9 356:3,7,15
358:19,23 359:10,21
360:1,6,15,20 363:15
363:20 364:7,16,21
365:1,21,24 366:2,4
366:14,19,21 367:8
367:12 368:2,5 369:3
369:20 370:10,13
372:11,23 375:1,10
375:24 376:7 377:2,8
377:13,20 378:5,9,12
378:15,19 383:1,8,13
384:1,8,15,23,25 | 385:3 386:12,18
387:17 389:4 391:9
391:15 392:3,7,16
393:4,14,22 394:2,4
394:8,19 395:4,12,15
395:18 397:3,8,17
398:16 399:4,14,19
400:9,15,19 401:1,6
401:12,22 402:20
403:7,19,24 404:7,11
404:20 405:17,25
406:1,10,22 407:5,18
408:1 409:14,23
411:5,10 412:15,19
413:7,18 414:2,13
415:22 416:1,7 419:1
419:5 421:14 422:17
422:20 425:13 426:8
426:14 427:23 428:3
428:14 433:9 438:12
440:4,12,21 442:8,14
442:17,21 443:5,11
444:6,12,22 445:17
lying 324:13,17 400:6
400:12 401:9
■■■ 321:21 330:4
333:22 341:16,17
343:2,6,8,13 381:16
388:13 392:10,11,18
417:10
L.M 309:2 | mean 321:9 323:20,24
328:1 330:18 336:12
336:20 340:25
341:11 342:3 345:19
346:6 349:2 351:16
351:19 352:11,12,13
352:14 353:7,17
359:12,16 366:5,6
367:6 374:5,22,23,23
383:18 384:18
396:21 411:8 412:20
412:23 413:8 414:15
415:23 416:11
424:22 426:17 427:1
434:25 436:12,13
441:20 444:16,25
445:6
meaning 412:10 413:16
means 352:13 356:20
359:14 413:4 448:15
meant 351:21 352:17
353:8,22 354:1,3,4
409:20 411:12
medication 437:6,8,10
437:13
medicine 322:18,19
meeting 436:5
men 328:13,16 424:21
mentioned 333:8
338:12 419:9
Mermelstein 309:8,9
312:20 313:24 314:6
314:10,23 315:7,11
315:22 316:10,19
317:1,7 320:6,18
324:14,19 327:6,10
327:17,21 328:7,24
329:25 330:16 331:2
331:4,10,13,20
332:11 333:11
335:23 336:6,14,25
337:9 338:5 339:12
339:17 340:4 342:7
346:25 347:5,7,24
348:3,13 349:3
351:23 352:9 353:19
353:23 354:5,11,16
354:23 355:7 356:2,6
356:13 358:17,21
359:8,18,23 360:5,13
360:18 363:13,18
364:6,12,19,24
365:18,23,25 366:3
366:12,17 367:6,10
367:25 368:3,25
369:18 370:3,8,11
372:9,18 374:15
375:9,22 376:6,24
377:7,12,15,24 378:3 | +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +|

378:7,11,17 382:24
383:6,11,17 384:6,14
386:8,16,24 391:8,14
392:1,5,13 393:12,21
394:1,3,7,18 395:1,8
396:13,14,18 397:1,6
397:15,21,25 398:3,9
399:1 400:7,13,17,23
401:4,11,17 402:12
402:14,16 403:5,18
403:22 404:2,5,8,13
405:15,21 406:8,19
407:4,9,24 409:11,21
411:1,9 412:13,17
413:6,12,15,25
414:10 415:21,25
416:4 418:22 419:4
421:13 422:16,19
425:11 426:5,13
427:22 428:2,9 433:8
438:7 440:2,10,17
442:16,18 443:2,7,16
443:22 444:8,15,24
445:5,10,12,16,20,25
449:3
message 430:15
Miami 309:10 449:4
MICHAEL 309:3
■ 319:25 320:12
321:2
middle 315:15,15,16,18
373:23 374:12,13
mind 389:3 391:23
397:16 399:9 402:17
442:7
mine 379:16 387:16
minute 320:20 387:18
387:18 437:19
minutes 445:23,25
missing 445:6
Mister 315:3
mom 326:4,6 335:1
354:4 379:25 433:10
433:20
moment 419:22
money 376:8 394:10,12
394:14,15,20,24
395:7 402:3 418:7,9
418:14,21 441:23
442:5
months 352:21 353:1,3
Morales 315:3,4,14
316:3,16,23,25 317:5
morning 319:9,20
322:6 358:13
mother 428:23 432:11
432:14,15,20,24
433:5
mother's 430:21

|

mouth 361:14 367:1,16
367:21 368:16
movie 353:10
movies 352:18 353:9
MRI 408:8
MRSA 417:11,11,16
417:22,25
318:12 386:1
418:21 440:25

N

N 310:2
naked 373:8 438:19
name 312:4 313:4
315:3,3 316:22
338:15 344:18
349:15 386:14 388:9
390:22 430:14,18,20
430:21 431:1,9,10
432:10,15 449:18
named 315:2
nature 351:3
near 321:21 360:23
necessary 449:9
neck 358:14
need 320:19 331:16
346:15,21 367:10
397:1
needed 430:3
neighborhood 337:2
neither 437:4
never 322:18,19 323:8
326:12 330:10,17
334:19,21,23 346:14
360:25 384:3,9 389:3
393:20 394:5 402:23
407:11 411:3 415:9,9
416:2,5 419:22,23,24
420:13 430:17
431:22 434:10,11,12
nice 361:3,4
night 340:11 344:10,12
345:5,8,18 346:5
358:11 429:25
nine 404:24 409:10,15
Noche 344:15,17
Noche's 344:18
North 309:15
Notary 308:22 447:14
448:5
notations 450:9
note 310:17 385:23
386:3 389:13 390:17
noted 449:13,14
notepad 388:3 389:6
389:10
notes 448:8
notice 449:7
notwithstanding

|

401:15
November 447:9
448:17 449:1
nude 373:17,22
number 311:4 385:18
385:21,22 388:18,20
388:22,23 395:13
401:23 402:21
431:17 445:14
449:13
Numeral 351:2

O

oath 400:21 401:8
415:6,14 416:2 447:1
obey 443:20
object 314:23 365:19
401:17 439:13
objection 312:20 314:6
314:24 315:11
316:11,19 317:1,7
324:14,15,19 327:6
327:10,17,21 328:7
328:24 329:25
330:16 333:11
335:23 336:6,25
337:9 338:5 351:23
352:9 353:19,23
354:5,11,23 355:7
356:2,6,13 358:17,21
359:18,23 360:5,13
360:18 363:18 364:6
364:12,19,24 368:25
370:3 372:9 374:15
375:9,22 376:6,24,24
377:7,12 378:6,10,17
382:24 383:6,11
384:6 386:8,16,24
391:8,14 392:1,1,5
392:13 393:12,21
394:1,7,18 395:1,8
399:1 400:7,13,17,23
401:11 403:5,18,22
405:15,21 406:8,20
407:4,9,24 409:21
411:1,9 412:13,17
413:6,12,15,25
414:10 418:22 419:4
421:13 422:16,19
426:5,13 427:22
428:2,9 440:2,10,17
obvious 376:3
obviously 313:21 418:8
occasion 328:12 410:8
410:12,17 411:7
occasions 319:14
376:14 400:11
410:16,17 411:13
420:11

|

occur 419:14 438:18
occurred 345:14
356:18 357:7
occurs 345:15
October 308:14 373:23
376:21 377:3,10
378:7 447:7 449:8
451:3
offered 394:14
offering 320:16
office 428:17 435:1,3
435:13 436:20
451:17
■ 340:6 352:15 370:15
378:12 387:21,23
389:2 441:24 442:3,5
442:6
okay 316:5,24 318:1,6
319:4,11 320:14,23
321:12 324:12
325:16 326:9 327:5
332:10,15 333:18
334:4 335:5,10
338:12,22 340:25
341:21 342:9 343:14
343:22,25 344:5,8
345:13 348:20 350:4
350:25 352:4 353:12
356:16 363:12,13
364:17 365:12
366:19 367:25 368:3
371:23 373:25 374:8
374:11 375:4 379:6
380:6,10 381:5,8
383:9 385:11,23
386:3 388:4,10,25
390:15 395:15
396:11 397:15,24,25
401:13,25 402:7,15
403:24 404:12 410:3
411:17,24 414:14,23
415:18,25 417:3
418:12 419:9 420:16
420:17,21,22 421:20
421:24 423:10,25
424:17 428:15,17
429:24 430:19 434:1
434:14,19 435:7
436:15,25 437:19
438:6 442:6,17
444:22 445:19
Olas 309:4
old 315:10,13 326:23
337:2 362:19 388:23
older 363:2
once 316:14 320:4
321:18 375:19 377:5
384:9 403:12 427:10
435:18 436:7,9,11,12

|

436:13,14,19 449:14
one-day 443:8,8
open 358:9 422:14
opened 358:4,6
opinion 358:25
oral 314:22 315:6
316:9,16 329:23
355:10 366:23
368:20
order 350:18 360:22
442:25,25 443:5,13
443:20,21,23,24
444:16,19,21,23
ordering 446:2 449:17
organ 439:16
orgasm 375:14,16
376:10 382:23 383:3
orgasming 381:25,25
382:3
orgasms 377:9 380:8
380:17
orifice 355:25 368:17
439:7
original 449:16 451:17
originally 389:12
402:18
ought 360:2
outbreak 323:6 324:11
outbreaks 322:18
outside 346:12
ovarian 408:9
overbroad 369:1
428:10
owned 362:17

P

pad 388:17 390:17,17
page 310:13 349:14,15
349:20,23,25 350:2
350:25 356:17,21,23
357:25 358:2 397:6
397:16 398:5,8
449:13 451:5
pages 448:7 449:15
paid 312:12 313:12
318:18 343:11 376:8
383:4 418:8,14,20
pain 358:14
pal 316:5
Palm 308:18 309:21
321:19,21,22 333:8
336:20 337:13,16,17
345:7,10 393:8
400:22 424:16 447:3
448:3 450:4
pals 316:5
pants 373:12,17
paper 387:25 398:17
405:23 409:11

| +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +| Paragraph 356:16,23 | pill 319:9 322:6 | 314 :21,22 318:14,16 | 381 :9,22 382:12,16 | really 361:4 397:19 | +|-------------------------------|-------------------------------|-------------------------------|------------------------------|--------------------------------| +| Parenthood 320:11 | pimp 418:12,14,16,20 | 318 :19 325:2 326:19 | 385 :18 386:14 | 401 :7 402:14 432:6,9 | +| 321:1 | Pine 334:7 402:2 | 330 :23 332:6 350:16 | 388 :18,20 389:6,10 | 434 :1 | +| parents 325:19 332:18 | place 311:23 313:3 | 351 :5,11 352:5,22 | 402 :3 422:11 439:10 | reason 389:17 392:8,17 | +| 332:21 362:7,8,17 | 318 :8 362:13 429:11 | 353 :2 356:20 357:4,9 | P.A 309:9,14 449:3 | 451 :5 | +| 363:24,25 365:16,17 | 429 :15 442:11 448:9 | 357 :10,12,17 361:21 | p.m 308:14 | reasonable 449:16 | +| 369:5,5,21,25 370:5 | placed 361:14,17 | 362 :11 364:1,15 | | recall 319:17 320:23 | +| 370:12,14 383:19,20 | Plaintiff 308:5 309:2 | 367 :1 371:15,20 | | 321 :5 352:20 367:20 | +| 406:23 434:15,16,18 | 444 :11 | 373 :1 393:24 421:9 | | 373 :15 384:22 | +| part 382:23 435:15 | plan 343:18,25 344:2 | 424 :22 425:16 | | 438 :16 440:13 | +| particularly 440:7 | Planned 320:11,11 | 426 :10 428:1,4 | qualify 397:22 | recognize 395:21 | +| parties 416:10 448:12 | 321:1 | Preston's 365:10 | question 314:25 315:8 | record 311:4 331:11 | +| 451:18 | plans 342:17,20 343:22 | 371 :23,25 438:4 | 315 :22 316:11,20 | 339 :23 362:10 | +| party 448:12 | play 435:7 | presumption 339:17 | 322 :21 330:1 331:4,6 | 396 :15,17,19 404:1 | +| pause 320:20 | played 337:18 371:6 | pretty 337:3,6 376:3 | 332 :13 336:13 349:4 | 442 :12 | +| pay 343:21 | player 330:3 337:16 | 382 :18 441:20 | 354 :13 355:17,21 | recorded 361:22 | +| paying 428:15 | playing 408:7,9 | prevent 424:20 | 366 :8,16 368:4 | 365 :15 | +| pen 388:6 390:21 | plead 347:8,10,13 | previously 352:20 | 369 :19 370:6,8 | recording 364:1 | +| penalty 451:19 | Please 449:7,10 451:17 | 449 :10 | 373 :20 389:8 392:15 | records 427:17 | +| pending 404:14 | Plus 376:8 | primary 411:18 | 397 :2,4 398:3,7 | RECROSS 310:4 | +| penetrate 421:21 439:7 | Pocket 379:5,7,8 | principle 407:6 | 401 :18 402:4,10,13 | REDIRECT 310:4 | +| 439:12,15 | point 313:14 373:10,15 | prior 314:20 328:12 | 402 :17 403:15,21 | refer 443:25 444:25 | +| penis 355:13,22 361:6 | 373 :25 374:19 | 331 :10 345:11 | 404 :7,14 405:2 | 445 :3 | +| 361:8,12,14,17 367:1 | 375 :11 381:9 411:4 | 410 :21 420:11,13 | 406 :19 408:22,22 | reference 444:6 445:14 | +| 368:6,16,17 437:22 | 438 :14 | 444 :23 | 410 :5 412:4,25 413:5 | referred 423:18 428:21 | +| 437:24,25 | police 334:1 340:14 | probably 319:13 | 413 :9,17 414:12 | 432 :15 433:6 441:24 | +| Pennsylvania 325:18 | 370 :20 392:10,18,21 | 340 :18 393:16 | 415 :14 416:12 | referring 349:14 | +| people 326:18 333:22 | 400 :21,22 | 436 :10 | 425 :12 433:8 438:3 | 356 :12 417:15,21 | +| 335:19 336:21 337:7 | Port 429:5 431:4 | problem 411:18 412:2 | 445 :18 | 424 :8 442:2 | +| 337:21 338:11 359:7 | portion 331:11 | 412 :8,10,11,21 | questionnaire 417:10 | refers 408:24 | +| 424:24 | position 366:11 368:9 | 413 :20 414:9 | questions 340:4 371:9 | reflect 366:23,25 402:7 | +| people-wise 383:21 | 422 :7 443:10 | problems 414:4 434:2 | 382 :3 392:22 396:22 | refresh 397:16 | +| perform 368:19 | positioned 421:24 | 434 :10,12,12 | 396 :23 399:22,24 | regard 443:14,15 | +| performing 373:4 | possible 320:25 | Professional 448:5,5 | 408 :15,18 | regarding 442:19 | +| period 318:1 330:21 | pot 415:19 416:3,8,13 | program 343:17 | quit 392:8,17 | register 312:4 | +| 332:5 353:5 424:1 | 416 :23 | prom 381:20 | quite 381:24 | registered 313:4 448:5 | +| perjury 451:19 | pregnancies 319:15 | Proposal 310:14 | | regular 341:12 | +| person 324:25 339:10 | pregnancy 325:14 | Prose 308:22 | | regularity 341:10,11 | +| 407:22 432:17 | pregnancy 325:14 | prostitute 418:15,16 | R 448:1 450:1 451:1,1 | Related 308:9 | +| 433:11 | 404 :25 | 419 :2,7 | Ra 344:24,25 429:21 | relations 314:4 351:22 | +| personal 414:24 | pregnant 312:16 | protection 349:13 | 429 :22 430:13 | 352 :5,23 353:2 355:4 | +| personally 447:6 | 313 :19,22 314:2,12 | 425 :22 | raised 442:23 | 361 :21 362:11 | +| person's 444:14 | 314 :16 318:25 | provide 444:2,25 445:2 | raising 407:12 | relationship 316:2 | +| Petition 310:16 349:12 | 325 :11 327:2 354:10 | psychiatrist 426:18 | rank 412:7 | 345 :21 351:3,4,5,9 | +| phone 309:5,11,16,22 | 354 :19,22 356:5 | 431 :23 432:1,9 | rate 412:21 444:13 | 351 :11,17 353:16 | +| 357:10 390:6 431:15 | 363 :6 393:24 405:3 | 435 :11 437:3,5 | reaction 371:16 | 355 :5 | +| 431:16,17 | 405 :10 406:3 407:21 | Psychological/Social | read 331:8,12 356:17 | relationships 355:4 | +| phonetic 315:20 348:19 | 408 :3,6 426:3,11 | 310 :18 395:20 | 357 :6 387:19 396:19 | relationship-wise | +| 426:19 | Pres 311:24,24 | psychologist 437:3 | 399 :2 402:4,9 444:4 | 383 :21 | +| photograph 373:1 | prescribe 437:6 | public 308:22 339:23 | 444 :4,8,9 449:10,12 | relative 448:12 | +| photographs 373:7 | prescribed 437:8,10 | 447 :14 448:6 | 449 :14,16 450:5 | release 425:23 | +| physical 346:8 | prescriptions 319:8,12 | pumpkin 443:16 | 451 :19 | relief 395:7 | +| physically 365:3 | 319 :18 | punished 394:22 | reading 323:25 399:16 | religious 407:1 | +| picked 388:6,9 | present 309:24 369:14 | 395 :10 | ready 404:5 | remarried 431:2 | +| picking 347:18 388:6 | 385 :23 437:13 439:1 | purports 349:12 | real 312:4 313:4 | remember 311:12,19 | +| picks 347:23 | Presidential 311:25 | purse 346:13,16,17,17 | 345 :20 | 311 :23 314:17,18 | +| piece 387:25 | press 347:19,19 | 357 :16 | reality 383:2 | 318 :2,4,5 320:13 | +| Pierce 428:18,19,20 | Preston 312:9,11,13 | pushed 357:18 | realize 346:18 | 322 :2 323:24,25 | +| 436:20 | 313 :9,11,13 314:4,15 | put 337:25 365:3 374:6 | realized 347:1 | 325 :6,7,12,13,14 | + +| spread 336:20 | 366:24 377:16,17,25 | 406:2,4,6 421:16 | 330:21,23 331:19 | +|------------------------|----------------------|-----------------------|------------------------| +| spring 343:7,8 | 378:1 411:18 415:5 | 423:10,11 427:16 | 332:5 338:24 340:17 | +| St 429:5 431:4 | 415:10 417:1 427:3 | 428:4,5,7 430:6,9,12 | 345:11 352:16 353:5 | +| stand 356:10 | 436:25 438:7,7 | 431:9 433:18 438:24 | 355:10,13 361:9 | +| standing 389:13 422:1 | 449:14 | 439:4,18 440:5 | 362:19 368:2,9 | +| start 343:5 355:5 | surgery 417:14 | telling 324:8 329:9 | 373:10 374:1,18,18 | +| started 317:13,14 | swollen 358:14 | 386:21 387:4 391:7 | 375:11 376:15,19 | +| 352:16 355:3 357:12 | sworn 447:7 | 400:6,11,21 401:2,8 | 377:9,14,21 378:16 | +| 357:17 374:20,21 | symptoms 325:23 | 413:3 415:6 425:17 | 378:20 379:1 381:9,9 | +| 433:2,4 438:19,21 | system 343:20 345:23 | 440:13,22 443:12 | 381:13 382:9,11,12 | +| state 308:22 347:21,22 | | ten 444:9 | 382:17,18 383:17 | +| 348:6,6 373:7 447:2 | | terms 366:13 438:15 | 384:14 385:7,17,19 | +| 447:14 448:2,6 450:3 | | tested 323:9 | 386:22 387:15 | +| stated 363:11 409:1 | | testified 352:21,25 | 388:14,17 389:11,22 | +| statements 337:15 | | testimony 330:20 | 389:25 391:7 407:10 | +| 450:6 | | 373:13 388:16 416:2 | 407:16 408:5 410:6 | +| States 308:1 326:3 | | 438:16 | 410:14,20,21,23 | +| State's 347:18 | | theater 353:10 | 411:12 417:18 419:2 | +| stay 341:9 393:8 | | thing 344:9 374:24 | 419:15 420:14,14,16 | +| 445:22 | | 394:23 395:5 397:7 | 420:22 421:25 | +| staying 341:7 379:17 | | 398:2 429:25 | 422:21 423:3 424:1 | +| stenotype 448:7 | | things 345:22 346:3,7 | 430:11 433:2,5 | +| stick 355:22 | | 347:20 383:22,23,24 | 434:20 435:22 | +| stop 382:4,7 421:16,18 | | 395:10 414:8 425:16 | 437:14 442:20,24 | +| 442:9,11 | | 427:2 428:13 441:21 | 443:3 448:9 449:8,16 | +| store 321:18 | | think 311:12,13 312:1 | times 319:11,13 328:25 | +| street 341:1,3,3,5 | | 312:15 320:10,10,16 | 376:18,20,22 377:18 | +| streetwise 378:13 | | 328:17,18 331:22 | 377:22 378:23 | +| Stuart 309:8 445:9,11 | | 332:14 346:21 348:1 | 393:25 410:24 | +| stuck 355:13 382:2 | | 348:9 354:16 365:11 | 420:20 426:4,7,25 | +| student 341:19 | | 370:9,19 371:1,2 | 427:4,5,6,12 435:20 | +| students 334:8 | | 381:2 389:15 397:2 | 435:21,24 436:1,4,16 | +| stuff 323:25 346:20 | | 399:8,9 406:19 | tissue 389:2 | +| 364:18 | | 407:14 411:11 | today 372:1 380:19,25 | +| stupid 345:21 | | 419:11 423:15,19 | told 323:2,7,16,19,25 | +| styled 444:10 | | 425:8,9 437:7 438:5 | 325:19,23,25 326:7,9 | +| subject 451:20 | | 438:15 443:2 444:3,6 | 326:11,13,19,20 | +| subsequent 444:21 | | thinking 399:12,17,17 | 328:11,14,18 329:4,6 | +| substance 451:20 | | third 317:10 318:24 | 329:8,10 334:14,16 | +| successful 319:15 | | 332:7 349:23 | 334:19,21,24 335:18 | +| sued 394:12 | | third-closest 335:16 | 339:22,25 347:2 | +| suffered 383:14 418:6 | | Thirty 401:24 | 356:17 357:19 | +| suggest 366:10 | | thought 333:7 336:11 | 367:11 370:4,4,16,23 | +| suing 394:21 | | 339:15 365:12 384:5 | 371:4,10,14 376:2 | +| suit 394:15 | | 391:3 393:19 407:16 | 378:20 382:4 384:19 | +| Suite 308:17 309:4,10 | | 408:7 410:12 424:5 | 391:22 401:16 | +| 309:15,21 449:4 | | 433:16 | 408:15,18 410:2,4 | +| summer 334:6 378:2 | | three 330:24 332:3,5 | 415:10,16 418:3,3 | +| 402:6,8 | | 376:20 393:24,25 | 423:17 425:23 | +| summers 402:1 | | 405:13 406:4 407:7 | 427:13,19,24 428:1,8 | +| summoned 340:14 | | 407:12 420:20 426:3 | 432:17,20,25 433:10 | +| suppose 404:2 | | 426:7 435:21 445:23 | 433:16,16,20 440:15 | +| supposed 347:15 400:5 | | three-way 390:2,5,6,7 | 442:24 | +| 445:5 | | threw 346:17 357:16 | top 358:13,13 439:10 | +| sure 320:18,18,21,23 | | 357:21 | topless 373:8 | +| 325:3,6 329:18 331:5 | | time 312:16 314:12 | total 320:11 | +| 331:6,22 332:13 | | 316:25 318:24 320:1 | touch 361:6 392:14 | +| 337:13 338:22 | | 320:9 323:10 325:9 | touched 361:11 | +| 347:20 353:12 | | 325:11 326:7,20,23 | town 376:20 | + +| 332:13 372:15
399:25 418:16
442:16,18 443:11
underwear 373:2 374:8
undress 373:7
UNITED 308:1
University 321:21
333:22 341:16,17
343:9,13 381:16
388:13 392:10,12,19
417:10
upset 371:17 406:13
usage 402:23
use 313:19 374:19
375:2,12 378:21,23
380:4,13,25 404:10
415:9,15 419:11
439:22 441:17 | 421:9 425:16 426:11
Vinyard's 367:1
violence 339:8,11
344:9 347:21 348:23
349:1,13 350:19
425:15 426:10 429:2
429:25 432:3
violent 428:4
vis 443:1
visa 443:1
visit 374:18,18 381:13
437:18 438:20
visits 437:17
Visual 309:25
VOLUME 308:6
voluntarily 373:11
375:6 387:23 391:1
422:23 423:8
vs 308:6 449:5 451:2
vulva 327:15
V-a-l-t-r-a-x 322:10 | 361:5 364:17 387:7
388:11 390:2 408:2
423:10 424:9 425:14
429:1
week 340:9 345:11
376:20 427:10
436:19
weekend 339:1,1
weekends 341:13,15
weeks 339:2,3
went 316:17 317:5
320:12 321:22
322:23 333:14,16,18
334:2 337:2,21 343:8
344:24 346:4,18,19
350:13 357:16,22
360:21 361:8,12,18
365:12,13 373:11
381:5 408:2,10,10
417:21,25 418:9
425:14,23 429:24
430:5,11 434:2,5
weren't 334:4 356:12
383:9 386:23 387:14
400:3 405:14 410:25
441:21
West 308:18 309:21
345:7,10
We'll 331:20 342:10
we're 311:4 348:25
353:12 366:5,7
396:18 404:3 411:11
415:5,12 427:16
442:14 445:5,21
we've 434:11
WHEELER 309:3
when's 338:24
whore 357:11 358:5
WILLITS 309:14,14
wish 449:12,17
wished 440:5 441:2
witness 310:4 312:21
315:24 328:8 330:17
331:3,9,14 332:16
335:24 336:8,15
337:10 338:7 339:19
340:6 347:4,6,13
348:1,16 351:25
352:11 353:25 354:7
354:13,25 355:6
356:14 358:18,22
359:20,24 360:14,19
363:19 364:14
366:20 369:2 370:4
372:10,19 374:17
377:1,18 378:2
382:25 383:7,18
386:10,17,25 389:2
392:6,14,25 395:9 | 396:21 397:24 398:1
398:6,11 399:2,5,15
400:18 401:5,19
402:10,13,15,19
403:23 404:6,9,17
406:9,21 407:10,23
411:2 412:14,18
413:13,16 414:1,11
415:24 416:5 418:24
426:6 428:11 438:10
440:3,11,19 445:18
446:5
woke 358:13
woman 390:13
Women's 311:25
word 336:20 370:24
371:1
words 387:19,19 389:5
389:9 423:19 439:22
441:17
work 343:20,24 429:20
worked 334:7 402:1,2
working 430:13
works 429:17,19
worse 359:16 361:2
Worth 309:16
worthless 360:17
wouldn't 346:13 353:5
393:11 426:17
write 352:7 358:3
387:10,11,14 389:5,7
389:9 449:13 451:5
writes 390:16,17,20
writing 351:4,10
written 398:5
wrong 332:1 381:2
wrote 351:8,21 353:16
357:7 386:5,11 388:2
388:5,7,16,25 389:11
409:3 425:17 | 329:10,14,17,17,19
330:5 331:18 332:9
332:20 334:2,2
335:11,15 336:24
337:5 338:23 340:12
340:16,20 341:14,24
342:5,14 343:10,24
344:1,4,4,13,20,24
346:9 347:4,6,18
348:15,16 349:16,19
349:22,24 350:1,3,6
350:9,12,15,21,24
351:7,13 352:3 353:3
353:7,25 354:25
355:18 356:9,14
357:15 359:4,13,15
360:8,14,19,24 361:4
361:24 362:3,9,12,18
364:23 365:6,13,23
366:2 367:2,15 368:8
369:8,24 370:10,19
370:19,21 371:22
373:19 374:2,17
375:3,5,8,15,18,20
376:1,9,13,14 377:6
377:11 379:3 380:5,7
380:9,12,14,16,18,23
380:24 381:1,7,11
382:15,18,22,25
383:7 384:24 385:14
385:25 386:2,6,17
387:24 388:19
389:15,18,21,23
390:4,8,19,23 391:2
391:4,6,11,19 395:22
395:24 396:1,4,7
397:14 398:11,13,14
398:19,21,23 401:5
403:23 404:13 405:1
405:5,8,20,25 406:5
406:9,12,14,16,21,25
408:21 409:18 410:2
410:9 411:3,8,15,16
411:23,25 413:22
414:7 416:14 417:2
417:13,19,19 418:13
418:18,24 419:13,19
420:4,25 421:3,8,10
421:17,19 422:6,6,10
422:13,22,24 423:2,6
423:9,21,24 424:2,7
424:19 425:3,24
426:2,16,22 427:1,3
427:6,8,9,18,21,25
428:6,25 429:9,18
431:16 432:4,12,14
432:19,22,23,24
435:6,17,19 436:8,10
436:10,14,14 437:2,7 | +|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| +|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| + +| * 438:5,10,17 439:11
441:9,10,12,15 443:5
444:8,15 446:1,1
year 311:10,19,20
312:24 317:12,15,18
317:20 350:18,22
360:23 373:24
374:12,14 403:12
419:17,17,20 425:8
years 401:21 404:19
405:3 425:3,8 433:4
yelling 357:17
young 353:8 364:17
you-all 441:7,13 | 15th 351:8,10,14 352:4
353:16 355:2
16 311:13 312:18
313:22 314:2 327:4,5
16-year-old 328:2
1650 309:4
17 311:16 312:25
362:25 363:3 399:16
18205 309:9 449:3

2
2 308:4 310:15 350:25
449:5 451:2
2nd 396:2 397:11
20th 356:18 357:7
358:15
2002 351:4,6,8,10,14
352:4 353:5,16 355:3
2003 322:5
2004 356:18 357:8
358:15
2008 396:3 397:11
2009 308:14 447:7,9
448:17 449:1,8
450:13 451:3
2011 447:15
2218 309:10 449:4
2290 309:15
232 310:15
249 341:4,5
25 447:15
250 308:17
27 308:14 451:3
27th 447:7 449:7 | 349:15 384:23,25
385:1,5,6,12,17
387:15 447:6 449:2
449:25 450:19 451:3
4:19 311:5
400 309:21
401 309:4
404 309:15
412 314:24 316:10,19
317:1,7 329:25
365:19 368:4
45 437:19 | | | +|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--| +| \$
\$200 383:4 441:21
\$300 312:15 441:22
\$50 437:18

0
05 317:14,14 376:21,21
377:3,3,10,10,19
378:2,7,8 419:16
06 317:15,22 318:3,4
318:15
07 317:23,24 318:3
08-CIV-80119-MAR...
449:6
08-CV-80119-MAR...
308:2
08-08380 308:9
08-80232 308:9
08-80381 308:9
08-80811 308:10
08-80893 308:10
08-80993 308:10
08-80994 308:9
09 341:22,23 426:19
09-80469 308:10
09-80591 308:10
09-80656 308:10
09-80802 308:10
09-81092 308:10 | 5 310:18 395:16,20
52 408:22,23
53 410:5
561.582.7600 309:16
561.842.2820 309:22
57 411:17

6
6 356:16,23
6th 447:9 448:17 449:1
6:04 442:13
6:05 308:14
635 385:21
635-3454 385:19
643788 447:15

7
7 335:7,9 336:9 337:7
414:16,24 415:3,7
416:3,16 442:4
72 310:14 | | | | +| 1
1 309:7 310:14 351:1,2
397:7
1st 351:4,6
1:00 340:18 345:15
10th 309:15
11:11 308:14
115 308:17
12 328:21 408:24
13 411:20
14 328:21 414:4
147 356:18
15 314:5 327:5 328:21
352:17 414:6 | 3
3 310:16 311:4 349:5,8
349:12 353:15
356:23 414:19
416:20,22 417:3,7
418:2,3 442:13,13
3.2 342:16
3.3 342:16
30 427:11
303 309:20
305.931.2200 309:11
311 310:7
324-7996 388:22
33160 309:10 449:4
33301 309:5
33401 308:18 309:21
33461 309:16
348 310:16
384 310:17
39 402:7
394 310:18

4
4 308:12 310:5,17 | 8
8 309:7
81 404:17
86 444:20
87 411:18
88 412:1
89 412:7

9
90 413:19
954.522.3456 309:5 | | | \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748364/EFTA02748364.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748364/EFTA02748364.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4413f21e76e6441c2fa5dd3b161c3d64841ac3dc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748364/EFTA02748364.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,1577 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748364.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 47, + "chars": 279072, + "elapsed_seconds": 135.25, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 63.17999999999999 + ], + [ + 450.95367431640625, + 63.17999999999999 + ], + [ + 450.95367431640625, + 100.254150390625 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 100.254150390625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "12VIDEO-CONFERENCED AND \nJANE \nVIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF \nDOE NO. 4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 44.45882034301758, + 353.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 509.9191589355469, + 353.15999999999997 + ], + [ + 509.9191589355469, + 389.3340148925781 + ], + [ + 44.45882034301758, + 389.3340148925781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 200 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 684 + ], + [ + "Line", + 74 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 837 + ], + [ + "Line", + 141 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 811 + ], + [ + "Line", + 142 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 842 + ], + [ + "Line", + 117 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 912 + ], + [ + "Line", + 116 + ], + [ + "Text", + 32 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 814 + ], + [ + "Line", + 91 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 848 + ], + [ + "Line", + 126 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 775 + ], + [ + "Line", + 65 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 754 + ], + [ + "Line", + 98 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 970 + ], + [ + "Line", + 115 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 826 + ], + [ + "Line", + 116 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 902 + ], + [ + "Line", + 140 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 958 + ], + [ + "Line", + 143 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 917 + ], + [ + "Line", + 167 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 868 + ], + [ + "Line", + 166 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 859 + ], + [ + "Line", + 125 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 20, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 902 + ], + [ + "Line", + 116 + ], + [ + "Text", + 56 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 21, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 883 + ], + [ + "Line", + 135 + ], + [ + "Text", + 79 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 22, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 844 + ], + [ + "Line", + 100 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 23, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 935 + ], + [ + "Line", + 165 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 24, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 758 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 25, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 881 + ], + [ + "Line", + 142 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 26, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 932 + ], + [ + "Line", + 116 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 5 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 27, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 860 + ], + [ + "Line", + 109 + ], + [ + "Text", + 83 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 28, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 864 + ], + [ + "Line", + 88 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 29, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 874 + ], + [ + "Line", + 117 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 30, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 842 + ], + [ + "Line", + 98 + ], + [ + "Text", + 70 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 31, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 891 + ], + [ + "Line", + 101 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 32, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 871 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 33, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 832 + ], + [ + "Line", + 128 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 34, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 974 + ], + [ + "Line", + 104 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 35, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 677 + ], + [ + "Line", + 121 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 36, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 35 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 37, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 38, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 941 + ], + [ + "Line", + 296 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 39, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 40, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 41, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 42, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 43, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 44, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 978 + ], + [ + "Line", + 296 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 45, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 46, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748364" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748411/EFTA02748411.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748411/EFTA02748411.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a30dce96792b31089c82488897d63eb718e86253 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748411/EFTA02748411.md @@ -0,0 +1,221 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +# JANE DOE NO. 4's APPEAL PURSUANT TO S.D.FLA.L.MAG.R. 4 OF ORDER DENYING HER MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AGAINST SECOND DAY OF DEPOSITION EXTENDING PAST SEVEN HOURS + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4 ("Plaintiff'), by and through undersigned counsel, files this Appeal, pursuant to S.D.Fla.Mag.J.R. 4 and 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1XA), of the Magistrate Judge's Omnibus Order entered on November 17. 2009 (DE 413), which denied Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Protective Order Against Second Day of Deposition Extending Past Seven Hours, on the grounds set forth below. + +## I. Introduction and S are + +Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's demonstrated strategy in defense of these cases has been to harass, intimidate, embarrass and humiliate the Plaintiffs. He has done this through the aggressive use of investigators; extensive and invasive discovery on the details of the Plaintiffs' sexual histories with men other than Epstein; and now, by means of a badgering and berating the + +Plaintiffs at deposition.' The Plaintiffs in these cases — who generally have low socio-economic backgrounds and poor self-esteem — are particularly vulnerable to Defendant's nefarious tactics, and indeed it may fairly be inferred that this is a significant reason why Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted sex offender, selected them to be his victims in the first place. By denying Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order in its entirety, the Magistrate Judge's Order (DE 413) is clearly erroneous and contrary to law. This Order compels Jane Doe No. 4 to sit for an additional four hours of deposition, after having her deposition taken for five hours and thirty-five minutes (excluding breaks) over the course of a full day. Plaintiff appeals this Order on the grounds that it fails entirely to recognize or acknowledge that: + +- Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(dXI) and S.D.Fla.L.R. 26.1(K), the 7-hour time limit for depositions is presumptive; it is clearly Defendant's burden by motion to show cause for a longer deposition, which Defendant fails entirely to satisfy.2 +- Under S.D.Fla.L.R. 30.1(A)(5), the questioning of Jane Doe No. 4 during the first 5' hours of her deposition was abusive. It demonstrates that no more than 7 hours are necessary for a fair and appropriate deposition, and that the additional four hours of deposition time ordered by the Magistrate Judge will undoubtedly subject Jane Doe No. 4 to further abuse as described in S.D.Fla.L.R. 30.1(A)(5). +- Under this Court's Order Consolidating Cases dated May 14, 2009 (DE 98), any waiver of the 7 hour limit is subject to the admonition that no party has the authority + +I Plaintiffs, Jane Does Nos. 2-8, sought in prior motion practice various protections against the conduct of Epstein's investigators and discovery of the Plaintiffs' sexual histories. In both of these instances, the Magistrate Judge denied Plaintiffs any relief. See infra. + +2 Defendant not only fails to satisfy this burden, but the 446 pages of transcripts of the existing deposition, in three volumes, demonstrate by themselves that Defendant should not be permitted to exceed the 7-hour limit. See infra and attached Exhibits 1-3. + +"to take unnecessarily long depositions, or abuse the process." (1 8). The Magistrate Judge's Order contains no such admonition, yet the transcripts of the existing deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 demonstrate vividly Defendant's abuse of the deposition process. + +Rules 26(c) and 30(d)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are designed to prevent exactly the misconduct demonstrated in the present case - Jeffrey Epstein's use of discovery as a tactic with the ulterior motive to harass and humiliate the Plaintiff. The Magistrate Judge's failure to provide any protection to Plaintiff whatsoever under these circumstances, and perfunctorily grant Defendant carte blanche in discovery,; is clearly erroneous. + +## II. Procedural Background + +Jane Doe No. 4's deposition was originally scheduled for September 16, 2009. On that date, while Plaintiff was walking to the conference room where the deposition was to be taken pursuant to Jeffrey Epstein's notice, Jeffrey Epstein appeared within a few feet of Plaintiff, in contravention of the express agreement of Epstein's counsel and in violation of the No-contact Order entered by this Court. (DE 238). This gave rise to motion practice that was resolved by the Magistrate Judge's Order dated October 23, 2009 (DE 369), which required that Jane Doe No. 4 sit for deposition on October 27, 2009 at 11:00 a.m., and prohibited Jeffrey Epstein from appearing at the deposition. + +Prior to the deposition, Plaintiffs' counsel advised Defendant's counsel of their position that the deposition could go no longer than 7 hours absent court order. Jane Doe No. 4 appeared + +&#x27; As discussed below, the Magistrate Judge issued her decision granting Defendant all the relief requested in his Response Memorandum before Plaintiff had an opportunity to file a Reply to Defendant's Response Memorandum, and without the benefit of the transcripts of Jane Doe No. 4's existing deposition, which had not been filed at the time that the Order was entered. + +for deposition at the court ordered date and time. Jane Doe's deposition proceeded from 11:11 a.m. until 6:05 p.m. The deposition transcript is in three volumes and at this point 446 pages in length. A complete copy of the deposition transcripts, volumes I-III, is attached hereto as Exhibits 1-3, respectively. + +Subsequent to the deposition, the parties attempted to reach agreement on the remaining time for a second day of deposition of Jane Doe No. 4. Plaintiff's counsel calculated the aggregate time of Jane Doe No. 4 in deposition on October 27, 2009 (excluding breaks) as 5 hours, 35 minutes, which Defendant's counsel did not dispute. Defendant's counsel, however, insisted on taking Jane Doe No. 4's deposition for an additional 4 hours, giving Defendant almost 10 hours of aggregate deposition time of Jane Doe No. 4 over two days. As a result, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Protective Order on November 3, 2009 (DE 392). Prior to the filing of this Motion, another Plaintiff in these cases represented by different counsel, Jane Doe, filed a similar Motion for Protective Order (DE 378), attempting to limit Defendant from taking a second day of Jane Doe's deposition. The principal argument set forth in both Motions concerned interpretation of the Court's Order Consolidating Cases dated May 14, 2009 (DE 98). Plaintiffs contended that the waiver of the 7-hour deposition limit set forth in paragraph 8 of that Order did not authorize the Defendant to take a deposition exceeding 7 hours of a Plaintiff absent court order. On November 12, 2009, Defendant filed his response in opposition to Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Protective Order. (DE 404). Under S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1, Plaintiff had until November 23, 2009 to file a Reply. However, well prior to this date, on November 17, 2009. t he Magistrate Judge issued an Omnibus Order (DE 413) which denied the relief sought in the + +Motions of both Jane Doe and Jane Doe No. 4 in their entirety.° The decretal portion of this Omnibus Order, which Jane Doe No. 4 appeals, is as follows: + +> ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Deposition and for Sanctions. (D.E. #378); and Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Protective re Second Day of Deposition (D.E. # 392) are DENIED. Epstein's counsel is hereby given leave to re-depose Jane Doe for up to 3 additional hours and hereby given leave to re-depose Jane Doe 4 for up to 4 additional hours. + +# v l)eposit ion Questioning + +The transcripts of Jane Doe No. 4's deposition, attached hereto as Exhibits 1-3, are replete with instances of abusive deposition conduct, consisting of harassing, humiliating and irrelevant questions having no legitimate discovery purpose. This abusive and unnecessary questioning demonstrates that: (I) the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, as well as the other Plaintiffs in these cases, can be fairly completed within 7 hours; and (2) providing Defendant with an additional four hours of deposition time for Jane Doe No. 4 will more likely than not subject Jane Doe No. 4 to additional abuse. + +For example, Defendant's counsel asked Jane Doe the following sequence of questions in response to her testimony that she has had three abortions: + +> Q. -- you went and aborted three kids? Why wouldn't you want people to know that? + +Q. Does it cause you any upset to know that you aborted three kids in your life? + +4 Plaintiff in her Motion for Protective Order described the nature and extent of the abusive questioning at Jane Doe No. 4's deposition, and stated her intent to file the transcript when it became available. (Motion (DE 392) at pp. 3-4 & n.1). Nonetheless, the Court issued the Omnibus Order without the benefit of the three-volume transcript, which is now filed as Exhibits 1-3 to this Appeal. + +Q. Were you told before each of these abortions that you had what they call viable fetuses? + +Q. Does it give you any, any emotional pain that you aborted three fetuses? + +Q. It's contrary to everything you ever learned as a child as a Roman Catholic, isn't it? + +Q. Does your mom know you aborted three kids? + +Q. Does your dad know you aborted three kids? + +Q. What do you think they'd think? + +Q. Do you think they're going to be happy about that? + +Q. Is it going to cause you a little emotional upset? + +Q. My question is, is it going to cause you any emotional upset? + +Q. would be far more traumatic than giving a man a massage in the nude? Wouldn't you agree with me that aborting three fetuses - + +Q. I want you to tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury whether or not aborting three fetuses is more traumatic than giving a man a massage in the nude. + +(Transcript, Exh. 2, pp. 301-305). While it may not be inappropriate to ask a plaintiff in a personal injury case a question about whether having abortions caused her emotional distress, the foregoing questions were intended and designed to provoke, harass, embarrass and humiliate Jane Doe No. 4. Early in this line of questioning, Jane Doe No. 4 answered "of course" to the question of whether having these abortions caused her upset. (1d., p. 301, line 19). Despite this, Defendant's counsel proceeds through four additional pages of deposition transcript asking essentially the identical question in different ways, unmercifully badgering Jane Doe No. 4 on an + +enormously sensitive topic, and going so far as to intimate that he will disclose the abortions to her parents.5 + +As another example, Defendant's counsel marked as Exhibit 1 to the Deposition the Proposal for Settlement that was served on Plaintiffs' counsel in March, 2009. (Transcript, Exh. I, p. 71). He proceeds to ask Jane Doe No. 4 a series of questions about this Proposal for Settlement, including whether she has seen and had an opportunity to review the Proposal. Of course, such questions could never lead to competent, admissible evidence at trial. (Id., pp. 71- 73). S.D.Fla.L.R. 30.1(A)(5).6 + +Defendant's counsel asked Jane Doe No. 4 a number of repetitive questions, over approximately 9 transcript pages, regarding how she came to see Plaintiffs' forensic expert, Dr. Gilbert Kliman. who has been retained in this case by Plaintiffs' counsel pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(2) and Fed.R.Evid. 702. (Transcript, Exh. 2, pp. 237-244, 267). Defendant's counsel had previously received extensive expert discovery from Dr. Kliman, including his interviews and testing of the Plaintiffs. Such deposition questions by Defendant's counsel were pointless and plainly not calculated to lead to competent, admissible evidence at trial. + +There are many other examples that may be gleaned from the attached transcripts. Defendant's counsel asked repetitive questions regarding exact dates that various types of sexual conduct occurred during the course of numerous massages given to Epstein by Jane Doe No. 4 over an approximate two year period, badgering the Plaintiff when Jane Doe No. 4 could only + +5 This line of questioning is the subject of a separate Motion for Protective Order to prevent Defendant's counsel from asking Plaintiff's parents leading questions about the abortions at her deposition. (DE 420). + +Defendant's counsel also asked Plaintiff an inordinate number of repetitive, intimidating questions concerning the oath and her duty to tell the truth to police officers. (See Transcript, Exh. I, pp. 7-10, 52-53). + +recall generally the months that certain sexual conduct commenced during her junior year of high school. (Transcript, Exh. 2, pp. 143-153). Defendant's counsel asked Plaintiff a number of questions regarding how Epstein had treated the Plaintiff, and then later in the deposition asked virtually the identical series of questions again. (Compare Transcript, Exh. 2, pp. 163-177, with pp. 288-296). + +The foregoing demonstrates that much of the deposition time consumed by Defendant's counsel was wasted with harassing, repetitive and badgering questions. An examination of the 446 existing pages of deposition transcripts reveals that Defendant's counsel does not require more than 7 hours to conduct a fair deposition of Plaintiff. + +## IV. Areument + +# A. THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S ORDER IS CONTRARY TO LAW + +The Magistrate Judge's decision to grant Defendant Epstein a second day of deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, for an additional four hours, is contrary to law. The error is apparent in the following portion of the Court's decision: + +> Epstein contends the Court's May 14, 2009 Consolidation Order, which provides that "Local Rule 26.1K (limiting deposition time to one day of seven hours) is waived so as to allow each party an adequate opportunity to develop fully the record as it may relate to that party," effectively waives L.R. 26.1K's limitation on the length of a deposition, thereby relieving Epstein from the seven hour deposition limit. The Court need not reach this issue, however, in that Epstein has provided sufficient and reasonable grounds in his Response Memorandum to sustain his burden, to the extent it is his burden, of showing additional time to depose Jane Doe and Jane Doe 4 is needed, to fully and fairly prepare his defense. + +(Omnibus Order (DE 413), p. 3) (emphasis supplied). Initially, as noted in the highlighted language above, the Magistrate Judge is equivocal on the issue of whether it is Epstein's burden to show cause for a deposition exceeding 7 hours. Yet the Advisory Committee's Note to Fed.R.Civ.P. p. 30 makes clear that "[t]he party seeking a court order to extend the examination . . . is expected to show good cause to justify such an order." Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(d) Advisory Committee's Note (2000 Amendment) (emphasis supplied). Rule 30(d)(1) establishes the "presumptive duration" of a deposition as 7 hours. See Home Design Services. Inc. v. W. Gargas Constr.. Inc. 2009 WL 3190462 (N.D. Fla. 2009). It is incumbent upon the party seeking a longer deposition to move the court for additional time and show cause. Here, the Court erroneously found sufficient cause in the Defendant's Response Memorandum to Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order. + +### B. THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY THE RECORD, INCONSISTENT WITH THE TRANSCRIPTS OF JANE DOE NO. 4'S DEPOSITION. AND THUS CLEARLY ERRONEOUS + +The Court's finding of cause is clearly erroneous. The first ground stated by the Magistrate Judge to support substantial added deposition time of Jane Doe No. 4 is that Plaintiffs are "seeking millions of dollars." This ground has been stated by the Magistrate Judge in rejecting, in their entirety, the prior attempts by Plaintiffs to place limits on the Defendant's abusive discovery conduct. See DE 299 (Order dated September 15, 2009, denying Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order on conduct of Epstein's investigators, p. 5); DE 377 (Omnibus Order dated October 28, 2009, granting Defendant's Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Request for Production regarding Plaintiffs' sexual histories, p. 4)). Yet the Magistrate Judge has not in any of these instances articulated why the Plaintiffs' seeking millions of dollars warrants granting the Defendant carte blanche in discovery, thereby facilitating Defendant's thinly veiled strategy to harass, , embarrass and humiliate the Plaintiffs. Indeed, the Magistrate Judge never mentions that Epstein is a reputed billionaire. While a plaintiff's demand for millions of dollars would in the typical case threaten the financial well + +being of the defendant, this is not the typical case. Every indication is that the "millions of dollars" sought by Defendant's sex abuse victims are, or at least could be, a trivial sum to Defendant Epstein.' + +The Magistrate Judge in the Omnibus Order states additional reasons for granting Defendant four additional hours of deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, including the need to ask questions about: (I) Jane Doe No. 4's alleged drug use; (2) repeated instances of domestic violence; (3) multiple aborted pregnancies; (4) arrests; and (5) details regarding her past sexual history. (Omnibus Order, p. 4). With regard to topics (1) through (4), a review of the 446 pages of existing deposition transcripts reveals that Jane Doe No. 4 has already been questioned extensively on each of these topics.8 As to past sexual history, Jane Doe No. 4 pursuant to Court Order has recently answered interrogatories detailing her past sexual history. The instances in which Jane Doe No. 4, on her counsel's advice, refused to answer questions at deposition regarding her sexual history are de minimus. ee Exh. 1 p. 5, Exh. 2, p. 182, Exh. 3, pp. 314- 317, 368). Indeed, she answered at her deposition most of questions concerning her sexual history with men other than Epstein. a, Transcript, Exh. 3, pp. 323-350, 354-355). My remaining questions regarding Jane Doe No. 4's sexual history can easily and fairly be covered + +It should also be noted that Plaintiffs seek millions of dollars inclusive of punitive damages. The discovery sought by Defendant through the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 is not pertinent to the issue of punitive damages, which focuses on the willful and wanton acts of Epstein in sexually molesting teenage girls. + +See the following portions of the attached transcripts: + +a. alleged drug use (Exh. I, pp. 86-88, Exh. 2, pp. 213-223). + +b. instances of domestic violence (Exh. 1, pp. 26-32, Exh. 2, pp. 200-206, Exh. 3, pp. 349-359, 425). + +c. aborted pregnancies (Exh. 2, pp. 301-307, Exh. 3, pp. 311-318, 426). + +d. arrests (Exh. I, pp. 25-26, Exh. 3, pp. 338-349). + +in the 1 hour and 25 minutes of additional deposition time Plaintiff has agreed to provide to Defendant's counsel .9 + +The Magistrate Judge issued a clearly erroneous decision in large part because she did not have the benefit of the complete 446-page transcript of Jane Doe No. 4's deposition at the time she made her ruling. She did not have the benefit of the transcript because she ruled prematurely, before Plaintiffs' counsel had an opportunity to reply to Defendant's Response or to file the complete transcript. In this instance, a careful review of the transcript is necessary in determining whether additional time is necessary for a fair deposition of Jane Doe No. 4. Instead, the Magistrate Judge's decision was premised on an inaccurate characterization of the existing deposition record and the topics yet to be covered, which Plaintiff's counsel could have corrected and clarified in the Reply prior to the Magistrate Judge's decision, if afforded the time to do so provided under S.D. Fla.L.R. 7.1(C). + +To make matters worse, the Magistrate Judge ordered that Defendant's counsel have up to four additional hours deposition time of Jane Doe No. 4, without restriction or qualification. In contrast, this Court's Order Consolidating Cases dated May 14, 2009 (DE 98) expressly notes that the waiver of the 7-hour limit set forth therein l° "shall not be construed as authority for any party to take unnecessarily long depositions, or abuse the process." (Order, p. 4, 1 8). No such admonition is present in the Magistrate Judge's Order. + +The Magistrate Judge ultimately makes the following finding: + +The Court agrees with Epstein that all of the foregoing issues are directly relevant to Plaintiffs' damage claims and credibility, and to deny him additional time in which to depose these Plaintiffs + +This will provide Defendant's counsel with an aggregate 7 hours of deposition time. + +19 As discussed above, Plaintiffs believe that the waiver of the 7-hour rule set forth in that Order does not authorize the Defendant to take a deposition of a Plaintiff in excess of 7 hours. + +would be unreasonable under the circumstances and result in prejudice to Epstein by denying him the opportunity to obtain discovery that is central to his defense. + +(Omnibus Order (DE 413), pp. 4-5). As discussed above, Defendant has submitted nothing in the record to support the conclusion that he will be prejudiced or denied the opportunity to obtain discovery that is central to his defense. To the contrary, a review of the transcripts of Jane Doe No. 4's deposition emphatically demonstrates that this finding is wrong. The Magistrate Judge's Order is thus clearly erroneous. + +In support of the Order, the Magistrate Judge relies upon Osbourne v. Columbia Helicopters, Inc., 2009 WL 2215076 (S.D. W. Va. 2009). (ate Omnibus Order, p. 5). Osbourne was a employment case in which the Court permitted the plaintiff's deposition to exceed 7 hours because plaintiff "submitted unverified, incomplete and inaccurate responses to [defendant's] written discovery." Id. at \*5. Here, in contrast, Plaintiffs have not been evasive in discovery. Defendant has not only received written discovery responses from Plaintiff, but extensive discovery from Plaintiff's psychiatric expert, Dr. Gilbert Kliman, and an 8-hour independent medical examination of the Plaintiff. An objection was made by Plaintiff to detailed written discovery requests on Plaintiffs sexual history with men other than Epstein. The Plaintiffs objection on this narrow issue was decided by the Magistrate Judge in favor of Epstein, who granted Epstein's Motion to Compel in its entirety (DE 377) shortly after the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 took place on October 27, 2009." Nonetheless, contrary to the Magistrate Judge's + +&quot; As discussed above, the instances in which Jane Doe No. 4 was instructed not to answer questions based on the then undecided issue of discovery of Plaintiff's sexual history were de minimus, and do not support an extended deposition of Jane Doe No. 4. Additionally, subsequent to the deposition, Plaintiff answered Defendant's written discovery requests on the subject of her sexual history in accordance with the Magistrate Judge's Order. + +finding, any lack of discovery on the issue of sexual history does not support an additional four hours of deposition of Jane Doe No. 4. Indeed, it may be anticipated that Epstein's counsel will use this additional time for abusive questioning on Jane Doe No. 4's sexual history.12 + +Finally, it should be noted that this is not a document driven commercial or employment case, where the need for a lengthy deposition of a party may be supported with cause. See Dunkin Donuts, Inc. v. Mary's Donuts. Inc., 206 F.R.D. 518, 522 (S.D.Fla. 2002), (allowing the plaintiff to depose the defendant's accountant and corporate representative for an additional seven hours because it was a complex commercial case involving seven years of commercial activity and 10,000 pages of documents). See also Pace v. City of Palmetto 2007 WL 470477 (S.D.Fla. 2007) (granting one hour additional deposition time because the deponent had not read documents in advance, and was taking an inordinate amount of time during the deposition to read documents). In such a case, it may be anticipated that them will be little if any prejudice or damage to the party witness created by a lengthy deposition exceeding one day. In stark contrast, the depositions of the Plaintiffs in these cases covers the most intimate and private details of their lives. Particularly given the harassing and badgering questioning engaged in by Defendant's counsel, a two day deposition will needlessly revictimize, embarrass and humiliate the Plaintiffs, which is the apparent strategy of Defendant in these cases. + +## V. Conclusion + +For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 respectfully requests that the Magistrate Judge's Omnibus Order (DE 413) be reversed as it pertains to the amount of time + +12 See, e.g., Transcript, Exh. 2, pp. 181-182 where Defendant's counsel asks Plaintiff if her former boyfriend "had taken his penis and inserted it in your vagina", and whether she had given him oral sex. He later in the deposition asked her again, regarding the same boyfriend, "when was the first time you gave him oral sex", and "when was the first time he stuck his penis in you and ejaculated." Transcript, Exh. 3, p. 355. + +remaining for Jane Doe No. 4's deposition; that Defendant's counsel be limited to an additional one hour and 25 minutes of deposition time for Jane Doe No. 4; that Defendant's counsel be admonished to refrain from abusive deposition conduct pursuant to S.D.Fla.L.R. 30.1(AX5); and that Plaintiff be granted such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. + +Dated: December 1, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) + +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +MERMELSTEIN & HOROWT17, P.A. + +Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 + +18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on December 1, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein + +### SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. iaoldberaer@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bc1claw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidroaarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack inh@searcvlaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawverwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg riosefsbera@Dodhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748411/EFTA02748411.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748411/EFTA02748411.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..256a1e398f41a1a9a80d9b246b878d960b71b4f0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748411/EFTA02748411.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,894 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748411.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 16, + "chars": 27195, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.09, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 99.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 99.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JANE DOE NO. 4's APPEAL PURSUANT TO S.D.FLA.L.MAG.R. 4 \nOF ORDER DENYING HER MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER \nAGAINST SECOND DAY OF DEPOSITION EXTENDING PAST SEVEN HOURS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 87.51599999999999, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 526.0430908203125, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 526.0430908203125, + 380.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 87.51599999999999, + 380.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "I. Introduction and S are", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 535.41 + ], + [ + 396.05877685546875, + 535.41 + ], + [ + 396.05877685546875, + 550.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 224.60399999999998, + 550.4830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "II. Procedural Background", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 331.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 388.44500732421875, + 331.28999999999996 + ], + [ + 388.44500732421875, + 346.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 346.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "v l)eposit ion Questioning", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 202.572, + 253.53000000000003 + ], + [ + 409.32305908203125, + 253.53000000000003 + ], + [ + 409.32305908203125, + 269.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 202.572, + 269.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "IV. Areument", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 258.264, + 319.14000000000004 + ], + [ + 351.28799999999995, + 319.14000000000004 + ], + [ + 351.28799999999995, + 334.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 258.264, + 334.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "A. THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S ORDER IS CONTRARY TO LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 346.68 + ], + [ + 502.0112609863281, + 346.68 + ], + [ + 502.0112609863281, + 362.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 110.77199999999999, + 362.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "B. THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS ARE NOT SUPPORTED \nBY THE RECORD, INCONSISTENT WITH THE TRANSCRIPTS OF \nJANE DOE NO. 4'S DEPOSITION. AND THUS CLEARLY ERRONEOUS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 297.27 + ], + [ + 523.0365600585938, + 297.27 + ], + [ + 523.0365600585938, + 340.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 340.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "V. Conclusion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 256.428, + 540.27 + ], + [ + 355.39495849609375, + 540.27 + ], + [ + 355.39495849609375, + 555.3630218505859 + ], + [ + 256.428, + 555.3630218505859 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 222.768, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.9223937988281, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 388.9223937988281, + 86.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 222.768, + 86.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 167.07600000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 445.149169921875, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 445.149169921875, + 113.60302734375 + ], + [ + 167.07600000000002, + 113.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 69 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 62 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 6 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 37 + ], + [ + "Line", + 19 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748411" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748427/EFTA02748427.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748427/EFTA02748427.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7b25e03d2e3316f8411c6da10c09c41b19d89676 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748427/EFTA02748427.md @@ -0,0 +1,718 @@ +AO 88B (Rev. 06109) Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects or to Permit Inspection of Premises in a Civil Action + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT + +for the + +Southern District of Florida + +Plaintiff v. + +Defendant + +Civil Action No. 08-civ-80119-Marra. + +Of the action is pending hi another district, state wbere: Southern District of Florida + +## SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS OR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES IN A CIVIL ACTION + +To: Presidential Women's Center, Records Custodian. 100 Northpoint Parkway, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +(Production: YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce at the time, date, and place set forth below the following documents, electronically stored information, or objects, and permit their Inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of the material: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A + +| Place: Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman, LLC
303 Banyan Blvd. Suite #400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 | Date and Time:
11/30/2009 9:00 am | +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------| +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------| + +OInspection of Premises: YOU ARE COMMANDED to permit entry onto the designated premises, land, or other property possessed or controlled by you at the time, date, and location set forth below, so that the requesting party may inspect, measure, survey, photograph, test, or sample the property or any designated object or operation on it. + +| Place: | Date and Time: | +|--------|----------------| +|--------|----------------| + +The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c), relating to your protection as aperson subject to a subpoena, and Rule 45(d) and (e), relating to your duty to respond to this subpoena and the potential consequences of not doing so, are attached. + +Date: 11 i1 ROMA + +CLERK OF COURT + +OR + +Signaturo of Clerk or Deputy Cknt Attorney's signature + +The name, address, e-mail, and telephone number of the attorney representing (name of party) Defendant , who issues or requests this subpoena, are: + +Burman Clifton Luther & Coleman, LIC, 303 Banyan Blvd., #400, West Palm Beach, FL. 33401; Phone (561) 842-2820; Fax (561) 844-6929; mplke@bddaw.com (Attorney); jcadwellabcIclaw.com (Paralegal) NA.. + +AO 88B (Rev. 06/09)Subpocna to Product Doane-its, lothrmation, or Objects of to Permit Inspection of Premises in s Civil Action (Page 2) + +Civil Action No. 08-civ-80119-MarraMil + +### PROOF OF SERVICE + +(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed It CYv. P. 45.) + +This subpoena for (name °lawny/dual and title, raw) was received by me on (dale) + +CI I served the subpoena by delivering a copy to the named person as follows: on orro or + +O I returned the subpoena unexecuted because: + +Unless the subpoena was issued on behalf of the United States, or one of its officers or agents, I have also tendered to the witness fees for one day's attendance, and the mileage allowed by law, in the amount of + +My fees are \$ for travel and for services, for a total of S 0.00 + +Date: + +Ideclare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. + +Server's signature + +Printed name and tide + +Server's address + +**Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (c), (d), and (e) (Effective 12/1/07)(c) Protecting a Person Subject to a Subpoena.****(1) Avoiding Undue Burden or Expense; Sanctions.** A party or attorney responsible for issuing and serving a subpoena must take reasonable steps to avoid imposing undue burden or expense on a person subject to the subpoena. The issuing court must enforce this duty and impose an appropriate sanction — which may include lost earnings and reasonable attorney's fees — on a party or attorney who fails to comply. + +**(2) Command to Produce Materials or Permit Inspection.****(A) Appearance Not Required.** A person commanded to produce documents, electronically stored information, or tangible things, or to permit the inspection of premises, need not appear in person at the place of production or inspection unless also commanded to appear for a deposition, hearing, or trial. + +**(B) Objections.** A person commanded to produce documents or tangible things or to permit inspection may serve on the party or attorney designated in the subpoena a written objection to inspecting, copying, testing or sampling any or all of the materials or to inspecting the premises — or to producing electronically stored information in the form or forms requested. The objection must be served before the earlier of the time specified for compliance or 14 days after the subpoena is served. If an objection is made, the following rules apply: + +(i) At any time, on notice to the commanded person, the serving party may move the issuing court for an order compelling production or inspection. + +(ii) These acts may be required only as directed in the order, and the order must protect a person who is neither a party nor a party's officer from significant expense resulting from compliance. + +**(3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena.****(A) When Required.** On timely motion, the issuing court must quash or modify a subpoena that: + +(i) fails to allow a reasonable time to comply; + (ii) requires a person who is neither a party nor a party's officer to travel more than 100 miles from where that person resides, is employed, or regularly transacts business in person — except that, subject to Rule 45(c)(3)(B)(iii), the person may be commanded to attend a trial by traveling from any such place within the state where the trial is held; + +(iii) requires disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, if no exception or waiver applies; or + +(iv) subjects a person to undue burden. + +**(B) When Permitted.** To protect a person subject to or affected by a subpoena, the issuing court may, on motion, quash or modify the subpoena if it requires: + +(i) disclosing a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information; + +(ii) disclosing an unretained expert's opinion or information that does not describe specific occurrences in dispute and results from the expert's study that was not requested by a party; or + +(iii) a person who is neither a party nor a party's officer to incur substantial expense to travel more than 100 miles to attend trial. + +**(C) Specifying Conditions as an Alternative.** In the circumstances described in Rule 45(c)(3)(B), the court may, instead of quashing or modifying a subpoena, order appearance or production under specified conditions if the serving party: + +(i) shows a substantial need for the testimony or material that cannot be otherwise met without undue hardship; and + +(ii) ensures that the subpoenaed person will be reasonably compensated. + +**(d) Duties in Responding to a Subpoena.****(1) Producing Documents or Electronically Stored Information.** These procedures apply to producing documents or electronically stored information: + +**(A) Documents.** A person responding to a subpoena to produce documents must produce them as they are kept in the ordinary course of business or must organize and label them to correspond to the categories in the demand. + +**(B) Form for Producing Electronically Stored Information Not Specified.** If a subpoena does not specify a form for producing electronically stored information, the person responding must produce it in a form or forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in a reasonably usable form or forms. + +**(C) Electronically Stored Information Produced in Only One Form.** The person responding need not produce the same electronically stored information in more than one form. + +**(D) Inaccessible Electronically Stored Information.** The person responding need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the person identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the person responding must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule 26(b)(2)(C). The court may specify conditions for the discovery. + +**(2) Claiming Privilege or Protection.****(A) Information Withheld.** A person withholding subpoenaed information under a claim that it is privileged or subject to protection as trial-preparation material must: + +(i) expressly make the claim; and + +(ii) describe the nature of the withheld documents, communications, or tangible things in a manner that, without revealing information itself privileged or protected, will enable the parties to assess the claim. + +**(B) Information Produced.** If information produced in response to a subpoena is subject to a claim of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation material, the person making the claim may notify any party that received the information of the claim and the basis for it. After being notified, a party must promptly return, sequester, or destroy the specified information and any copies it has; must not use or disclose the information until the claim is resolved; must take reasonable steps to retrieve the information if the party disclosed it before being notified; and may promptly present the information to the court under seal for a determination of the claim. The person who produced the information must preserve the information until the claim is resolved. + +**(e) Contempt.** The issuing court may hold in contempt a person who, having been served, fails without adequate excuse to obey the subpoena. A nonparty's failure to obey must be excused if the subpoena purports to require the nonparty to attend or produce at a place outside the limits of Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(ii). + +Acopy of the entire file of /MUM whose date of birth ISind social security number issaigiancluding but not limited to any forms completed by the patient, medical records, reports, lab or diagnostic test results, consultants' reports, letters to and from the patient, handwritten office notes by any person, telephone messages, computer data kept on the patient, attorney letters, photographs, charts, intake forms, release forms and consultations from January 1, 1999 through the date of this Subpoena. \*If you require the entire Social Security number, please contact our office at 561-842-2820 and ask for Jessica Cadwell. + +AO 83B (Rev. 06/09) Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects or to Permit Inspection of Premises in a Civil Action + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT + +for the + +Southern District of Florida + +Plaintiff v. + +Defendant + +Civil Action No. 08-clv-80119-Marral. + +(If the action is pending in another district, state where: Southern District of Florida + +## SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS OR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES LN A CIVIL ACTION + +To: Presidential Women's Center, Records Custodian, 100 Northpoint Parkway, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +aD Production: YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce at the time, date, and place set forth below the following documents, electronically stored information, or objects, and permit their inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of the material: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A + +| Place: Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman, LLC
303 Banyan Blvd. Suite #400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 | Date and Time:
11/30/2009 9:15 am | +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------| +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------| + +Cl Inspection of Premises: YOU ARE COMMANDED to permit entry onto the designated premises, land, or other property possessed or controlled by you at the time, date, and location set forth below, so that the requesting party may inspect, measure, survey, photograph, test, or sample the property or any designated object or operation on it. + +| Place: | Date and Time: | +|--------|----------------| +|--------|----------------| + +The provisions of Fed. It Civ. P. 45(c), relating to your protection as aperson subject to a subpoena, and Rule 45(d) and (e), relating to your duty to respond to this subpoena and the potential consequences of not doing so, are attached. + +Date: 11N '1(21)02 + +CLERIC OF COURT + +OR + +Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk is strain + +The name, address, e-mail, and telephone number of the attorney representing (none of party) Defendant , who issues or requests this subpoena, are: + +Burman Critton Luther & Coleman, LLC, 303 Banyan Blvd., #400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401; Phone (561) 842-2820; Fax (561) 844-6929; mplkergbdclaw.com (Attorney); Jcadwell@bciclaw.com (Paralegal) AO 88B (Rev. 0649) Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects or to Permit Inspection of Premises in s Civil Action (Page 2) + +Civil Action No. 08-clv-80110-Marra + +### PROOF OF SERVICE + +(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 45.) + +This subpoena for (name of Individual and Wit, !fatty) was received by me on (date) + +O I served the subpoena by delivering a copy to the named person as follows: on (dau) ; or + +O I returned the subpoena unexecuted because: + +Unless the subpoena was issued on behalf of the United States, or one of its officers or agents, I have also tendered to the witness fees for one day's attendance, and the mileage allowed by law, in the amount of + +My fees are S for travel and \$ for services, for a total of \$ 0.00 + +Date: + +I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. + +Server's signature + +Printed name and Wit + +Server's address + +### Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (c), (d), and (e) (Effective I2/1/07) + +### (c) Protecting aPerson Subject to a Subpoena. + +(1) Avoiding Undue Burden or Expense; Sanctions. A party or attorney responsible for issuing and serving a subpoena must take reasonable steps to avoid imposing undue burden or expense on a person subject to the subpoena. The issuing cowl must enforce this duty and impose an appropriate sanction — which may include lost earnings and reasonable attorney's fees — on aparty or attorney who fails to comply. + +### (2) Command to Produce Materials or Pen ni: Inspection. + +(A) Appearance Not Required A person commanded to produce documents, electronically stored information, or tangible things, or to permit the inspection of premises, need not appear in person at the place of production or inspection unless also commanded to appear for a deposition, hearing, or trial. + +(B) Objections. A person commanded to produce documents or tangible things or to permit inspection may serve on the party or attorney designated in the subpoena awritten objection to inspecting, copying, testing or sampling any or all of the materials or to inspecting the premises — or to producing electronically stored information in the form or forms requested. The objection must be served before the earlier of the time specified for compliance or 14 days after the subpoena is served. If an objection is made, the following rules apply: + +(i) At any time, on notice to the commanded person, the serving party may move the Issuing court for an order compelling production or inspection. + +(ii) These acts may be required only as directed in the order, and the order must protect a person who Is neither a party nor aparty's officer from significant expense resulting from compliance. + +### (3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena + +(A) When Required On timely motion, the issuing court must quash or modify a subpoena that: + +(9 falls to allow a reasonable time to comply; + +(i) requires a person who is neither a party nor aparty's officer to navel more than 100 miles from where that person resides, is employed, or regularly transacts business in person — except that, subject to Rule 45(cX3XB)(iii), the person may be commanded to attend a trial by traveling from any such place within the state where the trial is held; + +(ill) requires disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, if no exception or waiver applies; or + +(iv) subjects a person to undue burden. + +(B) When Permuted. To protect a person subject to or affected by asubpoena, the issuing court may, on motion, quash or modify the subpoena if it requires: + +() disclosing atrade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information; + +(I) disclosing an unretained expert's opinion or information that does not describe specific occurrences in dispute and results from the expert's study that was not requested by a party; or + +(Ill) a person who is neither a party nor aparty's officer to incur substantial expense to travel more than 100 miles to attend trial. + +(C) Specking Conditions as an Alternative. In the circumstances described in Rule 45(c)(3XB), the court may, instead of quashing or modifying a subpoena, order appearance or production under specified conditions if the serving party: + +() shows a substantial need for the testimony or material that cannot be otherwise met without undue hardship; and + +(11) ensures that the subpoenaed person will be reasonably compensated. + +### (d) Duties in Responding to a Subpoena. + +### (1) Producing Documents or Electronically Stored Information. + +These procedures apply to producing documents or electronically stored information: + +(A) Documents. A person responding to a subpoena to produce documents must produce them as they me kept in the ordinary course of business or must organize and label them to correspond to the categories in the demand. + +(B) Form for Producing Electronically Stored Information Not Specified. If asubpoena does not specify aform for producing electronically stored information, the person responding must produce it in a form or forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in areasonably usable form or forms. + +(C) Electronically Stored Information Produced in Only One Form. The person responding need not produce the same electronically stored information in more than one form. + +(D) inaccessible Electronically Stored Information. The person responding need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the person identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the person responding must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule 26(bX2XC). The court may specify conditions for the discovery. + +### (2) Claiming Privilege or Protection. (A) Information Withheld A person withholding subpoenaed + +Information under a claim that it is privileged or subject to protection as trial-preparation material muse + +(i) expressly make the claim; and + +(i) describe the nature of the withheld documents, communications, or tangible things in a manner that, without revealing information itself privileged or protected, will enable the parties to assess the claim. + +(B) Information Produced If information produced in response to a subpoena is subject to a claim of privilege or of protection as trialpreparation material, the person making the claim may notify any party that received the information of the claim and the basis for It. After being notified, a party must promptly return, sequester, or destroy the specified information and any copies it has; must not use or disclose the information until the claim is resolved; must take reasonable steps to retrieve the information if the party disclosed it before being notified; and may promptly present the information to the court under seal for a. determination of the claim. The person who produced the information must preserve the information until the claim is resolved. + +(e) Contempt. The issuing court may hold in contempt a person who, having been served, fails without adequate excuse to obey the subpoena. A nonparty's failure to obey must be excused if the subpoena purports to require the nonparty to attend or produce at a place outside the limits of Rule 45(eX3)(AXii). + +A copy of the entire file of Sibrhose date of birth Sand social security number is irmarisincluding but not limited to any forms completed by the patient, medical records, reports, lab or diagnostic test results, consultants' reports, letters to and from the patient, handwritten office notes by any person, telephone messages, computer data kept on the patient, attorney letters, photographs, charts, intake forms, release forms and consultations from January 1, 1999 through the date of this Subpoena. \*If you require the entire Social Security number, please contact our office at 561-842-2820 and ask for Jessica Cadwell. + +AO 88B (Rev. 060) Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects or to Permit Inspection of Premises in a Civil Action + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT + +for the + +Sputhem District of Florida + +Plaintiff v. + +Defendant + +Civil Action No. 08-civ-80119-Marna + +(If the action is pending in another district, state where: Southern District of Florida + +## SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS OR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES IN A CIVIL ACTION + +To: Presidential Women's Center, Records Custodian, 100 Northpoint Parkway, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +li~Production: YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce at the time, date, and place set forth below the following documents, electronically stored information, or objects, and permit their inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of the material: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A + +| Place: Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman, LLC
303 Banyan Blvd. Suite #400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 | Date and Time:
11/30/2009 9:45 am | +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------| +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------| + +OInspection of Premises: YOU ARE COMMANDED to permit entry onto the designated premises, land, or other property possessed or controlled by you at the time, date, and location set forth below, so that the requesting party may inspect, measure, survey, photograph, test, or sample the property or any designated object or operation on it. + +| Place: | Date and Time: | +|--------|----------------| +|--------|----------------| + +The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c), relating to your protection as a person subject to a subpoena, and Rule 45(d) and (e), relating to your duty to respond to this subpoena and the potential consequences of not doing so, are attached. + +Date: 1ll13i70D9 + +CLERK OF COURT + +Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk + +OR + +An• 's signature + +The name, address, e-mail, and telephone number of the attorney representing (name of parry) Defendant , who issues or requests this subpoena, are: + +Burman Critton Luther & Coleman, LLC, 303 Banyan Blvd., #400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401; Phone (561) 842-2820; Fax (561) 844-6929; mplke©bciclaw.com (Attorney); jcadwell©bc1claw.corn (Paralegal) AO 888 (Rev. 06/09) Subpoena to Produce Documents, Inforroatioo, or Objects or to Pamir Impaction of Premises in a Civil Action (Page 2) + +Civil Action No. 08-clv-80119-Marra/. + +### PROOF OF SERVICE + +(This section should not be flied with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 45.) + +This subpoena for (name of individual rind Urfa. Vary) was received by me on (dare) + +OI served the subpoena by delivering a copy to the named person as follows: on (date) ; Or + +O I returned the subpoena unexecuted because: + +Unless the subpoena was issued on behalf of the United States, or one of its officers or agents, I have also tendered to the witness fees for one day's attendance, and the mileage allowed by law, in the amount of + +My fees are S for travel and S for services, for a total of S 0.00 + +Date: Server's signature + +Ideclare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. + +Printed name and title + +Server's address + +### Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (e), (d), and (e) (Effective 12/1/07) + +### (e) Protecting aPerson Subject to a Subpoena. + +(1) Avoiding Undue Burden or Expense; Sanctions. A party or attorney responsible for issuing and serving a subpoena must take reasonable steps to avoid imposing undue burden or expense on a person subject to the subpoena. The issuing court must enforce this duty and impose an appropriate sanction — which may Include lost earnings and reasonable attorney's fees — on aparty or attorney who fails to comply. + +### (2) Command to Produce Materials or Permit Inspection. + +(A) Appearance Not Required A person commanded to produce documents, electronically stored information, or tangible things, or to permit the inspection of premises, need not appear in person at the place of production or inspection unless also commanded to appear for a deposition, hearing, or trial. + +(B) Objections A person commanded to produce documents or tangible things or to permit inspection may serve on the party or attorney designated in the subpoena awritten objection to inspecting, copying, testing or sampling any or all of the materials or to inspecting the premises — or to producing electronically stored information in the form or forms requested. The objection must be saved before the earlier of the time specified for compliance or 14 days after the subpoena is served. If an objection is made, the following rules apply: + +(I) At any time, on notice to the commanded person, the saving party may move the issuing court for an order compelling production or inspection. + +(ii) These acts may be required only as directed in the order, and the order must protect a person who is neither a party nor aparty's officer from significant expense resulting from compliance. + +### (3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena + +(A) When Required On timely motion, the issuing court must quash or modify a subpoena that + +(I) fails to allow a reasonable time to comply; + +(II) requires a person who is neither a party nor aparty's officer to travel more than 100 miles from where that person resides, is employed, or regularly transacts business in person — except that, subject to Rule 45(cX3XBXiii), the person may be commanded to attend a trial by traveling from any such place within the state where the trial is held; + +(Ill) requires disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, if no exception or waiver applies; or + +(iv) subjects a person to undue burden. + +(B) When Permitted To protect a person subject to or affected by asubpoena, the issuing court may, on motion, quash or modify the subpoena if it requires: + +(i) disclosing atrade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information; + +(If) disclosing an unretained expert's opinion or information that does not describe specific occurrences in dispute and results from the expert's study that was not requested by a party; or + +(Ill) a person who is neither a party nor aparty's officer to incur + +substantial expense to travel more than 100 miles to attend trial. (C)SpecifyIng Conditions as an Alternative. In the circumstances described in Rule 45(cX3XB), the court may, instead of quashing or modifying a subpoena, order appearance or production under specified conditions if the serving party: + +(i) shows a substantial need for the testimony or material that + +cannot be otherwise met without undue hardship; and + +(ii) ensures that the subpoenaed person will be reasonably compensated. + +## (d) Dulles in Responding to a Subpoena. + +## (1) Producing Documents or Electronically Stored Information. + +These procedures apply to producing documents or electronically stored information: + +(A) Documents. A person responding to a subpoena to produce documents must produce them as they are kept in the ordinary course of business or must organize and label them to correspond to the categories in the demand. + +### (B) Form for Producing Electronically Stored Information Not + +Specified If a subpoena does not specify aform for producing electronically stored information, the person responding must produce it in a form or forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in areasonably usable form or forms. + +### (C) Electronically Stored Information Produced in Only One + +Form The person responding need not produce the same electronically stored information in more than one form. + +### (D) Inaccessible Electronically Stored hfonnafion. The person + +responding need not provide discovery of electronically stored Information from sources that the person identities as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the person responding must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule 26(bX2XC). The court may specify conditions for the discovery. + +### (2) Claiming Privilege or Protection. + +(A) Information Withheld A person withholding subpoenaed information under a claim that it is privileged or subject to protection as trial-preparation material must: + +(i) expressly make the claim; and + +(ii) describe the nature of the withheld documents, communications, or tangible things in a manna that, without revealing information itself privileged or protected, will enable the parties to assess the claim. + +(B) Information Produced If information produced in response to a subpoena is subject to a claim of privilege or of protection as trialpreparation material, the person making the claim may notify any party that received the information of the claim and the basis for it. After being notified, a party must promptly return, sequester, or destroy the specified information and any copies it has; must not use + +or disclose the information until the claim is resolved; must take reasonable steps to retrieve the information If the party disclosed it before being notified; and may promptly present the information to the court under seal for a determination of the claim. The person who produced the information must preserve the information until the claim is resolved. + +(e) Contempt. The issuing court may hold in contempt a person who, having been served, fails without adequate excuse to obey the subpoena. A nonparty's failure to obey must be excused if the subpoena purports to require the nonparty to attend or produce at a place outside the limits of Rule 45(cX3)(A)(ii). + +### valutrr "A" + +Acopy of the entire file whose date of birth alla and social security number is eluding but not limited to any forms completed by the patient, medical records, reports, lab or diagnostic test results, consultants' reports, letters to and from the patient, handwritten office notes by any person, telephone messages, computer data kept on the patient, attorney letters, photographs, charts, intake forms, release forms and consultations from January 1, 1996 through the date of this Subpoena. \*If you require the entire Social Security number, please contact our office at 561-842-2820 and ask for Jessica Cadwell. + +AO 88B (Rev. 06/09) Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects or to Permit Inspection of Premises in a Civil Action + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT + +for the + +Southern District of Florida + +[REDACTED] +Plaintiff +v. + +Defendant + +) +) +) +) +) +) + +Civil Action No. 08-civ-80119-Marra/Johnson + +(If the action is pending in another district, state where: +Southern District of Florida ) + +## SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS OR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES IN A CIVIL ACTION + +To: Presidential Women's Center, Records Custodian, 100 Northpoint Parkway, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + + *Production:* **YOU ARE COMMANDED** to produce at the time, date, and place set forth below the following documents, electronically stored information, or objects, and permit their inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of the material: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A + +| Place: Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman, LLC
303 Banyan Blvd. Suite #400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 | Date and Time:
11/30/2009 10:00 am | +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------| +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------| + + *Inspection of Premises:* **YOU ARE COMMANDED** to permit entry onto the designated premises, land, or other property possessed or controlled by you at the time, date, and location set forth below, so that the requesting party may inspect, measure, survey, photograph, test, or sample the property or any designated object or operation on it. + +| Place: | Date and Time: | +|--------|----------------| +|--------|----------------| + +The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c), relating to your protection as a person subject to a subpoena, and Rule 45 (d) and (e), relating to your duty to respond to this subpoena and the potential consequences of not doing so, are attached. + +Date: 11/13/2009 + +CLERK OF COURT + +OR + +Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk + +![]()The name, address, e-mail, and telephone number of the attorney representing (name of party) Defendant + +, who issues or requests this subpoena, are: + +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman, LLC, 303 Banyan Blvd., #400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401; +Phone (561) 842-2820; Fax (561) 844-6929; mpike@bclclaw.com (Attorney); jcadwell@bclclaw.com (Paralegal) + +AO 888 (Rev. 06(09) Subpoena to Product Documents, Intonation, or Objects ot to Permit Inspection of Premises in aCivil Action (Page 2) + +Civil Action No. 08-civ-80119-Marra/M + +### PROOF OF SERVICE + +(This section should not bellied with the court unless required by Fed R. Civ. P. 45.) + +This subpoena for (name of individual and tide, ((any) was received by me on (dale) + +OI served the subpoena by delivering a copy to the named person as follows: on (date) ; or + +CI I returned the subpoena unexecuted because: + +Unless the subpoena was issued on behalf of the United States, or one of its officers or agents, I have also tendered to the witness fees for one day's attendance, and the mileage allowed by law, in the amount of S + +My fees are S for travel and S for services, for atotal of 0.00 + +Date: + +Ideclare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. + +Server's signature Printed name and ride + +Server's address + +### Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (c), (d), and (e) (Effective 12/1/07) + +#### (c) Protecting a Person Subject to a Subpoena. + +**(1) Avoiding Undue Burden or Expense; Sanctions.** A party or attorney responsible for issuing and serving a subpoena must take reasonable steps to avoid imposing undue burden or expense on a person subject to the subpoena. The issuing court must enforce this duty and impose an appropriate sanction — which may include lost earnings and reasonable attorney's fees — on a party or attorney who fails to comply. + +#### **(2) Command to Produce Materials or Permit Inspection.** + +**(A) Appearance Not Required.** A person commanded to produce documents, electronically stored information, or tangible things, or to permit the inspection of premises, need not appear in person at the place of production or inspection unless also commanded to appear for a deposition, hearing, or trial. + +**(B) Objections.** A person commanded to produce documents or tangible things or to permit inspection may serve on the party or attorney designated in the subpoena a written objection to inspecting, copying, testing or sampling any or all of the materials or to inspecting the premises — or to producing electronically stored information in the form or forms requested. The objection must be served before the earlier of the time specified for compliance or 14 days after the subpoena is served. If an objection is made, the following rules apply: + +(i) At any time, on notice to the commanded person, the serving party may move the issuing court for an order compelling production or inspection. + +(ii) These acts may be required only as directed in the order, and the order must protect a person who is neither a party nor a party's officer from significant expense resulting from compliance. + +#### **(3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena.** + +**(A) When Required.** On timely motion, the issuing court must quash or modify a subpoena that: + +- (i) fails to allow a reasonable time to comply; +- (ii) requires a person who is neither a party nor a party's officer to travel more than 100 miles from where that person resides, is employed, or regularly transacts business in person — except that, subject to Rule 45(c)(3)(B)(iii), the person may be commanded to attend a trial by traveling from any such place within the state where the trial is held; +- (iii) requires disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, if no exception or waiver applies; or +- (iv) subjects a person to undue burden. + +**(B) When Permitted.** To protect a person subject to or affected by a subpoena, the issuing court may, on motion, quash or modify the subpoena if it requires: + +- (i) disclosing a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information; +- (ii) disclosing an unretained expert's opinion or information that does not describe specific occurrences in dispute and results from the expert's study that was not requested by a party; or +- (iii) a person who is neither a party nor a party's officer to incur substantial expense to travel more than 100 miles to attend trial. + +**(C) Specifying Conditions as an Alternative.** In the circumstances described in Rule 45(c)(3)(B), the court may, instead of quashing or modifying a subpoena, order appearance or production under specified conditions if the serving party: + +- (i) shows a substantial need for the testimony or material that cannot be otherwise met without undue hardship; and +- (ii) ensures that the subpoenaed person will be reasonably compensated. + +#### (d) Duties in Responding to a Subpoena. + +**(1) Producing Documents or Electronically Stored Information.** These procedures apply to producing documents or electronically stored information: + +**(A) Documents.** A person responding to a subpoena to produce documents must produce them as they are kept in the ordinary course of business or must organize and label them to correspond to the categories in the demand. + +**(B) Form for Producing Electronically Stored Information Not Specified.** If a subpoena does not specify a form for producing electronically stored information, the person responding must produce it in a form or forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in a reasonably usable form or forms. + +**(C) Electronically Stored Information Produced in Only One Form.** The person responding need not produce the same electronically stored information in more than one form. + +**(D) Inaccessible Electronically Stored Information.** The person responding need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the person identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the person responding must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule 26(b)(2)(C). The court may specify conditions for the discovery. + +#### **(2) Claiming Privilege or Protection.** + +**(A) Information Withheld.** A person withholding subpoenaed information under a claim that it is privileged or subject to protection as trial-preparation material must: + +- (i) expressly make the claim; and +- (ii) describe the nature of the withheld documents, communications, or tangible things in a manner that, without revealing information itself privileged or protected, will enable the parties to assess the claim. + +**(B) Information Produced.** If information produced in response to a subpoena is subject to a claim of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation material, the person making the claim may notify any party that received the information of the claim and the basis for it. After being notified, a party must promptly return, sequester, or destroy the specified information and any copies it has; must not use or disclose the information until the claim is resolved; must take reasonable steps to retrieve the information if the party disclosed it before being notified; and may promptly present the information to the court under seal for a determination of the claim. The person who produced the information must preserve the information until the claim is resolved. + +**(e) Contempt.** The issuing court may hold in contempt a person who, having been served, fails without adequate excuse to obey the subpoena. A nonparty's failure to obey must be excused if the subpoena purports to require the nonparty to attend or produce at a place outside the limits of Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(ii). + +A copy of the entire file of whose date of birth and social security number is so, including but not limited to any forms completed by the patient, medical records, reports, lab or diagnostic test results, consultants' reports, letters to and from the patient, handwritten office notes by any person, telephone messages, computer data kept on the patient, attorney letters, photographs, charts, intake forms, release forms and consultations from January 1, 1998 through the date of this Subpoena. •If you require the entire Social Security number, please contact our office at 561-842-2820 and ask for Jessica Cadwell. + +AO 888 (Rev. 06109) Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects or to Permit Inspection of Premises in aCivil Action + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT + +for the + +Southern District of Florida + +Plaintiff + +v. + +Defendant + +Civil Action No. 08-civ-B0119-Marra/ + +(If the action is pending in another district, state where: + +Southern District of Florida + +### SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS OR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES IN A CIVIL ACTION + +To: Presidential Women's Center, Records Custodian, 100 Northpoint Parkway, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +ti Production: YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce at the time, date, and place set forth below the following documents, electronically stored information, or objects, and permit their inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of the material: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A + +| Place: Burman Critton Luttler & Coleman, LLC
303 Banyan Blvd. Suite #400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 | Date and Time:
11/30/2009 10:15 am | +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------| +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------| + +0Inspection of Premises: YOU ARE COMMANDED to permit entry onto the designated premises, land, or other property possessed or controlled by you at the time, date, and location set forth below, so that the requesting party may inspect, measure, survey, photograph, test, or sample the property or any designated object or operation on it. + +| Place: | Date and Time: | +|--------|----------------| +|--------|----------------| + +The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c), relating to your protection as aperson subject to a subpoena, and Rule 45(d) and (e), relating to your duty to respond to this subpoena and the potential consequences of not doing so, are attached. + +Date: 11111/2009 + +CLERK OF COURT + +Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk + +OR + +Alto signature + +The name, address, e-mail, and telephone number of the attorney representing (name of parry) Defendant , who issues or requests this subpoena, are: + +Burman CrItton Luttler & Coleman, LLC, 303 Banyan Blvd., #400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401; Phone (561) 842-2820; Fax (561) 8446929; mplke@bdclaw.com (Attorney); jcadwellfgbelciaw.can (Paralegal) A0888 (Rey. 06M) Subpoena to Produce Document, intimation, or Objects ato Permit Inspection of Promisee in a Civil Action (Pate 2) + +Civil Action No. 08-Glv-80119-Marra/Johnson + +### PROOF OF SERVICE + +(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed R. Cly. P. 45.) + +This subpoena for (name of individual and tale, rf any) was received by me on (dam) + +OI served the subpoena by delivering a copy to the named person as follows: + +01) (dale) ; or + +OI returned the subpoena unexecuted because: + +Unless the subpoena was issued on behalf of the United States, or one of its officers or agents, I have also tendered to the witness fees for one day's attendance, and the mileage allowed by law, in the amount of S + +My fees are \$ for travel and \$ for services, for atotal of S O.p0 • + +Date: + +Ideclare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. + +Server's signature + +Printed name and title + +Server's address + +### Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (c), (d), and (e) (Effective 12/1/07) + +#### (c) Protecting a Person Subject to a Subpoena. + +**(1) Avoiding Undue Burden or Expense; Sanctions.** A party or attorney responsible for issuing and serving a subpoena must take reasonable steps to avoid imposing undue burden or expense on a person subject to the subpoena. The issuing court must enforce this duty and impose an appropriate sanction — which may include lost earnings and reasonable attorney's fees — on a party or attorney who fails to comply. + +#### **(2) Command to Produce Materials or Permit Inspection.** + +**(A) Appearance Not Required.** A person commanded to produce documents, electronically stored information, or tangible things, or to permit the inspection of premises, need not appear in person at the place of production or inspection unless also commanded to appear for a deposition, hearing, or trial. + +**(B) Objections.** A person commanded to produce documents or tangible things or to permit inspection may serve on the party or attorney designated in the subpoena a written objection to inspecting, copying, testing or sampling any or all of the materials or to inspecting the premises — or to producing electronically stored information in the form or forms requested. The objection must be served before the earlier of the time specified for compliance or 14 days after the subpoena is served. If an objection is made, the following rules apply: + +(i) At any time, on notice to the commanded person, the serving party may move the issuing court for an order compelling production or inspection. + +(ii) These acts may be required only as directed in the order, and the order must protect a person who is neither a party nor a party's officer from significant expense resulting from compliance. + +#### **(3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena.** + +**(A) When Required.** On timely motion, the issuing court must quash or modify a subpoena that: + +(i) fails to allow a reasonable time to comply; + +(ii) requires a person who is neither a party nor a party's officer to travel more than 100 miles from where that person resides, is employed, or regularly transacts business in person — except that, subject to Rule 45(c)(3)(B)(iii), the person may be commanded to attend a trial by traveling from any such place within the state where the trial is held; + +(iii) requires disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, if no exception or waiver applies; or + +(iv) subjects a person to undue burden. + +**(B) When Permitted.** To protect a person subject to or affected by a subpoena, the issuing court may, on motion, quash or modify the subpoena if it requires: + +(i) disclosing a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information; + +(ii) disclosing an unretained expert's opinion or information that does not describe specific occurrences in dispute and results from the expert's study that was not requested by a party; or + +(iii) a person who is neither a party nor a party's officer to incur substantial expense to travel more than 100 miles to attend trial. + +**(C) Specifying Conditions as an Alternative.** In the circumstances described in Rule 45(c)(3)(B), the court may, instead of quashing or modifying a subpoena, order appearance or production under specified conditions if the serving party: + +(i) shows a substantial need for the testimony or material that cannot be otherwise met without undue hardship; and + +(ii) ensures that the subpoenaed person will be reasonably compensated. + +#### (d) Duties in Responding to a Subpoena. + +**(1) Producing Documents or Electronically Stored Information.** These procedures apply to producing documents or electronically stored information: + +**(A) Documents.** A person responding to a subpoena to produce documents must produce them as they are kept in the ordinary course of business or must organize and label them to correspond to the categories in the demand. + +**(B) Form for Producing Electronically Stored Information Not Specified.** If a subpoena does not specify a form for producing electronically stored information, the person responding must produce it in a form or forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in a reasonably usable form or forms. + +**(C) Electronically Stored Information Produced in Only One Form.** The person responding need not produce the same electronically stored information in more than one form. + +**(D) Inaccessible Electronically Stored Information.** The person responding need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the person identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the person responding must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule 26(b)(2)(C). The court may specify conditions for the discovery. + +#### **(2) Claiming Privilege or Protection.** + +**(A) Information Withheld.** A person withholding subpoenaed information under a claim that it is privileged or subject to protection as trial-preparation material must: + +(i) expressly make the claim; and + +(ii) describe the nature of the withheld documents, communications, or tangible things in a manner that, without revealing information itself privileged or protected, will enable the parties to assess the claim. + +**(B) Information Produced.** If information produced in response to a subpoena is subject to a claim of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation material, the person making the claim may notify any party that received the information of the claim and the basis for it. After being notified, a party must promptly return, sequester, or destroy the specified information and any copies it has; must not use or disclose the information until the claim is resolved; must take reasonable steps to retrieve the information if the party disclosed it before being notified; and may promptly present the information to the court under seal for a determination of the claim. The person who produced the information must preserve the information until the claim is resolved. + +**(e) Contempt.** The issuing court may hold in contempt a person who, having been served, fails without adequate excuse to obey the subpoena. A nonparty's failure to obey must be excused if the subpoena purports to require the nonparty to attend or produce at a place outside the limits of Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(ii). + +A copy of the entire file °a whose date of birth Illa and social security number is ne, including but not limited to any forms completed by the patient, medical records, reports, lab or diagnostic test results, consultants' reports, letters to and from the patient, handwritten office notes by any person, telephone messages, computer data kept on the patient, attorney letters, photographs, charts, intake forms, release forms and consultations from January 1, 1996 through the date of this Subpoena. •If you require the entire Social Security number, please contact our office at 561-842-2820 and ask for Jessica Cadwell. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748427/EFTA02748427.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748427/EFTA02748427.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..afd17b4d6ab208da03a95e2e56a2da3ca33a7b56 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748427/EFTA02748427.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,2050 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748427.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 20, + "chars": 53110, + "elapsed_seconds": 29.79, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 179.72499084472656, + 95.46466064453125 + ], + [ + 428.1734313964844, + 95.46466064453125 + ], + [ + 428.1734313964844, + 116.63999999999999 + ], + [ + 179.72499084472656, + 116.63999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS \nOR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES IN A CIVIL ACTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 135.252, + 231.66 + ], + [ + 479.196, + 231.66 + ], + [ + 479.196, + 261.63 + ], + [ + 135.252, + 261.63 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROOF OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 357.2701416015625, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 357.2701416015625, + 132.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 132.03000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (c), (d), and (e) (Effective 12/1/07)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 154.224, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 452.88, + 112.59 + ], + [ + 452.88, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 154.224, + 127.17 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(c) Protecting a Person Subject to a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 56.304, + 133.65 + ], + [ + 231.33599999999998, + 133.65 + ], + [ + 231.33599999999998, + 146.60999999999999 + ], + [ + 56.304, + 146.60999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Command to Produce Materials or Permit Inspection.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 65.484, + 213.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 273.564, + 213.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 273.564, + 225.99000000000004 + ], + [ + 65.484, + 225.99000000000004 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 65.484, + 422.82 + ], + [ + 212.36399999999998, + 422.82 + ], + [ + 212.36399999999998, + 435.7800000000001 + ], + [ + 65.484, + 435.7800000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(d) Duties in Responding to a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 307.836, + 129.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 460.836, + 129.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 460.836, + 140.94 + ], + [ + 307.836, + 140.94 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Claiming Privilege or Protection.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 307.836, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 452.26800000000003, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 452.26800000000003, + 400.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 307.836, + 400.95000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EXHIBIT \"A\"", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 286.41600000000005, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 359.1800231933594, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 359.1800231933594, + 111.76495361328125 + ], + [ + 286.41600000000005, + 111.76495361328125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 179.316, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 431.5740966796875, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 431.5740966796875, + 114.94097900390625 + ], + [ + 179.316, + 114.94097900390625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS \nOR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES LN A CIVIL ACTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 233.27999999999997 + ], + [ + 480.31903076171875, + 233.27999999999997 + ], + [ + 480.31903076171875, + 261.63 + ], + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 261.63 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROOF OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 123.93 + ], + [ + 360.5927734375, + 123.93 + ], + [ + 360.5927734375, + 136.8446044921875 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 136.8446044921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (c), (d), and (e) (Effective I2/1/07)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 154.224, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 453.27294921875, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 453.27294921875, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 154.224, + 119.07 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(c) Protecting aPerson Subject to a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 55.96226501464844, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 230.724, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 230.724, + 138.829833984375 + ], + [ + 55.96226501464844, + 138.829833984375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Command to Produce Materials or Pen ni: Inspection.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 56.304, + 206.54999999999998 + ], + [ + 273.564, + 206.54999999999998 + ], + [ + 273.564, + 218.9859619140625 + ], + [ + 56.304, + 218.9859619140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 56.304, + 417.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 417.15000000000003 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 430.1497802734375 + ], + [ + 56.304, + 430.1497802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(d) Duties in Responding to a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 309.0870361328125, + 123.12 + ], + [ + 460.8399658203125, + 123.12 + ], + [ + 460.8399658203125, + 135.91851806640625 + ], + [ + 309.0870361328125, + 135.91851806640625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(1) Producing Documents or Electronically Stored Information.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 309.672, + 133.65 + ], + [ + 544.068, + 133.65 + ], + [ + 544.068, + 145.999755859375 + ], + [ + 309.672, + 145.999755859375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Claiming Privilege or Protection. \n(A) Information Withheld A person withholding subpoenaed", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 309.672, + 387.18 + ], + [ + 532.4399999999999, + 387.18 + ], + [ + 532.4399999999999, + 408.24 + ], + [ + 309.672, + 408.24 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EXHIBIT \"A\"", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 287.64, + 93.96000000000001 + ], + [ + 361.17095947265625, + 93.96000000000001 + ], + [ + 361.17095947265625, + 109.8170166015625 + ], + [ + 287.64, + 109.8170166015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 179.928, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 431.6059265136719, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 431.6059265136719, + 116.63999999999999 + ], + [ + 179.928, + 116.63999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS \nOR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES IN A CIVIL ACTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 8, + "polygon": [ + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 234.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 480.857177734375, + 234.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 480.857177734375, + 262.44 + ], + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 262.44 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROOF OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 9, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 355.74383544921875, + 119.88 + ], + [ + 355.74383544921875, + 132.03000000000003 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 132.03000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (e), (d), and (e) (Effective 12/1/07)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 154.836, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 455.2802734375, + 110.16000000000003 + ], + [ + 455.2802734375, + 123.166015625 + ], + [ + 154.836, + 123.166015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(e) Protecting aPerson Subject to a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 56.916000000000004, + 129.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 232.56, + 129.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 232.56, + 142.9384765625 + ], + [ + 56.916000000000004, + 142.9384765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Command to Produce Materials or Permit Inspection.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.708, + 210.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 275.3433532714844, + 210.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 275.3433532714844, + 223.084716796875 + ], + [ + 66.708, + 223.084716796875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 56.916000000000004, + 421.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 289.476, + 421.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 289.476, + 434.2522888183594 + ], + [ + 56.916000000000004, + 434.2522888183594 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(d) Dulles in Responding to a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 310.284, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 463.13897705078125, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 463.13897705078125, + 140.403564453125 + ], + [ + 310.284, + 140.403564453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(1) Producing Documents or Electronically Stored Information.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 310.284, + 136.89000000000001 + ], + [ + 545.02734375, + 136.89000000000001 + ], + [ + 545.02734375, + 150.47845458984375 + ], + [ + 310.284, + 150.47845458984375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(B) Form for Producing Electronically Stored Information Not", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 310.284, + 208.17000000000002 + ], + [ + 544.6800000000001, + 208.17000000000002 + ], + [ + 544.6800000000001, + 220.1798095703125 + ], + [ + 310.284, + 220.1798095703125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(C) Electronically Stored Information Produced in Only One", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 310.284, + 257.58 + ], + [ + 536.1120000000001, + 257.58 + ], + [ + 536.1120000000001, + 270.809814453125 + ], + [ + 310.284, + 270.809814453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(D) Inaccessible Electronically Stored hfonnafion. The person", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 310.284, + 287.54999999999995 + ], + [ + 548.352, + 287.54999999999995 + ], + [ + 548.352, + 300.809814453125 + ], + [ + 310.284, + 300.809814453125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Claiming Privilege or Protection.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 10, + "polygon": [ + [ + 310.284, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 453.0063171386719, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 453.0063171386719, + 400.95977783203125 + ], + [ + 310.284, + 400.95977783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "valutrr \"A\"", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 11, + "polygon": [ + [ + 287.02799999999996, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 356.79599999999994, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 356.79599999999994, + 108.53999999999999 + ], + [ + 287.02799999999996, + 108.53999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 179.316, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 426.56399999999996, + 97.19999999999999 + ], + [ + 426.56399999999996, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 179.316, + 115.83 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS OR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES IN A CIVIL ACTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 12, + "polygon": [ + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 234.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 477.36, + 234.89999999999998 + ], + [ + 477.36, + 263.25 + ], + [ + 134.64000000000001, + 263.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROOF OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 13, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 122.30999999999999 + ], + [ + 356.28271484375, + 122.30999999999999 + ], + [ + 356.28271484375, + 134.46 + ], + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 134.46 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (c), (d), and (e) (Effective 12/1/07)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 154.836, + 111.78000000000002 + ], + [ + 454.716, + 111.78000000000002 + ], + [ + 454.716, + 124.74 + ], + [ + 154.836, + 124.74 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(c) Protecting a Person Subject to a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 56.916000000000004, + 131.22 + ], + [ + 231.948, + 131.22 + ], + [ + 231.948, + 142.56 + ], + [ + 56.916000000000004, + 142.56 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Command to Produce Materials or Permit Inspection.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 66.096, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 274.176, + 211.41 + ], + [ + 274.176, + 221.94 + ], + [ + 66.096, + 221.94 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 63.647999999999996, + 421.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 421.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 432.54 + ], + [ + 63.647999999999996, + 432.54 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(d) Duties in Responding to a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 309.06, + 129.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 462.06000000000006, + 129.60000000000002 + ], + [ + 462.06000000000006, + 140.13 + ], + [ + 309.06, + 140.13 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Claiming Privilege or Protection.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 14, + "polygon": [ + [ + 315.18, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 451.044, + 389.61 + ], + [ + 451.044, + 400.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 315.18, + 400.95000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EXHIBIT \"A\"", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 15, + "polygon": [ + [ + 287.02799999999996, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 358.7976379394531, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 358.7976379394531, + 109.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 287.02799999999996, + 109.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 181.152, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 430.0440673828125, + 95.58 + ], + [ + 430.0440673828125, + 114.20999999999998 + ], + [ + 181.152, + 114.20999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS \nOR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES IN A CIVIL ACTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 16, + "polygon": [ + [ + 135.252, + 232.46999999999997 + ], + [ + 478.78521728515625, + 232.46999999999997 + ], + [ + 478.78521728515625, + 259.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 135.252, + 259.20000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROOF OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 17, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 117.44999999999999 + ], + [ + 355.48272705078125, + 117.44999999999999 + ], + [ + 355.48272705078125, + 129.7620849609375 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 129.7620849609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (c), (d), and (e) (Effective 12/1/07)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 156.06, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 456.552, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 456.552, + 120.69 + ], + [ + 156.06, + 120.69 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(c) Protecting a Person Subject to a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 58.14, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 233.17200000000003, + 127.17 + ], + [ + 233.17200000000003, + 138.51 + ], + [ + 58.14, + 138.51 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Command to Produce Materials or Permit Inspection.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 67.32000000000001, + 207.36 + ], + [ + 275.4, + 207.36 + ], + [ + 275.4, + 218.70000000000002 + ], + [ + 67.32000000000001, + 218.70000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 63.647999999999996, + 417.96 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 417.96 + ], + [ + 209.91600000000003, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 63.647999999999996, + 429.29999999999995 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(d) Duties in Responding to a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 310.284, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 463.284, + 126.35999999999999 + ], + [ + 463.284, + 137.70000000000002 + ], + [ + 310.284, + 137.70000000000002 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Claiming Privilege or Protection.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 18, + "polygon": [ + [ + 316.404, + 386.37 + ], + [ + 451.044, + 386.37 + ], + [ + 451.044, + 397.71 + ], + [ + 316.404, + 397.71 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EXHIBIT \"A\"", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 19, + "polygon": [ + [ + 288.864, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 360.79095458984375, + 93.15 + ], + [ + 360.79095458984375, + 107.947021484375 + ], + [ + 288.864, + 107.947021484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 381 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 202 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 54 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 133 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 386 + ], + [ + "Line", + 38 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1195 + ], + [ + "Line", + 116 + ], + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 362 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 19 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 207 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1190 + ], + [ + "Line", + 117 + ], + [ + "Text", + 29 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 131 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 380 + ], + [ + "Line", + 39 + ], + [ + "Text", + 36 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "Table", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 209 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 14, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 41 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 15, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 16, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 386 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 17, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 212 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 18, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 54 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 19, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748427" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748447/EFTA02748447.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748447/EFTA02748447.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..13b109c648c338f90aa779071c354709b027da9b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748447/EFTA02748447.md @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-801 I 9-MARRAINIMI + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## JANE DOE NOS.' 2, 3, and 5-8 OBJECTION TO SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM DATED NOVEMBER 13, 2009 ISSUED TO PRESIDENTAL WOMEN'S CENTER + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3, and 5-8, by and through their undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 and 45, hereby object to the Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by Jeffrey Epstein to the records custodian of Presidential Women's Center dated November 13, 2009 on the basis that said subpoena is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence and constitutes an invasion of the privacy rights of the plaintiffs. There is no evidence or other indication whatsoever to indicate that Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3, and 5-8 have had an abortion at Presidential Women's Center, 100 Northpoint Parkway, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 or otherwise been seen or treated at that facility. Accordingly, this subpoena seeking records relating to these Plaintiffs is a pure "shot in the dark" attempt to obtain discovery, rather than the reasonably calculated discovery effort as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Pursuant to this objection, Plaintiffs Nos. 2, 3, and 5-8 request that non-party + +Presidential Women's Center not answer any questions or produce any records in response to the Subpoena Duces Tecum in the absence of a Court Order requiring such disclosure. + +Dated: November 25, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitzasexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent to the following via e-mail transmission, this 25th day of November, 2009: + +Louis Silber, Esq. Attorney for Presidential Women's Center Isilber@svdlaw.net + +Robert D. Critton, Jr, Esq. rcritabc1claw.com + +Michael James Pike, Esq. tv1Pike@bc1claw.com + +s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748447/EFTA02748447.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748447/EFTA02748447.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7453eb3f5d4746dd74b27ce1146c423d7b71c653 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748447/EFTA02748447.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,170 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748447.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2385, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.79, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 211.75199999999995, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 406.94976806640625, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 406.94976806640625, + 114.603515625 + ], + [ + 211.75199999999995, + 114.603515625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JANE DOE NOS.' 2, 3, and 5-8 OBJECTION TO SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM \nDATED NOVEMBER 13, 2009 ISSUED TO PRESIDENTAL WOMEN'S CENTER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 99.144, + 336.96 + ], + [ + 523.0519409179688, + 336.96 + ], + [ + 523.0519409179688, + 369.6035461425781 + ], + [ + 99.144, + 369.6035461425781 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 233.784, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 385.990478515625, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 385.990478515625, + 375.6035461425781 + ], + [ + 233.784, + 375.6035461425781 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748447" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748449/EFTA02748449.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748449/EFTA02748449.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7f1adb5263afbc0ef012ac54247691e4435bebe6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748449/EFTA02748449.md @@ -0,0 +1,111 @@ +## INSTITUTE FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH & BODY + +| 1395 State Road 7 | 560 Village Blvd. | 8188 Jog Road | 4495 Military Trail | +|----------------------|---------------------------|-------------------------|---------------------| +| Suite 450 | Suite 315 | Suite 203 | Suite 101 | +| Wellington, FL 33414 | West Palm Beach, FL 33409 | Boynton Beach, FL 33437 | Jupiter, FL 33458 | +| (561)798-1233 phone | (561)616-9988 phone | (561)740-1911 phone | (561)799-3722 phone | +| (561)798-1655 fax | (561)616-0507 fax | (561)740-1856 fax | (561)799-3692 fax | + +\*\*\*\*\* + +Reprinted from Electronic Medical Record - Created on 08/20/01 17:31:50 +Patient: [REDACTED] MR No.: 15961 DOB: [REDACTED] +\*\*\*\*\* + +CHIEF COMPLAINTS: . + +**HISTORY OF PRESENT ILLNESS:** + +On 08/20/2001, [REDACTED], a 52 year old Hispanic female, LMP 11/01/00 presented for an annual exam and with c/o postmenopausal bleeding which began 2 weeks ago. Pt has a watery, bloody discharge. She is not on HRT. She denies hot flashes, vaginal dryness. She reports recently increased libido. No hirsuitism or virilization. + +Pt also has c/o urinary incontinence upon climbing stairs, coughing, sneezing, laughing. She cannot exercise because of the condition. She is active and works as a cardiology tech at the V.A. Hospital. She has to wear a pad to work. The incontinence has become disabling for her. She has had the condition 2 years and it is worsinging. She has tried Kegels without success. Pt also has c/o pelvic and vaginal pressure while standing, and feels a mass at the introitus. She denies urgency, nocturia. + +PAST MEDICAL HISTORY: Grave's disease, GERD, hypercholesterolemia, no HX of infection, STDs and PID + +PAST SURGICAL HISTORY: no previous surgeries + +PAST PREGNANCIES: Total Pregnancies - 4, Full Term Pregnancies - 2, Premature - 0, Abortions Induced - 2, Abortions Spontaneous - 0, Ectopics - 0, Multiple Births - 0, Living - 2 + +**MENSTRUAL HISTORY:** + +| Amount/Duration | | +|--------------------------|-----------------------------------| +| Regularity | Regular | +| Frequency | | +| LMP | 11/01/00 (after stopping LoOvral) | +| Age Onset Menarche | | +| Last Pap Smear | 11/01/00 | +| Last Mammogram | 04/01/01 | +| Method of Contraception | none | +| Symptoms of Dysmenorrhea | none | + +FAMILY HISTORY: Family, No hx of Breast, Gyn, or Colon Cancer, Father, Alheimer's Disease, Mother and MI at age 45 + +SOCIAL HISTORY: denies drinking, balanced diet, infrequent exercise, moderate lifestyle, lives with husband, sexually active, denies smoking and denies use of street drugs + +**REVIEW OF SYSTEMS:** + +General: no fever, chills, or body aches + Eyes: no blurred vision, eye pain, or discharge + Ears: no ear pain, discharge, or difficulty hearing + Nose: no nasal congestion, discharge, or bleeding + +![]()Patient: Mouth: Neck: Respiratory: Cardiac: G/I: G/U: incontinence Neuro: MRNO: 15961 DOB: - Continued no sore throat, or difficulty swallowing no pain or swelling no shortness of breath, cough, wheezing or bloody sputum no chest pains or palpitations no nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation and no abdominal pain no dysuria, frequency of urination, or slow stream and stress urinary no slurred speech, seizures, or localized weakness + +#### MEDICATIONS HISTORY: + +- 1. Aciphex 20 mg, 1 po q day +- 2. Calcium Citrate with Vitamin D 1500 mg-2, 1 po q day +- 3. Synthroid 0.175 mg, 1 po q day +- 4. Vitamin C CR 1000 mg, 1 po q day +- 5. Vitamin E 400 iu, 1 po q day + +ALLERGIES: Codiene + +#### PHYSICAL EXAMINATION: + +### VITAL SIGNS: + +CONST.: WN WD female, NAND + +SKIN: no rash, no lesions + +HEAD: no trauma, normocephalic + +EYES: no gross ABN + +ENT: no gross ABN + +NECK: raised no nodes, no nuchal rigidity, thyroid normal size and texture and JVD not + +CHEST: CTA, BS equals BILAT + +BREASTS: supple NT without LAD, D/C, masses, both sitting supine + +CARDIAC: RRR without MGR + +ABDOMEN: soft, non-tender, BS+, no masses or HSM + +EXTREMITIES: w/o clubbing, cyanosis edema non tender w/o venous cords + +NEURO: cranial nerves intact and normal gait + +G/U: Vulva - urethra - incontinence of urine during cough in dorsal lithotomy position and upon valsala while standing; positive Q tip test (45-50 degrees) Vagina - mildly atrophic, 2nd degree cystocele upon standing Cervix - WNL Uterus - AV, NSSC, Mobile, NT Adnexa - no masses, NT Rectal - no hemorrhoids, no masses and guiac - negative + +#### DIAGNOSIS: + +- 1. 2nd degree Cystocele +- 2. Stess Urinary Incontenence +- 3. Post Menopausal bleeding +- 4. Well Woman Exam + +DECISION MAKING (PLAN): Return in one week forEMB. Check pelvic ultrasound. Consider urodynamic testing. Plan surgery in future for stress urinary incontinence + +Patient: MRNO: 15961 Continued and cystoce . e an erio repair and Burch. iscussed risks and benefits of HAT extensively. + +FOLLOWUP PLAN: Return in 1 Week + +Entered: LER + +Supervised by: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748449/EFTA02748449.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748449/EFTA02748449.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b228f2b6055f212bc4c85bf81de9d302458c9a26 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748449/EFTA02748449.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,331 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748449.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 5244, + "elapsed_seconds": 10.84, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "INSTITUTE FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH & BODY", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 148.10399999999998, + 52.650000000000006 + ], + [ + 481.032, + 52.650000000000006 + ], + [ + 481.032, + 68.85000000000001 + ], + [ + 148.10399999999998, + 68.85000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "HISTORY OF PRESENT ILLNESS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 47.124, + 214.64999999999998 + ], + [ + 211.14, + 214.64999999999998 + ], + [ + 211.14, + 226.8 + ], + [ + 47.124, + 226.8 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MENSTRUAL HISTORY:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 47.124, + 490.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 159.12, + 490.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 159.12, + 502.20000000000005 + ], + [ + 47.124, + 502.20000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REVIEW OF SYSTEMS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 47.124, + 692.55 + ], + [ + 159.12, + 692.55 + ], + [ + 159.12, + 704.7 + ], + [ + 47.124, + 704.7 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MEDICATIONS HISTORY:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 45.9, + 160.38 + ], + [ + 178.21127319335938, + 160.38 + ], + [ + 178.21127319335938, + 173.69622802734375 + ], + [ + 45.9, + 173.69622802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PHYSICAL EXAMINATION:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 45.9, + 265.68 + ], + [ + 185.08538818359375, + 265.68 + ], + [ + 185.08538818359375, + 279.44622802734375 + ], + [ + 45.9, + 279.44622802734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VITAL SIGNS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 45.9, + 286.74 + ], + [ + 130.77952575683594, + 286.74 + ], + [ + 130.77952575683594, + 300.8162536621094 + ], + [ + 45.9, + 300.8162536621094 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DIAGNOSIS:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 48.96, + 656.9100000000001 + ], + [ + 119.41633605957031, + 656.9100000000001 + ], + [ + 119.41633605957031, + 670.5762405395508 + ], + [ + 48.96, + 670.5762405395508 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 149 + ], + [ + "Line", + 75 + ], + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 131 + ], + [ + "Line", + 66 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748449" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748452/EFTA02748452.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748452/EFTA02748452.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ed490fa340312f429dfc765dccffca3fc120811b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748452/EFTA02748452.md @@ -0,0 +1,297 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRain + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PRESIDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENAS DUCES TECUM + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein"), pursuant to Rule 45(c)(2)(B)(i), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, moves to compel Presidential Woman's Center to comply with subpoenas duces tecum served by Epstein, and states: + +1. On November 13, 2009, Epstein served Subpoenas Duces Tecum (attached as Composite Exhibit A) on the records custodian of Presidential Women's Center' seeking: + +> Acopy of the entire file of [Plaintiff], whose date of birth [ ] and social security number is [ ], including but not limited to any forms completed by the patient, medical records, reports, lab or diagnostic test results, consultants' reports, letter to and from the patient, handwritten office notes by any person, telephone messages, computer data kept on the patient, attorney letters, photographs, charts, intake forms, release form and consultations from January I, 1999 through the date of this Subpoena? + +Presidential Women's Center is the primary, if not the only, facility in Palm Beach County that performs abortions. Presidential Women's Center is the only business listed in West Palm Beach on Yellowpages.com under "Abortion Services." + +The subpoenas for Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3 and 5 — 8 are identical, save for their names, dates of birth and social security numbers. + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Enstejs + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARIS + +Epstein's Motion to Compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoenas Duces Tecum + +Page 2 of 6 + +2. On November 25, 2009, Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3 and 5 — 8 ("Plaintiffs") served an Objection to Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated November 13, 2009 Issued to Presidential Women's Center ("Objection") (attached as Exhibit B). In their Objection, Plaintiffs argue that the "subpoena is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence and constitutes an invasion of the privacy rights of the plaintiffs."3 (Emphasis in original). Plaintiffs also argue that there is no evidence that Plaintiffs had an abortion or were seen or treated at Presidential Women's Center. See Exhibit B. + +3. Plaintiffs' argument that the subpoena is an invasion of privacy rights should fall on deaf ears as the issue of whether Plaintiffs had abortions is directly relevant to their damage claims in this case. + +4. This is yet another attempt by Plaintiffs to control discovery and insulate themselves and their witnesses by asking the Court to disallow discovery of information directly relevant and material to her damage claims on the basis that it may be "an invasion of privacy rights." However, the Court has already ruled, on a number of occasions, that Plaintiffs' past and present medical, psychological, familial and social histories is relevant and discoverable and goes to the heart of Plaintiff's damage claims : + +- a. Plaintiffs' attorneys sought to preclude the Epstein from serving third party subpoenas and allowing only Plaintiffs' counsel to obtain those materials and "filter them" to defense counsel. That motion was denied, and the Court, "agree[ing] that Defendant is entitled to discovery related to the allegations in Plaintiffs' complaints," tailored a method such that the Epstein could obtain the records directly. See DE #253 at 4 — 5. + +Abortions are known to cause emotional and psychological side effects such as relationship issues, suicidal thoughts and feelings, eating disorders, depression, anxiety, regret, anger, guilty feelings, shame, lonliness or isoloation, impaired self confidence, insomnia or nightmares. See http://www.americanpregnancy.org /unplannedpregnancy/abortionemotionaleffects.Mml + +Jane Doe No. 2 v, Epstein + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARRAIIMI + +Epstein's Motion to Compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoenas Duces MOM + +Page 3 of 6 + +- b. "Under these circumstances, where Plaintiff is seeking to recover expenses associated with these complex medical issues, full knowledge of Plaintiff's past and present medical, psychological, familial and social histories is essential." See DE #289 at 4. +- c. "As a global matter, Plaintiffs clearly and unequivocally place their sexual history in issue by their allegations that Epstein's actions in this case has negatively affected their relationships by, among other things, 'distrust in men, 'sexual intimacy problems,' diminished trust,' social problems,' 'problems in personal relationships,' feelings of stress around men,' 'premature teenage pregnancy,' antisocial behaviors,' and 'hypersexuality and promiscuity.' Considering these allegations, there simply can be no question that Epstein is entitled to know whether Plaintiffs were molested or the subject of other 'sexual activity' or 'lewd and lascivious conduct' in order to determine whether there is an alternative basis for the psychological disorders Plaintiffs claim to have sustained.... To deny Epstein this discovery, would be tantamount to barring him from mounting adefense." See DE #377 at 10. +- d. "The Court agrees with Epstein that all of the foregoing issues [which included 'multiple aborted pregnancies') are directly relevant to Plaintiffs' damage claims and credibility...." 5s1 DE #413 at 4. + +5. Information related to any abortions Plaintiffs had directly impacts Plaintiffs' damage claims and may provide an "alternative basis for the psychological disorders Plaintiffs claim to have sustained." See DE # 377 at 10. Indeed, Jane Doe No. 4 (who is represented by counsel for Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3 and 5 — 8, yetnotably absent from the instant Objection) testified that three abortions she had caused her more emotional trauma than her encounters with Mr. Epstein. See 10/27/09 Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 at 304 — 305; see also fn. 3 supra. + +6. Last, Plaintiffs' argument that these subpoenas are a"shot in the dark" attempt to obtain discovery is also unpersuasive. Presidential Women's Center is the primary, if not the only, facility in Palm Beach County that performs abortions. If Plaintiffs had an abortion in Palm Beach County, it was most likely at Presidential Women's Center. Moreover, Jane Doe No. 5's medical records indicate she had four pregnancies and two abortions. See 8/20/01 record + +Jane Doc No. 2 v. ED:nein Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA=. 4stein's Motion to Compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoenas Duces Tecum Page 4 of 6 + +for Institute for Women's Health & Body attached as Exhibit C. Thus, it is clear the subpoenas are reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. + +7. For the foregoing reasons, the Court should overrule Plaintiffs' Objection, grant the instant Motion and compel Presidential Women's Center to respond to the subpoenas. + +WHEREFORE, Epstein respectfully requests the Court deny Plaintiffs' Objection, grant the instant Motion and compel Presidential Women's Center to Respond to the subpoenas duces tecum attached to this Motion as Composite Exhibit A within ten (10) days of the Court's order and grant any additional relief the Court deems just and proper. + +# Rule 7.1 Certification + +I hereby certify that counsel for the respective parties communicated via telephone in a good faith effort to resolve the discovery issues prior to the filing of this motion to compel. + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 2nd day of December. 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Michael J. Pike ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bc1claw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bciclaw.com BURMAN, CR1TTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN 303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +Jane Dcc No. 2 v. Epstein + +Case No. 08-01/-80119-MARRAIMM + +Epstein's Motion to Compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoenas Duces Tecum + +Page 5 of 6 + +#### Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E tein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MA + +Stuart S. Mennelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssmQsexabuseattomev.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08- + +80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08- 80994 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 101h Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +80811 + +reelrhw@hotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack Rill Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcylaw.com + +jph@searcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. + +Brad Esq. + +Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler + +401 East Las Olas Boulevard + +Suite 1650 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-522-3456 + +Fax: 954-527-8663 + +bedwards@rra-law.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +casselln law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. , Esq. + +Law Finn, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberg@jpodhurst.com + +kezell@podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein + +Case No. 08-CIV-80119-MAla + +Epstein's Motion to Compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoenas Duces Tecum + +Page 6 of 6 + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf@brucereinhartlawsm + +Counsel for Defendan + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +08804 + +09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iaRescabellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748452/EFTA02748452.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748452/EFTA02748452.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2cb279de63d45506d9baabaec6db72c49051b3fd --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748452/EFTA02748452.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,380 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748452.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 11037, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.92, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.04400634765625, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 406.3802185058594, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 406.3802185058594, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 197.04400634765625, + 103.68 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PRESIDENTIAL WOMEN'S \nCENTER TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENAS DUCES TECUM", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 127.90799999999999, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 481.8758850097656, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 481.8758850097656, + 392.8526611328125 + ], + [ + 127.90799999999999, + 392.8526611328125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 Certification", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 325.62 + ], + [ + 365.6300048828125, + 325.62 + ], + [ + 365.6300048828125, + 343.10302734375 + ], + [ + 247.24800000000005, + 343.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 249.696, + 409.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 365.34051513671875, + 409.04999999999995 + ], + [ + 365.34051513671875, + 425.60302734375 + ], + [ + 249.696, + 425.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.02400000000003, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 358.02, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 358.02, + 115.83 + ], + [ + 246.02400000000003, + 115.83 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 302 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 472 + ], + [ + "Line", + 37 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 74 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 373 + ], + [ + "Line", + 82 + ], + [ + "Text", + 76 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 31 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748452" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748458/EFTA02748458.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748458/EFTA02748458.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..35c18cc47caf9ceb44a212d6cf4fcfa56bd4919b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748458/EFTA02748458.md @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO: 08-80119-CIV-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Third Party Witness, Igor Zinoview's, Motion for Protective Order (D.E. #402). For the following reasons, Third Party Witness Zinoview's Motion for Protective Order is denied. + +By this Motion Third Party Witness Zinoview, who has been employed by Defendant Epstein as a driver and bodyguard since 2005, seeks an order preventing the taking of his deposition on the basis that his employment with Epstein post-dates the facts giving rise to these cases and that "at not time has he discussed with Mr. Epstein any issues involving Mr. Epstein's criminal case or any the cases or issues involved with civil Plaintiffs." Zinoview's Mtn., p.1-3. + +For "good cause" shown the Court may issue a protective order preventing or delaying a deposition. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c); see McCarthy v. Barnett Bank of Poly County, 876 F.2d 89, 91 (11th Cir. 1989). An order completely prohibiting a deposition from going forward, however, is rare, and only resorted to in extraordinary circumstances. Salter v. Upiohn Co., 593 F.2d 649, 651 (5'" Cir. 1979)(noting that it is very unusual for trial court to prohibit the taking of a deposition altogether, and absent extraordinary circumstances, such order would likely be in error); Jennings v. Family Management, 201 F.R.D. 272 (D.D.C. 2001)(stating that a "complete prohibition of a deposition is an extraordinary measure which should be resorted to only in rare occasions."). In this instance the Court agrees with Plaintiff that neither Zinoview's conclusory affidavit in which he denies any knowledge of the facts giving rise to these cases, nor his Motion provide anything even approaching the "extraordinary circumstances" necessary to justify a complete prohibition of his deposition. Nor, does the Court find any basis to limit the questions that may be asked Zinoview at deposition. At the deposition Zinoview's counsel is free to invoke any privileges afforded him by the applicable procedural rules. In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Third Party Witness, Igor Zinoview's, Motion for Protective Order (D.E. #402) is DENIED. + +DONE AND ORDERED this December 3rd, 2009, in at West Palm + +Beach, Florida. + +/i??Seit + +ON JO R. LINNEA JUDGE MAGISTRATE STATES UNITED + +Marra A. Kenneth Honorable The CC: Record of Counsel All \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748458/EFTA02748458.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748458/EFTA02748458.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..131aaf8e5a8a6085a558cfc13aa8b3cde97e1ce5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748458/EFTA02748458.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,177 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748458.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2639, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.82, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.124, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 408.97198486328125, + 114.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 200.124, + 114.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 451.9800000000001 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 451.9800000000001 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 466.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 466.18353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 15 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748458" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748461/EFTA02748461.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748461/EFTA02748461.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6f43ae4c62d485ede2f4729294e6c03599cd46ed --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748461/EFTA02748461.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## OMNIBUS ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the following motions: (1) Plaintiff' Jane Doe's Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Deposition and for Sanctions (D.E. #378); and, (2) Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Protective Order Re Second Day of Deposition (D.E. #392). For the following reasons said Motions are granted in part and denied in part in accordance with the terms herein. + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm beach, New York and St. , with the promise of money in exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +The instant Motions are nearly identical and seek, as to each respective Plaintiff, Jane Doe in the case of D.E. #378 and Jane Doe 4 in the case of D.E. #392, protection/limitation from having to appear at a second deposition. Jane Doe was deposed on September 20, 2009 for a total of anywhere between just under 7 hours to 8 hours. Jane Doe 4 was deposed on October 27, 2009, and the parties are in agreement that taking into account breaks, the deposition lasted 5 hours and 35 minutes. Plaintiffs contend that under Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(d)(1), S.D. Fla. L.R. 26.1(K), and the Court's Consolidation Order (D.E. #98), all of which limit a deposition of an individual to a single day of seven hours unless leave of Court is granted, it is Defendant's burden to demonstrate why more than seven hours of deposition time is necessary for a particular Plaintiff. According to Plaintiff, Epstein has failed to sustain his burden in this regard and, as such, he should not be able to re-depose Jane Doe at all', and should only be able to re-depose Jane Doe 4 + +&#x27; In her Motion, Jane Doe represents that she was deposed for 8 hours. For his part, Defendant Epstein contends in his Response in Opposition that taking into account lunch and other breaks, the actual figure is 6 hours and 50 minutes, which figure he contends was confirmed with the court reporter. The Court finds that whether Jane Doe was deposed for just under 7 hours as Epstein contends, or for 8 hours as Jane Doe alleges, is under the circumstances herein presented, of no consequence. + +&#x27;This is based on Plaintiffs' representation that Jane Doe's deposition lasted 8 hours.

for an additional 1 hour and 25 minutes, providing Epstein with an aggregate of 7 hours deposition time of Jane Doe 4.

Epstein contends the Court's May 14, 2009 Consolidation Order, which provides that "Local Rule 26.1K (limiting deposition time to one day of seven hours) is waived so as to allow each party an adequate opportunity to develop fully the record as it may relate to that party," effectively waives L.R. 26.1K's limitation on the length of a deposition, thereby relieving Epstein from the seven hour deposition limit. The Court disagrees with Epstein's interpretation of the District Court's Order and finds that Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(d)(1) and S.D.Fla.L.R. 26.1(K) which, absent agreement or court order, presumptively limits depositions to 7 hours, applies in this case. That said, the undersigned finds that Epstein has provided sufficient and reasonable grounds in his Response Memorandum to sustain his burden under the Rules of showing additional time to depose Jane Doe and Jane Doe 4 is needed to fully and fairly prepare his defense.

Plaintiffs are seeking millions of dollars in personal injury damages for, among other things, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, and invasion of privacy. Epstein's counsel represents he will need an additional 2 1/2 to 3 hours to depose Jane Doe, so that he can cover such topics as background information not disclosed in answers to interrogatories, family background information, details regarding Jane Doe's visits to Epstein's home, Jane Doe's knowledge of other witnesses, school records and medical records, and finally, details regarding her past sexual history, an opportunity he did not have when he began her deposition as the Court had not yet ruled on Epstein's Motion to Compel (D.E. #s 67 & 68), which sought information related to Plaintiff's past

sexual history.

As for Jane Doe 4, Epstein's counsel represents he will need approximately an additional 4 hours to complete her deposition, owing to her "complicated and eventful past history" including alleged drug use, repeated instances of domestic violence, multiple aborted pregnancies and arrests. Defs Resp., p. 2. Also, as with Jane Doe, Epstein's counsel claims he needs additional time to depose Jane Doe 4 on details regarding her past sexual history, an opportunity he did not have when he began her deposition as the Court had not yet ruled on Epstein's Motion to Compel (D.E. #s 67 & 68), which sought information related to Plaintiff's past sexual history. All agree that there were instances at Jane Doe 4's initial deposition where she was instructed by her counsel not to answer questions "relat[ed] to sexual partners' names or sexual positions." Jane Doe 4 Deposition Excerpt, attached as Ex. "B" to Def's Resp., at 5. With these subjects fairly open to inquiry, it is only reasonable that Epstein's counsel will require additional time to depose Jane Doe and Jane Doe 4 on these areas.

The Court agrees with Epstein that all of the foregoing issues are directly relevant to Plaintiffs' damage claims and credibility, and to deny him additional time in which to depose these Plaintiffs would be unreasonable under the circumstances and result in prejudice to Epstein by denying him the opportunity to obtain discovery that is central to his defense. See Osborne v. Columbia Helicopters, Inc., 2009 WL 2215076 (S.D. W.Va. 2009)(granting the defendant an additional one day of 7 hours to depose the plaintiff, reasoning that because the plaintiff provided incomplete written discovery responses, the defendant "did not have full opportunity to examine Mr. Osbome respecting all of the information which might properly be considered in his discovery deposition.").

Nonetheless, with the Court now having the benefit of the 446 page, three-volume deposition transcript, a copy of which is attached to Plaintiffs' Appeal of Magistrate Judge Decision (D.E. #430), the Court finds the 4 additional hours requested by Defendant to depose Jane Doe 4 unreasonable under the circumstances. A review of the deposition transcript reveals numerous instances of Jane Doe 4 being subjected to repetitive questioning about exceedingly sensitive issues such as the emotional pain caused by having three abortions, the sexual positions she has engaged in, and Epstein's treatment of her. To re-phrase Plaintiffs' counsel's words', while it may be appropriate to ask a plaintiff in a personal injury case a question about whether having abortions caused her emotional distress, when the essentially identical question is re-phrased and asked over and over again, the questioning becomes badgering and harassing. Counsel for Defendant must be mindful that the depositions of the Plaintiffs in these cases covers the most intimate and private details of their lives and if not handled correctly may serve to needlessly revictimize, embarrass and humiliate them.

In order to avoid this result, in all future depositions of the Plaintiffs in these cases, including the re-depositions of Jane Doe and Jane Doe 4, Defendant's counsel is ordered to refrain from repetitive questioning. This does not mean that Defense counsel may not follow-up on questions asked or ask similar questions of a related nature, but counsel is expected to conduct himself in a responsible and professional manner befitting members of the Bar and balance the need for the information sought against the psychological trauma that could result from repetitive, humiliating questions regarding the sensitive

See Plaintiffs' Appeal of Magistrate's Order (D.E. #430), p.6-7.

issues at play in this case.

As for the time permitted defense counsel to re-depose these Plaintiffs, the Court finds that any remaining questions regarding Jane Doe 4 or Jane Doe 4's sexual history can fairly and reasonably be covered in 2 hours, rather than the 4 hours requested, and that any remaining questions regarding Jane Doe or Jane Doe's sexual history can fairly and reasonably be covered in the requested 3 hours. The Court's allowance of this additional time should not be construed by defense counsel as authority to take the depositions of these Plaintiffs for any longer time than is necessary, and in no event will the Court tolerate questioning of an abusive nature. In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff Jane Doe's Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Deposition and for Sanctions (D.E. #378); and Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Protective Order Re Second Day of Deposition (D.E. #392) are GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART in accordance with the terms of this Order. Epstein's counsel is hereby given leave to re-depose Jane Doe for up to 3 additional hours and hereby given leave to re-depose Jane Doe 4 for up to 2 additional hours. Counsel for the parties are ordered to immediately confer and come to mutual agreement on a date and time in which these depositions can be continued sometime within two (2) weeks from the date hereof, unless otherwise agreed to by the parties. Plaintiffs' request for sanctions is denied.

DONE AND ORDERED this December 3, 2009, in , at West Palm Beach, Florida.

O JOkf R. EA INN L N JUDGE MAGISTRATE STATES UNITED

ts.4:Sen\_\_\_..- fi

Marra A. Kenneth Honorable The CC: Record of Counsel All

+ + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748461/EFTA02748461.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748461/EFTA02748461.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0fa0cc33426e148dcc7d4984b9146cb5dfb901cc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748461/EFTA02748461.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,321 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748461.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 7, + "chars": 11292, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.35, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.288, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.5008544921875, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.5008544921875, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 198.288, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OMNIBUS ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 396.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 360.8534240722656, + 396.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 360.8534240722656, + 411.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 411.80352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 17 + ], + [ + "Line", + 9 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748461" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748468/EFTA02748468.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748468/EFTA02748468.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4ddbd5655ae2fe721a6eaa77283931c04102840a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748468/EFTA02748468.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER VACATING OMNIBUS ORDER OF NOVEMBER 17, 2009 (D.E. #413) + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court sua sponte. On November 17, 2009 (D.E. #413) the undersigned entered an Omnibus Order on two motions filed by the Plaintiffs, Plaintiff' Jane Doe's Motion for Protective Order Barring Second Deposition and for Sanctions (D.E. #378) and Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Protective Order Re Second Day of Deposition (D.E. #392). The Court inadvertently ruled on such motions without waiting for Plaintiffs to file their reply memorandums. Accordingly, it is hereby, + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the undersigned's Omnibus Order of + +November 17, 2009 (D.E. #413) is hereby VACATED. A ruling on the motions which were the subject of said Omnibus Order is forthcoming and shall be issued separately. + +DONE AND ORDERED this December 3, 2009, in Beach, Florida. at West Palm + +> LINNEA R. JO INSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748468/EFTA02748468.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748468/EFTA02748468.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..71a92c516940759fa335b554669aacbdf7ee1b57 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748468/EFTA02748468.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748468.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1268, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.76, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.5008544921875, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 407.5008544921875, + 100.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 100.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER VACATING OMNIBUS ORDER OF NOVEMBER 17, 2009 \n(D.E. #413)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 124.23600000000002, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 488.4207458496094, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 488.4207458496094, + 454.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 124.23600000000002, + 454.56353759765625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748468" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748470/EFTA02748470.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748470/EFTA02748470.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..edcaaab1bd08b01f39f71b74107f299766549fa7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748470/EFTA02748470.md @@ -0,0 +1,51 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4'S NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO THE SCOPE OF INQUIRY AT THE DEPOSITIONS OF JANE DOE NO. 4'S PARENTS + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4 ("Plaintiff"), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files this Notice of Withdrawal of Motion for Protective Order as to the Scope of Inquiry at the Depositions of Jane Doe No. 4's Parents (DE 420). + +Dated: December 7, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: /s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattonnev.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on December 7, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. iaoldberaer@aawpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James brad@pathtojustice.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcvlaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawverwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsbera@Dodhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748470/EFTA02748470.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748470/EFTA02748470.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..82d1c632ed5723157a8390493e281111fd6fd87a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748470/EFTA02748470.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,231 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748470.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2089, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.87, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4'S NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL \nOF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO THE SCOPE OF \nINQUIRY AT THE DEPOSITIONS OF JANE DOE NO. 4'S PARENTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 116.892, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 496.0283508300781, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 496.0283508300781, + 376.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 116.892, + 376.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 223.38, + 71.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 389.619384765625, + 71.92889404296875 + ], + [ + 389.619384765625, + 85.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 223.38, + 85.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 167.07600000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 445.149169921875, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 445.149169921875, + 113.60302734375 + ], + [ + 167.07600000000002, + 113.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748470" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748473/EFTA02748473.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748473/EFTA02748473.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d8401925ced541e3a0870df60bbb3ba75ce33976 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748473/EFTA02748473.md @@ -0,0 +1,79 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRia + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AND CHANGE OF FIRM AFFILIATION OF + +Attorney J. hereby enters his notice of appearance under his new firm affiliation as counsel for Plaintiff, JANE DOE (Case #80893), in the abovestyled cause, and respectfully requests that copies of all papers, filings, correspondence, notices and other materials relating to the above-styled action be directed to him at his new firm, as follows: + +> J. , Esq. Jaffe, Weissing, , Fistos & Lehrman, PL + +425 N. Andrews Ave., Suite 2 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +(954) 524-2820 + +(954) 524-2822 fax + +Florida Bar No.: 542075 + +E-mail: brad@pathtojustice.com + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Respectfully submitted, + +Dated: December 14, 2009 + +R. Jaffe, Weissing, , Fistos & Lehrman, PL 425 N. Andrews Ave., Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 (954) 524-2820 (954) 524-2822 fax brad@pathtojustice.com + +By: J. J. Florida Bar No.: 542075 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on December 14, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> /s/ J. J. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +## SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court - Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jeoldberner@aqwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidroqarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsbere@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748473/EFTA02748473.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748473/EFTA02748473.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2f85c45565c27b11f9293f8f1375bf0526a39f9c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748473/EFTA02748473.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,231 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748473.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2309, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.08, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AND CHANGE OF FIRM AFFILIATION OF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 108.93599999999999, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 503.3596496582031, + 401.76 + ], + [ + 503.3596496582031, + 416.79998779296875 + ], + [ + 108.93599999999999, + 416.79998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 381.51 + ], + [ + 387.3754577636719, + 381.51 + ], + [ + 387.3754577636719, + 396.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 396.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 350.56756591796875, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 350.56756591796875, + 134.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 134.30352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748473" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748476/EFTA02748476.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748476/EFTA02748476.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bdd05c44e24d2a31a8fa1381bce73e859a492e93 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748476/EFTA02748476.md @@ -0,0 +1,66 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/I + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 0940802, 09-81092 + +![](_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg) + +## OMNIBUS ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the following motions: (1) Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel filed March 6, 2009 (D.E. #54 in Case No. 08-80232 and D.E. #64 in Case No. 08-80381); (2) Defendant's Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages with Proposed Order filed March 18, 2009 (D.E. #55 in Case No. 08-80232 and D.E. #65 in Case No. 08-80381); (3) Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply to Response to Motion to Compel (D.E. #62 in Case No. 08-80232 and D.E. #72 in Case No. 08-80381); (4) Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Requests for Production filed March 2, 2009 ( D.E. #61 in Case No. 08-80381); (5) Plaintiffs Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel filed April 17, 2009 + +(D.E. #71 in Case #08-80232 and D.E. #75 in Case #08-80381); (6) Plaintiffs Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel filed April 29, 2009 (D.E. #79 in Case #08-80232; D.E. #79 in Case #08-80381; D.E. # 43 in Case #08-80993; and, D.E. #33 in Case #08-80994); (7) Defendant's Motion to File Reply to Response to Motion to Compel filed May 18, 2009 (D.E. #92 in Case #08-80232; D.E. #94 in Case #08-80381; and, D.E. #49 in Case #08-80994); (8) Third Party Zinoview's Motion for Protective Order filed November 9, 2009 (D.E. #131 in Case #08-80232; D.E. #132 in Case #08-80381; and, D.E. #84 in Case #08-80994); (9) Defendant's Motion to Compel Response to First Request for Production filed April 2, 2009 (D.E. #59 in 08-80232; D.E. #69 in 08-80381; D.E. #26 in 08-80993; and, D.E. #24 in 08-80994); and (10) Defendant's Motion to Compel Response to First Set of Interrogatories filed April 2, 2009 (D.E. #60 in 08-80232; D.E. #70 in 08-80381; D.E. #27 in 08-80993; and, D.E. #25 in 08-80994). + +Having reviewed the pleadings filed incident to these matters, and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: + +- (1) Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel filed March 6, 2009 (D.E. #54 in Case No. 08- 80232 and D.E. #64 in Case No. 08-80381) is GRANTED nunc pro tune; +- (2) Defendant's Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages with Proposed Order filed March 18, 2009 (D.E. #55 in Case No. 08-80232 and D.E. #65 in Case No. 08-80381) is GRANTED nunc pro tunc; +- (3) Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply to + +Response to Motion to Compel (D.E. #62 in Case No. 08-80232 and D.E. #72 in Case No. 08-80381) is GRANTED nunc pro tune; + +- (4) Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Requests for Production filed March 2, 2009 ( D.E. #61 in Case No. 08-80381) is DENIED AS MOOT; +- (5) Plaintiffs Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel filed April 17, 2009 (D.E. #71 in Case #08- 80232 and D.E. #75 in Case #08-80381) is GRANTED nunc pro tune; +- (6) Plaintiffs Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel filed April 29, 2009 (D.E. #79 in Case #08- 80232; D.E. #79 in Case #08-80381; D.E. # 43 in Case #08-80993; and, D.E. #33 in Case #08-80994) is GRANTED nunc pm tune; +- (7) Defendant's Motion to File Reply to Response to Motion to Compel filed May 18, 2009 (D.E. #92 in Case #08-80232; D.E. #94 in Case #08-80381; and, D.E. #49 in Case #08-80994) is GRANTED nunc pro tune; +- (8) Third Party Zinoview's Motion for Protective Order filed November 9, 2009 (D.E. #131 in Case #08-80232; D.E. #132 in Case #08-80381; and, D.E. #84 in Case #08-80994) is DENIED AS MOOT; +- (9) Defendant's Motion to Compel Response to First Request for Production filed April 2, 2009 (D.E. #59 in 08-80232; D.E. #69 in 08-80381; D.E. #26 in 08-80993; and, D.E. #24 in 08-80994) is STRICKEN as a duplicate filing as the identical Motion has been filed correctly in the lead case file of 08-80119 + +at D.E. #210. An order on D.E. #210 shall be issued shortly; and, + +- (10) Defendant's Motion to Compel Response to First Set of Interrogatories filed + +April 2, 2009 (D.E. #60 in 08-80232; D.E. #70 in 08-80381; D.E. #27 in 08- + +80993; and, D.E. #25 in 08-80994) is STRICKEN as a duplicate filing as the + +identical Motion has been filed correctly in the lead case file of 08-80119 at + +D.E. #212. An order on D.E. #212 shall be issued shortly. + +DONE AND ORDERED this December 16, 2009 ini=n, at West Palm Beach, + +Florida. + +o LINNEA R. JOH N UNITED STATE MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748476/EFTA02748476.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748476/EFTA02748476.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..301a16159ffbd7e4e84c85a0ce5321a739d1d529 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748476/EFTA02748476.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,241 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748476.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4963, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.04, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 195.57, + 69.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 404.1507263183594, + 69.5675048828125 + ], + [ + 404.1507263183594, + 99.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 195.57, + 99.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OMNIBUS ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 246.615, + 396.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 356.8642272949219, + 396.09000000000003 + ], + [ + 356.8642272949219, + 411.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 246.615, + 411.54998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748476" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748476/_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748476/_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7b992194a533b12e5e165b6aae4877b00afa2a98 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748476/_page_0_Picture_8.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:5e2b0cb9f5a356582c0e74bc2e09858f0943975126b710d6e5302ab8e8ef1891 +size 10671 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748480/EFTA02748480.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748480/EFTA02748480.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1fd0ef87f831af8ba28924985ad69579fd672901 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748480/EFTA02748480.md @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## OMNIBUS ORDER + +![](_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg) + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the following motions: (1) Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Requests for Production filed March 2, 2009 ( D.E. #63 in Case No. 08-80380); (2) Defendant's Motion to File Reply to Response to Motion to Compel filed May 18, 2009 (D.E. #109 in Case #08-80380 and D.E. #61 in Case #08- 80993); (3) Third Party Zinoview's Motion for Protective Order filed November 9, 2009 (D.E. #149 in Case #08-80380; D.E. #151 in Case #08-80811; D.E. #99 in Case #08- 80993; D.E. #116 in Case #08-80893; D.E. #16 in Case #09-80802; D.E. #69 in Case #09- 80469; and D.E. #8 in Case #09-81092); (4) Defendant's Motion to Compel Response to First Request for Production filed April 2, 2009 (D.E. #74 in 08-80380 and D.E. #27 in 08- + +80893); (5) Defendant's Motion to Compel Response to First Set of Interrogatories filed April 2, 2009 (D.E. #75 in 08-80380; D.E. #27 in 08-80993 and D.E. #28 in 08-80893); (6) Defendant's Motion to Compel Responses to Discovery filed April 15, 2009 (D.E. #35 in 08-80893); (7) Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order Re Scope of Depositions a relates to Jane Doe's Parents filed November 3, 2009 (D.E. #148 in 08-80380); Defendant's Motion to Compel Responses to Discovery filed April 2, 2009 (D.E. #54 in 08-80811); and (8) Plaintiffs' Joint motion for Protective Order filed July 2, 2009 (D.E. #94 in 08-80893). + +Having reviewed the pleadings filed incident to these matters, and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: + +- (1) Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Requests for Production filed March 2, 2009 ( D.E. #63 in Case No. 08-80380) is STRICKEN as said Motion may only be filed in Lead Case No. 08-80119; +- (2) Defendant's Motion to File Reply to Response to Motion to Compel filed May 18, 2009 (D.E. #109 in Case #08-80380 and D.E. #61 in Case #08-80993) is GRANTED nunc pro tune; +- (3) Third Party Zinoview's Motion for Protective Order filed November 9, 2009 (D.E. #149 in Case #08-80380; D.E. #151 in Case #08-80811; D.E. #99 in Case #08-80993; D.E. #116 in Case #08-80893; D.E. #16 in Case #09- 80802; D.E. #69 in Case #09-80469; and D.E. #8 in Case #09-81092 ) is DENIED AS MOOT; +- (4) Defendant's Motion to Compel Response to First Request for Production + +filed April 2, 2009 (D.E. #74 in 08-80380 and D.E. #27 in 08-80893) is STRICKEN as said Motion may only be filed in Lead Case No. 08-80119; + +- (5) Defendant's Motion to Compel Response to First Set of Interrogatories filed April 2, 2009 (D.E. #75 in 08-80380; D.E. #27 in 08-80993 and D.E. #28 in 08-80893) is STRICKEN as said Motion may only be filed in Lead Case No. 08-80119; +- (6) Defendant's Motion to Compel Responses to Discovery filed April 15, 2009 (D.E. #35 in 08-80893) STRICKEN as said Motion may only be filed in Lead Case No. 08-80119; +- (7) Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order Re Scope of Depositions a relates to Jane Doe's Parents filed November 3, 2009 (D.E. #148 in 08-80380); Defendant's Motion to Compel Responses to Discovery filed April 2, 2009 (D.E. #54 in 08-80811) is STRICKEN as said Motion may only be filed in Lead Case No. 08-80119; and +- (8) Plaintiffs' Joint motion for Protective Order filed July 2, 2009 (D.E. #94 in 08- 80893) STRICKEN as said Motion may only be filed in Lead Case No. 08- 80119. + +The Parties are reminded that discovery motions are only to be filed in Lead Case No. 08-80119. Failure to follow this directive in the future may result in the denial with prejudice of the motion in question. + +DONE ANDORDERED this December 16, 2009 in at West Palm Beach, Florida. + +(76 g o 7se,-- LINNEA R. JOH N UNITED STAT MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748480/EFTA02748480.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748480/EFTA02748480.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1b7d823eba98cdb99504849e770c2900599cdef5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748480/EFTA02748480.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,233 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748480.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4161, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.97, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 197.41500000000002, + 68.85000000000001 + ], + [ + 406.97955322265625, + 68.85000000000001 + ], + [ + 406.97955322265625, + 99.24969482421875 + ], + [ + 197.41500000000002, + 99.24969482421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OMNIBUS ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 245.385, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 355.9241027832031, + 425.25 + ], + [ + 355.9241027832031, + 440.03302001953125 + ], + [ + 245.385, + 440.03302001953125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 215 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 297 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 270 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 46 + ], + [ + "Line", + 8 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748480" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748480/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748480/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..50e84881edf2044830fdc05930bb305d7b90094b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748480/_page_0_Picture_10.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0540322897c7a22268f3dc0a10a987b1506184ed6be2a30512c2014c5802fa1e +size 9803 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748484/EFTA02748484.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748484/EFTA02748484.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6ab207c3281dc9fe36b0be4fed7f3b19e99e2c0b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748484/EFTA02748484.md @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +![](_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg) + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Requests for Production filed March 2, 2009 ( D.E. #61 in Case No. 08- 80381). Having reviewed the pleadings filed incident to this matter, and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Requests for Production filed March 2, 2009 ( D.E. #63 in Case No. 08- 80380) is DENIED AS MOOT. + +DONE AND ORDERED this December 18, 2009 in at West Palm Beach, + +Florida. + +or,), • 7407t.,, + +LINNEA R. JO H N UNITED STATE MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748484/EFTA02748484.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748484/EFTA02748484.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1865a0f28517c0b300fa9bb796fb676047b8626b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748484/EFTA02748484.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,153 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748484.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1009, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.9, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 193.72500000000002, + 69.1875 + ], + [ + 402.270751953125, + 69.1875 + ], + [ + 402.270751953125, + 98.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 193.72500000000002, + 98.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 276.75, + 424.44000000000005 + ], + [ + 326.1142272949219, + 424.44000000000005 + ], + [ + 326.1142272949219, + 439.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 276.75, + 439.29998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 45 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 22 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748484" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748484/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748484/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f991da75fe573b3d712ac1d1fb3397bfb1791385 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748484/_page_0_Picture_12.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b56171360c587d90be17a0e493479233bcb4cafe8b586a0a5ba59a4d6666025c +size 10808 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748486/EFTA02748486.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748486/EFTA02748486.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..aefa4ae61b6089dba23643e10354574d66d6f105 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748486/EFTA02748486.md @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARla + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## JANE DOE NOS.' 2, 3, and 5-8 OBJECTION TO SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM DATED NOVEMBER 13, 2009 ISSUED TO PRESIDENTAL WOMEN'S CENTER + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3, and 5-8, by and through their undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 and 45, hereby object to the Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by Jeffrey Epstein to the records custodian of Presidential Women's Center dated November 13, 2009 on the basis that said subpoena is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence and constitutes an invasion of the privacy rights of the plaintiffs. There is no evidence or other indication whatsoever to indicate that Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3, and 5-8 have had an abortion at Presidential Women's Center, 100 Northpoint Parkway, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 or otherwise been seen or treated at that facility. Accordingly, this subpoena seeking records relating to these Plaintiffs is a pure "shot in the dark" attempt to obtain discovery, rather than the reasonably calculated discovery effort as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Pursuant to this objection, Plaintiffs Nos. 2, 3, and 5-8 request that non-party + +Presidential Women's Center not answer any questions or produce any records in response to the + +Subpoena Duces Tecum in the absence of a Court Order requiring such disclosure. + +Dated: November 25, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattomey.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent to the following via e-mail transmission, this 25th day of November, 2009: + +Louis Silber, Esq. Attorney for Presidential Women's Center lsilber@svdlaw.net + +Robert D. Critton, Jr, Esq. rcrit@bciclaw.com + +Michael James Pike, Esq. MPike@bciclaw.com + +s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748486/EFTA02748486.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748486/EFTA02748486.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6ee1642c0f676888d39a424bca9985d2c2c8f37d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748486/EFTA02748486.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,170 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748486.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2376, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.75, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 72.7315673828125 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 72.7315673828125 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JANE DOE NOS.' 2, 3, and 5-8 OBJECTION TO SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM \nDATED NOVEMBER 13, 2009 ISSUED TO PRESIDENTAL WOMEN'S CENTER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 87.51599999999999, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 525.0357055664062, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 525.0357055664062, + 365.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 87.51599999999999, + 365.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 356.4 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 356.4 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 371.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 371.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748486" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748488/EFTA02748488.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748488/EFTA02748488.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bb9f94fe6bb93c68be847c323514efd782531f22 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748488/EFTA02748488.md @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +/ + +## JANE DOE NOS.' 2, 3, and 5-8 RESPONSE TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PRESIDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM + +Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3, and 5-8, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby file their Response to Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoena Duces Tecum dated November 13, 2009, and state as follows: + +I. Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3, and 5-8 ("Plaintiffs) served a timely objection to Jeffrey Epstein's Subpoena Duces Tecum issued to Presidential Women's Center. See Exhibit "A". In the subpoena, Jeffrey Epstein seeks records on any abortion-related or other services rendered to the Plaintiffs.' + +2. Plaintiffs objected to the subpoena on the basis that there is no evidence or other indication whatsoever to indicate that Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3, and 5-8 have had an abortion or + +I Jeffrey Epstein contends, without support, that "Presidential Women's Center is the primary, if not the only, facility in Palm Beach County the performs abortions." + +otherwise been seen or treated at Presidential Women's Center, 100 Northpoint Parkway, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401. + +3. As a result, said subpoena is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence and constitutes an invasion of the privacy rights of the plaintiffs. The subpoena seeking records relating to these Plaintiffs is a pure "shot in the dark" attempt to obtain discovery, rather than the reasonably calculated discovery effort as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. + +4. If a party could simply subpoena all potential medical providers in a particular geographic area based on the possibility that that treatment was rendered to a party, it would wreak havoc on the discovery process and render the rules of procedure meaningless. + +5. Jeffrey Epstein cannot deny this subpoena is merely a "shot in the dark". Remarkably, Epstein's Motion provides no evidence or other indication that Plaintiffs were ever treated at or seen by Presidential Women's Center. + +6. The only Plaintiff who Epstein even attempts to connect to Presidential Women's Center is Jane Doe No. 5. Epstein contends that "Jane Doe No. 5's medical records indicate that she had four pregnancies and two abortions." (D.E. 431,1 6). This statement is simply untrue. In fact, the plain language of the medical records relied upon by Epstein reveals that these medical records do not belong to Jane Doe No. 5, but instead are of an unknown fifty-two (52) year old Hispanic female. See Epstein's Motion to Compel, Exhibit "C". This lack of attention to detail reflects an utter lack of diligence by Epstein as even the one piece of "evidence" upon which Epstein relies is erroneous. In reality, Jane Doe No. 5 has had no abortions and has never been to Presidential Women's Center. Epstein should immediately + +withdraw all incorrect references in his motion to Jane Doe No. 5 having had four pregnancies and two abortions. + +7. Based on the foregoing, Epstein's subpoena is objectionable on the basis that it is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence and constitutes an invasion of privacy. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Nos. 2, 3, and 5-8 request that this Court deny Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Compel Non-Party Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoena Duces Tecum in its entirety, sustain Plaintiffs' objections as to the subpoena duces tecum, and all other relief this Court deems just and appropriate. + +Dated: December 21, 2009 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent to the following via e-mail transmission, this 21st day of December, 2009: + +Louis Silber, Esq. Attorney for Presidential Women's Center lsilber@svdlaw.net + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. jeoldberger@aewna.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bc1claw.com + +Michael James Pike, Esq. MPike@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassello@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +s/ Adam D. Horowitz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748488/EFTA02748488.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748488/EFTA02748488.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4eea65a85864bae5d06a22186d0212a0b879cb61 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748488/EFTA02748488.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,242 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748488.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4898, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.01, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 405.56707763671875, + 100.10302734375 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 100.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JANE DOE NOS.' 2, 3, and 5-8 RESPONSE TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S \nMOTION TO COMPEL PRESIDENTIAL WOMEN'S \nCENTER TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 118.72800000000001, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 494.28900146484375, + 333.71999999999997 + ], + [ + 494.28900146484375, + 380.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 118.72800000000001, + 380.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.052, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 85.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 227.052, + 85.4830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748488" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748492/EFTA02748492.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748492/EFTA02748492.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e5cae484852efac783b08b8bf42197458c20f7a9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748492/EFTA02748492.md @@ -0,0 +1,223 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAMS + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +-vs- + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +VOLUME III OF III + +## Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +VIDEO-CONFERENCED AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO. 4 + +Tuesday, October 27, 2009 + +11:11 - 6:05 p.m. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 115 + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Reported B: + +Cynthia , RPR, FPR + +Notary Public, State of Florida + +Prose Court Reporting + +if + +Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia Electronically signed by cynthia (601-051-976-2934) (601-061-976-2934) + +1 + +\* \* \* \* \* + +2 + +CONTINUED DIRECT EXAMINATION + +3 + +THE VIDEOGRAPHER: It is the beginning of + +4 + +Tape Number 3. We're back on the record at + +5 + +4:19. + +6 + +BY MR. LUTTIER: + +7 + +Q. All right. When did you have your first abortion? + +8 + +A. Sixteen. + +10 + +Q. Which would have been -- what year was that? + +11 + +12 + +A. I think it was, I don't remember, but I think it was when I was 16. + +13 + +14 + +Q. Let's see, you were a senior -- + +15 + +A. A sophomore. + +16 + +Q. -- you were 17 when you were a senior, right? + +17 + +18 + +A. It might have been my sophomore or junior year. I don't remember. + +19 + +20 + +Q. Sophomore or junior year in high school? + +21 + +A. Yeah. + +22 + +Q. And where did you have that abortion? + +23 + +A. I don't remember what the place was + +24 + +called, The Pres -- Pres -- + +25 + +Q. Presidential Women's Clinic? + +1 A. Yeah, I think so. + +2 Q. Over on Congress Avenue? + +3 A. Yeah. + +4 Q. And did you register under your real name? + +5 A. Yeah. + +6 Q. Did anybody go with you? + +7 A. Yeah. + +8 Q. Who? + +9 A. IIIIIIIIIk + +10 Q. And who was the daddy of that baby? + +11 A. III111111 + +12 Q. And who paid for it? + +13 A. IIIIIIIII + +14 Q. Do you know what it cost? + +15 A. \$300, I think. + +16 Q. Was that the first time you were pregnant? + +17 A. Yeah. + +18 Q. And would you agree with me, that age 16 19 to have to go have an abortion was traumatic to you? + +20 MR. MERMELSTEIN: Objection to form. + +21 THE WITNESS: Yeah. + +22 BY MR. LUTTIER: + +23 Q. When was your second abortion? + +24 A. In my senior year in high school. + +25 Q. That was when you were 17? + +1 A. Yes. + +2 Q. And where did you get that one? + +3 A. Same place. + +4 Q. You registered under your real name? + +5 A. Yes. + +6 Q. Did anybody go with you? + +7 A. Yes. + +8 Q. Who? + +9 A. IIIIIIIIP + +10 Q. Who was the daddy? + +11 A. IIIIIIIIIIIF + +12 Q. Who paid for it? + +13 A. NMI + +14 Q. Now, I, I assume at some point in your 15 life somebody explained to you what birth control 16 was. + +17 A. Yeah. + +18 Q. After you aborted one child, didn't you 19 use birth control to keep from getting pregnant? + +20 A. Yeah, I did. I was using birth control. + +21 Q. And so, obviously, if you had the baby, 22 your first baby if you were pregnant at 16 -- + +23 A. I wasn't using birth control then. + +24 MR. MERMELSTEIN: How about letting him 25 finish. Let him finish. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748492/EFTA02748492.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748492/EFTA02748492.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3d13f4ece18469d9142802402b77f7ca61ef9dbb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748492/EFTA02748492.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,238 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748492.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3022, + "elapsed_seconds": 7.31, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 189.72, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 416.1583557128906, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 416.1583557128906, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 189.72, + 102.06 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Related cases:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 272.97 + ], + [ + 215.5035400390625, + 272.97 + ], + [ + 215.5035400390625, + 285.92999999999995 + ], + [ + 97.30799999999999, + 285.92999999999995 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CONTINUED DIRECT EXAMINATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.168, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 415.54800000000006, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 415.54800000000006, + 115.01999999999998 + ], + [ + 192.168, + 115.01999999999998 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 152 + ], + [ + "Line", + 35 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 71 + ], + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 72 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 27 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 68 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 23 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748492" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748496/EFTA02748496.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748496/EFTA02748496.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f212a6fac95c4d3b7a7435520cba2023baa4b678 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748496/EFTA02748496.md @@ -0,0 +1,162 @@ +AO 88B (Rev. 06/09) Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects or to Permit Inspection of Premises in a Civil Action + +# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT + +for the + +Southern District of Florida + +[REDACTED] +Plaintiff +v. + +Defendant + +) +) +) +) +) +) + +Civil Action No. 08-civ-80119-Marral/[REDACTED] + +(If the action is pending in another district, state where: +Southern District of Florida ) + +## SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS OR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES IN A CIVIL ACTION + +To: Presidential Women's Center, Records Custodian, 100 Northpoint Parkway, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +**Production: YOU ARE COMMANDED** to produce at the time, date, and place set forth below the following documents, electronically stored information, or objects, and permit their inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of the material: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A + +| Place: Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman, LLC
303 Banyan Blvd. Suite #400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 | Date and Time:
11/30/2009 9:30 am | +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------| +|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------| + +**Inspection of Premises: YOU ARE COMMANDED** to permit entry onto the designated premises, land, or other property possessed or controlled by you at the time, date, and location set forth below, so that the requesting party may inspect, measure, survey, photograph, test, or sample the property or any designated object or operation on it. + +| Place: | Date and Time: | +|--------|----------------| +|--------|----------------| + +The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c), relating to your protection as a person subject to a subpoena, and Rule 45 (d) and (e), relating to your duty to respond to this subpoena and the potential consequences of not doing so, are attached. + +Date: 11/13/2009 + +CLERK OF COURT + +OR + +Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk + +![]()The name, address, e-mail, and telephone number of the attorney representing (name of party) Defendant, who issues or requests this subpoena, are: + +Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman, LLC, 303 Banyan Blvd., #400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401; +Phone (561) 842-2820; Fax (561) 844-6929; mpike@bclclaw.com (Attorney); jcadwell@bclclaw.com (Parallel party) + +B + +AO NB (Rev. 06(09) Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects or to Permit Inspection of Premises in aCivil Action (Page 2) + +Civil Action No. 08-civ-80119-Marraell. + +#### PROOF OF SERVICE + +(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 45.) + +This subpoena for (name of individual and title, ifany) was received by me on (date) + +Cl I served the subpoena by delivering a copy to the named person as follows: + +on (date) ; or + +Cl I returned the subpoena unexecuted because: + +Unless the subpoena was issued on behalf of the United States, or one of its officers or agents, I have also tendered to the witness fees for one day's attendance, and the mileage allowed by law, in the amount of + +My fees are \$ for travel and \$ for services, for a total of \$ 0.00 + +Date: + +Ideclare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. + +Server's signature + +Printed name and title + +Server's address + +Additional information regarding attempted service, etc: + +# Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (c), (d), and (e) (Effective 12/1/07) + +## (c) Protecting aPerson Subject to a Subpoena. + +(I)Avoiding Undue Burden or Expense; Sanctions. A party or attorney responsible for issuing and serving a subpoena must take reasonable steps to avoid imposing undue burden or expense on a person subject to the subpoena. The issuing court must enforce this duty and impose an appropriate sanction — which may include lost earnings and reasonable attorney's fees — on aparty or attorney who fails to comply. + +## (2) Command to Produce Materials or Permit Inspection. + +(A) Appearance Not Required A person commanded to produce documents, electronically stored information, or tangible things, or to permit the inspection of premises, need not appear in person at the place of production or inspection unless also commanded to appear for a deposition, hearing, or trial. + +(B) Objections. A person commanded to produce documents or tangible things or to permit inspection may serve on the party or attorney designated in the subpoena awritten objection to inspecting, copying, testing or sampling any or all of the materials or to inspecting the premises — or to producing electronically stored information in the 101711 or forms requested. The objection must be served before the earlier of the time specified for compliance or 14 days after the subpoena is served. If an objection is made, the following rules apply: + +(i) At any time, on notice to the commanded person, the serving party may move the issuing court for an order compelling production or inspection. + +(i) These acts may be required only as directed in the order, and the order must protect a person who is neither a party nor aparty's officer from significant expense resulting from compliance. + +# (3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena. + +(A) When Required On timely motion, the issuing court must quash or modify a subpoena that: + +(i) fails to allow areasonable time to comply; + +(i) requires a person who is neither a party nor aparty's officer to travel more than 100 miles from where that person resides, is employed, or regularly transacts business in person — except that, subject to Rule 45(c)(3XBXiii), the person may be commanded to attend atrial by traveling from any such place within the state where the trial is held; + +(iii) requires disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, if no exception or waiver applies; or + +(iv) subjects a person to undue burden. + +(B) When Permitted To protect a person subject to or affected by asubpoena, the issuing court may, on motion, quash or modify the subpoena if it requires: + +(i) disclosing atrade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information; + +(II) disclosing an unretained expert's opinion or information that does not describe specific occurrences in dispute and results from the expert's study that was not requested by a party; or + +(iii) a person who is neither a party nor aparty's officer to incur substantial expense to travel more than 100 miles to attend trial. + +(C)Spectfying Conditions as an Alternative. In the circumstances described in Rule 45(c)(3XB), the court may, instead of quashing or modifying a subpoena, order appearance or production under specified conditions if the serving party: + +(i) shows asubstantial need for the testimony or material that cannot be otherwise met without undue hardship; and + +## (d) Duties in Responding to a Subpoena. + +#### (1) Producing Documents or Electronically Stored Information. These procedures apply to producing documents or electronically stored information: + +(A) Documents. A person responding to a subpoena to produce documents must produce them as they are kept in the ordinary course of business or must organize and label them to correspond to the categories in the demand. + +#### (B) Form for Producing Electronically Stored Information Not Specified If a subpoena does not specify aform for producing + +electronically stored information, the person responding must produce it in aform or forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in a reasonably usable form or forms. + +#### (C) Electronically Stored Information Produced in Only One Form The person responding need not produce the same + +electronically stored information in more than one form. + +(D) Inaccessible Electronically Stored Information. The person responding need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the person identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the person responding must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule 26(bX2XC). The court may specify conditions for the discovery. + +# (2) Claiming Privilege or Protection. + +(A) Information Withheld. A person withholding subpoenaed information under aclaim that it is privileged or subject to protection as trial-preparation material must: + +(i) expressly make the claim; and + +(i) describe the nature of the withheld documents, communications, or tangible things in amanner that, without revealing information itself privileged or protected, will enable the parties to assess the claim. + +(B) Information Produced If information produced in response to a subpoena is subject to aclaim of privilege or of protection as trialpreparation material, the person making the claim may notify any party that received the information of the claim and the basis for it. After being notified, a party must promptly return, sequester, or destroy the specified information and any copies it has; must not use or disclose the information until the claim is resolved; must take reasonable steps to retrieve the information if the party disclosed it before being notified; and may promptly present the information to the court under seal for adetermination of the claim. The person who produced the information must preserve the information until the claim is resolved. + +(e) Contempt. The issuing court may hold in contempt a person who, having been served, fails without adequate excuse to obey the subpoena. A nonparty's failure to obey must be excused if the subpoena purports to require the nonparty to attend or produce at a place outside the limits of Rule 45(cX3XAXii). + +# EXHIBIT "A" + +A copy of the entire file of , whose date of birth Milliaand social security number is , including but not limited to any forms completed by the patient, medical records, reports, lab or diagnostic test results, consultants' reports, letters to and from the patient, handwritten office notes by any person, telephone messages, computer data kept on the patient, attorney letters, photographs, charts, intake forms, release forms and consultations from January I, 1996 through the date of this Subpoena. \*If you require the entire Social Security number, please contact our office at 561-842-2820 and ask for Jessica Cadwell. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748496/EFTA02748496.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748496/EFTA02748496.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c9c954dafcc68b30defedf3a4f221d72cb5705bc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748496/EFTA02748496.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,484 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748496.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 10679, + "elapsed_seconds": 9.94, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 178.704, + 80.19 + ], + [ + 440.64, + 80.19 + ], + [ + 440.64, + 98.01 + ], + [ + 178.704, + 98.01 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS OR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES IN A CIVIL ACTION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 130.968, + 225.18 + ], + [ + 494.4960000000001, + 225.18 + ], + [ + 494.4960000000001, + 253.53000000000003 + ], + [ + 130.968, + 253.53000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PROOF OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 256.428, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 366.02593994140625, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 366.02593994140625, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 256.428, + 119.07 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (c), (d), and (e) (Effective 12/1/07)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 151.164, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 471.1376647949219, + 94.77000000000001 + ], + [ + 471.1376647949219, + 109.4556884765625 + ], + [ + 151.164, + 109.4556884765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(c) Protecting aPerson Subject to a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 47.124, + 116.63999999999999 + ], + [ + 235.06890869140625, + 116.63999999999999 + ], + [ + 235.06890869140625, + 130.082275390625 + ], + [ + 47.124, + 130.082275390625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Command to Produce Materials or Permit Inspection.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 57.52799999999999, + 201.69 + ], + [ + 280.045654296875, + 201.69 + ], + [ + 280.045654296875, + 215.104736328125 + ], + [ + 57.52799999999999, + 215.104736328125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 57.52799999999999, + 424.44000000000005 + ], + [ + 212.97427368164062, + 424.44000000000005 + ], + [ + 212.97427368164062, + 439.0259094238281 + ], + [ + 57.52799999999999, + 439.0259094238281 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(d) Duties in Responding to a Subpoena.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 315.79200000000003, + 113.4 + ], + [ + 479.5613098144531, + 113.4 + ], + [ + 479.5613098144531, + 127.0172119140625 + ], + [ + 315.79200000000003, + 127.0172119140625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(1) Producing Documents or Electronically Stored Information. \nThese procedures apply to producing documents or electronically \nstored information:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 315.79200000000003, + 122.30999999999999 + ], + [ + 567.33642578125, + 122.30999999999999 + ], + [ + 567.33642578125, + 157.326904296875 + ], + [ + 315.79200000000003, + 157.326904296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(B) Form for Producing Electronically Stored Information Not \nSpecified If a subpoena does not specify aform for producing", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 315.79200000000003, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 564.876, + 197.64 + ], + [ + 564.876, + 223.3394775390625 + ], + [ + 315.79200000000003, + 223.3394775390625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(C) Electronically Stored Information Produced in Only One \nForm The person responding need not produce the same", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 315.79200000000003, + 251.10000000000002 + ], + [ + 556.821044921875, + 251.10000000000002 + ], + [ + 556.821044921875, + 276.21453857421875 + ], + [ + 315.79200000000003, + 276.21453857421875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "(2) Claiming Privilege or Protection.", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 315.79200000000003, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 468.68035888671875, + 388.79999999999995 + ], + [ + 468.68035888671875, + 403.7072448730469 + ], + [ + 315.79200000000003, + 403.7072448730469 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EXHIBIT \"A\"", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 292.536, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 372.2417907714844, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 372.2417907714844, + 99.05352783203125 + ], + [ + 292.536, + 99.05352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 392 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 39 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Form", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 208 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 1301 + ], + [ + "Line", + 116 + ], + [ + "Text", + 26 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 20 + ], + [ + "Line", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Text", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748496" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748500/EFTA02748500.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748500/EFTA02748500.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..15d2abaaa1dab5e8b3ddff694ad0a3bcbae97d8a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748500/EFTA02748500.md @@ -0,0 +1,182 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAMM + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +/ + +### EPSTEIN'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO MOTION TO COMPEL PRESIDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM AND INCORPORATED MOTION TO COMPEL PRESIDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM REGARDING JANE DOE NO. 4 + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), submits this reply to Plaintiffs', Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3and 5-8 ("Plaintiffs"), Response to Epstein's Motion to Compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoena Duces Tecum (DE #442) and also moves to compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoena Duces Tecum Regarding Jane Doe No. 4, and states: + +- 1. On December 2, 2009, Epstein filed aMotion to Compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoena Duces Tecum ("Motion to Compel") (DE #431). +- 2. Since the filing of the Motion to Compel (DE #431), Presidential Women's Center notified undersigned counsel that it does not have any records for Jane Doe Nos 2, 3, 5, 6 and 8.i + +Epstein did not serve asubpoena on Presidential Women's Center for Jane Doe No. 7. + +3. Thus, unless circumstances change in the future, the issues in Epstein's Motion to Compel and the subpoenas to Presidential Women's Center regarding Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 8 are moot at the current time. + +## MOTION TO COMPEL PRESIDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM REGARDING JANE DOE NO. 4 + +4. In her deposition, Jane Doe No. 4 testified that she had three abortions, at least two of which was performed at Presidential Women's Center. See 10/27/09 Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 at 311-313, excerpt attached as Exhibit A. + +5. On November 13, 2009, Epstein issued a subpoena (attached as Exhibit B) to Presidential Women's Center for records relating to Jane Doe No. 4. + +6. Jane Doe No. 4 did not object to said subpoena. + +7. Presidential Women's Center represented they will not produce records without a court order or a signed HIPAA release from the patient. + +8. On December 18, 2009, counsel for Epstein requested Jane Doe No. 4 provide an executed release for Presidential Women's Center. To date, no release has been received. + +9. Accordingly, Epstein requests the Court enter an order compelling Presidential Women's Center to comply with the November 13, 2009 subpoena duces tecum within five (5) days of the Court's order. + +10. This discovery is obviously relevant and discoverable and, again, Jane Doe No. 4 (also represented by counsel for Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3 and 5-8) did not object to the subpoena. As the Court stated in its September 4, 2009 Order (DE #289), "[u]nder these circumstances, where Plaintiff is seeking to recover expenses associated with these complex medical issues, full knowledge of Plaintiff's past and present medical, psychological, familial and social histories is essential." age DE #289 at 4; see also DE #377 at 10 ("As a global matter, Plaintiffs clearly and unequivocally place their sexual history in issue by their allegations that Epstein's actions in this case has negatively affected their relationships.... To deny Epstein this discovery [regarding past sexual history], would be tantamount to barring him from mounting a defense."). + +WHEREFORE, Epstein respectfully requests the Court enter an order compelling Presidential Women's Center to produce documents responsive to the subpoena duces tecum regarding Jane Doe No. 4 and attached to this Motion as Exhibit A within five (5) days of the Court's order and grant any additional relief the Court deems just and proper. + +# Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 29th day of December, 2009 + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Michael J. Pike ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar 4617296 mpike@bc1claw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +### Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Brad Esq. Jaffe, Weissing, Lehrman, PL 424 N. Andrews Avenue, Suite #2 Fistos & + +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-524-2820 +Fax: 954-524-2833 +[brad@pathtojustice.com](mailto:brad@pathtojustice.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 + +Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. + +Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. + +Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. + +2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 + +Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 + +561-684-6500 + +Fax: 561-515-2610 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- + +08804 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +ianeso@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748500/EFTA02748500.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748500/EFTA02748500.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6979da2b95d946fdbf550504ada26fc1d28085d9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748500/EFTA02748500.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,326 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748500.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 7439, + "elapsed_seconds": 11.12, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 411.26400000000007, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 411.26400000000007, + 101.25 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 101.25 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EPSTEIN'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO MOTION TO COMPEL \nPRESIDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM \nAND INCORPORATED MOTION TO COMPEL PRESIDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO \nCOMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM REGARDING JANE DOE NO. 4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.05199999999999, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 547.128, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 547.128, + 416.34000000000003 + ], + [ + 74.05199999999999, + 416.34000000000003 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "MOTION TO COMPEL PRESIDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO COMPLY WITH \nSUBPOENA DUCES TECUM REGARDING JANE DOE NO. 4", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 89.352, + 153.09 + ], + [ + 528.2932739257812, + 153.09 + ], + [ + 528.2932739257812, + 184.4730224609375 + ], + [ + 89.352, + 184.4730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 262.44 + ], + [ + 365.6679382324219, + 262.44 + ], + [ + 365.6679382324219, + 278.60302734375 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 278.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 580.77 + ], + [ + 366.0479431152344, + 580.77 + ], + [ + 366.0479431152344, + 595.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 595.4830169677734 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 245 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 84 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 92 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 29 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748500" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748505/EFTA02748505.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748505/EFTA02748505.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c39953499fbc08c8b532c2abb70ac7154a3534f8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748505/EFTA02748505.md @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## AFFIDAVIT OF JESSICA ARBOUR + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS: COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE + +Jessica Arbour deposes and states as follows: + +- 1. My name is Jessica Arbour. I am an attorney at Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A., the law firm representing Jane Doe No. 3. +- 2. I was present at the first scheduled deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 in September 2009, when Defendant Epstein crossed paths with the Plaintiff in the lobby of the building where her deposition was to take place. (DE 305,15). +- 3. I attended all of the IMEs of Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 2-6, including that of Jane Doe No. 3. Hers was the last of the five IMEs conducted by the expert for Jeffrey Epstein in these cases. + +![](_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg) + +4. The IME was conducted at Prose Court Reporting, located on the 15th Floor of 250 S. Australian Ave. in West Palm Beach, FL. + +5. In all five IMF-s, Dr. Ryan M, the Defendant's expert, advised the Plaintiffs that they could take breaks throughout the day, and specifically advised them that they could go outside and smoke cigarettes during these breaks. He knew which of the Plaintiffs, including Jane Doe No. 3, smoked cigarettes because he asked them if they smoked. + +6. On more than one occasion on November 24, 2009, Jane Doe No. 3 and I went outside the office building to sit on a bench so she could smoke a cigarette. It was generally at a point when the videotape was being changed, which was every two hours. + +7. At about 4:15 p.m. on November 24, 2009, the videographer stopped the IME for the last tape change of the day. Jane Doe No. 3 and I went just outside of the building so she could smoke a cigarette. Jane Doe No. 3 and I were sitting on a bench at that location. + +8. I saw Defendant Jeffrey Epstein exit the building where the IME was taking place through the door closest to us. I stood up, trying not to alert my client to his presence, but so as to alert Epstein that we were sitting there in hopes that he would turn around and walk away. Epstein and I made direct eye contact. It appeared to me that he recognized me and then glared at me. When I realized he was not stopping, I immediately placed myself between Jane Doe No. 3 and Epstein in hopes of blocking her view of him. Her back was still to him at this point and 1 do not believe that she saw this interaction between Epstein and me. + +9. Epstein did not make any attempt to stop, change his direction, or return to the building, despite the fact that he had to walk more than 15 feet before he reached the bench where Jane Doe No. 3 was sitting. He continued to stare at me for several seconds as he walked toward us. + +11. When Jane Doe No. 3 saw Epstein, she yelled, “█ God! No!” and began to scream. She began to cry loudly, yelling “No! No! No!” My immediate concern was to remove her from Epstein’s immediate vicinity and into the safety of the building. Eventually I got her into the lobby of the building and she collapsed into a chair in the lobby. She was crying and screaming so loudly that several onlookers, including the security guard at the front desk, stopped and stared at the commotion. + +12. After some time, I was able to calm Jane Doe No. 3 enough to get her back up to the office where the IME was taking place. I immediately brought Jane Doe No. 3 into a private office. I did not tell anyone what had happened in the lobby. Dr. █ immediately apologized to me and said that he had no knowledge that Epstein was in the building. I do not know how Dr. █ found out about the incident. + +13. Jane Doe No. 3 and I spent several minutes alone in the private office. When it was apparent to me that Jane Doe No. 3 was still quite visibly distraught and could not proceed, I terminated the IME. + +14. On multiple occasions prior to November 24, 2009, because of the incident with Jane Doe No. 4 in September, I consulted the list of companies with office space in the building at 250 S. Australian Ave. I noted each time that Epstein’s employer, the Florida Science Foundation, was not listed on the building’s directory. + +15. When I saw him on November 24, 2009, Epstein was dressed in an oversized sweatsuit. + +FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +Dated: January 4, 2010 + +![]()BEFORE ME, personally appeared Jessica D. Arbour who after being first duly sworn, deposes and states that he has executed the foregoing Affidavit, and that it is correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. + +THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT was sworn to and subscribed before me this 1 .4nuarl 2010. 4 day of + +![](_page_3_Picture_3.jpeg) + +. 0003095 + +pa,11,2013 + +sitsi vaywrortostIOTIREcail NOTARY PUBLI STATE OF FLORIDA \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748505/EFTA02748505.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748505/EFTA02748505.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9cb7d9b797612c7f6bd32879d55941c1e154207b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748505/EFTA02748505.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,230 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748505.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4878, + "elapsed_seconds": 6.21, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg", + "_page_3_Picture_3.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 406.01995849609375, + 103.68 + ], + [ + 406.01995849609375, + 131.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 131.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF JESSICA ARBOUR", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 406.38592529296875, + 393.65999999999997 + ], + [ + 406.38592529296875, + 408.363037109375 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 408.363037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 16 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 33 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748505" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748505/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748505/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..221240a8bf94419e870e91128b0742c8419a3802 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748505/_page_0_Picture_14.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:843f4d0ce4d71fcf8b7f18d06addfa1baa12e5e4852e99264503f1bd43cf2916 +size 6819 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748505/_page_3_Picture_3.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748505/_page_3_Picture_3.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ecef4e48cf58912534cad1bbe5a3735a69227833 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748505/_page_3_Picture_3.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b0e9ff7ae22837ca06275e055fee1c1ad069419cc86b158cbb9ef166a327b6ae +size 4188 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748509/EFTA02748509.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748509/EFTA02748509.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0fefdb0dd79d6ad452b24a5ba636cce678e44308 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748509/EFTA02748509.md @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +J. MICHAEL BARMAN. PA" GREGORY W. COLEMAN. PA ROBERT D. CRITTON. JR.. PA' BERNARD A. LEBEDEKER MARK T. LUTTIER. PA JEFFREY C. PENN MICHAEL J. PIKE HEATHER MCNAMARA RUDA DAVID A. YAKIMA + +'notion toARDaIMPIED CIVIL TRIAL LAWYER 2ACMITTID To PRACTICE IN Froruo,AAND COLORADO + +## Sent by Fax and U.S. Mail + +Adam Horowitz, Esquire Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Blvd. Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 + +![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg) + +A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP + +November 25, 2009 + +Re: Jane Doe No. 6 v. Epstein + +Case No. 08-CIV-80994-Marra + +Dear Adam: + +ADELQUI I. BENAVENTE PARALECAL/INVISTICATOR JESSICA C.ADWELL BOBBIE M. MCKENNA AMIE STOKEN-BARING BETTY STOKES PAMLICO-3 RITA H. BVDNYK Or col/NSIL EDWARD M. RICCI Is:m=6r' + +Yesterday, our client had an appointment at our office at 4:45 p.m. As you know, my office is only one-half a mile away from the location where the IME of Jane Doe 6 took place. At or around that time, Mr. Epstein was leaving the building where the IME was taking place. It appears that at the time Jeffrey Epstein was exiting the building, your client and your associate were outside smoking a cigarette. Mr. Epstein entered his vehicle and left the building where his office is located and made his way to my office without speaking or acknowledging either person. + +I learned from Dr. . that your client, by and through her lawyer, prematurely terminated the IME. This was no proper. With regard to past agreements, you were obligated to call when you and your client arrived at the building and to call when you and your client were leaving the building. Your associate did not follow that procedure at the IME. Instead, your client and your associate took several smoking breaks without letting anyone know that they had exited the building. This procedure was initiated by and used at your request. + +Mr. Epstein was leaving the building to attend a meeting with his lawyers. There was no way, without a phone call from your office, that Mr. Epstein could know that your clients were outside smoking cigarettes. + +![](_page_0_Picture_17.jpeg) + +Adam Horowitz, Esquire November 25, 2009 Page 2 + +It is my intention to continue the IME of Jane Doe 6. I would like to do so without having to file a Motion to Compel the completion of the IME. In that regard, I hope to reach some agreement with you regarding same. One possibility is to have Jane Doe complete her IME the day before and/or the day after the next/ scheduled IME. We must also discuss costs. + +> 124 Very truly yolks + +> > / 11 + +MIC/hael J. P + +MJP/asb + +Enclosures + +cc: Jack Goldberger, Esq. Robert D. Critton, Esq. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748509/EFTA02748509.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748509/EFTA02748509.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..63264db3b2a006a633106e7f0e77c24897f11f2c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748509/EFTA02748509.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,127 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748509.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2606, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.0, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_17.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Sent by Fax and U.S. Mail", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 77.112, + 284.31 + ], + [ + 222.5834503173828, + 284.31 + ], + [ + 222.5834503173828, + 298.92352294921875 + ], + [ + 77.112, + 298.92352294921875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 120 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 135 + ], + [ + "Line", + 18 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748509" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748509/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748509/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f5015a96f661085b7c3dbe8477799e1318e4d513 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748509/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:abe03cf01a111c4f1295cddf008d6cb74c9bbb030cdd07e3498fcc84b7bd5b5b +size 13455 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748509/_page_0_Picture_17.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748509/_page_0_Picture_17.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d5d67ff06034abad80f006881f40f774d5560986 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748509/_page_0_Picture_17.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:fb0727483188be521273183b9100af08694be30e68193a8a28a453bb42c85104 +size 5953 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748511/EFTA02748511.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748511/EFTA02748511.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b29b772fd830067d2868f0cce32a6d5f7f162836 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748511/EFTA02748511.md @@ -0,0 +1,99 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 3's MOTION FOR SANCTIONS, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER, AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 3, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files this Motion for Sanctions, Motion for Protective Order, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, and states as follows: + +I. Plaintiffs in these cases have previously brought to this Court's attention Jeffrey Epstein's pattern of intimidating and harassing his victims, as well as the Plaintiffs' fear of Jeffrey Epstein. See e.g., Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. I02's Motion for No-Contact Order (D.E. 113); Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7's Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel and/or Identify Plaintiffs in the Style of this Case (D.E. 144); Plaintiffs Jane Does' 2-7 Motion for Protective Order and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (D.E. 223); Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8's Motion for Protective Order as to Jeffrey Epstein's Attendance at Deposition of Plaintiffs, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (D.E. 292); Affidavit of Dr. Kliman (D.E. 223, Exh. A); Jane Doe No. 4's Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order (D.E. 306); Order, dated October 23, 2009 (D.E. 369) (forbidding Epstein from attending Jane Doe No. 4's deposition); Omnibus Order (forbidding Epstein's attorneys from repetitive and abusive questioning during Plaintiffs' depositions) (D.E. 433). + +2. Jane Doe No. 4 previously brought to this Court's attention that Epstein attended her deposition in violation of this Court's No-Contact Order (D.E. 238), a nearly identical No-Contact Order entered by the Court in Epstein's criminal prosecution, and a stipulation between the parties that Epstein would not appear at her deposition. + +3. Yet again, on November 24, 2009, Defendant Epstein flagrantly violated multiple Orders of this Court when he deliberately presented himself at the location of Jane Doe No. 3's medical examination pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 35 (the "IME"). At that time, he terrorized Jane Doe No. 3 by crossing paths with her in a place and at a time when he must have known that his presence was forbidden by Court Order. + +4. Epstein's counsel served the Notice of Jane Doe No. 3's IME on October 30, 2009. The Notice included the date and location of Jane Doe No. 3's IME, 250 S. Australian Avenue, West Palm Beach. The Notice stated that the IME would start at 9 am and last until approximately 5:30 p.m. A Court Order required the Plaintiff to submit to eight hours of evaluation. Jane Doe No. 3 was the fifth plaintiff to undergo her IME. All of the previous IMEs lasted until later than 6:15 p.m. Therefore, Epstein and his counsel knew where Jane Doe No. 3 would be on November 24, 2009, and that she would be there between 9:00 am and sometime around 6:15 p.m. Epstein, therefore, must have known that there was a fair chance he would + +encounter Jane Doe No. 3 on November 24, 2009, at the address where his attorney had scheduled the IME. + +5. On November 5, 2009, this Court entered a Joint Agreed Order, which stated that "Defendant Jeffrey Epstein will not attend the IMEs or make himself seen by Plaintiffs on the date of their IMEs." (D.E. 401) (emphasis added). It was Epstein's responsibility to ensure his compliance with this Order. The Order further provided that the IMEs of Jane Doe Nos. 2-8 would take place at a "mutually agreeable location," and not at the office of Epstein's counsel. + +6. Pursuant to the November 5, 2009 Order, Jane Doe No. 3 appeared at her IME. During a brief recess in the IME, Jane Doe No. 3 and her attorney were outside the office building where the IME was taking place, 250 S. Australian Ave., West Palm Beach.' As in the other Plaintiffs' IMEs that took place over a two-week period, Jane Doe No. 3 took a short break approximately every two hours when it was time to change the videotape in the camera recording the IME.2 It was during the last break of the day that Defendant Epstein crossed paths with Jane Doe No. 3, in violation of multiple Court Orders. + +7. While Jane Doe No. 3 and her counsel, Jessica Arbour, were sitting on a bench just outside the foyer of the office building, Defendant Epstein exited the building. When he encountered Jane Doe No. 3 and her attorney, he made no attempt to stop, change his direction, or return to the building without Jane Doe No. 3 seeing him, despite having ample opportunity to avoid them. See Affidavit of Jessica Arbour, attached as Exhibit "A". + +This is the same building where Defendant Epstein crossed paths with Jane Doe No. 4 on the date of her deposition. (See D.E. 306). + +2 At the beginning of each IME, the Defendant's expert advised all of the Plaintiffs, including Jane Doe No. 3, that she was allowed to take "smoke breaks" any time she would like. + +8. Epstein crossed in front of Jane Doe No. 3, approximately 5-7 feet from her. Jane Doe No. 3 immediately reacted in a terrified, emotional manner that included screaming and crying. Her attorney physically removed her from Defendant Epstein's vicinity and into the safety of the building's lobby. Jane Doe No. 3's reaction was so emotional that the security guard on duty and several onlookers appeared quite concerned. Exh. "A" 7-11). + +9. Epstein does not dispute that he encountered Jane Doe No. 3 and her attorney. See Exhibit B. He does not dispute that he recognized them. + +10. Jane Doe No. 3 was eventually calmed enough to be taken back to the office where her IME was being conducted, but was too distraught to continue her IME. At that point, Jane Doe No. 3's counsel terminated the IME. + +11. At no time were Plaintiff or her counsel made aware that Defendant Epstein would be in the building when any of the Plaintiffs would be present for their IMEs. Indeed, Plaintiffs reasonably expected that this Court's prior orders and the threat of sanctions would be a sufficient deterrent to keep Epstein away. + +12. Defendant Epstein's ostensible full-time employer, the Florida Science Foundation, is no longer located in the building where the IMEs took place. The company was administratively dissolved several months ago, approximately the same time that his courtordered work-release program with the foundation ended. As a result, it would appear that Epstein had no legitimate purpose in the building at 250 S. Australian Ave. on November 24, 2009. Indeed, he was dressed in an oversized sweatsuit that would not be appropriate for any professional environment. (Arbour Aff., Exh. "A", 114). The reason for his presence in the building has never been explained to Jane Doe No. 3's counsel. + +13. In addition to violating the Agreed Order (D.E. 401), Epstein's conduct recklessly or intentionally violated (i) this Court's No-Contact Order dated July 31, 2009 (D.E. 238), in which he was specifically instructed to have no "direct or indirect contact" with Jane Doe No. 3 or any other plaintiff; and (2) the July 31, 2008, no-contact Order entered by the Court in his criminal matter arising from the sexual assaults of numerous underage girls, including Jane Doe No. 3. The July 31, 2009 Order mirrored the June 30, 2008 criminal sentence entered by Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillio, wherein she instructed Jeffrey Epstein that he shall have "no direct or indirect contact" with the Plaintiffs. (D.E. 238). + +14. Jane Doe No. 3 agrees to attend the remaining two hours of her IME in order to comply fully with this Court's Order on the IME length. However, a protective order specifically barring the continuation of the IME from occurring anywhere not previously agreed upon by Plaintiff's counsel is necessary to ensure that Defendant Epstein will not be given another opportunity to traumatize Jane Doe No. 3. Given the violation of the prior Orders as well as a prior similar incident at the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, a more drastic measure is now necessary to protect Jane Doe No. 3 from Epstein. + +15. Furthermore, Jane Doe No. 3 seeks sanctions against Defendant Epstein for the violation of not one, but three court orders designed to protect Plaintiffs from the exact conduct in which Defendant Epstein engaged. This Court has authority to sanction a party for civil contempt for violating the terms of a court order. See Sizzler Family Steak Houses v. Western Sizzlin Steak House. Inc., 793 F.2d 1529, 1534-35 (11th Cir. 1986) (attorneys' fees may be awarded for civil contempt in failure to comply with court order). Additionally, sanctions for violation of multiple court orders are an appropriate exercise of judicial oversight. + +16. Given Jeffrey Epstein's violation of this Court's No-Contact Order and the Agreed Order, appropriate sanctions and other relief are necessary to compensate Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 3. + +17. Prior to filing this Motion, Plaintiff's counsel conferred with Jeffrey Epstein's counsel in an attempt to reach an agreement as to the relief requested. No agreement was reached. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 3, respectfully requests (1) an award of sanctions, including attorneys' fees and costs reasonably and necessarily incurred by Plaintiff due to Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's violation of the Court's No-Contact Order (D.E. 238) and Agreed Order (D.E. 401); (2) an Order requiring that the remaining two hours of Jane Doe No. 3's IME take place at a mutually agreeable location in a city other than West Palm Beach, with Defendant Epstein responsible for all costs above and beyond those originally contemplated by this Court in its Nov. 5 Order; and (3) all other relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. + +# CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.I.A.3 + +Undersigned counsel has conferred with Defendant's counsel in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this motion, and has been unable to do so. + +Dated: January 4, 2010 Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: (305) 931-2200 Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +#### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on January 4, 2010, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +# SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James bedwards@rra-law.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748511/EFTA02748511.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748511/EFTA02748511.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..294f03c395d54aa84f943e5e5e333bb781f058b8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748511/EFTA02748511.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,432 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748511.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 11459, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.22, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 205.02, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 99.63 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 205.02, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 3's MOTION FOR \nSANCTIONS, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER, \nAND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 159.732, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 453.674560546875, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 453.674560546875, + 430.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 159.732, + 430.56353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.I.A.3", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 129.744, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 483.43212890625, + 429.29999999999995 + ], + [ + 483.43212890625, + 445.10302734375 + ], + [ + 129.744, + 445.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.44, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 71.9815673828125 + ], + [ + 385.39947509765625, + 85.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 226.44, + 85.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 48 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748511" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748519/EFTA02748519.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748519/EFTA02748519.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..030d6d340f4bc728a4596ed0e5fa060cba49462b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748519/EFTA02748519.md @@ -0,0 +1,251 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +/ + +## NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PRESEDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM (DE 421) AND DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PRESIDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM AS TO JANE FOE NO.4 (DE 443) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Notice of Withdrawal of Defendant, EPSTEIN'S, Motion to Compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoena Duces Tecum (DE 421) and Defendant, EPSTEIN'S, Motion to Compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoena Duces Tecum as to Jane Doe no. 4, and state: + +I. On December 2, 2009, Epstein filed aMotion to Compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoena Duces Tecum ("Motion to Compel") (DE #431). + +2. Since the filing of the Motion to Compel (DE #431), Presidential Women's Center notified undersigned counsel that it does not have any records for Jane Doe Nos 2, 3, 5, 6 and 8. + +3. Thus, unless circumstances change in the future, the issues in Epstein's Motion to Compel and the subpoenas to Presidential Women's Center regarding Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 8 are moot at the current time. + +4. On December 29, 2009, Epstein filed a Motion to Compel ("Motion to Compel") (DE #443) Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoena Duces Tecum as to Jane Doe No. 4. + +5. Since the filing of the Motion to Compel (DE #443) Epstein has been provided copies of the records in the possession of Presid ial Women's Center related to Jane Doe No. 4. + +> By: ROBE' ITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida 22 162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bc1claw.com + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 12th day of Jan 2y 0. + +Respectfu i sub fl ted, + +By: + +ROBERT ON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar No. 224 62 + +rcrit@bc1claw.com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ES + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike@bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN + +303 Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/253-0164 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAa. + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomev.com + +Brad e Esq. + +Jai e, Weissing, Fistos + +& Lehrman,PL + +424 N. Andrews Avenue, Suite #2 + +Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-524-2820 + +Fax: 954-524-2833 + +brad@pathtoiustice.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +08-80893 + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, +08-80994* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +*Pro Hac Vice* + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) + +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80811* + +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. + +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* + +*08-80469* + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P. [REDACTED], Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) + +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) + +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) + +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748519/EFTA02748519.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748519/EFTA02748519.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cc5bc4c780ed56662842f2eca604772735344722 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748519/EFTA02748519.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,283 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748519.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 5, + "chars": 5280, + "elapsed_seconds": 12.06, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 79.38 + ], + [ + 411.641845703125, + 79.38 + ], + [ + 411.641845703125, + 106.92 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 106.92 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO \nCOMPEL PRESEDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO COMPLY WITH \nSUBPOENA DUCES TECUM (DE 421) AND DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S \nMOTION TO COMPEL PRESIDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO \nCOMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM AS TO JANE FOE NO.4 (DE 443)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 93.636, + 366.93 + ], + [ + 528.156, + 366.93 + ], + [ + 528.156, + 439.83000000000004 + ], + [ + 93.636, + 439.83000000000004 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 143.37 + ], + [ + 366.08050537109375, + 143.37 + ], + [ + 366.08050537109375, + 158.2230224609375 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 158.2230224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 515.16 + ], + [ + 366.41790771484375, + 515.16 + ], + [ + 366.41790771484375, + 530.60302734375 + ], + [ + 252.75599999999997, + 530.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 197 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 43 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 89 + ], + [ + "Line", + 43 + ], + [ + "Text", + 35 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 138 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 3 + ], + [ + "Line", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748519" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748524/EFTA02748524.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748524/EFTA02748524.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..698e38ca88ead978364cf3346530773269040cf8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748524/EFTA02748524.md @@ -0,0 +1,153 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRal + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## NOTICE TO STRIKE (DE 445) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Notice to Strike: + +- 1. On January 12, 2010 Defendant filed his Motion to Withdrawal (DE 445). +- 2. The incorrect docket number was linked. +- 3. Defendant will re-file his Motion with the correct ket number. + +By: ROBERT ON, JR., ESQ. Florida B.. #2 41 rcrit@bc1claw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@bc1claw.corn + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 12th day of January, 2010. + +![]()By: \_\_\_\_\_ +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. +Florida Bar No. 224162 +rcrit@bclclaw.com +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +mpike@bclclaw.com +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN +303 Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/253-0164 Fax +(*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein*) + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/...** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, +08-80994* + +Brad \_\_\_\_\_ Esq. +\_\_\_\_\_ Jaffe, Weissing, \_\_\_\_\_ Fistos +& Lehrman, PL +424 N. Andrews Avenue, Suite #2 +Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-524-2820 +Fax: 954-524-2833 +brad@pathtojustice.com +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. +08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. +Richard H. Willits, P.A. +2290 10th Avenue North +Suite 404 +Lake Worth, FL 33461 +561-582-7600 +Fax: 561-588-8819 +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80811* +[reelrhw@hotmail.com](mailto:reelrhw@hotmail.com) + +Jack Scarola, Esq. +Jack P. [REDACTED] Esq. +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, +P.A. +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 +561-686-6300 +Fax: 561-383-9424 +[jsx@searcylaw.com](mailto:jsx@searcylaw.com) +[jph@searcylaw.com](mailto:jph@searcylaw.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A.* + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. +250 S. Australian Avenue +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-202-6360 +Fax: 561-828-0983 +[ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com](mailto:ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com) +*Counsel for Defendant* [REDACTED] + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED] Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.* +*08-80469* + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. +25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 +Miami, FL 33130 +305 358-2800 +Fax: 305 358-2382 +[rjosefsberg@podhurst.com](mailto:rjosefsberg@podhurst.com) +[kezell@podhurst.com](mailto:kezell@podhurst.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases* +*Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748524/EFTA02748524.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748524/EFTA02748524.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bc5f9589bf304bdcecc6bd9d81a4122a7e5f1579 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748524/EFTA02748524.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,219 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748524.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 4182, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.91, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 411.26400000000007, + 75.33 + ], + [ + 411.26400000000007, + 102.06 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 102.06 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE TO STRIKE (DE 445)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 393.67071533203125, + 364.5 + ], + [ + 393.67071533203125, + 378.27 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 378.27 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 361.692, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 361.692, + 91.53 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 91.53 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/...", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 193.392, + 449.55000000000007 + ], + [ + 395.964, + 449.55000000000007 + ], + [ + 395.964, + 489.23999999999995 + ], + [ + 193.392, + 489.23999999999995 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 147 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 52 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 70 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748524" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748527/EFTA02748527.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748527/EFTA02748527.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ac4368d61a4bb101d605192dd59775322b430d9d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748527/EFTA02748527.md @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 013-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PRESEDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM WE 431) AND DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL PRESIDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM AS TO JANE FOE NO.4 (DE 443) + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Notice of Withdrawal of Defendant, EPSTEIN'S, Motion to Compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoena Duces Tecum (DE 421) and Defendant, EPSTEIN'S, Motion to Compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoena Duces Tecum as to Jane Doe no. 4, and state: + +1. On December 2, 2009, Epstein filed a Motion to Compel Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoena Duces Tecum ("Motion to Compel") (DE #431). + +2. Since the filing of the Motion to Compel (DE #431), Presidential Women's Center notified undersigned counsel that it does not have any records for Jane Doe Nos 2, 3, 5, 6 and 8. + +3. Thus, unless circumstances change in the future, the issues in Epstein's Motion to Compel and the subpoenas to Presidential Women's Center regarding Jane Doe Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 8 are moot at the current time. + +4. On December 29, 2009, Epstein filed a Motion to Compel ("Motion to Compel") (DE #443) Presidential Women's Center to Comply with Subpoena Duces Tecum as to Jane Doe No. 4. + +5. Since the filing of the Motion to Compel (DE #443) Epstein has been provided copies of the records in the possession of Pre 'dential Women's Center related to Jane Doe No. 4. + +> By: ROBE TTON, JR., ESQ. Florida ar #224 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpi ke@belelaw.com + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 12th day of January, 2010. + +![]()By: \_\_\_\_\_ +ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. +Florida Bar No. 224162 +rcrit@bclclaw.com +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. +Florida Bar #617296 +mpike@bclclaw.com +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & +COLEMAN +303 Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561/842-2820 Phone +561/253-0164 Fax +*(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)* + +**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/J** [REDACTED] + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +ssm@sexabuseattorney.com +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, +08-80994* + +Brad [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED], Jaffe, Weissing, [REDACTED], Fistos +& Lehrman, PL +424 N. Andrews Avenue, Suite #2 +Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 +Phone: 954-524-2820 +Fax: 954-524-2833 +brad@pathtojustice.com + +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. +08-80893* + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Richard Horace Willits, Esq. + +Richard H. Willits, P.A. + +2290 10th Avenue North + +Suite 404 + +Lake Worth, FL 33461 + +561-582-7600 + +Fax: 561-588-8819 + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80811 + +reelrhwOhotmail.com + +Jack Scarola, Esq. + +Jack P.M, Esq. + +Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. + +2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard + +West Palm Beach, FL 33409 + +561-686-6300 + +Fax: 561-383-9424 + +jsx@searcvlaw.com + +iphAsearcvlaw.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. + +Bruce Reinhart, Esq. + +Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. + +250 S. Australian Avenue + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-202-6360 + +Fax: 561-828-0983 + +ecf brucereithartlaw.com + +Counsel for Defendant + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp®law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintifflane Doe + +Isidro M. =, Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 + +Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. + +Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. + +Podhurst Orseck, P.A. + +25 West Hagler Street, Suite 800 + +Miami, FL 33130 + +305 358-2800 + +Fax: 305 358-2382 + +riosefsberanodhurst.com + +kezelle,podhurst.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases + +Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jaizese@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748527/EFTA02748527.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748527/EFTA02748527.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ce8a164c9a584cb9cc4f8b55367b733852ac0024 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748527/EFTA02748527.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,253 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748527.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4992, + "elapsed_seconds": 8.12, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.24566650390625, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.24566650390625, + 103.10302734375 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 103.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO \nCOMPEL PRESEDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO COMPLY WITH \nSUBPOENA DUCES TECUM WE 431) AND DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S \nMOTION TO COMPEL PRESIDENTIAL WOMEN'S CENTER TO \nCOMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM AS TO JANE FOE NO.4 (DE 443)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 528.9965209960938, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 528.9965209960938, + 434.60302734375 + ], + [ + 92.41199999999999, + 434.60302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 362.916, + 74.52 + ], + [ + 362.916, + 86.67 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 86.67 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/J [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 445.5 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 445.5 + ], + [ + 420.4440000000001, + 486.0 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 486.0 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 41 + ], + [ + "Line", + 21 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 133 + ], + [ + "Line", + 66 + ], + [ + "Text", + 63 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748527" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748531/EFTA02748531.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748531/EFTA02748531.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d8d861dabad5887dfcd75ef1134fbe22e204211d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748531/EFTA02748531.md @@ -0,0 +1,47 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +## AFFIDAVIT OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN + +STATE OF FLORIDA + +COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared JEFFREY EPSTEIN having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +- 1. My Name is Jeffrey Epstein and I am the individual named as the Defendant herein. I have read Jane Doe #3's Motion for Sanctions, Motion for Protective Order and Incorporated Memorandum of Law. +- 2. I work from an office located at 250 Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach, Florida, Suite 1404 (the "Office Building"). +- 3. On November 24, 2009, I was leaving the Office Building for a scheduled appointment with my lawyers, Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esq. and Michael J. Pike, Esq., which was scheduled to occur at approximately 4:45 p.m. at 303 Banyan Boulevard, West Palm Beach, Florida. + +fat4er "A + +4. At approximately 4:30 p.m., I exited the Office Building, met my driver who was waiting outside of the Office Building, entered my vehicle and left the premises. + +5. Upon my exit of the Office Building, I did not notice anyone including, Jane Doe 3 or her attorney. + +6. After meeting with my attorneys at 303 Banyan Boulevard, they asked me if I had seen Jane Doe 3 or her attorney outside of the building smoking cigarettes. I replied that I did not recall seeing anyone. In fact, the first time I learned of the alleged incident described in Plaintiff's Motion was when my attorneys asked me the foregoing question at the conclusion of our meeting on November 24, 2009. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. + +Jeffrey + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +I hereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Jeffrey Epstein, known to me to be the person descr' ed in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me th t he executed the same, that I relied upon the / fo lowing form of identification of the above named person: egMe, ilea>1 , and that an oath was/was not taken. + +\_y\_LTNESS my hpnd and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this day ofjd.4fr(ly a , 2010. + +![](_page_1_Picture_10.jpeg) + +42.dethe--12--e NT NAME: 7e56/0-9 e-//lia4SEAL) OTARY PUBLIC/STATE OF FLORIDA COMMISSION NO.: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748531/EFTA02748531.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748531/EFTA02748531.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9edde561415c8af7b456b1af3486e68c7b20ab89 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748531/EFTA02748531.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,157 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748531.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2425, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.85, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_1_Picture_10.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 413.1453552246094, + 69.66 + ], + [ + 413.1453552246094, + 99.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 99.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 207.46800000000002, + 276.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 409.7783508300781, + 276.21000000000004 + ], + [ + 409.7783508300781, + 292.29998779296875 + ], + [ + 207.46800000000002, + 292.29998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 3 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 66 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748531" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748531/_page_1_Picture_10.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748531/_page_1_Picture_10.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fbc1c9aa819bc6b07fdbf98a7e059e23b2a023c3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748531/_page_1_Picture_10.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:153e3773c1776d2e47bebb40541883f8854df67dc28ba01eaa3b2c2b5d48fa92 +size 13845 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748533/EFTA02748533.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748533/EFTA02748533.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6e0e87026c9112e47ae0817cf485d6f13dffea2c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748533/EFTA02748533.md @@ -0,0 +1,100 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA-MM + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, + +v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### AFFIDAVIT OF MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQUIRE + +STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) + +BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Michael J. Pike, Esq., having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: + +- 1. I, Michael J. Pike, have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein. I am an attorney licensed to practice in the State of Florida, and I am one of the main attorneys in charge of litigating this matter. + - 2. I have read Plaintiff, Jane Doe, No. 3's Motion For Sanctions. +- 3. Plaintiffs IME was set to occur on November 24, 2009 at 250 Australian Avenue S., West Palm Beach Florida ("One Clearlake Centre"). +- 4. On that same date, Mr. Epstein had a prescheduled attorney-client conference/meeting with the undersigned and Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esq., at our offices located at 303 Banyan Boulevard, West Palm Beach, FL. + +ejelion 9, + +5. On November 24, 2009, at or around 4:40 p.m., I was contacted by Dr. ■ **(Defendant's IME Examiner) who stated that Plaintiffs counsel terminated the IME because Plaintiff and her lawyer, while on asmoking break, had seen Epstein exiting One Clearlake Centre through the lobby area, which occurred towards the end of the work day. At that time, I contacted Mr. Horowitz, who was not in attendance at the IME, to discuss the circumstances. I explained to Mr. Horowitz that Epstein's office was still located in One Clearlake Centre, that Epstein was leaving the building at the end of the day to meet with the undersigned and Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esq. for an attorney-client meeting and that no one from Mr. Horowitz's office had contacted the undersigned to let him know that Plaintiff and her lawyer had exited the building to have a cigarette or otherwise. I also advised Mr. Horowitz that it was improper to unilaterally cancel or terminate the IME.** + +**6. Had Plaintiff's counsel contacted the undersigned as required by the Order (DE 369) this alleged event could have been avoided altogether.** + +**7. The attorney-client meeting with Mr. Epstein lasted approximately 2 hours. During that time, Mr. Epstein made no mention whatsoever of seeing Jane Doe No. 3 or her attorney, and Mr. Critton and I did not bring up the subject until the end of said meeting. At the end of the meeting, Mr. Critton and I advised Mr. Epstein of what Dr.** ■ **and Mr. Horowitz advised us of earlier that afternoon (i.e., that Jane Doe No.3 and her attorney had seen Epstein exit the building and, as aresult, Plaintiffs counsel unilaterally cancelled the IME). As stated in his Affidavit, Mr. Epstein did not recall seeing anyone, including Jane Doe No.3** or her attorney when he exited One Clearlake Centre and immediately entered his vehicle to arrive at my office for the above meeting. + +8. Much effort went into the scheduling of the Plaintiffs' IMEs including, but not limited to, attorney and paralegal resources. Plaintiffs counsel should not have unilaterally terminated the IME. + +9. The costs associated with the court reporter and videographer currently totals \$1.260.00 for Visual Evidence and \$2,207.65 for Prose Court Reporting for a total amount of \$3,467.65. See Exhibit's "A" and "B" hereto. Also, the undersigned should be entitled to recover his reasonable attorneys' fees for having to defend Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions. + +FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT + +ike, Esq. + +STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH + +Ihereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Michael J. Pike, Esquire, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above named person:/9€60/4 , and that an oath was/was not taken. + +iWESS my h. d""and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this /' day of ..YanIt4` . 2010. + +![](_page_3_Picture_7.jpeg) + +(SEAL) + +![]()![](_page_4_Picture_1.jpeg) + +P.O. Box 6967 West Palm Beach, FL 33405 + +BURMAN, CRITTON & LUTTIER ROBERT CRITTON 303 BANYAN BLVD SUITE 400 WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401 + +| | | Case / Reference: | JANE DOE #2 VS EPSTEIN | +|------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------|-------------------------------------| +| Date | Services Rendered | Qty | Amount | +| 11/23/2009 | VIDEOTAPED EXAMINATION OF: JANE DOE #6
Tech Time - 1ST 2 Hours
Additional Tech Time
Digital Tape ██████████
Digital Video encoded to Mpeg2 format: per hour per original video source | 8
4
8 | 275.00
800.00
60.00
400.00 | +| 11/24/2009 | VIDEOTAPED EXAMINATION OF: JANE DOE#2

Tech Time - 1ST 2 Hours
Additional Tech Time
Digital Tape ██████████
Digital Video encoded to Mpeg2 format: per hour per original video source | 6
4
6.5 | 275.00
600.00
60.00
325.00 | +| 11/30/2009 | Delivery | | | + +## Invoice + +| Date | Number | +|-----------|---------| +| 12/8/2009 | 29091 | +| Due on | receipt | + +ONE CALL SERVICE FOR VIDEOCONFERENCING. We make all other arrangements for you. I Remit to: + +P.O. Box 6967 West Palm Beach, FL 33405 Tax ID # 59-2476529 + +TOTAL: \$2,795.00 + +# Prose Court Reporting Agency, Inc + +One Clearlake Centre 250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1500 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 (561) 832-7500 Phone (561) 832-7506 Fax Tax ID: 26-3892897 www.prosecra.com + +November 30, 2009 + +Robert Critton, Esquire Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman - WPB 303 Banyan Boulevard Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +### Invoice Number CH 772 + +Re: Jane Doe II vs. Jeffrey Epstein, et al. 11-24-09 CME of Jane Doe No. 3 + +| Description of Services | | +|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------| +| CME App - 1st Hr Appearance 1st Hr | 150.00 | +| CME App - Add! Hr Appearance Addl 6.5 Hrs | 585.00 | +| Other Tran CC - Exp 3 Transcript Pages - 195 Complimentary E-Transcript Emailed ETran, Mini, Exbs Pkg | 1456.65 | +| S & H - Local | 6.00 | +| Total: | \$2,207.65 | +| Paid: | -2,207.65 | +| Invoice total: | \$0.00 | + +Thank you for choosing Prose Court Reporting Agency, Inc. Payment is due upon receipt. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748533/EFTA02748533.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748533/EFTA02748533.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..571b45edd2c6f2aa6ea5fa760becc20a968e0fdb --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748533/EFTA02748533.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,375 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748533.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 7915, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.95, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_3_Picture_7.jpeg", + "_page_4_Picture_1.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.348, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 410.8741760253906, + 83.42999999999999 + ], + [ + 410.8741760253906, + 112.46990966796875 + ], + [ + 201.348, + 112.46990966796875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "AFFIDAVIT OF MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQUIRE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 183.6, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 436.3153381347656, + 303.75 + ], + [ + 436.3153381347656, + 319.95000000000005 + ], + [ + 183.6, + 319.95000000000005 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Invoice", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 498.16799999999995, + 63.99000000000001 + ], + [ + 567.9752807617188, + 63.99000000000001 + ], + [ + 567.9752807617188, + 81.0 + ], + [ + 498.16799999999995, + 81.0 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Prose Court Reporting Agency, Inc", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 424.5724792480469, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 424.5724792480469, + 88.38592529296875 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 88.38592529296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Invoice Number \nCH 772", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 406.36800000000005, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 494.9627380371094, + 295.65 + ], + [ + 494.9627380371094, + 325.4370422363281 + ], + [ + 406.36800000000005, + 325.4370422363281 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 209 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 4 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 345 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 256 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 205 + ], + [ + "Line", + 36 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "Table", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 64 + ], + [ + "Line", + 32 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Table", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748533" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748533/_page_3_Picture_7.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748533/_page_3_Picture_7.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..560b489f3a701782183c7021d9cea4a63718e1b5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748533/_page_3_Picture_7.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e2dec2777b4579ecfa57f5caad44b69de3eab8cb28adf89ef9cf8a0b4bc98718 +size 12659 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748533/_page_4_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748533/_page_4_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7974e9938fc08d13aab89e11ae68f891f3d2446b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748533/_page_4_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3c9f710cdfb173a2223d8429a10a753dfa7fef53a4ac8722c50698c8406cd7fe +size 11579 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748539/EFTA02748539.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748539/EFTA02748539.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..129e9768b214b1158b7dba8f794306d733596afc --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748539/EFTA02748539.md @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA'S= + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +-vs- + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. / + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +II 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +/ + +VIDEO-TELECONFERENCED AND VIDEOTAPED COMPULSORY MEDICAL EVALUATION OF + +JANE DOE NO. 3 + +Tuesday, November 24, 2009 + +9:18 - 4:45 p.m. + +250 Australian Avenue + +Suite 1500 + +West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Reported By: + +Cynthia RPR, FPR + +Notary Public, State of Florida + +Prose Court Reporting Services + +APPEARANCES: + +On behalf of the Plaintiff: + +JESSICA D. ARBOUR, ESQUIRE MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, Florida 33160 + +Phone: 305.931.2200 + +E-mail: Ahorowitz®sexabuseattorney.com + +ALSO PRESENT: + +P4 er ite" + +A. I told them exactly what could happen. Q. Give me -- I mean, what did you tell them? A. I told them that I got a phone call from Haley that this guy is flying into town. He likes to get massages, this is what could happen, do you want to do it? + +Q. Okay. + +A. So they -- + +Q. Did you have to invite them? + +A. Did I have to invite them? + +Q. Yeah. Did you have to tell them? + +A. I don't think anyone has to do anything. + +Q. Okay. So, it wasn't that you had no + +control over inviting them? + +A. I still don't understand that, the way that you're saying it, it's not -- I'm, I'm just maybe not comprehending. + +Q. I mean, you weren't worried that he was going to beat you up, have you arrested, have you killed if you didn't bring more people? + +A. I didn't know what, I didn't know what he could have done. To be honest with you, my honest opinion, aman of that stature -- + +DR. Come in. Come in. + +THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Sorry for the interruptiaust need to change the tape. + +DR. Change the tape. (A brief recess was held from 4:29 p.m. + +until 4:33 p.m.) + +MS. ARBOUR: I just want to make the record that it is 4:35, and we are going to be terminating this IME because my client and 1 went downstairs. Jane Doe 3 and I went downstairs. We ran into Jeffrey Epstein who is present in the building and in violation of three court orders. He made direct eye contact with me and obviously to me appeared to have recognized me. I did my best to shield my client, but obviously there was a moment of + +contact and she is now crying hysterically and unable to compose herself. So, we're going to go. And that's my record. + +(A brief recess was held from 4:36 p.m. until 4:42 p.m.) + +THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Okay. We're on. + +MS. ARBOUR: One more thing I wanted to add is that Mr. Epstein was dressed in a gray sweatsuit and his building or his office of the Florida Science Foundation is no longer in this building, so it is unclear to me what he is doing here. Thank you. + +(Compulsory Medical Evaluation was \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748539/EFTA02748539.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748539/EFTA02748539.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..91a55da83f48bcbeaf29f3d48566e1f5a0ab1f8c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748539/EFTA02748539.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748539.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2859, + "elapsed_seconds": 3.27, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 234 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 54 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 520 + ], + [ + "Line", + 57 + ], + [ + "Text", + 24 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748539" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748541/EFTA02748541.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748541/EFTA02748541.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c6924f82491644367749b1c98f96ab8f992ec786 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748541/EFTA02748541.md @@ -0,0 +1,96 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRAM= + +JANE DOE NO. 3, + +Plaintiff, v. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +### DEFENDANT, EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS, AND DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, serves his Response In Opposition and Supporting Memorandum of Law to Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions, Motion for Protective Order, And Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE 244, "The Motion for Sanctions") and Motion for Sanctions against Plaintiff for Unilaterally Terminating the IME. In support, Defendant states: + +- 1. On January 4, 2010, Plaintiff filed her Motion for Sanctions, which contains several misleading statements and assertions. +- 2. Plaintiff's IME was set to occur on November 24, 2009 at 250 Australian Avenue South, West Palm Beach Florida ("One Clearlake Centre"). All of the Plaintiffs' IMEs occurred at One Clearlake Center with the consent of their lawyers, Adam Horowitz and Stuart Mermelstein (the "Plaintiffs' Lawyers"). Plaintiffs' Lawyers always knew that Epstein's office was located on the 14th Floor of One Clearlake Centre, and they know full well that Epstein maintains an office there today. See Affidavit of Epstein attached as Exhibit "A". Plaintiff, Jane Doe #3's IME took place on the 15th Floor of + +One Clearlake Centre at the offices of Prose Court Reporting, one Floor above the 14th Floor where Epstein's office is located. The IME was scheduled at One Clearlake Centre in order to provide Plaintiffs' Attorneys with a video-feed from the IME room into an adjacent room so that Plaintiffs' Attorneys could monitor the IME as requested. In an effort to avoid any alleged contact between Epstein and any Plaintiff on the dates of the IMEs, the undersigned offered Plaintiffs' Attorneys his office located at 303 Banyan Boulevard within which to conduct the IMEs but Plaintiffs' Attorneys refused. During the time in which negotiations were taking place relative to the location where the IMEs would occur, Plaintiffs' Attorneys knew full well that Epstein's office was located at One Clearlake Centre because several depositions took place at the above location wherein a video-feed was utilized from Prose Court Reporting to Epstein's office in One Clearlake Centre so that Epstein could view the depositions from a separate floor.' + +3. Also, well before Jane Doe 3's IME took place, this court entered an Order (DE 369) wherein it outlined the procedure to be followed when Plaintiffs arrived at and exited One Clearlake Centre, which included Plaintiff's Lawyer contacting the undersigned by cellular telephone upon their arrival and Plaintiff's lawyer contacting the undersigned by cellular telephone once they had exited the building. While the undersigned lawyers were not in attendance at said IME, it appears that Plaintiff and her lawyer exited the building to take breaks without contacting the undersigned to let them know that they were exiting the building. See infra. Epstein cannot be expected to predict when Plaintiff and her lawyer would take a smoking break during the IME, + +I Of note, Epstein was not viewing Jane Doe Number 3's IME from any video-feed on November 24, 2009. + +especially since Plaintiff and her lawyer refused and/or failed to contact the undersigned to let him know when they would be exiting the building. + +4. On November 24, 2009, at or around 4:40 p.m., the undersigned's office was contacted by Dr. •(Defendant's IME Examiner) who stated that Plaintiff's counsel terminated the IME because Plaintiff and her lawyer, while on a smoking break, had seen Epstein exiting One Clearlake Centre through the lobby area, which occurred towards the end of the work day. At that time, the undersigned contacted Mr. Horowitz, who was not in attendance at the IME, to discuss the circumstances. See Affidavit of Michael Pike, Esq. attached hereto as Exhibit "B." On that telephone call, the undersigned lawyer explained to Mr. Horowitz that Epstein's office was still located in One Clearlake Centre, that Epstein was leaving the building at the end of the day to meet with the undersigned and Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esq. for an attorney-client meeting and that no one from Mr. Horowitz's office had contacted the undersigned to let him know that Plaintiff and her lawyer had exited the building to have a cigarette or otherwise. See Exhibits "A" and "B". Arguably, had Plaintiffs counsel contacted the undersigned as required by the Order (DE 369) this event could have been avoided altogether. + +5. Despite Plaintiffs inability to follow simple directives, her lawyer now claims that Epstein "terrorized Jane Doe No. 3 by crossing paths with her . . . ." as he exited One Clearlake Centre to meet with his lawyers. See Motion for Sanctions at ¶3. "Terrorized" is certainly a stretch and is simply interposed as a means to prejudice Epstein in the eyes of the court. Again, Plaintiff and her counsel were on an unannounced smoke break. See Jessica Arbour, Esq.'s Affidavit attached to the Motion + +for Sanctions as Exhibit "A". How was Epstein supposed to know that Plaintiff and her lawyer were outside of One Clearlake Center at the time he was exiting the building to go meet his lawyers for an attorney-client meeting? He was not! It should also be noted that six (6) IMEs occurred in the exact same manner prior to Jane Doe No. 3's IME and at no time did any Plaintiff have an alleged "Epstein sighting." + +6. Plaintiff forgets that her lawyers stipulated to the above location, and agreed to the procedure outlined in DE 369. The undersigned's office is not located in One Clearlake Centre. Therefore, the only way to know when Plaintiff and her lawyer were going to exit the building would have been for Plaintiff's Lawyer to call the undersigned by cellular telephone as anticipated by the above order. Based upon Ms. Arbour's Affidavit, Plaintiff and Ms. Arbour exited the building at or around 4:15. Based upon the transcript of the IME, Ms. Arbour returned to the IME room and terminated the IME at or around 4:35 p.m. Therefore, if Ms. Arbour is correct, the unannounced smoking break lasted approximately fifteen (15) to twenty (20) minutes. If the transcript is correct, the unannounced smoking break lasted only six (6) minutes and, based upon Jane Doe Number 3's allegations, resulted in a Jeffrey Epstein "sighting." + +7. Importantly, Jeffrey Epstein did not notice anyone (much less Jane Doe No. 3 and her lawyer) when he exited the building to go meet with his lawyers. See Epstein Affidavit. He simply exited the building, got in his vehicle and left the premises. Id. Moreover, Epstein did not make eye contact with them as he did not notice them outside the building and he certainly did not "terrorize" Jane Doe No. 3. + +8. Any suggestion that the chance "visual" between Mr. Epstein and Jane Doe No. 3 was "pre-planned" would be absurd, disingenuous and false. The + +undersigned has gone out of his way to make sure that Epstein is out-of-sight during depositions and IMEs. Had the Plaintiff and her counsel been in the IME room and on the separate floor where the IME was taking place or had Plaintiff's counsel notified the undersigned that they were exiting the building, no alleged contact would have occurred. + +9. Had the "visual" been premeditated, the cancellation of the IME may have been justified, however, under these circumstances, it was grandstanding and improper. In that the Plaintiff has stated that she voluntary went to Epstein's home without trauma until she filed a lawsuit, this alleged brief visual encounter from a distance should not have resulted in the unilateral cancellation of her IME or any trauma whatsoever. + +10. Ms. Arbour claims in her Affidavit that she is unaware how Dr. ■ **learned of the alleged sighting of Mr. Epstein. The answer to that question is simple - Ms. Arbour went on the record and terminated the IME in front of Dr.** ■ **because she claimed to have seen Epstein while outside of the One Clearlake Centre building. See Transcript attached as Exhibit "C".** + +**11. After having discussions with Mr. Horowitz and Epstein, the undersigned sent Mr. Horowitz a letter dated November 25, 2009 discussing the alleged incident as Mr. Horowitz had explained it to the undersigned on November 24, 2009. See Exhibit "8" attached to the Motion for Sanctions. Despite Plaintiffs contentions, the letter does not state that Epstein noticed Plaintiff or her lawyer as he exited the building, nor does it remotely concede that the event even happened because Mr. Epstein did not recall seeing anyone as he exited the building. The undersigned simply took Mr. Horowitz for** + +his word, and sent the November 25, 2009 letter to Mr. Horowitz in an effort to reschedule the IME that Ms. Arbour unilaterally terminated. + +12. Despite Plaintiff's interpretation of the November 25, 2009 letter, Epstein does dispute that he saw Jane Doe No. 3 on November 24, 2009. See Epstein Affidavit attached hereto. Epstein does NOT recall ever seeing jane Doe No. 3 as he exited the building. Further, Epstein has NEVER seen or met Ms. Arbour and therefore would be unable to even recognize or identify her. + +13. The unilateral termination of the IME was unnecessary, inappropriate and a substantial waste of physician and now attorney time, and the costs related to the IME (court reporter and videographer) have now increased in that Dr. ■will **be required to travel to Palm Beach County to conclude Jane Doe No.: 3's IME, and an additional fee for the court-reporter and the videographer will be required as well. See Affidavit of Michael J. Pike, Esq.** + +**14. The costs associated with the court reporter and videographer currently totals \$1.260.00 for Visual Evidence and \$2.207.65 for Prose Court Reporting for a total amount of \$3,467.65. See Affidavit of Michael J. Pike, Esq. See Beecham v. City of West Sacramento, 2009 WL 689729 (E.D. Cal. 2009)** + +# **Memorandum of Law In support of Motion** + +**15. A substantial amount of administrative time went into the setting up the IME of Jane Doe No. 3, not to mention the many motions that were filed pursuant to Rule 35 to get the Plaintiffs to consent to a rule 35 IME. Weeks passed from the time that the Defendant's counsel first requested dates for the IMEs of Plaintiffs.** + +16. Pursuant to Rule 30(d)(2) and (3)(A) and (C) and its reference to 37(a)(5) and (d)), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court may impose an appropriate sanction, including reasonable expenses in attorneys fees incurred by any party on a person who impedes or delays the fair examination of the deponent. While this matter involves and IME and not a deposition, the same legal application should be utilized here because an IME is an examination as contemplated by Rule 35. In this instance, the alleged and brief sighting of Epstein, which was completely unintended and inadvertent, should not have been grounds for Plaintiffs counsel and Plaintiff refusing to move forward with the IME. Furthermore, Plaintiff and Plaintiffs counsel had no right to unilaterally terminate/cancel the IME and fail to move forward. In fact, Plaintiff and her counsel have not, to date, filed an appropriate Motion seeking the proper termination of the IME. Plaintiff should have continued with the IME and filed any motion deemed appropriate post IME. Therefore, Defendant is asking for the costs associated with the attendance of the court reporter, her transcript and the presence of the videographer. Defendant would also request reasonable fees for being required to prepare this motion and affidavits associated with same. + +## Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference + +Counsel for Defendant conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff by telephone and by email; however, an agreement has not been reached. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant moves this court for an order denying Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order, granting sanctions to include attorneys fees and costs as set forth above and costs associated with the attendance of the court reporter, the transcript and the presence of the videographer and direction that + +Jane Doe No. 3 appear for IME within fifteen (15) days from the date of the court's order at the undersigned's office, and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +![]()**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 13th day of January, 2010: + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) +*Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #3* + +Jack Alan Goldberger +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) +*Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein* + +![]() \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748541/EFTA02748541.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748541/EFTA02748541.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b15513d2970ba8f563baca65dd707506733697b2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748541/EFTA02748541.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,432 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748541.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 8, + "chars": 13450, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.47, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 412.78076171875, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 412.78076171875, + 101.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 101.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT, EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR \nSANCTIONS, AND DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS WITH \nINCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.384, + 277.02 + ], + [ + 507.2677917480469, + 277.02 + ], + [ + 507.2677917480469, + 321.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 111.384, + 321.91998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Memorandum of Law In support of Motion", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 186.048, + 538.6500000000001 + ], + [ + 432.51513671875, + 538.6500000000001 + ], + [ + 432.51513671875, + 555.9574890136719 + ], + [ + 186.048, + 555.9574890136719 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Rule 7.1 A. 3. Certification of Pre-Filing Conference", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 161.568, + 511.11 + ], + [ + 458.26885986328125, + 511.11 + ], + [ + 458.26885986328125, + 527.0499877929688 + ], + [ + 161.568, + 527.0499877929688 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 7, + "polygon": [ + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 208.17000000000002 + ], + [ + 386.17199999999997, + 208.17000000000002 + ], + [ + 386.17199999999997, + 221.94 + ], + [ + 263.15999999999997, + 221.94 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748541" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748549/EFTA02748549.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748549/EFTA02748549.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ac999313f5fa583068cebaf6e78ded3325b173f7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748549/EFTA02748549.md @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/ + +Plaintiff, + +Vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S NOTICE OF 90 DAYS EXPIRING ON MOTIONS TO COMPEL + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1.B.3, to give notice that more than 90 days have elapsed on three pending motions regarding her case (No. 9:08-CV-80893-KAM). Because these motions are discovery motions, they were filed in the consolidated case (9:08-cv-80119-KAM) pursuant to this Court's consolidation order. + +1. On July 10, 2009, Jane Doe filed (1) a Motion to Compel Responses to Plaintiff's Request for Production (dkt. #194 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM), (2) a Motion to Compel Responses to Plaintiff's Request for Production (dkt. #195), and (3) a Motion to Compel Answers to Plaintiff's Interrogatories (dkt. #196). + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA' + +2. After defendant Epstein received an extension, he filed responses/objections to all three of these motions on October 6, 2009 (dkts. #339, 342, 343). + +3. Jane Doe filed her reply to these responses on October 16, 2009 (dkts. #354, 355, and 356). + +4. More than 90 days has now elapsed since the filing of those replies (and, in addition, since the filing of the original motions). For the reasons offered in her pleadings, Jane Doe respectfully requests that her motions be granted. + +DATED: January 22, 2010 + +Respectfully Submitted, + +AFFE, WEISSING, , FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 524-2820 Facsimile (954) 524-2822 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: brad@pathtojustice.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA' + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on January 22, 2010 electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> s/ J. + +## SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jooldberaer@aqwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bcIclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcvlaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@bcIclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com + +William J. Berger wberger@rra-law.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748549/EFTA02748549.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748549/EFTA02748549.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..25d517475fd0f7de35b277e2a4e3a9d69d35ac65 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748549/EFTA02748549.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,261 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748549.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3120, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.91, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S NOTICE OF 90 DAYS EXPIRING \nON MOTIONS TO COMPEL", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 143.20800000000003, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 469.3027648925781, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 469.3027648925781, + 417.17999267578125 + ], + [ + 143.20800000000003, + 417.17999267578125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 123.93 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 123.93 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 138.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 138.91998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 317.4375 + ], + [ + 350.1988220214844, + 317.4375 + ], + [ + 350.1988220214844, + 332.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 332.04998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 44 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 9 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 65 + ], + [ + "Line", + 33 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748549" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748553/EFTA02748553.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748553/EFTA02748553.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..95fba509d4cd162908356ab0b4a4c826b57b0052 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748553/EFTA02748553.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA, + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Epstein's Motion to Quash and Motion for Protective Order and Objections to the Subpoena Served on JP Chase & Co. Which is Incorrectly Titled and Addressed to Bear Stearns (D.E. #307). + +The time period for filing a response in opposition to the subject Motion has long since passed and Plaintiff has elected to not file a response to the Motion. Noting Plaintiff's failure and refusal to file a response to the Motion, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that said Motion, Defendant Epstein's Motion to Quash and Motion for Protective Order and Objections to the Subpoena Served on JP Chase & Co. Which is Incorrectly Titled and Addressed to Bear Stearns (D.E. #307), is GRANTED BY DEFAULT pursuant to and in accordance with S.D. Fla. L.R. 7.1.C. Defendant's objections to the subject subpoena are sustained and no documents need be produced. + +DONE AND ORDERED this January 27, 2010, in Florida. at West Palm Beach, + +> LINNEA R. JO ON UNITED STA S MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748553/EFTA02748553.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748553/EFTA02748553.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7cab6ebc7aebec55d52417f4f85ffde402f1cd55 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748553/EFTA02748553.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748553.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1367, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.77, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 199.512, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 406.6453857421875, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 406.6453857421875, + 99.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 199.512, + 99.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 281.52, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 375.84000000000003 + ], + [ + 330.8534240722656, + 390.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 281.52, + 390.43353271484375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748553" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748555/EFTA02748555.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748555/EFTA02748555.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0c7a1d89fe1ee8a0c1cc65ee3fb35b1fd810847c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748555/EFTA02748555.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER AFFIRMING MAGISTRATE JUDGE DISCOVERY ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8's Appeal and Objections to Magistrate Judge's Discovery Order Entered September 10, 2009. (DE 327). Defendant filed a response in opposition to the motion on November 3, 2009. The Court has conducted a review of the motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. + +Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a), a district court reviewing a magistrate judge's order shall only modify or set aside the order if it is "found to be clearly erroneous or contrary to law." See also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A); Local Magistrate Judge Rule 4(a)(1). An order is clearly erroneous if "the reviewing court, after assessing the evidence in its entirety, is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." Krys v. Lufthansa German Airlines 119 F.3d 1515, 1523 (11th Cir. 1997). See also United States v .United States Gypsum csa, 333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948) (explaining generally "[a] finding is'clearly erroneous' when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed"). The mere fact that a reviewing court might have decided the issue differently is not sufficient to overturn a decision when there are two permissible views of the issue. Georgia State Conference of Branches of NAACP v. Georgia, 775 F.2d 1403, 1416 (11th Cir. 1985). + +After careful review of the Magistrate's Order, Plaintiffs' Appeal, and Defendant's Response, the Court finds that the Magistrate's Order was not clearly erroneous or contrary to law. The Magistrate Judge fully addressed all of the issues presented and her order cogently explained her conclusions and the rationale behind those conclusions. Additionally, Plaintiffs' Appeal is, at least in part, founded upon the mistaken belief that the Magistrate Judge relied upon Defendant's redacted filings, rather than =redacted version provided for in camera review. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8's Appeal and Objections to Magistrate Judge's Discovery Order Entered September 10, 2009. (DE 327) is DENIED. + +DONE AND ORDERED in at \\ est Palm Beach. Palm Beach County, Florida, this 27ih day of January, 2010. + +KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge + +Copies to: all counsel of record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748555/EFTA02748555.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748555/EFTA02748555.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2940f9e47f2d28c6d4267c642df04a1d3070222d --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748555/EFTA02748555.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748555.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 2738, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.73, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 72.08999999999999 + ], + [ + 402.5581359863281, + 100.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 100.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER AFFIRMING MAGISTRATE JUDGE DISCOVERY ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 84.456, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 528.4231567382812, + 368.55 + ], + [ + 528.4231567382812, + 383.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 84.456, + 383.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Caption", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748555" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748557/EFTA02748557.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748557/EFTA02748557.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cf26bef3be4cd674ce2fe0091b0267b22c23d6b5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748557/EFTA02748557.md @@ -0,0 +1,59 @@ +![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg) + +Home Contact Us E•Filing Services Document Searches Forms Help + +Previous on List Next on List Return To List Entity Name Search + +Events No Name History Submit + +# Detail by Entity Name + +#### Florida Non Profit Corporation + +THE FLORIDA SCIENCE FOUNDATION, INC. + +#### Filing Information + +Document Number N07000010684 FEI/EIN Number APPLIED Date Filed 11/01/2007 State FL Status INACTIVE Last Event ADMIN DISSOLUTION FOR ANNUAL REPORT Event Date Filed 09/25/2009 Event Effective Date NONE + +#### Principal Address + +250 AUSTRALIAN AVENUE SUITE 1400 WEST PALM BEACH FL 33401 US Changed 09/17/2008 + +#### Mailing Address + +250 AUSTRALIAN AVENUE SUITE 1400 WEST PALM BEACH FL 33401 US Changed 09/17/2008 + +### Registered Agent Name & Address + +C T CORPORATION SYSTEM 1200 SOUTH PINE ISLAND ROAD PLANTATION FL 33324 US + +#### Officer/Director Detail + +Name & Address Title AD INDYKE, DARREN K 457 MADISON AVENUE, FOURTH FLOOR NEW YORK NY 10022 US + +## Annual Reports + +Report Year Filed Date 2008 09/17/2008 + +![](_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg) + +09!17!2008 -ANNUAL REPORT + +11/01/2007 — Domestic Non-Profd + +View image in PDF format + +View image in PDF format + +Note: This is not official record. See documents if question or conflict. + +etevious on List Next on List Holum To List + +Events No Name History + +I Horne I Contact us I Document Searches 10-Filing Services 1 Forms 1 Help 1 + +Copyright and Privacy Policies Copyright iD 2007 State of Florida. Department of State. Entity Name Search + +Submit \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748557/EFTA02748557.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748557/EFTA02748557.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..663de42eaf9b91e129caf146e015da6c2e88e906 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748557/EFTA02748557.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,311 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748557.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1498, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.16, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Detail by Entity Name", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 55.692, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 227.24822998046875, + 182.25 + ], + [ + 227.24822998046875, + 201.99761962890625 + ], + [ + 55.692, + 201.99761962890625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Florida Non Profit Corporation", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 55.692, + 206.54999999999998 + ], + [ + 237.14361572265625, + 206.54999999999998 + ], + [ + 237.14361572265625, + 222.06353759765625 + ], + [ + 55.692, + 222.06353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Filing Information", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 55.692, + 243.0 + ], + [ + 164.0888671875, + 243.0 + ], + [ + 164.0888671875, + 258.43353271484375 + ], + [ + 55.692, + 258.43353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Principal Address", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 55.692, + 372.6 + ], + [ + 164.399658203125, + 372.6 + ], + [ + 164.399658203125, + 387.80352783203125 + ], + [ + 55.692, + 387.80352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Mailing Address", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 55.692, + 445.5 + ], + [ + 154.618408203125, + 445.5 + ], + [ + 154.618408203125, + 460.93353271484375 + ], + [ + 55.692, + 460.93353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Registered Agent Name & Address", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 55.692, + 518.4000000000001 + ], + [ + 261.83709716796875, + 518.4000000000001 + ], + [ + 261.83709716796875, + 534.8035278320312 + ], + [ + 55.692, + 534.8035278320312 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Officer/Director Detail", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 55.692, + 575.0999999999999 + ], + [ + 186.93072509765625, + 575.0999999999999 + ], + [ + 186.93072509765625, + 591.0635223388672 + ], + [ + 55.692, + 591.0635223388672 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Annual Reports", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 55.692, + 664.1999999999999 + ], + [ + 151.26593017578125, + 664.1999999999999 + ], + [ + 151.26593017578125, + 681.0635147094727 + ], + [ + 55.692, + 681.0635147094727 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Document Images", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 55.692, + 716.8499999999999 + ], + [ + 165.4490966796875, + 716.8499999999999 + ], + [ + 165.4490966796875, + 734.303524017334 + ], + [ + 55.692, + 734.303524017334 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 93 + ], + [ + "Line", + 46 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 9 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 31 + ], + [ + "Line", + 15 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748557" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748557/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748557/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6af2394d1f37c72fc590a2dfbd9c529a32dbfa33 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748557/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3c9225b98632635a7de067bf81e1164841f1c9db2a879f4228d5b03a1b4c20f8 +size 45344 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748557/_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748557/_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b5ee475d2a7031df33198cb2fc04c2879cd8acca --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748557/_page_0_Picture_21.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3e78277787989b1a9209e68da13919e5ff698147d27db6bf6a948f476bec0488 +size 7090 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748559/EFTA02748559.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748559/EFTA02748559.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bcdd70998423046279cd8788ca6ad3d45fff1421 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748559/EFTA02748559.md @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +-vs- + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +# Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## VIDEO-TELECONFERENCED AND VIDEOTAPED COMPULSORY MEDICAL EVALUATION OF + +JANE DOE NO. 3 + +Tuesday, November 24, 2009 9:18 - 4:45 p.m. + +250 Australian Avenue Suite 1500 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 + +Reported By: Cynthia , RPR, FPR Notary Public, State of Florida Prose Court Reporting Services + +#### APPEARANCES: + +On behalf of the Plaintiff: JESSICA D. ARBOUR, ESQUIRE MERMELS7EIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Phone: 305.931.2200 E-mail: Ahorowitagsexabuseattomey.com + +#### ALSO PRESENT: + +, Paralegal, Burman, Critton, butler & Coleman + +Sascha Quimby, Videographer Visual Evidence, Incorporated + +### EXAMINATION + +BY DR. Q. I'm Dr. . I am going to be seeing you today. My understanding is this is due to a court case that you're involved in. I have been retained by one of the sides; I think the side representing Mr. Epstein. So, I am going to talk with you about kind of your history and where things are at and how that's affected you. + +What'you have before you is two releases, information which basically says that you realize this is for court, that anything you tell me is not confidential, meaning I am going to write a report. Anything you say to me may end up in my report. A copy will be sent to both attorneys, I believe a judge may see it and things along those lines. + +Usually when you see adoctor, there is the expectation that what you say to him stays in that office. That's not the case in this situation. Also in this situation, I am not going to be taking on treatment responsibility for you. So usually when you see adoctor there is an expectation that they are going to treat you, make recommendations, + +Page 3 + +maybe prescribe medicines, things along those lines. I am not going to be doing that. I'm just doing the evaluation for the court case. So there is no doctor-patient relationship. All right? A. Okay. Q. Do you have any questions? 7 A. No. Q. All right. This will probably be a long day. This is not an endurance test though, so at any time if you need to take abreak or, I don't know if you smoke or want to get some water, use the restroom, feel free. Just let me know. And we usually break for lunch around 12'ish, l'ish, just depending on how things are going and what the flow is. And we are videotaping. The tapes last about two hours, so usually they have to come in and change them out and then it becomes a good break 18 point. A. Okay. 0 Q. So, but if you want to take abreak before, just let me know. A. Okay. Do you want me to sign this now? Q. Yes, please. A. Today is the 23rd? Q. I believe so. 24th. + +Page 5 + +A. 24th, thank you. Do I just sign here and 2 here? Q. Yes, please. If you don't mind just dating that. A. Yeah. Q. Thank you. Okay. So, I'd just like to start by getting some background information, things along those lines. If I could get your actual name, please. A. Jane Doe No. 3. Q. Okay. Where were you born? A. West Palm Beach, Florida. Q. Date of your birth? A. March 5th, 1988. Q. Were there any problems or complications with your birth? A. No. I was ahealthy baby. Q. So, not born early, born late, no time in the NICU, PICU, or nothing like that? 20 A. No. 21. Q. Okay. Any in-utero exposures to anything that you are aware of, alcohol, tobacco, cocaine? A. When I was, when I was in the womb? Q. Uh-huh. A. No, none of that. + +2 (Pages 2 to 5) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748559/EFTA02748559.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748559/EFTA02748559.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d49a0c5c6190ccaf55d54b1d2a71b79b054749a2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748559/EFTA02748559.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,235 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748559.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 3709, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.42, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 193.392, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 423.5977478027344, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 423.5977478027344, + 99.96209716796875 + ], + [ + 193.392, + 99.96209716796875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Related cases:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 97.92, + 273.78000000000003 + ], + [ + 219.06475830078125, + 273.78000000000003 + ], + [ + 219.06475830078125, + 288.5920715332031 + ], + [ + 97.92, + 288.5920715332031 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "VIDEO-TELECONFERENCED AND VIDEOTAPED \nCOMPULSORY MEDICAL EVALUATION OF", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 153.0, + 367.74 + ], + [ + 445.5333557128906, + 367.74 + ], + [ + 445.5333557128906, + 396.5920715332031 + ], + [ + 153.0, + 396.5920715332031 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "APPEARANCES:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 58.14, + 55.08000000000001 + ], + [ + 129.132, + 55.08000000000001 + ], + [ + 129.132, + 66.10003662109375 + ], + [ + 58.14, + 66.10003662109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ALSO PRESENT:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 58.14, + 167.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 130.47872924804688, + 167.67000000000002 + ], + [ + 130.47872924804688, + 179.01 + ], + [ + 58.14, + 179.01 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "EXAMINATION", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 101.59200000000001, + 386.37 + ], + [ + 207.54531860351562, + 386.37 + ], + [ + 207.54531860351562, + 398.3000183105469 + ], + [ + 101.59200000000001, + 398.3000183105469 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 17 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 796 + ], + [ + "Line", + 102 + ], + [ + "Text", + 18 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748559" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748561/EFTA02748561.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748561/EFTA02748561.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e6dadd1a90ca9fdcd6069c8ee1b2a5bf0486dd68 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748561/EFTA02748561.md @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +/ + +Related Cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092, + +/ + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 3's MEMORANDUM IN RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND REPLY IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 3, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files this Memorandum in Response to Defendant's Motion for Sanctions (D.E. 450) and Reply in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions (D.E. 444), and states as follows: + +- I. On January 13, 2010, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein filed a Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions along with his own Motion for Sanctions against Jane Doe No. 3 pertaining to the termination of her Rule 35 medical examination. The Response/Motion filed by Defendant Epstein contains multiple misleading and inaccurate statements of both law and fact. +- 2. Defendant Epstein claims that Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 3's attorneys were aware that Defendant Epstein kept an office in the building where the medical examination (IME) of Jane Doe No. 3 was to take place on November 24, 2009. This is false, and it is also irrelevant, + +as this Court previously entered an Order which unequivocally placed an affirmative burden upon Epstein not to be seen by the Plaintiffs at their IMEs. (D.E. 401). + +3. The Affidavit filed by Jane Doe No. 3's attorney, Jessica Arbour, states that counsel had no knowledge that Epstein maintained an office in that building. See Affidavit of Jessica Arbour, Esq., attached to Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions (D.E. 444) as Exhibit "A." Epstein's alleged employer, The Florida Science Foundation, is not listed on the building's directory in the lobby of the building. Furthermore, according to the Florida Secretary of State, the Florida Science Foundation was formally dissolved on September 25, 2009, two months before the IME. See Exhibit A. Plaintiff's counsel had no knowledge that Epstein still maintained an office in that building until counsel for Epstein, Michael Pike, called Plaintiff's counsel after the November 24 incident. Mr. Pike "explained to Mr. Horowitz that Epstein's office was still located in One Clearlake Center." See Epstein's Response, et al. (D.E. 450), p. 3, ¶ 4. + +4. Defendant Epstein claims that this Court entered an Order directing the Plaintiffs' counsel to contact his attorneys' offices to advise them when the Plaintiffs were going outside during breaks in the IME. However, the Order referenced by Epstein applies only to the depositions of the Plaintiffs, including Jane Doe No. 3. That Order (D.E. 369) was entered after Epstein appeared at the deposition of another Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4, in violation of at least two court orders and a specific agreement of the parties. Nothing in the Order suggests that it would apply to any proceeding other than a deposition. It makes no reference to, nor does it contemplate, Epstein's appearance at Rule 35 examinations, which is controlled by a separate Order (D.E. 401). + +5. Defendant Epstein conspicuously fails to address the Order (D.E. 401) that expressly applies to the IMEs of the Plaintiffs, including Jane Doe No. 3. The Order specifically prohibited Epstein from "being seen" by the Plaintiffs on the date they appeared for their IMEs. + +6. Furthermore, the Defendant's expert repeatedly told Jane Doe No. 3 that she was allowed to take breaks throughout the day, specifically instructing her that she could go outside and smoke if she wanted to do so, without warning her that Epstein could be on the premises. He also mentioned that they would likely break approximately every two hours when the videotapes were changed. See Exhibit "B". + +7. Any assertions made by Defendant Epstein that he did not notice Jane Doe No. 3 or recognize her attorney when he left the building on November 24 are absurd. Jane Doe No. 3's attorney, Jessica Arbour, stated that Epstein clearly made eye contact with her that was more than merely incidental; he attempted to stare her down. See Arbour Affidavit. In 8-9. + +8. Epstein attempts to convince this Court that an "alleged brief encounter" was not at all traumatizing to Jane Doe No. 3 and could not possibly have rendered her so distraught that she could not proceed with another two hours of invasive, repetitive IME questioning about her most intimate personal thoughts, feelings, and experiences. Yet he fails to support his assertions with any competent expert opinion that would suggest Jane Doe No. 3 could not have been traumatized by the incident. On the contrary, his own expert repeatedly and profusely apologized to Jane Doe No. 3's attorney, making statements that he had "never even met the man [Mr. Epstein]" and that he "understood" the decision to terminate the IME after the incident with Epstein. I + +I Epstein also argues that Dr. the Defendant's expert, did not learn of the incident until after Ms. Arbour terminated the IME on the record. This is inconsistent with Ms. Arbour's statement that Dr. ■ **began apologizing about the incident the moment she and Jane Doe No. 3 re-** + +9. In his Motion for Sanctions against Jane Doe No. 3, Epstein has the audacity to suggest that Jane Doe No. 3 was at fault for the incident that occurred on November 24, 2009, when he recklessly and flagrantly violated the authority of this Court by appearing at the location of her IME. Any costs incurred by the Defendant as a result of the premature termination of Jane Doe No. 3's IME are the fault of Jeffrey Epstein alone. + +10. Jane Doe No. 3 does not oppose completion of the last two hours of her eight hour IME. She will appear for the last two hours of her IME without additional order of this Court, but has sought relief from this Court ordering that it occur in a location other than West Palm Beach, Florida, where she can feel some level of security that Epstein will not appear at her IME and again violate a Court Order. + +WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 3, respectfully requests this Court (I) grant her Motion for Sanctions (D.E. 444) against Jeffrey Epstein, (2) order completion of her IME at a location other than West Palm Beach, Florida, (3) deny Defendant's Motion for Sanctions against Jane Doe No. 3 for unilaterally terminating her IME in its entirety, and (4) all other relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. + +Respectfully submitted, + +By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) ssm@sexabuseattorney.com Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) ahorowitz@sezabuseattorney.com MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 + +entered the offices where the IME was taking place, before she went on the record to terminate the IME, and even before she had a chance to advise him off the record about what had occurred. See Arbour Affidavit, q 12. + +Tel: (305) 931-2200 + +Fax: (305) 931-0877 + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I hereby certify that on February 1, 2010, 1 electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. + +/s/ Adam D. Horowitz + +## SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. igoldberger@agwpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +James brad@pathtojustice.com + +Isidro Manuel isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack jph@searcylaw.com U + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerwillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@podhurst.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748561/EFTA02748561.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748561/EFTA02748561.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b09cd23a774b7b79a10297c7bf0112ae243ff17f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748561/EFTA02748561.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,345 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748561.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 6, + "chars": 8095, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.15, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 98.82 + ], + [ + 405.95098876953125, + 127.4830322265625 + ], + [ + 206.24400000000003, + 127.4830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 3's MEMORANDUM IN \nRESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND \nREPLY IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 118.72800000000001, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 494.513427734375, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 494.513427734375, + 430.863037109375 + ], + [ + 118.72800000000001, + 430.863037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 226.44, + 138.51 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 138.51 + ], + [ + 385.0019836425781, + 152.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 226.44, + 152.9830322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST \nDOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN \nUnited States District Court, Southern District of Florida", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 70.47 + ], + [ + 455.16455078125, + 113.9830322265625 + ], + [ + 157.28400000000002, + 113.9830322265625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 50 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 56 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748561" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748567/EFTA02748567.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748567/EFTA02748567.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..27d92fbd21f7ca555e547016cbecf76183a552ae --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748567/EFTA02748567.md @@ -0,0 +1,175 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/. + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE 47 (80993) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Richard C.W. S M.D. of Richard C.W. S M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on March 1, 2010 at the offices of Richard C.W.. M.D., 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd., Suite #219, Lake Mary, FL 32746, (407) 322-88199. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring a sweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. Sim infra and Motion attached at DE (319) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well. + +2. Plaintiff has not provided an available date; however, unless a timely and valid objection to this Notice is made, the Plaintiff is required by this Rule to be in attendance at the above-scheduled examination. + +3. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as a witness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court. + +4. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +5. The interview will be videotaped. + +6. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (319). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (319). See Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documents have been provided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient notice has b n made. + +> By: MICHAEL PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar 617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 3"I day of February, 2010. + +Respectfully submi + +By: + +ROBERT D. ITTON, JR., ESQ. + +Florida Bar .. 224162 + +rcrita,bc1c1 .com + +MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. + +Florida Bar #617296 + +mpikeabciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattornev.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Brad r, Esq. + +, Jaffe, Weissing, , Fistos + +& Lehrman, PL + +425 N. Andrews Avenue + +Suite #2 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-524-2820 + +Fax: 954-524-2822 + +bradQvathtojustice.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellrqlaw.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for Plaintifpane Doe + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +iagesciabellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Isidro M., Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datum Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarciaabellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748567/EFTA02748567.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748567/EFTA02748567.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c4891eec536faf8fd965a3e18e8abbfd7e55d80e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748567/EFTA02748567.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,265 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748567.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 4041, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.5, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 202.572, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 417.3964538574219, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 417.3964538574219, + 103.10302734375 + ], + [ + 202.572, + 103.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE CHANGE ONLY) OF INDEPENDENT \nMEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE 47 (80993)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 517.1227416992188, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 517.1227416992188, + 392.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 105.87599999999998, + 392.9730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.98, + 541.8900000000001 + ], + [ + 367.54791259765625, + 541.8900000000001 + ], + [ + 367.54791259765625, + 556.4830169677734 + ], + [ + 253.98, + 556.4830169677734 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 347.49 + ], + [ + 365.70050048828125, + 347.49 + ], + [ + 365.70050048828125, + 362.2230224609375 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 362.2230224609375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 23 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 117 + ], + [ + "Line", + 59 + ], + [ + "Text", + 55 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 28 + ], + [ + "Line", + 14 + ], + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748567" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748571/EFTA02748571.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748571/EFTA02748571.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..70b0f5ae42c0b022249d1f3d965af3df029a1419 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748571/EFTA02748571.md @@ -0,0 +1,50 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, + +08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, + +09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## NOTICE TO STRIKE + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Notice to Strike: + +- I. On February 3, 2010, Defendant filed his Re-Notice of Inde ndent Medical Examination of, Plaintiff Jane Doe #7 (DE 459). +- 2. The Notice incorrectly stated that the Plaintiff ha not ovided a date of availability. In fact, the Plaintiff and Defendant have agreed and a location. + +By: + +MICI , ESQ. + +Flori v a Bar #6172 6 + +Respec mined, + +By: ROBE' TTON, JR., ESQ. Florid. '4162 rcri ,ciclaw.com MIC AEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpike@belclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattorney.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattomev.com Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 + +dBra = Esq. Jaffe, Weissing, Fistos & Lehrman, PL Suite #2 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-524-2820 Fax: 954-524-2822 brad@pathtjustice.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp@law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe Isidro M. =, Esq. + +jagesqabellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarciaabellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748571/EFTA02748571.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748571/EFTA02748571.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d5c82f9ac17d94bc370cc1c777d8f766cd995361 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748571/EFTA02748571.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,212 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748571.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 2284, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.01, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 413.98565673828125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 413.98565673828125, + 99.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 99.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE TO STRIKE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 370.19970703125, + 360.45000000000005 + ], + [ + 370.19970703125, + 375.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 248.47200000000004, + 375.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service \nJane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein \nCase No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 332.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 424.7796936035156, + 332.90999999999997 + ], + [ + 424.7796936035156, + 375.363037109375 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 375.363037109375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 14 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 121 + ], + [ + "Line", + 60 + ], + [ + "Text", + 5 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748571" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748574/EFTA02748574.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748574/EFTA02748574.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4765f72267e040b82ac3298f6bbd95ec1fd808be --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748574/EFTA02748574.md @@ -0,0 +1,161 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAJ + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE & LOCATION CHANGE) OF INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #7 (80993) + +Defendant, JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, pursuant to Rule 35, Fed. R. Civ. P., notices the Plaintiff for an independent/psychological medical examination and states: + +1. An appointment for examination of the Plaintiff has been made with Richard C.W. ■, **M.D. of Richard C.W.** ■, **M.D., P.A. at 9:00 a.m. on March 1, 2010 at the offices of Richard C.W.** ■, **M.D., 2500 West Lake Mary Blvd., Suite #219, Lake Mary, FL 32746, (407) 322-88199. The Plaintiff is to wear comfortable clothing and bring a sweater. The examination shall consist of an interview and testing and will likely last until 5:30 p.m. ate infra and Motion attached at DE (319) for scope, time and place of IME. See Exhibits attached as well.** + +**2. Pursuant to Rule 35, if the psychiatrist performing the examination is called as a witness, the psychiatrist shall not be identified as one appointed by the Court.** + +3. The cost of the examination will be originally borne by the Defendant but is subject to taxation by the Court upon proper motion. + +4. The interview will be videotaped. + +5. Dr. Halls' specialties and qualifications are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (319). The time, place, manner, conditions and scope of the examination are attached to the Motion to Compel the IME at DE (319). es Affidavit attached thereto. All of the above documents ha e been provided to the Plaintiff's counsel and, therefore, sufficient notice n made. + +> By: MICHA E, ESQ. Florida 96 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 3rd day of February, 2010. + +> Respectfull submi ed, By: ROBERT ON, JR., ESQ. Florida B. No. 224162 rcrit@bc1 law.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +mpike®bciclaw.com + +BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTFIER & COLEMAN + +515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561/842-2820 Phone + +561/515-3148 Fax + +(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +## Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesq®bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein + +Brad Esq. + +a e, Weissing, Fistos + +Le rman, PL + +425 N. Andrews Avenue + +Suite #2 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-524-2820 + +Fax: 954-524-2822 + +bradApathtoiustice.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff' in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Ilac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellpalaw.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for PlaintyPane Doe + +Isidro M. NM Esq. + +Law Firm, P.A. + +224 Datum Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrozarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748574/EFTA02748574.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748574/EFTA02748574.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e80289f5735807348d26a7b5cade35fbc576dcf9 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748574/EFTA02748574.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,231 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748574.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3825, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.62, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 415.48565673828125, + 71.28 + ], + [ + 415.48565673828125, + 99.363037109375 + ], + [ + 203.18400000000003, + 99.363037109375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S RE-NOTICE (DATE & LOCATION CHANGE) OF \nINDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE #7 \n(80993)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 102.20400000000001, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 518.5778198242188, + 359.64 + ], + [ + 518.5778198242188, + 402.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 102.20400000000001, + 402.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 402.57 + ], + [ + 368.29791259765625, + 402.57 + ], + [ + 368.29791259765625, + 418.10302734375 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 418.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 208.17000000000002 + ], + [ + 368.29791259765625, + 208.17000000000002 + ], + [ + 368.29791259765625, + 224.60302734375 + ], + [ + 253.36799999999997, + 224.60302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 128 + ], + [ + "Line", + 64 + ], + [ + "Text", + 60 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748574" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748577/EFTA02748577.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748577/EFTA02748577.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..51ab759b3414a335e4bea429c66a1755193034f1 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748577/EFTA02748577.md @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## OMNIBUS ORDER + +THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the following motions: (1) Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Plaintiff's First Request for Production(D.E. #194 and #210); (2) Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Answers to Plaintiff's First Request for Admissions (D.E. #195 and #211); and, (3) Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories (D.E.#196 and #212). + +In this case, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls in question were approximately 16 years of age. As part of this scheme, Epstein, with the help of his assistant allegedly lured economically disadvantaged minor girls to his homes in Palm beach, New York and St. with the promise of money in exchange for a massage. Epstein purportedly transformed the massage into a sexual assault. The three-count Complaint alleges sexual assault and battery (Count I), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count II), and, coercion and enticement to sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422 (Count III). + +In 2008, Epstein entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement with the United States Attorney General's Office for the Federal Southern District of Florida and the State Attorney's Office for Palm Beach County. Under the terms of the Non-Prosecution Agreement, any criminal prosecution against Epstein is deferred as long as he abides by the certain terms and conditions contained therein. If at any time the United States Attorney's Office has reason to believe Epstein is in breach of the Agreement, it need only provide Epstein's counsel with notice of the breach and then move forward with Epstein's prosecution. Accordingly, the mere fact the Govemment and Epstein have entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement does not mean that Epstein is free from future criminal prosecution. + +In each of these motions Plaintiff Jane Doe seeks to compel answers to certain requests for admissions, interrogatories and requests for production that were propounded on Defendant Epstein. Defendant has responded by asserting several objections, the primary one of which is an assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege. + +The Fifth Amendment serves as a guarantee against testimonial compulsion and provides, in relevant part, thatirdo person...shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against himself." Id. In practice, the Fifth Amendment's privilege against selfincrimination "permits a person not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings." Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985)(citing Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973)). The privilege is accorded "liberal construction in favor of the right it was intended to secure," Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486 (1951), and extends not only to answers that would in themselves support a criminal conviction, but extends also to those answers which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a crime. Id.; Blau v. United States, 340 U.S. 159 (1950). Thus, information is protected by the privilege not only if it would support a criminal conviction, but also in those instances where "the responses would merely 'provide a lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate." United States v. Neff, 615 F.2d 1235, 1239 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 925 (1980). + +The Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination comes into play only in those instances where the witness has "reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer." Hoffman, 341 U.S. at 486 (citing Mason v. United States, 244 U.S. 362, 365 (1917)). "The claimant must be 'confronted by substantial and 'real,' and not merely trifling or imaginary, hazards of incrimination." United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 128 (1980). + +When the Fifth Amendment privilege is raised as a bar to discovery, a blanket refusal to answer questions or to produce documents is improper. Anolada v. Sprague, 822 F.2d 1035, 1037 (11th Cir. 1987). Instead, the privilege must be asserted in response to a particular question, and in each instance the burden is on the claimant to justify invocation of the privilege. Id. Once a particularized showing has been made, lijt is for the court to decide whether a witness' silence is justified and to require him to answer if it clearly appears to the court that the witness asserting the privilege is mistaken as to its validity." In re Morganroth, 718 F.2d 161, 166-67 (6th Cir. 1983). In making this determination the judge is instructed to view the facts and evidence presented on a caseby-case basis, and "must be governed as much by his perception of the peculiarities of the case, as by the facts actually in evidence." Hoffman, 341 U.S. at 487. + +The law is well established that the Fifth Amendment privilege may not apply to specific documents "even though they contain incriminating assertions of fact or belief, because the creation of those documents was not 'compelled' within the meaning of the privilege." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 35-36 (2000). However, in certain instances, "'the act of production' itself may implicitly communicate 'statements of fact.'" Id. For this reason the Fifth Amendment privilege also encompasses the circumstance where the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena or production request has a compelled testimonial aspect Id. Thus, in those instances where the existence and/or location of the requested documents are unknown, or where production would "implicitly authenticate" the requested documents, the act of producing responsive documents is considered testimonial and is protected by the Fifth Amendment. In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 1 F.3d 87, 93 (2d Cir. 1993); see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391, 410 (1976)(issue expressed as whether compliance with a document request or subpoena "tacitly conceded" the item's authenticity, existence or possession by the defendant). + +The Court begins with an analysis of the Fifth Amendment privilege as applied to each request or category of requests. In the event the Court determines that a certain request does not infringe upon Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege, Epstein's additional objections to that request shall be addressed. Where appropriate, the Court looks to Epstein's Response Memorandum for more particularized objections, rather than relying solely on Epstein's objections as initially stated, which in some cases are less specific in nature. + +The Admission Requests at issue herein, Request Numbers 1-9 and 21-23, all essentially seek admissions relating to the same general subject matter, namely, Defendant's financial history: Epstein's net worth (Requests 1-5, and 23); fraudulent conveyances (Requests 6, 9, 21 and 22); real estate ownership (Requests 7-8). Epstein argues, and this Court agrees, that to force him to respond to these requests would involve compelled statements that could reasonably furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute Epstein in future criminal proceedings or even support a criminal conviction. Accordingly, Epstein's objection to responding to these requests on the basis of his Fifth Amendment Right against self incrimination is upheld and Plaintiff's Motion is denied. + +As noted previously, the Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination is accorded "liberal construction," Hoffman, 341 U.S. at 486, and extends not only to answers that would in themselves support a criminal conviction, but extends also to those answers which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a crime. Id. Thus to be afforded protection, the answer need not necessarily be enough to support a criminal conviction; it is enough if the response merely provides a lead or clue to evidence having a tendency to incriminate. Neff, 615 F.2d at 1239. + +In asserting his Fifth Amendment privilege, Epstein expresses a concern that these requests for admissions, if answered, may result in compelled testimonial communications from Epstein regarding his financial status and history and would require him to waive his right to decline to respond to other inquiries related to the same subject matter in this case, the related cases and those matters outlined in Epstein's in camera submissions at D.E. #s 282 and 283. Given the allegations raised in the various Complaints and the elements required to convict Epstein of a crime, and considering the background facts underlying the case, these concerns are reasonable, real and not unjustified. It goes without saying that being forced to admit, deny and/or identify the existence of the information sought by virtue of an admission or denial is tantamount to forcing testimonial disclosures that would communicate statements of fact. Finding that such admissions or denials present a real and substantial danger of self-incrimination in this case, in other related cases, and relative to potential federal claims of violations, the Court concludes the subject requests are subject to Epstein's assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination. + +# INTERROGATORY REQUESTS + +The interrogatories at issue here fall into three general categories: contention-type interrogatories seeking information such as the facts upon which Defendant relies in support of his affirmative defenses and pleading allegations and the anticipated testimony of certain witnesses (Interrogatories 12 and 23); financial history information such as what assets Epstein has, where such assets are located, and whether such assets have been transferred or fraudulently concealed (Interrogatories 2-7 and 13-15); and one identity information interrogatory seeking the names, addresses and phone numbers of Epstein's current accountants, financial planners or money managers (Interrogatory 17). For the following reasons Epstein's objections on the basis of his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination are upheld and Plaintiff's Motion to Compel the subject Interrogatory Requests is denied. + +As with the Admission Requests, Epstein argues, and this Court agrees, that to force Epstein to answer the above-stated Interrogatories would involve compelled statements that could reasonably furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute Epstein in future criminal proceedings or even support a criminal conviction. Asking Epstein to identify persons or witnesses who may have knowledge of the events in question, to state the facts upon which he relies in support of his affirmative defenses, and to give an accounting of all of his assets and list all actions taken by him and those retained by him with reference to those assets, would violate the Fifth Amendment in that Epstein would be forced to incriminate himself in the commission of crimes. Further, such an order would constitute compelled testimonial admissions that could potentially provide a link in the chain of evidence having a tendency to incriminate Epstein and would threaten to invade his privilege against being required to produce or testify. Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232 F.3d 1258, 1263 (991 Cir. 2000). Accordingly, finding the sought after information would result in testimonial disclosures that would communicate statements of fact which in turn would present a real and substantial danger of self-incrimination in this case and other related cases as well as in areas that could result in criminal prosecution, Epstein's objection to responding to these requests on the basis of his Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination is upheld and Plaintiffs Motion is denied. + +## PRODUCTION REQUESTS + +The production requests at issue here fall into four general categories: requests for documents the federal government gave to Epstein in the course of its plea discussions with him (Requests 7, 9 and 10); requests for financial information documents (Requests 8, 11, 14 and 15); requests for personal tax returns from 2002 to the present and for a copy of Epstein's passport (Requests 12 and 13); and Epstein's medical records from Dr. Stephen Alexander (Request 16). Each of these categories of requests shall be addressed in turn. + +Plaintiffs Motion to Compel as it relates to the first category of documents, consisting of documents the federal government gave to Epstein in the course of its plea discussions with him (Requests 7, 9 and 10), is granted. The law is well established that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination does not extend to documents whose existence is known to the government or is a foregone conclusion. Fisher, 425 U.S. at 410; United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 44 (2000); United States v. Ponds, 454 F.3d 313, 325 (D.C. Cir. 2006). Thus, while the Fifth Amendment covers situations where the act of producing documents has "communicative aspects of its own wholly aside from contents of the papers produced" Fisher, 425 U.S. at 410, the doctrine does not apply where the government has "prior knowledge of either the existence or the whereabouts of the...documents ultimately produced... ." Hubbell, 530 U.S. at 44. + +Requests 7, 9 and 10 seek production of documents the govemment itself gave to Epstein, making the government's prior knowledge of the documents sought an obvious and undeniable "foregone conclusion." As such, Epstein can not reasonably and in good faith argue that in producing these documents to Plaintiff he will somehow be incriminating himself. In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 383 F.3d 905, 910 (9th Cir. 2004) (noting there can be no self-incrimination by production where the "existence and location of the documents ... are a 'foregone conclusion' and [the claimant] ... adds little or nothing to the sum total of the Government's information by conceding that he in fact has the documents."). + +In an attempt to get around this settled principle of law, Epstein argues that forcing him to give Plaintiff the discovery produced by the government would implicate the Fifth Amendment in that such production might disclose witnesses helpful to Plaintiff. Epstein Resp., p.7. This argument misses the point. As Plaintiff correctly observes, the question is not whether the government's documents have information that might be harmful to Epstein's defense, indeed, a reasonable presumption would be that the documents do contain information harmful to Epstein and that is precisely why the government was showing Epstein the documents in the first place; Instead, the only pertinent question is whether turning over the government's documents to Plaintiff somehow forces Epstein to provide 'testimony' to the government in contravention of the privilege against self incrimination guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. This question can only reasonably be answered in the negative. + +Also without merit is Epstein's argument that these requests are the same requests the undersigned previously found subject to the Fifth Amendment. Epstein Resp., pp.7-8. This is not the case. The earlier requests referenced by Epstein were significantly broader than the narrow requests at issue here, including for example, a request for all documents "relating to" the federal non-prosecution agreement, all documents "relating to" Epstein's Florida guilty plea, and all documents obtained in "investigation relating to" either the federal or state criminal investigations. These requests would have required Epstein to pick and choose which documents were responsive and in this way force Epstein to effectively make "use of the content of his mind," an action that would undeniably implicate the Fifth Amendment. See Hubbell, 530 U.S. at 43. + +Epstein also raises objections on the basis of the work product doctrine and the attorney client privilege. objections on the basis of the attorney client privilege and the work product doctrine are rejected out of hand. The attorney-client privilege protects "confidential communications" between a lawyer and his client for the purpose of obtaining legal advice. Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391, 403 (1976); U.S. v. Schaltenbrand, 930 F.2d 1554, 1562 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 640 (1991); In re Grand Jury Subpoena (Bierman), 788 F.2d 1511, 1512 (11th Cir. 1986). Under the rule, only material involving confidential communications between the attorney and the client which fall within the purview of the privilege are rendered immune from discovery. Fisher, 425 U.S. at 403. The documents at issue here were given by the Government to Epstein, and as such are clearly not confidential communications protected by the attorney client privilege. The work product doctrine, which protects from disclosure documents and tangible things prepared in anticipation of litigation by or for a party or by or for that party's attomey acting for his client, Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3)'; In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 601 F.2d 162, 171 (5th Cir. 1979), is also not implicated as the subject documents were not created by Epstein's attorneys. Id. + +Finally, Epstein argues the information sought is protected from disclosure by Rules 408 and 410 of the Federal Rules of Evidence governing the admission into evidence of documents involving settlement discussions and plea negotiations. Plaintiffs acknowledge that Request Number 10 might, at some point, be implicated by the Rule, but they are correct when they avail themselves of the broad federal discovery rules and argue that the information sought, while it may ultimately be barred from use at trial, is nonetheless subject to disclosure at the instant discovery stage. See Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 352 (1978). Accordingly, Epstein is ordered to produce the documents subject to these Requests within ten (10) days from the date hereof. + +Plaintiffs Motion to Compel as it relates to the second category of documents, financial information documents (Requests 8,11,14 and 15), is denied on the basis of the Fifth Amendment. In sustaining Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege, the Court has considered the facts alleged in the Complaints, the elements needed to convict Epstein of + +Rule 26(b)(3) was adopted in 1970 to codify the holding in Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495 (1947). + +a crime, the particularized showing made in Epstein's Response Brief and in camera submission, and drawn upon the Court's knowledge of the cases at issue. On this basis the Court finds the privilege raised as to these Requests valid, and asserted by Epstein only with reference to "genuinely threatening questions." United States v. Goodwin, 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir. 1980). + +In ruling as it does, the Court finds that ordering Epstein to produce the information sought, information which relates to potential violations of federal law and claims, constitutes testimonial disclosures that would communicate statements of fact and present a real and substantial danger of self-incrimination in both this case and other related cases that could result in criminal prosecution. Fisher, 425 U.S. at 410 (noting that the Fifth Amendment covers situations where the act of producing documents has "communicative aspects of its own wholly aside from contents of the papers produced"). The danger Epstein faces by being forced to testify in this instance is "substantial and real, and not merely trifling or imaginary' as required. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 128. Accordingly, finding the subject requests involve compelled statements that would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to convict Epstein of a crime, the Court finds Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege claim validly asserted. Accordingly, Epstein's objection is sustained and he need not produce documents subject to these Requests. + +The third category of documents requested consists of Epstein's personal tax returns for the year 2002 through the present (Request No. 12) and a copy of Epstein's U.S. Passport (Request No. 13). Plaintiffs' Motion as it relates to both these requests is granted. Once again, the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination does not extend to documents whose existence is known to the government or is a foregone conclusion. Fisher, 425 U.S. at 410; Hubbell, 530 U.S. at 44; Ponds, 454 F.3d at 325 (D.C. Cir. 2006). In this instance the Government, namely the IRS, already has Epstein's tax returns, so it can hardly be incriminating for Epstein to produce them. Id. The same is true of Epstein's U.S. Passport. Since Epstein is required to show his Passport to Government officials every time he travels outside the United States, the Government undeniably has "prior knowledge" of the Passport's existence, and its whereabouts is a "foregone" conclusion. Hubbell, 530 U.S. at 44. + +Even more persuasive is the fact that tax records and passports, considered by the courts to be "required records," are as a matter of law deemed not subject to Fifth Amendment protection. See, e.q., Rajah v. Mukasey, 544 F.3d 427, 442 (2d Cir. 2008)("Just as a taxpayer's W-2 forms are required records not subject to the Fifth Amendment because they are a mandatory part of a civil regulatory regime, so too are the passports...at issue in the current case."); In re Doe, 711 F.2d 1187, 1191 (2d Cir. 1983)(ordering production of W-2 forms over Fifth Amendment objection on grounds of required records exception); In re Doe, 97 F.R.D. 640, 644-45 (S.D. N.Y. 1982)(same). + +Epstein's reliance on 26 U.S.C. §6103, governing the confidentiality of tax returns, does little to aid Epstein's cause. The same federal statute Epstein cites was cited by the claimant of the privilege in the cases referred to above and in each of them the court's ruled that the confidentiality provided by the IRS statute was properly overridden by the broad federal discovery rules. Id. Accordingly, Epstein's Fifth Amendment claim of privilege as it relates to these Requests is rejected and Epstein has ten (10) days from the date hereof to provide the discovery subject to these Requests. + +The last category of documents concern Epstein's medical records from Dr. Stephen Alexander (Request 16). Epstein raises several objections to this category of Requests from relevancy concerns to privilege claims. Because Plaintiff has failed to articulate any reasonable basis for obtaining the documents in question, Plaintiffs' Motion as it relates to this request is denied. While the scope of discovery is broad, it is not without limits. Washington v. & Williamson Tobacco, 959 F.2d 1566, 1570 (11th Cir. 1992). Indeed the 2000 Amendment to Rule 26 has effectively limited the scope of discoverable information to those matters which are relevant to a claim or defense in the lawsuit. Dellacasa, LLC v. John Moriarty & Ass. Of Florida, Inc., 2007 WL 4117261 at \*3 (S.D. Fla. 2007). Courts have long held that "[w]hile the standard of relevancy [in discovery] is a liberal one, it is not so liberal as to allow a party to 'roam in the shadow zones of relevancy and to explore matter which does not presently appear germane on the theory that it might conceivably become so.' " Food Lion, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Intern. Union, 103 F.3d 1007, 1012-13 (C.A. D.C. 1997)(quoting Broadway and Ninety Sixth Street Realty Co. v. Loew's Inc., 21 F.R.D. 347, 352 (S.D. N.Y. 1958)); Donahay v. Palm Beach Tours & Transp., Inc., 2007 W.L. 1119206 at \*1 (S.D. Fla. 2007). Accordingly, Plaintiffs' Motion as it relates to Request No. 16 is denied. Epstein has raised detailed objections to the request, among other things calling into question the relevancy of his medical condition in this case where, according to him, he has not placed his medical condition at issue. This particular objection was met by Plaintiffs with silence. In light of the objection made by Epstein, Plaintiffs were obligated to come back in their reply and articulate some rational basis for seeking the records requested. Having failed in this regard, Plaintiffs' Motion as it relates to Request No. 16 is denied and Epstein need not produce documents responsive to this request. + +In accordance with the above and foregoing, it is hereby + +ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: + +(1) Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Answers to Plaintiff's First Request for Production (D.E. #194 and #210) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART in accordance with the terms herein; + +(2) Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Plaintiff's First Request for Admissions (D.E. #195 and #211) is DENIED; and, + +(3) Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories (D.E.#196 and #212) is DENIED. + +DONE AND ORDERED this February 4, 2010, in , at West Palm Beach, Florida. + +> c\_2(744:) 4-4%13"--- 0 Anson LINNEA R. IHMSON UNITED STA ES MAGISTRATE JUDGE + +CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748577/EFTA02748577.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748577/EFTA02748577.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6a2d643157ddb7c73602a12461e022cac8095515 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748577/EFTA02748577.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,636 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748577.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 14, + "chars": 25376, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.97, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 45.29888916015625 + ], + [ + 407.5008544921875, + 45.29888916015625 + ], + [ + 407.5008544921875, + 73.56353759765625 + ], + [ + 198.89999999999998, + 73.56353759765625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "OMNIBUS ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 341.01 + ], + [ + 360.8534240722656, + 341.01 + ], + [ + 360.8534240722656, + 356.68353271484375 + ], + [ + 250.92000000000002, + 356.68353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 4, + "polygon": [ + [ + 216.036, + 45.29888916015625 + ], + [ + 396.158447265625, + 45.29888916015625 + ], + [ + 396.158447265625, + 59.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 216.036, + 59.30352783203125 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "INTERROGATORY REQUESTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 5, + "polygon": [ + [ + 211.75199999999995, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 393.17474365234375, + 264.06000000000006 + ], + [ + 393.17474365234375, + 280.18353271484375 + ], + [ + 211.75199999999995, + 280.18353271484375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PRODUCTION REQUESTS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 6, + "polygon": [ + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 384.1462707519531, + 457.65 + ], + [ + 384.1462707519531, + 473.30352783203125 + ], + [ + 227.66400000000002, + 473.30352783203125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 70 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 4, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 53 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 5, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 6, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 7, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 67 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 8, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 9, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 10, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 11, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 63 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 12, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 13, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 17 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748577" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748591/EFTA02748591.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748591/EFTA02748591.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..388a8df40f9f950e17a8002853ed5e9dcd968c90 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748591/EFTA02748591.md @@ -0,0 +1,59 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAte + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## JOINT AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN's Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence, & Incorporated Memorandum of Law ("Motion to Preserve Evidence"), dated November 12, 2009. The Court having reviewed the file including Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, P.A.'s November 16, 2009 Response to Defendant's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence, the Court enters this Order: + +Defendant Epstein's November 12, 2009 Motion to Preserve Evidence [DE # 405] alleges that Plaintiff's counsel, Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, P.A. ("RRA") has been accused of serious unethical and possible criminal misconduct and requests an order requiring the preservation of certain documents identified in Composite Exhibit A to his Motion to Preserve Evidence. On November 13, + +2568019-3 emisig "A" + +Case No. 08-CIV-801189 + +Order on Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence + +Page 2 of 3 + +2009, the Court entered its Order on Epstein's Motion to Preserve Evidence on a temporary basis expiring on November 17, 2009. [DE #408]. In a November 16, 2009 Response to Defendant's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence, Mr. Stettin, in his capacity as RRA's Receiver and Chief Restructuring Officer,' represented that he "understands fully the gravity of document and evidence preservation" and that he "intends to continue to fully comply with his fiduciary duties both as Receiver and now as CRO of an alleged bankruptcy debtor." RRA's Response at 2; [DE # 409]. On November 18, 2009, the Court entered its Order renewing and continuing in effect its November 13, 2009 Order "until such time as [a] proposed order [on the Motion to Preserve Evidence] has been issued by the Court." [DE # 414]. + +In the meantime, on November 10, 2009, RRA had been put into an involuntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. RRA's Chapter 11 bankruptcy case is still pending as In re: Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, P.A., Case No. 09-34791-RBR. On November 20, 2009, after having filed the Response in his capacity as the state court appointed Receiver, Mr. Stettin was appointed RRA's Chapter 11 Trustee. See, In re: Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, P.A., Case No. 09-34791-RBR, DE #35. + +The duties of a bankruptcy trustee are provided by statute, including that the trustee "be accountable for all property received." 11 U.S.C. § 1106(a); 11 U.S.C. § 704(a)(2). Therefore, a bankruptcy trustee is "charged with the duty of + +On November 4, 2009, Mr. Stettin was appointed as RRA's receiver by Judge Jeffrey Streitfeld of the Florida Seventeenth Judicial Circuit in Case No. 09-059301. [DE # 409]. + +Case No. 08-CIV-801189 + +Order on Epstein's Emergency Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence + +Page 3 of 3 + +collecting and reducing the property of the estate and is to be accountable for all such property." Ohio v. Kovacs, 469 U.S. 274, 284,105 S.Ct. 705, 710 (1985). Since the federal bankruptcy code already requires a trustee to assemble and protect a bankrupt's property, therefore essentially covering the relief requested in the Motion to Preserve Evidence, there is no need for the Court to enter a further order as to Mr. Stettin. + +DONE and ORDERED this day of February, 2010. + +Linnea R. + +United States Magistrate Judge + +Courtesy copies: All Counsel of Record + +Kendall Coffey, Esq. Coffey Burlington Office in the Grove, Penthouse 2699 South Bayshore Drive Miami, FL 33133 + +James C. Cunningham, Jr. Berger Singerman, 2000 South Biscayne Blvd. Suite 1000 Miami, FL 33131 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748591/EFTA02748591.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748591/EFTA02748591.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e451634827e7c16bf511ff67cc9b9e10742078c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748591/EFTA02748591.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,181 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748591.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3977, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.89, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 203.796, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 415.4053649902344, + 73.71000000000001 + ], + [ + 415.4053649902344, + 104.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 203.796, + 104.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "JOINT AGREED ORDER ON DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION \nFOR ORDER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 130.968, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 492.2850036621094, + 362.07 + ], + [ + 492.2850036621094, + 393.91998291015625 + ], + [ + 130.968, + 393.91998291015625 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 58 + ], + [ + "Line", + 29 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Footnote", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 57 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748591" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748594/EFTA02748594.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748594/EFTA02748594.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..bc8eee6bac59d4521887230d8e3e3f195abe9885 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748594/EFTA02748594.md @@ -0,0 +1,93 @@ +### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-C1V-80119-MARRAa + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +# NOTICE OF FILING JOINT AGREED ORDER + +Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, hereby gives Notice of Filing Joint Agreed Order on Defendant, Epstein's, Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence in support thereof : + +- 1. Joint Agreed Order on Defendant, Epstein's, Motion for Order for the Preservation of Evidence (EXHIBIT A). + +By: ROBERT D. TTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar N . 224162 MICHAEL J PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 5th day of February, 2010. + +Respectfully su fitted, + +By: ROBERT D CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar o. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mnike@hciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTHER & COLEMAN 303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +# Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein + +Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRAAIMM + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattornev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com rini,1Jaffe, Weissing, Fistos an, PL 425 N. Andrews Avenue Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-524-2820 Fax: 954-524-2822 brad@pathtoiustice.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* + +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, +08-80994* + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. +250 Australian Avenue South +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 +561-659-8300 +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +[jagesq@bellsouth.net](mailto:jagesq@bellsouth.net) + +*Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Estein* + +Kendall Coffey, Esq. +Coffey Burlington +Office in the Grove, Penthouse +2699 South Bayshore Drive +Miami, FL 33133 + +James C. Cunningham, Jr. +Berger Singerman, +2000 South Biscayne Blvd. +Suite 1000 +Miami, FL 33131 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. +*Pro Hac Vice* +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 +801-585-6833 Fax +[cassellp@law.utah.edu](mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu) +*Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe* + +Isidro M. [REDACTED], Esq. +[REDACTED] Law Firm, P.A. +224 Datura Street, Suite 900 +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F +[isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net](mailto:isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net) +*Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. +08-80469* \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748594/EFTA02748594.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748594/EFTA02748594.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6057c92e10571aeee0cc9274ce108060c83a96b5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748594/EFTA02748594.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,254 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748594.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 3012, + "elapsed_seconds": 5.79, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 202.572, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 416.24566650390625, + 76.94999999999999 + ], + [ + 416.24566650390625, + 106.85302734375 + ], + [ + 202.572, + 106.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "NOTICE OF FILING JOINT AGREED ORDER", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 181.152, + 366.93 + ], + [ + 441.06317138671875, + 366.93 + ], + [ + 441.06317138671875, + 383.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 181.152, + 383.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 252.144, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 367.521484375, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 367.521484375, + 93.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 252.144, + 93.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 255.204, + 504.63 + ], + [ + 368.67791748046875, + 504.63 + ], + [ + 368.67791748046875, + 521.2330322265625 + ], + [ + 255.204, + 521.2330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Counsel for Plaintiffs", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 89.964, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 197.676, + 78.57000000000001 + ], + [ + 197.676, + 92.34 + ], + [ + 89.964, + 92.34 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 49 + ], + [ + "Line", + 25 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 95 + ], + [ + "Line", + 45 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 47 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748594" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748597/EFTA02748597.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748597/EFTA02748597.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..769932ed3b30148932af4d2d9bae1419b000c50b --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748597/EFTA02748597.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRS + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED TO THE COURT PURSUANT TO RULE 4, REVIEW AND APPEAL-SOUTHERN DISTRICT, IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COURT'S ORDER DATED FEBRUARY 4, 2010 [DE 4621 + +This matter came before the Court on Defendant's, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Motion For Extension Directed to the Court Pursuant to Rule 4, Review and Appeal-Southern District, In Connection With This Court's Order [DE 462] Dated February 4, 2010. Having considered Defendant's motion it is HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the motion is GRANTED as follows: + +1. The Defendant shall file with the clerk of Court, and serve on all parties, written objections which shall specifically set forth the order, or part thereof, appealed from an a concise statement of the alleged error in ruling, along with statutory, rule or case authority in support of his position, on or before March 5, 2010. + +08-C1V-80119-Marra/ + +Related cases 08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +Page 2 + +DONE and ORDERED this \_day of , 2010. + +Kenneth A. Marra United States District Judge + +Courtesy Copies: Counsel of Record \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748597/EFTA02748597.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748597/EFTA02748597.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d8d61f75b5d33cb1dd4276e72a84c22cca03379f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748597/EFTA02748597.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748597.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 1452, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.7, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 418.5164489746094, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 418.5164489746094, + 103.10302734375 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 103.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED \nTO THE COURT PURSUANT TO RULE 4, REVIEW AND APPEAL-\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT, IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COURT'S ORDER \nDATED FEBRUARY 4, 2010 [DE 4621", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 519.7733764648438, + 361.26 + ], + [ + 519.7733764648438, + 420.35302734375 + ], + [ + 105.26399999999998, + 420.35302734375 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 52 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 21 + ], + [ + "Line", + 11 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748597" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748599/EFTA02748599.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748599/EFTA02748599.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b28be42aee63604584117a633c5127464eb1f8f0 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748599/EFTA02748599.md @@ -0,0 +1,151 @@ +#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-C1V-80119-MARRS + +JANE DOE NO. 2, + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +#### DEFENDANT'S, MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED TO THE COURT PURSUANT TO RULE 4, REVIEW AND APPEAL-SOUTHERN DISTRICT, IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COURT'S ORDER DATED FEBRUARY 4, 2010 (DE 462) + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, and Pursuant to Rule 4, Review and Appeal — Southern District, and other applicable rules as well as this court's discretion, respectfully moves this Court for an extension of time in which to ". . . file with the Clerk of the Court, and serve of all parties written objections which shall specifically set forth the order, or part thereof, appealed from [and] aconcise statement of the alleged error in the [] ruling, and statutory, rule, or case authority, in support of defendant's position." As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: + +1. This court entered an order (DE 462) stating that Epstein must provide documents responsive to request to numbers 7, 9, 10, 12, and 13 within 14 days from the date of said order. Federal Rule 4 allows for an appeal to be filed within 14 days of said order + +2. Based upon the timing of the order to produce documents and the 14 day time period allowed for the filing of an Appeal, there remains aconflict as to the timing of both. Defendant needs an extension of time as aresult of said timing conflict, and for additional the reasons set forth below. + +3. Defendant seeks to appeal, pursuant to Rule 4, those portions of the order which specifically address the above requests for production. Given the breadth of the 5th Amendment addressing the above requests and the fact that the order does not address various issues in the Response (including relevance), the Defendant respectfully requests an additional 15 days from February 18, 2010 within which to "file with the Clerk of the Court, and serve of all parties written objections which shall specifically set forth the order, or part thereof, appealed from (and] aconcise statement of the alleged error in the ruling, and statutory, rule, or case authority, in support of defendant's position." As such, Defendant requests that the due date effectively be moved to August 31, 2009. + +4. The undersigned, Michael J. Pike, has a special set hearing in front of the Honorable Elizabeth Metzgen in Stuart, Florida on February 9, 2010. In addition, the undersigned, Robert D. Critton, Jr., Esq., is scheduled for various depositions in these related matters. + +5. This request is not made to delay and will not prejudice any of the parties. + +6. While this request is within the sound discretion of the court pursuant to Rule 4, the undersigned has consulted with opposing counsel and he has not agreed. + +Wherefore, the undersigned respectfully requests the relief sought herein, and for such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper. + +### Local Rule 7.1 Statement + +Counsel for the movant conferred by telephone with counsel or the Plaintiff and Counsel for Plaintiff is not in agreement with the requested e + +> By: ROBERT ON, JR. Florida #2241 2 MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 + +## Certificate of Service + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by electronic mail (e-mail) on this 9th day of February, 2010. + +Respectfully s + +By: ROBERT . C N, JR., ESQ. Florida g r No. 224162 rcrit@bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpikeAbciclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) + +# Certificate of Service + +Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. + +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. + +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. + +18205 Biscayne Boulevard + +Suite 2218 + +Miami, FL 33160 + +305-931-2200 + +Fax: 305-931-0877 + +ssm@sexabuseattomey.com + +ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com + +Counsel for Plaintiffs + +In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, + +08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, + +08-80994 + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. + +Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. + +250 Australian Avenue South + +Suite 1400 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 + +561-659-8300 + +Fax: 561-835-8691 + +jagesq(abellsouth.net + +Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Estein + +! , Jaffe, Weissing, Fistos + +Man, PL + +425 N. Andrews Avenue + +Suite 2 + +Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 + +Phone: 954-524-2820 + +Fax: 954-524-2822 + +brad@pathtoiustice.com + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80893 + +Paul G. Cassell, Esq. + +Pro Hac Vice + +332 South 1400 E, Room 101 + +Salt Lake City, UT 84112 + +801-585-5202 + +801-585-6833 Fax + +cassellp@law.utah.edu + +Co-counsel for PlaintiffJane Doe + +Isidro M. Esq. + +LIR, P.A. + +ifitura Street, Suite 900 + +West Palm Beach, FL 33401 + +561-832-7732 + +561-832-7137 F + +isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. + +08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748599/EFTA02748599.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748599/EFTA02748599.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7673bf75a68ccc7abfadb7365c9fc10b74029e3a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748599/EFTA02748599.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,284 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748599.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 5231, + "elapsed_seconds": 2.48, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 413.14764404296875, + 77.76 + ], + [ + 413.14764404296875, + 105.30000000000001 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 105.30000000000001 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "DEFENDANT'S, MOTION FOR EXTENSION DIRECTED TO THE COURT \nPURSUANT TO RULE 4, REVIEW AND APPEAL-SOUTHERN DISTRICT, IN \nCONNECTION WITH THIS COURT'S ORDER DATED FEBRUARY 4, 2010 (DE 462)", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 98.53200000000001, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 524.484, + 365.31000000000006 + ], + [ + 524.484, + 407.43 + ], + [ + 98.53200000000001, + 407.43 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Local Rule 7.1 Statement", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 243.57600000000002, + 135.27 + ], + [ + 380.87115478515625, + 135.27 + ], + [ + 380.87115478515625, + 151.85302734375 + ], + [ + 243.57600000000002, + 151.85302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 314.28000000000003 + ], + [ + 369.80792236328125, + 314.28000000000003 + ], + [ + 369.80792236328125, + 331.10302734375 + ], + [ + 254.59199999999998, + 331.10302734375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 257.652, + 671.49 + ], + [ + 370.96051025390625, + 671.49 + ], + [ + 370.96051025390625, + 688.8530197143555 + ], + [ + 257.652, + 688.8530197143555 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 255 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 353 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 71 + ], + [ + "Line", + 34 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 106 + ], + [ + "Line", + 53 + ], + [ + "Text", + 50 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748599" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748603/EFTA02748603.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748603/EFTA02748603.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f676429c91bd00fcd43c31972b67aa9e41d26a4c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748603/EFTA02748603.md @@ -0,0 +1,73 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/MM + +Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. + +Defendant. + +Related Cases: + +08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S OBJECTION TO EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPEAL AND, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, REQUEST FOR DIRECTION TO EPSTEIN TO BEGIN ASSEMBLING MATERIALS + +Plaintiff, Jane Doe, respectfully files this Objection to Defendant's Motion for Extension of Time (dkt. #464). + +Epstein is apparently requesting an additional 15 days from February 18, 2010, to file an objection to an order from the magistrate judge that he produce documents that were provided to him by the Government during the discovery phase of the criminal case. As the magistrate judge concluded, any purported Fifth Amendment objection to producing such documents is utterly groundless. The Fifth Amendment protects a defendant from revealing things to the Government that it does not know. The Government obviously knows what is in the documents that it gave to him. Therefore, there is no legitimate Fifth Amendment objection to such production. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +In addition, 15 days on top of the already prescribed 10 days to appeal is an excessively long period of time. As the Court is aware, the discovery period prescribed in this case will soon draw to a close. Jane Doe needs the documents produced quickly and in a timely fashion so that she can pursue any leads revealed in them during the discovery period. + +In the alternative, if the Court grants any extension of time to file an appeal, Jane Doe respectfully requests that the extension order also include a direction to Epstein to fully assemble all of the required documents so that, if Epstein's appeal is rejected, the documents can be produced to Jane Doe without any further delay. + +DATED: February 9, 2010 + +Respectfully submitted, + +AFFE, WEISSING, , FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 524-2820 Facsimile (954) 524-2822 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: brad@pathtojustice.com + +and + +Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: cassellp@law.utah.edu + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA + +## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that on February 9, 2010 I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically filed Notices of Electronic Filing. + +> s/ J. J. + +CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA' + +## SERVICE LIST + +Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court, Southern District of Florida + +Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Jaoldberaer@aawpa.com + +Robert D. Critton, Esq. rcritton@bciclaw.com + +Isidro Manual isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net + +Jack iph@searcylaw.com • + +Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com + +Michael James Pike MPike@bciclaw.com + +Paul G. Cassell cassello@bciclaw.com + +Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol.com + +Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@oodhurst.com + +Adam D. Horowitz ahorowitzOsexabuseattorney.com + +Stuart S. Mermelstein ssm@sexabuseattorney.com \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748603/EFTA02748603.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748603/EFTA02748603.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..84e527604f9cf8646704fbb539a5ddd519bb7dfe --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748603/EFTA02748603.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,265 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748603.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3503, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.92, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 71.0675048828125 + ], + [ + 410.520751953125, + 99.54998779296875 + ], + [ + 200.73600000000002, + 99.54998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S OBJECTION TO EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPEAL \nAND, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, REQUEST FOR DIRECTION TO EPSTEIN TO BEGIN \nASSEMBLING MATERIALS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 538.406494140625, + 387.98999999999995 + ], + [ + 538.406494140625, + 431.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 74.66399999999999, + 431.04998779296875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 225.216, + 136.89000000000001 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 136.89000000000001 + ], + [ + 387.0013122558594, + 152.41998291015625 + ], + [ + 225.216, + 152.41998291015625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "SERVICE LIST", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 3, + "polygon": [ + [ + 261.936, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 350.57220458984375, + 109.35000000000001 + ], + [ + 350.57220458984375, + 125.04998779296875 + ], + [ + 261.936, + 125.04998779296875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 51 + ], + [ + "Line", + 26 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 61 + ], + [ + "Line", + 31 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 25 + ], + [ + "Line", + 13 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 59 + ], + [ + "Line", + 30 + ], + [ + "Text", + 13 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748603" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748607/EFTA02748607.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748607/EFTA02748607.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2857c3d32b021ce46857fcd09ac3c5f0b19397d3 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748607/EFTA02748607.md @@ -0,0 +1,64 @@ +## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA + +CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON + +JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, + +vs. + +JEFFREY EPSTEIN, + +Defendant. + +Related cases: + +08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 + +## REPLY TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S OBJECTION TO EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPEAL AND, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, REQUEST FOR DIRECTION TO EPSTEIN TO BEGIN ASSEMBLING MATERIALS + +Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Reply to Plaintiff, Jane Doe's Objection to Extension of Time to File Appeal and, in the Alternative, Request for Direction to Epstein to Begin Assembling Materials [DE 465], and states: + +- 1. J. (" '), formerly of Rothstein Rosenfeldt & Adler, P.A. ("RRA"), requested that a stay be entered during the time he was in the process of assembling and forming his new law practice. +- 2. formally made his request for a stay in the two state court matters in which he is counsel for the plaintiffs. Judge Hafele granted his request, entered a stay, and the cases were removed from the trial docket. + +3. Subsequent to the implosion of RRA, contacted the undersigned law firm and advised that he had been locked out of his office, had no access to his computer or files (including the instant Federal case), and therefore had no way to litigate matters. + +4. In turn, the undersigned, as a courtesy, did not schedule depositions, IMEs, and the like relative to client while was organizing his new law practice and regaining access to his files. As a result, this case was delayed at request not the Defendant's. + +5. Now that has established his new law firm, wishes to push this matter by ignoring, or simply forgetting that the undersigned law firm has in excess of ten (10) related cases. + +6. The extension requested by the Defendant is not designed to delay this matter; it is simply to provide an adequate amount of time to address what are serious 51h Amendment issues. + +WHEREFORE, Defendant Epstein requests that the Court grant Epstein's Motion for an Extension of Time to File a Rule 4 Appeal allowing the Epstein an additional fifteen (15) days to file his Appeal making it due on or before Mjrch 5, 2010. + +> By: Robert D. Critton, Jr. Florida Bar #224162 Michael J. Pike Florida Bar #617296 + +**Certificate of Service** + +I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by electronic mail (e-mail) on this 10th day of February, 2010. + +Respectfully submitted, + +![]()**Certificate of Service** +**Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein** +**Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]** + +Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. +Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. +Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. +18205 Biscayne Boulevard +Suite 2218 +Miami, FL 33160 +305-931-2200 +Fax: 305-931-0877 +[ssm@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ssm@sexabuseattorney.com) +[ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com](mailto:ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com) + +*Counsel for Plaintiffs* +*In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,* +*08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,* +*08-80994* + +![]()Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jagesqebellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Estein Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassello@law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe + +Isidro M. = Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datum Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748607/EFTA02748607.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748607/EFTA02748607.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fce2b4e1e2d320e40a51928bae70f9a70daba975 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748607/EFTA02748607.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,261 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748607.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 4, + "chars": 3801, + "elapsed_seconds": 4.31, + "image_assets": [], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.24566650390625, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 416.24566650390625, + 102.7330322265625 + ], + [ + 201.96000000000004, + 102.7330322265625 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "REPLY TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE'S OBJECTION TO EXTENSION OF \nTIME TO FILE APPEAL AND, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, REQUEST \nFOR DIRECTION TO EPSTEIN TO BEGIN ASSEMBLING MATERIALS", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 111.384, + 347.49 + ], + [ + 511.4065246582031, + 347.49 + ], + [ + 511.4065246582031, + 392.9730224609375 + ], + [ + 111.384, + 392.9730224609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 363.52799999999996, + 72.9 + ], + [ + 363.52799999999996, + 85.85999999999999 + ], + [ + 251.53199999999998, + 85.85999999999999 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED]", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 2, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.78000000000003, + 430.11 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 430.11 + ], + [ + 421.0559999999999, + 471.41999999999996 + ], + [ + 192.78000000000003, + 471.41999999999996 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 54 + ], + [ + "Line", + 27 + ], + [ + "Text", + 8 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "ListItem", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "ListGroup", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 47 + ], + [ + "Line", + 24 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "surya", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Text", + 12 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 3, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 55 + ], + [ + "Line", + 28 + ], + [ + "Text", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748607" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748611/EFTA02748611.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748611/EFTA02748611.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7523887868eb19b1aaa708f36f57a579dfb8efd7 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748611/EFTA02748611.md @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ +# Personal Injury, Intellectual Property es Child Sex Abuse Attorneys in Miami + +Mennelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami. Florida 33160 + +> Call Toll Free!' 1-80043864921 + +Miami / 30-01-2200 Fax / M4-01-OTT + +Email lawyersithsexabusestomey oom Web wwer sexabusatiornev Corn + +Contact Stuart S. Mermelstem. or Adam D. Horowitz by filling out the form below. + +• indicates a required field + +'Address me as + +'email + +phone + +message + +Sultent + +## Stuart S. Mermelsteln + +Stuart S. Mennostein is a native of New York City. In 1981, he graduated summa cum laud\* horn the University of Mien with a Bachelor of Business Administration (B.EI A) Mr. Mermeistern went on to attend taw school at the Slate University of New York at Buffalo. graduating magna awn lase in 1986. + +Stuart S. Mermelstein has been admitted to the New York and U.S. District Court Southern and Eastern Districts of New York; the U.S. Court of Appeals. Fifth Circuit, Pennsylvania. Florida and U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida. the U.S. District Court Western District of Pennsylvania; and the U.S District Court. Middle District of Florida. + +Mr. Meneelstein Is a member of the Florida Bar and the American Bar Association sections on business law. intellectual property, and avtabon. From 1985 to 1986, ho was the executive editor of the Buffalo Law Review. + +Stuart S. Mormeistein specializes in the areas of imam business law. contracts products liability bankruptcy. and intellectual property + +back to too + +#### Adam D. Horowitz + +Adam D Horowitz. a native of Long Beach, New York, received his undergraduate and legs' education at the University of MiarM. In 1996, he graduated cum laude with a Bachelor of Arts; in 2000 he graduated cum laud. with a Juris Doctor. + +Mr. Horowitz has been Startled to the Florida and U.S. District Court. Southern District of Florida; the U.S. District Court, Middle District or Florida. the U.S Court of Appeals. Eleventh Cowl, the U S Tax Court and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. + +Adam D. Horowitz focuses on the areas of sexual abuse ernDlOrrnent lisairon commerthal ;ingots,. and education law. From 1998-2000. Mr. Horowitz was on the Moot Court Board From 1999 through 2000. he was the articles editor for the University of Miami Law Renew + +### Publications: + +"Nelson v McClatchy Newspapers\* What Happens When Freedom of the Press cosset With Free Speech?? 54 University of Miami Law Review 359 (2030) + +![](_page_0_Picture_27.jpeg) + +#### Reported Cases: + +MAPQUEST + +![](_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg) + +MaliCki v. Doe. 814 So.2d 347 (Fla. 2002). Jarzynka v. St. University. 310 F.Supp.2d 1256 (S 0 Fla. 2004); Cherry v. Catholic Cnantes, 815 So 2d 1282 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004): Jarzynka v. St. University, 323 F Supp.2d 860 (W D Pa. 2004) + +Stuart Mermelstein. and Adam Horowitz skillfully handle cases involving everything from awabon accidents to child sex abuse To contact one of our attorneys. crease call or e-mail our Miami firm today. + +• PaCk to too + +Home I Attorneys I Practice Areas I In me News I Verdicts 8 Settlements I Contact Us I Site Map Mermetstein 8 Horowitz focuses on several macho: areas. including chid \*ex abuse litigation The attorneys at our Miami firm Stuart S Mermelsteip and Adam D. Horowitz + +18205 Bocayne Boulevard I Suite 22181 Miami. Florida 33160 + +Copyright O 2007 Mermolstein 8 Horowitz PA I Website Developed by Einstein law \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748611/EFTA02748611.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748611/EFTA02748611.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7a8cd42b80d570178923b76cbb776ca603b5739a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748611/EFTA02748611.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,227 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748611.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 2, + "chars": 3392, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.44, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_27.jpeg", + "_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Personal Injury, Intellectual Property es Child Sex Abuse Attorneys in Miami", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.168, + 342.63 + ], + [ + 507.98779296875, + 342.63 + ], + [ + 507.98779296875, + 356.636474609375 + ], + [ + 192.168, + 356.636474609375 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Stuart S. Mermelsteln", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.168, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 281.2669677734375, + 362.88 + ], + [ + 281.2669677734375, + 375.7665100097656 + ], + [ + 192.168, + 375.7665100097656 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Adam D. Horowitz", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.168, + 540.27 + ], + [ + 268.318359375, + 540.27 + ], + [ + 268.318359375, + 552.7664794921875 + ], + [ + 192.168, + 552.7664794921875 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Publications:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 192.168, + 665.01 + ], + [ + 245.8360595703125, + 665.01 + ], + [ + 245.8360595703125, + 677.6364822387695 + ], + [ + 192.168, + 677.6364822387695 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Reported Cases:", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 1, + "polygon": [ + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 53.46 + ], + [ + 250.31060791015625, + 53.46 + ], + [ + 250.31060791015625, + 63.7664794921875 + ], + [ + 191.55599999999998, + 63.7664794921875 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 121 + ], + [ + "Line", + 58 + ], + [ + "Text", + 22 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 35 + ], + [ + "Line", + 16 + ], + [ + "Text", + 7 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748611" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748611/_page_0_Picture_27.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748611/_page_0_Picture_27.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d1d825441e7a05c9de755aa7379e44511e628d1c --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748611/_page_0_Picture_27.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:d7816ea83a3b336bec455416367129a3cd34381e156268ecb3ea93a1977a6911 +size 11262 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748611/_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748611/_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9c8298ce2927f27760eea9a177fb73083051c62f --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748611/_page_1_Picture_2.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:3dcd02967e268d2f022aa61cdbd50edf2e144d9835e7f107aa971db2a44532fd +size 6232 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748613/EFTA02748613.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748613/EFTA02748613.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..35b7face6cf53b3516010efb4de7fad99a2a5b2e --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748613/EFTA02748613.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg) + +print nog. Window + +## Jessica D. Arbour - Lawyer Profile + +Jessica D. Arbour Update this Profile + +950 BrIckell Bay Dr., Rm. 4508 Miami, Florida (Miami-Dade Co.) + +## Profile Visibility in + +#1,287 in weekly profile views out of 7,949 lawyers In Miami, Florida #115,808 in weekly profile views out of 970,057 total lawyers Overall + +## Experience & Credentials + +Law School DePaul University, J.D. + +Admitted 2009 + +ISLN 920790494 + +Source: Martindale-Hubbell Print flose Window + +![](_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748613/EFTA02748613.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748613/EFTA02748613.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..92be268806c7ab93ad10e9f070d86124282b9ddf --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748613/EFTA02748613.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,139 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748613.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 1, + "chars": 528, + "elapsed_seconds": 0.88, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "Jessica D. Arbour - Lawyer Profile", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 60.08415985107422, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 268.5357360839844, + 119.07 + ], + [ + 268.5357360839844, + 135.27 + ], + [ + 60.08415985107422, + 135.27 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Profile Visibility in", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 67.932, + 221.94 + ], + [ + 160.344, + 221.94 + ], + [ + 160.344, + 235.70999999999998 + ], + [ + 67.932, + 235.70999999999998 + ] + ] + }, + { + "title": "Experience & Credentials", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 76.5, + 285.92999999999995 + ], + [ + 197.10855102539062, + 285.92999999999995 + ], + [ + 197.10855102539062, + 298.2588806152344 + ], + [ + 76.5, + 298.2588806152344 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 118 + ], + [ + "Line", + 22 + ], + [ + "Text", + 10 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 3 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 3 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748613" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748613/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748613/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..751a085780e9a16ad02eadced805e0eda8e88fa6 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748613/_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:e3f1be5712284d7e0c6c661ac2f57caa3bb641ba26ac43028a7c81d2050f41c0 +size 4194 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748613/_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748613/_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..179b2f78009d75fa966f63a287aa55e139dd3ab2 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748613/_page_0_Picture_15.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:61fa0eada3b87b4bf0ec172424dd5c47fa99e1e3174a3ccd50ca18bbd4c70816 +size 12088 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/EFTA02748614.md b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/EFTA02748614.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3fcdbccbe59eb60d44d7b222467532beedd0a446 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/EFTA02748614.md @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ +Search: + +![](_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg) + +The Florida Bar News Advertising WII • Classifieds • Attorneys Exchange • Archives • ciehscrihe • Journal News HOMF + +![](_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg) + +![](_page_0_Picture_5.jpeg) + +October 15, 2009 + +## On the Move + +Laura S. Rotstein has joined Redgrave & Rosenthal in Boca Raton and will practice in the firm's elder services practice group. Rotstein's concentration is in guardianships, long-term care, advance directives, Medicaid and nursing home planning, disability and incapacity planning, special needs trusts, elder law litigation, and nursing home residents' rights litigation. + +Dustin D.P. Delany has become managing partner of Elliott D. Mottley & Co. in Barbados, West Indies, providing regional coverage throughout Commonwealth Caribbean, including Anguilla, Antigua, Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Montserrat, St. Lucia, St. Kitts, Nevis, St. Vincent, the Grenadines, Trinidad, and Tobago. He practices primarily in the areas of civil litigation, commercial construction, corporate finance, and the off-shore industry. His office is located at Shenstone, Strathclyde; Bridgetown, Barbados; West Indies; telephone: 246-436-6725; fax: 246-429-3769; e-mail: dodelanvOmottlevco.com. + +Amy L. Drushal and Nathaniel ("Nat") Roland have been elected shareholders of Trenam Kemker in Tampa. Drushal's practice involves commercial litigation, employment law, ERISA benefits litigation, bankruptcy, creditors' rights, and appeals. Roland's practice focuses primarily on corporate formation and structuring matters, capital-raising, private placements, lending transactions, mergers and acquisitions, and commercial contracts. + +Alaina B. Siminovsky has joined the commercial litigation firm of Herron Ortiz in Miami as an associate. + +Todd has joined The Haggard Law Firm in Coral Gables as an associate. handles a wide array of cases, including those involving negligent security, wrongful death, and other personal injury incidents. + +C. has joined Hagen & Hagen in Ft. Lauderdale. will assist clients with commercial litigation, real estate transactions, lender liability, debtors' rights, and other consumer protection issues. He may be contacted at (954) 987-0515 or by e-mail at BDavis(aHaoenl,awFirm.com. + +Amelia (Mel). Maguire of Coral Gables has become associate for external affairs at the University of Miami School of Business Administration. Maguire will lead the school's development initiatives and oversee executive education programs, communications, and graduate placement. + +![](_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg) + +33131, phone (305) 358-9995 has changed it name to Lex International Law Firm, P.A., and has opened a European office at Cabinet EJPC - 4th Floor, 112 Boulevard Haussmann, Paris, France, 75008, phone (+33-1) 5643-3940, e-mail lex(8lex-international.com, and on the Web at www.lex-international,cont. + +Sandra M. Sovinski has opened Innovative IP, LLC, a Central Florida boutique intellectual property firm. The firm will focus primarily on domestic and international patent and trademark prosecution, copyrights, licensing, and opinions, and is based out of New Smyrna Beach. Phone (800) 729-5541, e-mail ideasOinnovative-io.net. + +David 3. has established a private legal practice at 824 West Indiantown Road in Jupiter. primary focus will be representing medical, legal, and business professionals with individual disability income insurance policies who have incurred disabilities that prevent them from performing their specialties. + +=has joined Buckingham, Doolittle & Burroughs in Boca Raton as an associate in the trusts and estates practice group. + +Jacqueline E. Ferris has joined Burr & Forman In Orlando as an associate in the creditors' rights and bankruptcy practice. + +Andrew J. has joined Ruden McClosky in St. Petersburg as an associate In the litigation practice group. focus his practice on commercial and banking litigation. + +Brenda Ezell has opened Ezell Law Firm, of which she is the owner and sole shareholder. The firm concentrates in all areas of commercial real estate and land development law. + +William D. has joined the Tallahassee office of McConnaughe Duffy, Coonrod, Pope & Weaver. He will focus his practice in the area of workers' compensation defense. + +Robert has joined Franklin, Starnes & Holt in Ft. Myers. will focus his law practice in tort and insurance litigation. + +Kenneth D. Pratt has become a lobbyist with the Florida League of Cities, Inc., In Tallahassee. + +Andrew M. ES has joined Ruden McClosky in Miami as an associate in the litigation practice group. will handle a variety of commercial litigation matters. + +Jason A. Fischer has joined Zies Widerman & Malek in Melbourne where he will practice intellectual property law. + +Joshua D. Weintraub has been named a partner with Mase Lara Eversole in Miami. Weintraub focuses his practice areas in admiralty and maritime, civil litigation, corporate governance, hospitality, insurance, pleasure boating and yachting, and regulatory work. + +Jessica Arbour has joined Mermelstein & Horowitz in Miami as an associate. Arbour will concentrate her practice on representing victims of childhood sexual abuse and exploitation. + +David has been named chair of Zumpano Patricios & Winker's corporate practice. The firm is located in Miami. + +Paul D'Arelli has joined Berger Singerman in Ft. Lauderdale as a shareholder in the firm's government and regulatory team. + +G. Steven Fender has become of counsel with Ruden McClosky in West Palm Beach. Fender will work in the bankruptcy and litigation practice groups. + +3. Stuart Kirwan III has joined VastolauSchulz in North Palm Beach and Stuart. He consentrates in personal injury, wrongful death, and general civil litigation. + +News HOMF + +[Revised: 02-09-2010 ] + +Sp 2005 The Florida Bar \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/EFTA02748614.metadata.json b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/EFTA02748614.metadata.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a31c706f4add7aec601968df3a758b2f9ab6bb40 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/EFTA02748614.metadata.json @@ -0,0 +1,163 @@ +{ + "source_pdf": "/home/robbd/my/apps/epstein-index/data/raw/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614.pdf", + "engine": { + "marker_major": "2", + "marker_version": "2.0.0", + "mode": "balanced", + "use_llm": false, + "force_ocr": false, + "disable_ocr": false, + "output_format": "markdown", + "preserve_source": false + }, + "fingerprint": "d889ea60d5548ac4", + "pages": 3, + "chars": 5780, + "elapsed_seconds": 1.12, + "image_assets": [ + "_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_5.jpeg", + "_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg" + ], + "marker_metadata": { + "table_of_contents": [ + { + "title": "On the Move", + "heading_level": null, + "page_id": 0, + "polygon": [ + [ + 183.6, + 188.052490234375 + ], + [ + 430.2768249511719, + 188.052490234375 + ], + [ + 430.2768249511719, + 232.27001953125 + ], + [ + 183.6, + 232.27001953125 + ] + ] + } + ], + "page_stats": [ + { + "page_id": 0, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 94 + ], + [ + "Line", + 41 + ], + [ + "Text", + 11 + ], + [ + "Picture", + 4 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ], + [ + "SectionHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 1, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 83 + ], + [ + "Line", + 40 + ], + [ + "Text", + 15 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + }, + { + "page_id": 2, + "text_extraction_method": "pdftext", + "block_counts": [ + [ + "Span", + 23 + ], + [ + "Line", + 12 + ], + [ + "Text", + 6 + ], + [ + "PageFooter", + 2 + ], + [ + "PageHeader", + 1 + ] + ], + "block_metadata": { + "llm_request_count": 0, + "llm_error_count": 0, + "llm_tokens_used": 0, + "previous_text": "", + "previous_type": "", + "previous_order": 0 + } + } + ], + "debug_data_path": "debug_data/EFTA02748614" + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..73aba5fa2b3fdf6740d3b7e30e46add65271860a --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/_page_0_Picture_16.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b61d491922deb114730ce190b41d5d9d8c90e5f8c79b6c7cc1a088366c654d46 +size 10682 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e80849a1c3d98197956db36dc6a0813f01e734e5 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:c9e156c5f89f2d537a498c9441ab45da7b77862df7f492567095c24407548d91 +size 1807 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9d10651033692a601f2939add6d8566ae18a25ba --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/_page_0_Picture_4.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:0167310c90410318017c4a332c7f3230aff4fbcc277c96c7513e7b6020321dfe +size 692 diff --git a/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/_page_0_Picture_5.jpeg b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/_page_0_Picture_5.jpeg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..de2552f3b0afd523b0b3debe993a20d0af6d3cc8 --- /dev/null +++ b/marker2/court-doe-v-epstein-80119/EFTA02748614/_page_0_Picture_5.jpeg @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:f9dc254229bdab010af54a3b9893f8b8fa848b11886c257ac2603f3070c3ea7b +size 912